every rational view, and to make him, in many cases, a savage.

The indications of meanness in the face are, a thin face generally, thin from habit, not from illness, a hollow eye, projecting eye brow, a thin nose, like Gurney's the Barrister. Gurney carries nearly every mark of meanness in a high degree. Low or little forehead is another sign. I confess, however, that, I am of opinion, that much depends upon education, in fostering or counteracting any propensity of the human body.

With meanness there is a companion seldom absent called low cunning, which makes the individual totally blind to his own character, or to the observations of others upon it. He fancies that he is outwitting them, and depriving them of something to bis satisfaction, while, in fact, he is but undermining his own sources of prosperity and happiness.

To finish this phrenological subject, I must find a name for this organ of meanness in the slang of the science, and leave the practical men to find the real seat of the organ. The best expression I can hit upon, though not well expressed, is DEGRADATIVENESS. I can rather believe that there is an organ of degradativeness, than of acquisitiveness or theft. To discover the seat of this organ, I recommend to the Phrenological Societies, that they examine the heads of the aforementioned Sheriffs and Visiting Magistrates, but more particularly that of the Gaoler, and yours, Mr. Sturt, if Sturt be your name, and if you can all bear a phrenological manipulizing.

I learn, that you have made an excuse, since Mr. Garland has altered my treatment, for not altering it while you were Sheriff, on the ground, that my application to you to that effect was not humble enough. I wrote but one letter to you, and that, because you did not come, as was your duty, to hear what complaints I had to make. You had no disposition to make any alteration: "your conscience would not allow it" was your excuse to me in August last. Upon that same principle, your conscience operated when it would not allow you to pay your father's debts-because you were a mean scoundrel. Since I have been in this Gaol, I have seen an old widow, at least sixty years old, who had always led the most reputable life, and who had been reduced in circumstances in consequence of her widowhood, in consequence of leaving her farm and other property to the management of her young relatives, imprisoned at your instance for near twelve months; while you, at the very time, were

revelling upon the property of different tradesmen in your neighbourhood, because the abominable law of primogeniture allowed you to inherit your father's freehold property without inheriting his debts accumulated upon the credit of that property. I presume, that your conscience compelled you to imprison the poor old widow; and to leave her to rot in the Gaol, had not the law provided a remedy to release her. Think of Widow Standforth, if yours be a reflecting conscience!

I come now to speak of the ruffiauly part of your Shrievalty, of the act of putting irons upon me in November last. This was a black act, and originated from a black motive. You were not a principal, but a mere tool in this affair; and played your part like a fool. I have already published the particulars, in No. 22, Vol. VIII, of this publication, and have now but to say a few words by way of comment. That it was an arranged thing between Peel, perhaps all the ministers, your Uncle, Shaftesbury, and poor Old Pitt, to be revenged for the letter of advice I had written to him, I have no doubt. You were the tool to be worked with. Two Priests were sent to deceive me as to the nature of your intended visit, Mr. Colson the Magistrate, and Mr. Wood the Chaplain; though they say for themselves that they were ignorant that any such outrage was intended. I have yet my doubts of that, though it was quite possible, as I know them to be, in character, peacemakers; only, I cannot say precisely how far that disposition may extend beyond the Christian world. It has been every where a religious maxim, to keep no faith, to preserve no laws, to practice no morality, towards heretics; but to injure, to war with, and to exterminate them. It is also a well known axiom, that a priest is a priest all the world over, whatever be the tenets which constitute his religion. The priesthood has spoiled many a good man, but never improved one.

Your conduct in ordering irons to be put upon me was that of an ignorant ruffiau; for we were conversing in as mild a manner as any two men could converse, and you saw nothing in my conduct that could require any such restraint. You came prepared with irons, before you had seen me; you expected violence from me, because you knew that you deserved it; and what is worst of all, you entered my room with the salute of a treacherous mind: "How d'ye do, Carlile, I hope you are in good health." We sat down to converse, and in the midst of a mild conversation, you ordered irons to be put upon me, when I was as mild as a

child. It would have been time for you to have threatened irons, if I had offered resistance to your removing from my room any thing that you thought proper to remove. I should not have offered that resistance. I was conscious that I had nothing in the room that I feared to exhibit; though, by the bye, it is singular that the only one forbidden thing that I had in the room should have been overlooked. You and the Gaoler would have crowed to have found it; though it was nothing of which I had need to be ashamed, nothing that was brought into the room from any motive or design on my part, or on the part of any other person. The narrow, singularly narrow, escape of the of the thing being seen, was to me a source of amusement, when I saw the saucepans, frying-pan, hand brush, and teakettle put under arrest. Yes, valiant Sheriff! you deprived me of all cooking utensils, of all the nails in the room, of a couple of brushes, and of a couple of window curtain rods: and while this was doing, you thought it necessary to keep me in irons to prevent my interference! Why, fellow, it was pure glory to me to see you and the Goaler such fools, I told the Gaoler so in the midst of it. Hadst thou not been as great a coward as ever stood in shoes, or without shoes, thou wouldst have scorned to handcuff me while the room was searching, and with not even a word of resistance on my part. A brave man would have felt no fear in doing such a thing; nor an honest man been afraid of it. Amidst all, thou wert fool enough to ask me a sort of civil question upon a subject foreign to what was passing, and to be driven out of the room, because I told thee that I would give thee no answer. Thou wert a cowardly foolish ruffian-a sneaking treacherous ruffian-thus to act, and thus to be made to skulk back, every article taken away. Why, fellow, during the time that I was deprived of a penknife by thee, I had no less than fifteen brought into the room; a dozen of which I sent away, as more than I wanted. Besides this, not a man of you know how I took my beard off, when I thought proper to shave or to be mustachioed. All your insolent searchings of my visitors availed nothing. One visitor, though searched, brought me a penknife, but I would not take it of him. I was determined to outwit your searchers by other

means.

Leaving this hand-cuffiing affair as a matter for future consideration, if ever the opportunity to have it fairly considered arrives, I will make a few observations upon what was said in the House of Commons upon it.

Mr. Hume, seeing various accounts in the Newspapers upon the subject, wrote to request, that I would make him a statement of the particulars. This was done; and a statement, true to the letter, sent to him. In the course of the last Sessions of Parliament, it appears, that this statement, or a copy of this statement, was put into the hands of young Portman, the member for this county, who fancied that he could get it all contradicted. It was sent down, or brought down, to the Visiting Magistrates, and to you, the Sheriff. I was informed, that you and they cavilled with some of the minor points, but left the important ones uncontradicted. At any rate I felt that I ought to have been a party in this matter, to have known what had been contradicted: as 1 will now repeat, that my statement was true to the letter, and that if a point was contradicted, it was contradicted falsely.

Several months of the Sessions had passed, and I heard of nothing more than a promise, that something was to be done with this statement. At leugh, towards the end of May, it was suggested to me to draw up a petition setting forth the hardships of my case. As there was a petition already in the House upon that subject, which Mr. Peel was sadly afraid to have printed, I declined to do it, or felt that it was superfluous upon every straight forward ground of proceeding. But to afford an opportunity of commenting upon the statement, I drew up a brief petition, a mere outline of my case. This petition was presented on June 11. I have not a copy of the petition, so little importance did I attach to it; but every report that I have seen of its presentation, is filled with lies and nonsense; therefore, I cannot presume to say here, what was there said upon the subject, as I do not know. To me, it appeared altogether like a smuggled or hushed up concern; and I concieve that to prevent a comment on the truth of the thing, a resort was bad to a shuffle and a few lies. In one report Mr. Peel is made to say, that he had seen a written document under my hand, in which I had threatened to kill any keeper who opposed my liberation after a certain day. To this, I answer, that I never wrote any such document, nor said any such thing for another to write it truly. The Gaoler challenged me with saying something of the kind, on the 25th November last, while I was handcuffed; but I gave him the " lie," and silenced him at once on that head, by telling him what I did say, and by fully explaining to him what I meant; which was, that I would force a way to walk in the open air, but not to quit his keeping. I repeat to you, what I before said, both to you and Mr. Peel, that the Visiting Magistrates and Gaoler have paid no res

pect to truth, in the reports they have made of my conduct. I made them all plead guilty to this charge, in this room, at the visit before the January Sessions 1823; and it was upon that conviction, that I made such a charge against them, in writing to you in March of that year.

Some of the newspapers represent the young Mr. Portman, a mere boy, and a novice in the House of Commons, as putting Mr. Hume to confusion and silence upon the subject, by challenging him to shew an act of cruelty on the part of the Magistrates. As to cruelty in the shape of personal violence, I would not suffer any man to practice it upon me, without an effort on my part to put him to death; but as to cruelty of treatment in the mode of confinement, and in other pranks which these Magistrates have played me in this Gaol, Mr. Hume needed not to have been at a loss to have answered and silenced this young crowing Mr. Portman. If Mr. Portman will come and converse with me, and bring all the Magistrates in the county with him, I will engage to put them all to shame, as far as they are sensitive enough to feel shame for wrong doing. Mine certainly has been a perfect triumph over them; and this Mr. Hume might have clearly shown. But the truth is, that my case was very reluctantly introduced to the House of Commons in this last Sessions, as if another year's confinement had reduced it to a matter of no consequence. Next year, I expect, it will be less than nothing at least, it will be so, as far as I feel disposed to trouble the House with another petition. They will get nothing more than Anti-Christian Petitions from me in future-something worth printing, as well as presenting there, or if not presented there. Petitions against Christianity are things to tell to some purpose over the country: petitions for parliamentary reform are a waste of paper. We must reform the parliament by unchristianizing it-an odd way certainly; but one, which to me appears likely to be more speedily accomplished than any other. It is an attack upon it, with the most powerful kind of moral power. Nothing has so much tended to stay clerical interference in politics, as the assaults which have been lately made upon Christianity. A Priest, now, is a very different animal, a very humble and meek creature, to what he was a few years ago. Every devil of them, and they are all devils, feels to his back bone what I am doing. I wish I could make you feel my rod, as they feel it, Mr. Sturt: if Sturt be your name; for, at least, I will not be dogmatical upon that subject. Scepticism is