Gentlemen, all this is mighty well; but he must be but little acquainted with the calamities of France, who believes that this was the source of them.-It was from no such causes that those horrors and calamities arose, which have disfigured and dishonoured her revolution, and which have clouded and obscured the otherwise majestic course of freedom ;— horrors and calamities which have inspired an alarm into many good men, and furnished a pretext for many wicked ones, in our own country. It was the profligacy and corruption of the French STATE, and not the immorality of her CLERGY, which produced that sudden and extraordinary crisis, in the vortex of which the church, and almost religion itself, were swallowed up. The clergy of France was pulled down in the very manner of this pamhplet. A trumpet was blown against their order--the Massacre of St. Bartholomew was acted upon the stage, and the Cardinal of Lorraine introduced upon it, exciting to murder, in the robes of his sacred order. It was asked by a most eloquent writer* (with whom I do not agree in many things, as I do in this,) whether this horrid spectacle was introduced to inspire the French people with a just horror of blood and persecution?-and he answers the question himself by saying, that it was to excite the indignation of the French nation against RELIGION AND ITS OFFICES; and that it had its effect: "That, by such means, "the Archbishop of Paris, a man only known to his flock "by his prayers and benedictions, and the extent of whose

vast revenues could be best ascertained by his unexampled "charity to the unhappy, was to be hunted down like a wild "beast, merely because the Cardinal of Lorraine, in the "sixteenth century, had been a rebel and a murderer."

In the same manner, this pamphlet, through the medium of abuse upon the Bishop of Bangor, is obviously calculated to abuse the minds of the lower orders of the people against the CHURCH; and to destroy the best consolation of human life, by bringing the sanctions of religion into doubt and disrepute. I am, myself, no member of the church of England, nor do I know that my Friend is-we were both born in another part of the Island, and educated in other forms of worship; but we respect the offices of religion, in whatever hands they are placed by the laws of our country, and certainly the English clergy never stood higher than they do to-day, when Mr. Adam, so thoroughly acquainted with the history of his country, as far as it is ancient, and who,

* Mr. Burke.

from his personal and professional connections, is so perfectly acquainted with all that passes in the world of our own day, is drawn back to the times of Laud and Wolsey, to search for English Prelates, who have been a reproach to the order; and when he would represent tyranny and oppression in churchmen, is forced back upon an unreformed church, and to ages of darkness and superstition, because it would have been in vain to look for them under the shadow of that mild religion which has promoted such a spirit of humanity, and stamped such a character upon our country, that if it should ever please God to permit her to be agitated like neighbouring nations, the happy difference would be seen between men who reverence religion, and those who set out with destroying it.-The BISHOPS, besides (to do them common justice,) are certainly the last of the clergy that should be attacked.-The indulgent spirit of reformed Christianity, recollecting, that, though invested with a divine office, they are men with human passions and affections, permits them to mix in all the customary indulgences, which, without corrupting our morals, constitute much of the comfort and happiness of our lives; yet, they in a manner separate themselves from their own families; and, whilst the other orders of the clergy, even the most dignified, enjoy (without being condemned for it) the amusements which taste and refinement spread before us, no Bishop is found within these haunts of dissipation.-So far from subjecting themselves to be brought to the assizes for riot and disorder, they thus refuse many of the harmless gratifications, which perhaps, rather give a grace and ornament to virtue, than disfigure the character of a Christian; and I am sure, the Reverend Prelate, whom I represent, has never overstepped those limits, which a decorum, perhaps overstrained, has by custom imposed upon the whole order. The Bishop's individual character, like every other man's, must be gathered from his life, which I have always understood, has been eminently useful and virtuous. I know he is connected with those whose lives are both; and who must be suffering distress at this moment from these proceedings. He is nearly allied to one, whose extraordinary knowledge enables him to fulfil the duties of a warm benevolence, in restoring health to the sick, and in bringing back hope and consolation along with it, to families in the bitterness of affliction and distress.-I have, more than once, received that bless

The celebrated Dr. Richard Warren.

ing at his hands, which has added not a little, to the anxiety which I now feel.

Gentlemen, I am instructed, and indeed pressed by the anxiety of the Bishop's friends, to call many witnesses, to show, that he was by no means disturbed with passion, as has been represented, and that, so far from it, he even repressed those, whose zeal for order, and whose affection for his person, prompted them to interfere; saying to them, "The law will interpose in due season." I have witnesses, to a great number, whom I am pressed to call before you, who would contradict Mr. Grindley in the most material parts of his testimony; but then I feel the advantage he would derive from this unnecessary course; he would have an opportunity, from it, to deprive the Reverend Prelate of the testimony and protection of your approbation. He would say, no doubt, "Oh, I made out the case which vindicated my Prosecution, "though it was afterwards overturned by the testimony of persons in the Bishop's suite, and implicitly devoted to his "service ;-I laid facts before the Jury, from which a convic❝tion must have followed, and I am not responsible for the "false glosses by which his witnesses have perverted them." -This would be the language of the Prosecutor; and I am, therefore, extremely anxious that your verdict should proceed upon the facts as they now stand before the Court, and that you should repel, with indignation, a charge which is defeated by the very evidence that has been given to support it.--I cannot, besides, endure the humiliation of fighting with a shadow, and the imprudence of giving importance, to what I hold to be nothing, by putting any thing in the scale against it; a conduct, which would amount to a confession that something had been proved which demanded an answer. How far those, from whom my instructions come, may think me warranted in pursuing this course, I do not know; but the decision of that question will not rest with either of us, if your good sense and consciences should, as I am persuaded they will, give an immediate and seasonable sanction to this conclusion of the trial.

Mr. ERSKINE, after consulting a few minutes with Mr. Plumer, Mr. Leycester, and Mr. Milles, informed the Court he should give no Evidence.

Mr. Justice HEATH then summed up as follows; which we insert, as the Learned Judge stated the substance of all the Evidence given on the Trial.

MR. JUSTICE HEATH.

GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY,

THIS is an Indictment against the Bishop of Bangor, Hugh Owen, John Roberts, John Williams, and Thomas Jones. The Indictment states, "That Samuel Grindley "(who, it seems, is the Prosecutor of this Indictment,) on "the 8th of January last, was Deputy Registrar of the "Episcopal and Consistorial Court of the Bishop of Bangor, ❝and that, in right of his office, he had the use of a room "adjoining to the cathedral church of Bangor, called the "Registrar's Office, for transacting the business of his of"fice: that the Defendants, intending to disturb the Prose"cutor in the execution of his office of Deputy Registrar, on "the 8th of January last, riotously assembled and unlawfully "broke the Registrar's Office, and remained there for an ❝hour, and continued making a great disturbance, and as"saulted the Prosecutor, and stirred up a riot."

This, Gentlemen, is the substance of the Indictment.The definition of a riot has been truly stated to you; it may be collected, indeed, from the indictment itself; and is, when two or more persons assemble together with an intent mutually to assist each other, and to resist all those who should oppose them, and with a farther intent to break the peace ;—and it is likewise for a private purpose.

Now, before I sum up the evidence, I shall state those things particularly, to which you should direct your attention; and you will consider how the evidence applies in support of the Indictment. It must be proved, to your satisfaction, that the Prosecutor is Deputy Registrar of this Consistorial Court of the Bishop of Bangor; that, in Right of that office, he had the use of this room to transact his business there; that the Defendants, intending to disturb him in his

office, riotously assembled to disturb the peace, and broke and entered the office-room, and continued there, making a great disturbance, asserting that he had assumed an office which did not belong to him, and making a riot there. These things must be proved to your satisfaction.-I will comment upon the evidence as I shall state it to you.

Samuel Grindley, the Prosecutor, tells you, that in February 1792, he was appointed Agent to the Bishop of Bangor, and that he afterwards held the office of Deputy Registrar, under Mr. Gunning, who it seems, was a minor; that he saw Mr. Gunning, the Registrar, in October 1794; that he paid seventy pounds a year to the Bishop, on account of Mr. Gunning his principal; that the Bishop was the person who made the bargain between him and his principal; that he entered on his office as Deputy.---He says, that he was invited by the Bishop, and that the Bishop introduced him (the Prosecutor) to Mr. Gunning, as the Principal Registrar, and introduced the Principal Registrar to the witness as his Deputy.---He says, that there was no complaint that he had not discharged the duties of his office; and that he continued to discharge the duties of his office till the 22d of February last. He says, that there is an apartment belonging to this office, which, it seems, is under the chapter-house adjoining to the cathedral; that there is a flight of steps going up to it-that he employs his Clerks in the office, and he has a resident Clerk there. He says, he told the Bishop that he would resign on the 22d of February last; that on the 4th of January he was absent from Bangor, and returned on the 7th, having received information that his office had been broken open; that the Bishop afterwards acknowledged to him, that it had been broken open by his (the Bishop's) servants, under his direction.-He says, that some panes of glass had been taken down, the leads had been removed, and fresh locks had been put upon the doors. All this the Bishop acknowledged.-And then he gives you an account of his coming there; of his breaking open the door, and his entering again.

Let us consider, so far as this, how it applies. In the first place, it certainly does not lie in the mouth of the Bishop to say, that this man was not properly appointed to his office; he was in the exercise of his office; he had made an agreement with his principal, and he paid him seventy pounds a yearthe Bishop was the person who negotiated the business; and he gave the Bishop notice that he meant to give up his office on the 22d of February; but you see, between the 4th and the 7th of January, before the time the Prosecutor had appointed for resigning his office, the Bishop thought proper to