Is the Bible Indictable?: Being an Enquiry whether the Bible Comes within the Ruling of the Lord Chief Justice as to Obscene Literature

In Short

This inquiry serves as a sharp legal and moral critique of nineteenth-century censorship laws. Following a high-profile trial regarding the distribution of medical literature, the author examines whether the Bible—widely distributed and affordable—would survive the very definition of "obscenity" established by the Lord Chief Justice. By meticulously cataloging passages of violence, sexual impropriety, and physiological detail within the Old and New Testaments, the work demonstrates the absurd inconsistency of a state that protects sacred texts while criminalizing scientific or philosophical inquiry. It remains a foundational document in the history of secularism and free speech.

The Story

The narrative begins not with a theological debate, but with a legal grievance. The author observes that the law concerning "obscene literature" has been turned into a tool of class-based censorship. Under the ruling of the Lord Chief Justice, motive—even the noble motive of health or education—is irrelevant if a book contains content that might stir "prurient" thoughts in a reader. The author highlights the glaring hypocrisy: expensive medical treatises or high-priced art are treated as respectable, while the same information, printed cheaply for the poor, is labeled a criminal obscenity.

Having established that "cheapness" is the true metric of legal danger, the author turns this logic against the pillars of the Victorian establishment. If the law is to be applied without bias, it cannot merely target political dissidents or medical reformers; it must account for every book in circulation. The author identifies the Bible as the most prominent example of a widely available, low-cost publication that contains explicit descriptions of sexual violence, incest, and bodily functions.

The core of the work proceeds as a systematic, chapter-by-chapter audit of the Bible. Starting with Genesis and moving through the prophets and the New Testament, the author points to specific verses that detail episodes of rape, adultery, and brutal physical retribution. These are not presented as theological observations but as evidence for a court of law. The author emphasizes that these stories are often given to children in schools, despite the state’s aggressive posture toward other literature deemed "demoralizing." By contrasting these Biblical accounts with the specific, sober physiological descriptions in the pamphlets that led to the author's own prosecution, the absurdity of the legal double standard is laid bare.

The argument concludes that the law has been narrowed and weaponized specifically to silence dissenters. The author challenges the reader to recognize that the protection of the Bible is a political choice, not a legal necessity. If the law is truly to be blind, it must either condemn everything or tolerate the freedom of all expression. The author does not actually demand that the Bible be banned; rather, the intent is to show that the current legal precedent is so dangerously broad that it threatens the intellectual liberty of the entire nation. By exposing the "Bible-glass" walls of the Christian establishment, the author forces a choice: either revise the law to protect free inquiry, or face a society where the government has the power to seize any book based on the subjective, inconsistent whims of a judge.

How It Unfolds

The anatomy of a double standard The author explains that the legal definition of obscenity has shifted from the author’s intent to the reader’s potential reaction. This "vicarious punishment" means that a seller is now held responsible for the private, impure thoughts of any random person who might purchase their book.

The economics of morality A distinction is drawn between high-priced works, which remain "respectable" in the eyes of the law, and inexpensive books, which are targeted because they are accessible to the common people. This price-based discrimination reveals that the law is not about morality, but about keeping information out of the hands of the public.

A catalogue of the sacred and the profane The author provides an exhaustive list of Biblical citations, moving book by book to identify stories that would be considered legally obscene under the current ruling. These include the narratives of Lot’s daughters, the Levite’s concubine, and the graphic metaphors found in Ezekiel and the Song of Solomon.

The call for legal consistency The work culminates in a challenge to the authorities: if the Bible is not also prosecuted as an obscene book, then the law is being applied with overt religious bias. The author argues that the only way to preserve a free society is to strike down this judge-made law entirely, ensuring that no book is suppressed simply because it covers the realities of human nature.

The People

The Lord Chief Justice serves as the primary antagonist of the argument. Through his restrictive rulings, he represents the rigid, inconsistent power of the Victorian state. He is the architect of the "new judge-made law" that ignores the author’s motive and focuses entirely on the potential for corruption in the reader.

Dr. Knowlton is the figure whose work on human physiology is the focus of the state's prosecution. He represents the "undoubted physician" and the advocate for health, standing in for all those who seek to provide useful, scientific knowledge to the poor but are struck down by the law.

The author is the voice of reason and indignation. Armed with the very laws used to suppress her, she adopts the role of the prosecutor to show the absurdity of the state's position. She is intellectually fearless, refusing to be intimidated by the power of the church or the state, and she remains committed to the idea that knowledge—no matter how raw or uncomfortable—is superior to the "fragile purity" of ignorance.

Lord Sandon appears as a representative of the educational establishment who, while mandating the Bible for children, inadvertently illustrates the hypocrisy of the state. His call for children to read the Bible "right through" provides the perfect foil for the author’s argument, as it exposes the government's willingness to promote as "sacred" the very content they would label as "obscene" in any other context.

In Its Own Voice

"If Dr. Knowlton was sold at 10s. 6d. and Dr. Churchill at 6d., then the vials of legal wrath would have descended on the advocate of abortion and not on the teacher of prevention."

The author illustrates how the legal system uses pricing as a shield for the wealthy and a weapon against the poor.

"The law has been narrowed in order to enmesh Freethought: its net will catch other fishes as well, or else break under the strain and let all go free."

This reflects the author's assessment of how the law is being misused to target specific groups, with the warning that such overreach will ultimately fail.

"I do not urge that the Bible should be prosecuted: I do urge that it is indictable under the present ruling; and I plead, further, that this very fact shows how the present ruling is against the public weal."

The author clarifies that her goal is not censorship, but rather the dismantling of an unjust and dangerous legal precedent.

What It's Really About

This book is fundamentally an argument for intellectual freedom and the separation of law from religious orthodoxy. It examines the "questions underneath" the legal proceedings of the era: who gets to define morality, and why is that definition used to keep the lower classes in a state of enforced ignorance? The author posits that the suppression of knowledge is a form of control, and that the state uses the label of "obscenity" to maintain a hierarchy of information. By pitting the Bible against the law, the author explores the tension between state-mandated religion and the emerging rights of the individual, ultimately arguing that the "purity" maintained by government-enforced silence is both fragile and fundamentally dishonest.

Why Read It Today

Readers interested in the history of civil liberties, the development of secularism, or the evolution of free-speech laws will find this work compelling. It offers a rare, ground-level view of how nineteenth-century activists used the legal machinery of the state to expose the contradictions of the establishment. The writing is urgent, sharp, and remarkably modern in its critique of class-based justice; the author’s refusal to be silenced by the judicial system provides a bracing, empowering reading experience.

However, the reader should be prepared for the author's direct, analytical style. Because the book catalogs explicit Biblical passages, it is unflinching in its language and content, mirroring the "coarse" nature of the source material she examines. Readers expecting a purely philosophical treatise may be surprised by the gritty, forensic nature of the text, as the author systematically tears through chapter and verse to build her case. It is a dense, argumentative, and polemical work that does not shy away from the intensity of the period's cultural warfare. What stays with you is the author's unwavering conviction that the only true path to a moral society is one built on the open, unhindered exchange of all human knowledge, rather than the curated, state-protected ignorance of the few.