« PreviousContinue »
cut those rascally Jews in pieces, and have saved the Son of GOD! The priest blushed for himself, and was obliged to talk about the necessity of the Son of God dying in this manner, for our sins, to make out a story to reconcile the mind of the prince to the measure!
I have now merely to tell Mr. Horne that the book of nature is the book of books, and all that cannot be tried by the test of nature and reason, must, sooner or later, be rejected as false. It is the bounden duty of man to reject all books that contain notions contrary to the known laws of nature, in whatever name they may appear. A successful imposture is not the less an imposture, neither can time sanctify it sooner or later it must find exposure, and fall. Every system of religion has been alike calculated to stupify and brutalize the mind of man. It is entirely a weed in society, and the sooner it be plucked up the better will be the future growth and strength of society. It has nothing to do with morality—they are distinct principles and opposites which cannot be made to amalgamate.
I end by repeating what I began with, that if a man talks about refuting Deism, he must necessarily assume Atheism as a principle, which it is not, nor cannot be made so. It is however, the only word that seems to stand opposed to Deism on one side, as Tritheism (Christianity) or Polytheism, is on the other. The word God is but an idle word, and is bandied about without a single idea being connected with it, more than any other word whatever. It is time that we dropped words of sound, and dealt only in words of meaning, as a more substantial commodity. We have been hitherto cutting each others throats about something more insignificant than a shadow, of which all our ideas are borrowed from books, and beyond printed paper we cannot raise an idea upon the subject, CHRISTIAN, JEW, MAHOMETAN, OR ATHEIST, I OFFER YOU
THE HAND OF FELLOWSHIP.
Conclusion of Reply to Mr. Horne's Pamphlet.
Printed and Published by M. A. CARLILE, 55, Fleet Street.
No. 10, Vol. 4.] LONDON, FRIDAY, Nov. 3, 1820. [PRICK 6D.
A LETTER TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, GIFFORD, ON HIS CONDUCT TOWARDS THE QUEEN, IN PROSECUTING THE BILL OF PAINS AND PENALTIES.
SIR, As you have now finished your part in the performance of the Grand Drama, the public can take a survey of your motives and conduct without being charged with doing it prematurely. I am of opinion that you have earned a halter as dearly as any poor creature who ever swung with it at Newgate or Tyburn. My reasons for forming such an opinion are these: You have filled the offices of Solicitor and Attorney-General upwards of three years, or I believe from the month of April or May 1817. At the time you were appointed Solicitor-General, I understand the Milan Commission did not exist, consequently, it is but fair to infer that you sanctioned that commission by your advice as Solicitor-General, and you might be fairly presumed to have formed one of that Commission, save that you remained at home to receive and arrange the fruits of its exertions. It is but a fair presumption to say, that you have been one of the conspirators against the Queen, for you must have known all that has been passing, and you must have known that it would fall to your lot to assist in prosecuting the charges made against her Majesty. We have no further trace of your conduct individually until the death of the late King, when we find you, in connection with the minister, telling the present King, that you had not sufficient ground for impeaching her Majesty; but you offer it as your own opinion, in conjunction with the other law officers, that a small bill might be carried through Parliament, to exVol. IV. No. 10.
Printed by M. A. CARLILE, 55, Fleet Street.
clude her Majesty from the coronation, on the ground of the long separation that had existed between the King and Queen. This recommendation was publicly mentioned in the Newspapers at the time, and I am of opinion that this recommendation is a clearer proof of High Treason on your part, than ever you could establish against all those entrapped and unfortunate men, whem you have brought to the gallows and the block in the Old Bailey or at Derby.
The next part in the drama we find you in, is the House of Lords, pretending that you do not know how you came there, or by whose order and authority. But whether you had any order or authority from any one or not, you came prepared to play well the part that you knew would please your nominal employer. The viperous and malicious conduct of Sir Edward, afterwards Lord Coke, towards the brave and virtuous Sir Walter Raleigh, has been much exceeded by the filthy venom which you have endeavoured to spit upon the Queen. I know not whether you have foamed at the mouth, in the manner you did in the Court of King's Bench, Guildhall, when I met you there; if so, I should think that you must have tainted the atmosphere, and we might in some measure account for the sulphureously hot smell that has been so much complained of, and that seemed likely to breed some contagious disease or plague. A more bitter, a more unfeeling wretch, never filled the office of Attorney-General: a more unmanly character, nor a more ignorant person never before reached that office. You seem to have been formed by some fiend, as the necessary tool of Castlereagh.
Your task is finished-your time is nearly spun-you have been consistent to an astonishing degree, and your exit must necessarily correspond with your progress. What you have so well earned must not be denied to you-a halter, Gifford! a halter! Say your prayers and get ready to grace the scaffold.
But to come more particularly to your conduct in the House of Lords, I would observe, that you set out with statements and charges which you must have known to be altogether your invention, as you had no evidence even to insinuate any thing of the kind; and in many instances you mentioned times and places without bringing an Italian to support you, or to shew that the Queen had been at such place. Your disposition or your instructions in your opening charge seems to have been an endeavour to paralyze the public sympathy towards her Majesty, by painting her as something worse than had been
imagined of the most abandoned of her sex. I will at least, said you to yourself, try to shame any woman from opening her mouth in behalf of her Majesty whilst this case is pending. I will paint her as something which lust itself has never before imagined. But what effect, Gifford? The public seemed to stagger at the nature of your charges, at least, that portion of the public, who had no consideration of your character and office, those persons who receive all that is uttered as truths, without a calm discrimination and investigation of their bearings; those persons I say were for a moment paralyzed, but no sooner had Majocchi been cross-examined, than a re-action as violent as your charge took place, and you were generally branded as a foul, lying, and venemous traitor. Your first Italian knocked down the whole case, and formed an antidote to the venom of your opening charge. The well-dressed Majocchi, with his satin waistcoat and silk stockings, displayed so much of the character attributed to the unjustly slandered devil, that every eye in the kingdom became jaundiced against all your succeeding Italians. The name of Guelph and Gifford, with the Italian witnesses as their imps, will form an appropriate substitute for the Devil, inasmuch as real beings are to be preferred to imaginary beings that never had existence. We shall no longer want a name and substance by which we may display the evil spirit that Kingcraft and priestcraft has engendered amongst mankind. We need no longer to set up an idol as the butt of slander, we have now found living beings that deserve to denominate all that disgraces and all that is pernicious to the human race.
But, as if you had not accumulated a sufficient load of infamy on your own head, and the heads of your employers, you return at the close of the case a similar species of slander and false imputation. Like the dismembered snake, you continue to struggle, and attempt to poison. Your opponents have only need to look on, and smile, and wait your last breath-they have disarmed your tongue of its tenom, and they now hold you up as a spectacle for execration, or ridicule, just as the spectators may feel disposed to view you. The cheers of your supporters and patrons, can scarcely raise your voice to an audible pitch; and your importance is the more displayed as you make an effort to be heard.
You may now begin to lament the day when Sir Vicary Gibbs made a bargain with your father to take you from the Attorney's Office. Wit nor honesty are not to be purchased: and as you are not blessed with either inherently, you have
been hastened to the end of your career, by the want of both, and the force of money and influence. You seem to have been born as a fit Attorney General for George the Fourth; and if I could believe the tales about the power and inference of the Devil, I should think that he had been for years arranging and preparing his characters to perform this grand drama. No man could have been a better minister for George the Fourth than Castlereagh; and no man could have suited them both, as Attorney General, so well as Gifford. I am not yet acquainted with the fate of the Bill of Pains and Penalties, and I feel quite indifferent about it, It is a scene of the drama that will be the least interesting, for this, unlike other dramas, began with a plot instead of ending with one. The spectators all cry out, we have seen enough, and the last scene can no longer entertain us-let us away and seek after other amusement. The revolution is to be the after-piece, at which all the spectators will cheerfully resume their places, and rapturously applaud the performance and its result.
One of your chief complaints against her Majesty has been, that, during her residence abroad, she never had "divine worship" performed in her household, according to the estalished rites of this country; but that she once accompanied Bergami to a Catholic Church, and partook of the ceremony of that church. In the first place, I would observe, that to have had family worship in Italy, or any other part of her Majesty's travels, according to the established Liturgy of this country, it would have been necessary for her Majesty to have had a priest in her suite. The deficiency of this you have just cause to lament. A Priest, or Confessor, would have been an important witness for you, and your master would have given him the Archbishopric of Canterbury, if he had sworn effectually. This is the ground of your complaint. A priest-aye, Aye! aye! there has been a deficiency of a Priest to perfect the conspiracy, Priests in all ages have been the most famous conspirators: it is a profession which they study: it is synonimous with their office. Your case is short by a priest, Mr. Attorney General-you are not perfect-you have suffered yourself to be defeated for want of a Priest. Why had you not made your Italian Priest swear what was necessary? He could have absolved his own sins and perjuries, as well as those of his flock in Cotton Garden. You might well lament that you have not an English Priest to assist you-he would have capped your case nicely, Mr. Attorney. As to her Majesty's going to a Catholic Church