spectator, he was evidently ignorant of such a sect as Christians; for he has not an allusion to such a sect. The inference is therefore good, that before Jerusalem was destroyed, and the Jews residing in Judea extirpated, the words Jesus Christ, or the sect called Christians, or the system called Christianity, were not heard of in that neighbourhood.

There is not a record extant, written within the first century, that mentions a sect called Christians; but of records written in the second century, we have an abundance. The book called the Acts of the Apostles, which was written after the middle of the second century, as proved, by reference, at the commencement, of its being addressed to Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch, about the middle of that century, says, "the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” The writer of this was Luke, a Physician of Antioch. Antioch was a Grecian city, and Christ is a derivation of Christos, a Greek word. The first persecution of Christians recorded was at Antioch, at the commencement of the sect, during the reign of Trajan, At the close of that reign, the sect had not spread beyond the neighbourhood of Antioch. Pliny the younger, being appointed Proconsul of Bithynia, at the commencement of the second century, or about the year 110, travelled from Rome to that, one of the most distant Roman provinces, and found nothing of a sect of Christians until he came there: as is proved in his letter to Trajan, enquiring how he should deal with them, in consequence of the novelty of the thing. These are powerful, abundant, and convincing proofs, that the words Jesus Christ do not designate the name of a person; but that they are allegorical, and the symbol of a new system; the inventors of which must have seen the propriety of laying their scenes in Judea, a neighbouring country just laid desolate, and from which none could rise to contradict them.

No writer on Ecclesiastical History can trace Christianity a step either as to time or place, beyond where I have here gone. Ît would be a great satisfaction to me to be able to do it. I have spared no pains to get farther; but find myself absolutely fixed here, and here I am compelled to conclude, that Christianity originated not in Judea, as the inventors of the system have stated.

Dr. Lardner, the most eminent and most laborious man who has attempted the task, has sought in vain for traces beyond those I now state. Eusebius, the first Ecclesiastical Historian after the Christians were seated in power, has not an atom of proof of the existence of Christianity before this period, and laments the want of facts to corroborate the contents of the New Testament. What then, Gentlemen, am I charged with blaspheming? Two words? Nothing more! I challenge the world to shew that the words ever applied to a person: and, if this cannot be shewn, I have not published blasphemy of a person: I cannot have offended the law of England, which takes cognizance of nothing but injuries

done to persons or property. I cannot have offended public morals; for there can be no immorality but in injury done to persons or property. All that I have done is to publish a useful book-useful, because it is a fair exposure of a book that is not useful cried up as good, whilst it is a public nuisance.

In arguing the matter as a point of law, or the legal practice in these cases, I have every thing in my favour. I rest, first, upon the circumstance, that I have done no injury, either to person or property; without the one or the other of which, there can be no offence against law: and, second, that the old common law of the country, never did take cognizance of such cases as that now before you. Coke was the first to define the spirit of the common law, and of the law court practice of this country; and, relating to such cases as mine, he has laid down the following clear decision.

The following are the words in the reports of Lord Coke, fifth volume, in the celebrated case of Caubrey, page 9.

"So in causes ecclesiastical and spiritual, as, namely, blasphemy, apostacy from Christianity, heresies, schisms, and others, (the common source whereof belongs not to the common laws of England), the same are to be determined and decided by the ecclesiastical judges, according to the king's ecclesiastical laws of the realm." And a little lower down, page 10, he says-" For that as before, it appeareth the deciding of matters so many, and of so great importance, are not within the conusance of the common laws."

Here we find that such matters are not within the cognizance of the common law courts, and the whole history of such prosecutions as this, for which I now stand here, proves, that the cognizance now taken is an usurpation of power, unsanctioned by the legislature of the country. The ecclesiastical court is the proper court, according to the law and right practice; and this court has not lost an atom of its power, beyond that of which it has been deprived by public opinion. Nothing has been legislatively taken from it. Justice from the Judge of this court, I do not ask, in this matter; because, my experience, in noticing the similar cases of others, has taught me that it would be vain to expect it; but, justice from you, the Jury, I have a right to expect; because you are supposed to be strangers to all former proceedings of this kind: you cannot be implicated in any of them.

Now, then, I repeat to you, Gentlemen, that I have proved, not only that I am tried by no law, not only that I have committed no offence, as property or person I have injured not, and blasphemy as here charged I have proved cannot maliciously exist or be an act; but, even admitting that there was a law, and that mine was an offence against it, I have shewn you, that it is not cognizable in this court. The Ecclesiastical Court dares not to take cognizance of such a case in the present state of public knowledge and

public disposition; and, consequently, I am absolved from all legal jurisdiction, for having published the book before you. I have shewn you, that the book itself is defensible at every point; therefore, I must not be understood as boasting of a triumph because there is no power to take cognizance of a wrong doing: whatever I have done, in this and similar cases, I have done under the conviction that it was perfectly moral, perfectly legal, and highly useful to the public as a whole.

I will conclude, Gentlemen, with repeating those sentiments with which I opened my defence. If it be said that I had warning of the practicability and end of such prosecutions, I answer, that that warning was to me nothing more than a sense of duty to take my stand against them. I have seen such prosecutions instituted in defiance of the most convincing arguments against them, and I conclude, that it is not a respect for the law, that it is not this or that opinion, or religion, sought to be protected; but that the end and aim of these prosecutions is, to protect certain abuses profitable only to the prosecutors. Against this abuse of power alone do I array myself; and all I ask is, the liberty to shew fully and freely, through the medium of the printing press, that it is an abuse of power, that it does not exist for the benefit of the people as a whole.

If one prosecution of this kind were a moral justification of their continuance, the same might be said of every abuse that has been practised. All great changes among mankind, all great benefits, have been obtained by successfully resisting established error supported by governmental power. With power, profit is always allied, and whatever abuses be connected with power and profit, the holders for the time being will never quietly and morally yield; but will defend them even tyrannically and cruelly. This is, and has been, the common disposition of mankind. It is not confined to my prosecutors; it is not confined to this country; but wherever it has existed, it has been and must ever be conquered by such conduct as I have thus exhibited to you Gentlemen of the Jury and with this conviction, an adverse verdict from you will be to me a matter of perfect indifference: I shall bear my sufferings like those who have gone before me, with the fortitude of innocence and the calmness of integrity: but should I hear from you that which I feel that I deserve a verdict of Not Guilty of a malicious intention in publishing this book, I shall hail the moment that puts a stop to further persecution and further suffering on this ground, and look back to that retirement from which such prosecutions have unwisely drawn me to bid them defiance. I have now done my duty in this case, Gentlemen, I leave you to do yours with equal resolution and sincerity.

The Recorder then summed up the case to the Jury, and after stating the offence the prisoner stood charged with, said there could be no doubt of his crime being punishable at common law,

and cited a number of cases from James I. down to the present reign, tried before Judges Hale, Holt, Mansfield, Kenyon, Ellenborough, &c. He particularly adverted to the case of a prisoner tried before Judge Hale, for publishing a work, in which he said, "Christ was a bastard, and religion was a cheat," and on being convicted, was sentenced to be fined 1,000 marks, thrice to stand on the pillory, and to find sureties for life. He also alluded to the case of Peter Annet, for publishing a work called the "Free Inquirer," who was tried before Lord Mansfield. This work libelled the Bible and the Christian religion, declared that the books of Moses were forgeries, and the Christian religion an invention and fraud. He was convicted, and sentenced to one month's imprisonment in Newgate, to stand in the pillory at three different places, to be afterwards imprisoned in Newgate for twelve months, and to enter into security for his good behaviour for the term of his natural life. In this case the defendant was seventy years of age, he admitted his guilt, and put in affidavits of mitigation; but the court, although the defendant expressed his sorrow for his offence, (a mode of conduct very different from that displayed by the defendant at the bar) thought proper to inflict a sentence apparently severe, that being the only mode, in the opinion of the Judges, likely to suppress the sale of such diabolical publications. The present defendant was, therefore, mistaken in saying, that he had not offended the law, and that in publishing a libel of that malignant character which had been read to the Jury, he had done no wrong, and ought not to be punished. The Court were determined, as far as in its power lay, to suppress the sale of these publications, which diffused irreligious and diabolical opinions throughout the kingdom-publications not containing fair and candid arguments, but horrid expressions and false assertions, which he would not repeat, but would call the attention of the Jury to one sentence, viz. "that those who believed in the fabulous story of Christ were infidels to God."

After some further observations, the Recorder said that the law gave him the power to deliver his opinion upon the nature of the publication, and he did not hesitate to say, that it was a scandalous, impious, and blasphemous libel.

The Jury retired for about an hour, and then returned a verdict -"Guilty of publishing the libel in question."

Recorder-That is the charge against the Defendant.—Let him be brought up instantly for judgment.

Clerk of the Arraigns-What have you to say, William Campion, why judgment should not be pronounced upon you, as in case of misdemeanour?

Defendant--The learned Judge, in replying to my defence, has not controverted one single argument I have used.

Recorder-The Jury have pronounced the work to be a blasphemous libel, by finding you guilty. Have you any thing to say?

Defendant-Nothing that I can say can benefit me.
Recorder-You may take an objection to the indictment proba-

bly?

Defendant-I shall take no legal objections.

The Recorder proceeded to pass the sentence of the Court.Prisoner, you have been convicted of an atrocious offence--the publishing of a most wicked libel, blaspheming the Holy Bible and the Christian religion, and you have had the hardihood to take upon yourself the defence of the publication. You knew it was contrary to law to sell a work of that description, for you could not be ignorant that the same work had already been prosecuted, and adjudged in the Court of King's Bench to be an abominable libel. In spite of this warning you repeat the offence-you glory in your crime, and assert that your object was to do good to your fellow-countrymen. If you are so blindly infatuated, and bent upon violating the law of this land by propagating works denying the truth of the established religion, you must take the consequences of such obstinacy. It is the duty of the Court to pass such a sentence as will be the means of putting an end to the unlawful traffic you have been for some months concerned in. The rising generation are interested in the suppression of such abominable publications, which tend to destroy the seeds of religion, which had been implanted in their juvenile minds, and induce them to believe that there is no such thing as revealed religion. For the purpose of preventing you from continuing a practice which is a violation of the law, tending to subvert the established religion, and to debase and corrupt the morals of society, the Court sentences you, William Campion, to three years' imprisonment in his Majesty's Gaol of Newgate, and at the termination of that period to enter into your own recognizances in the sum of £100. to keep the peace for the term of your natural life.

The prisoner seemed surprised, as did also the majority of the spectators, at the extent of punishment to which he had been sentenced. There were three other indictments against him, which were withdrawn.