Monday, the 28th, was the day fixed for his second trial; and here he exhibited the character of a real Christian. His defence he had written before, and it was as follows:—“Gentlemen, whatever may be my fate, I shall not die without having to reproach myself for not having quitted my father’s house. By so doing, I should have avoided being the victim in different unhappy affairs that often took place between my father and mother, in which I was generally the object upon which the weight of their discontent fell. I was often obliged to submit to being beaten most severely, and to hear language unworthy of being uttered by either father or mother. Now, left to myself in the solitude of a dungeon, I reflect on times gone by, remembering that I was the only child, abandoned to the most deplorable fate. Yet I ought to have been wiser, and not followed the example of my nearer relations, the source of my misfortune. But now that respectable ministers of the Gospel have taken the trouble to visit me, and point out my duty towards God and towards man, I rest contented. I pray to God to pardon the horrible, but never premeditated crime of which I am guilty. If I ever had an intention of killing my poor father, I had a very favourable opportunity of doing so, when he was stretched upon a bed of sickness, unable to help himself. I was then the only person who took care of him, and administered to his wants, as there was no other person besides myself in the house. I beg pardon of all those whom I may have willingly or unwillingly offended. Gentlemen, after this declaration, I submit myself entirely to your wisdom. It is you who are going to decide my fate. I am ready to meet it, and I will submit to your judgment without a murmur.—PH. G. JOLIN.” This paper is a translation from the French, in which language it was originally written. Whether it is accurately translated, or whether it was written by Jolin himself, or by his advocate, it is impossible to judge. The passage in it which relates to his parents, if his own, is liable to objection. The faults of a parent, especially faults so awfully punished, ought not to have made a part of his defence. If the language is that of his advocate, it is only the language of legal justification, and the facts are both true and of much weight for the extenuation of his crime.