the said publication, and intended to have continued the sale of the said publication until your Petitioner should have had an opportunity of submitting the said publication and his intentions in publishing it, to a jury of his fellow-citizens.

"That your Petitioner, to his great surprize and injury, was again arrested on the eleventh day of February in the present year aforesaid, on a warrant issued by the Lord Chief Justice Abbott, which warrant amongst other things sets forth "on the affidavit of George Prichard and Thomas Fair," that your Petitioner had ben proceeded against by an indictment for the said publication, and that your Petitioner had entered into recognizances to plead to the said indictment, but that since your Petitioner had entered into the said recognizances, your Petitioner "had sold another copy of the said Libel, for which last mentioned offence the said George Prichard intends to prosecute." That your Petitioner was brought before Mr. Justice Holroyd, at his chambers in Serjeant's Inn, Chancery Lane, and by him committed on the said eleventh day of February, to his Majesty's goal of Newgate.

"And your Petitioner further prayeth, that your Honourable House will of its wisdom take into consideration the necessity of repealing the said grievous and oppressive law, which by its provisions, enables the common informer or perjured villain, with the aid of a partial judge, to harrass and injure his Majesty's unoffending subjects.

"And as in duty bound, your Petitioner will ever pray,
&c.
"RICHARD CARLILE."

On the 23d February the Publisher addressed the following Letter and Petition to the Attorney-General and received the following Answer.

SIR,

Fleet Street, February 23rd, 1819.

I BEG leave to lay before you a Petition, to the IIonourable the House of Commons, with a request that you will be pleased to present it.

It has occurred to me, that no other Member of the Honourable House is so well qualified to judge of and support its prayer, as his Majesty's Attorney-General.

Your condescension to the above request will oblige.

"To Sir Samuel Shepherd, Knight,

His Majesty's Attorney-General."

Sir, your humble servant,

R. CARLILE.

"TO THE HONOURABLE THE COMMONS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED. "The PETITION of RICHARD CARLILE, of Fleet Street, in the City of London, Bookseller,

HUMBLY SHEWETH,

"That your Petitioner being anxious to see restored to its original purity, that invaluable right and privilege, the Trial by Jury; as well for his own personal safety, as for the honour of his country; humbly prayeth the at

tention of your Honourable House, to that part of the Jury List belonging to the City of London, whence the Jurors denominated Special Jurors are

chosen.

"That it appears to your Petitioner, who presumes, it could also be made apparent to your Honourable House, that instead of the Merchants of the City of London being called on, to serve as Special Jurors, according to the statute in that case made and provided, many persons, who are not bona fide Merchants of the City of London, but who, by some undue influence, have got their names inserted on the Jury List as merchants of the City of London, have, for a considerable time, to the great scandal of our Courts of Justice, made a traffic of serving as Jurors, for the consideration of the sum of one guinea, which is paid to a Special Juror for each case on which he is called to decide.

"That, it appears to your Petitioner, according to a report laid before the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commonality of the City of London, in Common Council assembled, on the eleventh day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventeen, that one person decided no less than fifty-five cases, out of one hundred and fourteen, which were decided in the City of London, during the sittings after the several Terms of Hilary, Easter, and Trinity of the year aforesaid.

"That it appears to your Petitioner, that although a new List of Jurors, has of of late been presented to the Master of the Crown Office by the Sheriff or Deputy of the City of London, it is not a full and proper list of the merchants of the City of London, a great portion of their names bearing only the initial of the Christian name, which renders any attempt to summon such persons abortive.

"That it appears to your Petitioner, that the intent of the statute, which provides, that, all cases of Libel and other difficult cases may be decided by a Special Jury, (meaning thereby, from the situation in life, of such persons as are qualified for Special Jurors) that, such Juries would be more likely to combine the necessary information and talent required to decide on difficult or abstruse questions, and the true meaning of such statute could be no otherwise, than, that such Juries should be considered to posses Special abilities, applicable to such questions as they may severally be called on to decide.

"And your Petitioner, further prayeth, that when your Honourable House shall have taken the above premises into consideration; your Honourable House will in its wisdom think fit to order the returns of the names and residences, in full, of all the merchants in the City of London, qualified to serve as Special Jurors, according to the statute, in that case made and provided; and, also, to order such lists as have of late been used for the nomination of Special Jurors, to be laid before your Honourable House, that your Honourable House may become acquainted with the gross perversion of the statute in that case made and provided.

"And further prayeth, that your Honourable House will in its wisdom, take such steps, as shall in future rescue our Courts of Justice from this disgrace, and secure to the subject the benefit of the Trial by Jury in its original purity.

"And as in duty bound, your Petitioner will ever pray, &c.
"R. CARLILE."

"SIR,

Spring Gardens, February 24, 1819.

"I HAVE received your note dated the 25th, February, 1819 accompanied by a Petition addressed to the Honourable the Commons of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled, signed R. Carlile, and I beg to inform you that I decline presenting the Petition to the House, and have therefore returned it to you.

"I am, Sir, your obedient Servant,

"S. SHEPHERD."

"Mr. Carlile."

The Petition was then presented to Mr. Alderman Waithman, with copies of the forgoing letters, requesting him to present it; but he made an excuse, by saying, that, it had better not be presented, as the subject matter was before the Common Council of the City of London and that it would be shortly decided. That short time does not appear to have arrived yet although three years have nearly elapsed, and near five from the time of Mr. Pearson's introducing the matter and getting it referred to a Committtee! Quere. Are these Committees paid for their particular business?

from

On the 28th April, being the first day of Easter Term, the Publisher appeared and pleaded to the Information and Indictment to which he had imparled in the former term, and found another information, on the No. 6, vol 4, of Sherwin's Political Register, which had been kept out of sight until this time; although it was purchased for prosecution prior to the first publication of Paine's Theological Works. There was also a second Indictment on the part of the Vice Society, against the "Thelogical Works of Thomas Paine," and a third against Elihu Palmer's "Principles of Nature," to which the Publisher's Letter to the Hypocrites called attention. To the three last, the Publisher again imparled. On leaving the Court no further bail having been moved for, which, it appeared, arose the neglect of Mr. Marriot, the Junior Counsel to the Essex Street Gang, and a man who on the score of hypocrisy seems well adapted for them, Messrs. Prichard and Jones the Agents for the Gang ran out after the Publisher, and begged him to give notice of bail, that it might be taken at the Judge's Chambers. This was done accordingly, and a circumstance which occurred at the Chambers is worthy of record Mr. Justice Best was sitting, and a similar attempt was made on the part of the Prosecutors to demand heavy bail, as was made before Judge Bailey, but resisted by the Judge in a similar manner. The recognizances having been taken, Mr. Jones the Clerk in the Crown Office, demanded of the Publisher half a guinea as a fee; he was answered, good humouredly, that he must look to the Society for whom he acted, for all his fees. To this he angrily replied, that the fee was not his, but the Judge's Clerk's, and that if it was not paid the recognizances would not be valid. The Publisher not being dupe enough for this pick-pocket, told him that he had no money for any such purpose. The Judge's Clerk was appealed

to, who insisted on payment, in the same authoritative manner, and was answered with the same indifference. "Well then," says he, "we will lay the matter before Mr. Justice Best, and have his authority for it." "I will wait for you," says the Publisher, "but you will have none of my money for any such purpose. In they went to the adjoining Chamber, where the Judge was sitting and after a conference of fifteen or twenty minutes, came out quite mild and very civilly informed the Publisher that Mr. Justice Best said if Mr. Carlile had no money he could not pay the fee: which was just the same as saying: the fee is an imposition and robbery, and none but easy dupes would pay it: although it is well known to be a compounded matter between the Judge and his Clerk, and that all these offices from the Lord Chancellor and Chief Justices down to the lowest of their Clerks are farmed out at a rent just like a house or estate; only in these cases the suitors at law have to pay the exactions. If you employ a Lawyer he makes it a point of honour to pay all these fees, and a pretty list of them he will exhibit to you in his bill. It is a robbery, and the writer of this will never pay another fee in any case where he is the defendant. He has successfully resisted them all, and has paid none save in a few instances where he employed an Attorney, who made it a point of honour to pay them, and of course out of the pocket of his client. Beware of Lawyers. They are quite unnecessary in cases of Libel for the Defendant. Murray and Sharpe for the Bridge Street Gang pay all the fees both for the prosecutors, and defendants. They are very liberal with the funds of their Association in that way.

Trinity Term came, when the Publisher appeared in Court and attempted further to postpone his plea upon the three last prosecutions, upon the strength of three affidavits, which set forth that the Vice Society's prosecutions were multiplied for the malignant purpose of embarrassing him in his defence.

Mr. Justice Best called this very rash swearing, to say the least of it. Gurney the Counsel got up and nodded assent, and said it was merely making the Court a medium to defame this very respectable society. Defendant told him to sit down, and asked him what business it was of his, when it came out that he was to be the Counsel for the Society. This very man who had promised to defend the third part of the "Age of Reason" gratuitously, if ever it should be prosecuted, even before it was printed in this country! This man who rose at the bar entirely from defending the publications of Daniel Isaac Eaton, who may be said to have been the predecessor of the present Publisher of Paine's Works. The Publisher knows nothing of the private character of Gurney, but if personal representations and anonymous letters were of any weight, he could write a pretty history or memoir of him. This is known, he is a great hypocrite as a public character, and from a late trial at the Surrey Assizes, it appears, to be a family complaint, which breaks through

the surplice and cassock as well as through the gown and wig. A Family that will say, preach, or swear any thing for gain.

The Defendant's attempt to imparle further was resisted by the Court, and he pleaded Not Guilty to all, being now three Indictments and two Informations, besides four other Informations, which were hanging over his head, and which altogether, at the time of the Mock Trials, were understood to have been increased to more than a dozen. When the enemy is defeated they shall be all gathered into a volume.

The Attorney-General Shepherd was evidently reluctant to bring his Information to a trial, as it might have been done in the sittings after Easter Term. However, he delayed it until he could shift the odium upon Gifford by getting a start in office, which was done in August. The Defendant stood ready for trial as soon as he had pleaded to the first Information and Indictment and took the precaution to subpoena the Archbishop of Canterbury at an early period. The Archbishop was so far surprized at the subpoena as not to notice that a guinea was left with it, but politely returned it the following day, by his Secretary, saying, that its being left was overlooked for the moment, and that it was not a necessary accompaniment with the subpoena in this case.

In September the note of preparation for the trials was heard on the part of the Persecutors, and the following Correspondence took place.

* SIR, Lincoln's Inn, September 2, 1819. "WE are directed by His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, to acquaint you, that His Grace will be in Nottinghamshire in the month of October, and that if you should require his attendance upon your trial according to the subpoena with which he has been served, you must take the trouble to enquire at Lambeth Palace, about a week previous to the day appointed, where you will obtain His Grace's exact address; and upon notice being then sent his Grace, and suitable arrangements made, His Grace will not fail to attend.

"His Grace concludes that you will be aware of the great inconvenience he must be subjected to by such a journey, and that you will not require his attendance unless it be very material.

"We are, Sir, your obedient Servants,

"Mr. Carlile.

"FORSTER, COOKE, and FRERE.

"MY LORD,

Fleet Street, September 4, 1819.

"I FEEL it my duty to express the warm approbation I felt on receiving the candid information from Messrs. Forster, Cooke, and Frere, where your Grace may be found in the month of October, should the presence of your Grace be required on my trial.