AN
ESSAY
ON THE
LIBERTY OF THE PRESS:
IN WHICH THE
RATIONAL AND PRUDENTIAL LIMITS
OF THE
NOBLE INVENTION
F
PRINTING
ARE PROPERLY DEFINED.
Salus populi suprema lex.
६..
BY THE REV. T. MEEK, A. M.
A
BY
SOUTH SHIELDS:
PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR,
At the Minerva Dffice,
W. HALLGARTH, JUN. THRIFT-STREET.
1799.
Page Missing
in Original
Volume
Page Missing
in Original
Volume
Reference - alko
4-77-48,
62332
་
PREFACE.
THE subject of the following
Essay is highly interesting at any
time, but more especially at the
present juncture. The period has
now arrived when government has
thought proper to interfere, and
thus exert its parental authority
over the conduct of its children.
I do not flatter myself that the
subsequent Essay will give universal
satisfaction, because it is next to
impossible to treat a political sub-
ject in such a manner as to give
기다
​[vi]
offence to none. I have, however,
deduced my arguments from im-
mutable and eternal principles,
which will hold true though the
whole world was reduced to no-
thing; so that the republican or
the friend to monarchy, the whig
or the torie, cannot view these
pages as the effect of party spirit.
I have only to add that if the man
who publishes his sentiments to the
world is afraid, or ashamed to
avow them, they ought to be
buried in everlasting oblivion.
The debauched villain who vends
his anonymous poison by means
[ vii ]
of the press, will now be obliged
to come forward in his native de-
formity, or remain for ever behind
the scene.
Merit will now lift up
its head in triumph, and general
utility be the employment of the
press. Before such a step can be
proved to be tyrannical, it must
first be shewn that government
is not the political parent of a
country, and that the happiness
of the people should be none of
its concerns. To assert this, how-
ever, would be madness and ex-
travagance, and to endeavour to
prove it, an herculean task. I
[viii]
meddle not with the motives which
may have induced government to
take such a step, but I flatter my-
self that it will ultimately be pro-
ductive of the most beneficial
effects. It will have a tendency
to screen us from the displeasure.
of the Almighty, by suppressing
such publications as have brought
his curse upon us.
AN
ESSAY
ON THE
LIBERTY OF THE PRESS.
OF all the arts which have contributed to
the improvement and civilization of mankind,
we may justly consider that of printing as one
of the most beneficial. How imperfect was
the knowledge of the human race, how cir-
cumscribed, how difficult in the acquisition,
and how easily forgotten, before the sublime,
the elegant, the commodious discovery of the
use of types! Oral tradition was superseded
by a clumsy carving on the bark of trees, on
waxen tables, and such like; and this rude
attempt to transmit science to posterity, was
followed by the tedious practice of writing
B
1
[ 2 ]
upon vellum. A load of parchment of some
stones in weight, could not contain the useful,
important information of a single volume in
print. What a noble invention! We speak
of the dark ages prior to its discovery; but
God alone can tell what darkness would have
been the fate of Europe before this time, had
that inquisitive genius never been born, who
was the highly honored instrument of our
emancipation from ignorance. The nativity
of great men, and the annual commemoration
of wonderful events, have been superstitiously
observed in every age of the world; but the
birth-day of the soldier who complimented
mankind with the art of printing, should never
be forgotten.
८
>
It is not to be wondered at, if the gradual
improvement of this art met with every suit-
able encouragement, till it arrived at its present
perfection. Individuals and states would soon
find their interest in bringing it to maturity,
and monarchs could not consider it as beneath
[ 3 ]
their dignity to countenance it by premiums.
To feel and acknowledge the excellence of
the human faculties, and to be sensible of
the value of every thing subservient to their
cultivation, are the necessary consequences of
a moment's` reflection. Man left to himself,
is only a very few removes from the brutes
that perish; but by the study of useful and
ornamental science he becomes truly dig-
nified, resembles his maker in many noble
endowments, and can advance in the love
and practice of those things which will be
eternally advantageous.
Since the invention of printing, the dif
ficulty of purchasing and perusing authors has
been unspeakably diminished; every thing
valuable in ancient manuscripts has been con-
cisely imparted to the world, and many in-
teresting productions entirely new, have con-
tinued to illuminate the minds of men. The
poor have the highest reason to remember the
discovery with gratitude, since it places the
B 2
[ 4 ]
means of moral, religious, and mechanical
improvement within their reach. The Bible,
which contains the concerns of an eternal
world, and the method of securing the divine.
favor through everlasting ages, can be pur-
chased at a very small expense by the lowest
ranks in life.
It is the duty of every well regulated govern-
ment to encourage all works of science, all
moral and mechanical investigations, as tending
either to explain and enforce our duty to God,
society and ourselves, or to instruct the in-
dustrious tradesman how to perform his work
with the least possible expense, and the greatest
facility. All men are not equally possessed
of eminent abilities, nor of the power of ap-
plication to study and enquiry. The few who
are thus endowed, and who are willing to
devote a life of thirty or forty years to the
service of their country, in improvements,
experiments, or in making discoveries, ought
to have all the encouragement which the state
[ 5 ]
can impart. If they are timid, and too fond
of remaining in obscurity, they should be
diligently sought out, stimulated to come
forward, and animated with the hopes of
being esteemed, honored and rewarded. If
they are poor (and riches seldom belong to
men of understanding;) it becomes the public
to free them from embarrassment, by defray-
ing the expenses of those labours which may
prove the glory of humanity, the defence of
real religion and rational liberty, or the source
- of inexpressible advantage to the merchant or
mechanic. Many valuable manuscripts have
been rescued from oblivion, if not utter de-
struction, by commendable research, which
would have been permitted to become the prey
of the moth, or devoted to the flames by un-
assuming merit. The greatness and glory,
or the fatal stupidity of any nation, may be
в 3
* Perhaps no period can be found in the history of England in
which more encouragement was ever given to men of investigation
and research, than during the reign of his present Britannic Majesty,
[ 6 ]
ascertained from the encouragement given, or
the contempt shewn to works of real genius,
utility and pleasure. When a Peter Pindar
receives thirty shillings a copy for his outrages
on decency, and his burlesques on common
sense, while genuine master pieces of a digni-
fied understanding can scarcely pay the printer,
-the Lord help our country, say I, for it
is arrived at dotage.
Having applauded the invention of printing,
not more highly than I am persuaded it de-
serves, I trust I shall be considered as sincere
at least, if I defend the necessity of circum-
scribing its present extent, however much a
large proportion of mankind may be disposed
to differ from me in opinion. The liberty of
the press has so corrupted the taste of Britons,
and thrown it into such a dangerous putrid
fever, that I scarce know what antiputrescents
will remove the distemper. It has made us
incapable of discerning genuine merit, and
consequently unwilling to reward its possessor.
[ 7 E
1.
O Britain! while the historic page shall trans-
mit to posterity, that you suffered a Chatter-
ton to die in obscurity and want, the world
must stand astonished at your monstrous stu-
pidity and horrid ingratitude. But could
men be restored to themselves by the ever-
lasting exclusion of those works that level
them with the brutes, the golden age for merit
would instantly spring up. Then would some
acquire ease and independence by the exertions
of their genius, while such as now make a figure
in the world would be buried in oblivion.
Were I to assert, that government ought to
circumscribe the liberty of the press, thousands
would listen to me with the profoundest indif-
ference; such a step would be considered by
others as a master-piece of despotism, and
perhaps others might view it as highly merit-
orious. It ought, however, to be remem-
bered, that it could neither be censured nor
applauded, till its precise object should be
known and accurately defined. Perhaps there
[ 8 ]
is not a phrase in the English Language more
vague and indeterminate in its signification
than "the liberty of the press." Should that
infamous publication of Thomas Paine's,
called the Age of Reason, be prohibited, * on
pain of incurring the penalties of a high mis-
demeanor, that would be a death blow at the
press in the estimation of some. Were govern-
ment to punish the printers and venders of
Mr Burke's writings, a vast multitude would
perhaps sigh and say, there goes the liberty of
the press! In short, the opinions of mankind
upon this subject are not less diversified than
their faces, and therefore it becomes extremely
difficult, as well as delicate, to descant upon
it. In what I have to advance,. I wish to stand
clear of all party disputes; and since I shall
deduce my arguments from immutable and
eternal principles, I will be the more likely
to reach conviction without giving offence.
In this manner I will evade all controversy
about the mischief which it is pretended has
* It was not prohibited when this Essay was begun.
[ 9 ]
always followed from such a step as the above.
In some countries, it may be deemed a pitiful
subterfuge of absolute monarchy, to keep
men easy under their chains, and in this
country it may be viewed by some as the
forerunner of that euthanasia of the British
Constitution predicted by Mr Hume. These
opinions and disputes are nothing to me, and
absolutely foreign to my present purpose.
!
My first immutable and eternal principle is
this; that to restrain the exercise or operation
of any thing which is calculated to increase the
substantial knowledge, or to improve the mo
rals of the human race, would be the most con-
summate tyranny and insufferable despotism.
Men have indiscrimately a right to enjoy a free
access to rational information, if calculated to
promote their present happiness, their meetings
for a better life, and to perpetuate the exist-
ence of social order. It is the incumbent duty
of all good governments to watch over the
morals of the subjects with a parental anxiety,
[ 10 ]
i
because the happiness of the body politic de..
pends on their cultivation. This has engaged
the attention of the wisest legislators since the
commencement of time, of which a Solon and
a Lycurgus might be selected as examples.
If a father has at any time reason to reflect on
his own criminal folly and inattention in neg-
lecting the moral improvement of his offspring,
and permitting their minds to resemble an
unweeded garden, or the vineyard of the slug-
gard; the same compunction, in similar cir-
cumstances, ought to be felt by the political
parent or guardian of every nation,-I mean
its government. Every family is a nation in
miniature, and therefore the analogy from the
one to the other is fair and conclusive.
Now, what kind of publications must all
men grant to be calculated to increase the sub-
stantial knowledge, and to improve the morals
of the human race? Surely they are such as
the works of Newton, Ferguson, Halley, Keil,
in the departments of natural philosophy and
1
[ 11 ]
astronomy; Euclid, Simson, Bonnycastle,
Playfaire, in geometry; Atterbury, Hervey,
Tillotson, Connybeare, Leland, Hume, Ro-
bertson, and such like, in divinity and history,
with every instructive publication on manufac-
tures, agriculture, and the fine arts. Here I
cannot run the risk of giving just cause of of-
fence, because there is not a man upon earth,
if he is compos mentis, who can be so ridiculous
as dispute what we have now asserted. No
wise government will ever prohibit such publi-
cations as the above, because it must intui-
tively discover that the more extensively these
are circulated, and the more perfectly they
are understood, its hands are proportionably
strengthened, and its stability insured. Ignor-
ance and wickedness are the only enemies
which an excellent constitution and a lenient
administration can ever know. I distinguish-
ed above, between knowledge and substantial
knowledge, because there are ten thousand
things which a man may know, that are either
beneath his dignity, or a disgrace to his nature.
[ 12 ]
The arts of legerdemain, boxing, and gaming,
are the dismal relicts of gothic barbarity, and
only fit for lunatics or children.
pro-
Upon the same principles ought all profane,
licentious, and infidel publications to be
hibited, as the very permission of them is a
breach of the most sacred trust that can be
committed to any government. It was there-
fore a pleasing sight to behold in the public
prints, The King versus the Publisher of
Paine's Age of Reason, and to see the stupen-
dous talents of Mr Erskine employed in level-
ing it to the dust. This may be supposed to
belong more emphatically to the sons of the
church, because the inculcating of moral pre-
cepts is a clerical duty. We grant it is; but
such is the depravity of the human heart, that
if men can procure volumes of obscenity from
the press, no denunciations from the pulpit will
deter them from perusing them. And it is
needless to repeat what has been in effect said
already, that the genuine felicity of a nation is
[ 13 ]
in proportion to the purity of its morals, or the
rectitude of their conduct of whom it is com-
posed. Excessive luxury and dissipation carry
misery in their train. Their escutcheon is,
damnation to good order, and they extinguish
all those manly energies which make a nation.
happy. Thus we give a death-blow to all pro-
fane ballads, to licentious poetry of every
kind, though it should come from the polluted.
pen of a nobleman, and to all secret históries
of female prostitution. I know there is not a
man in the island who can prove, to the satis-
faction of sound reason, that government ought
not to interfere in this respect. It is its duty,
it is its interest, and it would therefore be a
sturdy assertion, that such restraints on the
press could be the result of despotism. They
would discover a spirit truly philanthropic, and
a most ardent wish for the extension of human
felicity. I have no hesitation in affirming,
that the licentiousness of the press, called
by some its liberty, has made more thieves,
C
[ 14 ]
rogues, pick-pockets, rakes, and prostitutes
than would people a continent. Witness,
ye rapes, robberies, murders, trials, and
condemnations without number, if I can pos-
sibly be mistaken. No! corrupt nature is un-
questionably chargeable with innate corrup-
tion, but the infernal publications formerly al-
luded to, and which it is equally as criminal to
print as to tolerate, have taught men to be
wicked by method and rule, to invent new
modes of accumulating guilt, and discovered the
nighest possible road to the regions of misery.
All this may be considered as whimsical by the
voluptuary and the infidel, but a blind man is
no judge of colours. He knows not the dif
ference between a pavement and a quagmire.
Another immutable and eternal principle is
This, that it is humanity in any government to
suppress books that teach men to make experi-
ments, where the hope of success is not half so
strong as the probability of miscarriage, and
when irreparable misery must follow, whether
[ 15 ]
their experiments succeed or prove abortive,
after they are once attempted. Let us sup-
pose that twenty or thirty thousand men, in a
particular country, conceive and attempt to
execute the plan of a revolution. If we could
admit the possibility of their success, must we
therefore infer that they would have changed
for the better? If they got rid of an absolute
monarchy for a democratical government, E
conceive they only changed one tyrant for a
thousand. But what right had they to come
upon the nation by surprise, throw all into
confusion, and thus involve the innocent, per-
haps a thousand times more numerous than
themselves, in all the wretchedness of a civik
war? Let Mr Paine's principle be admitted,
that what a nation wills to do, it has a right to
do; yet from what source does one man out
of a thousand derive his right to overturn an
existing government; It would puzzle a wise
head to give me an answer; and I here pledge
myself to prove, that no revolution almost,
C 2
[ 16 ]
1
•
ever happened in any country with a much
larger proportion on its side. It began with
the knowledge of a few, and the majority stood
astonished at the unexpected explosion. They
might grumble and retreat from the scene of
action, but a public avowal of their discontent
would have conducted them to the scaffold.
Let the weather-cock determinations, the deli-
berate murders, the weekly constitutions, and
the indiscriminate butchery of guilt and inno-
cence, speak aloud the frightful nature of all
popular governments. But suppose they
should fail of accomplishing their object, the
consequences are too obvious to require point-
ing out. They must fall the unpitied victims
of their own folly and extravagance.
Now, if a majority of perhaps two-thirds of
a nation are satisfied with their political con-
stitution, the man who publishes, with a view
to disaffect them, is worthy of punishment,
and his works of being consigned to perpetual
[ 17 ]
oblivion. If they are not satisfied, I mean a
great majority, it is their duty to express it in
the form of a petition. Thousands have re-
quested a reform in the representation of this
country, but none, I believe, ever went so far
as to demand a republic. Yet this would
have been no more criminal than the writings
of Mr Rs, who ventured to mention the
lopping off two thirds of our excellent consti-
tution, (the two houses of parliament.) The
one was fully as much high treason as the
other, and as repugnant to the nature of our
constitution, as an Executive Directory would
be, or a Council of Five Hundred.
It cannot be said that the power of restric-
ting the press can be lodged any where so
properly as in the hands of government, be-
cause if that restriction be intended to prevent
the introduction and spread of impiety, anar-
chy and wickedness, government is only ex-
ecuting its deed of trust by every such inter-
[ 18 ]
ference.
The absolute necessity of some
restraint, by which its present licentiousness
may be curbed, will admit of no dispute; but
who, it may be said, are to determine its
limits? When I say that every publication
tending to increase useful knowledge, and to
promote the interests of piety and virtue, is
deserving of encouragement and public sanc-
tion, and that every work, however ingenious,
which destroys rational liberty, moral obliga-
tion, and a love of what is excellent, ought
to perish in manuscript, I apprehend that
the limits are obvious to every understanding,
and may be settled with the greatest ease. I
humbly apprehend that to specify the nature
of such productions as may be legally pub-
lished, always keeping in view the increase of
useful knowledge and moral improvement,
would be a more eligible and less injurious
method, than to require of every printer an
enormous bond. My reason for thinking so
is this. When the topics for discussion are
stated in general terms, without condescending
[ 19 ]
on every particular, men are explicitly made
acquainted with the extent of their authority,
and rendered incapable of pleading ignorance
as an excuse. But it is conceiveable, that
many whose presses never groaned with blas-
phemy or sedition, who never printed any
thing unbecoming the dignity of human nature,
and the good order of society, may not be
able to give a bond for a thousand or two
thousand pounds. Men of considerable credit
and respectability in the world can seldom
procure sureties for such an immense sum.
Hence they must be excluded from employ-
ment, though they should be the only men of
the profession who deserve to be encouraged.
If the nature and extent of the subjects are
clearly specified, a bond, in my judgment, is
wholly superfluons, because every man must
be responsible for his violation of the law.
In the case of a bond, the people may suffer
who alone are innocent, while the man is ex-
emptedwho deserves to be punished. I should
consider this, not as any curb to the licenti-
[ 20 ]
ousness of the press, but a dire& attempt to
ruin the honest tradesman. It does not strike
at the root of the evil, while it injures the art
of printing as a commendable employment.
It must be heavy, could it remedy the evil
which it is intended to correct; and yet in
proportion to its weight it would encourage
monopoly, which is pregnant with mischief to
every occupation. After specifying the nature
of the subjects to be prohibited, let each
transgression of the law be considered as
seditious, libellous, or a misdemeanor, to
each of which its proper punishment is already
annexed by the jurisprudence of this country.
Let author and printer be deemed equally
criminal, and let nothing anonymous be given
to the world. These or such like regulations
will answer all the important purposes for
which a restraint can be adopted, and pre-
vent the many mischiefs that we presume must
result from insisting on a bond.
-
[ 21 ]
་
But here I anticipate an objection which
will no doubt be made against me, that all
restraints of the forementioned kind, are out-
rages on that sacred and unalienable right-
the right of private judgment. It is no doubt
true, that none but the Almighty is privy to
our secret thoughts, and that nothing short of
omnipotence can controul our opinions. The
right, therefore, of private or individual
judgment is a pure momentity, or at best alto-
gether insignificant, if its operation must be con-
fimed within us, and if it may not be made
manifest by words or writing. This would be
the private judgment of a beast, if you will
pardon the expression, to which nature has de-
nied the faculty of speech. The deductions
of reason from particular premises, and the
coincidence or incongruity we may discover
between ideas by means of comparison, would
constitute a load of wretchedness instead of
satisfaction, were an unconditional embargo
laid on the faculty of communication which
God has given us.
Thus would the objector
[ 22 ]
no doubt reason, and so far he would reason
with propriety. But while it is impossible
not to venerate the right of private judgment,
I presume that no man can deliberately look
at the terrific consequences which have teem-
ed from the abuse of it in every age, with-
out being alarmed. The right of private
judgment, like every other which nature has
conferred, becomes forfeited to society, the
instant it disturbs the public peace, because it
will ever be dangerous in proportion to its
power. Armed with the authority of the civil
magistrate, and impatient of restraint or oppo-
position, it has often deluged the earth with
innocent blood, and arrogated to itself the ex-
clusive privilege of dictating to others. Men
who thus think and thus act, may be deprived
of authority while their inclinations conti-
nue, so that we cannot ascribe any apparent
change to a renunciation of their former creed.
The lion may cease to devour when he is
chained, but in such a case we must ascribe
his conduct to his fetters, not to his disposition.
[ 23 ]
A man may deem it persecution to put the
smallest restraint on his private judgment,
but his opinion alters not the nature of things,
which must be immutable and eternal. When
that restraint is designed to prevent him from
accumulating guilt, and bringing mischief
upon others, it is certainly a favor, let him
call it what he pleases. The abstract essence
of things cannot be altered by vowels and
consonants. If I may quote from that anti-
quated book, the Bible, we understand that
Saul of Tarsus thought he should do many
things contrary to the name of Christ, and
therefore under such a persuasion he would
have deemed it persecution to stop him on his
way to Damascus, and confine him in prison.
Yet he was afterwards fully convinced of the
contrary; but it would not have altered the
case although he never had.
I trust I shall live and die in the persuasion
of this truth, that God never gave human
nature a right, the immediate tendency of the
[ 24 ]
exercise of which was to subvert the good
order of society, and raise man in arins against
man. The essential difference between a.
state of nature and of civilized life is this;
that, in the former, every man is obliged to
defend his person and property by individual
exertion, whereas he throws in his rights into
the other as into a bank, and draws upon the
constitution for a redress of grievances. He
is no longer his own judge or avenger, because
such acts would imply the personal possession
of those very rights which his claim to a con-
nection with society point blank denies. I
grant, indeed, that the rights given up to the
guardianship and management of society, are
such as are imperfect in the individual, which,
it may be said, the right of private judgment
is not. But it is equally true, that every right
of which mankind can boast is subject to the
controul of society, in so far as the exercise
of them would disturb the general happiness.
For instance, when a man inculcates opinions
upon others, by all the artifice and sophistry
[ 25 ]
of which he is master, the manifest tendency
whereof is, to diminish our love of God and
our neighbour, and set open the flood-gates
of debauchery and injustice, he is as deserv-
ing of confinement as the midnight plunderer.
Society could not long exist without sacrificing
a lesser evil to a greater good, when necessity
requires it.
If she did not thus act, she
would betray her trust, defeat the ends of her
institution, and cherish in her bosom the seeds
of her own destruction.
If there be any right perfect in the indi-
vidual, it must be the one under consideration,
yet it would be barbarous in society never to
limit its exercise. We have seen already
what use the devotees of Rome have made of
it when unrestrained. Upon the same prin-
ciple that a man looks up to the community
for a redress of grievances, which he could
not always do himself by corporeal punish-
ment, though he were allowed, he must also
be persuaded that society is not bound to
defend his person and avenge his quarrel, and
1
D
[ 26 ]
yet allow him to do more mischief to thou-
sands of her members than he could ever
experience as an individual. But is not this
doctrine, it will perhaps be said, founded upon
the Roman Catholic persuasion, that persecu-
tion for conscience sake is highly meritorious?
It is not. They who
They who persecute for this reason,
wish to step in between God and man, and
dare the Almighty at his peril to receive the
worship of his creatures. They profess un-
common zeal for the honor of Jehovah, and
yet it is impossible to take a more effectual
method of bringing him into contempt. What
for a bloody monster is your God, may the
persecuted say, when he requires us to barter
our reason for a bundle of absurdities, and
demands our lives if we refuse to comply?
They who are persecuted cannot act so to
others without renouncing their principles,
while they who persecute cannot act otherwise,
so long as they believe them. Such persecu-
tion is a premium for acts of wickedness, if
-the persecuted shall retreat through fear, and
[ 27 ]
a method which never made a steady convert
in the memory of man. But the doctrine of
this lecture dreams not of stepping in between
God and man, but between firebrands and
society in civil matters, to prevent that
mischief which individuals may do to thou-
sands, and which in fact they would ulti-
mately feel as well as others, if permitted
to continue. The man, therefore, who can
perceive no difference between this and per-
secution for conscience sake in religious mat-
ters, must be a more acute logician than Ari-
stotle himself. The restraints proposed in this
discourse, and which are deduced from eternal
principles, would indeed exclude many thou-
sands of volumes from deluging the earth;
but they are such restraints as keep from mar
no gratification to a refined taste, no useful
invention to the mechanic, no solid food for
an enlarged understanding, nor any real a-
musement which can be of service to our
nature. All the rest are like daggers in the
hands of a madman, or poison in the spoon of
D 2
[ 28 ]
a child;-sudden interference can alone avert
the danger, which, when it proceeds a certain
length, sets all remedy at defiance.
Those who pretend to develope the plans
of government, and who ascribe designs to
administration which it never publicly avowed,
say, that the regulations concerning the press
which have taken place since this Essay was
composed, have no other view than to sup-
press every political performance of a repub-
lican tendency.* It is commonly observed,
and with great judgment, that we are never
to ascribe a man's conduct to unworthy mo-
tives, if we can find those which are commend-
able. Would it not then be more charitable
to conclude, that the object of administration
is to check the triumphant spread of impiety
and wickedness, by attaching responsibility
to the author of every licentious performance?
* It is equally the duty of government to suppress books of this,
as well as any other description, provided their obvious effect is the
wretchedness of the subjects.
!
[ 29 ]
1
The Bp of D-m made a motion some
time ago, respecting the more punctual obser-
vance of the Lord's day, and although it was
afterwards set aside without passing into a law,
who can tell but the present restraint on the
press may ultimately be productive of the
same salutary effects? I will venture to predic
that it must be so, though the present genera-
tion should not live to see it, since the most
rampant wickedness to which men have for-
merly had an unlimited access, will, in time,
be beheld in perspective. The fuel which
now feeds the fire of human depravity will be
gradually removed; and I hope it will not be
deemed extravagant to assert, that a new na-
tion shall arise from the ruins of the old.
The liberty of the press was deeply lamented
by a noble real on his death-bed, because it
had given him the opportunity of disgracing
his character and wounding his conscience, by
the most infamous and villainous publication
with which the press ever groaned. If I may
D 3
[ ૩૦ ]
depend on my information, he called in some
hundred copies at about £.5 each, to be com-
mitted to the flames.* This was after he
came to himself, for the greater part of his
short life was a state of insanity, worse than
ordinary madness. O, glorious liberty, which
makes a man tremble at himself when on the
verge of an eternal world, and willing to give
the universe, did he possess it, could he ob-
literate his extravagance for ever! Voltaire's
Philosophical Dictionary was burnt at Paris
by the hands of the common executioner,
in the year 1766, and it is pleasing to be-
hold something of a similar spirit kindling up
in Britain.
* It will not perhaps be deemed impertinent to give the reader in
this place, a short anecdote of a sister of the earl's mentioned above.
She was a lady of consummate abilities, both natural and acquired,
but whose mind had been desperately corrupted by the liberty of the
press. Some gentlemen or noblemen taking occasion to praise her
brother in very handsome terms;yes, said she, he would have
been a very clever man, had it not been for that old foolish thing
called repentance! Such language is terrible in the mouth of any
rational being, but it is monstrous beyond description in the mouth
of a female.
[ 31 ]
By the licentiousness which the press for-
merly enjoyed, it was possible for unprincipled
men to assassinate their fellow creatures in the
dark, without the danger of being brought to
punishment. He who was, or thought himself
injured by another, had it in his power to
hold him up to the ridicule or contempt of
the world, while the supposed culprit had not
the opportunity of vindicating his character,
or of taking vengeance on the cowardly as-
sailant. If I am stopped upon the highway
by a foot-pad, I may endeavour to save my-
self by running him through the body; but
the rascal who attacks me in ambush from
behind the liberty of the press, puts it out of
my power to obtain satisfaction. While we
cannot read the letters of Junius without ad-
miring the poignancy of his wit, and consider-
ing the elegance and nervousness of his diction
as wholly unrivalled by any writer, one is
tempted at the same time to conclude, that all
he says cannot be strictly true. If it is, why
}
[ 32 ]
did not Junius come forward in propria per-
sona? Nobody can tell who Junius is, and
therefore while he lies hid behind the curtain
of a fictitious appellation, we can neither tell
who in reality we are to praise, nor who is
liable to feel the consequences of defamation,
if he has departed from veracity. To feast
in secret on the applause of mankind, is a
singular pitch of self-denial, and to be afraid
of danger, if convinced we have done our
duty, is the most contemptible weakness. No
man should be ashamed to avow the truth,-
a conduct proportionably meritorious as the
danger of doing it încreases. But might not
Junius have been prosecuted, imprisoned, or
perhaps put to death, had he told his real
name? I answer, let him die a martyr for the
truth, or for ever hold his tongue. If we may
meddle with things sacred in a political Essay,
why did not the Apostles act as Junius has
done? Because they were convinced of the
infinite importance of the truths they delivered,
[ 33 ]
they gloried in being the publishers of them,
and smiled at the arm of authority when lifted
up to destroy them.
I consider every anonymous writer in the
light of Lingo in the Agreeable Surprize, who,
when out of the reach of danger, exclaimed
with the magnanimous voice of a hero; "fire
away my brave Bellona!" The man who puts
not his name to his own performances, is either
afraid or ashamed. If afraid, he must be
müsi
conscious that he is not speaking truth, or if
he is, I pronounce him an advocate that will
do it more harm than good. If he is ashamed,
his productions must be impious or profane,
and as such, ought to be damn'd from the
press.
*
* This is not to be considered in the light of swearing, and there-
fore it may be necessary to inform the unlearned reader, that when
books are said to be damned, critics mean by it that they are consigned
to oblivion. They are like ephemerons in the republic of letters;
they are born in the morning, and perish at night.
[ 34 ]
A man has no reason to be ashamed of what
is intended for the good of his fellow creatures,
whether it be theology, philosophy, or any of
What he publishes may be
the sciences.
Nor
weak, destitute of the graces of fine composi-
tion, and the masterly arguments of deep re-
search; but if it is countenanced by the
Almighty, and the monitor within, its author
need not redden as if guilty of a crime. No-
thing is shameful but what is criminal.
has he reason to be afraid when standing forth
the advocate of injured truth and justice,
since the worst that can happen him in so
glorious a cause, ought to be a source of
triumph. But may, not the arm of power be
sometimes disposed to crush the defender of
truth, and hang or transport the man who
appears its vindicator? If this should ever
happen, the sufferer cannot bear a more honor-
able testimony for it, than by becoming an
exile from his native country, or by the for-
feiture of his life. But life is sweet, and a
[ 35 ]
man's native country has ten thousand charms.
Be it so, the restrictions imposed on the for-
mer licentiousness of the press, do not oblige
a man to defend the truth, but leave him the
alternative of silence, and the enjoyment of
his sentiments as an individual. If he will
write-if he cannot help shewing his talents—
if incurably smitten with the rabies scribendi,
it is surely reasonable that he should father
his own productions. If I rightly understand
the late regulations, they do nothing more than
oblige every author to avow his own perform-
ances, and certainly it is impossible to prove
that this is a restraint. If they punish, in one
shape or other, the authors of such publica-
tions as would formerly have passed with im-
punity, it must be proved that such punishment
is tyranny, and that the former negligence was
highly commendable, before it can be admitted
that such a measure is unjust. I could easily
prove it rational, political, benevolent and
[ 36 ]
wise, which I trust the present Essay will in
some degree evince.
Men are accustomed to view the present
subject through a camera obscura, if I may so
express myself, which shews every thing in an
inverted position. If we consider books,
merely as the repositories of the opinions of
mankind, without once adverting to their na-
ture and probable tendency, it will indeed be
difficult, if not impossible to prove, that the
liberty of the press ought in any case to be
circumscribed. But let pernicious principles,
with all their fair and obvious consequences,
take possession of the minds and deportment
of the human race, and the whole enchantment
is presently dissolved. I may keep a dagger,
a musket, or a battering-ram in my cabinet of
curiosities, but the instant I employ` them
against the life of a fellow creature, I become
deserving of punishment. When I hear of a
robber, a murderer, or one guilty of high..
[ 37 ]
treason, going to the gibbit, I dare not say that
he is cruelly treated; yet many licentious au-
thors have done more permanent mischief to
immortal beings, than all the murderers upon
earth.
But why impose any restraints on the press,
when the sentiments of mankind ought to be
free as the air? I have as good a right as you
have, to deliver my opinion upon any subject
whatever, the very existence of which right is
denied, if I am to be punished for divulging
it. Have you not granted already, that print-
ing is an admirable, a valuable invention, and
that to it we are indebted for our emancipation
from ignorance, and for that high degree of
intellectual improvement for which all men
either are, or may now be distinguished? This,
I apprehend, is the gordian knot of the whole.
controversy, which, however, it will not be
difficult to undo. "Why impose any re-
straints on the press ?" I answer, why impose
any restraints upon the thief, the robber, or
E
[ 38
the murderer? The reasons which would be
deemed conclusive in the one case, are a thou-
sand times more so in the other. "He who
steals my purse, steals trash."*-he who mur-
ders me, from whatever motives, cannot kill
my soul; but the licentious author may so
artfully infuse his poison, and by such imper-
ceptible degrees, that I may be everlastingly
ruined before I am aware. "I have as good
''
'
"a right as you have, to publish my opinion
upon any subject whatever." That I most
readily grant. This right we both received
from the Almighty, and while our opinions
continue in the abstract, or wholly detached
from any thing but ourselves;-while we keep
them in our minds, and communicate them to
none, they are capable of being controuled by
no being in the universe, the Almighty alone
excepted. But the moment we divulge them,
BROV
ib farkom
Caldeneme
as soon as we labour to make them be be-
9736
Shakespeare,
[ 39 ]
serts.
lieved, and adopted as principles of action,
society has an indubitable right to judge
whether they are pernicious or profitable, and
to reward or punish in proportion to our de-
The remaining part of the objection is
therefore downright sophistry;-that the ex-
istence of the right is called in question, when
our opinions subject us to punishment. It is
not our opinions, considered purely as such,
that render us liable to be punished. It is the
effect we intend them to produce, and the in-
dustry we employ to propagate and enforce
them, which constitute our guilt. For in
stance, were a man to say,
"it is my humble
"opinion that this country
would be better
"governed by a republic, but I may be
"wrong, and therefore I offer it with the
66 greatest diffidence;" he could not be deemed
punishable. But should the same man tell
us" I assert that the constitution of this
❝ country ought to be republican, and nothing
"shall be wanting on my part to convince the
"people of its truth, and spur them on to
E 2
[ 40 ]
"obtain it;" let common honesty determine
if the case would not be radically changed.
By the former hypothesis his opinion is de-
livered with modesty; it is the language of a
man who requests information, and, cannot be
productive of any dangerous effects. By the
latter, he avows himself the enemy of his
country, and resolves to bring ruin on the
whole community. I have a right to vindi-
cate my innocence when unjustly accused, but
should I be found guilty of a capital crime by
a jury of my countrymen, would any person
be so absurd as maintain that this took away
my right to vindicate my innocence? Dread-
ful! No! I took it away in this case myself,
and freely forfeited my right to defend any
longer what I did not possess.
1
In fine, let the voluptuary suppose for a
moment that he has no beastly appetites to
please, the ambitious man no extravagant pro-
jects to execute, and the incendiary no infernal
thirst for tumult to satisfy, and I desire no
[ 41 ]
more. If such men make such suppositions,
they will be astonished why they did not long
since discover the very doctrine here defended,
instead of censuring its author as an enemy to
-freedom.
1
E 3
}
[ 42 ]
POSTSCRIPT.
THE foregoing Essay was composed long
before any restrictions on the press were agi-
tated, either in the English or Irish House of
Commons, except the late additional duty of
two-pence on each newspaper may be viewed
in that light. I believe that the members who
brought in the bills, suggested the idea of
insisting on a bond from every printer, but
we are happy to understand that it has been
finally relinquished. What I have said on
the insufficiency of bonds as a radical cure
for the evils complained of, seems to me to
be founded on the nature and reason of things;
it was not dictated by a spirit of opposition,
and I can venture to call it the effusions of
an honest heart. It is to me peculiarly grati
fying, that the measures of government re
specting the press appear to have, my very:
reasoning for their basis, although myfEssay:!:
was composed before their adoption, I have::
[ 48 ]
always thought that the press required to be
restricted, ever since I was capable of reason
ing on any subject, and the more minutely I
examine the incalculable evils which its licen-
tiousness has occasioned, the more deeply am
I persuaded that I have not been deceived.
It has been the means of shedding more in-
nocent blood in a neighbouring country, than
ever was spilt by all the despots upon earth in
the same space of time. The people of France
have got rid of a despotic government; but
can human wisdom discover no medium be-
tween the horrid magnificence of absolute mo-
narchy, and the fluctuating, unprincipled bawl-
ing of a 'democracy or a republic? The cry of
the multitude is, Danton to-day, and Brissot
to-morrow! In all popular governments there
is always billy, unmeaning competition for
fame, and envy and jealousy distract and divide
them. The Robespierre of to-day becomes
the victim of to-morrow, and the transition
from the tribune to the guillotine is easy and
[ 44 ]
He
natural. Men will always be men, and when
the rabble are in authority, the consequence
will be a mob. When the whole mass have
the power of representation, there is no security
that wise and good men will be elected, for a
blind man, it is well observed, is no judge of
colours. The horrid massacres which have dis-
graced a neighbouring country, have originated
from the very texture of its political constitu-
tion. A Custine is chosen a general to command
a formidable army, and he glories in transmit-
ting accounts of his wonderful success.
sometimes fails to carry off the palm of victory,
and yet in the midst of discomfiture he hopes
afterwards to be triumphant. But is Custine
dead? Yes. Did he then resign his breath in
the field of battle? No: envy and jealousy
found means to defame him, and the impetu
osity of his zeal was rewarded with the guillo-
tine. The antipathies and attachments of the
multitude are altogether unaccountable, and
when they have authority, they will accusé to
shew it. And from the accusation of the inno
cent, the transition is easy to the swearing to his
J6913
QII.YSW D
M
[ 45 ]
guilt. Myriads rejoiced at the murder of Ma-
rat, and the Convention punished the perpe-
trator of the deed. But behold the stock-
jobbing nature of public opinion where there
is no settled authority. The remains of Ma-
rat are interred with honor, and they are after-
wards dug out of the earth to be branded with
disgrace! When the question is put, Could a
Custine, a Robespierre, a Danton, a Brissot,
and a thousand other victims of popular fury,
be all guilty of capital crimes? Charity recoils
with horror, and even stern justice hangs down
her head and blushes. But when men are
once countenanced in defamation, they con-
vert it into a trade, and live upon its emolu-
ments. In all popular governments, the man
whose conduct is at one time inserted in the
bulletin, may be denounced at another as an
enemy to his country, without any cause, and
at last finish his career upon a scaffold. Who
300 30
9d to 2109ad
is that great, pacific, and beloved personage,
CUS STOR INVO
on his way from Swisserland to Paris? It is
01520996 HIW VA
the illustrious Barthelemy. He comes to the
-Ohm saF TO DES
}
*
[ 46 ]
metropolis incognito, that his chariot may not
be drawn along by an applauding populace.
But in an instant, before he has time to let
either France or any other country feel the sa-
lutary effects of his uncommon abilities, he is
arrested and sentenced to banishment, without
even the formality of a trial. If he had ac-
cusers, they were kept behind the scene, and
neither witnesses nor jury were summoned to
do him justice. I believe all Europe rejoiced
when Robespierre was guillotined, but what if
France should prove a hot-bed for rearing such
monsters? Nay I venture to predict, that it will
never want Robespierres so long as it is a re-
public. All these blessed consequences have
originated from the liberty of the press.
objects at a distance affect only the intelligent.
few, while the multitude are touched with those
alone which they feel to be calamitous.
us therefore come nearer home, and see what
has been done among ourselves by the liberty
of the press. The enlightened part of the
community, I believe, had no other object in
But
Let
[ 47 ]
view by all their clubs and petitions, than a
reform in Parliament; but there were, and
still are countless thousands among us who
look a great way beyond this. I do sincercly
believe that the measures of government have
been intended to prevent us from plunging
into the gulph of a revolution. This, I
honestly confess, was not always my opinion,
for I viewed the treason and convention bills,
the suspension of the Habeas Corpus, and
such like measures, in a very different light.
But I must now acknowledge that all these
regulations have been the result of dire neces-
sity, when I look at the present miserable state
of Ireland. But perhaps it will be said that
its. pitiable condition is the effect, not the cause,
of such regulations. I deny the assertion.
If we consider the magnitude of this rebellion,
and the uncommon caution with which it has
been conducted-if we advert to the time ab-
solutely necessary to ascertain the genuine sen-
timents, of eighty or a hundred thousand men,
together with their oaths of allegiance to be
fordo:
I
[ 48 ]
true to their trust, and the unexampled man-
ner in which they accumulated weapons, by
conducting them to the grave like deceased
friends; it will be impossible not to see, that
it had been projected before the commence-
ment of the war with France, when none of
the regulations complained of had any exist-
ence. If it was then seen by Mr Pitt, when
only in embryo (a supposition neither extra-
vágant nor improbable,) it follows that the war
with France furnished him with an opportu-
nity of raising such a formidable army as
might be sufficient to check that rebellion in an
instant, whenever it should openly appear.
To have said, six years ago, that such a rebel-
lion would have existed in Ireland, would not
have been believed neither in nor out of the
House of Commons. The Minister might of
consequence have been prevented from guard-
ing against the evil, till the disease had grown
too desperate for any remedy to subdue.
7
[ 49 ]
'
Who are the rebels in Ireland, and for
what are they contending? I need not say
who they are, nor that their object is the
final overthrow of the British constitution, let
them ascribe their conduct to whatever they
please. It is similar to the desperate attempts
of the Pretender, in the years 1715 and 1745,
and therefore to bewail the situation into which
they have plunged themselves, is to lament that
we are not hanged, drowned, and burnt, for
the sake of conscience! It is a pity that the
public at large do not understand their princi-
ples, for then the conduct of administration
towards Ireland would appear in à very dif
ferent light from what it does to many. In
one word, if the Irish insurgents are what
we all know them to be, the man who can
• condemn the vigorous measures of Govern-
ment, after such hostile and formidable pre-
parations, might as well honestly tell us that
he is sorry he cannot see something like the
Irish massacre, the year 45, or the revocation
of the Edict of Nantz.
[ 50 ]
If it be as manifest as the equality of two and
two to four, that all the evils formerly men-
tioned, and a thousand others which intended
brevity allowed us not to consider, have ori-
ginated from the press, it will strike every ra-
tional being that it has had too much liberty.
Many will consider the smallest restraint as ty-
ranny at first, but as soon as mankind come to
themselves, the scene will be changed. The
universal exclamation will then be,-what
fools have we been to court our own destruc-
tion, to admire only such books as set us to-
gether by the ears, eradicated every principle
of moral obligation, and made us run stark
mad in pursuit of butterflies! God be praised
for a return of reason, which we will never
prostitute in time to come, as alas, we have
done in days that are past!
FINIS.
W. HALLGARTH, JUN. PRINTER,
SOUTH SHIELDS.
JUST PUBLISHED,
(PRICE SIX-PENCE)
A
TESTIMONY
FOR
JEHOVA H:
OR,
AN IMPARTIAL SURVEY OF THE
Doctrine of Predestination,
A SERMON,
BY THE REV. T. MEEK.