The whole proceedings on the trial of an information exhibited ex officio by the King's Attorney-General against Thomas Paine: for a libel upon the Revolution and settlement of the Crown and regal government as by law established; ... Tried by a special jury in the Court of King's Bench, Guildhall, on Tuesday, the 18th of December, 1792. ... Taken in short-hand by Joseph Gurney.
[Page]
THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE TRIAL OF AN INFORMATION Exhibited ex Officio by the KING'S ATTORNEY-GENERAL AGAINST THOMAS PAINE
For a LIBEL upon the REVOLUTION and SETTLEMENT of the CROWN and REGAL GOVERNMENT as by Law eſtabliſhed; and alſo upon the BILL of RIGHTS, the LEGISLATURE, GOVERNMENT, LAWS, and PARLIAMENT of this KINGDOM, and upon the KING.
Tried by a Special Jury in the Court of King's Bench, GUILDHALL, on Tueſday, the 18th of December, 1792.
BEFORE THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD KENYON.
Taken in Short-Hand By JOSEPH GURNEY.
LONDON: Sold by MARTHA GURNEY, No. 128, HOLBORN-HILL.
1. INFORMATION. Of Eaſter Term, in the 32d Year of King George tht Third.
[Page]London, (to wit) BE it remembered, that Sir Archibald Macdonald, Knight, Attorney General of our preſent Sovereign Lord King George the Third, who, for our preſent Sovereign Lord the King, proſecutes in this behalf in his own proper perſon, comes into the court of our ſaid preſent Sovereign Lord the King, before the King himſelf at Weſtminſter, in the county of Middleſex, on Friday next, after one month from the feaſt day of Eaſter in this ſame term; and for our ſaid Lord the King giveth the court here to underſtand and be informed, that THOMAS PAINE, late of London, gentleman, being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and being greatly diſaffected to our ſaid Sovereign Lord the now King, and to the happy conſtitution and government of this kingdom, and moſt unlawfully, wickedly, ſeditiouſly, and maliciouſly deviſing, contriving, and intending to ſcandalize, traduce, and vilify, the late happy Revolution, providentially brought about and effected under the wiſe and prudent conduct of his Highneſs William, heretofore Prince of Orange, and afterwards King of England, France, and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging; and the acceptance of the Crown and royal dignity of King and Queen of England, France, and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging, by his ſaid Highneſs William, and her Highneſs Mary, [Page 4] heretofore Prince and Princeſs of Orange; and the means by which the ſame Revolution was accompliſhed to the happineſs and welfare of this realm; and to ſcandalize, traduce, and vilify the convention of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, at whoſe requeſt, and by whoſe advice, their ſaid Majeſties did accept the ſaid crown and royal dignity; and to ſcandalize, traduce, and vilify, the act of the Parliament holden at Weſtminſter in the firſt year of the reign of their ſaid Majeſties, King William and Queen Mary, intituled, ‘an act, declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, and ſettling the ſucceſſion of the crown,’ and the declaration of rights and liberties in the ſaid act contained; and alſo the limitations and ſettlements of the crown and regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions as by law eſtabliſhed; and alſo by moſt wicked, cunning, and artful inſinuations to repreſent, ſuggeſt, and cauſe it to be believed, that the ſaid Revolution, and the ſaid ſettlements and limitations of the crown and regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions, and the ſaid declaration of the rights and liberties of the ſubject, were contrary to the rights and intereſt of the ſubjects of this kingdom in general; and that the hereditary regal government of this kingdom was a tyranny. And alſo by moſt wicked, cunning, and artful inſinuations, to repreſent, ſuggeſt, and cauſe it to be believed, that the Parliament of this kingdom was a wicked, corrupt, uſeleſs, and unneceſſary eſtabliſhment; and that the King and the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in Parliament aſſembled, [Page 5] wickedly tyrannized over and oppreſſed the ſubjects of this kingdom in general, and to infuſe into the minds of the ſubjects of this kingdom groundleſs and unreaſonable diſcontents and prejudices againſt our preſent Sovereign Lord the King and the Parliament of this kingdom, and the conſtitution, laws, and government thereof; and to bring them into hatred and contempt, on the ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty-ſecond year of the reign of our ſaid preſent Sovereign Lord the King, with force and arms at London aforeſaid, to wit, in the pariſh of Saint Mary le Bow, in the Ward of Cheap, he, the ſaid Thomas, wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly, did write and publiſh, and cauſe to be written and publiſhed, a certain falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious libel, of and concerning the ſaid late happy Revolution, and the ſaid ſettlements and limitations of the crown and regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions; and the ſaid act, declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject; and the ſaid declaration of the rights and liberties of the ſubject therein contained, and the hereditary regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions; and alſo of and concerning the Legiſlature, Conſtitution, Government, and Laws, of this kingdom; of and concerning our preſent Sovereign Lord the King that now is; and of and concerning the Parliament of this kingdom, intituled, ‘Rights of Man, Part the Second, Combining principle and practice, by Thomas Paine, Secretary for Foreign Affairs to Congreſs, in the American War, and Author of the [Page 6] Work, entitled Common Senſe, and the Firſt Part of the Rights of Man, the Second Edition, London, printed for J. S. Jordan, No. 166, Fleet Street, 1792;’ in which ſaid libel are contained, amongſt other things, divers falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious, matters. In one part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, that is to ſay, ‘All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny. An heritable crown’ (meaning, amongſt others, the crown of this kingdom) ‘or an heritable throne,’ (meaning, amongſt others, the throne of this kingdom) ‘or by what other fanciful name ſuch things may be called, have no other ſignificant explanation than that mankind are heritable property. To inherit a government, is to inherit the people, as if they were flocks and herds.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘This Convention met at Philadelphia, in May, 1787, of which General Waſhington was elected preſident. He was not at that time connected with any of the State Governments, or with Congreſs. He delivered up his commiſſion when the war ended, and ſince then had lived a private citizen. The Convention went deeply into all the ſubjects, and having, after a variety of debate and inveſtigation, agreed among themſelves upon the ſeveral parts of a Federal Conſtitution, the next queſtion was the manner of giving it authority and practice. For this purpoſe, they did not, like a cabal of courtiers, ſend for a Dutch Stadtholder [Page 7] or a German Elector, but they referred the whole matter to the ſenſe and intereſt of the country,’ (thereby meaning and intending that it ſhould be believed that a cabal of courtiers had ſent for the ſaid Prince of Orange and King George the Firſt, heretofore Elector of Hanover, to take upon themſelves reſpectively the regal government of the ſaid kingdom and dominions, without referring to the ſenſe and intereſt of the ſubjects of the ſaid kingdoms.) And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, that is to ſay, ‘The hiſtory of the Edwards and the Henries’ (meaning Edwards and Henries, heretofore Kings of England) ‘and up to the commencement of the Stuarts,’ (meaning Stuarts, heretofore Kings of England) ‘exhibits as many inſtances of tyranny as could be acted within the limits to which the nation had reſtricted it. The Stuarts’ (meaning Stuarts, heretofore Kings of England) ‘endeavoured to paſs theſe limits, and their fate is well known. In all thoſe inſtances, we ſee nothing of a conſtitution, but only of reſtrictions on aſſumed power. After this, another William,’ (meaning the ſaid William Prince of Orange, afterwards King of England) ‘deſcended from the ſame ſtock, and claiming from the ſame origin, gained poſſeſſion’ (meaning poſſeſſion of the crown of England) ‘and of the two evils, James and William, ’ (meaning James the Second, heretofore King of England, and the ſaid William Prince of Orange, afterwards King of England) ‘the nation preferred what it [Page 8] thought the leaſt; ſince from circumſtances it muſt take one. The act called the Bill of Rights’ (meaning the ſaid act of Parliament intituled, "an act declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, and ſettling the ſucceſſion of the crown) ‘comes here into view; what is it’ (meaning the ſaid act of Parliament laſt mentioned) ‘but a bargain which the parts of the government made with each other to divide powers, profits and privileges?’ (meaning that the ſaid laſt-mentioned act of Parliament was a bargain which the parts of the government in England made with each other to divide powers, profits, and privileges. ‘You ſhall have ſo much, and I will have the reſt; and with reſpect to the nation it ſaid, for your ſhare YOU ſhall have the right of petitioning. This being the caſe, the Bill of Rights’ (meaning the ſaid laſt-mentioned act of Parliament) ‘is more properly a Bill of Wrongs and of inſult; as to what is called the Convention Parliament, it’ (meaning the ſaid Convention of Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons herein before mentioned) ‘was a thing that made itſelf, and then made the authority by which it acted. A few perſons got together, and called themſelves by that name; ſeveral of them had never been elected, and none of them for the purpoſe. From the time of William,’ (meaning the ſaid King William the Third) ‘a ſpecies of government aroſe, iſſuing out of this coalition Bill of Rights;’ (meaning the ſaid act, intituled, "an act, declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, and ſettling the ſucceſſion of the crown) ‘and [Page 9] more ſo ſince the corruption introduced at the Hanover ſucceſſion’ (meaning the ſucceſſion of the Heirs of the Princeſs Sophia, Electreſs and Dutcheſs Dowager of Hanover to the crown and dignity of this kingdom) ‘by the agency of Walpole, that’ (meaning the ſaid ſpecies of government) ‘can be deſcribed by no other name than a deſpotic legiſlation. Though the parts may embarraſs each other, the whole has no bounds; and the only right it acknowledges out of itſelf is the right of petitioning. Where then is the conſtitution either that gives or that reſtrains power? It is not becauſe a part of the government’ (meaning the government of this kingdom) ‘is elective, that makes it leſs a deſpotiſm, if the perſons ſo elected poſſeſs afterwards, as a parliament, unlimited powers; election in this caſe becomes ſeparated from repreſentation, and the candidates are candidates for deſpotiſm.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘The attention of the government of England (for I rather chuſe to call it by this name than the Engliſh government) appears, ſince its political connection with Germany, to have been ſo completely engroſſed and abſorbed by foreign affairs, and the means of raiſing taxes, that it ſeems to exiſt for no other purpoſes. Domeſtic concerns are neglected; and with reſpect to regular laws, there is ſcarcely ſuch a thing;’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘With reſpect to the two houſes of which the Engliſh Parliament’ [Page 10] (meaning the Parliament of this kingdom) ‘is compoſed, they appear to be effectually influenced into one, and, as a Legiſlature, to have no temper of its own. The miniſter,’ (meaning the miniſter employed by the King of this realm in the adminiſtration of the government thereof) ‘whoever he at any time may be, touches it’ (meaning the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom) ‘as with an opium wand; and it’ (meaning the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom) ‘ſleeps obedience. But if we look at the diſtinct abilities of the two Houſes’ (meaning the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom) ‘the difference will appear ſo great, as to ſhew the inconſiſtency of placing power where there can be no certainty of the judgement to uſe it. Wretched as the ſtate of repreſentation is in England,’ (meaning the ſtate of repreſentation of the Commons of this kingdom) ‘it is manhood compared with what is called the Houſe of Lords;’ (meaning the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament aſſembled) ‘and ſo little is this nick-named Houſe’ (meaning the Houſe of Lords) ‘regarded, that the people ſcarcely inquire at any time what it is doing. It’ (meaning the ſaid Houſe of Lords) ‘appears alſo to be moſt under influence, and the furtheſt removed from the general intereſt of the nation.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, viz. ‘Having thus glanced at ſome of the defects of the two Houſes of Parliament,’ (meaning the Parliament of this kingdom) ‘I proceed to what is called the crown,’ (meaning the crown [Page 11] of this kingdom) ‘upon which I ſhall be very conciſe. It’ (meaning the crown of this kingdom) ‘ſignifies a nominal office of a million ſterling a year, the buſineſs of which conſiſts in receiving the money, whether the perſon’ (meaning the King of this realm) ‘be wiſe or fooliſh, ſane or inſane, a native or a foreigner, matters not, every miniſtry’ (meaning the miniſtry employed by the King of this realm in the adminiſtration of the government thereof) ‘acts upon the ſame idea that Mr. Burke writes, namely, that the people’ (meaning the ſubjects of this kingdom) ‘muſt be hoodwinked and held in ſuperſtitious ignorance by ſome bugbear or other; and what is called the crown’ (meaning the crown of this kingdom) ‘anſwers this purpoſe, and therefore it anſwers all the purpoſes to be expected from it. This is more than can be ſaid of the other two branches. The hazard to which this office’ (meaning amongſt others the office of King of this realm) ‘is expoſed in all countries,’ (meaning amongſt others this kingdom) ‘is not from any thing that can happen to the man,’ (meaning the King) ‘but from what may happen to the nation,’ (meaning amongſt others this kingdom) ‘the danger of its coming to its ſenſes.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘I happened to be in England at the celebration of the centenary of the revolution of 1688. The characters of William and Mary’ (meaning the ſaid late King William and Queen Mary) ‘have always appeared to me deteſtable; the one’ (meaning [Page 12] the ſaid King William) ‘ſeeking to deſtroy his uncle, and the other’ (meaning the ſaid Queen Mary) ‘her father, to get poſſeſſion of power themſelves; yet as the nation was diſpoſed to think ſomething of that event, I felt hurt at ſeeing it aſcribe the whole reputation of it to a man’ (meaning the ſaid late King William the Third) ‘who had undertaken it as a jobb, and who, beſides what he otherwiſe got, charged ſix hundred thouſand pounds for the expence of the little fleet that brought him from Holland. George the Firſt’ (meaning George the Firſt, late King of Great Britain, &c.) ‘acted the ſame cloſe-fiſted part as William the Third had done, and bought the Dutchy of Bremin with the money he got from England, two hundred and fifty thouſand pounds over and above his pay as King; and having thus purchaſed it at the expence of England, added it to his Hanoverian Dominions for his own private profit.— In fact, every nation that does not govern itſelf is governed as a jobb: England has been the prey of jobbs ever ſince the revolution.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay)— ‘The fraud, hypocriſy, and impoſition of governments,’ (meaning, amongſt others, the government of this kingdom) ‘are now beginning to be too well underſtood to promiſe them any long career. The farce of monarchy and ariſtocracy in all countries is following that of chivalry, and Mr. Burke is dreſſing for the funeral. Let it then paſs quietly to the tomb of all other follies, and the mourners be comforted. [Page 13] The time is not very diſtant when England will laugh at itſelf for ſending to Holland, Hanover, Zell, or Brunſwick, for men,’ (meaning the Kings of theſe realms, born out of the ſame, who have acceded to the crown thereof at and ſince the revolution) ‘at the expence of a million a year, who underſtood neither her laws, her language, nor her intereſt; and whoſe capacities would ſcarcely have fitted them for the office of a pariſh conſtable. If Government could be truſted to ſuch hands, it muſt be ſome eaſy and ſimple thing indeed; and materials fit for all the purpoſes may be found in every town and village in England.’ In contempt of our ſaid Lord the King and his laws, to the evil example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown and dignity. And the ſaid attorney general of our ſaid Lord the King, for our ſaid Lord the King, further gives the court here to underſtand and be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine, being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and being greatly diſaffected to our ſaid Sovereign Lord the now King, and to the happy conſtitution and government of this kingdom, and moſt unlawfully, wickedly, ſeditiouſly, and maliciouſly deviſing, contriving, and intending to ſcandalize, traduce, and vilify the late happy revolution, providentially brought about and effected under the wiſe and prudent conduct of his Highneſs William, heretofore Prince of Orange, and afterwards King of England, France, and Ireland, and the Dominions thereunto belonging; and the [Page 14] acceptance of the Crown and Royal Dignity of King and Queen of England, France, and Ireland, and the Dominions thereunto belonging, by his ſaid Highness William, and her Highneſs Mary, heretofore Prince and Princeſs of Orange, and the means by which the ſame revolution was accompliſhed, to the happineſs and welfare of this realm; and to ſcandalize, traduce, and vilify the convention of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, at whoſe requeſt, and by whoſe advice, their ſaid Majeſties did accept the ſaid Crown and Royal Dignity; and to ſcandalize, traduce, and vilify the act of the Parliament holden at Weſtminſter, in the firſt year of the reign of their ſaid Majeſties, King William and Queen Mary, intituled, ‘an act, declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, and ſettling the ſucceſſion of the crown,’ and the declaration of rights and liberties in the ſaid act contained; and alſo the limitations and ſettlements of the crown and regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions, as by law eſtabliſhed, and alſo by moſt wicked, cunning, and artful inſinuations, to repreſent, ſuggeſt, and cauſe it to be believed, that the ſaid revolution, and the ſaid ſettlements and limitations of the crown and regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions, and the ſaid declaration of the rights and liberties of the ſubject, were contrary to the rights and intereſt of the ſubjects of this kingdom in general; and that the regal government of this kingdom was a tyranny; and alſo by moſt wicked, cunning, and artful inſinuations, to repreſent, ſuggeſt, and cauſe it to be believed, [Page 15] that the Parliament of this kingdom was a wicked, corrupt, uſeleſs, and unneceſſary eſtabliſhment; and that the King and Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in Parliament aſſembled, wickedly tyrannized over and oppreſſed the ſubjects of this kingdom in general; and to infuſe into the minds of the ſubjects of this kingdom groundleſs and unreaſonable diſcontents and prejudices againſt our preſent Sovereign Lord the King, and the Parliament of this kingdom; and the conſtitution, laws, and government, thereof and to bring them into hatred and contempt, on the ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty-ſecond year of the reign of our ſaid preſent Sovereign Lord the King, with force and arms at London aforeſaid, to wit, in the pariſh of Saint Mary le Bone, in the ward of Cheap, he, the ſaid Thomas, wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly did print and publiſh, and cauſe to be printed and publiſhed, a certain falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious libel, of and concerning the ſaid late happy revolution, and the ſaid ſettlements and limitations of the crown and regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions; and the ſaid act declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, and the ſaid declaration of the rights and liberties of the ſubject therein contained, and the hereditary Regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions, and alſo of and concerning the Legiſlature, Conſtitution, Government, and Laws of this Kingdom, and of and concerning our preſent Sovereign Lord the King that now is, and of and concerning the Parliament of this kingdom, intituled, ‘Rights [Page 16] of Man, part the ſecond, combining principle and practice, by Thomas Paine, ſecretary for foreign affairs to Congreſs in the American War, and author of the work, entitled Common Senſe, and the firſt part of the Rights of Man, the Second Edition, London, Printed for J. S. Jordan, No. 166, Fleet Street.’ In which ſaid libel are contained, amongſt other things, divers falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious matters. In one part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘All hereditary government is in its nature tyranny. An heritable crown’ (meaning, amongſt others, the crown of this kingdom) ‘or an heritable throne,’ (meaning, amongſt others, the throne of this kingdom) ‘or by what other fanciful name ſuch things may be called, have no other ſignificant explanation than than that mankind are heritable property. To inherit a government is to inherit the people, as if they were flocks and herds.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘This Convention met at Philadelphia in May, 1787, of which General Waſhington was elected preſident. He was not at that time connected with any of the ſtate governments, or with Congreſs; he delivered up his commiſſion when the war ended, and ſince then had lived a private citizen. The Convention went deeply into all the ſubjects, and having, after a variety of debate and inveſtigation, agreed among themſelves upon the ſeveral parts of a Federal Conſtitution, [Page 17] the next queſtion was the manner of giving it authority and practice. For this purpoſe they did not, like a cabal of courtiers, ſend for a Dutch Stadtholder or a German Elector; but they referred the whole matter to the ſenſe and intereſt of the country.’ (thereby meaning and intending that it ſhould be believed that a cabal of courtiers had ſent for the ſaid Prince of Orange and King George the Firſt, heretofore Elector of Hanover, to take upon themſelves reſpectively the regal government of the ſaid kingdoms and dominions, without referring to the ſenſe and intereſt of the ſubects of the ſaid kingdoms) And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘The hiſtory of the Edwards and Henries,’ (meaning Edwards and Henries, heretofore Kings of England) ‘and up to the commencement of the Stuarts,’ (meaning Stuarts, heretofore Kings of England) ‘exhibits as many inſtances of tyranny as could be acted within the limits to which the nation had reſtricted it. The Stuarts’ (meaning Stuarts, heretofore Kings of England) ‘endeavoured to paſs thoſe limits, and their fate is well known. In all thoſe inſtances, we ſee nothing of a conſtitution, but only of reſtrictions on aſſumed power. After this, another William,’ (meaning the ſaid William Prince of Orange, afterwards King of England) ‘deſcended from the ſame ſtock, and claiming from the ſame origin, gained poſſeſſion;’ (meaning poſſeſſion of the crown of England) ‘and of the two evils, James and [Page 18] William,’ (meaning James the Second, heretofore King of England; and the ſaid William Prince of Orange, afterwards King of England) ‘the nation preferred what it thought the leaſt; ſince from circumſtances it muſt take one. The act, called the Bill of Rights,’ (meaning the ſaid act of Parliament, intituled, "an act declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, and ſettling the ſucceſſion of the crown") ‘comes here into view. What is it’ (meaning the ſaid act of Parliament laſt mentioned) ‘but a bargain which the parts of the government made with each other to divide powers, profits, and privileges,’ (meaning that the ſaid laſt-mentioned act of Parliament was a bargain which the parts of the government in England made with each other to divide powers, profits, and privileges) ‘ You ſhall have ſo much, and I will have the reſt. And with reſpect to the nation, it ſaid, for your ſhare you ſhall have the right of petitioning. This being the caſe, the Bill of Rights’ (meaning the ſaid laſt-mentioned act of Parliament) ‘is more properly a bill of wrongs and of inſult. As to what is called the Convention Parliament, it’ (meaning the ſaid convention of Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, herein-before mentioned) ‘was a thing that made itſelf, and then made the authority by which it acted. A few perſons got together, and called themſelves by that name; ſeveral of them had never been elected, and none of them for the purpoſe. From the time of William,’ [Page 19] (meaning the ſaid King William the Third) ‘a ſpecies of government aroſe iſſuing out of this coalition Bill of Rights;’ (meaning the ſaid act, intituled, an act declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, and ſettling the ſucceſſion of the crown) ‘and more ſo ſince the corruption introduced at the Hanover ſucceſſion,’ (meaning the ſucceſſion of the heirs of the Princeſs Sophia, Electreſs and Ducheſs Dowager of Hanover, to the crown and dignity of this kingdom) ‘by the agency of Walpole, that’ (meaning the ſaid ſpecies of government) ‘can be deſcribed by no other name than a deſpotic legiſlation. Though the parts may embarraſs each other, the whole has no bounds; and the only right it acknowledges out of itſelf, is the right of petitioning. Where then is the conſtitution either that gives or that reſtrains power. It is not becauſe a part of the government’ (meaning the government of this kingdom) ‘is elective, that makes it leſs a deſpotiſm. If the perſons ſo elected poſſeſs afterwards, as a Parliament, unlimited powers, election, in this caſe, becomes ſeparated from repreſentation, and the candidates are candidates for deſpotiſm.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘The attention of the government of England (for I rather chuſe to call it by this name than the Engliſh government) appears, ſince its political connection with Germany, to have been ſo completely engroſſed and abſorbed by foreign affairs, and the means of raiſing taxes, that [Page 20] it ſeems to exiſt for no other purpoſes. Domeſtic concerns are neglected; and with reſpect to regular law, there is ſcarcely ſuch a thing.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following,(that is to ſay) ‘With reſpect to the two Houſes of which the Engliſh Parliament’ (meaning the Parliament of this kingdom) ‘is compoſed, they appear to be effectually influenced into one, and, as a Legiſlature, to have no temper of its own. The miniſter,’ (meaning the miniſter employed by the King of this realm, in the adminiſtration of the government thereof) ‘whoever he at any time may be, touches it’ (meaning the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom) ‘as with an opium wand, and it’ (meaning the two Houſes of Parliament of this kindom) ‘ſleeps obedience. But if we look at the diſtinct abilities of the two Houſes,’ (meaning the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom) ‘the difference will appear ſo great, as to ſhew the inconſiſtency of placing power where there can be no certainty of the judgement to uſe it. Wretched as the ſtate of repreſentation is in England,’ (meaning the ſtate of repreſentation of the Commons of this kingdom) ‘it is manhood, compared with what is called the Houſe of Lords;’ (meaning the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament aſſembled) ‘and ſo little is this nicknamed Houſe’ (meaning the Houſe of Lords) ‘regarded, that the people ſcarcely inquire at any time what it is doing. It’ (meaning the ſaid Houſe of Lords) ‘appears alſo to be moſt under [Page 21] influence, and the fartheſt removed from the general intereſt of the nation.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, viz. ‘Having thus glanced at ſome of the defects of the two Houſes of Parliament,’ (meaning the Parliament of this kingdom) ‘I proceed to what is called the crown,’ (meaning the crown of this kingdom) ‘upon which I ſhall be very conciſe. It’ (meaning the crown of this kingdom) ‘ſignifies a nominal office of a million ſterling a year, the buſineſs of which conſiſts in receiving the money. Whether the perſon’ (meaning the King of this realm) ‘be wiſe or fooliſh, ſane or inſane, a native or a foreigner, matters not; every miniſtry’ (meaning the miniſtry employed by the King of this realm in the adminiſtration of the government thereof) ‘acts upon the ſame idea that Mr. Burke writes, namely, that the people’ (meaning the ſubjects of this kingdom) ‘muſt be hoodwinked and held in ſuperſtitious ignorance by ſome bugbear or other; and what is called the crown’ (meaning the crown of this kingdom) ‘anſwers this purpoſe, and therefore it anſwers all the purpoſes to be expected from it. This is more than can be ſaid of the other two branches. The hazard to which this office’ (meaning, amongſt others, the office of King of this realm) ‘is expoſed in all countries,’ (meaning, amongſt others, this kingdom) ‘is not from any thing that can happen to the man,’ (meaning the King) ‘but from what may happen to the nation,’ (meaning, [Page 22] amongſt this kingdom) ‘the danger of coming to its ſenſes.’ And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘I happened to be in England at the celebration of the centenary of the Revolution of 1688. The charaters of William and Mary’ (meaning the ſaid late King William and Queen Mary) ‘have always appeared to me deteſtable; the one’ (meaning the ſaid late King William) ‘ſeeking to deſtroy his uncle, and the other’ (meaning the ſaid Queen Mary) ‘her father, to get poſſeſſion of power themſelves. Yet as the nation was diſpoſed to think ſomething of that event, I felt hurt at ſeeing it aſcribe the whole reputation of it to a man’ (meaning the ſaid late King William the Third) ‘who had undertaken it as a job, and who, beſides what he otherwiſe got, charged ſix hundred thouſand pounds for the expense of the little fleet that brought him from Holland. George the Firſt’ (meaning George the Firſt, late King of Great Britain, &c.) ‘acted the ſame cloſe-fiſted part as William’ (meaning the ſaid King William the Third) ‘had done, and bought the Duchy of Bremin with the money he got from England, two hundred and fifty thouſand pounds over and above his pay as King; and having thus purchaſed it at the expence of England, added it to his Hanoverian dominions for his own private profit. In fact, every nation that does not govern itſelf is governed as a jobb. England has been the prey of jobbs ever ſince the Revolution.’ [Page 23] And in another part thereof, according to the tenor and effect following (that is to ſay) ‘The fraud, hypocriſy, and impoſition of governments’ (meaning amongſt others, the government of this kingdom) ‘are now beginning to be too well underſtood to promiſe them any long career. The farce of monarchy and ariſtocracy in all countries is following that of chivalry, and Mr. Burke is dreſſing for the funeral. Let it then paſs quietly to the tomb of all other follies, and the mourners be comforted. The time is not very diſtant when England will laugh at itſelf for ſending to Holland, Hanover, Zell, or Brunſwick, for Men’ (meaning the Kings of theſe realms, born out of the ſame, who have acceded to the crown thereof at and ſince the Revolution) ‘at the expence of a million a year, who underſtood neither her laws, her language, nor her intereſt, and whoſe capacities would ſcarcely have fitted them for the office of a Pariſh Conſtable. If government could be truſted to ſuch hands, it muſt be ſome eaſy and ſimple thing indeed, and materials fit for all the purpoſes may be found in every town and village in England.’ In contempt of our ſaid Lord the King and his laws, to the evil example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown and dignity, and the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, for our ſaid Lord the King, further gives the Court here to underſtand and be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine being a wicked, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed, perſon, and wickedly, [Page 24] ſeditiouſly, and maliciouſly, intending to ſcandalize, traduce, and vilify, the character of the ſaid late Sovereign Lord, King William the Third, and the ſaid late happy Revolution, and the Parliament of England, by whoſe means the ſame was eſtabliſhed, commonly called the Convention Parliament; and the laws and ſtatutes of this realm limiting and eſtabliſhing the ſucceſſion to the crown of this kingdom, and the ſtatute declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, commonly called the Bill of Rights, and the happy conſtitution and government of this kingdom, as by law eſtabliſhed, and to bring the conſtitution, legiſlation, and government, of this kingdom into hatred and contempt with his Majeſtys ſubjects; and to ſtir up and excite diſcontents and ſeditions among his Majeſtys ſubjects. And to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect his ſaid wicked, malicious, and ſeditious intentions, on the ſaid Sixteenth Day of February, in the Thirty Second Year aforeſaid, at London aforeſaid, in the Pariſh and Ward aforeſaid, he, the ſaid Thomas Paine, wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly, did write and publiſh, and cauſe and procure to be written and publiſhed, a certain other falſe ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious libel, in which, amongſt other things, are contained certain falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious matters, of and concerning the character of the ſaid late Sovereign Lord King William the Third, and the ſaid Revolution and the ſaid Parliament, and the laws and ſtatutes of this realm, and the happy conſtitution and government thereof, as by law eſtabliſhed, according to the tenor and effect following, [Page 25] (that is to ſay) ‘The hiſtory of the Edwards and the Henries,’ (meaning Edwards and Henries, heretofore Kings of England) ‘and up to the commencement of the Stuarts,’ (meaning Stuarts, heretofore Kings of England) ‘exhibits as many inſtances of tyranny as could be acted within the limits to which the nation’ (meaning England) ‘had reſtricted, it. The Stuarts’ (meaning Stuarts, heretofore King of England) ‘endeavoured to paſs thoſe limits, and their fate is well known. In all thoſe inſtances we ſee nothing of a conſtitution, but only of reſtrictions on aſſumed power. After this, another William,’ (meaning the ſaid late King William the Third) ‘deſcended from the ſame ſtock, and claiming from the ſame origin, gained poſſeſſion;’ (meaning poſſeſſion of the crown of England) ‘and of the two evils, James and William,’ (meaning James the Second, heretofore King of England, and the ſaid King William the Third) ‘the nation’ (meaning England) ‘preferred what it thought the leaſt, ſince from circumſtances it muſt take one. The act called the Bill of Rights’ (meaning the ſaid ſtatute, declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, commonly called the Bill of Rights) ‘comes here into view. What is it’ (meaning the ſaid laſt mentioned ſtatute) ‘but a bargain which the parts of the government made with each other to divide powers, profits, and privileges?’ (Meaning that the ſaid laſt-mentioned ſtatute was a bargain which the parts of government in England made with each other to divide powers, profits, and privileges) ‘You ſhall have [Page 26] ſo much, and I will have the reſt. And with reſpect to the nation’ (meaning England) ‘it ſaid, for your ſhare you ſhall have the right of petitioning. This being the caſe, the Bill of Rights’ (meaning the ſaid laſt-mentioned ſtatute) ‘is more properly a Bill of Wrongs and of inſult. As to what is called the Convention Parliament,’ (meaning the aforeſaid Parliament of England, commonly called the Convention Parliament) ‘It’ (meaning the aforeſaid Parliament of England, commonly called the Convention Parliament) ‘was a thing that made itſelf, and then made the authority by which it acted. A few perſons got together, and called themſelves by that name. Several of them had never been elected, and none of them for the purpoſe. From the time of William,’ (meaning the ſaid King William the Third) ‘a ſpecies of government’ (meaning government of England) ‘aroſe, iſſuing out of this coalition Bill of Rights;’ (meaning the ſaid ſtatute, declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject) ‘and more ſo ſince the corruption introduced at the Hanover Succeſſion;’ (meaning the ſucceſſion of the heirs of the Princeſs Sophia, Electreſs and Dutcheſs Dowager of Hanover, to the crown and dignity of this kingdom) ‘by the agency of Walpole, that’ (meaning the ſaid ſpecies of government) ‘can be deſcribed by no other name than a deſpotic legiſlation. Though the parts may embarraſs each other, the whole has no bounds; and the only right it acknowledges out of itſelf, is the right of petitioning. Where then is the conſtitution either that gives [Page 27] or that reſtrains power? It is not becauſe a part of the government’ (meaning the government of this kingdom) ‘is elective, that makes it leſs a deſpotiſm. If the perſons ſo elected poſſeſs afterwards, as a Parliament, unlimited powers, election, in this caſe, becomes ſeparated from repreſentation, and the candidates are candidates for deſpotiſm.’ In contempt of our ſaid Lord the King and his laws, to the evil example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown and dignity. And the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, for our ſaid Lord the King, further gives the court here to underſtand and be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine being a wicked, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and wickedly, ſeditiouſly, and malicioſly intending to ſcandalize, traduce, and vilify the character of the ſaid late Sovereign Lord King William the Third, and the ſaid late happy revolution, and the Parliament of England, by whoſe means the ſame was eſtabliſhed, commonly called the Convention Parliament; and the laws and ſtatutes of this realm, limiting and eſtabliſhing the ſucceſſion to the crown of this kingdom; and the ſtatute declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, commonly called the Bill of Rights; and the happy conſtitution and government of this kingdom as by law eſtabliſhed; and to bring the Conſtitution, Legiſlation, and Government of this Kingdom into hatred and contempt with his Majeſty's ſubjects;— and to ſtir up and excite diſcontents and ſeditious among his Majeſty's ſubjects; and to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect his ſaid [Page 28] wicked, malicious, and ſeditious intentions, on the ſaid ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty ſecond year aforeſaid, at London aforeſaid, in the pariſh and ward aforeſaid, he, the ſaid Thomas Paine, wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly, did print and publiſh, and cauſe and procure to be printed and publiſhed, a certain other falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious libel, in which, amongſt other things, are contained certain falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious, matters, of and concerning the character of the ſaid late Sovereign Lord King William the Third, and the ſaid revolution, and the ſaid Parliament, and the laws and ſtatutes of this realm, and the happy conſtitution and government thereof, as by law eſtabliſhed, according to the tenor and effect following,— (that is to ſay) ‘The hiſtory of the Edwards and the Henries,’ (meaning Edwards and Henries heretofore Kings of England) ‘and up to the commencement of the Stuarts,’ (meaning Stuarts, heretofore Kings of England) ‘exhibits as many inſtances of tyranny as could be acted within the limits to which the nation’ (meaning England) ‘had reſtricted it. The Stuarts’ (meaning Stuarts, heretofore Kings of England) ‘endeavoured to paſs thoſe limits, and their fate is well known. In all thoſe inſtances we ſee nothing of a conſtitution, but only of reſtrictions on aſſumed power. After this, another William,’ (meaning the ſaid late King William the Third) ‘deſcended from the ſame ſtock, and claiming from the ſame origin, gained poſſeſſion;’— [Page 29] (meaning poſſeſſion of the crown of England) ‘and of the two evils, James and William,’ (meaning James the Second, heretofore King of England, and the ſaid King William the Third) ‘the nation’ (meaning England) ‘preferred what it thought leaſt, ſince from circumſtances it muſt take one. The act called the Bill of Rights’ (meaning the ſaid ſtatute, declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject, commonly called the Bill of Rights) ‘comes here into view. What is it’ (meaning the ſaid late-mentioned ſtatute) ‘but a bargain which the parts of the government made with each other to divide powers, profits, and privileges?’ (meaning that the ſaid laſt-mentioned ſtatute was a bargain which the parts of the government in England made with each other to divide powers, profits, and privileges) ‘You ſhall have ſo much, and I will have the reſt. And with reſpect to the nation,’ (meaning England) ‘it ſaid, for your ſhare you ſhall have the right of petitioning.—This being the caſe, the Bill of Rights’ (meaning the ſaid laſt-mentioned ſtatute) ‘is more properly a Bill of Wrongs and of inſult. As to what is called the Convention Parliament,’ (meaning the aforeſaid Parliament of England) ‘it’ (meaning the aforeſaid Parliament of England, commonly called the Convention Parliament) ‘was a thing that made itſelf, and then made the authority by which it acted; a few perſons got together and called themſelves by that name; ſeveral of them had never been elected, and none of them for the [Page 30] purpoſe. From the time of William’ (meaning the ſaid King William the Third) ‘a ſpecies of government’ (meaning the government of England) ‘aroſe, iſſuing out of this coalition Bill of Rights;’ (meaning the ſaid ſtatute declaring the rights and liberties of the ſubject) ‘and more ſo ſince the corruption introduced at the Hanover ſucceſſion’ (meaning the ſucceſſion of the heirs of the Princeſs Sophia, Electreſs, and Ducheſs Dowger of Hanover to the Crown and Dignity of this kingdom) ‘by the agency of Walpole: that’ (meaning the ſaid ſpecies of government) ‘can be deſcribed by no other name than a deſpotic Legiſlation, though the parts may embarraſs each other, the whole has no bounds; and the only right it acknowledges, out of itſelf, is the right of petitioning.—Where then is the conſtitution either that gives, or that reſtrains power? It is not becauſe a part of the government’ (meaning the government of this kingdom) ‘is elective that makes it leſs a deſpotiſm, if the perſons ſo elected poſſeſs afterwards, as a Parliament, unlimited powers. Election in this caſe becomes ſeparated from repreſentation, and the canditates are canditates for deſpotiſm.’ In contempt of our ſaid Lord the King and his laws, to the evil example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown, and dignity. And the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, for our ſaid Lord the King, further gives the Court here to underſtand and [Page 31] be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine, being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and being greatly diſaffected to our ſaid preſent Sovereign Lord the King, and wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly intending, deviſing, and contriving to traduce and vilify our Sovereign Lord the King, and the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom, and the Conſtitution and Government of this kingdom, and the adminiſtration of the government thereof, and to ſtir up and excite diſcontents and ſeditions amongſt his Majeſty's ſubjects, and to alienate and withdraw the affection, fidelity, and allegiance of his ſaid Majeſty's ſubjects from his ſaid Majeſty; and to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect, his ſaid wicked, malicious, and ſeditious intentions, on the ſaid ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty-ſecond year aforeſaid, at London aforeſaid, in the pariſh and ward aforeſaid, he, the ſaid Thomas Paine, wickedly, ſediciouſly, and maliciouſly did write and publiſh, and cauſe to be written and publiſhed, a certain other falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious libel; in which libel, amongſt other things, are contained certain falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious matters, of and concerning the Crown of this kingdom, and the King's adminiſtration of the government thereof, and of and concerning the King and the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom, according to the tenor and effect following, viz. ‘Having thus glanced at ſome of the defects of the two Houſes of Parliament,’ (meaning the Parliament of this kingdom,) ‘ [Page 32] I proceed to what is called the Crown,’ (meaning the Crown of this kingdom,) ‘upon which I ſhall be very conciſe. It’ (meaning the Crown of this kingdom) ‘ſignifies a nominal office of a million ſterling a year, the buſineſs of which conſiſts in receiving the money: whether the perſon’ (meaning the King of this realm) ‘be wiſe or fooliſh, ſane or inſane, a native or a foreigner, matters not, every Miniſtry.’ (meaning the Miniſtry employed by the King of this realm in the adminiſtration of the government thereof) ‘acts upon the ſame idea that Mr. Burke writes, namely, that the people’ (meaning the ſubjects of this kingdom) ‘muſt be hoodwinked and held in ſuperſtitious ignorance by ſome bugbear or other; and what is called the Crown’ (meaning the Crown of this kingdom) ‘anſwers this purpoſe, and therefore it anſwers all the purpoſes to be expected from it: this is more than can be ſaid of the other two branches. The hazard to which this office’ (meaning, amongſt others, the office of King of this realm) ‘is expoſed in all countries’ (meaning, amongſt others, this kingdom) ‘is not from any thing that can happen to the man,’ (meaning the King) ‘but from what may happen to the nation,’ (meaning, amongſt others, this kingdom) ‘the danger of its coming to its ſenſes.’ In contempt of our ſaid Lord the King and his laws, to the evil example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown, and dignity. And [Page 33] the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, for our Lord the King, further gives the Court here to underſtand and be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine, being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and being greatly diſaffected to our ſaid preſent Sovereign Lord the King, and wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly intending, deviſing, and contriving to traduce and vilify our Sovereign Lord the King, and the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom, and the Conſtitution and Government of this kingdom, and the adminiſtration of the government thereof, and to ſtir up and excite diſcontents and ſeditions amongſt his Majeſty's ſubjects, and to alienate and withdraw the affection, fidelity, and allegiance of his ſaid Majeſty's ſubjects from his ſaid Majeſty; and to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect his ſaid wicked, malicious, and ſeditious intentions, on the ſaid ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty-ſecond year aforeſaid, at London aforeſaid, in the pariſh and ward aforeſaid, he, the ſaid Thomas Paine, wickedly, ſeditiouſly, and maliciouſly did print and publiſh, and cauſe to be printed and publiſhed, a certain other falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious libel; in which libel, amongſt other things, are contained certain falſe, ſcandalous, malicious, and ſeditious matters, of and concerning the Crown of this kingdom, and the King's adminiſtration of the government thereof, and of and concerning the King and the two Houſes of Parliament of this kingdom, according to the tenor and effect following, viz. ‘Having thus [Page 34] glanced at ſome of the defects of the two Houſes of Parliament,’ (meaning of the Parliament of this kingdom) ‘I proceed to what is called the Crown,’ (meaning the Crown of this kingdom) ‘upon which I ſhall be very conciſe. It’ (meaning the Crown of this kingdom) ‘ſignifies a nominal office of a million ſterling a year, the buſineſs of which conſiſts in receiving the money: whether the perſon’ (meaning the King of this realm) ‘be wiſe or fooliſh, ſane or inſane, a native or a foreigner, matters not, every Miniſtry’ (meaning the Miniſtry employed by the King of this realm in the adminiſtration of the government thereof) ‘acts upon the ſame idea that Mr. Burke writes, namely, that the people’ (meaning the ſubjects of this kingdom) ‘muſt be hoodwinked and held in ſuperſtitious ignorance by ſome bugbear or other, and what is called the Crown’ (meaning the Crown of this kingdom) ‘anſwers this purpoſe, and therefore it anſwers all the purpoſes to be expected from it: this is more than can be ſaid of the other two branches. The hazard to which this office’ (meaning, amongſt others, the office of King of this realm) ‘is expoſed in all countries’ (meaning, amongſt others, this kingdom) ‘is not from any thing that can happen to the man,’ (meaning the King) ‘but from what may happen to the nation,’ (meaning, amongſt others, this kingdom) ‘the danger of its coming to its ſenſes.’ In contempt of our ſaid Lord the King and his laws, to the [Page 35] evil example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown, and dignity. And the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, for our ſaid Lord the King, further giveth the Court here to underſtand and be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine, being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and being greatly diſaffected to our ſaid Lord the King, and the Conſtitution and Government of this kingdom, and wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly intending, deviſing, and contriving to aſperſe, defame, and vilify the characters of the late Sovereign Lord and Lady William and Mary, heretofore King and Queen of England, and of George the Firſt, heretofore King of Great Britain, &c.; and to aſperſe, defame, and vilify, the happy Revolution, providentially effected under the wiſe and prudent conduct of the ſaid King William and Queen Mary, and to bring the ſaid Revolution, and the characters of the ſaid King William and Queen Mary, and King George the Firſt, into hatred and contempt with the ſubjects of this realm, and to ſtir up and excite diſcontents and ſeditions among his Majeſty's ſubjects, and to alienate and withdraw the affection, fidelity, and allegiance of his Majeſty's ſubjects from his ſaid preſent Majeſty; and to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect his ſaid wicked, malicious, and ſeditious intentions, on the ſaid ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty-ſecond year of the reign of our Lord the now King, at London aforeſaid, in the pariſh and ward aforeſaid, [Page 36] wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly, did write and publiſh, and cauſe to be written and publiſhed, a certain other falſe, wicked, malicious, ſcandalous, and ſeditious libel; in which ſame libel, amongſt other things, are contained certain falſe, wicked, malicious, ſcandalous, and ſeditious matters, of and concerning the ſaid King William and Queen Mary, and the ſaid King George the Firſt, and the ſaid Revolution, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘I happened to be in England at the celebration of the centenary of the Revolution of 1688.’ (meaning the ſaid Revolution) ‘The characters of William and Mary’ (meaning the ſaid late King William and Queen Mary) ‘have always appeared to me deteſtable; the one’ (meaning the ſaid King William) ‘ſeeking to deſtroy his uncle, and the other’ (meaning the ſaid Queen Mary) ‘her father, to get poſſeſſion of power themſelves; yet, as the nation was diſpoſed to think ſomething of that event, I felt hurt at ſeeing it aſcribe the whole reputation of it to a man’ (meaning the ſaid late King William the Third) ‘who had undertaken it as a jobb; and who, beſides what he otherwiſe got, charged ſix hundred thouſand pounds for the expence of the little fleet that brought him from Holland. George the Firſt’ (meaning George the Firſt, late King of Great Britain, &c.) ‘acted the ſame cloſe-fiſted part as William’ (meaning the ſaid King William the Third) ‘had done, and bought the Duchy of Bremin with the money he got from England, [Page 37] two hundred and fifty thouſand pounds over and above his pay as King; and having thus purchaſed it at the expence of England, added it to his Hanoverian dominions for his own private profit: in fact, every nation that does not govern itſelf is governed as a jobb: England has been the prey of jobbs ever ſince the Revolution.’ (meaning the aforeſaid Revolution.) In contempt of our ſaid Lord the King and his laws, to the evil and pernicious example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown, and dignity. And the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, for our ſaid Lord the King, further gives the Court here to underſtand and be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine, being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and being greatly diſaffected to our ſaid Lord the King, and the Conſtitution and Government of this kingdom, and wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly intending, deviſing, and contriving to aſperſe, defame, and vilify the characters of the late Sovereign Lord and Lady William and Mary, heretofore King and Queen of England, and of George the Firſt, heretofore King of Great Britain, &c. and to aſperſe, defame, and vilify the happy Revolution, providentially effected under the wiſe and prudent conduct of the ſaid King William and Queen Mary, and to bring the ſaid Revolution, and the characters of the ſaid King William and Queen Mary, and King George the Firſt, into hatred and contempt with the ſubjects of this realm, and to [Page 38] ſtir up and excite diſcontents and ſeditions among his Majeſty's ſubjects, and to alienate and withdraw the affection, fidelity, and allegiance of his Majeſty's ſubjects from his ſaid preſent Majeſty; and to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect, his ſaid wicked, malicious, and ſeditious intentions, on the ſaid ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty-ſecond year of the reign of our Lord the now King, at London aforeſaid, in the pariſh and ward aforeſaid, wickedly. maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly, did print and publiſh, and cauſe to be printed and publiſhed, a certain other falſe, wicked, malicious, ſcandalous, and ſeditious libel; in which ſame libel, amongſt other things, are contained certain falſe, wicked, malicious, ſcandalous, and ſeditious matters, of and concerning the ſaid King William and Queen Mary, and the ſaid King George the Firſt, and the ſaid Revolution, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay,) ‘I happened to be in England at the celebration of the centenary of the Revolution of 1688.’ (meaning the ſaid Revolution) ‘The characters of William and Mary’ (meaning the ſaid late King William and Queen Mary) ‘have always appeared to me deteſtable; the one’ (meaning the ſaid King William) ‘ſeeking to deſtroy his uncle, and the other’ (meaning the ſaid Queen Mary) ‘her father, to get poſſeſſion of power themſelves; yet, as the nation was diſpoſed to think ſomething of that event, I felt hurt at ſeeing it aſcribe the whole reputation of it to a man’ (meaning the ſaid [Page 39] late King William the Third) ‘who had undertaken it as a jobb; and who, beſides what he otherwiſe got, charged ſix hundred thouſand pounds for the expence of the little fleet that brought him from Holland. George the Firſt’ (meaning George the Firſt, late King of Great Britain, &c.) ‘acted the ſame cloſe-fiſted part as William’ (meaning the ſaid King William the Third) ‘had done, and bought the Duchy of Bremin with the money he got from England, two hundred and fifty thouſand pounds over and above his pay as King; and having thus purchaſed it at the expence of England, added it to his Hanoverian dominions for his own private profit: in fact, every nation that does not govern itſelf is governed as a jobb: England has been the prey of jobbs ever ſince the Revolution.’ (meaning the aforeſaid Revolution.) In contempt of our ſaid Lord the King and his laws, to the evil and pernicious example of all others, in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown and dignity. And the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, for our ſaid Lord the King, further gives the court here to underſtand and be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and being greatly diſaffected to our ſaid Lord the King, and the Conſtitution and Government of this kingdom, and wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly, intending, deviſing, and contriving, to aſperſe, defame, and vilify, the character of the late [Page 40] Sovereign Lord William, heretofore King o-England, and of George the Firſt, heretofore King of Great Britain, &c. and to aſperſe, defame, and vilify, the happy Revolution, providentially effected under the wiſe and prudent conduct of the ſaid King William; and to bring the ſaid Revolution and the characters of the ſaid King William and King George the Firſt into hatred and contempt with the ſubjects of this realm; and to ſtir up and excite diſcontents and ſeditions among his Majeſty's ſubjects, and to alienate and withdraw the affection, fidelity, and allegiance, of his Majeſty's ſubjects from his ſaid preſent Majeſty; and to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect, his ſaid wicked, malicious, and ſeditious, intentions, on the ſaid ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty-ſecond year of the reign of our Lord the now King, at London aforeſaid, in the pariſh and ward aforeſaid, wickedly and maliciouſly did write and publiſh, and cauſe to be written and publiſhed, a certain other falſe, wicked, malicious, ſcandalous, and ſeditious, libel; in which ſame libel, amongſt other things, are contained certain falſe, wicked, malicious, ſcandalous, and ſeditious, matters, of and concerning the ſaid King William the Third, and the ſaid King George the Firſt, and the ſaid Revolution, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘The fraud, hypocriſy, and impoſition, of Government (meaning, amongſt others, the government of this kingdom) "are now beginning to be too well undeſtood to promiſe them any long career. The farce of monarchy [Page 41] and ariſtocracy in all countries is following that of chivalry, and Mr. Burke is dreſſing for the funeral. Let it then paſs quietly to the tomb of all other follies, and the mourners be comforted. The time is not very diſtant when England will laugh at itſelf for ſending to Holland, Hanover, Zell, or Brunſwick, for men,’ (meaning the ſaid King William the Third, and King George the Firſt) ‘at the expence of a million a year, who underſtood neither her laws, her language, nor her intereſt; and whoſe capacities would ſcarcely have fitted them for the office of a pariſh conſtable. If government could be truſted to ſuch hands, it muſt be ſome eaſy and ſimple thing indeed; and materials fit for all the purpoſes may be found in every town and village in England.’ In contempt of our ſaid Lord the now King and his laws, to the evil example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown and dignity, And the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, for our ſaid Lord the King, further gives the court here to underſtand and be informed, that the ſaid Thomas Paine being a wicked, malicious, ſeditious, and ill-diſpoſed perſon, and being greatly diſaffected to our ſaid Lord the King, and the conſtitution and government of this kingdom, and wickedly, maliciouſly and ſeditiouſly, intending, deviſing, and contriving, to aſperſe, defame, and vilify, the character of the late Sovereign Lord William heretofore King of England, and of [Page 42] George the Firſt heretofore King of Great Britain, &c. and to aſperſe, defame, and vilify, the happy revolution, providentially effected under the wiſe and prudent conduct of the ſaid King William, and to bring the ſaid Revolution and the characters of the ſaid King William and King George the Firſt into hatred and contempt with the ſubjects of this realm; and to ſtir up and excite diſcontents and ſeditions among his Majeſty's ſubjects, and to alienate and withdraw the affection, fidelity, and allegiance of his Majeſty's ſubjects from his ſaid preſent Majeſty, and to fulfil, perfect, and bring to effect, his ſaid wicked, malicious, and ſeditious, intentions, on the ſaid ſixteenth day of February, in the thirty-ſecond year of the reign of our Lord the now King, at London aforeſaid, in the pariſh and ward aforeſaid, wickedly, maliciouſly, and ſeditiouſly, did print and publiſh, and cauſe to be printed and publiſhed, a certain other falſe, wicked, malicious, ſcandalous, and ſeditious, libel; in which ſame libel, amongſt other things, are contained certain falſe, wicked, malicious, ſcandalous, and ſeditious matters, of and concerning the ſaid King William the Third, and the ſaid King George the Firſt, and the ſaid Revolution, according to the tenor and effect following, (that is to ſay) ‘The fraud, hypocriſy, and impoſition, of Governments,’ (meaning, among others, the government of this kingdom) ‘are now beginning to be too well underſtood to promiſe them any long career. The farce of monarchy and ariſtocracy in all countries is following that of chivalry, and Mr. Burke [Page 43] is dreſſing for the funeral. Let it then paſs quietly to the tomb of all other follies, and the mourners be comforted. The time is not very diſtant when England will laugh at itſelf for ſending to Holland, Hanover, Zell, or Brunſwick, for men’ (meaning the ſaid King William the Third, and King George the Firſt) ‘at the expence of a million a year, who underſtood neither her laws, her language, nor her intereſt, and whoſe capacities would ſcarcely have fitted them for the office of a pariſh conſtable. If government could be truſted to ſuch hands, it muſt be ſome eaſy and ſimple thing indeed; and materials fit for all the purpoſes may be found in every town and village in England.’ In contempt of our ſaid Lord the now King and his laws, to the evil example of all others in the like caſe offending, and againſt the peace of our ſaid Lord the King, his crown and dignity. Whereupon the ſaid Attorney General of our ſaid Lord the King, who for our ſaid Lord the King in this behalf, proſecuteth for our ſaid Lord the King, prayeth the conſideration of the court here in the premiſes, and that due proceſs of law may be awarded againſt him the ſaid Thomas Paine in this behalf, to make him anſwer to our ſaid Lord the King, touching and concerning the premiſes aforeſaid.
To this information the defendant hath appeared, and pleaded Not Guilty, and thereupon iſſue is joined.
2. Court of KING's BENCH, Guildhall, London, DECEMBER 18th, 1792, Before the RIGHT HON. LORD KENYON.
[Page]SPECIAL JURY.
- JOHN CAMPBELL,
- JOHN LIGHTFOOT,
- CHRISTOPHER TADDY,
- ROBERT OLIPHANT,
- CORNELIUS DONOVAN,
- ROBERT ROLLESTON,
- JOHN LUBBOCK,
- RICHARD TUCKWELL,
- WILLIAM PORTER,
- THOMAS DRUCE,
- ISAAC RAILTON,
- HENRY EVANS.
Counſel for the Crown.
- The ATTORNEY GENERAL,
- The SOLICITOR GENERAL,
- Mr. BEARCROFT,
- Mr. BALDWIN,
- Mr. WOOD,
- Mr. PERCIVAL.
-
Solicitors.
Counſel for the Defendant.
‘February 16, 1792,’ (that was the day on which the book was publiſhed) ‘For your ſatisfaction and my own I ſend you the incloſed, though I do not apprehend there will be any occaſion to uſe it: if in caſe there ſhould, you will immediately ſend a line for me, under cover, to Mr. Johnſon, St. Paul's Church Yard, who will forward it to me, upon which I ſhall come and anſwer perſonally for the work; ſend alſo for Mr. Horne Tooke.’
T.P.
Gentlemen, I certainly will comply with this requeſt. I am proſecuting both him and his work; and if I ſucceed in this proſecution, he ſhall never return to this country otherwiſe than in vinculis, for I will outlaw him. ‘But I have other reaſons than thoſe I have mentioned for writing you this letter; and however you may chuſe to interpret them, they procceed from a good heart. The time, Sir, is becoming too ſerious to play with Court proſecutions, and ſport with national rights. The terrible examples that have taken place here upon men who, leſs than a year ago, thought themſelves as ſecure as any proſecuting Judge, Jury, or Attorney General, can now do in England, ought to have ſome weight with men in your ſituation.’ Now gentlemen, I do not think that Mr. Paine judges very well of mankind—I do not think that it is a fair concluſion of Mr. Paine, that men ſuch as you and myſelf, who are quietly living in obedience to the laws of the land which they inhabit, exerciſing their ſeveral functions peaceably, and I hope with a moderate ſhare of reputation: I do not conceive that men called upon to think, and in the habit of reflection, are the moſt likely men to be immediately thrown off the hinges by meances and threats; and I doubt whether men exerciſing public functions, as you and I do in the face of our country, could have the courage to run away. All I can tell Mr. Paine [Page 79] is this—if any of his aſſaſſins are here in London, and there is ſome ground to ſuppoſe they may be, or the aſſaſſins of thoſe with whom he is connected; if they are here, I tell them, that I do in my conſcience think, that for a man to die of doing his duty, is juſt as good a thing as dying of a raging fever, or under the tortures of the ſtone. Let him not think, that not to be an incendiary is to be a coward. He ſays— ‘That the Government of England is as great, if not the greateſt perfection of fraud and corruption, that ever took place ſince governments began, is what you cannot be a ſtranger to; unleſs the conſtant habit of ſeeing it has blinded your ſenſe." Upon my word gentlemen, I am ſtone blind, I am not ſorry for it.’— ‘But though you may not chuſe to ſee it, the people are ſeeing it very faſt, and the progreſs is beyond what you may chuſe to believe, or that reaſon can make any other man believe, that the capacity of ſuch a man as Mr. Guelph, or any of his profligate ſons, is neceſſary to the government of a nation.’ Now, gentlemen, with reſpect to this paſſage, I have this to ſay, it is contemptuous, ſcandalous, falſe, cruel;—Why Gentlemen, is Mr. Paine, in addition to the political doctrines that he is teaching us in this country; Is he to teach us the morality and religion, of IMPLACABILITY? Is he to teach human creatures, whoſe moments of exiſtence, depend upon the permiſſion of a Being, merciful, long ſuffering and of great goodneſs, that thoſe youthful errors from which even royalty is not exempted, [Page 80] are to be treaſured up in a vindictive memory, and are to receive ſentence of irremiſſible ſin at HIS hands. Are they all to be confounded in theſe ſlanderous terms, ſhocking for Britiſh ears to hear, and I am ſure diſtreſſing to their hearts. He is a barbarian, who could uſe ſuch profligate expreſſions uncalled for by any thing which could be the object of his letter addreſſed to me. If giving me pain was his object, he has that helliſh gratification. Would this man deſtroy that great auxiliary of all human laws and conſtitutions— "to judge of others as we would be judged ourſelves."—This is the bill of wrongs and inſults of the chriſtian religion. I preſume it is conſidered as that bill of wrongs and inſults, in the heart of that man who can have the barbarity to uſe thoſe expreſſions and addreſs them to me in a way by which I could not but receive them. Gentlemen, there is not perhaps in the world a more beneficial analogy, nor a finer rule to judge by in public matters, than by aſſimilating them to what paſſes in domeſtic life.— A family is a ſmall kingdom, a kingdom is a large family ſuppoſe this to have happened in private life, judge of the good heart of this man, who thruſts into my hands, the grateful ſervant of a kind and beneficent maſter, and that too through the unavoidable trick of the common poſt ſlander upon that maſter, and ſlander upon his whole offspring. Lay your hands upon your hearts, and tell me what is your verdict with reſpect to his heart—I ſee it! [Page 81] Gentlemen, he has the audacity to ſay, "I ſpeak to you as one man ought to ſpeak to another." Does he ſpeak to me of thoſe Auguſt Perſonages as one man ought to ſpeak to another? Had he ſpoken thoſe words to me perſonally, I will not anſwer for it, whether I ſhould not have forgot the duties of my office, and the dignity of my ſtation, by being hurried into a violation of that peace, the breach of which I am compelled to puniſh in others. He ſays, ‘And I know alſo, that I ſpeak, what other people are beginning to think. That you cannot obtain a verdict (and if you do, it will ſignify nothing) without packing a Jury, and we both know that ſuch tricks are practiſed, is what I have very good reaſon to believe.’—Mentiris impudentiſſime. —Gentlemen, I know of no ſuch practice; I know, indeed, that no ſuch practice exiſts, nor can exiſt; I know the very contrary of this to be true; and I know too that this Letter, containing this dangerous falſehood, was deſtined for future publication; that I have no doubt of, and therefore I dwell thus long upon it. ‘I have gone into coffee-houſes, and places where I was unknown, on purpoſe to learn the currency of opinion.’ Whether the ſenſe of this nation is to be had in ſome pot-houſes and coffee-houſes in this town of his own chooſing, is a matter I leave to your judgment. ‘And I never yet ſaw any company of twelve men that condemned the book; but I have often found a greater number than twelve approving it; and this I think [Page 82] is a fair way of collecting the natural currency of opinion. Do not then, Sir, be the inſtrument of drawing twelve men into a ſituation that may be injurious to them afterwards;’ injurious to them afterwards, thoſe words ſpeak for themſelves. He proceeds thus, "I do not ſpeak this from policy," (what then?) "but from" (gentlemen, I will give you a hundred gueſſes) ‘BENEVOLENCE! but if you chuſe to go on with the proceſs, I make it my requeſt that you would read this letter in Court, after which the Judge and the Jury may do as they pleaſe. As I do not conſider myſelf the object of the proſecution, neither can I be affected by the iſſue one way or the other, I ſhall, though a foreigner in your country, ſubſcribe as much money as any other man towards ſupporting the right of the nation againſt the proſecution; and it is for this purpoſe only that I ſhall do it.—THOMAS PAINE.’ So it is a ſubſcription defence you hear. ‘P. S. I intended, had I ſtaid in England, to have publiſhed the information, with my remarks upon it,’—that would have been a decent thing— ‘before the trial came on; but as I am otherwiſe engaged, I reſerve myſelf till the trial is over, when I ſhall reply fully to every thing you ſhall advance;’ I hope in God he will not omit any one ſingle word that I have uttered to day, or ſhall utter in my future addreſs to you. This conceited menace I deſpiſe, as I do thoſe of a nature more cut-throat. [Page 83] Gentlemen, I do not think that I need to trouble you any further for the preſent: according as you ſhall be of opinion, that the neceſſarily miſchievous tendency and intent of this book is that which I have taken the liberty (at more length than I am warranted perhaps) to ſtate to you; according as you ſhall or ſhall not be of that opinion, ſo neceſſarily will be your verdict. I have done my duty in bringing before a Jury an offender of this magnitude. Be the event what it may, I have done my duty; I am ſatisfied with having placed this great and flouriſhing community under the powerful ſhield of your protection.Paris, 11th of November, 1ſt Year of the Republic.
Sir, as there can be no perſonal reſentment between two ſtrangers, I write this letter to you, as to a man againſt whom I have no animoſity.
You have, as Attorney General, commenced a proſecution againſt me as the author of the Rights of Man. Had not my duty, in conſequence of my being elected a member of the National Convention of France, called me from England, I ſhould have ſtaid to have conteſted the injuſtice of that proſecution; not upon my own account, for I cared not about the proſecution, but to defend the principles I had advanced in the work.
The duty I am now engaged in is of too much importance to permit me to trouble myſelf about your proſecution; when I have [Page 77] leiſure, I ſhall have no objection to meet you on that ground; but, as I now ſtand, whether you go on with the proſecution or whether you do not, or whether you obtain a verdict, or not, is a matter of the moſt perfect indifference to me as an individual. If you obtain one (which you are welcome to if you can get it), it cannot affect me, either in perſon, property, or reputation, otherwiſe than to increaſe the latter; and with reſpect to yourſelf, it is as conſiſtent that you obtain a verdict againſt the Man in the Moon, as againſt me; neither do I ſee how you can continue the proſecution againſt me as you would have done againſt one of your own people, who had abſented himſelf becauſe he was proſecuted; what paſſed at Dover, proves that my departure from England was no ſecret.
My neceſſary abſence from your country affords the opportunity of knowing whether the proſecution was intended againſt Thomas Paine, or againſt the Rights of the People of England to inveſtigate ſyſtems and principles of government; for as I cannot now be the object of the proſecution, the going on with the proſecution will ſhew that ſomething elſe was the object, and that ſomething elſe can be no other than the People of England; for it is againſt their Rights, and not againſt me, that a verdict or ſentence can operate, if it can operate at all. Be then ſo candid as to tell the Jury (if you chuſe to continue the proceſs) whom it is [Page 78] you are proſecuting, and on whom it is that the verdict is to fall.
2.1. EVIDENCE FOR THE CROWN.
Feb. 16, 1792.
For your ſatisfaction and my own, I ſend you the encloſed, tho' I do not apprehend there will be any occaſion to uſe it; if in caſe there ſhould, you will immediately ſend a line for me under cover, to Mr. Johnſon, St. Paul's Church-Yard, who will forward it to me, upon which I ſhall come and anſwer perſonally for the work.—Send alſo to Mr. Horne Tooke.
Mr. Jordan, No. 166, Fleet-ſtreet.
T. P.
Feb. 16, 1792.
SIR,
Should any perſon, under the ſanction of any kind of authority, enquire of you reſpecting the author and publiſher of the Rights of Man, you will pleaſe to mention me as the author and publiſher of that work, and ſhew to ſuch perſon this letter. I will, as ſoon as as I am made acquainted with it, appear and anſwer for the work perſonally.
Mr. Jordan, No. 166, Fleet-ſtreet.
Your humble Servant, THOMAS PAINE.
London, June 29, 1792.
SIR,
I have drawn on you two drafts for one hundred and fifty pounds each, one at ſeven days ſight, the other at fourteen, payable to Mr. Johnſon, or order, for monies which he has advanced on my account, and bills which are due, which drafts pleaſe to pay, and place the ſame to my account.
Mr. Jordan, No. 166, Fleet-ſtreet.
Yours, &c. THOMAS PAINE.
Paris, 11th November, 1ſt year of the Republic.
SIR,
As there can be no perſonal reſentment between two ſtrangers, I write this letter to you, as to a man againſt whom I have no animoſity.
You have, as Attorney General, commenced a proſecution againſt me, as the Author of [Page 93] Rights of Man. Had not my duty, in conſequence of my being elected a Member of the National Convention of France, called me from England, I ſhould have ſtaid to have conteſted the injuſtice of that proſecution; not upon my own account, for I cared not about the proſecution, but to have defended the principles I had advanced in the work.
The duty I am now engaged in is of too much importance to permit me to trouble myſelf about your proſecution: when I have leiſure, I ſhall have no objection to meet you on that ground; but as I now ſtand, whether you go on with the proſecution, or whether you do not, or whether you obtain a verdict, or not, is a matter of the moſt perfect indifference to me as an individual. If you obtain one (which you are welcome to, if you can get it) it cannot affect me either in perſon, property, or reputation, otherwiſe than to increaſe the latter; and with reſpect to yourſelf, it is as conſiſtent that you obtain a verdict againſt the Man in the Moon as againſt me: neither do I ſee how you can continue the proſecution againſt me as you would have done againſt one of your own people who had abſented himſelf becauſe he was proſecuted: what paſſed at Dover proves that my departure from England was no ſecret.
My neceſſary abſence from your country now, in conſequence of my duty here, affords the opportunity of knowing whether the proſecution was intended againſt Thomas Paine, or againſt the Rights of the people of England to inveſtigate ſyſtems and principles of [Page 94] government; for as I cannot now be the object of the proſecution, the going on with the proſecution will ſhew that ſomething elſe was the object, and that ſomething elſe can be no other than the people of England, for it is againſt their rights, and not againſt me, that a verdict or ſentence can operate, if it can operate at all. Be then ſo candid as to tell the jury (if you chuſe to continue the proceſs) whom it is you are proſecuting, and on whom it is that the verdict is to fall.
But I have other reaſons than thoſe I have mentioned for writing you this letter; and, however you may chuſe to interpret them, they proceed from a good heart. The time, Sir, is becoming too ſerious to play with Court proſecutions, and ſport with National Rights. The terrible examples that have taken place here, upon men who leſs than a year ago thought themſelves as ſecure as any proſecuting Judge, Jury, or Attorney General, can now do in England, ought to have ſome weight with men in your ſituation. That the government of England is as great, if not the greateſt, perfection of fraud and corruption that ever took place ſince governments began, is what you cannot be a ſtranger to, unleſs the conſtant habit of ſeeing it has blinded your ſenſes; but though you may not chuſe to ſee it, the people are ſeeing it very faſt, and the progreſs is beyond what you may chuſe to believe. Is it poſſible that you, or I can believe, or that reaſon can make any other man believe, that the capacity of ſuch a man as Mr. Guelph, or any of his profligate ſons, is [Page 95] neceſſary to the government of a nation. I ſpeak to you as one man ought to ſpeak to another; and I know alſo, that I ſpeak what other people are beginning to think.
That you cannot obtain a verdict (and if you do it will ſignify nothing) without packing a jury, (and we both know that ſuch tricks are practiſed) is what I have very good reaſon to believe. I have gone into coffee-houſes, and places where I was unknown, on purpoſe to learn the currency of opinion, and I never yet ſaw any company of twelve men that condemned the book; but I have often found a greater number than twelve approving it, and this I think is a fair way of collecting the natural currency of opinion. Do not then, Sir, be the inſtrument of drawing twelve men into a ſituation that may be injurious to them afterwards. I do not ſpeak this from policy, but from benevolence; but if you chuſe to go on with the proceſs, I make it my requeſt to you that you will read this letter in Court, after which the Judge and the Jury may do as they pleaſe. As I do not conſider myſelf the object of the proſecution, neither can I be affected by the iſſue, one way or the other, I ſhall, though a foreigner in your country, ſubſcribe as much money as any other man towards ſupporting the right of the Nation againſt the proſecution; and it is for this purpoſe only that I ſhall do it.
To Archd. Macdonald, Attorney General.
THOMAS PAINE.
As I have not time to copy letters, you will excuſe the corrections.
P. S. I intended, had I ſtaid in England, to have publiſhed the information, with my remarks upon it, before the trial came on; but, as I am otherwiſe engaged, I reſerve myſelf till the trial is over, when I ſhall reply fully to every thing you ſhall advance.
T. P.
Page 47.This convention met at Philadelphia in May 1787, of which General Waſhington was elected preſident. He was not at that time connected with any of the State-governments, or with Congreſs. He delivered up his commiſſion when the war ended, and ſince then had lived a private citizen.
The convention went deeply into all the ſubjects; and having, after a variety of debate and inveſtigation, agreed among themſelves upon the ſeveral parts of a federal conſtitution, the next queſtion was, the manner of giving it authority and practice.
[Page 99] For this purpoſe, they did not, like a cabal of courtiers, ſend for a Dutch Stadtholder, or a German Elector; but they referred the whole matter to the ſenſe and intereſt of the country.
Page 52.The hiſtory of the Edwards and Henries, and up to the commencement of the Stuarts, exhibits as many inſtances of tyranny as could be acted within the limits to which the nation had reſtricted it. The Stuarts endeavoured to paſs thoſe limits, and their fate is well known. In all thoſe inſtances we ſee nothing of a conſtitution, but only of reſtrictions on aſſumed power.
After this, another William, deſcended from the ſame ſtock, and claiming from the ſame origin, gained poſſeſſion; and of the two evils, James and William, the nation preferred what it thought the leaſt; ſince, from circumſtances, it muſt take one. The Act, called the Bill of Rights, comes here into view. What is it but a bargain, which the parts of the Government made with each other to divide powers, profits, and privileges? You ſhall have ſo much, and I will have the reſt; and with reſpect to the nation, it ſaid, for your ſhare, YOU ſhall have the right of petitioning. This being the caſe, the Bill of Rights is more properly a bill of wrongs, and of inſult. [Page 100] As to what is called the Convention Parliament, it was a thing that made itſelf, and then made the authority by which it acted. A few perſons got together, and called themſelves by that name. Several of them had never been elected, and none of them for the purpoſe.
From the time of William, a ſpecies of government aroſe, iſſuing out of this coalition Bill of Rights; and more ſo, ſince the corruption introduced at the Hanover ſucceſſion, by the agency of Walpole; that can be deſcribed by no other name than a deſpotic legiſlation. Though the parts may embarraſs each other, the whole has no bounds; and the only right it acknowleges out of itſelf is the right of petitioning. Where then is the Conſtitution either that gives or that reſtrains power?
It is not becauſe a part of the government is elective, that makes it leſs a deſpotiſm, if the perſons ſo elected, poſſeſs afterwards, as a parliament, unlimited powers. Election, in this caſe, becomes ſeparated from repreſentation, and the candidates are candidates for deſpotiſm.
Page 56.The attention of the Government of England, (for I rather chuſe to call it by this name, than the Engliſh Government) appears, [Page 101] ſince its political connexion with Germany, to have been ſo completely engroſſed and abſorbed by foreign affairs, and the means of raiſing taxes, that it ſeems to exiſt for no other purpoſes. Domeſtic concerns are neglected; and with reſpect to regular law, there is ſcarcely ſuch a thing.
Page 63. Note.With reſpect to the two Houſes, of which the Engliſh Parliament is compoſed, they appear to be effectually influenced into one, and, as a legiſlature, to have no temper of its own. The Miniſter, whoever he at any time may be, touches it as with an opium wand, and it ſleeps obedience.
But if we look at the diſtinct abilities of the two Houſes, the difference will appear ſo great, as to ſhew the inconſiſtency of placing power where there can be no certainty of the judgment to uſe it. Wretched as the ſtate of repreſentation is in England, it is manhood compared with what is called the Houſe of Lords; and ſo little is this nicknamed Houſe regarded, that the people ſcarcely enquire at any time what it is doing. It appears alſo to be moſt under influence, and the furtheſt removed from the general intereſt of the nation
[Page 102] Pages 107-108.Having thus glanced at ſome of the defects of the two Houſes of Parliament, I proceed to what is called the Crown, upon which I ſhall be very conciſe.
It ſignifies a nominal office of a million ſterling a year, the buſineſs of which conſiſts in receiving the money. Whether the perſon be wiſe or fooliſh, ſane or inſane, a native or a foreigner, matters not. Every miniſtry acts upon the ſame idea▪ that Mr. Burke writes, namely, that the people muſt be hoodwinked, and held in ſuperſtitious ignorance by ſome bugbear or other; and what is called the Crown anſwers this purpoſe, and therefore it anſwers all the purpoſes to be expected from it. This is more than can be ſaid of the other two branches. The hazard to which this office is expoſed in all countries, is not from any thing that can happen to the man, but from what may happen to the nation—the danger of its coming to its ſenſes.
Page 116. Note.I happened to be in England at the celebration of the centenary of the revolution of 1688. The characters of William and Mary have always appeared to me deteſtable; the one ſeeking to deſtroy his uncle, and the other her father, to get poſſeſſion of power themſelves; yet, as the nation was [Page 103] diſpoſed to think ſomething of that event, I felt hurt at ſeeing it aſcribe the whole reputation of it to a man who had undertaken it as a job, and who, beſides what he otherwiſe got, charged 600,000 l. for the expence of the little fleet that brought him from Holland. George the Firſt acted the ſame cloſe-fiſted part as William had done, and bought the Duchy of Bremin with the money he got from England, 250,000 l. over and above his pay as King; and having thus purchaſed it at the expence of England, added it to his Hanoverian dominions for his own private profit. In fact, every nation that does not govern itſelf, is governed as a job. England has been the prey of jobs over ſince the revolution.
Page 161.The end of the Evidence for the Crown.The fraud, hypocriſy, and impoſition of governments, are now beginning to be too well underſtood to promiſe them any long career. The farce of monarchy and ariſtocracy, in all countries, is following that of chivalry, and Mr. Burke is dreſſing for the funeral. Let it then paſs quietly to the tomb of all other follies, and the mourners be comforted.
The time is not very diſtant when England will laugh at itſelf for ſending to Holland, Hanover, Zell, or Brunſwick for men, at [Page 104] the expence of a million a year, who underſtood neither her laws, her language, nor her intereſt, and whoſe capacities would ſcarcely have fitted them for the office of pariſh conſtable. If government could be truſted to ſuch hands, it muſt be ſome eaſy and ſimple thing indeed, and materials fit for all the purpoſes may be found in every town and village in England.
2.2.
[Page 105]Gentlemen, you muſt undoubtedly wiſh to deal with every man who comes before you in judgment, as you would be dealt by yourſelves; and ſurely you will not lay it down to day as a law to be binding hereafter even upon yourſelves, that if you ſhould publiſh any opinion concerning the exiſting abuſes in your country's government, and point out to the whole public the means of amendment, you are to be acquitted or convicted as any twelve [Page 125] men may happen to agree with you in your opinions. Yet this is preciſely what you are aſked to do to another: it is preciſely the caſe before you. Mr. Paine expreſsly ſays, I obey a law until it is repealed; obedience is not only my principle but my practice, ſince my diſobedience of a law from thinking it bad, might apply to juſtify another man in the diſobedience of a good one; and thus individuals would give the rule for themſelves, and not ſociety for all. Gentlemen, you will preſently ſee that the ſame principle pervades the reſt of the work; and I am the more anxious to call your attention to it, however repetition may tire you, becauſe it unfolds the whole principle of my argument: for, if you find a ſentence in the whole book that inveſts any individual, or any number of individuals, or any community ſhort of the whole nation, with a power of changing any part of the law or conſtitution, I abandon the cauſe—YES, I freely abandon it, becauſe I will not affront the majeſty of a court of juſtice by maintaining propoſitions which, even upon the ſurface of them, are falſe. Mr. Paine, page 162—168, goes on thus: ‘When a nation changes its opinion and habits of thinking, it is no longer to be governed as before; but it would not only be wrong, but bad policy, to attempt by force what ought to be accompliſhed by reaſon. Rebellion conſiſts in forcibly oppoſing the general will of a nation, whether by a party or by a government. There ought, therefore, [Page 126] to be, in every nation, a method of occaſionall [...] aſcertaining the ſtate of public opinion with reſpect to government.’ ‘There is, therefore, no power but the voluntary will of the people that has a right to act in any matter reſpecting a general reform; and, by the ſame right that two perſons can confer on ſuch a ſubject, a thouſand may. The object in all ſuch preliminary proceedings is, to find out what the general ſenſe of a nation is, and to be governed by it. If it prefer a bad or defective government to a reform, or chooſe to pay ten times more taxes than there is occaſion for, it has a right ſo to do; and, ſo long as the majority do not impoſe conditions on the minority different to what they impoſe on themſelves, though there may be much error, there is no injuſtice; neither will the error continue long. Reaſon and diſcuſſion will ſoon bring things right, however wrong they may begin. By ſuch a proceſs no tumult is to be apprehended. The poor, in all countries, are naturally both peaceable and grateful in all reforms in which their intereſt and happineſs are included. It is only by neglecting and rejecting them that they become tumultuous.’ Gentlemen, theſe are the ſentiments of the author of the Rights of Man; and, whatever his opinions may be of the defects in our government, it never can change our ſentiments concerning it, if our ſentiments are juſt; and a writing [Page 127] can never be ſeditious in the ſenſe of the Engliſh law, which ſtates that the government leans on the univerſal will for its ſupport. Gentlemen, this univerſal will is the beſt and ſecureſt title which his Majeſty and his family have to the throne of theſe kingdoms; and in proportion to the wiſdom of our inſtitutions, the title muſt in common ſenſe become the ſtronger: ſo little idea, indeed, have I of any other, that in my place in Parliament, not a week ago, I conſidered it as the beſt way of expreſſing my attachment to the conſtitution, as eſtabliſhed at the revolution, to declare (I believe in the preſence of the heir apparent of the crown, for whom I have the greateſt perſonal zeal) that his Majeſty reigned in England, by choice and conſent, as the magiſtrate of the Engliſh people; not indeed a conſent and choice by perſonal election, like a King of Poland, the worſt of all poſſible conſtitutions; but by the election of a family for great national objects, in defiance of that hereditary right, which only becomes tyranny, in the ſenſe of Mr. Paine, when it claims to inherit a nation, inſtead of governing by their conſent, and continuing for its benefit. Gentlemen, this ſentiment has the advantage of Mr. Burke's high authority, who ſays with great truth, in a letter to his conſtituents, ‘Too little dependance cannot be had at this time of day on names and prejudices: the eyes of mankind are opened; and communities muſt be held together by a viſible and ſolid intereſt.’ I believe, Gentlemen of the Jury, that the Prince of Wales will always render this title dear to the people. The Attorney General can [Page 128] only tell you what he believes of him; I can tell you what I know, and what I am bound to declare, ſince this Prince may be traduced and calumniated in every part of the kingdom, without its coming often in queſtion, till brought in to load a defence with matter collateral to the charge. I therefore aſſert what the Attorney General can only hope, that, whenever that Prince ſhall come to the throne of this country (which I hope, but by the courſe of nature, will never happen), he will make the conſtitution of Great Britain the foundation of all his conduct. Having now, Gentlemen, eſtabliſhed the author's general intention by his own introduction, which is the beſt and faireſt expoſition, let us next look at the occaſion which gave it birth. The Attorney General, throughout the whole courſe of his addreſs to you (I knew it would be ſo), has avoided the moſt diſtant notice or hint of any circumſtance having led to the appearance of the author in the political world, after a ſilence of ſo many years; he has not even pronounced, or even glanced at the name of Mr. Burke, but has left you to take it for granted that the defendant volunteered this delicate and momentous ſubject; and that, without being led to it by the provocation of political controverſy, he had ſeized a favourable moment to ſtigmatiſe, from mere malice, and againſt his own confirmed opinions, the Conſtitu [...]ion of this Cou [...]t [...]y. Gentlemen, my learned friend knows too well my reſpect and value for him to ſuppoſe that I am charging him w [...]th a wilful ſuppreſſion; I know him to be incapable of it; he knew it would come from me. He will premit me, [Page 129] however, to lament that it ſhould have been left for me, at this late period of the cauſe, to inform you, that, not only the work before you, but the Firſt Part, of which it is a natural continuation, were written avowedly, and upon the face of them, IN ANSWER TO MR. BURKE. They were written beſides under circumſtances which I ſhall hereafter explain, and in the courſe of which explanation I may have occaſion to cite a few paſſages from the works of that celebrated perſon. And I ſhall ſpeak of him with the higheſt reſpect: for, with whatever contempt he may delight to look down upon my humble talents, however he may diſparage the principles which direct my public conduct, he ſhall never force me to forget the regard which this country owes to him for the writings which he has left upon record for the illumination of our moſt diſtant poſterity. After the gratitude which we owe to God for the divine gifts of reaſon and underſtanding, our next thanks are due to thoſe from the fountain of whoſe enlightened minds they are fed and fructified. But pleading, as I do, the cauſe of freedom of opinions, I ſhall not give offence by remarking that this great author has been thought to have changed ſome of his; and, if Thomas Paine had not thought ſo, I ſhould not now be addreſſing you, becauſe the book which is my ſubject would never have been written. Who is right and who is wrong, in the contention of doctrines, I have repeatedly diſclaimed to be the queſtion; I can only ſay that Mr. Paine may be right throughout, but that Mr. Burke cannot—Mr. Paine has been uniform in his opinions, but Mr. Burke has not—Mr. [Page 130] Burke can only be right in part; but, ſhould Mr. Paine be even miſtaken in the whole, ſtill I am not removed from the principle of his defence. My defence has nothing to do with either the concealment or rectitude of his doctrines. I admit Mr. Paine to be a republican; you ſhall ſoon ſee what made him one—I do not ſeek to ſhade or qualify his attack upon our conſtitution; I put my defence on no ſuch matter— he undoubtedly means to declare it to be defective in its forms, and contaminated with abuſes, which, in his judgment, will one day or other bring on the ruin of us all: it is in vain to mince the matter; this is the ſcope of his work. But ſtill, if it contains no attack upon the King's Majeſty, nor upon any other living magiſtrate; if it excites to no reſiſtance to magiſtracy, but, on the contrary, if it even inculcates, as it does, obedience to government, then, whatever may be its defects, the queſtion continues as before, and ever muſt remain an unmixed queſtion of the liberty of the preſs. I therefore conſidered it as no breach of profeſſional duty, nor injurious to the cauſe I am defending, to expreſs my own admiration of the real principles of our conſtitution— a conſtitution which I hope never to ſee give way to any other—a conſtitution which has been productive of various benefits, and which will produce many more hereafter, if we have wiſdom e [...]ough to pluck up thoſe weeds that grow in the richeſt ſoils and amongſt the brighteſt flowers. I agree with the merchants of London, that the Engliſh government is equal to the reformation of its own abuſes; and, as an inhabitant of the city, I would have ſigned their [Page 131] Declaration, if I had known, of my own knowledge, the facts recited in its preamble. But abuſes the Engliſh conſtitution unqueſtionably has which call loudly for reformation, the exiſtence of which has been the theme of our greateſt ſtateſmen, which have too plainly formed the principles of the defendant, and created the very conjuncture which produced his book. Gentlemen, we all but too well remember the calamitous ſituation in which our country ſtood but a few years ago—a ſituation which no man can look back upon without horror, nor feel himſelf ſafe from relapſing into again, while the cauſes remain which produced it. The event I allude to you muſt know to be the American war and the ſtill exiſting cauſes of it, the corruptions of this government. In thoſe days it was not thought virtue by the patriots of England to conceal their exiſtence from the people; but then, as now, authority condemned them as diſaffected ſubjects, and defeated the ends they ſought by their promulgation. Hear the opinion of Sir George Saville;—not his ſpeculative opinion concerning the ſtructure of our government in the abſtract, but his opinion of the ſettled abuſes which prevailed in his own time, and which continue at this moment. But firſt let me remind you who Sir George Saville was—I fear we ſhall hardly look upon his like again—How ſhall I deſcribe him to you?— In my own words I cannot. I was lately commended by Mr. Burke, in the Houſe of Commons, for ſtrengthening my own language by an appeal to Dr. Johnſon. Were the honourable gentleman preſent at this moment, he would no [Page 132] doubt doubly applaud my choice in reſorting to his own works for the deſcription of Sir George Saville: ‘His fortune is among the largeſt; a fortune, which, wholly unincumb [...]red as it is, without one ſingle charge from luxury, vanity, or exceſs, ſinks under the benevolence of its diſpenſer. This private benevolence, expanding itſelf into patriotiſm, renders his whole being the eſtate of the public, in which he has not reſerved a peculium for himſelf of profit, diverſion, or relaxation. During the ſeſſion, the firſt in, and the laſt out of the Houſe of Commons; he paſſes from the ſenate to the camp; and, ſeldom ſeeing the ſeat of his anceſtors, he is always in Parliament to ſerve his country, or in the field to defend it.’ It is impoſſible to aſcribe to ſuch a character any principle but patriotiſm, when he expreſſed himſelf as follows: ‘I return to you baffled and diſpirited, and I am ſorry that truth obliges me to add, with hardly a ray of hope of ſeeing any change in the miſerable courſe of public calamities.’ ‘On this melancholy day of account, in rendering up to you my truſt, I deliver to you your ſhare of a country maimed and weakened; its treaſure laviſhed and miſſpent; its honours faded; and its conduct the laughing-ſtock of Europe: our nation [Page 133] in a manner without allies or friends, except ſuch as we have hired to deſtroy our fellow-ſubjects, and to ravage a country, in which we once claimed an invaluable ſhare. I return to you ſome of your principal privileges impeached and mangled. And, laſtly, I leave you, as I conceive, at this hour and moment fully, effectually, and abſolutely, under the diſcretion and power of a military force, which is to act without waiting for the authority of the civil magiſtrates.’ ‘Some have been accuſed of exaggerating the public misfortunes, nay, of having endeavoured to help forward the miſchief, that they might afterwards raiſe diſcontents. I am willing to hope, that neither my temper, nor my ſituation in life, will be thought naturally to urge me to promote miſery, diſcord, or confuſion, or to exult in the ſubverſion of order, or in the ruin of property. I have no reaſon to contemplate with pleaſure the poverty of our country, the increaſe of our debts, and of our taxes; or the decay of our commerce.—Truſt not, however, to my report: reflect, compare, and judge for yourſelves.’ ‘But, under all theſe diſheartening circumſtances, I could yet entertain a cheerful hope, and undertake again the commiſſion with alacrity, as well as zeal, if I could ſee any effectual ſteps taken to remove the original couſe of the miſchief—'Then would there be a hope.’ ‘But, till the Purity of the conſtituent [Page 134] body, and thereby that of the repreſentative, be reſtored, there is NONE.’ ‘I gladly embrace this moſt public opportunity of delivering my ſentiments, not only to all my conſtituents, but to thoſe likewiſe not my conſtituents, whom yet, in the large ſenſe, I repreſent, and am faithfully to ſerve.’ ‘I look upon reſtoring election and repreſentation in ſome degree (for I expect no miracles) to their original purity, to be that, without which all other efforts will be vain and ridiculous.’ ‘If ſomething be not done, you may, indeed, retain the outward form of your conſtitution, but not the power thereof.’ Such were the words of that great good man, loſt with thoſe of many others of his time, and his fame, as far as power could hurt it, put in the ſhade along with them. The conſequences we have all ſeen and felt: America, from an obedient affectionate colony, became an independent nation; and two millions of people, nurſed in the very lap of our monarchy, became the willing ſubjects of a republican conſtitution. Gentlemen, in that great and calamitous conflict Mr. Burke and Mr. Paine fought in the ſame field of reaſon together, but with very different ſucceſſes. Mr. Burke ſpoke to a parliament in England, ſuch as Sir George Saville deſcribes it, that had no ears but for ſounds that flattered its corruptions. Mr. Paine, on the other hand, ſpoke TO A PEOPLE; reaſoned with them, that they were bound by no ſubjection to any ſovereignty, [Page 135] further than their own benefits connected them; and by theſe powerful arguments prepared the minds of the American people for that GLORIOUS, JUST, and HAPPY revolution. Gentlemen, I have a right to diſtinguiſh it by that appellation, becauſe I aver that at this moment there is as ſacred a regard to property; as inviolable a ſecurity to all the rights of individuals; lower taxes; fewer grievances; leſs to deplore, and more to admire, in the conſtitution of America, than that of any other country under heaven. I wiſh indeed to except our own, but I cannot even do that, till it ſhall be purged of thoſe abuſes which, though they obſcure and deform the ſurface, have not as yet (thank God) deſtroyed the vital parts. Why then is Mr. Paine to be calumniated, and reviled, becauſe out of a people conſiſting of near three millions, he alone did not remain attached in opinion to a monarchy. Remember, that all the blood which was ſhed in America, and to which he was for years a melancholy and indignant witneſs, was ſhed by the authority of the crown of Great Britain, under the influence of its parliament, ſuch as Sir George Saville has deſcribed it, and ſuch as Mr. Burke himſelf will be called upon by and by in more glowing colours to paint it. How then can it be wondered at that Mr. Paine ſhould return to this country in his heart a republican? Was he not equally republican when he wrote Common Senſe? yet that volume has been ſold without reſtraint or proſecution in every ſhop in England ever ſince, and which nevertheleſs (I appeal to the book, which I have in court, and which is in every body's hands) contains every one principle of government, and every abuſe in the Britiſh [Page 136] conſtitution, which is to be found in the Rights of Man. Yet Mr. Burke himſelf ſaw no reaſon to be alarmed at its publication, nor to cry down its contents, even when America, which was ſwayed by it, was in arms againſt the crown of Great-Britain. You ſhall hear his opinion of it, in his letter to the ſheriffs of Briſtol, pages 33 and 34. ‘The court gazette accompliſhed what the abettors of independence had attempted in vain. When that diſingenuous compilation, and ſtrange medley of railing and flattery, was adduced, as a proof of the united ſentiments of the people of Great-Britain, there was a great change throughout all America. The tide of popular affection, which had ſtill ſet towards the parent country, began immediately to turn, and to flow with great rapidity in a contrary courſe. Far from concealing theſe wild declarations of enmity, the author of the celebrated pamphlet which prepared the minds of the people for independence, inſiſts largely on the multitude and the ſpirit of theſe addreſſes; and draws an argument from them, which (if the fact were as he ſuppoſes) muſt be irreſiſtible. For I never knew a writer on the theory of government ſo partial to authority, as not to allow, that the hoſtile mind of the rulers to their people, did fully juſtify a change of government; nor can any reaſon whatever be given, why one people ſhould voluntarily yield any degree of pre-eminence to another, but on a ſuppoſition of great affection and benevolence towards them. Unfortunately your [Page 137] rulers, truſting to other things, took no notice of this great principle of connexion.’ But there is a time, it ſeems, for all things. Gentlemen, the conſequences of this mighty revolution are too notorious to require illuſtration. No audience would ſit to hear (what every body has ſeen and felt,) the independence of America notoriouſly produced, not by remote and circuitous effect, but directly and palpably, the revolutions which now agitate Europe, and which portend ſuch new changes over the face of the earth. Let governors take warning. The revolution in France was the conſequence of her incurably corrupt and profligate government. God forbid that I ſhould be thought to lean, by this declaration, upon her unfortunate monarch, bending, perhaps at this moment, under afflictions which my heart ſinks within me to think of; but, when I ſpeak with deteſtation of the former politics of the French court, I faſten as little of them upon that fallen and unhappy prince, as I impute to our gracious ſovereign the corruptions of our own government. I deſire, indeed, in the diſtincteſt manner, to be underſtood that I mean to ſpeak of his Majeſty, not only with that obedience and duty which I owe to him as a ſubject, but with that juſtice which I think is due to him from all men who examine his conduct either in public or private life. Gentlemen, Mr. Paine happened to be in England when the French revolution took place [Page 138] and notwithſtanding what he muſt be ſuppoſed and allowed from his hiſtory to have felt upon ſuch a ſubject, he remained wholly ſilent and inactive. The people of this country too appeared to be indifferent ſpectators of the animating ſcene. They ſaw, without viſible emotion, deſpotiſm deſtroyed, and the King of France, by his own conſent, become the firſt magiſtrate of a free people. Certainly, at leaſt, it produced none of thoſe effects which are ſo deprecated by government at preſent; nor, moſt probably, ever would, if it had not occurred to the celebrated perſon, whoſe name I muſt ſo often mention, voluntarily to provoke the ſubject; a ſubject which, if dangerous to be diſcuſſed, he ſhould not have led to the diſcuſſion: for, ſurely, it is not to be endured, that any private man is to publiſh a creed for a whole nation; to tell us that we are not to think for ourſelves—to impoſe his own fetters upon the human mind—to dogmatiſe at diſcretion—and that no man ſhall ſit down to anſwer him without being guilty of a libel. I aſſert, that if it be a libel to miſtake our conſtitution—to ſupport it by means that tend to deſtroy it—and to chooſe the moſt dangerous ſ [...]aſon for the interference, Mr. Burke is that libeller; but not therefore the object of a criminal proſecution: for, whilſt I am defending the motives of one man, I have neither right nor diſpoſition to criminate the motives of another. All I contend for, is a fact that cannot be controverted, viz. that this officious interference was the origin of Mr. Paine's book. I put my cauſe upon its being the origin of it—the avowed origin [Page 139] —as will abundantly appear from the introduction and preface to both parts, and throughout the whole body of the work; nay, from the very work of Mr. Burke himſelf, to which both of them are anſwers. Gentlemen, for the hiſtory of that celebrated work, I appeal to itſelf. When the French revolution had arrived at ſome of its early ſtages, a few, and but a few, perſons (not to be named when compared with the nation) took a viſible intereſt in theſe mighty events; an intereſt well worthy of Engliſhmen. They ſaw a pernicious ſyſtem of government, which had led to cruel deſolating wars, and had been for ages the ſcourge of Great Britain, giving way to a ſyſtem which ſeemed to promiſe harmony and peace amongſt the nations. They ſaw this with virtuous and peaceable ſatisfaction: And a reverend divine *, eminent for his eloquence, recollecting that the iſſues of life are in the hands of God, ſaw no profaneneſs in mixing the ſubject with public thankſgiving; reminding the people of this country of their own glorious deliverance in former ages. It happened, alſo, that a ſociety of gentlemen, France being then a neutral nation, and her own monarch ſwearing almoſt daily upon her altars to maintain the new conſtitution, thought they infringed no law by ſending a general congratulation. Their numbers, indeed, were very inconſiderable; ſo much ſo, that Mr. Burke, with more truth than [Page 140] wiſdom, begins his volume with a ſarcaſm upon their inſignificance. ‘Until very lately he had never heard of ſuch a club. It certainly never occupied a moment of his thoughts; nor, he believed, thoſe of any perſon out of their own ſet.’ Why then make their proceedings the ſubject of alarm throughout England? — There had been no proſecution againſt them, nor any charge founded upon ſuſpicion of diſaffection againſt any of their body. But Mr. Burke thought it was reſerved for his eloquence to whip theſe curs of faction to their kennels. How he has ſucceeded, I appeal to all that has happened ſince the introduction of his ſchiſm in the Britiſh empire, by giving to the King, whoſe title was queſtioned by no man, a title which it is his Majeſty's moſt ſolemn intereſt to diſclaim. After having, in his firſt work, laſhed Dr. Price in a ſtrain of eloquent irony for conſidering the monarchy to be elective, which he could not but know Dr. Price, in the literal ſenſe of election, neither did or could poſſibly conſider it, Mr. Burke publiſhed a ſecond treatiſe; in which, after reprinting many paſſages from Mr. Paine's former work, he ridicules and denies the ſuppoſed right of the people to change their governments, in the following words: [Page 141] "The French revolution, ſay they," (ſpeaking of the Engliſh ſocieties) ‘was the act of the majority of the people; and if the majority of any other people, the people of England, for inſtance, wiſh to make the ſame change, they have the ſame right; juſt the ſame undoubtedly; that is, none at all.’ And then, after ſpeaking of the ſubſerviency of will to duty, (in which I agree with him,) he, in a ſubſtantive ſentence, maintains the ſame doctrine; thus: ‘The conſtitution of a country being once ſettled upon ſome compact, tacit or expreſſed, there is no power exiſting of force to alter it, without the breach of the covenant, or the conſent of all the parties. Such is the nature of a contract.’ So that if reaſon, or even revelation itſelf, were now to demonſtrate to us, that our conſtitution was miſchievous in its effects; that, to uſe Mr. Attorney General's expreſſion, we had been inſane for the many centuries we have ſupported it; yet that ſtill, if the King had not forfeited his title to the crown, nor the Lords their privileges, the univerſal voice of the whole people of England could not build up a new government upon a legitimate baſis. [Page 142] Gentlemen, not to argue for the preſent againſt ſuch a propoſition, and ſuppoſing it could, beyond all controverſy, be maintained; for heaven's ſake, let wiſdom never utter it! Let policy and prudence for ever conceal it! If you ſeek the ſtability of the Engliſh government, rather put the book of Mr. Paine, which calls it bad, into every hand in the kingdom, than doctrines which bid human nature rebel even againſt that which is the beſt.—Say to the people of England, Look at your conſtitution, there it lies before you—the work of your pious fathers, handed down as a ſacred depoſit from generation to generation, the reſult of wiſdom and virtue, and its parts cemented together with kindred blood. There are, indeed, a few ſpots upon its ſurface; but the ſame principle which reared the ſtructure will bruſh them all away: you may keep it, or you may deſtroy it.—To ſuch an addreſs, what would be the anſwer? A chorus of the nation— YES, WE WILL PRESERVE IT. But ſay to the ſame nation, even of the very ſame conſtitution, It is yours, ſuch as it is, for better or for worſe; it is ſtrapped upon your backs, to carry it as beaſts of burthen, and you have no juriſdiction to caſt it off. Let this be your poſition, and you inſtantly raiſe up (I appeal to every man's conſciouſneſs of his own nature) a ſpirit of uneaſineſs and diſcontent. Yet it is the controverſy alone, which this uſeleſs and miſchievous propoſition ſtirred up, that has pointed moſt of the paſſages arraigned before you, which it will be preſently my duty to explain. [Page 143] But let the prudence of the argument be what it may, the argument itſelf is untenable. His Majeſty undoubtedly was not elected to the throne. No man can be ſuppoſed, in the teeth of fact, to have contended it; but did not the people of England elect King William, and break the hereditary ſucceſſion? and does not his Majeſty's title grow out of that election? It is one of the charges againſt the defendant, his having denied the parliament which called the Prince of Orange to the throne to have been a legal convention of the whole people; and is not the very foundation of that charge, that it was ſuch a legal convention, and that it was intended to be ſo? and if it was ſo, did not the people then confer the crown upon King William without any regard to hereditary right? Did they not cut off the Prince of Wales, who ſtood directly in the line of ſucceſſion, and who had incurred no perſonal forfeiture? Did they not give their deliverer an eſtate in the crown totally new and unprecedented in the law or hiſtory of the country? And, laſtly, might they not, by the ſame authority, have given the royal inheritance to the family of a ſtranger? Mr. Juſtice Blackſtone, in his Commentaries, in terms, aſſerts that they might; and aſcribes their choice of King William, and the ſubſequent limitations of the crown, not to want of juriſdiction, but to their true origin, to prudence and diſcretion in not diſturbing a valuable inſtitution further than public ſafety and neceſſity dictated. The Engliſh government ſtands then on this public conſent, the true root of all governments. [Page 144] And I agree with Mr. Burke, that, while it is well adminiſtered, it is not in the power of factions or libels to diſturb it; though, when miniſters are in fault, they are ſure to ſet down all diſturbances to theſe cauſes. This is moſt juſtly and eloquently exemplified in the Thoughts on the Cauſe of the preſent Diſcontents, page 5 and 6. ‘Miniſters contend that no adequate provocation has been given for ſo ſpreading a diſcontent, our affairs having been conducted throughout with remarkable temper and conſummate wiſdom. The wicked induſtry of ſome libellers, joined to the intrigues of a few diſappointed politic [...]ans, have, in their opinion, been able to produce this unnatural ferment in the nation.’ ‘Nothing, indeed, can be more unnatural than the preſent convulſions of this country, if the above account be a true one. I confeſs I ſhall aſſent to it with great reluctance, and only on the compulſion of the cleareſt and firmeſt proofs; becauſe their account reſolves itſelf into this ſhort but diſcouraging propoſition. 'That we have a very good miniſtry, but that we are a very bad people; that we ſet ourſelves to bite the hand that feeds us; and, with a malignant inſanity, oppoſe the meaſures, and ungratefully vilify the perſons of thoſe whoſe ſole object is our own peace and proſperity. If a few puny [Page 145] libellers, acting under a knot of factious politicians, without virtue, parts, or character (for ſuch they are conſtantly repreſented by theſe gentlemen), are ſufficient to excite this diſturbance, very perverſe muſt be the diſpoſition of that people, amongſt whom ſuch a diſturbance can be excited by ſuch means.’ He ſays true: never were ſerious diſturbances excited by ſuch means! But to return to the argument.—Let us now ſee how the rights of the people ſtand upon authority, and whether this great ſource of government is not maintained by perſons on whom my friend will find it hard to faſten the character of libellers. I ſhall begin with the moſt modern author on the ſubject of government—a gentleman, whoſe work lies ſpread out before me, as it often does for my delight and inſtruction in my leiſure hours. I have alſo, by the favour of a friend who ſits near me in court, the honour of his perſonal acquaintance. He is a man, perhaps more than any other, devoted to the real conſtitution of the country, as will be found throughout his valuable work; and he is a perſon, beſides, of great learning, which enabled him to infuſe much uſeful knowledge into my learned friend who introduced me to him * I ſpeak of Mr. Paley, Archdeacon of Carliſle, and of his work, entitled, The Principles of Political and Moral Philoſophy, in which he inveſtigates the [Page 146] firſt principles of all governments — a diſcuſſion not thought dangerous till lately: and I hope we ſhall ſoon get rid of this ridiculous panic. Mr. Paley profeſſes to think of governments what the Chriſtian religion was thought of by its firſt teachers:—'If it be of God it will ſtand;' and he puts the duties of obedience to them upon free will and moral duty. After diſſenting from Mr. Locke as to the origin of governments in compact, he ſays, ‘Wherefore, rejecting the intervention of a compact as unfounded in its principle, and dangerous in the application, we aſſign for the only ground of the ſubjects' obligation, THE WILL OF GOD, AS COLLECTED FROM EXPEDIENCY.’ ‘The ſteps by which the argument proceeds are few and direct — 'It is the will of God that the happineſs of human life be promoted:'—this is the firſt ſtep, and the foundation, not only of this, but of every moral concluſion. 'Civil ſociety conduces to that end:'—this is the ſecond propoſition. 'Civil ſocieties cannot be upheld, unleſs in each, the intereſt of the whole ſociety be binding upon every part and member of it:'—this is the third ſtep, and conducts us to the concluſion, namely,— 'That, ſo long as the intereſt of the whole ſociety requires it (that is, ſo long as the eſtabliſhed government cannot be reſiſted [Page 147] or changed without public inconveniency) it is the will of God (which will univerſally determines our duty) that the eſtabliſhed government be obeyed,'—and no longer. ’ ‘But who ſhall judge of this? We anſwer, 'Every man for himſelf.' In contentions between the ſovereign and the ſubject, the parties acknowledge no common arbitrator; and it would be abſurd to commit the deciſion to thoſe whoſe conduct has provoked the queſtion, and whoſe own intereſt, authority, and fate, are immediately concerned in it. The danger of error and abuſe is no objection to the rule of expediency, becauſe every other rule is liable to the ſame or greater; and every rule that can be propounded upon the ſubject (like all rules which appeal to, or bind the conſcience) muſt, in the application, depend upon private judgment. It may be obſerved, however, that it ought equally to be accounted the exerciſe of a man's private judgment, whether he determines by reaſonings and concluſions of his own, or ſubmits to be directed by the advice of others, provided he be free to chooſe his guide.’ He then proceeds in a manner rather inconſiſtent with the principles entertained by my learned friend in his opening to you:— ‘No uſage, law, or authority whatever, is [Page 148] ſo binding, that it need or ought to be continued, when it may be changed with advantage to the community. The family of the prince—the order of ſucceſſion—the prerogative of the crown—the form and parts of the legiſlature—together with the reſpective powers, office, duration, and mutual dependency of the ſeveral parts; are all only ſo many laws, mutable, like other laws, whenever expediency requires, either by the ordinary act of the legiſlature, or, if the occaſion deſerve it, BY THE INTERPOSITION OF THE PEOPLE.’ No man can ſay that Mr. Paley intended to diffuſe diſcontent by this declaration. He muſt therefore be taken to think with me, that freedom and affection, and the ſenſe of advantages, are the beſt and the only ſupports of government. On the ſame principle, he then goes on to ſay,— ‘Theſe points are wont to be approached with a kind of awe; they are repreſented to the mind as principles of the conſtitution, ſettled by our anceſtors, and being ſettled, to be no more committed to innovation or debate; as foundations never to be ſtirred; as the terms and conditions of the ſocial compact, to which every citizen of the ſtate has engaged his fidelity, by virtue of a promiſe which he cannot now recall. Such reaſons have no place in our ſyſtem.’ Such are the ſentiments of this excellent author, and there is no part of Mr. Paine's work, from the one end of it to the other, that advances any other propoſition. [Page 149] But the Attorney General will ſay, theſe are the grave ſpeculative opinions of a friend to the Engliſh Government, whereas Mr. Paine is its profeſſed enemy; what then? the principle is, that every man, wh [...]le he obeys the laws, is to think for himſelf, and to conduct himſelf as he thinks. The very ends of ſociety exact this licence, and the policy of the law, in its proviſions for its ſecurity, has tacitly ſanctioned it. The real fact is, that writings againſt a free and well-proportioned Government, need not be guarded againſt by laws. They cannot often exiſt, and never with effect. The juſt and aweful principles of ſociety, are rarely brought forward, but when they are inſulted and denied, or abuſed in practice: Mr. Locke's Eſſay on Government, we owe to Sir Robert Filmer, as we owe Mr. Paine's to Mr. Burke; and indeed, between the arguments of Filmer and Burke, I ſee no eſſential difference; ſince it is not worth diſputing, whether a King exiſts by Di [...]ine right, or indiſſoluble Human compact, if he exiſts whether we will or no: If his exiſtence be without our conſent, and to continue without benefit, it matters not a farthing, whether his title be from God or from Man. That his title is from man, and from every generation of man, without regard to the determination of former ones, hear from Mr. Locke, All m [...]n," ſay they, (i. e. Filmer and his adherents,) ‘ are born under government, and therefore they cannot be at liberty to begin a new one. Every one is born a ſubject to his father, or his prince, and is therefore under the perpetual [Page 150] tie of ſubjection and allegiance. It is plain, mankind never owned nor conſidered any ſuch natural ſubjection that they were born in, to one or to the other, that tied them, without their own conſents, to a ſubjection to them and their heirs.’ ‘It is true, that whatever engagements or promiſes any one has made for himſelf, he is under the obligation of them, but cannot, by any compact whatſoever, bind his children or poſterity: for his ſon, when a man, being altogether as free as the father, any act of the father can no more give away the liberty of the ſon, than it can of any body elſe.’ So much for Mr. Locke's opinion of the rights of mankind. Let us now examine his ideas of the ſuppoſed danger of truſting them with them. ‘Perhaps it will be ſaid, that the people being ignorant, and always diſcontented, to lay the foundation of government in the unſteady opinion and uncertain humour of the people, is to expoſe it to certain ruin: and no government will be able long to ſubſiſt, if the people may ſet up a new legiſlature, whenever they take offence at the old one. To this, I anſwer quite the contrary: people are not ſo eaſily got out of their old forms, as ſome are apt to ſuggeſt: they are hardly to be prevailed with to amend the acknowledged faults in the frame they have been accuſtomed to; and if there be any original defects, or adventitious ones introduced by time, or corruption, it is not an eaſy thing [Page 151] to be changed, even when all the world ſees there is an opportunity for it. This ſlowneſs and averſion in the people to quit their old conſtitutions, has in the many revolutions which have been ſeen in this kingdom, in this and former ages, ſtill kept us to, or, af [...]er ſome interval of fruitleſs attempts, ſtill brought us back again to our old legiſlative of king, lords and commons: and whatever provocations have made the crown be taken from ſome of our princes heads, they never carried the people ſo far as to place it in another line.’ Gentlemen, I wiſh I had ſtrength to go on with all that is material, but I have read enough, not only to maintain the true principles of government, but to put to ſhame the narrow ſyſtem of diſtruſting the people. It may be ſaid, that Mr. Locke went great lengths in his poſitions, to beat down the contrary doctrine of divine right, which was then endangering the new eſtabliſhment. But that cannot be objected to David Hume, who maintains the ſame doctrine; ſpeaking of the Magna Charta in his hiſtory, vol. ii. page 88, he ſays, ‘It muſt be confeſſed, that the former articles of the great charter, contain ſuch mitigations and explanations of the feodal law, as are reaſonable and equitable; and that the latter involve all the chief outlines of a legal Government, and provide for the equal diſtribution of juſtice and free enjoyment of property; the great object for which political ſociety was founded by men, which the people have a perpetual and unalienable right to [Page 152] recall; and which no time, nor precedent, nor ſtatute, nor poſitive inſtitution, ought to deter them from keeping ever uppermoſt in their thoughts and attention.’ Theſe authorities are ſufficient to reſt on, yet I cannot omit Mr. Burke himſelf, who is, if poſſible, ſtill more diſtinct on the ſubject. Speaking not of the ancient people of England, but of Colonies planted almoſt within our memories, he ſays, ‘If there be one fact in the world perfectly clear, it is this; That the diſpoſition of the people of America is wholly averſe to any other than a free Government" and this is indication enough to any honeſt ſtateſman, how he ought to adapt whatever power he finds in his hands to their caſe. If any aſk me what a free Government is, I anſwer, THAT IT IS WHAT THE PEOPLE THINK SO; AND THAT THEY, AND NOT I, ARE THE NATURAL, LAWFUL, AND COMPETENT JUDGES OF THIS MATTER. If they practically allow me a greater degree of authority over them than is conſiſtent with any correct ideas of perfect freedom, I ought to thank them for ſo great a truſt, and not to endeavour to prove from thence, that they have reaſoned amiſs, and that having gone ſo far, by analogy, they muſt here-after have no enjoyment but by my pleaſure.’ Gentlemen, I am ſorry to feel my time conſiderably conſumed before I am arrived at what I conceive to be the material ſubject of your conſideration. For all that I have been ſtating now, is only to ſhew; that [Page 153] there is not that novelty in the opinions of the defendant, that ſhould lead you to think that he does not bona f [...]de entertain them, much leſs when connected with the hiſtory of his life, which I therefore brought in review before you.—But ſtill the great queſtion remains unargued. Had he a right to promulgate theſe opinions? Gentlemen, if he entertained them, I ſhall argue that he had— And although my arguments upon the Liberty of the Preſs, may not to-day be honoured with your, or the Court's approbation, I ſhall retire not at all diſheartened, conſoling myſelf with the reflection, that a ſeaſon may arrive for their reception.—The moſt eſſential freedoms of mankind have been but ſlowly and gradually received, and ſo very late, indeed, do ſome of them come to maturity, that notwithſtanding the Attorney General tells you that the very queſtion I am now agitating, is moſt peculiarly for y [...]ur conſideration, AS A JURY, under our ANCIENT Conſtitution, yet I muſt remind both you and him, that your juriſdiction to conſider and deal with it at all in judgment, is but A YEAR OLD.—When, before that late period, I ventured to maintain this very RIGHT OF A JURY over the queſtion of Libel under the ſame ancient Conſtitution. (I do not mean before my Lord, for the matter was gone to reſt in the Courts, at leaſt long before he came to ſit where he does.) But when, before a Noble and Reverend Magiſtrate of the moſt exalted underſtanding, and of the moſt uncorrupted integrity, to give effect to it *, I had occaſion to maintain it, he [Page 154] treated me, not with diſregard, indeed, for of that his nature was incapable; but he put me aſide with indulgence, as you do a child while it is liſping its prattle out of ſeaſon; and if this cauſe had been tried then, inſtead of now, the Defendant muſt have been inſtantly convicted on the proof of the publication, whatever you might have thought of his caſe.— Yet, I have lived to ſee it reſolved, by an almoſt unanimous vote of the whole Parliament of England, that I had all along [...]een in the right. If this be not an awful leſſon of caut [...]on concerning opinions, where are ſuch leſſons to be read! Gentlemen, I have inſiſted, at great length, upon the origin of Government being in the conſent of the people, and detailed the authorities which you have heard upon the ſubject, becauſe I conſider it to be not only a ſupport, but, indeed, the only foundation of the Liberty of the Preſs. If Mr. Burke be right in HIS principles of Government, I admit that the Preſs, in my ſenſe of its freedom, ought not to be free, nor free in any ſenſe at all; and that all Addreſſes to the people upon the ſubject of Government; and all ſpeculations of amendment, of what kind or nature ſoever, are illegal and criminal:—For, if the people have, without poſſible recall, delegated all their authorities, they have no juriſdiction to act, and therefore none to think, upon ſuch ſubjects; and it is a libel to arraign Government or any of its acts, before thoſe that have no juriſdiction to correct them. But on the other hand, as it is a ſettled rule in the Law of [Page 155] England, that the ſubject may always addreſs a competent juriſdiction on every matter within it, no legal argument can ſhake the freedom of the Preſs in my ſenſe of it, if I am ſupported in my doctrines concerning the great unalienable rights of the people, to change or to reform their Governments. Gentlemen, it is becauſe the Liberty of the Preſs reſolves itſelf into this great iſſue, that it has been in every time and country, the laſt liberty which ſubjects have been able to wreſt from power.—Other liberties are held under Governments, but the liberty of opinion keeps Governments themſelves in due ſubjection to their duties. This has produced the martyrdom of truth in every age, and the world has only purged itſelf from ignorance with the innocent blood of thoſe who have enlightened it. Gentlemen, my ſtrength and time are waſted, and I can only make this melancholy hiſtory paſs like a ſhadow before you. I ſhall begin with the grand type and example. The univerſal God of Nature,—the Saviour of Mankind,—the Fountain of all Light, who came to pluck the world from eternal darkneſs, expired upon a croſs the ſcoff of infidel ſcorn; and his bleſſed Apoſtles followed him in the train of Martyrs. When he came in the fleſh, he might have come like the Mahometan Prophet, as a powerful Sovereign, and propagated that religion with an unconquerable ſword, which even now, after the lapſe of ages, is but ſlowly moving, under the [Page 156] influence of reaſon, over the face of the earth: But ſuch a proceſs would have been inconſiſtent with his miſſion, which was to confound the pride, and to eſtabliſh the univerſal rights of men; he came therefore in that lowly ſtate which is repreſented in the Goſpel, and preached his conſolations to the poor. When the foundation of this religion was diſcovered to be invulnerable and immortal, we find political power taking the church into partnerſhip; thus began the corruptions both of Religion and Civil Power, and, hand in hand together, what havoc have they not made in the world; ru [...]ing by ignorance and the perſecution of truth; but this very perſecution only haſtened the revival of letters and liberty, which was t [...] deſtroy the one and to raiſe up the other. Nay, you will find, that in the exact proportion that knowledge and learning have been beat down and fettered, they have deſtroyed the Governments that bound them. The Court of Star-Chamber, the firſt reſtriction on the Preſs of England, was erected in 1637. From that moment no man could legally write without an Imprimatur from the State; but truth and freedom found their way with greater force through ſecret channels, and the unhappy Charles, unwarned by a free preſs, was brought in eleven years afterwards to an ignominious death. When men can freely communicate their thoughts and their ſufferings, real or imaginary, their paſſions ſpend themſelves in air, like gun-powder ſcattered upon the ſurface; but pent up by terrors, they work unſeen like [Page 157] ſubter [...]aneous fire, burſt forth in earthquake, and deſtroy every thing in their courſe. Let reaſon be oppoſed to reaſon, and argument to argument, and every good Government will be ſafe. The Uſurper, Cromwell, purſued the ſame ſyſtem of reſtraint in ſupport of his Government, and the end of it ſpeedily followed. At the Reſtoration of Charles the Second, the Star-Chamber Ordinance of 1637, was worked up into an Act of Parliament, and was [...]ollowed up during that reign, and the ſhort one that followed it, by the moſt ſanguinary proſecutions; but what fact in hiſtory is more notorious, than that this blind and contemptible policy prepared and haſtened on the Revolution. At that great aera theſe cobwebs [...]ere all bruſhed away: The freedom of the Preſs was regenerated, and the Country, ru [...]ed by its affections, has ſince enjoyed a century of tranquillity and glory.—Thus I have maintained, by Engliſh Hiſtory, that in proportion as the Preſs has been free, Engliſh Government has been ſecure. Gentlemen, I will now ſupport the ſame important truth by very great authorities. Upon a ſubject of this kind reſort cannot be had to Law Caſes. The ancient Law of England knew nothing of ſuch Libels; they began, and ſhould have ended, with the Star-Chamber. What writings are ſlanderous of individuals, muſt be looked for where theſe proſecutions are recorded; but upon general ſubjects we muſt go to general writers. If, indeed, I were to refer to obſcure authors, I [Page 158] might be anſwered, that my very authorities were Libels, inſtead of juſtifications or examples; but this cannot be ſaid with effect of great men, whoſe works are claſſics in our language, taught in our ſchools, and printed under the eye of Government. Gentlemen, I ſhall begin with the Poet Milton, a great authority in all learning.— It may be ſaid, indeed, he was a Republican, but that would only prove that Republicaniſm is not incompatible with virtue; it may be ſaid too, that the work which I cite was written againſt previous Licenſing, which is not contended for to-day. But, in my opinion, if every work is to be adjudged a libel, which is adverſe to the wiſhes of Government, or to the opinions of thoſe who may try it, the revival of a Licencer would be a ſecurity to the public: For, if I preſent my book to a Magiſtrate appointed by law, if he rejects it, I have only to forbear from the publication, and in the forbearance I am ſafe; and he too is anſwerable to Law for the abuſe of his authority. But, upon the argument of to-day, a man muſt print at his peril, without any guide to the principles of judgment, upon which his work may be afterwards poſecuted and condemned. Milton's argument therefore applies, and was meant to apply, to every interruption to writing, which, while they oppreſs the individual, endanger the State. ‘We have them not,’ ſays Milton, ‘that can be heard of, from any ancient ſtate, or polity, or church, nor by any ſtatute left us by our anceſtors, elder or later, nor from the [Page 159] modern cuſtom of any reformed city, or church abroad; but from the moſt antichriſtian council, and the moſt tyrannous inquiſition that ever exiſted. Till then, books were ever as freely admitted into the world as any other birth; the iſſue of the brain was no more ſti [...]ed than the iſſue of the womb. ’I have differed from ſome profeſſional gentlemen on the ſubject of proſecutions, and I ſince find they are falling into my opinion, which I will here ſtate as fully, but as conciſely as I can.
I will firſt put a caſe with reſpect to any law, and then compare it with a government, or with what in England is, or has been, called a conſtitution.
It would be an act of deſpotiſm, or what in England is called arbitrary power, to make a law to prohibit inveſtigating the principles, good or bad, on which ſuch a law, or any other, is founded.
If a law be bad, it is one thing to oppoſe the practice of it, but it is quite a different thing to expoſe its errors, to reaſon on its defects, and to ſhew cauſe why it ſhould be repealed, or why another ought to be ſubſtituted in its place. I have always held it an opinion (making it alſo my practice) that it is better to obey a bad law, making uſe at [Page 124] the ſame time of every argument to ſhew its errors and procure its repeal, than forcibly to violate it; becauſe the precedent of breaking a bad law might weaken the force, and lead to a diſcretionary violation, of thoſe which are good.
The caſe is the ſame with principles and forms of government, or to what are called conſtitutions and the parts of which they are compoſed.
It is for the good of nations, and not for the emolument or aggrandiſement of particular individuals, that government ought to be eſtabliſhed, and that mankind are at the expence of ſupporting it. The defects of every government and conſtitution, both as to principle and form, muſt, on a parity of reaſoning, be as open to diſcuſſion as the defects of a law, and it is a duty which every man owes to ſociety to point them out. When thoſe defects, and the means of remedying them are generally ſeen by a nation, that nation will reform its government or its conſtitution in the one caſe, as the government repealed or reformed the law in the other.
He then adverts to his viſit to the famous Galileo, whom he found and viſited in the inquiſition, ‘for not thinking in Aſtronomy with the Franciſcan and Dominican Monks.’ And what event ought more deeply to intereſt and affect us. The very laws of Nature were to bend under the rod of a Licenſer; this illuſtrious Aſtronomer ended his life within the bars of a priſon, becauſe, in ſeeing the phaſes of Venus through his newly-invented teleſcope, he [Page 161] pronounced, that ſhe ſhone with borrowed light, and from the Sun as the centre of the univerſe. This was the mighty crime, the placing the Sun in the center: that Sun which now inhabits it upon the foundation of mathematical truth, which enables us to traverſe the pathleſs ocean, and to carry our line and rule amongſt other worlds, which but for Galileo we had never known, perhaps even to the receſſes of an Infinite and Immortal God. Milton then, in his moſt eloquent addreſs to the parliament, puts the liberty of the preſs on its true and moſt honourable foundation. ‘Believe it, Lords and Commons, they who counſel ye to ſuch a ſuppreſſing of books, do as good as bid you ſuppreſs yourſelves; and I will ſoon ſhew how.’ ‘If it be deſired to know the immediate cauſe of all this free writing and free ſpeaking, there cannot be aſſigned a truer than your own mild, and free, and humane Government; it is the liberty, Lords and Commons, which your own valorous and happy counſels have purchaſed us; liberty which is the nurſe of all great wits: this is that which hath rarified and enlightened our ſpirits like the influence of heaven; this is that which hath enfranchiſed, enlarged and lifted up our apprehenſions, degrees above themſelves. Ye cannot make us now leſs capable, leſs knowing, leſs eagerly purſuing the truth, unleſs ye firſt make yourſelves, that made us ſo, leſs the lovers, leſs the founders of our true liberty. We can grow ignorant again, brutiſh formal and ſlaviſh, as ye [Page 162] found us; but you then muſt firſt become that which ye cannot be, oppreſſive, arbitrary and tyrannous, as they were from whom ye have freed us. That our hearts are now more capacious, our thoughts now more erected to the ſearch and expectation of greateſt and exacteſt things, is the iſſue of your own virtue propagated in us. Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conſcience, above all liberties.’ Gentlemen, I will now refer you to another Author, whoſe opinion you may think more in point, as having lived in our own times, and as holding the higheſt monarchical principles of Government. I ſpeak of Mr. Hume, who, nevertheleſs, conſiders, that this Liberty of the Preſs extends not only to abſtract ſpeculation, but to keep the public on their guard againſt all the acts of their Government. After ſhewing the advantages of a Monarchy to public freedom, provided it is duly controlled and watched by the popular part of the Conſtitution, he ſays, ‘Theſe principles account for the great liberty of the preſs in theſe kingdoms, beyond what is indulged in any other Government. It is apprehended, that arbitrary power would ſteal in upon us, were we not careful to prevent its progreſs, and were there not an eaſy method of conveying the alarm from one end of the kingdom to the other. The ſpirit of the people m [...]ſt frequently be rouſed, in order to curb the ambition of the Court; and the dread of rouſing this ſpirit muſt be employed to prevent that ambition. Nothing is ſo [Page 163] effectual to this purpoſe as the liberty of the preſs, by which all the learning, wit, and genius of the nation, may be employed on the ſide of freedom; and every one be animated to its defence. As long, therefore, as the republican part of our Government can maintain itſelf againſt the monarchical, it will naturally be careful to keep the preſs open, as of importance to its own preſervation. ’ There is another authority co-temporary with the laſt, a ſplendid Speaker in the upper Houſe of Parliament, and who held during moſt of his time high offices under the King; I ſpeak of the Earl of Cheſterfield, who thus expreſſed himſelf in the Houſe of Lords:— ‘One of the greateſt bleſſings, my Lords, we enjoy, is Liberty; but every good in this life has its alloy of evil—Licentiouſneſs is the alloy of Liberty, it is —.’To the pure all things are pure; not only meats and drinks, but all kind of knowledge whether good or evil; the knowledge cannot defile, nor conſequently the books, if the will and conſcience be not defiled.
Bad books ſerve in many reſpects to diſcover, to confute, to forewarn and to illuſtrate. Whereof, what better witneſs can we expect I ſhould produce, than one of your own, now ſitting in parliament, the chief of learned men reputed in this land, Mr. Selden; whoſe volume of natural and national laws, proves, not only by great authorities brought together, but by exquiſite reaſons and theorems almoſt mathematica [...]ly demonſtrative, that all opinions, yea errors, known, read and collated, are of main ſervice and aſſiſtance toward the ſpeedy attainment of what is trueſt.
Opinions and underſtanding are not ſuch wares as to be monopolized and traded in by tickets and ſtatutes, and ſtandards. We muſt not think to make a ſtaple commodity of all the knowledge in the land, to mark and licence it like our broad cloth and our woolpacks.
Nor is it to the common people leſs than a reproach; for if we be ſo jealous over them [Page 160] that we cannot truſt them with an Engliſh pamphlet, what do we but cenſure them, for a giddy, vicious, and ungrounded people; in ſuch a ſick and weak eſtate of faith and diſcretion, as to be able to take nothing down but through the pipe of a Licenſer. That this is care or love of them we cannot pretend.
Thoſe corruptions which it ſeeks to prevent, break in faſter at doors which cannot be ſhut.
To prevent men thinking and acting for themſelves, by reſtraints on the preſs, is like to the exploits of that gallant man, who, thought to pound up the crows by ſhutting his park gate.
This obſtructing violence meets for the moſt part with an event, utterly oppoſite to the end which it drives at: inſtead of ſuppreſſing books, it raiſes them and inveſts them with a reputation: the puniſhment of wits enhances their authority, ſaith the Viſcount St. Albans'; and a forbidden writing is thought to be a certain ſpark of truth, that flies up in the face of them who ſeek to tread it out.
[Page 195] Engage them by their affections, convince their reaſon, and they will be loyal from the only principle that can make loyalty ſincere, vigorous, or rational, a conviction that it is their trueſt intereſt, and that their form of government is for their common good. Conſtraint is the natural parent of reſiſtance, and a pregnant proof, that reaſon is not on the ſide of thoſe who uſe it. You muſt all remember, gentlemen, Lucian's pleaſant ſtory; Jupiter and a countryman were walking together, converſing with great freedom and familiarity upon the ſubject of heaven and earth. The countryman liſtened with attention and acquieſcence, while Jupiter ſtrove only to convince him; but happening to hint a doubt, Jupiter turned haſtily round and threatened him with his thunder.— "Ah! ha!" ſays the countryman, ‘now Jupiter, I know that you are wrong; you're always wrong when you appeal to your thunder.’ This is the caſe with me—I can reaſon with the people of England, but I cannot fight againſt the thunder of authority. Gentlemen, this is my defence for free opinions. With regard to myſelf, I am, and ever have been, obedient and affectionate to the law: to that rule of action, as long as I exiſt, I ſhall ever give my voice and my conduct; but I ſhall ever do as I have done to-day, maintain the dignity of my high profeſſion, and perform, as I underſtand them, all its important duties.Be to their faults a little blind,Be to their virtues very kind;Let all their thoughts be unconfin'd,And clap your padlock on the mind.
[Mr. Attorney General aroſe immediately to reply to Mr. Erſkine, when Mr. Campbell (the [Page 196] foreman of the Jury) ſaid,—My Lord, I am authorized by the Jury here, to inform the Attorney General, that a reply is not neceſſary for them, unleſs the Attorney General wiſhes to make it, or your Lordſhip.—Mr. Attorney General ſat down, and the Jury gave in their verdict, GUILTY.