that justice which it is not impossible to expect at the hands of Englishmen--I ask you to give me a verdict of "Not Guilty," and to send me home unstained. Mr. Bradlaugh, in his speech, dealt more fully than his co-defendant had been able to do with the legal and physiological aspects of the case. In the clearest fashion he maintained the lawfulness of disseminating the knowledge of innocent prudential checks: I submit to you, gentlemen of the jury, that it is moral to teach poor people to marry early, and that this teaching avoids and will diminish illicit intercourse. I will not weary you with reading the whole of the report on the "Employment of Women and Children in Agriculture," from which my co-defendant quoted that terrible extract from the report of Bishop Fraser. You will there find that the illicit intercourse which we are charged with trying to produce is an illicit intercourse which is going on and bringing with it the birth of the child, and bringing with it the murder of the child by the mother, because there is the pang of starvation and misery and shame to contend with. I say that it is amongst the poor married people that the evils of over-population are chiefly felt, and that it cannot tend to deprave their morals to teach them how to intelligently check this over-population.... I submit that the advocacy of all checks is lawful except such as advocate the destruction of the foetus after conception or of the child after birth. I say that the advocacy of every birth-restricting check is lawful which is not the advocacy of the destruction of human life in any form after that life has been created. Assuming the legality of such advocacy, it is useless unless conveyed in plain and simple language: I say that the advocacy of any check amongst the masses to be useful must of necessity be put in the plainest language and in the cheapest form, and be widely spread; and I press that upon you because I understand that the learned Solicitor-General in his argument put it that one of the faults of this pamphlet was that it was not obscured in learned language. If we possessed the facility of expressing ourselves in French, or Italian, or Greek, or Latin, or Hebrew, or Arabic, what earthly use would that be to the poor unfortunate wretches whose misery we want to address? After traversing with his accustomed skill and acumen the charges formulated by the prosecution, Mr. Bradlaugh concluded his address with a peroration full of passionate eloquence: