Out of this debate, which contains nothing particularly noteworthy,[56] arose a lawsuit. The reporter, a person named Stephenson M. Struthers, after having sold "the transcript" to Mr Bradlaugh at 8d. per folio, sold a second copy of his notes to Mr William Heaton, on behalf of Mr Hutchings' Committee, for 3 guineas. This my father did not discover until he had used some of the copy, and paid Struthers £5 on account. He then refused to pay the balance (£11, 16s.), and for this the shorthand-writer sued him. Mr Bradlaugh expressed his willingness to pay for the labour involved in making a copy; but he objected to pay for the _sole_ copy when he had not received that for which he had contracted. The suit came on in the Wigan County Court, before J. S. T. Greene, Esq., on April 11th (1861). After the case for the plaintiff was closed, Mr Bradlaugh entered the witness-box to be sworn--at that time the only form under which he could give evidence. Mr Mayhew (for the plaintiff), after some preamble as to not desiring to be offensive, asked "with regret" if Mr Bradlaugh believed "in the religious obligations of an oath?" Mr Bradlaugh objected to answer any question until he was sworn. The Judge would not allow the objection; and after a considerable interchange of opinion and question and answer between the Judge and Mr Bradlaugh, in which the latter explicitly stated his readiness to be sworn, he asked to be allowed to affirm. This the Judge refused to permit. And this is how the episode ended:-- [Footnote 56: The following short passage from this debate may serve as an example of the incisive eloquence of which my father was capable at the age of eight-and-twenty:-- "Men say, 'I believe.' Believe in what? 'I believe' is the prostration of the intellect before the unknown--not an exertion of the intellect to grasp the knowable. Men who have taught in Sunday Schools, and children who have been taught there, men worshipping in our churches--men following men in this way have their ideas made for them, fitted on to them like their clothes; and, like the parrot in its gilded cage, they say 'I believe,' because they have been taught to say it, and not because they have a vital faith when they do say it."] The JUDGE: Only give me a direct answer. Mr BRADLAUGH: I am not answering your question at all. I have objected on two grounds, both of which your Honour has overruled, that I am not bound to answer the question. The JUDGE: If you put it in that way, I should be sorry to exercise any power that I believe I possess according to law. You won't answer the question? Mr BRADLAUGH: I object that I am not bound to answer any question that will criminate myself. The JUDGE: You will not answer my question. Do you believe in the existence of a supreme God? Mr BRADLAUGH: I object that the answer, if in the negative, would subject me to a criminal prosecution. The JUDGE: Do you believe in a state of future rewards and punishments?