this event, when Roger was at the lodgings of his friend, the latter took down a pair of foils and said, "now I will show you how I settled our adversary the other day. He looked like a broken-down gamester, the sort of fellow to let himself out to hire for any villanous job well-paid. He saw I was a student, and knowing that in our duels we only cut, thought I should be innocent of thrusts and small-sword. Not so,thanks to that little Creole who gave me so many lessons-I must introduce you to him some day,—such a springy piece of wire, and he rolls his eyes, and stamps, and cries ha! in a way enough to unnerve the best

of the uninitiated."

"Look here: it was so. Stand on your defence. No great things that-however, it will do. After a few feints and passes, very prettily made on both sides, I will say, he made a thrust in tierce. I was waiting for that. Instead of parrying it by a slight movement of my wrist towards the right, and making a return lunge in carte as he expected, I raised my hand towards my head, with the point of my sword directed downwards on the left,-say 45°-then his blade passed out over my sword in the air-my sword was under his, mind-so I was able to make a thrust in carte instantly which would have sufficed for him, if he had not drawn back like lightning and parried it, but the spring back made him parry too violently-and then, for me, it was but describing a semicircle with my sword-point under his wrist, and I thrust at him in tierce he never looked for another so quick-and that he did not parry. I could have killed him on the spot, but I thought a wound a little higher would serve my purpose, and leave him time to repent."

Roger expressed his wish to take a lesson or two with the foils, and promised to reciprocate with the gloves.

"The small-sword," said Arnim, "affords the most graceful practice in the world, it improves the carriage, quickens the eye, and strengthens the wrist, You never know what use it may be to you. Strange to say and yet what harm?-we number our best fencers here among the students of theology."

Our conscience is now somewhat at rest. Nothing requiring explanation has been left unexplained. You are not called on to believe anything either improbable or impossible. The credibility of this narrative would have been lamentably impaired, had this rationale of so important an encounter been omitted, and a leading event left unaccounted for.

V.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF HUMAN NATURE.

The Nature of Man as Spiritual, Immortal, and Responsible, will be the most frequent topic of this department: though sometimes we shall introduce MISCELLANEOUS Subjects.

AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF AN ATHEIST.*

THE phenomenon of a trial for Atheism by a Jury, in a court of law, instead of in the court of reason, occurred about nine years ago, but has lately been presented to the public with more matured thoughts and comments of the persecuted Atheist.

We have already expressed in a few words (see the criticism in our last number,) our views of this transaction; that it was an unchristian procedure, carried out with needless severity, and mistakenly set down (by the Author of this account) to the credit of Christianity. We then enquired of him or his friends, and here repeat the request-whether they would favour us with any facts or principles or injunctions in the records of Christianity justifying this method of legal enforcement of opinions. Leaving this question for the present, we shall endeavour to lay before our readers, some of the main points of this "history," from which without the aid of enlarged comments) they will learn that this is a page in the history of "Statesmen's Religion," and has no connexion with the religion of Jesus.

And we confidently anticipate that the Author himself will see some reasons for revising many of his observations, as well as for a candid examination of his mental history, as to how far his opinions have been influenced by feelings,-whether his rejection of Christianity, and even the doctrine of a Divine Being, has not been hastened and intensified by the conduct of those who, in the name of God and Christianity, have dishonoured both.

But to enter upon this narrative, Mr. Holyoake, with others, was engaged as Socialist Missionary and Lecturer:"A fellow missionary, Mr. Charles Southwell, had, in conjunction with Mr. Chilton, and Mr. Field, set up an Atheistical periodical in Bristol, entitled the Oracle of Reason-which the authorities attempting forcibly to put down, Mr. Southwell was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment in Bristol Gaol. On a visit to him I walked ninety miles from Birmingham to Bristol,

The History of the last trial by Jury for Atheism in England: a fragment of Autobiography. By George Jacob HOLYOAKE. London: James Watson.

and as my way lay through Cheltenham, I staid a night in that town to deliver a lecture on Home Colonization as a means of superseding Poor Laws and Emigration.' At the conclusion of the lecture, I instructed the chairman to make the announcement, which I still make after my lectures, viz., that any of the audience may put relevant questions or offer what objections they consider useful-whereupon a person stood up, of the name of Maitland, a teetotaler, and sort of local preacher, and complained that though I had told them their duty to man, I had not told them of their duty to God,' and enquired, whether we should have churches and chapels in community?"

"I answered thus: I do not desire to have religion mixed up with an economical and secular subject, but as Mr. Maitland has introduced questions in reference to religion I will answer him frankly. Our national debt already hangs like a mill stone round the poor man's neck, and our National Church and general religious institutions cost us, upon accredited computation, about twenty millions annually. Worship being THUS expensive, I appeal to your heads and your pockets, whether we are not too poor to have a God? If poor men cost the State as much, they would be put like officers on half-pay, and while our distress lasts, I think it would be wise to do the same thing with the Deity. Thus far I object, as a matter of political economy, to build chapels in communities. If others want them they have themselves to please, but I, not being religious, cannot propose them. Morality I regard, but I do not believe there is such a thing as a God.* The pulpit says Search the Scriptures,' and they who are thus trepanned get imprisoned in Bristol Gaol, like my friend Mr. Southwell. For myself, I flee the Bible as a viper, and revolt at the touch of a Christian.

"Perhaps this reply was indecorous, but it was nothing more."

This "indecorous" speech gave rise to an equally indecorous prose

cution.

The proper answer to the speech would have been to shew that it was rather an objection to endowing a sect with large national funds, than any proof that we could not afford to have a God, and that therefore the allusion to the Deity might have been spared, without any violation of decency. For he is served only with "a willing mind," "not grudgingly nor of necessity; for God loveth a cheerful giver."-(2 Cor. ix. 7.)

And therefore since even our Author allows "others to please themselves," if they "want chapels," he should not have put down as objectionable items "general religious institutions," in addition to the National Church; since these institutions are willingly supported by those who "want them."

The speech then, is more than "indecorous," it was unfair and illogical. Whatever system of opinions our Author may finally adopt, or his companions introduce into "community," there will, we suppose, be a necessity for teachers, who must consequently be supported, though it is quite possible the Deity will not then be upbraided for the expense.

• I do not remember using this phrase, but as the witnesses reported it, perhaps it was so but I still incline to the opinion that it was an expression they fell upon in stating their impressions of the meeting to their employers, and all working in one office, they fell into one story, either through inadvertance or from precaution.

And of this we are sure, that if we can afford to live without God, he can manage without us: "God that made the worlds and all things therein," is not "worshipped with men's hands as though he needed anything, seeing he giveth to all life and breath and all things."-(Acts xvii. 24, 25.) None of the money collected for religion, makes him the richer; it is not paid into any bank as a fund for the relief of the Almighty he is not enriched by our gifts, nor impoverished by our withholding; our goodness extendeth not to him, but only to his creatures, as in distant imitation of his providence, we become the almoners of his bounty: and he condescends to regard our usefulness to men, as a service done unto him, when that service is rendered from right motives.

Nor is any alteration made in this principle when "all judgment is committed unto the Son;" for "when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all his holy angels with him"-"then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: then shall he answer them, saying, verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me."-(Matt. xxvi. 34–45.)

Thus is the Redeemer served with men's hands, as men administer to the necessities (spiritual and bodily) of their fellow-men. All the good we do to men, by spreading truth, extending liberty, relieving poverty, is set down as done to Christ; all that we refrain from thus doing, is defrauding and despising him; therefore, to put the Deity on half-pay, is to shut up the bowels of our compassion, and become deaf to the woes and necessities of the human race.

To give up religion because of its expense, is to give up charity, to abandon all forms of real benevolence.

And since instruction is one of the highest benefits we can bestow upon mankind, this benevolence is not ill directed when advanced for the support of those whose life is devoted to reading, meditation and teaching; for though they may teach religon (to which the Atheist objects) he cannot consistently object to the liberty of doing this; and the honesty of living by it; at least in that form which God sanctions in Christianity, and for which our Author contends,-namely, the voluntary principle. So that the answer of our Author, was not only indecorous, but entirely beside the mark, since they could have religion in community without State burdens; by simply leaving religion as its founder left it,-to support itself, by the willing contributions of those who experience its power and feel its value.

Nor will an impartial judge see any difference on the score of economy between supporting missionaries of the Cross, and missionaries of Socialism: the right of the Socialist parson is defended by Mr. Holyoake, in the following part of his experience as a travelling preacher.

"My next location was in a northern manufacturing town, where I was treated like its iron-ware-case-hardened. My salary there of 30s. per week was a subject of frequent discussion by the members of the Branch. For this sum, I taught a Day School and lectured on Sunday. And as he who lives the life of a child all the week (as he must do who teaches children to any purpose) finds it hard to live that of a man on Sunday, my duties were wearying and perplexing. Those who

VOL. I..

U 2

grudged my salary made no sufficient allowance for that application necessary for the discharge of my duties-an application which often com menced long before they were up in the morning, and continued long after their mechanical employment was over at night. Not comprehending myself, at that time, that they who work for the improvement of others, must not calculate on their appreciation as an encouragement, but as a result, I was thrown into that unpleasant state in which my pride incited me to stop and my duty to go on. It was not till subsequent to my return from Glasgow, four years afterwards, that I mastered the problem thus raised, which so many have been ruined in solving. Though an anti-priest, my treatment was that of a priest. My congregation, as is the case with most Freethinkers, objected to the pay of the priest, when the true quarrel was with error, and not with payment: for if a man has the truth, it is well that it should be his interest to hold it. But Dissent, objecting to the pay of others, has been left without pay itself -hence its apostles have been reduced to fight the lowest battles of animal wants, when they should have been fighting for the truth. Dissent has too often paid its advocates the bad compliment of supposing, that if placed within the reach of competence, they would either fall into indolence or hypocrisy. It has acted practically upon the hypothesis, that the only possible way of ensuring their zeal and sincerity, was to starve them a policy which leaves progress to the mercy of accident. For a long period the operation of this policy chilled me. My initiation into affairs of progress was in company with men who estimated, above all other virtues, the virtue which worked for nothing. They would denounce the patriotism of that man who accepted a shilling for making a speech, although it had cost him more to compose it than those who heard it would probably give to save their country. Nine-tenths of the best public men and women I have known, have turned back at this point. Not any new conviction-not any bribe of the enemy, but the natural though unwise revolt against being considered mendicants, has forced them back into supineness, indifference, or even into the very ranks of oppression. True, I felt that he who labours with his brains is worthy of his hire, as well as he who labours with his hands. As often as I read a book or heard a lecture, which threw new light on the paths of life, I found that it not only relieved me from the dominion of ignorance, but imparted to me the strength of intelligence. I felt indebted to the author and speaker, for I found that knowledge is not only power, but property. I knew all this, but painful years passed over me before I acquired the courage to offer what instruction I had to impart as an article of

commercial value."

This is nothing but a principle of Christianity, applied to another system, "even so hath the Lord ordained, that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel."—(1 Cor. ix. 14.)

Mr. Holyoake's congregation, only imitated his own fallacy, as recorded in his reply to Maitland, since they "as is the case with most Freethinkers, objected to pay the priest, when the true quarrel was with error, not with payment."

Nor does the account he gives in that passage, say much for the strength of the Socialist principle, either in scholars or teachers; for the