Read Ebook: A Letter to Sir Samuel Shepherd Knt. His Majesty's Attorney General Upon the Subject of His Prosecutions of Richard Carlile for Publishing Paine's Age of Reason by Anonymous

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 84 lines and 11890 words, and 2 pages

ALCOHOL, ITS VARIOUS FORMS AND SOURCES.

Its chemical structure. How produced. Boiling points. Alcohol and water. Alcohol, where found. Produced from decomposition of vegetables. Sources. Principal alcohols. 1

THE PREPARATION OF MASHES, AND FERMENTATION.

A synopsis of steps. Mashing starchy materials. Gelatinizing apparatus and processes. Saccharifying. Cooling the mash. Fermentation. Yeast and its preparation. Varieties of fermentation:--Alcoholic, acetous, lactic and viscous. Fermenting periods. Fermenting apparatus and rooms. Strengthening alcoholic liquors. 8

DISTILLING APPARATUS.

The simple still. Adams still. Concentrating stills. Compound distillation. Dorn's still. Continuous distillation. The Cellier-Blumenthal still. Coffey's still. Current stills. Regulating distillery fire. 33

MODERN DISTILLING APPARATUS.

The principles of modern compound stills. Vapor traps and their construction. Steam regulation. Feed regulation. American apparatus. The Guillaume inclined column still. 66

RECTIFICATION.

General principles of "fractionation." Old form of rectifying still. Simple fractionating apparatus. "Vulcan" rectifier. Barbet's twin column rectifier. Guillaume's "Agricultural" rectifying apparatus. Rectifying by filtration. 82

MALTING.

The best barley to use. Washing. Steeping. Germinating. The "wet couch." The "floors." "Long malt." Drying. Grinding and crushing. 103

ALCOHOL FROM POTATOES.

Washing. Gelatinizing and saccharifying. Low pressure steaming, and apparatus therefor. Crushing the potatoes. High pressure steaming and apparatus. The vacuum cooker. The Henze steamer. Isolation of starch without steam. English methods. Saccharifying the starch. 110

ALCOHOL FROM GRAIN, CORN, WHEAT, RICE, AND OTHER CEREALS.

Relative yields of various cereals. Choice of grain. Proportions of starch, etc., in various grains. Grinding. Steeping. Preparatory mashing. Saccharifying. Treatment of grain under high pressure. Softening grain by acid. 126

ALCOHOL FROM BEETS.

Beet cultivation. Composition. Soil and manures. Sowing. Harvesting. Storing. Production of alcohol from beets. Cleaning and rasping. Extraction by pressure. Extraction by maceration and diffusion. The diffusion battery. Fermentation. Direct distillation of roots. 140

ALCOHOL FROM MOLASSES AND SUGAR CANE.

The necessary qualities in molasses. Beet sugar. Molasses mixing and diluting. Neutralizing the wash. Pitching temperature. Distilling. Fermenting raw sugar. Cane sugar molasses. "Dunder." Clarifying. Fermenting. Various processes. 163

ALCOHOLOMETRY.

Hydrometers in general. Proof spirit. Syke's hydrometer. Gay-Lussac's hydrometer. Tralles alcoholometer. Hydrometric methods. Estimation of alcohol. Field's alcoholometer. Grisler's method and apparatus. Estimating sugar in mash. Determination of alcoholic fruits. Physical tests. Chemical tests. The Permanganate of Potash test. Results by Barbet. 174

DISTILLING PLANTS, THEIR GENERAL ARRANGEMENT AND EQUIPMENT.

Simple apparatus. Elaborate plants. Steam stills. The fermenting room. Ventilation. Fermenting vats. Preparatory vats. Arrangement of grain distillery. A small beet distillery. Large beet distilling plant. Transporting beets. Potato distillery. Molasses distillery. Fermenting house for molasses. Transportation of molasses to distillery. Coal consumption. 189

DE-NATURED ALCOHOL, AND DE-NATURING FORMUL?.

Uses of alcohol. De-natured spirit:--Its use in Germany, France and England. The "De-naturing Act." The uses of de-natured alcohol. Methods and Formul? for de-naturing. De-natured alcohol in the industrial world. 211

DE-NATURING REGULATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES.

The Free Alcohol Act of 1906, and proposed changes therein. The Amendment of 1907. Internal Revenue Regulations. 224

Index. 261

No. PAGE.

"Their solace in the hours of affliction, sickness, and death." Jesus's religion has caused the affliction and death of far more people than it has solaced on such occasions.

"Their moral instructor in this world." The real moral tendency of Jesus's system is one of the points at issue between his followers and the Deists; therefore that position is not to be assumed as it has not been fairly proved. The effect of Jesus's religion may have been to repress some vices in the world, but it has greatly increased others. When the Pagan Romans possessed Britain, there was not as much gin, brandy, and whiskey drank here as there is now. Nay, the Pagan Romans used to mix water with their wine most usually. Unpaid Bank notes were unknown to them; and thus millions of inhabitants were not employed in circulating among themselves falsehood and fraud, which horrid practice among us renders those two last crimes familiar to the view, and abates the abhorrence of them. Indeed, perjury was evidently not near so frequent among the Pagan Romans as it is now that Jesus's system has prevailed; this fact we can clearly infer from what remains to us of Greek and Roman writers. The unnatural tax on unborn children was totally unknown to those ancients: so that Jesus's morality has not done us much good.

"Libels of this impious description are zealously thrown in the way of the young and inexperienced." This practising upon the minds of the young and inexperienced, if it be culpable, is not so chargeable upon the Deists as upon Jesus's priests. The deistical writings are argumentative, and therefore cannot be read by the young till they are almost grown up, and the judgement is always appealed to by the Deists; neither do they discourage the examination of the other side of the question, as Jesus's followers usually do. On the other hand, Jesus's priests burden the memory of children, not seven years old, with creeds and catechisms; besides, they labour to prejudice the young in favour of Jesus's system, and to discourage all fair inquiry into what concerns its truth; a conduct which the Deists would abhor to pursue in favour of deism. Moreover, the catechisms and other machinations of Jesus's priests are calculated to impair the discerning faculty of the young, and to blunt its acumen.

Let us examine the beginning of the church of England catechism as an example. "Q. Who gave you that name?"--"A. My godfathers and godmothers in my baptism, wherein I was made a member of Christ," &c. How should a child at seven years comprehend the meaning of a membership with an unseen metaphysical being? This beginning with children on subjects beyond their comprehension is playing tricks with their understanding.

"Q. What did your godfathers, &c. then for you?"

"A. They did promise and vow three things in my name: first, that I should renounce the devil and all his works." It is a monstrous proposition to instil into a child's mind that one person could swear to the certainty of another's conduct. Surely these priestly tricks must be meant to incapacitate these young children throughout life from thinking ever acutely on religious subjects. And what idea could a child have of the devil's works? Of the devil himself they might form some notion from the picture of him, and might

"Dream of the devil, and wake in a fright."

The processions and empty things of this wicked world. Would any pious man swear that a child should not be fond of processions, pomps, and splendid shows? Neither could a child distinguish empty things or vanities of the world. It is unavailing for Jesus's priests to say that at any age of maturity these distinctions will be comprehended, for they have taken care before hand, as far as they could, to injure and debilitate the discerning faculty: and if they should afterwards distinguish vanities, they would still be less able to examine religious truths; and to place impediments in the way of this last, is the priest's object. "Secondly, that I should believe all the articles of the Christian faith." How can one person swear, to what another shall believe? and what a notion this swearing must give to young minds of the reverence due to an oath! Descant, Mr. Attorney-General, as you think proper upon the good moral tendency of the religion as by law established, but you will find it very difficult to prove your assertions in its favour, whenever you may please to advance them. The oath extends so far as that the child shall believe not one article only but all the articles of Jesus's religion, and that without even comprehending them all, for some, as that of the Trinity, are quite unintelligible; and some of these articles contain other articles so as to embrace the whole volume of the Bible, all and singular every passage of it.

"And thirdly, that I should keep God's holy will and commandments." Then they must swear that the boy shall never be a godfather.

All this is done to impair the intellect, and accounts, in part, for the extreme obstinacy and prejudice of Jesus's followers. Somebody must have sworn, Mr. Attorney General, that you should never be an Attorney-General; for this exercise of your office herein described, is not compatible with much scrupulosity. As for its being said that the child afterwards takes the oath upon itself, oaths cannot be so transferred; therefore that plea is futile. No description of people, besides Jesus's followers, ever admitted the execrable principle of the transfer of an oath. In fact, if the godfathers had sworn that the boy should turn out a pickle, after all the rest of priestly management, they would have stood a pretty good chance of having nothing fall upon their conscience from that quarter.

Jesus's priests are apt to injure the intellect of young people by telling them, that if they do not believe Jesus's religion they will be damned to eternal punishments. Now as in all natural belief, when the intellect is sound and healthy, the mind is always passive in the act of giving its assent to any proposition, this trick of Jesus's priests disturbs, impairs, and disorders the understanding; and by this means also people are rendered incapable, throughout life, to reason and inquire with penetration, discernment, and impartiality on religious subjects. The natural belief of a sound mind is not determined by the will. If men could, in all cases, believe whatever they pleased, their minds would be a complete chaos; yet have Jesus's priests, in all ages since the days of the founder of their religion, offered this violence to the human intellect. Thus, I think, that I have shewn you, Mr. Attorney-General, that the young and inexperienced are not more in danger of imbibing absurd notions and depraved principles from the Deists than from Jesus's priests.

I now proceed to examine a supposed assertion, rife enough among those of your side of the question that "infidelity and immorality are necessarily connected." That the Deists and other unbelievers are more immoral than Jesus's followers, is more than can be proved. And when we consider that Jesus's religion is always taken up as a prejudice, and is maintained in the world by violence, and by a pertinacious determination of Jesus's adherents to hear the reasons only on one side of the question, that side which is favourable to his pretensions, a procedure which is utterly repugnant to the love of truth, the most probable conjecture is, that the unbelievers should be, upon the whole, the more moral party. But it must be allowed to be a difficult matter to determine such a question as that to any thing like certainty. Until it be determined, however, you have no right to make the assertion alluded to.

When you declaim upon the too great prevalence of infidelity, you speak a language which implies the insane and monstrous notion that natural belief is dependent upon the will; whereas it is the known and suggested reasons which always naturally determine the assent. A man is no more culpable merely for what he believes, than he is for discovering by the taste that sugar is sweet and aloes bitter. Your slang when you speak of infidelity and belief, as virtues or vices, reprehensible or laudable, would be quite unintelligible to us, if we were not already acquainted with the tricks and machinations of priests to create prejudice, or frighten people into an assent to points, which they dare not trust and submit to the test of fair inquiry.

If the Creator were to require an assent without a sufficient reason to determine it, he would demand what is contrary to the structure of the human mind, which was formed by himself: thus he would disorder his own work, which is a thing incredible. If he has suggested reasons which would not have been otherwise thought of, let Jesus's priests produce them, and let them be examined. Then the prosecutions of Deists would be superfluous, for they would be forced to: believe when the reasons were found cogent enough. But no such reasons have been hitherto produced: reason or no reason, the assent is still required. And how shall such an assent without reasons sufficient be distinguished from what is universally allowed, by physicians and all others, to be insanity and mental derangement?

"That the propagators of infidelity are instigated by the Devil." This assertion, very usual from men in your office, Mr. Attorney-General, you are unable to prove. And hereby you remind us, that Jesus's followers universally admit the very absurd notion of two principles in the universe, a good and a bad one.

I know that the moderns being ashamed of it, wish to abrogate it, and to throw it off from themselves upon the early heretics. But we shall not allow you to escape that way. If you advance any principle, you must admit all the consequences which necessarily flow from it; and we will not suffer your evasions in this particular. When pressed hard, you followers of Jesus want to pass off the Devil upon us for a mere angel, and tell us of his war in Heaven, and that he was cast out upon the earth. This will not do, we shall not allow you this subterfuge, for in other places your received canon of Scripture maintains the ubiquity of the Devil; this extravagant notion with which we charge you, we shall bring home to you. In 2 Cor. chap. iv. ver. 4, you have, "In whom the God of this world hath blinded the eyes of them that believe not." implying, that the Devil, i. e. the God of this world, is present in all unbelievers. This is still further confirmed by 1 John chap. v. ver. 19, "The whole world lieth in the wicked one," i.e. the Devil. I know that it is translated, "lieth in wickedness." But this is a sneaking evasion of Jesus's followers, who are ashamed of the notion of the two principles. That is an extraordinary vicious translation of the passage. A man who knows the least of Greek at all must be sensible that the passage will only admit of the rendering which I have here, and others have before me, given to it. The Devil is said by Jesus's followers to pervade the whole unbelieving world. If you complain, Mr. Attorney-General, that this is pressing a lawyer too far on a theological question, I shall lay the blame on you, and those who have held your office, for starting this particular subject; and whenever an Attorney-General advances a position he takes the risks attending it. The story of the Devil's fall from Heaven in Revelations, chap. xii. may establish and show an inconsistency in Jesus's religion, but it does not get you nor his followers clear of the silly notion of the two principles, when your canon of Scripture has once advanced what clearly implies that groundless notion.

"The jury are conjured." Since the detection and exposition of that infamous list of jurors, out of which a jury used to be packed for the Crown whenever it was prosecutor, some sort of reformation has taken place in the manner of appointing a jury, so as to leave a better chance of having disinterested men on the jury. Before Hone's trial the scene which used to take place in prosecutions for alledged blasphemy was scandalous and detestable. The legislature take upon themselves to assign a revelation to the Almighty, but as a revelation is a delineation of his character, they assign to him a character of their own choosing; and as they labour to suppress and hide the objections started against it, that character which they have given to the Supreme Being must of course be a bad one, because concealment in this case implies guilt in the concealing party: so that the charge of blasphemy is justly retorted upon the legislature and upon the prosecuting party in this case of R. Carlile, and also in the preceding cases of Houston, the reputed author of Ecce Homo, of Williams, who was

Paine's printer of the Age of Reason, of Daniel Isaac Eaton, too, and others. The legislative bodies, I repeat, and their accomplices, are the real blaspheming party, who have given, as they testify by their concealing practices, a bad and slanderous character to the Almighty, and whose guilt is aggravated by their endeavours to hinder other men from vindicating him from their foul aspersions.

"And raised to gods confess even virtue vain." --Pope.

"As they value the preservation of good morals." This, as I have shewn, must be merely ironical, these prosecutions having the opposite tendency.

"The peace and good order of society." This is to obtain a submission to tyranny; which submission Jesus in his religion inculcates by his Apostle Peter, 1 Cph. chap. ii. ver. 13: "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man." And this will account for zeal of the ruling authorities to support Jesus's pretensions:

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet