to send its poison out to the world. It was scarcely necessary for him to allude to the place in which the Lectures were delivered-it was a place licensed by royal charter; but he would contend, if such Lectures were allowed to be delivered there, that the charter would be as bad as the plaintiff's copyright: he, however, understood that the plaintiff was no longer Lecturer there. He had nothing, certainly, to do with the place where the Lectures were delivered; but he would deal with him in his character of an author, and he would dilate on the poison disseminating from him as a lecturer to a school, the pupils of which were afterwards to become practitioners of surgery. Looking at it as the work of an author, it did not require criticism to shew its evil tendency, for it was as clear as the sun at noon. The learned counsel was proceeding with his argument, when he was interrupted by

The Lord Chancellor, who stated that he should stop there for the present, as he was obliged to attend elsewhere.

Mr. Wetherell this day resumed his argument. He had but little further to add to what he had said on Thursday. The article in The Quarterly Review called the work in question an open avowal of the doctrine of Materialism. It was also reprobated for the pernicious tendency of its principles by The Edinburgh Medical Review, which said that it was calculated to lead the minds of his pupils into darkness worse than the darkness of the valley of death; and by the vicar of Kensington, who was the Christian Lecturer in Cambridge. The book, he contended, had the same object as the doctrine of the French Imperialists, namely, to establish the belief that death was an eternal sleep, and that, therefore, we were not hereafter to be accountable for our actions in this life. The learned counsel concluded, with expressing his regret that such great learning, taste and talent, as this work evinced, should be combined with such dangerous principles; which, being calculated to subvert the doctrines of our religion, deprived the work of all claim to protection on the score of copyright; he therefore submitted that the injunction ought to be dissolved.

Mr. Rose followed on the same side, and referred to Dr. Priestley's case, where it was determined that, although a work might contain much valuable information, yet if it was directed against the institutions of the country, the law would afford it no support. He also referred to the case of Mr. Southey's book, and the work of Lord Byron the other day, in which

the Court, to use the language of the poet, refused to "set its seal on Cain," and sent him forth a wanderer through the world. The pernicious principles contained in these Lectures were not the native growth of this country, but were sought for in the doctrines of foreign professors, and imported here from the German and French schools. The learned counsel then read a passage from the Dedication, which he said was the first passage complained of: the second was in page 98, where the learned professor said, that the Mosaic account of the origin of mankind, as contained in the book of Genesis, did not make it quite clear that all the world had been peopled by the descendants of Adam and Eve; and treated the account of the circumstances of the deluge as a zoological impossibility. Mr. Lawrence (Mr. Rose continued) had subtilely condensed into one passage all the venom contained in a whole chapter of Gibbon. He then read an extract from page 422, in which Professor Lawrence contended, from the peculiar organization of the brain, that it was the seat of the sentient principle, which necessarily depended upon it for existence, and that the annihilation of the one must inevitably involve the annihilation of the other. He also read other passages, in which it was stated that many writers had doubted the inspiration of the scriptural writers: and containing other observations, the tendency of which, the learned counsel argued, was subversive of our faith; and they were the more dangerous, from the author's scholarlike command of language, and his scientific manner of treating his subject; which, acting upon undisciplined minds, was calculated to subdue and bring them under its controul, and thereby work the greater mischief.

Mr. Shadwell, on behalf of the plaintiff, suported the injunction. He was obliged to his friend, Mr. Wetherell, for the manner in which he laid the question befor the Court. He had condemned the work on the ground of its professing the doctrine of Materialism. The docrine of Materialism was two-fold. One species of Materialism limited the existence of man to this world only. That was a doctrine which he (Mr. Shadwell) would be the last person in existence to say one word in defence of. But there was another species of Materialism, which says, that the sentient principle of man depends upon the organic structure of the body, and therefore cannot have a separate existence; but does not deny that both may exist hereafter, when the resurrection of the body takes place. That was perfectly

thought the present question materially affected the liberty of the press. It was by the liberty of the press that this country had grown great: he did not speak of it in its licentious sense. This gentle man had not spoken of Scripture with disrespect. He had certainly said that some persons had entertained doubts of the inspiration of its writers; but he himself spoke in terms of the highest eulogy of the New Testament. He called it "a religion of peace and love, as unfolded by the apostles." He qualified his denial of those doctrines which he controverted by saying that, "physiologically speaking," it was impossible to believe them, calling them, at the same time, sublime doctrines, and admitting that they had existed in all places and in all ages, and therefore depended not on his inferences. He talked of Paschal, who was the best friend of Christianity, "the profound, fervent, and pious Paschal." In short, if there were any exceptionable passages in the book, there were others which contained their antidote, and the whole work should be taken together. He (Mr. Shadwell) would rather drop down lifeless upon the ground, thau attempt for a moment to uphold the doctrine of Materialism, as tending to overturn belief in a future state. But the principles in the book before the Court were quite consistent with the notion of existence in a future world; and a valuable work of this kind ought not to be condemned, and the author to lose the price of his labour, because there might happen to be a passage or two in it which might as well have been omitted.

as

Mr. Wilbraham followed on the same -side with Mr. Shadwell, and said that the defendant had no claim to the favour of the Court, who had taken to himself the fruits and profits of the plaintiff's labour without any moral right whatever to the work; but merely because he thought there were a few passages in it which disentitled it to the protection of the law. The learned gent. then contended that the doctrine contained in the Lectures was perfectly reconcileable with Christianity; and argued from a passage in the burial service, in addition to what Mr. Shadwell had cited, that a mutual existence of the soul and body was the result after death. In the sentence "the dead shall be raised," &c., the words in the Greek were oi nekroi, and not ten nekren in the neuter. Dr. Butler had said that that doctrine depended on revelation only, and not on natural principles. Mr. Lawrence's Materialism was confined to this life, and contained no principle contrary to the immortality of the soul here

after, when the resurrection took place; and it was countenanced by Scripture. With respect to his doctrine of mankind having descended from different parents, that opinion was strengthened, not only by the different complexions of nations, but also by the difference in their features, the formation of their bones, and the substantive parts of the body: and he only said that "the Mosaic account did not make it clear," &c. And as to saying that many doubted the inspiration of the scriptural writings, he was surely entitled to say what were the opinions of others; but that was not stating that they were his own. On the contrary, he spoke of their simple grandeur, and said that "they were not inferior to the uninspired writings of the East," from which the inference was, that he looked upon them as inspired. The Mosaic account of the deluge, the collection of two of every description of animal on the earth, he stated to be a zoological impossibility; but he did not deny the fact, that it took place miraculously. With respect to a passage in Mr. Wetherell's speech, in which he stated that Mr. Lawrence was no longer Lecturer to the College of Surgeons, he should state that he laid down the office of his own accord, in consequence of his increased practice; and the members of the College had expressed their regret at his so doing. These Lectures were delivered in 1816 and 1817: in 1819 he delivered other Lectures, but in the interval these had been published. The College of Surgeons, therefore, had not only heard them delivered, but had them in print before 1819, and what was their opinion of them? (Mr. Wilbraham here read an affidavit of Mr. Lawrence, by which it appeared that he had received the thanks of the College of Surgeons for his luminous Lectures delivered in 1816, 1817, 1818 and 1819.) The learned counsel then resumed his argument, and insisted that the author of our planetary system might as well be condemned for impugning the passage in Scripture which ascribed motion to the sun, and affirmed that it stood still on one day; as Professor Lawrence's Lectures, because they asserted the zoological impossibility of one or two facts stated in Scripture. He concluded by expressing his hope that his Lordship would continue the injunction.

The Lord Chancellor.-Mr. Wetherell, I shall hear you in reply on Tuesday: you will lose nothing by the delay, for I shall have an opportunity of reading the book in the mean time.

(To be continued.)

PROFESSOR CHENEVIERE, of Geneva, has in the press a French Translation of Marsh's Michaelis, with many additional notes. Scriptural criticism has been so much neglected among the French and Swiss Protestants, that the publication of a version of this admirable work becomes an important fact; and it is doubly so at a moment when authority pretends to decide all subjects of doubt, and refuses to the judgment and to the conviction their honest exercise. The Professor will attack the supposed errors of the English Prelate, and give, we have reason to believe, a high tone of liberal feeling to the volumes.

Letter from Lord Byron to Mr. Murray, the Bookseller, on his " Cain.” (From the Newspapers.)

DEAR SIR,

Pisa, February 8, 1822.

ATTACKS upon me were to be expected; but I perceive one upon you in the papers, which I confess I did not expect. How, or in what manner, you can be considered responsible for what I publish, I am at a loss to conceive. If "Cain" be "blasphemous," Paradise Lost is blasphemous; and the words of the Oxford gentleman, "Evil, be thou my good," are from that very poem, from the mouth of Satan; and is there any thing more in that of Lucifer in the Mystery? Cain is nothing more than a drama, not a piece of argument. If Lucifer and Cain speak as the first murderer and the first rebel may be supposed to speak, surely all the rest of the personages talk also according to their characters; and the stronger passions have ever been permitted to the drama. I have even avoided introducing the Deity, as in Scripture (though Milton does, and not very wisely either); but have adopted his angel, as sent to Cain, instead, on purpose to avoid shocking any feelings on the subject, by falling short of what all uninspired men must fall short in, viz. giving an adequate no

319

tion of the effect of the presence of Jehovah. The old Mysteries introduced him liberally enough, and all this is avoided in the new one.

The attempt to bully you, because they think it will not succeed with me, seems to me as atrocious an attempt as ever disgraced the times. What! when Gibbon's, Hume's, Priestley's and Drummond's publishers have been allowed to rest in peace for seventy years, are you to be singled out for a work of fiction, not of history or argument? There must some private enemy of your own: it is be something at the bottom of thisotherwise incredible.

I can only say, "Me-me adsum qui feci," that any proceedings directed against you, I beg may be transferred to me, who am willing, and ought to endure them all; that if you have lost money by the publication, I will refund any, or all, of the copyright; that I desire you will say, that both you and Mr. Gifford remonstrated against the publication, as also Mr. Hobhouse; that I alone occasioned it, and I alone ain the person who either legally or otherwise should bear the burden. If they prosecute, I will come to England; that is, if by meeting it in my own person, I can save yours. Let me know-you sha'nt suffer for me, if I can help it. Make any use of this letter which you please.

Yours ever,

Slave Trade.

BYRON.

Ir is distressing to learn that the nefarious commerce in human beings is still largely carried on. The profits of the abominable traffic are so great, that it is not likely to be finally crushed, until all the civilized states shall engage by treaty to employ an adequate naval force on the African coasts, for the protection of humanity. England has, to the honour of her government, done much in this philanthropic work; the United States of America, more. The latter country has employed armed vessels on the shores of Africa for the suppression of the piracy (as it is now regarded) of making and transporting slaves. Many wretched cargoes have been seized by the American navy, and the poor negroes carried to the United States' colony, set on foot in Africa for their civilization. A committee of the Senate was appointed some time ago for the suppression of the Slave Trade, and they have made a report in which they recommend the continuance of the exertions already made, with some improvements as to the construction of the vessels employed and their comple