Page images
PDF
EPUB

divinity, and graduates in the civil and canon-laws, aflembled at the Bhop's houfe; when they reviewed all that had been confeffed by Joan, and took down the particular points on which her anfwers were infufficient. John de Fonte was therefore appointed, by a commiffion from the Bhop, to renew the examinations in order to supply this deficiency; from which circumitance he became the principal actor in the whole affair.

The new examinations, which lafted until the 17th of March, were conducted in the very room in which Joan was con. fined, and were attended by only two of the affeffors, doctors in divinity, and two witneffes. On the conclufion of thefe re-examinations, the Bishop convoked, on Paffion-Sunday, twelve of the affeffors, with the Vice Inquifiter; when, after reviewing the proceedings, he afked their advice as to what remained to be done. Many articles were then read, founded upen Joan's anfwers, and it was agreed to examine the opinions of the doctors, and the books of the canon-law.

On the following Thurfday, another meeting was held, when a digeft of the proceedings, and the opinions of the docters, were read. After long deliberation, in which each took a fhare, it was determined to reduce the whole to a fewer number of articles, in the nature of charges and propofitions, which fhould be again laid before the doctors for their further opinion, in order to avoid any error in the proceedings.

Before this refolution was acted upon, it was thought neceffary to authenticate, judicially, the truth of the examinations. The Judges, therefore, accompanied by fix of the affeffors, and the accufer, had Joan brought before them. Previous to reading the proceedings, the accufer of fsed to prove that the questions and anfwers were correctly recorded, in cafe Joan fhould think proper to deny any of them. She took an oath to add nothing but the truth to her anfwers, and they were then read before her. She only made fome flight and unimportant additions, admitting the accuracy of the minutes.

The manufcrit-details of the trial give all the examinations in the Latin language. It is therefore poffible that the Judges did not attend all the ftages of the trial, and it may be prefomed that they were ignorant of the prifoner's demand to have part of her Judge's felected from the ecclefiaftics fubject to Charles VII. It is alfo probable that they were

not aware, that the Latin translation of the examinations, which created a pof. fibility of more or lefs error or accuracy, was totally unintelligible to the prifoner, for whom they were obliged to tranflate the questions into another language*.

While the doctors were employed in the duy which had been entrusted to them, it was thought neceffary that Joan fhould difcharge the religious duties of Eatter. On Palm Sunday, March the 25th, she was vifited by the Bishop of Beauvais, accompanied by four affeffors, and the accufer. He ftated to her, that the had often requested permiffion to hear mafs, and he defired her to inform him, in cafe he granted her equeft, if the would lay afide her male attire, and affume the female habit, which he had worn at the place of her birth. On her perfifting that the might be permitted to hear mass in her male drefs the Bishop faid, that he would willingly grant her requeft, in cafe flie would comply with his demand; but the replied, that she had not been inftructed upon that point, and could not yet realfume the habit of her fex. The Bishop, upon this, propofed that the fhould confult the two Saints, who, the faid, appeared to her, upon the point; but the contented herself with maintaining that they might permit her to hear mafs in her then attire; for that, as to changing it, it did not depend upon her, but that if it did, it would foon be done. The Bishop, however, ftill perfilled to prefs her to confult the two Saints, who the fail communicated to her in prifon, whether the should take the female habit, in order to be admitted to the communion. To this recommendation, which was well enough calculated to difcover the fource of the alleged communication, the fimply replied, that they ought to permit her to hear Mass in male attire, as that did not change her sex, and was not contrary to any canon of the Church.

From what has been stated, it might be fuppofed that the trial was confiderably advanced; but in fact, it was not even begun; for it appears that the ordinary proces which follows the official enquiry, commenced on the 26th of March, 1430. It was then ordered that the accufed fhould be examined on the articles presented by

It will appear, in the courfe of the procès of revifion, that, with the exception of the decifions, they were read neither in Latin or French.

the

the profecutor, and that, if the refufed to answer, they should be taken as admitted and proved.

This order does not explain the affertion of many hiftorians, that the Inquifition compels each prifoner to ftate and declare the matter upon which he fuppofes he was apprehended; and the courfe purfued in this trial proves, indifputably, that Joan was never proceeded againit judicially. The Judges had, indeed, by innumerable interrogatories, informed themselves of her life and conduct, with as many other facts as they could; but all this was merely for the purpose of collecting materials in order to decide whether they could or ought to put her-upon trial; nor had the profecutor at this time directed, acted as a public complainant.

On the 27th of March, the Bishop and the Inquifitor affembled their affeffors, to the number of 38, in the great hall of the caftle, whither Joan was brought. The public profecutor, on this occafion, affumed the functions of his office, and prefented the charge against the prifoner, in which, after giving her at least thirty criminal epithets, he required that the hould answer the truth to the accufation, and if the refused, that she should be deem ed contumacious, and the articles taken 2s true. The affeffors feverally gave their opinion; agreeably to which, the Judges ordered that the interrogatories which remained to be put, fhould be read and explained in French to the prifoner, who fhould be bound to anfwer to each of them, an that in cafe the demanded time, it fhould be granted. The profecutor accordingly took the old oath de Calumnia, a form which is at prefent quite banished from all regular proceedings.

The Bishop then addreffed Joan, informing her that all the affiftants were learned men, who wished to treat her with mildnefs: that their object was not the infliction of corporeal punishment, but to inftruct and bring her back to the path of falvation and truth: that, as he was not fufficiently intructed to decide for herfelf, in matters fo difficult and arduous, he offered her the choice of two of his affitans to advife her; and that in çife the objected to them, he would ap. point any others the wished, He con cluded by requiring her to take an oath to pak the truth.

Joan thanked him for the advice he had given her, and the affiftance he had offered, but that he was perfectly latis fied with her divine counfel, which the

would not part from. She then took the oath required.

The first day was entirely taken up in reading and feparately explaining the new articles, and on the two following days the gave her antwers. According to the ordinary forms of procedure, it might be fuppofed that the trial was now drawing to a conclufion but the Inquifition has the advifers of its holy office to confult, who must give their advice. A fpecies of admonition mult alfo be given to the accufed, as the principal object of the tribunal is to bring back the accused to the path of truth. It is necessary to examine with what attention thofe requifites were adhered to.

The Bishop and other Judges accordingly met on the fecond of April, 1431, when, after receiving all that had been dene, they refolved on reducing the whole procès to twelve charges, forming the refult of Joan's confeffions, which should be fubmitted o men learned in the civil and common law. The Bop and the Inquifitor wrote the neceffary letters, tranfmitting the articles, without the intervention of the affeffors, which might arife from its being neceffary to confult fome of them, or perhaps because they feared fo great a number of witneffes. Those to whom the letters were fint, were required to give their opinions whether any of the articles were contrary to true faith, or in contradition to the Holy Scriptures, to the decifions of the Romish Church, to thofe of the doctors approved by the Church, to the holy canons, or whether they were fcandalous, improper, liable to difturb public order, injurious, criminal, or contrary to morality, and what judgment fhould be pron unced in the matter.

Such apparently is the ordinary form of the Inquifition, which conceals from thofe who are confulted, whether they are affeffors on the trial or not, and alfo the perfon concerning whom the opinion is afked;.

a mode of proceedure evidently moft dangerous, when it is confidered in what hands it is found. If it were a question upon formal propofitions, touching matters of faith, advanced by the accused, this inconvenience would not exift in fo great degree, provided the ftatement was literally as advanced by the accused, but in an affair of this nature, a liberty to admit, or reject facts, at pleasure, must invariably open a door to inaccuracy and fraud; the prifoner, befides, being totally ignorant of the matter until the opincus are taken. (To be continued.) Y y 2

To

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.

SIR,

WAS in hopes, when I faw my "Re

I ply to the anonymous Obfervations on

my Letter to the Editor of the Edinburgh Review" fairly out of the hands of the printer, that I had done with the controverfy into which I have been fo unhappily plunged; and that I might now be at liberty to apply myfelf, without further interruption, to the cultivation of my fcience. But a new and unprecedented inftance of perfecution calls for a new mode of appeal; and though I am far from wifhing that your refpectable Mifcellany fhould be made a vehicle of mere perfonal conteft and recrimination; yet as, in every civilized fociety, for every fpecies of injury, there fhould be fome means of redrefs-or, if actual redress cannot be had, at least fome organ through which the injur ed may complain; I rely upon that libera lity which literary men have, from you, fo frequently experienced, for an opportu nity of laying before the public the following ftatement of circumftances under which the proprietors of the Edinburgh new papers have been influenced to refufe my advertisements.

Many months ago, in the third number of the Edinburgh Review, an attack was made upon my moral character, in a pretended criticifm of a volume of Poems and Memoirs, which had never been fubmitted to the customary process of publication. In this pretended review, after loading me with every fcurrility, as a perfon whofe only talent confifted in "mere forwardness and audacity;" after comparing me to "thofe females who delight the public by their beauty in the treets," and ftating as fact, upon the authority of the "Memoir," a variety of circumftances directly the reverfe of those which the Memoir contains, the Editor, (for it is now fully and completely afcertained that the article was written by the Editor himself,) proceeds to infert, with the quotative dif tination of inverted commas, as if it had been copied from my book, a complete fentence of bombaftic and fophifticated felf-commendation, no two words of which are in any part of that book to be found in company together. If the review had been written with any ability, I fhould undoubtedly have found myself called upon to defend myfelf immediately against fo grofs an attack: but the article in question, and the two others into which I happened to look, exhibited fuch imperfect acquaintance, not only with the principles of criticifin, but with the fim

[ocr errors]

pleft elements of grammar and conftruction, that I easily perfuaded myself that fuch calumny might be neglected without

injury, and that only to which

it was entitled, was to fulfil my intention (which had been already announced,) of vifiting Edinburgh at the close of the year, and give the good people of that city an opportunity of judging for themselves, whether I were in reality the kind of being my calumniators had reprefented.My vifit, however, foon occafioned me to difcover, that, how deficient foever my enemies might be in talent and in grammar, there were other particulars in which they were fufficiently formidable: that the Edinburgh reviewers were in reality a confederacy of the most turbulent and prefuming young men of that very profeffion (the faculty of advocates,) who, time immemorial, had enjoyed the prerogative of dictating to the city of Edinburgh in matters of taste and public amusement : a prerogative which, upon the prefent occation, they were by no means difpofed to relinquith. They tried every expedient, therefore, to prejudice the public mind against me, and openly planted themselves in the lecture-room, with a party of their confederates, to interrupt me with the moft degrading infults, and laugh down a course of lectures which had already received the fanction and approbation of the fcientific part of the community through. out all the towns and populous neighbour, hoods of the northern half of England; and which has fince been honoured with unprecedented countenance in the liberal and enlightened city of Glasgow, and with the respectful attention of the literary few in the other towns of Scotland that I have vifited. This circumftance produced my "Letter to Mr. Jeffrey," (the editor of the Review,) in the compofition of which I was impeded" by the hourly interruptions, infults, and indignities, with which the wicked induftry of unmanly enemies contrived to affail me.' ing, by the treachery of my agent," got poffeffion of the first part of my manu fcript, and being "fufficiently apprized of the nature of my intended publication, they contrived, by the terrors of their legal profeffion, to chafe me from printer to printer, and from book feller to bookfeller, with threats of indictinent and profecution," (Profecution and indictment! for detecting the falfe quotations and ungrammatical ignorance of reviewers!!!)" till I actually began to defpair of all poffibi lity of either printing or publishing in Edinburgh." At last, however, my pam

[ocr errors]

"Hav

phlet

phlet was printed; and, although no bookfeller would render himself obnoxious to the confederacy, by fuffering his name to be announced as publisher and vender, it has found its way into tolerably extenfive circulation. The charges in this Letter, it is well known, are a catalogue of mifreprefentations, mifquotations, and untruths; a hoft of grammatical inaccuracies, (feventeen of which occur in one fingle paffage, without the intervention of one fingle fentence, or clause of a sentence, that is grammatically conftructed!) and a confederacy to cry down, as a public lecturer, the perfon whom, as an author and a man, these reviewers had already defamed. How far thefe allegations are proved, it is for the public to decide. All I request is, that no new confpiracy may be permitted to fupprefs the evidence upon the one fide, while that upon the other continues to be industriously circulated.

Not fuch was its fate in Edinburgh.Still no book feller there would hazard the difpleafure of the publisher of the Edin burgh Review, and the confederacy of reviewing advocates, by lending his name to the publication; and to complete the ftory, the proprietors of the Edin burgh newspapers were fo far worked upon by fome means or other, as actually to refufe the infertion of the advertisement in their journals. Thefe fame proprietors, be it remembered, advertise Mr. Conftable's Review, in which my name, my character, and my writings, are defamed; and they advertite for Mr. Conftable the anonymous "Obfervations," in which I am again defamed, again abufively compared to a ftreet-walker, again milquoted with aggravated groffness, and again mifreprefented as faying the very reverse of what I really have faid; and yet, when I would reply, with the open responsibility of my name, to the injuftice of my enemies, they refufe to infert the advertisement of my vindication. If this is the way in which literary warfare is to be conducted, how terrible is the lot of that man who has a reviewer for his enemy! and where is the man whofe character, whofe interefts, whofe property in his talents or his good name, can be regarded as fecure? The existence of every lite

After the delay of five weeks, an anony mous pamphlet, entitled "Obfervations on Mr. Thelwall's Letter to the Editor of the Edinburgh Review," price two-pence halfpenny, was fent forth by Mr. Contable, the publisher of the Review; and it has been circulated with all the industry which numerous agents, and interefts, and connections, could promote. All this was perfectly fair, if the contents them-rary man hangs upon the stroke of a refelves had been fo. To me, however, it appeared, that in affertion, ftatement, and quotation, the vindication was ftill more falfe, and in compofition ftill more abfurd and ungrammatical, than the Review itfelf. I therefore wrote and printed a Reply, of which the following is the title entire :

"Mr. Thelwall's Reply to the Calumnies, Mitreprefentations, and Literary Forgeries, contained in the anonymous Obfervations on his Letter to the Editor of the Edinburgh Review; with a further Expofition of the ungrammatical Ignorance of the Writers and Vindicators of that defamatory Journal.

A lawyer art thou ?-draw not nigh;
Go carry to fome other place
The hardness of thy coward eye,

The falfehood of thy fallow face."

WORDSWORTH.

Glafgow, printed for the Author, by W.
Lang, 62, Bell-street, and fold by all the
Bookfellers in Town and Country.”

This Title was inferted as an advertifement in all the Glaigow newspapers; and the name of a refpectable (the most refpectable,) bookfeller in that city was advertised as vender of the publication.

viewer's pen, who may calumniate and
deftroy him with impunity. Defamation
may be published, but the defamed muft
not publish his reply. Under thefe cir-
cumitances, Mr. Editor, I appeal to your
liberality, and, through you, to the libe-
rality of the numerous readers of your in-
terefting Mifcellany, that my cafe may,
at leaft, be made known; and that fuch
of the inhabitants of the city of Edin
burgh as read your Magazine, may be in-
duced to reflect, how far it is decorous
that thofe perions who have chosen to de
cide what thall and what fhall not be
beard, fhould also determine, (by their in-
fluence,) what thall and what fhall not be
read.
Your's, &c.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

His words are, "Should any of your renders here at an objection, and fay tha leaven and yeast are different things, I requ it that he wil' be 'o go d as to inform me whence leaven fift renated?"

It is no without reluctance tha I venture to diffen from your learned Correfpendent on any fubject, and especially on one with which I am perhaps rot uff ciently acquainted; but, Sir, I do think that leaven an yeaft are different things, and that they bear no relation whatever to each other.

[ocr errors]

Dr Cry afks, whence did leaven firft originate? We have o, I belive, any authentic docuests which prove the precie time when heaven was firit ufed. But it does not a pear, that the brea which Abraham pelenied t the angels was leavened; for we read that Sara baked it as foon as he had mixed the meal and the water, (Gen. chp xviii. v. 6. ;) though the ute of leaven was very ancient, and must have been known before the time of Motes, who, when he prefcribed to the Ifraelites the manner of eating the pafchal lamb, forbade them to make ufe of leavened-bread, (Exod. chap. xii. v. 15.) The fame leg flator obferves, that when the Ifraelites departed from the land of Egypt, they ate unleavened-bread baked in the afhes, because, fays he, they were thrust out of Egypt, and had no time allowed them to aven their bread. (Exod. chap. xii. v. 39.)

It would feem that the discovery of leaven was owing entirely to chance, and that the idea of fuch a thing could not naturally enter into the mind of man; for it is not likely that as foon as men difcovered the art of making bread, they found out the fecret of raising the patte. It is probable that the world was indebted for this fortunate difcovery to fome perfon, who, having kept a little of the old dough, mixed it with the new, without forefeeing the utility of this mixture. Dr. Carey, I prefume, will not deny, that dough kept for a fhort time, and afterwards mixed with the new paffe, will leaven the bread. If he does, I can affure him, that in many parts of the county of Cumberland they ufe what they call brown-bread, made of barley, and fermented with fome old dough, which had been kept for that purpofe, but which needs not be older than ten or twelve days. That this was alfo the manner in which they anciently leavened their bread, appears from the folJowing paffages of Holy Writ :-" Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. Purge out, therefore, the old

leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened."—" The kingdom of heaven is l'ke unto leaven, which a womin took and hid in three meafures of meal, till the whole was leavened.”— Is it no then evident, that leaven and yeah are different things, and that they bear no relation to each then?

To th information aff rded by Dr. Carey on the subject of mit liquors, al low me to ad, that Diodo: us Siculus, (1b. i.) inforns us, that, according to

adition, Ofiris, for the fake of the people whole countries produced no wine, invented a liquor, made of barley and water, which was not inferior to wine either in ftrength or flavour. Ths, it must be confeffed, is an exact description of heer or ale. The lame author alfo fays, (lib. iv.) that Bacchus taught the Greeks to compote, with water and barley, a liquor, which, for strength and fweetners, approached to wine. Ovid, fpeaking of the meeting which Ceres, who was exhaufted with weariness, had with an old woman named Baubo, fays, that the goddels hav ing requested fome water, the old woman prefented her with a liquor which she had made of dried grain:

lymphamque roganti Dulce dedit, totâ quod coxerat ante polenta.

Though it would feem that these authos, by their defcriptions, mean beer fome doubts may be entertained with refpect to the knowledge of that liquor being fo ancient in Greece as they fay. Homer, who feems fond of defcribing the customs and ufages of his country, never once mentions beer in all his writings.Did this omiffion of the poet proceed from defign? or, rather, is it not a proof that in his time beer was not used?

Notwithstanding the difficulty which Dr. Carey fuppofes the Egyptians mult have experienced in preventing the liquor from continuing to ferment beyond the neceffary time in fo warm a climate, or from fermenting anew after it had undergone the vinous fermentation to a fufficient degree, it appears that beer was the molt common drink of the greatest part of Egypt. (Herodot. lib. ii. cap. 77.—Diod. Sicul. lib. i.—Strab. lib. xvii.)

In fome parts of the North of England, the bufhel of barley is equal to eight pecks of Wincheiter-mealure. This, perhaps, may in fome degree obvi ate the difficulty which appears from its being mentioned in the Northumberland Houshold book," that twelve gallons of beer were made from every bushel of malt. But if we adopt this method of

folving

« PreviousContinue »