Mr. Ince and Mr. Bardswell argued that my Atheism and Malthusianism made me an unfit guardian for my child; Mr. Ince declared that Mabel, educated by me, would “be helpless for good in this world”, and “hopeless for good hereafter”; outcast in this life and damned in the next; Mr. Bardswell implored the Judge to consider that my custody of her “would be detrimental to the future prospects of the child in society, to say nothing of her eternal prospects”.  I could have laughed, had not the matter been so terribly serious, at the mixture of Mrs. Grundy, marriage-establishment, and hell, presented as an argument for robbing a mother of her child.  Once only did judge and counsel fall out; Mr. Bardswell had carelessly forgotten that Sir George Jessel was a Jew, and lifting eyes to heaven said: 

“Your lordship, I think, will scarcely credit it, but Mrs. Besant says in a later affidavit that she took away the Testament from the child, because it contained coarse passages unfit for a child to read.”

To his horror, Sir George Jessel considered there were “some passages which a child had better not read in the New Testament”, and went on: 

“It is not true to say there are no passages that are unfit for a child’s reading, because I think there are a great many.

“Mr. BARDSWELL:  I do not know of any passages that could fairly be called coarse.

“Sir G. JESSEL:  I cannot quite assent to that.”

With the exception of this little outburst of religious feeling against the book written by apostate Jews, Jewish judge and Christian counsel were united in their hatred of the Atheist.  My argument fell on deaf ears; I distinctly admitted that I was an Atheist, that I had withdrawn the child from religious instruction at school, that I was the author of the “Gospel of Atheism”, “The Fruits of Christianity”, “The Freethinkers’ Text Book, Part II.”, and “The Law of Population”, produced against me:  I claimed her custody on the ground that it was given me by the deed of separation executed by the father who was trying to set it aside, and that no pretence was made that the child was neglected, the admission being, on the contrary, that she was admirably cared for:  I offered lastly, if she were taken from me, to devote L110 a-year to her maintenance and education, provided that she were placed in the hands of a third person, not of her father.  Sir George Jessel decided against me, as he had clearly intended to do from the very outset, and as the part of his judgment affecting Freethinkers as parents is of continued interest I reprint it here.