C.B.: I decline to answer these questions, because prosecutions for penalties are at present pending against the _National Reformer_ at the instance of the late Government. Mr O'M.: Did you write this passage, which appeared in the _National Reformer_: "There is a great big monkey," etc. [fable already referred to on p. 233]. C.B., after some hesitation: I might refuse to answer this question on the same ground I have refused to answer the other questions. I prefer, however, to answer, and I say that passage did appear in a paper with which I was connected, but was not written by me. It was part of a translation of a German fable, and was copied nearly two years ago into the _Saturday Review_ without the context. If the context were read with it, the meaning of the passage would be entirely different It related as much to Hinduism as to Christianity. I wrote a reply to the _Saturday Review_ at the time.[127] [Footnote 127: This reply was refused insertion.] Mr O'M.: Did you ever take legal proceedings against the _Saturday Review_ for publishing this article? C.B.: No; I considered it a criticism on my opinions, and answered it by other articles in other papers. I should never sue a journal for an attack on my opinions. Mr O'M.: Do you believe in the truth of the Christian religion? C.B.: I decline to answer, because it is a prosecutable offence for a man to deny the truth of Christianity after he had been brought up in its tenets. The defence, as I have said, called no witnesses; but Mr O'Malley was a host in himself, and as far as the jury were concerned, the "eloquence" of his address more than made up for the weakness of his case. He said that from Mr Bradlaugh's refusals to answer his questions, "it is fair to assume that he has no character to be injured by such a criticism as this," meaning by that that an Atheist had no character to be injured when his principles were likened to those of such a man as Broadhead, a "self-confessed assassin," and his morality to that of a man compelled to flee the country on a charge of fraud. Mr O'Malley went on to say that while it would have been better if the article had not appeared, "it was nonsense to talk of it as injury to the notorious character of such a man. The smallest amount of damages would be sufficient to set up the character of that 'noble' man. He asked the jury, as Christian men, to refrain from giving their endorsement to that man Bradlaugh, to that man Bradlaugh, to that man Bradlaugh." In the course of his summing up, Mr Justice Blackburn said that "all in Court must have been disgusted with some of the questions which had been put in cross-examination." That all were not disgusted was soon apparent, for, after a short consultation, the jury, feeling bound to respond to this appeal to their Christianity, returned a verdict for the plaintiff indeed, but with one farthing damages.