date

1820 Oct. 10 Spanish liberticide measures
1820 Oct. 10 Spanish liberticide measures 2. Torreno King irresponsible

Well then, and so in the opinion of Count Torreno by societies without

responsibility the nation might be led to its ruin. Well then if by societies

without responsibility how is it in regard to individuals without

responsibility. In a bad as in a good course The action of an individual is it

not somewhat more prompt and steady than that of a society composed of one set

of members one day and a different set the next. A Society without

responsibility is the creature of his imagination: but an individual without

responsibility is the creature of his voice. One individual without

responsibility: and through that one individual others at all times in any

numbers. The King by his irresponsibility is authorized to committ in every

imaginable shape, to every imaginable extent […?] […?] those acts which on the

part of an individual not so endowed would be crimes. The King by his power of

pardoning communicates that same omnipotence in wrong to as many individuals as

he pleases.
Similar Items
  • Title: [1820 Oct. 10 Spanish liberticide measures]
    Description: 1820 Oct. 10 Spanish liberticide measures Letter 2. Public discussion 2.

    Torreno

    I want words to express my astonishment and grief.

    My best hopes were turned to /stood/ /founded in/ Lord Torreno: if these laws

    stand long all my hopes are gone.

    After other speeches of which I see no account comes Count Torreno’s: by which

    the Debate is closed. He too is blind of Mr Goreli’s blindness: for nothing less

    could serve. In his eyes there is no difference between liberty and power

    between impunity for speaking ill of Ministers /censuring the conduct of public

    functionaries/, and impunity for murdering them: to him to the difference

    between the abuse of the tongue and the abuse of the hand /arm/ is unknown. So

    pressed is he for argument he scruples not to insinuate, that by those by whom

    the right of assembling for the purpose of speaking, well or ill, as their

    judgment dictates of the conduct of the members of government, along with that

    right is assumed the right which is given to the King – the right of committing

    crimes of all sorts without being punishable without being responsible for it.

    Take this assumption from him he has no argument. Whoever proposed that /Where

    is the madman that ever proposed/ that these or any other societies should have

    place /existence/ without responsibility on the part of its members! The abuse

    that might arise from such societies without responsibility! He puts a case that

    has never happened, that never could happen, and on no better ground than this

    he divests the people of all security for their rights and himself and those

    with whom he acts of all effectual responsibility for every abuse they may make

    of those powers of which they profess to hold from the people.

    The abuses that might arise! By the same argument by which he justifies /thinks

    to justify/ the stopping men’s tongues from saying any thing of him and his

    Colleagues, any thing that they would wish should not be heard, he might give

    himself an equally good justification for cutting them out.
  • Title: [1820 Oct. 11 Spanish liberticide measures]
    Description: 1820 Oct. 11 Spanish liberticide measures 1 Meeting licensing Speeches 1.

    Gorelli 2. Torreno English liberticide Acts

    But are not the sort of societies in question

    But as to all permanent societies /these same Societies/ in general are not they

    at this moment under the yoke of a license? O yes: and so they have been for

    more than | | years past the Government has kept them under this yoke

    Sir acts of the same spirit /laws all with the same intent/ /six liberticide

    Acts/ were in the year 1819 /no longer ago than the last year/ passed all in the

    same /in a/ breath. Now mark the fruit of these laws and if it suit your

    purpose, sow and reap the like. Under the name of the Six Acts The laws stand

    consigned to infamy: they form a match for the law of Henry the eighth called

    the law of the six Articles: they class George the fourth with Henry the eighth.

    they are to us what the Inquisition is to you. The authors are objects of

    abhorrence – of abhorrence to every body, except /with the exception/ those to

    whom Your Constitution with the system of representation which is the great

    glory of it, is an object of abhorrence.
  • Title: [1820 Oct 27 1 15 Letter 4. Not employed 15]
    Description: 1820 Oct 27 1 15 Letter 4. Not employed 15 Torreno

    One speech more, and the name put to it is Count Torreno’s. Happily As to the

    speech /discourse/ itself as his was at length and this has but a few lines in

    it whosoever else it may be it is not his. I am glad it is not: for worded as it

    is it led me into error, and that error into remorse. But after two slight

    glances at distant and as many misconceptions, I will shew you how after a

    direct and close attention paid to it it has represented itself to me. Read on,

    you shall see the course taken by my mind.

    ‘The Conde de Torreno (continues the Report) spoke at length on the abuses that

    might arise from such Societies without responsibility, which might lead the

    nation to its ruin. He wishes them to subsist: and when at liberty to censure

    the abuses of authority, not to be allowed to make an improper use of their

    liberty, and lead the people to excesses, in which case all the Deputies were

    resolved to lose their lives rather than see the bar of the Assembly invaded by

    the factions.’

    Here we have again /once more/ the Societies without responsibility. Real or

    hypothetical – in which of these two characters /cases/ is this exemption from

    responsibility meant to be represented to us. is it intended that this exemption

    should be regarded? If as real, the perfect groundlessness of the assertion may

    be seen already in the first or second of these three letters: if as

    hypothetical only and not real what need of a speech at length? What need of any

    such softening /weakening/ /hesitating/ word as the […?] mark of the potential

    mood might. Why speak of possibility /say possibility/ only where the case

    speaks certainty? O yes: to lead a nation to its ruin one individual is quite

    sufficient.