nent: but such opinion, if it did not convince me that my judg. ment was erroneous, could not be expected to make any change in my views as to such question or subject, and ought not to be followed by any other consequences. The folly and injustice of twelve men deciding on the quality of an opinion upon any subject whatever will be easily illustrated. Suppose an able defence of Christianity was arraigned as a libel, and the author brought before an English jury-he would be soon and honourably acquitted. Let the same defence and the same author be tried by a jury of Mahometans at Constantinople, and he would be punished with death. In like manner, let a Deist or Republican be tried for the publication of his opinions by a jury of twelve priest-ridden and passive-obedience fellows, and what chance; would he have of either justice or fair play? In all this sort of cases, if trials must be had, surely the same mode of proceeding should be adopted which is employed in the case of foreigners when accused of and tried for crimes, viz. the jury should be onehalf foreigners, Deists, or Republicans, as the case may be. But you may be compelled to go before a jury for the publication of your opinions, and as this will probably be the case soon, I wish very much to assist you in your defence. In shaping this the most advantageously for you,, I will endeavour to submit my notions in the way of aphorisms; and the text, or touch-stone, by which every axiom, whether pro or con, shall be tried, is one which every body admits to be true, and which I never met with one person who had the impudence to deny, viz. "That as you wish that every one should do unto yourself, so ought you to do unto them." Having premised this, I go on to say, that the right of thinking is given by his Maker to every human being, and cannot be taken from him by any power under heaven. But as this right of thinking would be of no value without the right and power of speaking, the two must be considered as forming one right only. This right must, of course, belong to all human beings equally, for either every man has this right or no man has it. This right, too, is retained, and can never be surrendered, under every form of Government, and under all circumstances in which man can be placed, whether in a state of nature or in a state of society. To suppose the contrary would lead to every thing absurd, an Act of Parliament is passed, which the persons enacting it consider as Proper at the time. In a while some of its provisions are felt, and found to operate injuriously: and how is a repeal to be accomplished, if those who see and feel this injurious operation were not at liberty to point out the defects and mischievous tendency of such provisions, and to suggest a remedy? Besides, where is the man of any party who does not act, yes, really act upon this principle? Again; there is no man who can hold an opinion which he believes to be wrong. He must believe it to be right; and believing it to be right, he must believe it to be useful; and be lieving it to be right and useful, it becomes his duty to propagate and maintain it. And can it possibly be right. that a man should be punished or punishable for doing that which he conscientiously feels it to be his duty to do? Can any man feel it right or desire to be punished for the maintenance of an opinion, the establishment of which he thinks would be beneficial to himself and to society at large? Impossible. And how, then, can he feel it right to punish or persecute any other person who may be acting under a similar influence-with the same views and from the same motives? And is it in the nineteenth century that these questions require to be asked? But It would be easy to shew that opinions, merely as such, never can prove injurious to any society or government legitimately constituted that numbers cannot alter the nature of things; that majorities cannot make black white, or white black; and that as to matters of opinion purely, they have no right to interfere at all. I have not leisure to enlarge upon the subject much more at present. The great mistake seems to be committed by those who are called our legislators not well understanding the science of legislation. They are a great deal too officious. Instead of confining their attention to matters of general concernment, they are frequently nibbling at those rights which individuals do not surrender when entering into society, and with which even society itself has no right to intermeddle. A legislature for instance, would have as much right to say whether I shall have tea or coffee to my breakfast,-whether I shall wear woollen or cotton hose, as it has to say how I shall worship my Creator, or what I shall or shall not believe. In short if a Jury or a legislature do not think as 1 de upon any given subject, we should agree to differ. These gentlemen, claim and exercise the right of thinking individually for themselves; and surely they cannot think it right to punish or to eensure me for exercising the same privilege. Would this be doing by me as they would wish to be done unto? In fact, I know of no opinion, excepting one which can be deemed seditious; and even this, supposing a Government to be fairly and légitimately constituted, I think we might safely treat with silence and contempt. When a nation is fairly and fully called upon to exercise its sovereignty in the formation of a government and when the general will has been fairly and fully ascertained upon the important subjeet, I should hold it to be very culpable for any individual to as sert that such general will ought not to decide, or ought not to meet practically with universal support. There can be no society or association for any purpose where the few will not consent to be governed by the many in all matters of general concernment. Yet, while I thus claim the practical support of every individual in all measures of general concernment and which have been previously determined upon by the general will, I still hold every individual to be at liberty to urge any argument or opinion which ke may think it necessary to bring forward in opposition to any 1 measure which he shall disapprove of, as injurions or improper. But I must here conclude. Most sincerely wishing you a glorious victory upon your approaching trial, and a safe deliverance from those hypocritical Scoundr-is ycleped the " Vice Society." I remain, dear Sir, Your sincere friend, JAMES OGDEN, Surgeon SIR, To the Editor of the REPUBLICAN. I SHOULD not have troubled you at this period, did I not conceive that a few observations in answer to Mr. Cousins, are called for from me. Now I beg to put this question, to every reader of this letter, to which he alludes, Do you consider that the meaning of the words, "those blessings which nature intended equally for all her sons" conveys the slightest allusion to landed, or any other property? I am convinced that without torture, they only carry with them an idea of universal, civil, and religious liberty; and the free enjoyment of the produce of labour, exempt from the claims of a corrupt government, and a national clergy. This I can assure Mr. C. and all your readers, was my meaning; and I wish other men, would like him honestly come forward, and call for explanation whenever any thing like ambiguity appears in the couduct, or statements of the reformers. That seems to me the best method by which our views and intentions may be better known: for as the more able friends to reform, from certain causes are detered from becoming the more prominent in the cause, it is left to those who with honest and pure motives, are nevertheless less capable perhaps, of expounding and proposing their sentiments. I am inclined to think, that Mr. C. is a person of landed property, and I am sure we shall hail his accession to our cause, with great satisfaction; and pledge ourselves that private property, under all circumstances, must be held sacred in that spirit of universal· justice, which we boast as our anchor." I hope, and trust, that Mr. C., myself, and all we Reformers, have the same end in view; and the method he has chosen of promoting unanimity, is the only one calculated to succeed, and bring us to the possession of our object, Political and Religious Equality." Justice is what the Reformers want. Justice is what they are entitled to, and Justice they will have, for when men are acquainted with their natural rights, when they see that we are all subject to the same passions; it is morally impossible, that they can suffer a power, founded only on fraud, and injustice, to usurp their best blessings, and deprive them of what is peculiarly their own. "The fever throbbing in the tyrant's veins In quick strong language, tells the daring wretch I have already endeavoured to shew the injustice, mischief, and danger, necessarily attendant on church government, and hereditary privilege; and I feel certain that reform in our representation will alone remove their evils. All our grievances may be traced to the want of that reform. The want of reform, to the progress of abuse, and the progress of abuse, to some defect in our constitution in not preventing it. Here then is the matter brought to issue, and it only remains to decide in what part this defect lies. It must be certain it cannot rest with the People themselves, for they have at no period since the conquest, and introduction of feudal law, had their full share in the legislature of their country. They have only partially succeeded, in the attempts made by them, from that period down to the revolution of 1688, to regain the freedom of their Saxon ancestors. Perhaps at the time of the revolution, the three branches of our constitution, had more nearly equalized their moral and physical power, than at any former period, but since that, the knowledge of the People has so rapidly advanced, and its progress has been so great, as would have left the best monarchical government, that could possibly exist, far, very far behind. Instead of Considering how to remedy this evil, by an advance as nearly equal on their own parts, they impolitically have been attempting to oppose and suppress, all efforts to enlighten the People. But all their, efforts have been vain. Knowledge has triumphantly overcome all the obstacles that despotism could interpose; and has now reached an eminence, that affords a clear prospect of the intricate maze from which the People have begun to emerge, and displays to their minds, the land of milk and honey, so long the object of their hopes. The disseminating rays of literature, have at length penetrated the dark recesses of obscurity, and cast its flame of elucidation, on the errors of former times. The framers of our constitution, saw that as all the physical or real power was on the part of the People, it would only be possible to balance it by conferring a corresponding weight of moral or fictitious power on the other branches. It was necessary that a very particular respect should be impressed on the minds of the People, with regard to the moral power, with which the executive and lords, were invested; and to have continued the three powers in the equal balance in which they thus appeared, it would have been necessary that the People should be continually kept in that ignorance, in which they then were: for if once by the light afforded by general knowledge, they could discover through the flimsy veil, in which these moral rights were wrapped, the discovery would necessarily prove fatal to the existence of those rights. Information did, however, spread rapidly, in spite of the indirect efforts by governments to prevent it. And to meet the power which knowledge thus 1 gave the People, the successive governments of this country, have so progressively encroached on our constitution, (that very constitution on which they depend, and which gave them existence) as to leave but little of it to us. The period seems now to have arrived, when we shall sink into a military despotism, or rise to liberty immortal. If the former, our evils will, like a body of combustibles, be only more compressed, to take a wider range when they do explode. The moment will come, when grievances will be redressed by force; and utter destruction will be the probable consequence of withholding our rights from us. Every thing that then presents abuse, or needs reform, will meet ample attention. If we have now ceased to be politically free, a nation accustomed to freedom, must soon prové that a general sense of oppression, is not to be dissipated by force. The embers of former liberty, though shaded by tyranny, will shed a horrid glare on the enormities of that tyranny, and at some seasonable opportunity, impulsively burst forth, with all its consequent terrors. When Britons are thus driven to extremes, they may perhaps perceive that some of their institutions, are incapable of keeping pace with the wisdom of the People. They have long shewn themselves too slow, conscious perhaps, that every step weakens their moral power. These institutions may probably fall on the same principle, that destroyed the feudal system: and a government may yet be established, which being a government of the People, and the People only, will ever advance with them, unclogged with the prejudices of former times. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, Speldhurst Street. J. A. PARRY. WINDSOR POLITICS, Lines composed on the occasion of His Royal Highness the Prince Regent being seen standing betwixt the coffins of Henry VIII., and Charles I., in the Royal Vault at Windsor. Famed for contemptuous breach of sacred ties, R. Carlile, Printer, 55, Fleet Street, London. |