ART. V. De la Responsabilité des Ministres. Par M. BENJAMIN DE CONSTANT. A Paris, 1815.

A

Adresse à l'Empereur. Par JOSEPH REY, de Grenoble, President du Tribunal Civil de Rumilly. Seconde Edition. Paris, 1815.

W E hope it is not merely because we belong ourselves to the fraternity of public writers, that we regard the press as the palladium of civilized society. It is not only the grand source of hope for its advancement, but the only effectual security against its return to pristine wretchedness and barbarity. When ever, therefore, the state of society becomes unsettled; when the old tackle and machinery seem at any time worn out, and new instruments of connexion and operation are required, it is of peculiar importance to trace the tendency of this extraordinary agent, and to point out the results to which it may be expected to lead.

From the titles of the publications which we have placed at the head of this article, the reader will readily infer, that it is our intention to occupy him with the consideration of what is likely to be the influence of the press, during the earlier part of the succeeding age, rather on the Continent of Europe, than in our own country; as to which indeed there is much less scope for speculation. The more fixed and stationary condition of this country, and the advances we have already made in liberal opinions, give us a kind of assurance, that for some years to come we shall go on much as we have done lately. It is on the Continent chiefly that the new circumstances in which the press is about to operate become interesting, and make us anxious to anticipate the results; although the circumstances by which its influence has been found to be obstructed or promoted in this country, afford the chief fund of experience from which our conclusions as to other countries can safely be founded.

It is very evident, that all the good which can be expected must depend upon the degree of liberty which the press is permitted to enjoy. Could a press exist perfectly enslaved, it would be an instrument of pure, and unbounded mischief. It would be employed to mould the minds of men into absolute submission to the will of arbitrary rulers, and their instruments; and as this could only be effected through the medium of falsehood and deception, a press perfectly enslaved would be solely employed to corrupt and debase the human mind.

Most happily, however, for human nature, the press cannotexist at all in a state of absolute slavery. It appears, by a pret

ty full experience, that if the press does but operate, under whatever restrictions, it will occasionally give vent to thoughts which tend to enlighten the mind, and to deliver it from ignorance and deception. There is no country in Europe, which does not bear testimony to this truth. Even in Spain and Austria, where the influences of a bad government and a bad religion have been united to prevent and exclude its salutary operation, books, not altogether destitute of good sentiments, have occasionally appeared. No vigilance, it seems, however keen and malignant, can exclude every thing instructive; and the difficulty appears, fortunately, to increase with the intelligence and civilization of the people. The laws were the same, and the interests of the rulers the same, in Italy as in Austria and Spain; but a much greater proportion of useful publications issued from the press in the first country than in the other two-exactly because it was the most enlightened. The case was not very different under, the old monarchy in France: but there, for the same reason, it was still less practicable totally to prevent the publication of salutary truths. By the laws, even of Britain, every thing is forbidden to the press which the most perfect state of slavery requires, and the British rulers have interests of the same kind as other rulers; but, in Great Britain, beyond any other country, it is impossible to prevent the publication of liberal sentiments--exactly because there is no country in which such sentiments have already made so great a

progress.

The press, then, lays a foundation for human improvement that cannot fail, because it ensures a state of progression in every country in which it can operate at all; and increases its power in proportion to the progress which it has made. It may ac cordingly be observed, that, from the grand era of the invention of printing, the human mind, in every country in Europe, even' the most besotted, has been gradually improved; that its improvement has been more rapid in every succeeding age; and is, at this moment, most rapid in the countries which have made the greatest advancement.

We may, therefore, conclude, and that with a pretty full assurance, that whether the form into which Europe is about to be cast, shall be as highly favourable, or as unfavourable as possible to the interests of humanity, the press will enjoy, either by law, or in spite of law, a considerable degree of liberty; and books, tending to clear away deception, and to instruct the people in what manner their interests may be best consulted, will a bound in some countries, and find their way into all.

In endeavouring to estimate what, during the next age, may VOL. XXV. No. 49.

H

be the influence of the press in improving the condition of the European world, it is natural to turn our first attention to France. This country has long enjoyed the distinction of serving as a kind of model to her continental neighbours; and many powerful circumstances ensure to her a leading influence in their conduct and character. Her language is, in some measure, the universal language;-her position is central;-she is, on the whole, the most powerful, and the most accomplished nation; and the character of her people is active and imposing. What is enjoyed and admired in France will not easily fail of being desired in other countries where it is wanting. Celebrated books, published in France, can never be altogether excluded from any country in Europe; and we may, therefore, pretty safely conclude, that the degree of liberty enjoyed by the French press, will go far to determine the rapidity with which salutary truths are likely to be disseminated in the rest of the Continent. In no single event, therefore, were the interests of humanity ever more deeply concerned, than in the species of government which may, in this respect, be established in that country.

In trying to conjecture what degree of liberty the press is likely to enjoy in France, the melancholy experience of human affairs seems to require that we should anticipate the worst, rather than the best state of things, of which its present civilization will admit. Suppose the Bourbons again restored; and suppose them as able as they were before, to set aside every stipulation in favour of good government, and, among the rest, the liberty of the press-how adverse soever the laws may then be to a free discussion, the laws, to a certain extent, will prove impotent. Where the discordance between them and the public opinion has risen to a certain height, they cannot be executed-and their very forms become the means of evasion. The grand question therefore is, What extent of free discussion may the state of public opinion in France be expected to ensure, in spite of all which bad laws and a bad government can effect to repress it?-for this, in truth, is all the liberty to which, with any assurance, we are entitled to look forward.

Our hopes, we lament to say, are not very sanguine. The apathy with which the French looked on, when Louis the Eighteenth expunged from their constitution the article which provided for the liberty of the press, was of ill omen. In the debates which took place on that occasion, the members who showed any great warmth in favour of the liberty of printing, were wonderfully few; and many, who themselves possessed the most cultivated minds, betrayed no slight jealousy of that blesing-conjuring up to themselves the frightful image of many dangerous consequences. Not one man,-at least not more

than one man, in France, appeared to have any thing like a sound and comprehensive view of the natural effects of an unrestricted press. A few vague and puerile conceptions about its vast advantages, on the one hand, and its monstrous evils on the other, seemed to make up the whole stock of French thinking upon the subject. Their minds seemed to be in a great degree subdued by the remembrance of the excesses of the times of terror;-as if a period of popular frenzy could fail to be prolific of excesses, with or without a press,-as if the excesses in which po pular frenzy uses the press as an instrument, were produced by the liberty, and not by the slavery, of the press-slavery more complete than under any other circumstances it can possibly be made to endure. So far from being agreeable to fact, is the frightful association of the ideas of a free press, and the excesses of a people excited to fury, that it is only where a press has been previously enslaved, that the authors of mischief can ever make use of it for the accomplishment of their designs. Where a press bas been previously free, there are means for making the people hear both sides. But where they have had no experience of fair discussion, every faction that is uppermost silences all opposition, and uses the press for its own purposes. In that case, no doubt, it is superlatively mischievous: But against that mischief, whether in a state of calm or commotion, the only effectual security is its freedom. A people who have been habituated to hear both sides, cannot see that privilege destroyed, without suspecting the views of those by whom so questionable an act has been performed. And, finally, where a press has really been free, it is so difficult suddenly to destroy it, that the designs of the wicked may generally be exposed; and that deception, on which the excesses of a season of frenzy chiefly depend, may always be more or less completely prevented. Could Robespierre have perpetrated the atrocities of which he was guilty, had it been free to the press to expose his villany, and fully to instruct the people? No!-But that tyrant used the press for his purposes, just as it is used by every other master of an enslaved press. He prevented every one by terror from using it against him; and then employed it to praise himself, and to blacken all those whom he wished to destroy. After all, the press was by no means the most efficient of his instruments; and it has got the credit, or discredit, of innumerable effects which were produced by other causes.*

But though the imperfect knowledge which the French appear to possess of the benefits of free printing, their exaggerated conception of its dangers, and the apathy towards public good which belongs to them in common with other nations, are all

unfavourable symptoms, there are other circumstances from which we may infer, with some confidence, that a considerable degree of freedom in printing will in fact be enjoyed, and that on the most important of all topics, namely, that which touches their political rights, the people will from time to time receive important information.

Of the truth of this, the tract, which we have placed at the head of this article, affords considerable proof. It was written during the short reign of Louis XVIII., when both law and government were opposed to the liberty of the press. It was even printed under the curb of a licenser; and yet it abounds with observations tending to show the people what they ought to expect at the hands of their rulers, and what they have it in their power to compel their rulers to perform.

The object of the performance is to lay down a plan, according to which, ministers, and other instruments of government, may be rendered subject to punishment, in case of ill desert. To this whole design, however, it was obvious to object,—that if the instruments of government may be punished for their obedience, they must be entitled to judge of the orders they receive; and that the whole business of government would, in this way, be obstructed and disturbed.

This objection M. Constant meets, in the following manner. 'Je réponds d'abord: si vous prescrivez aux agens de l'autorité le devoir absolu d'une obéissance implicite et passive, vous lancez sur la société humaine des instrumens d'arbitraire et d'oppression, que le pouvoir aveugle ou furieux peut déchaîner à volonté. Lequel des deux maux est le plus grand?

Mais je crois devoir remonter ici à quelques principes plus géneraux sur la nature et la possibilité, de l'obéissance passive. Depuis la révolution, l'on s'extasie plus que jamais sur les avantages de ce genre d'obéissance. S'il n'y a pas obéissance passive dans l'armée, dit-on, il n'y aura plus d'armée; s'il n'y a pas dans l'administration obéissance passive, il n'y aura plus d'administration. Je ne serois pas étonné que ces raisonneurs, que les fureurs de la démagogie ont d'autant mieux façonnés au despotisme, ne blâmassent les commandans et les gouverneurs de provinces, que l'histoire loue, depuis près de trois siècles, de n'avoir pas obéi à Charles IX, lors du massacre de la Saint-Barthélemy.

Il est bizarre que les faits dont nous avons été témoins et victimes n'aient pas découragé les partisans d'un pareil systême. Ce n'est pas faute d'obéissance, dans les agens inférieurs de nos diverses tyrannies, que la France a tant souffert de ces tyrannies. Tout le monde au contraire n'a que trop obéi; et si quelques malheureux ont échappé, si quelques injustices ont été adoucies, si le gouverne. ment de Robespierre a été renversé, si celui de Buonaparte ne pèse plus sur la France, c'est qu'on s'est quelquefois écarté de la doetring de l'obéissance.