ver il

bringeth with him warmth and animation, and causeth the day to triumph over the night. The vernal equinox, or the beginning of spring, was therefore naturally and universally supposed to be the time of the creation. It is then that the Persians, who call April the month of Paradise, celebrate their "Neurouz," or "New Revolution:" The Jesuit Petavius hath remarked, that the Rabbies, when speaking of the creation, generally employ the word Bard, which properly signifieth" to renew." Virgilius saith: " lud erat." Syncellus, Cedrenus, St. Cyrillus, &c. all agree that the world was created at the vernal equinox, or at Easter, and it is also at this epoch, that they expect the second creation, or the re-establishment of all things, even the second coming of their God, which Cedrenus telleth us will arrive at the festival called the Lord's Passover. As Taurus, or the Bull, formerly presided over the vernal equinox, it was to the Bull that the Persians attributed those ideas of regeneration, which a later superstition hath naturally transferred to Aries, a sign, called by the Persians the Lamb. Men (saith the Boundesh) will be again what they were: and the dead will be resuscitated by that which shall come of the Bull."

After

But let us hear what the Persians say of their cosmogony-"The supreme Deity at first created Man and the Bull in an elevated place; and they remained three thousand years without evil. These three thousand years comprehend the Lamb, the Bull, and the Twins. Afterwards, they remained upon the earth another space of three thousand years without experiencing any difficulty or contradiction; and these three thousand years answer to the Crab, the Lion, and the Ear of Corn, i. e. the Virgin. wards, at the seventh thousand, which answereth to the Balance, Evil appeared. The man was called Kaïomorh. He cultivated the earth. The stars began their career in the month Farvardin, which is the Neurouz (i. e. at the vernal equinox at which the Neurouz is celebrated); and by the revolution of heaven, Day was distinguished from Night. Such is the origin of Man." We see that the space of time, during which the sun passeth through each sign of the Zodiac, is in this passage allegorically denoted by a thousand years.

We may here remark, that the Bull is elsewhere said to have been killed by Ahrimân, when he came into the world at the ascension of the Balance; and Theon hath told us that the Balance riseth at the same time with the Serpent. But our Christocoles say, that it was the Lamb that was slain from the beginning of the world; for, in consequence of the precession of the equinoxes, the sun, which first about the year 4688 seemed to perish in the sign of Taurus, began in the year 2428 to be annually vanquished in the sign of Aries.

Now, Evil, in the Persian Cosmogony, is nothing more than Winter; and as the destructive effects of this season are repaired by

the genial warmth of Spring, the Sun is naturally considered as saving the world from the powers of darkness, and as overcoming the principle of Evil. The Sun is indeed an universal God; as Dupuis hath fully proved in the treatises, which precede that which I am now translating. We may even remark, Richard Carlile, that he is the Sampson and the Elijah of the Hebrews; and that after being honoured as a Deity, or a divine Man, by every nation on the face of the earth, he hath at last been humbled into a Jewish malefactor, and is adored under the name of Christ, by a set of persecuting bigots, who know not what they worship. They tell us, that their Christ is the reflection of the glory, and the express image of the person of his divine father, who by him made the worlds; while, on the other hand, Plato calleth the luminary of the day the Son of the supreme Being, whom he hath begotten similar to himself; and Cheræmou telleth us, that the Egyptian priests considered the vanquisher of darkness, as the great Demiourgos, or creator of all things.

But while I am thus, Richard Carlile, proving what the orthodox would call "the divinity of our Saviour," I have strangely digressed from the cosmogony of the Persians and their imitators. It is however now too late to recommence this subject; for, if I mistake not, this letter is already as long as my former one; and as I should wish to make all my letters of as uniform a length as possible, I shall here conclude.

Remaining, with the highest esteem, fellow citizen,
THY FRIEND.

QUESTIONS,

PROPOSED BY A SEARCHER AFTER TRUTH.

DOTH not the " onus probandi" fall upon the affirmer, and not upon the denier of any thing?

Can we believe, what we cannot conceive?

If God be incomprehensible, can we believe in him?

Can we be as certain of the existence of that which is not the object of our senses, as of that which is the object of our senses? Are there not degrees in belief?

Must a thing necessarily exist, because many men affirm that it doth exist?

Can a positive idea be expressed in wholly negative terms?

Can we argue upon any thing that we cannot define positively? Can we define positively the word "Spirit," or "Immateriality?" When savages are ignorant of the cause of any thing, do they not attribute it to a spirit?

Is not the "Great Spirit" a mere personification of unknown causes?

What is the difference between "Nothing" and "Spirit?"

Can an immaterial being draw matter out of his own substance?

What was God about, before he created matter?

What could have induced a Deity to create?

Can an Immutable Being change his mind?

If it were proper that matter should be created, why was it not created from all eternity?

If matter be eternal, is it not coeval with the Deity?

Doth not matter occupy space?

Can two things simultaneously occupy the same space?

Can there be any God, or Spirit, in the space occupied by

matter?

Can any thing be infinite when matter excludes it from a portion of space?

Can two infinites exist together;

Can any thing be infinite, as well as indivisible?

Are not action and re-action reciprocal?

Can matter act upon that which is not matter?

Can matter be acted upon by that which is not matter?

If God created matter, who created God?

Which is more conceivable-that, what we see existing, hath always existed? Or that what we do not see existing, hath always existed?

Supposing that a God were necessary to create the world, is not the world now capable of existing to eternity without a God? When a God is of no use, why should we suppose that he existeth?

Ought we to admit a God, if all things be equally or more explicable without one?

Ought we to admit a God, if all things be equally or more inexplicable with one?

Can we form any idea, independent of form and figure?

Can we form any idea of a spirit, without giving it form and figure?

Can that which hath form and figure, be immaterial?

If the universe be every thing, must not that, which is no part of it be nothing?

Could nature have existed otherwise than it now existeth?
Can we prove, that matter cannot think?

Can an animal reason without a brain?

Do not those animals reason best, who have the organs of the brain most fully developed?

Doth not reason depend upon the developement of the brain?
What is there, that doth not depend upon matter and motion?
Can we prove that matter was ever quiescent?

Are not animalculæ produced spontaneously?

Can there be vinegar in which there are not animalculæ? If certain known states of matter can produce animalculæ, could not certain unknown states of matter have produced animals? Can we define the word "soul," except as being the vital principle?

Where was the soul before the body was created?

Doth a man generate a soul, at the same time that he generateth a child?

When doth the soul enter the fœtus?

Hath a still born child a soul? Hath an ideot? Hath an ourangoutang? Hath an Elephant?

Doth an Elephant reason less than an ideot?

If women are less capable of reasoning than men, must not the souls of women be inferior to those of men?

If there be a gradation in souls, where doth this gradation end? Cannot there be reason without a soul?

Cannot there be a soul without reason?

Where is the soul, during sleep? or, in persons apparently drowned? or in persons stupified by a blow on the head?

If souls are continually being created during an infinity of time, must they not at last occupy an infinity of space (or the whole of space?)

Of what substance are the souls created?

Can any thing come out of nothing?

THE ADVANTAGES OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

FROM THE CANDID PHILOSOPHER.

EVERY one will allow, that freedom of thought ought not, and cannot be restrained, however freedom of speech may be so. The judge observed very justly to a satirical author, that the law forbade him to call him rogue. "I know it, my lord," replied as justly the arch wag; "but the law does not forbid my thinking your lordship one.'

Since, then, freedom of thought cannot be taken from a man,

and is confessedly useful, let us briefly consider the advantages of freedom of speech.

And here a most excellent author occurs to me, and I shall give his sentiments on the subject, as nearly as I can remember, they being perfectly agreeable to my own:

The passions are not to be extinguished but with life: to forbid, therefore, people to speak, is to forbid them to feel. The more men express of their hate and resentment, perhaps the less they retain, and sometimes they vent the whole that way; but these passions, where they are sinothered, will be apt to fester, to grow venomous, and to discharge themselves by a more dangerous organ than the mouth; even by an armed and vindictive hand. Less dangerous is a railing mouth than an heart filled with bitterness and curses; and more terrible to a prince ought to be the secret execrations of his people than their open revilings, or than even the assaults of his enemies. In truth, where no liberty is allowed to speak of governors, besides that of praising them, their praise will be little regarded. Their tenderness and aversion to have their conduct examined will be apt to prompt people to pronounce their conduct guilty or weak; to suspect their management and designs to be worse than perhaps they are; and to become turbulent and seditious rather than be forced to be silent.

IGNORANCE THE FOUNDATION OF UNEQUAL GOVERNMENTS, AND FOSTERED BY THEM DESIGNEDLY.

FROM BARLOW'S ADVICE TO THE PRIVILEGED ORDERS.

UNEQUAL governments are necessarily founded on ignorance, and they must be supported by ignorance; to deviate from their principle, would be voluntary suicide. The great object of their policy is to perpetuate that undisturbed ignorance of the people, the parent of crimes, and the pillar of the state.

In England, the people at large are as perfectly ignorant of the acts of parliament, after they are made, as they possibly can be before. They are printed by one man only, who is called the King's printer-in the old German characters, which few men can read-and sold at a price that few can afford to pay. But, lest some scraps or comments upon them should come to the people, through the medium of public newspapers, every such paper is stamped with a heavy duty: and an act of Parliament is made, to prevent men from lending their papers to each other; so that, not one person in a hundred sees a newspaper once in a year. If