“Thrice the brindled cat hath mew’d” – The Three Trials of William Hone

Abstract

This essay argues that the bold affirmation of the political, rather than the religious, purpose of his liturgical parodies enabled the journalist, satirist, and publisher William Hone (1780–1842) to turn three accusations of blasphemous libel into the triple defence of the freedom of the press during his trials in December 1817. Hone was accused of blasphemous and seditious libel for having printed and published three liturgical parodies in the early months of that year. These were The Late John Wilkes’s Catechism of a Ministerial Member, The Political Litany, Diligently Revised and The Sinecurist’s Creed, or Belief. He conducted his own defence and, against the odds, was acquitted in all three trials. On January 23, 1818, Hone published the narrated transcripts of the trials. The present essay analyses and interprets those transcripts, highlighting Hone’s eloquence, his de-sacralisation of court ritual, and, most important, the strategic use of satire as a legitimate method of political criticism and as an index of the freedom of the press. The Conclusion focuses on the political and cultural significance of Hone’s rebuttal performance and claims his long-standing right to our attention.

Keywords

• william hone
• liturgical parodies
• popular radical satire