The Lion.

No. 3. VOL. 4.] LONDON, Friday, July 17, 1829. [PRICE 6d.

Stockport, July 13, 1829.

We have little to say in addition to what has been said of Manchester. On the Wednesday evening of the last week, I lectured before an audience of about fifty persons, on the subject of phrenology. It was my first attempt of the kind; for I have taken up and treat of this science, as I do with every other, only as far as it can be brought to bear against the superstition of mankind: hence I treated but cursorily on that class of organs, immediately over the eye, which are called perceptive. On the intellectual, the moral, the superstitious, and the energetic organs, I treated more at large, and I flatter myself, that I satisfied the audience as to their immediate bearing against the validity of religion and the too common customs of mankind. All the lecturing that I have heard, or the books that I have read, on this science, have not done it justice; because the lecturers and writers have allowed themselves to be trammeled with religion. Religion should make no part of education. The untutored mind will be as wise on that head, and perhaps wiser than all the Doctors in Divinity who have not reasoned themselves into Atheism. It is a subject, out of which a man may reason himself; but cannot reason himself into any kind of belief. I shall continue to lecture on this very interesting and very important science, not doubting but that I can give to it much more importance and utility than has been hitherto given to it.

On Friday, the 10th instant, we came to Stockport, and for three nights successively addressed an increasing number of the people, who exhibited much satisfaction at what they heard

Printed and Published by R. CARLILE, 62, Fleet Street.

No. 3.-Vol. 4.

from us. We suppressed no part of our sentiments, but spake out in the boldest strain as to the bad foundation and general viciousness of the Christian religion, teaching, that to sit regularly under a preacher was the character and conduct of a slave; but to question, discuss, and demand discussion, on all subjects, is the great distinction of the free and independent mind.

Our Circular has been sent to the following preachers in Lancashire:

To the Rev. Mr. Lamport, Unitarian preacher, with the following postscript:-"If the Rev. Mr. Lamport will lend his pulpit to the Rev. R. Taylor, he will undertake, sermonically or by discussion, to show the people of Lancaster, that his pretensions are not without the most respectable validity."

Rev. Robert Houseman.

Rev. Mr. Hall.

We received an answer from Mr. Lamport, which shall be appended, and is civil, compared with the ignorant impertinence of Mr. Scholefield, the Bible Christian of Manchester. But the general shuffle of these Christian preachers, at the mention of discussion, is characteristic of their most certain conviction, that the Christian religion is indefensible when questioned. They are unanimous in not submitting it to controversy before an audience. They know full well that such men as Mr. Taylor and myself, if heard, would most certainly carry from them the voice, and countenance, and support of their present hearers. Circulars in Manchester sent to the

Rev. Henry Gillow.
John Griffiths.

John Hannah.
William Harrison.
Daniel Hearne.

Dr. Hepworth.

Peter Hordern.

David Howard.
Dr. Jack.

Abraham Jackson.

Rev. John Sumner,
William Smith.
J. T. Parsons.

John Parsons.

Thomas Tate.
John James Taylor.
Richard Watson.
James White.

William Whitelegg.

Cecil Dan. Wray, M.A.

The only answer received is the very silly letter from the Therapeut of Ancoat's-lane, Dr. Scholefield, which I append, but deem unworthy of comment.

Circulars in Stockport sent to the

Rev. Henry Wright, B. A.
Mr. Gilpin.

Edward Howell.

Charles Prescot.

Solomon Ashton.

Mr. Ryan.

Rev. Nathaniel Pagsley.

Theophilus Lessey.

Mr. Harris.

Samuel Parker.

R. S. Wood.

Mr. Keeley.

This Mission and challenging will tell its tale in history. It begins to be seriously felt, both by the preachers and their congregations, and must be followed up. In Leeds and in Manchester, we have been but ill supported in the project; but we shall persevere to the utmost extent of our means. Infidel chapels will rise up, wherever the Mission extends, and we call upon every Infidel to support us to the extent, that shall unite to his or her affordings, a sense of the value of the job which we have undertaken.

The arguments with which we are furnished against the Christian religion are irresistible. They leave not a shadow of pretence to honesty in those preachers, who silently receive our circular challenge. This Circular is becoming a subject of curiosity among the congregations of several preachers. They have acknowledged the receipt of the challenge, without stating the particular grounds on which it has been made; and these particular grounds are the points into which the congregation begins to inquire.

I perceive, by the papers, that an effort is about to be made again, to set up the cry of radical reform. The mass of the people of this neighbourhood are quite sick of the tricks of that kind which were played off upon them from the years 1816 to 20. I like the definition of radical reform; but I like not the scurvy pretence of beginning reform with the House of Commons, a source from which it cannot be reasonably expected. I maintain, as the experience of my political enquiries, added to those of

many old and able politicians, that a breaking up of the church and other religious establishments is the only road to any kind of radical or useful reform in this country. However difficult this task may be, it is clearly the only ground on which the least advance toward reform has been made in the last twelve years. Some advance has been made on this ground. Progressive advance is here individually practicable. It is a case in which every reformer may be usefully employed, and in which the end can neither be bad nor dangerous. Political reforms, such as the pretence to reform the House of Commons, have ever been and will again be attempted to be worked by paltry plots, conspiracies, pretences to insurrection without the necessary courage to accomplish it, by the beggared habit of petitioning and by all that is low, rascally, and degrading. Excitement in such a nation as this, at this time, is useful and cannot fail to lead to some good; but it is a matter of high importance to turn that excitement into a proper channel, and to lead it on to the most useful subjects. Bold, honest, and intelligent men are wanted as the advocates of reform; and they who have once deceived us, should never be allowed to deceive us, should not even be trusted again.

RICHARD CARLILE.

TO THE REV. ROBERT TAYLOR, A. B., 218, GREAT ANCOAT'S-STREET, MANCHESTER.

MR. LAMPORT, having this day received the Circular sent to him by Mr. Taylor, and Mr. Carlile, wishes to occasion them neither suspense nor delay with respect to the purport of his answer; he at the same time regrets that his engagements have reduced him He is of 'to one hour's time, to which he must limit his remarks. opinion that all discussion should be unfettered; that personal feelings, and if possible, private interest, should be allowed no He thinks that weight in the investigation of important truths.

controversy, so far from " engendering strife," should ever excite the most pleasurable feelings, as well as exercise the most exalted faculties of human nature. Some of the most interesting hours of his early life, in a distant part of the kingdom, were passed in discussing, amicably and patiently, with acute and well-informed Deists, "the merits of the Christian religion;" particularly its external, i. e. historical evidences: he is happy in the belief that more than one individual, both felt and acknowledged the efficacy of those proofs as they might be urged by a liberal, though not ultra Unitarian; a Christian of that class not being answerable in his opinion for nine-tenths of the common objects of revealed religion.

Premising these observations, Mr. Lamport, with all due admiration of Mr. Taylor's talents and learning, and without the slightest tincture of acrimony, declines the proposal contained in the Circular, for the following reasons:

1st. He thinks the controversy so far decided as any controversy can be, on a matter of fact, where the information to be acquired is limited and ascertained.

2nd. That the very few hearers who could be induced to attend Mr. Taylor's preaching at Lancaster, would be unqualified to decide upon a question to be determined by a reference to Latin and Greek writers, flourishing from 15 to 18 centuries ago. The press appears to be the only proper medium for the investigation of a point requiring leisure, a dispassionate state of mind, and reconsideration.

3rd. That even, if there were not abundant evidence to prove the existence of Jesus Christ, it is impossible to prove that he did not exist; and there appears to be inconsistency in maintaining the insufficiency of historical testimony in the former instance; and in resorting to it, in the latter. The discussion of this point could only produce confusion, doubt, and dissatisfaction, in the unprepared minds of a popular assembly.

1

4th. Mr. Lamport conceives that he only holds the pulpit of his chapel upon certain conditions, implied, if not expressed, viz: -to conduct the public Christian worship of the society, and to teach them Christian morality on Christian principles. Mr. L. is quite certain that nearly all of them would refuse the use of their seats in the chapel, for a purpose directly at variance with their opinions, and as they would think, with their duties. At all events, they have an option, and it would ill become a preacher of truth and uprightness, to excrcise a power not vested in him.

Much more might be said as to the present state of the question at issue, and as to the best means of attaining, and of teaching, "the truth," but Mr. Lamport must request indulgence, whether he may be thought to have said too little or too much; he cannot, however, conclude without expressing his decided disapprobation of those legal measures by which Mr. Taylor has been made a sufferer for his opinions.

Lancaster, July 7, 1829..

THE THERAPEUTAN EPISTLE OF DR. SCHOLEFIELD TO THE INFIDEL MISSIONARIES.

To the Messrs. Taylor and Carlile.

I CONSIDER myself an exception to 999 out of every thousand, both as it regards my principles of religion, and my mode of gratuitously communicating them, and with both of which I am