“Mr. BRADLAUGH:  Every copy that is unsold shall be at once put under lock and key until the decision of the case.

“The SOLICITOR-GENERAL:  My lord, I think there should be no misunderstanding upon this; I understand that the defendants have undertaken that during the pendency of the appeal this book shall not be circulated at all.  But if the decision should be against them they are under no pledge not to publish.

“Mr. BRADLAUGH:  I hope your lordship will not ask us what we shall do in future.

“The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE:  We have meted out the amount of punishment upon the assumption—­there being no assertion to the contrary, but rather an admission—­that they do intend to set the law at defiance.  If we had understood that they were prepared to submit themselves to the law, we should have been disposed to deal with them in the most indulgent manner; but as we understood that they did not intend this, we have meted out to them such a punishment as we hope, when undergone, will have a deterrent effect upon them, and may prevent other people offending in like manner.  We have nothing to do with what may happen after the defendants obtain a judgment in their favor, if they do so, or after the sentence is carried out, if they do not.  Our sentence is passed, and it will stand, subject only to this, that we stay execution until a writ of error may be disposed of, the defendants giving the most unqualified and unreserved pledge that they will not allow another copy of the book to be sold.

“Mr. BRADLAUGH:  Quite so, my lord; quite so.”

We were then taken into custody, and went down to the Crown Office to get the form for the recognizances, the amount of which, L100, after such a sentence, was a fair proof of the view of the Court as to our good faith in the whole matter.  As a married woman, I was unable to give recognizances, being only a chattel, not a person cognisable by law; the Court mercifully ignored this—­or I should have had to go to prison—­and accepted Mr. Bradlaugh’s sole recognizance as covering us both.  It further inserted in the sentence that we were “to be placed in the First Class of Misdemeanants”, but as the sentence was never executed, we did not profit by this alleviation.

The rest of the story of the Knowlton pamphlet is soon told.  We appeared in the Court of Appeal on January 29th, 30th, and 31st, 1878.  Mr. Bradlaugh argued the case, I only making a brief speech, and on February 12th the Court, composed of Lords Justices Bramwell, Brett, and Cotton, gave judgment in our favor and quashed the indictment.  Thus we triumphed all along the line; the jury acquitted us of all evil motive, and left us morally unstained; the Court of Appeal quashed the indictment, and set us legally free.  None the less have the ignorant, the malicious, and the brutal, used this trial and sentence against us as a proof of moral obliquity, and have branded us as “vendors of obscene books” on this sole ground.