THE BIBLE BURNING CASE,

Lyttelton Times, Volume VI, Issue 375, 7 June 1856, Page 6

THE BIBLE BURNING CASE,

The trial of the Reverend Vladimir Petcherine for Bible-burning1, terminated on Saturday, in a verdict of acquittal. The proceedings occupied the Court two days. The Judges were Mr. Justice Crampton, and Mr. Baron Green. On the side of the prosecution were the AttorneyGenera], the Solicitor-Genera!, Mr. Corballis, Mr. A. Flunkett, and Mr. Boyta^h. For the defence wore Mr. O'Hagan, Sir Colinan O'Log-blt-n, Mr. J. A. Burran, Mr. Kiernan, and Mr.

J. Coffey. The court was crowded with an anxious audience. There were several counts in the indictment—to the effect that Vladimir Petcherine had caused the Bible to be contemptuously burnt, "to the high displeasure of Almighty God, and the great disrespect, discredit, and dishonour of the religion established by law," In his opening speech for the prosecution, Mr. Keogh described how Petcherine had exhorted the people of Kingston to abandon and bring to him books of an immoral tendency. Among the numbers of books brought in were several copies of the Bible and New Testament. Were these volumes included in the attacks made on the licentious pret-s? Why were they brought, unless included ? The books were burnt, the Bible and Testament among them, in the most open manner; and if they were knowingly burnt, the law svas so clear that there could be no doubt Petcherine had committed an offence. The Attorney- General then described at some length, and with great emphasis, the relation of the Bible to the administration of justice. " From the humblest individual who is called to attest lo any fact, to the Sovereign who sits on the throne, there is no security for anything but what is based on the authorized version of the Scriptures. The law as laid down by our greatest authorities, and as it has been recognised and established in our recent cases, is then - staled—' Offences immediately against God' are by common law indictable ; as all blasphemy against God, denying His being or providence ; all profane scuffing of the Holy Scriptures, or exposing any part thereof to contempt or ridicule.' Exposing any part thereof to contempt or ridicule ! That, my Lords, is laid down in Hawkins Pleas of the Croivn, page 359 ; and the same is recognised in Blackstone's Commentaries, v. 4, p. 59, where he quotes the words of Chief Justice Brissot,' The Scriptures are the common law-' And when was this said? Not since the Reformation, not since the authorized version was given to the British people. But here are the words of a Roman Catholic, let it be assumed, Chief Justice of England before ever the Reformation took place in England. What does he say? —'The Scriptures are the common law, upon which all other laws are founded ?'" The offence was equally committed whether the Bible were the Douay version, or the authorized version.

The evidence for ihe prosecution being called, Christopher Duff, a boy engaged in the business, deposed, that at the request of Father Peteherine, he had wheeled a barrow full of books from the Father's lodgings to the courtyard of the chapel. Another boy wheeled a second barrow. When Father Petcherine arrived, the books were tumbled out; and the Father, giving orders that they should be set on fire, went away towards the vestry. A crowd of persons had collected. The fire was not lighted until the Father had gone. When the Father came back the books were well burnt, but not consumed. Henry Lawson, labourer, said that he saw among the books, Byron's Poems, some tracts, a New Testament, a Prayer-hook, and a Bible. Mr. W. T. Darkin,a Sub-Inspector of Factories, and Policeman Halpin, deposed that they saw a Bible and Testament in the fire ; and the Rev. R. Wallace, Dissenting minister, produced a portion of the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua which he had rescued from the flames.

For the defence, Mr. O'Hagan described the accused as one who, though a stranger, had resided in this country long enough to make him one of ourselves. For fourteen or twenty years he had been an alien from his native land, where he had abandoned a high position for conscience* sake. The indictment charged against the a matter of fact and a matierof intention. The Counsel resisted both. His client had only endeavoured, in discharge of, a religious duty, to put an end to the circulation of immoral publications in Kingston, and had required them to be delivered at his lodgings. They were sent in multitudes, and he directed them to be burnt. It would have been better had they not been publicly burnt. There is not any evidence to show that he was cognisant of the presence, among the many books that were consumed, of the Bible and Testament —the only Bible and Testament that had been distinctly referred to. He was for a few minutes a not very close witness of the burning: and all the fragments in the world proved nothing against him, when it was considered that great opportunities existed for other persons U have thrown Bibles into the heap. Mr. O'Hagan denied that the Roman Catholic Church is- the enemy of the Scriptures. From the time „

when tlis early Christians took shelter in the Catacombs at Rome to this day, the Church has preserved the Scriptures. The monks perpetuated Ind spread them through the earth ; and the Chirch called it preeminently " the Book." When/printing was invented, the first employment of the press on any great and important scale k'as in the production of that Massareue Bible which is a miracle to later times. Tte only witnesses produced on behalf of the accused was called to show the nature of those discourses in which he had asked for books. Bu: this testimony was rejected by the Court; anl the counsel for the defence therefore closed th3ir case. Baron Green summed up ; and after deliberating for three-quarters of an hour, the Jury returned a verdict of acquittal. This anaouneement was received with the most vociferous applause, which was taken up by the croivds assembled outside ; who interspersed their exclamations of delight with groans for the Attorney-General and her Majesty's Law-offi-cers. The Jury was composed of five Protestants and seven Roman Catholics; the foreman •was a member of the Established Church. James Hamilton, a boy concerned in the burning of the books, was tried on Mouday, and acquitted. •Edward Haydon, an ardent disciple of Father "'Petcherine, was tried on Monday, for assaulting one of the witnesses for the prosecution. He was found guilty, but strongly recommended to ■ mercy. Baron Green sentenced him to three months' imprisonment with hard lahuur. The streets in the neighbourhood of the court were illuminated on Saturday night in commemoration of the acquittal of Peteherine. lAW OF THE BIBLE BURNING CASE. The result of the trial of the Rev. Vladimir Petcherine is a proof that he ought not to have been indicted at all; since the prosecution, with Its conduct aud conclusion, has tended to obscure both law and justice. It must remain matter of grave doubt, beyond a technicality, whether the accused had any part whatever in the burning of the Bibles ; and the exclusion of his sermon from the evidence offered in defence contributed to strengthen that doubt, as the Law-officers of the Crown thus prevented our seeing the exhortation in connexion with the acts of the missionary's disciples. The probability is, that some ignorant zealot was guilty of excess of orders; although the absence of any testimony to that effect is remarkable. The Irish mob, however, have had an example of Bible burning attended with impunity; they will still associate the saintly Vladimir Petchrine with Bible-burning,and with the prosecution under a judge of'irrepressible Ultra-Protestant

feeling, which broke down so completely that it looked like baffled persecution. The houses in Dublin were illuminated ; but was it for the escape of Vladimir from an unfounded charge, or for the triumph over Protestantism and temporal authority?

The confusion cannot be blamed in Ireland, Bince in a certain degree it extends to England. We find among intelligent ppople a doubt ■whether the Bible-burners had not a "rijjht" to burn a book which they hold it mischievous to circulate indiscriminately ; and to deny that the Bible is the basis of the common law of this country, is regarded as an admission that there is no offence at law if the sacred volume be contemptuously destroyed. Laymen copy Judge Crampton's blunder. Christianity and the .Bible have become essentially incorporated with the common law of England, but they are not the basis of the common law. Probably our common law would indirectly outlaw non-Christians, by not providing them with the means, on various occasions, of obtaining justice through the instrumentality of an oath ; an imperfection which the statute law of later times has imperfectly corrected. But the basis of a common law. ■which includes numberless cases where religion does not come in question, is wont and usages. It is therefore an offence against the law to make a direct attempt at inciting rebellion against the authority of the Bible ; although the basis of the common law is not in question. Apart from the high legal view of the subject, the Bible-burners were guilty of a gross offence against common police law. By the custom of the country, the Bible is held in worship, and to treat it with contempt is to outrage the sense of decency. In order to constitute an offence against "bonus mores" it is not necessary that there should be a culpable motive. There are sects of Christians who regard immersion naked ,as the proper form of baptism ; and they of

course strip the body without any indecency of motive. Simple nudity is not in itself offensive ; the common consent of cultivated taste regards pictures of the nude, when executed in the spirit of reverence for beauty, with respect and not revulsion. Yet there can be no question that the ceremony of baptism by immersion without clothing, puhlicly performed, is a flagrant offence against decency ; because in the feeling of the bystanders the act is indecent, and it incites the vulgar to derision, and outrages this feeling of the decorous. The police would neglect their duty if they did not interfere to prevent such an exhibition. So, whatever the motives of the perpetrators, persons who publicly treat the Bible with contempt are guilty of indecency, and violate the police law. From a consideration of all the circumstances, it appears to us tiiat the case should have been kept within the pulice courts, and not made the subject of an indictment before the coinmision Court. The act was in every way a contemptible escapade, and it should Jiave been corrected summarily. It was of a kind which naturally leads to a breach of the peace. It was an insult flaunted by one sect in the face of another, calculated to provoke a return, and to begin a competition of insults ending in actual fighting. But protection for the peace could have been afforded without solemnly raising important but inopportune questions only to obscure them.