The _Morning Star_ (August 2nd) had a most indignant article, condemning such a verdict "as a flagrant denial and mockery of justice." The _Bradford Review_ was courageously outspoken, and urged that a new trial should be moved for. In a leaderette the _Weekly Dispatch_ (August 4th) thought that this Devonshire dealing was altogether a scene for Spain rather than for England, and condemned Mr Collier's conduct of the case. In the following issue _Publicola_ had a long article on the proceedings, in which he deplored "that such an institution as that of trial by jury, to which we are indebted for magnificent assertions of political right and freedom, which, generally speaking, is a safeguard against social injury, should, by the conduct described, become a portion of the machinery of persecution." _Punch_ (August 10th) joined in its voice, and published a flippant article on "A Short Way with Secularists," in which it tells the story of the seizure of "that fellow Bradlaugh, who calls himself Iconoclast," and hailed with mock delight the advent of the "orthodox reaction." Said _Punch_, "The magistrates becoming judges of controversy, and the policemen forcing their decrees, the office of justice of the peace will become a holy office indeed, and the constabulary will rise into familiars of a British Inquisition." Not the least remarkable article appeared in the Catholic _Tablet_ for August 3rd. It speaks of the arrest and imprisonment of Mr Bradlaugh as "frightful persecution," and says: "His legal rights have been violated by the police, and a jury of British Protestants have refused him redress, because his interpretation of the Scriptures is different from theirs. Either that is religious persecution or there is no such thing." In 1861 the English Roman Catholics regarded Mr Bradlaugh as a weak and (to them) harmless unit, and they affected to espouse his cause as a weapon against their deadly enemies, the Protestants. What a change in less than twenty years to the time when "Henry Edward, Cardinal-Archbishop," and Prince of the Church of Rome, thought it necessary, with his own powerful hand, to write protest after protest in the _Nineteenth Century_, against Mr Bradlangh being allowed to take his seat in the Commons House at Westminster! What a change from 1861 to 1882, when this same great prelate thought it necessary to pay a formal visit in solemn state to the town of Northampton itself to use his mighty influence to turn the electors against "this poor Secular Iconoclast," as the _Tablet_ once called him.]