may we erect a fabric that will be honourable to the humanity and wisdom of man, and dedicate it to truth,

For Truth has such a face, and such a mien,
As to be lov'd, needs only to be seen.

Dec. 19, 1828.

HUMANITAS.

VICE OF OATH-MAKING AS EXHIBITED IN AMERICA.

(From the New York Correspondent.)

LEGALITY OF WITNESSES.

MR. EDITOR,--At a moment so pregnant as this is with schemes, devised by the priesthood, to abridge our political rights under religious pretences, it would not only gratify a number of your readers, but subserve the cause in which you are engaged, if you would publish the letter written by Mr. Edward Giddins, which was read at a late trial, in Ontario county, for conspiracy, and which the court held as sufficient evidence to authorise the rejection of Mr. G. as a witness. To enable you to comply with the request, I enclose a copy of the letter; together with some remarks on the legality of the decision, from the "National Observer," which ought to accompany the document. Yours, &c.

MR. GIDDINS' LETTTER.

F.

Fort Niagara, 10th April, 1827. MR. D. MORRISSON,-My dear friend. Your friendly letter of the 10th of February was duly received, for which you will please accept my warmest thanks, and now, after a very fashionable delay, finding" all my nerves in a serene mood," I have resolved to answer it. You must not, however, expect to find in it "all about the past, present, and future," for the first would require a scroll as lengthy as one of the holy Evangelists has been pleased to declare would be necessary to relate all the acts and sayings of Jesus Christ. "Behold," says he," the world would not be able to contain all the volumes on the subject," or words to that import. The second, or present time, is but a moment and leaves us with the celerity of lightning before we begin to describe it; in fact it is to time what a point is to space, and all attempts to define either are but so many proofs of the fallacy and impotency of our minds. With respect to the future, I can only reiterate what has been said by thousands, that it is concealed, (and kindly I believe) from our view by an impenetrable barrier, which no human sagacity can remove, but that it passes in review before us, fold by fold, as it becomes present, and rushes on to join the past. And now, although it is bolting the course, as a knight of the turf would say, let me put in a word, that I think grammarians exhibit more grammar than philosophy by dressing their verbs in so many different tenses or times-but let this subject rest till another time.

I am happy that your prospects are so flattering-that you have friends to your mind, and know how to appreciate the boon which some one has said, is the "mysterious cement of the soul, sweetener of life, and solder of society," and above all that your neighbourhood is not infested with "cold

* Involving a case of alleged murder.-R. C.

hearted misanthropes," or “devils in human shape," but that "angelic philanthropy" pervades your borders; indeed, one would be led to believe from your description of society, that Buffalo was situated in the Symzonian world, or the interior of our old terraqueous nut-shell, where` sin and trouble never entered, but felicity reigned triumphant. I love to see you write this way, it betokens a satisfaction of mind, a cheerfulness of heart, which I hope you may always possess, but which some have not, and which you must remember you are liable to lose.

Under the head of Orthodoxy you relate an anecdote which I am sorry to say is but too faithful a picture of the intolerance of Christianity in general, but of Calvinism in particular; it is now, however, the raging mania of the times and must have its day, but the world is fast advancing in knowledge, and driving before it superstition, bigotry, credulity, and intolerance; and establishing in their places universal benevolence and liberal principles. Reason will yet gain her right, and man no longer be duped by priestcraft and manacled by imaginary fears, emanating from the superstitious dogmas imbibed in youth; the time is approaching when universal charity, universal benevolence, and universal philanthropy will prevail, when man will know how to act in conformity to the dictates of reason, and when he will subscribe to no creed but that of nature; that her laws are immutable, and can never he violated; and that a knowledge of them is at the same time, a knowledge of Deity.---Look up to the heavens and see what a mighty volume is open to our view, in which is written in a legible character, intelligible to every nation and individual on the whole earth, "universal power, wisdom and benignity.' The sun rises upon the just and unjust, and inculcates universal charity---bigots will not see these things, or seeing them, pervert their construction.

A full and complete knowledge of our situation in the scale of being, will convince us that God has the same care of man as of an insect, of an insect as of a tree, of a tree as of a stone-that with him there can be no difference or distinctions between beauty and deformity, virtuc and vice, perfection and imperfection-that prayers are but mockery to his name, and ought not to be encouraged, as they tend to impress us with the false notion that he is impotent, and operated upon by our persuasion-that all we can say or do cannot change him—that he is not susceptible of persuasion and as relates to men, he is not capable of love or hatred-we are all members of the grand society of mankind, and every act we can do to benefit it, may be called virtuous, but every act that does it injury if done wilfully is wicked; this is my notion of virtue and vice, that they do not refer to a future time, but relate altogether to man in his present state, and the whole of our duty as moral agents may be comprised in these few words, "do all the good we can to our fellow creatures, and inflict not pain unnecessarily upon the meanest reptile,"-practice that, and we need not fear any of the horrible punishments painted in such vivid colours by fanatics.

You will perceive from the above that my views are not in accordance with the Bible, for that book represents the Deity as vindictive, revengeful and inconsistent, performing an act to-day and repenting to-morrow.

But I have preached long enough for this time, I presume, either for your pleasure or edification.

Please to reply soon-and here let me assure you that nothing would please me more than a continuance of a friendly correspondence.

I am, dear Sir, very respectfully, your friend and well wisher,

EDWARD GIDDINS.

We perceive, by the report of the trial in the "Ontario Messenger," that the Court considered Mr. Giddins an incompetent witness," because he had not such a belief in the existence of an over-ruling providence, and in a future state of rewards and punishments, as the law requires.' On the decision, the "National Observer" has the following pertinent remarks ;--

It will be seen that the testimony of Mr. Giddins was rejected; and the ground upon which it was rejected. In an article from the "Anti-Masonic Enquirer," we are not a little surprised to find Mr. Weed acknowledging the legality of that decision. If it be legal, it must rest upon a statute of our own, or upon the Common Law. But we have no statute declaring a witness either incompetent or incredible, on account of any religious opinion, or irreligious opinion, if you please, which he may have formed.

Does it rest upon the Common Law? We answer no! For Black. stone expressly says; "All witnesses of whatever religion or country, that have the use of their reason, are to be received and examined, except such as are infamous, or such as are interested in the event of the cause. All others are competent witnesses; though the jury from other circumstances, will judge of their credibility." Now, then, where will Mr. Weed find "the laws of the land" which "excluded his (Giddins) testimony?"

Our system of law is founded---Firstly, on our Federal and State Constitutions. Secondly, on the statutes of Congress, or the state Legisla tures, passed in conformity to the literal provisions of these constitutions; we say literal, because we will never consent to any other construction in passing laws, or judicially deciding upon them. Thirdly, on such portions of the Common Law of England as are not incompatible with the letter, or spirit of our Federal and State Constitutions.

What says our Federal Constitution? "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." If then, no religion can be established by law in the United States, it follows that no Judge, or Court of the United States, can reject a witness as incompetent, on account of any supposed eccentricity in his religious creed, or his being destitute of any religious creed.

What says our State Constitution! "The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall for ever be allowed in this State, to all mankind."

What says our Statute Law? That is silent; for we have no statute on the subject; and God forbid that we ever should; unless it be a statute to put down for ever such decisions as that which we are combating.

It is clear, then, that there is no ground for this decision in the Constitution of the United States; nor in the Constitution of the State of NewYork; nor in the Common Law of England, as laid down by its great, and we had almost said unerring Oracle; nor in the Statute Law of the United States, or of New-York. From neither of these correct and legitimate sources, we affirm it without fear of contradiction, is any principle, rule, or law, to be derived, that shall sanction the decision of the petty court of Sessions, which excluded Giddins' testimony---the testimony of an unimpeachable witness, in a case involving the life, liberty and property of every citizen of this state.

Where, then, we ask Mr. Weed once more, will he find the law of the land, sustaining that grossly weak or infamously wicked decision? for one or the other of these it is, as every tyro in law must know, if he has

read his books, and has common sense to understand them. We put this question seriously to Mr. Weed; because as the professed advocate of the Anti-Masonic cause, he must be aware, that any erroneous opinions, or misrepresentations of his, may produce wide-spread and ruinous effects to that cause, upon the success of which hang all our hopes of preserving the constitutional liberties of this land; and we beg him to reconsider the subject, for he may rest assured he will find no such law has even the shadow of an existence.

We can tell him, however, where he can find the authorities, or precedents, as they are called, upon which we presume this fatuitous or felonious decision was made. He will find them in the arbitrary, tyranical, and weak or wicked decisions of partial and corrupt, or infatuated and higotted Judges of Great Britain and America. But he will find no law for it, not the shadow of law for it, in this country. Several of our Supreme Court Judges, it is true, have made such decisions; but they have made them in the face of law, in the face of right, in the face of liberty and justice; and every Judge who has been guilty of making such a decision, ought to have been impeached and removed from the bench for it; and so ought the Judges who turned Giddins out of court, were it not that they are honest farmers, (save one) misled by mistaking the unauthorised, extra-Judicial, arbitrary and illegal decisions of their Supreme Superiors for the law of the land; a mistake not to be wondered at in them, since a legislator, like Mr. Weed, has run into it.

NOTE BY R. CARLILE.

The case, in which the evidence of Edward Giddins was rejected, was a trial for conspiracy in the abduction of a man who is supposed to have been murdered as a revealing freemason, by other masons.

In the year 1826, after I had published an Exposure of Freemasonry in 1825, the same thing was attempted in North America, and one William Morgan, who had been a captain in some kind of North American employ, was the first to announce his intention to do it. Under the pretence of a writ for debt, this man was arrested and handed about from one gang of masons to another, in secresy, until he was no more heard of; and there is not a doubt but he has been masonically murdered. The United States of North America have been deeply agitated on the subject of this believed murder; rewards have been offered for discoveries; trials for conspiracy to abduct and for abduction have taken place, until such a storm is raised, that the Anti-Masonic Test has become the great point of eligibility to all offices. Newspapers and magazines have been started purposely as AntiMasonic Beacons and Observers, to write down Masonry; aud every paper announces renunciations and denunciations of masonry; so far indeed that Masonry can no longer survive in the Northern States.

It was on one of those trials for conspiracy, out of which some evidence of the murder of William Morgan, by the Masons, would have been educed, that the evidence of this very intelligent man, Edward Giddins, was rejected. His letter is a well written letter, and evinces the love of truth that can alone make evidence respectable. This is a very good postscript to the Letter and Lesson to the Duke of Wellington.

LETTER 47.-FROM THE REV. ROBERT TAYLOR.

NEW YEAR'S PROSPECTS.

DEAR MR. CARLILE,-There is a very clever adage that represents it as a ninth beatitude, by some error dropt out of the text of Christ's mountebank sermon-" Blessed are they that entertain no expectations, for they shall never be disappointed." As predicated of expectations, that the humble in station, or unfortunate in circumstances, might be betrayed to repose in the virtue, honour, or honourable feeling of aristocratical tyrants, the adage is replete with moral wisdom. And I am now right heartily glad, that it ruled my mind's observance in my late application to the Right Hon. Robert Peel. It requires no great advance in the moral science, to be able to make a very accurate calculation, as to the probable when, where, how, and under what modifications and circumstances, such a man as Mr. Peel, would do an act that itself would be morally right. Imprimis, when he could by no possibility stumble on any other sort of action.-2nd. When it should not cost him the pains of a thought, of an inquiry, or of the diversion of his shallow-hearted vanity, from that eternal round of dissipation and luxury which constitutes the whole business of life, to the officers and ministers of a profligate and unprincipled government.-3rd. When something should be to be got by it, to his own popularity and influence, such as the chance of being toasted at a more-than-half drunken city feast, as the friend of civil and religious liberty.-4th. And when nothing should be to be lost by it, and no hazard at all incurred, of abating the adulations of the pimps and parasites of the church, and the lordships and ladyships of the drawing room, or of doing anght that "might seem disgracious in the city's eyes." In a word, when in some way or other it shall gratify his own selfishness, then, and not till then, however late, the Right Hon. Robert Peel will be just:-and send you in his bill for it.

For, after all, your great statesmen are very little creatures, and like the rascal GOD, save us, or damn us, not for our merits or demerits, but only with a view to their own glory. I am vastly inclined to be a little popish in this matter, as I find a prayer addressed to the Almighty, at the end of the mass-book, which most wonderfully expresses my state of sentiment and feeling towards the Almighty Robert Peel :- O Lord God, if thine own goodness will not induce thee to be merciful unto me !— my importunity shall make thee."

There is a little waggery in this humble suit of a sinner, which might make you suspect the genuineness of the quotation, but I assure you that it is genuine, and worth observance; as supplying a consolatory evidence, that in that depth of mental imbecility, than which there is no lower deep, there is an indefeasiNo. 1.—Vol. 3.

C