1820. Octr 18 Spanish liberticide measures 12 Letter 2. Public Discussion 12

But this protection for the supreme legislative body King and Cortes together –

this protection against sudden violence and no more in that one spot – it would

not prevent the communication of ideas belonging to the field of government all

over the kingdom on the subject of government: it would not prevent the

communication of those ideas from which disaffection to the government might

arise. No, to be sure it would not: and therefore though it would answer my

purpose, it would not answer Mr Gorelli’s, that purpose being to prevent the

communication of all ideas about government, except such as he and /might be

agreable/ those with whom he acts. For to this it comes at every turn. Rulers!

Spanish Rulers! Are you content to suffer, at all times, the undisturbed

communication of all ideas whatsoever on the subject of the government and the

governors for the time being, how adverse so ever to your own? If yes /content/,

Your principles on this subject {as to the liberty of speech and writing} are

those of the Anglo-American United States and the Constitutional Code which you

profess to uphold: if no, your principles are those of the King of England and

the Emperor of Morocco.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1820 Octr. 19 Spanish liberticide measures]
    Description: 1820 Octr. 19 Spanish liberticide measures 17 Letter 2. Public Discussion 17

    Mr Goreli makes no distinctions: at one crush he suppresses and for ever all

    free meetings of the people howsoever modified. Mr Goreli acts consistently –

    the government his endeavours are employed to organize and support is a despotic

    one: he will have no eventual faculty of resistance no possibility of resistance

    to misrule be it ever so consummate no relief to misery from misrule be it ever

    so excruciating: he will have no free communication of ideas on political

    subjects he will have no instruction no excitation no concert between man and

    man any where for any such purpose.

    Mr Goreli acts consistently; consistently with his principles in regard to

    government: whether with any that he avows I know not: assuredly with the

    principles he acts upon: assuredly consistently with the attainment of the

    object towards which this measure of his tends, the establishment of despotism:

    principles directly the reverse /the direct reverse/ of those which the

    Constitutional Code has set up, and to the giving effect to which the system of

    representation ordained by it is directed.

    Mr Goreli has not yet proposed a law abolishing the whole system of Election

    meetings. He need not: should this proposed law of his be established and be

    productive of its declaredly intended effect, they will be of no use to the

    people of whom those meetings if held will be composed, and whose interests they

    were intended to support and serve: in those meetings there will be neither

    excitation nor instruction: and to the production of any good effect both are

    necessary: at the meeting itself there will be no time for any thing like

    adequate instruction: indeed by the Constitutional Code itself (Article | |) all

    such use of the time appointed for Election is prohibited: at the time of such

    meeting there can not be any such instruction: and it is Mr Goreli’s care that

    there shall not be any at any other time.
  • Title: [1820. Octr 19 Spanish liberticide measures]
    Description: 1820. Octr 19 Spanish liberticide measures 15 Letter 2. Public Discussion 15

    To the keeping up this disposition to eventual resistance partly by instruction

    partly by excitation, the unrestrained communication of all ideas belonging to

    the field of government is necessary. It is therefore the characteristic of an

    undespotic government to give not only toleration but favour to such

    unrestrained communication: and this with a view not only to instruction but

    excitation: for without correspondent excitation all the instruction imaginable

    would not be productive of any effect. Instruction applies to the understanding;

    excitation to the will: both must be in a suitable state or no effect can be

    produced.

    In /Of/ popular meetings various sorts or modifications might in this view be

    distinguished: instruction and excitation can not in any case be altogether

    separated: of every such meeting it is the tendency to be in some degree or

    other conducive /contributory/ to both those effects: some however are in a

    greater degree /more particularly/ conducive to the one of these two instruments

    of political security, others to the other.

    A meeting in an open space /and unlimited space such as an unenclosed field/ is

    more particularly conducive /suitable/ to excitation than to instruction: a

    meeting within a limited space such as a room public or private is more

    conducive /suitable/ to instruction than to excitation.

    A meeting open to all /once for all/ without distinction, or even to all who at

    each time pay a small sum for admittance, is more suitable to the purpose of

    excitation than to that of instruction: a meeting held as one of a fixt and

    permanent series of meetings is more suitable to the purpose of instruction than

    excitation. A select meeting or meeting of a Society with which in addition to

    those by whom it was first formed none are admitted but by election is more

    suitable to the purpose of instruction than of excitation: in regard to

    excitation it is more suitable to the purpose of maintaining a constant and

    ordinary degree, than any such extraordinary degree as on extraordinary

    occasions may become necessary to the proposed end.
  • Title: [1820. Octr 18 Spanish liberticide measures]
    Description: 1820. Octr 18 Spanish liberticide measures 10 Letter 2. Public Discussion 10

    Where there is no ignorance there is no […?]

    In secresy in this case there is danger. True, but is that reason sufficient for

    prohibiting it? By no means. Throughout the whole field of government throughout

    the whole field of thought and action, look where you will you may see. Do what

    is proposed there is danger forbear doing it there is still danger. Do any thing

    or do nothing to avoid danger is impossible. The uncertain mischief with which

    the supposed danger is pregnant is it greater in value than the certain mischief

    of the proposed remedy? behold in this a question which should not ever be out

    of mind.

    Looking to the United States, where you may meet and form political schemes and

    be all the while as secret as you please, I see all this supposed danger at its

    height for forty years and not a grain of mischief from it in all that time: if

    forty years if this experience be not enough for you, look at any one of the

    original thirteen States or of the […?] two and twenty states, and see whether

    from the very birth of them the case has not been every where the same.

    True it is that if upon this part of the field of thought and action I were to

    feel myself under the weight of introducing regulation coercion and prohibition,

    this circumstance of secresy would be the first subject I should be for applying

    them.