« PreviousContinue »
MR. JUSTICE BEST,
ALMOST AT ITS COMMENCEMENT;
ON THE PROPRIETY OF WHICH SUPPRESSION,
Public, as the highest Tribunal,
IS NOW APPEALED TO AND CALLED UPON
THE DEFENDANT, HER PROSECUTORS, AND HER JUDGE:
REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS
Defence was Suppressed.
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY R. CARLILE, 55, FLEET-STREET.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GUILDHALL,
Before Mr. Justice BEST, and a Special Jury.
THIS was an Indictment, upon the Prosecution of the Society for the Suppression of Vice, against the Defendant, Mary-Ann Carlile, for an impious and blasphemous libel.
Mr. MARRYAT was about to open the pleadings, when The Defendant handed a paper to the Judge, requesting his lordship to ask the Jury whether any of them were members of the Society.
Mr. Justice BEST did not think the fact would be a ground for challenge. His lordship, however, put the question.
The Jury all replied in the negative.
Mr. GURNEY said that no such gentleman would have been put upon the Jury.
The Defendant said that there was a gentleman upon the Jury who was a member of the Constitutional Society. The Jury looked at each other.
Mr. Justice BEST.-This is not the Constitutional Society prosecution: it is the next.
The Defendant.-I do not think a member of the Constitutional Association fit to serve on any Jury that is to try me.
Mr. Justice BEST did not think that the fact, if it existed, would be any ground of objection; but if there was any gentleman upon the Jury belonging to the Association, he would request him to retire.
Defendant.—Mr. Houghton is a member.
Mr. Houghton (from the jury box) begged to contradict that statement: he belonged to no such society.
Defendant.-The name of Houghton is on the list.
Mr. Houghton. Then it is the name of some other person. Mr. MARRYAT opened the pleadings.
Mr. GURNEY stated, that the Defendant stood indicted for selling a pamphlet entitled "An Appendix to the Theological Works of Thomas Paine." She was the sister of Richard Carlile, and, after the conviction of that individual and of his wife, carried on their business at the shop in Fleet-street. How long that shop, which was a disgrace to the magistracy of the city of London, would be allowed to