Mr. Gurney.—My lord, this is the case of the Defendant.
Mr. Marryatt then replied to the Defendant’s case.
Lord Ellenborough proceeded to sum up the evidence on which he commented most ably. With respect to the up the evidence, on which he commented most ably. With respect to the young man searching the house, his Lordship said it shewed a precaution which was highly creditable to the boy, who had also given a good reason for not going into the Defendant’s room, namely, that it must have disturbed and alarmed his mistress at that unseasonable hour of the night, and that as to the alleged delay, this seemed to have arisen from the interference of the Defendant’s friends; but, although a considerable time elapsed before the prosecutor went to a magistrate, it was clear that he made instant complaint to West, and to his master. His Lordship then adverted to the admission of the Defendant as to being in the boy’s room without assigning any reason or motive, and his Lordship asked, what earthly purpose could the Defendant have for visiting this youth in his bed-room in the dead of the night? and, if no honest reason appeared, it was for the jury to say whether the lad’s account was not irresistably confirmed by this admission. His Lordship read the letter, before alluded to, throughout, and most emphatically expressed his indignation at sacred names, which ought never to be mentioned but with reverence, being used with disgusting familiarity in such a shocking transaction.
The Jury almost instantly returned a verdict of Guilty, which gave universal satisfaction to a crowded Court. The trial occupied four hours.
LIFE OF JOHN CHURCH.
The nearer to Church the further from God!! Old English Proverb.
Dr. Jortin, in his Adversaria, very justly remarks, that “a sudden rise from a low station, as it sometimes shews to advantage the virtuous and amiable qualities, which could not exert themselves before, so it more frequently calls forth and exposes to view, those spots of the soul which lay lurking in secret, cramped by penury, and veiled with dissimulation.”
JOHN CHURCH, better known as the Obelisk Parson, it appears, was abandoned by his parents, when he was scarcely six weeks old, and left exposed in a basket, with little covering to protect him from the inclemency of the weather, on the steps of St. Andrew’s Church, Holborn. In this pitiable state he was found by the overseers of the parish, and sent to the Foundling Hospital; and it was from this circumstance he derived the name of Church. Here he remained until he was nine years old, when a complaint to the Governor’s having been made against him by the nurses that he was addicted to improper and disgusting practices, it was thought prudent to apprentice him out at that early age, in order to prevent the morals of the boys being corrupted from so dangerous an example. He must have quitted the hospital at an earlier age than usual, from his evident illiteracy, and the badness of his writing. In general the boys from this institution are distinguished as good scholars. Church was accordingly placed out as an apprentice to a carver and gilder, in the neighbourhood of Blackfriar’s Road; but before his time of servitude had expired, he married, and abruptly quitted his master. For a short period he followed his business, and worked for a composition ornament maker, in Tottenham-Court-road; but being of an artful disposition, of lazy habits, and with much hypocritical cant, he at length succeeded in imposing upon several religious persons his great anxiety and desire to become a minister of the Gospel. It appears, he commenced his pretended religious career, by taking upon himself the office of a teacher of a sunday school, at that time established in Tottenham Court-road. Thinking that preaching was a more lucrative employment than that in which he was engaged, this hypocritical wretch, together with two other young men, who were also candidates for the gown, hired a garret in Compton-street, Soho, in order to acquire the method of addressing a congregation with confidence. He made a rapid progress in dissimulation, and even at this early period of his religious studies, he laughed in his sleeve at the credulity and ignorance of those persons who were induced to listen to his pious harangues. An old chair was the substitute for the pulpit. He now began, as he termed it, “to gammon the old women.” Good luck procured him the notice of old Mother Barr, of Orange-street, who being interested in his behalf, allowed him the use of a room of her’s, in which he treated her and a few choice labourers in the field of piety, with his rapturous discourses. From this he used to hold forth more publicly. He became acquainted with one Garnet, of notorious memory, who procured him the situation of a preacher at Banbury. It was at this place that he first became obnoxious. But before we proceed further, it may be necessary to inquire by what authority such a man as Church presumed to take upon himself the functions of a minister of the gospel. A man so profligate—so notoriously criminal—come forth to instruct others in religion. It seems, the practice among Dissenters is, that when any man feels a strong desire to become a preacher, he communicates the same to several ministers, who make a strict inquiry into his qualifications as to piety, learning, morals, &c. and if they find these established on satisfactory evidence, they then confer on the candidate a sort of ordination, without which he can have no authority to officiate as a minister of the Gospel. It is evident he must have played the hypocrite in a masterly style, as he did receive an ordination at Banbury, in Oxfordshire. But his real character soon made its appearance, from his having made several violent attempts upon some young men while at the above place, he was driven out from thence, by the trustees of the chapel in which he preached, and the magistrates, and ordered never to shew his face there again. He hastily decamped, leaving behind him his wife and children, and the police-officers having been sent in pursuit of him, their searches proved fruitless, and it was a long time before he was heard of. He then threw off all controul, and acted in defiance of all the ordinances of the Dissenting Church! preaching doctrines tending to encourage licentiousness, and foster the worst of passions. At Colchester he turned the whole congregation against their minister. The mode of healing the consciences of profligate men was practised by the Romish Church before the Reformation, and when it flourished in its rankest state of corruption—when indulgences for sins to be committed, and pardons for sins past, were openly sold for money. The manner in which the Obelisk Preacher conducts the affairs of his chapel bears some resemblance to this practice. He has filled his pockets, it appears, from the money which he has raised by inflaming the passions, and exciting hopes and fears; this pretender of piety has even administered the sacrament to persons who were nearly intoxicated with gin! It is said that Church belongs to that sect called Antinomians, which is thus described by the Rev. John Evans, in his “Sketch of the Denominations of the Christian World:”—“The Antinomian derives his name from Anti and Nomos; simplifying, against, and a Law, his favourite tenet being, that the law is not a rule of life to believers. It is not easy to ascertain what he means by this position, but be seems to carry the doctrine of imputed righteousness of Christ and salvation faith, without works, to such lengths, as to injure, if not wholly destroy, the obligation to moral obedience. Antinomianism may be traced to the period of the Reformation, and its promulgator was John Agricola, originally a disciple of Luther. The Papists, in their disputes with the Protestants of that day, carried the merit of good works to an extravagant length; and this induced some of their opponents to run into the opposite extreme.”—“This sect (says the Encyclopædia) sprung up in England during the protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, and extended the system of libertinism much further than Agricola, the disciple of Luther. Some of their teachers expressly maintained, that as the elect cannot fall from grace nor forfeit the divine favour, the wicked actions they commit are not really sinful, nor are they to be considered as instances of their violation of the Divine Law; consequently, they have no occasion to confess their sins, or to break them off by repentance. According to them, it is one of the essential and distinctive characters of the elect that they cannot do any thing displeasing to God, or prohibited by law.” It may easily be inferred from such doctrine as the above, the dreadful crime men may be induced to commit, without the horrors of conscience or fear of punishment. From his retreat in the country, it seems, he was called to use his influence in town, by a man of his own disgraceful kind, designated Kitty Cambric; and well known at the Swan, in Vere-street. It is notorious from the public exposure of the wretches, who were detected in this street, and brought to punishment, that many of them assumed the name of women, and were absolutely married together, and it appears Church was actually the parson who performed the blasphemous mock ceremony of joining them in the ties of “holy matrimony,” he being nominated their chaplain. He now settled himself at Chapel-court, in the Borough, when his old friend Garrett publicly charged him with a wicked and diabolical offence, as the law says, “not to be named amongst Christians,” and he was obliged to run away from the accusation. By some fortuitous event he, at length, got possession of the Obelisk Chapel, where he began again to deliver his abominable doctrines; and several young men were obliged to leave him, in consequence of his having used them in a manner too indecent to be mentioned or hinted at. The first document we have is letter dated March 7, 1810, from a person, at Banbury, named Hall, of which the following is a copy:—
“Honoured Sir—in reply to your letter concerning Mr. C. I can only inform you, there was a report against him of a very scandalous nature; but how far his culpability extends, it is quite out of my power to determine. He was absent from hence when the rumour first spread. The managers of our chapel took great pains to inquire into the origin of such reports, and the result was, they sent Mr. C. positive orders never, on any account, to return to Banbury again; which advice he has hitherto wisely observed. Now, sir, after giving you the above information, I beg leave to conclude the subject by referring you to your own comment hereon.
(Signed) S. Hall.
Banbury, March 7, 1817.”
Then follows a letter from William Clark, of Ipswich, a young man between 19 and 20 years of age, which contains an account of attempts to horrid to be published. The written confession (frightful indeed it is) of this poor simple young man, whose mind was bewildered by the canting exhortations of Church; and the whole of his statements corroborated by the oral testimony of Mr. Wire, who resides at Colchester, and knows Clark very well. The circumstances related by Clark would have furnished ample grounds for a criminal prosecution had he made his complaint immediately after the assault was committed:—but, suffering under the influence of ignorance and fear, he kept it a secret too long, and afterwards accepted of a pound note from Church. A case was laid before two eminent barristers, to have their opinion whether such a prosecution could be carried on with any prospect of conviction. Their opinion, in writing, is, that after the long concealment of a charge, a jury would pay no attention to his evidence, unless he was confirmed in his story by other evidence.