524 
complaints, and their suggestions for tke. 
improvement of the government; and 
the Chinese emperors considered it a 
sacred duty to open those boxes them- 
selves, and peruse and attend to their 
contents.. A free press effects the same 
object, with the advantages to be de- 
rived from collision of sentiment, No 
#ritish Prince ought, therefore, to encou- 
rage restrictions on the press in regard 
to public objects, unless he at the same 
instant announce the plan of a Chinese 
letter-box at the gate of-his Palace. 
The press, isso vital and important a 
machine for the enlargement of know- 
dJedge and the removal of abuses, that I 
consider the misuse of it, for purposes of 
‘private slander and personal libel, as 
little less than sacritrcr! The an- 
cients would have personified, and under 
that personification have worshipped 
THE PRESS for its social power and use- 
fulness ; they would therefore have treated 
as blasphemers, those who made use of it 
for the gratification of private-malice, 
and would have punished in very dif. 
ferent degrees a manuscript or oral libels 
and a calumny diffused by the instru- 
mentality of the hallowed press. 
So little however are the sacred puwers 
of this deity reverenced by the British 
‘People, that it is to be regretied, nearly 
as much of mischief is perpetrated by 
venal and sycophaut writers, as of be- 
nefit from. patriotic writers who detect 
abuses, and advocate the interests of the 
people. In short, truth 1s 80 confounded 
and so perplexed by the systematic cor- 
ruption of the press, that I have some. 
times been almest led to entertain the 
heretical sentiment, that the press itself 
was pernicious to the public ‘welfare, 
and an obstruction to the cause of truth 
and justice! It is well known that pens 
sions are allowed to many editors and 
‘writers, by most administrations, for the 
general support of their measures, and 
that annual allowances have been nade 
by many of the public offices to news- 
papers, for the purpose of supporting 
interests of the particular office, and of 
puffing and praising its conduct, 
If a too free use of the press subjects 
a man to pains and penalties, how much 
heavier ought punishment to fall on pub- 
' lic functionaries, who bribe the press 
with the public money to impose on the 
people, or who bribe it even out of their 
own fortunes to give a false colouring to 
their mal administration? I earnestly 
recommend, therefore, that an Act of 
Necessary Discriniination between 
[July 15 
Parliament should be. passed, which 
should subject a public functionary to at 
least two years imprisonment, and to be 
cashiered, who should be proved to have 
bribed the conductors of any public 
print, to give a false colour to any act 
of his administration. 
Till some measure of this kind is 
adopted, the governed aud the governors, 
in regard to the press, are not upon an 
equal footing. The people may be in- 
sulted every day by mistatemeats to their 
prejudice; the patriotic friends of the 
country may be grossly libelled, while 
the writers are basking in the sun-shine 
of power, and reaping a golden harvest 
as the reward of their prostitution; but 
should one of the people fur his co- 
patriots stand forward to expose in un- 
guarded language the, mal-administration 
of a public functionary, he is liable to be 
made to answer without the interven- 
tion of a Grand Jury, and to be sub- 
jected to vengeful proceedings from 
united and condensed power, which 
eventually crush aud destroy him. : 
Llow imperiously then is the Parlia- 
ment called upon to prohibit proceedings 
ex officio, and to insist that all libels shall 
be referred toa Grand Jury! This done, 
how. delicate and -how sacred are the 
functions of that Jury in deciding when 
the latitude of free discussion and the 
bounds of decency are exceeded! And 
again, after these have decided in the 
aflirmative, how great is the respansibi- 
lity of a Petit Jury, and how nicely ought 
they to consider the consequences of a 
conviction on the cause of truth, on their 
country’s welfare, and on the improve- 
ment of man! 
In regard to the paradox of Lord 
MansFieip, that the greater the truth 
the greater the libel, [ agree; and at the 
same time I differ with that great man. 
In charges of private libels, he was most 
correct, and justifications ought never to 
be encouraged ; but in regard to a public 
functionary, on the truth or falsehood of 
the matter lies the merit or demerit of the 
publication. - An author or publisher 
who truly proclaims that mal-acministra- 
tion which, on investigation, he can 
prove, deserves a ctvic cRowN; but, on 
the other hand, if he turn out to bea 
base calumniator, he ought to be pus 
Lished with salutary rigour. 
Lord Mansfield was not in error when, 
in regard to private libel or personal slan- 
der, he asserted, that the greater the 
truth the greater the libel. It was a bold 
; ASSELUON § 
