-ORSHIP OF THE PRESS. 



CENSOKSHIP OF THE PRESa 





brought forthwith to the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Bishop of 

 London, or to the High Commission Office, to be dealt with accord- 

 ingly. All boob, ballad*, charts, and portniU were to bear the name 

 of the printer or engraver a* well a* of the author or maker. All 

 printer* were to take out licence. Their number was fixed and their 

 name* were published. 



The war between Charles I. and the Parliament, and the abolition 

 of the royal authority, di<( not affect the censorship, and the Long 

 Parliament in the plenitude of its power maintained the practice just 

 as the Star Chamber bad dona. 



In March, 1642, an order of the Commons House of Parliament 

 appointed byname certain stationers of London to search for any lying 

 IuuphleU scandalous to his majesty, or the proceedings of both or 

 either House of Parliament, demolish and take away the printing. 

 presses, and apprehend the printers or sellers. 



In June, 1043, was issued an order of the Lords and Comiuoifs 

 assembled in parliament for the regulating of printing, and for sup- 

 pressing the great late abuses and frequent disorders in printing many 

 false, scandalous, seditious, libellous, and unlicensed pamphlets, to the 

 great defamation of religion and government. It enacts that no book, 

 [amphlet, paper, nor part of any such book, pamphlet, or paper, shall 

 from henceforth be printed, bound, stitched or put to sale by any 

 person or persons whatsoever unless the same be first approved of and 

 Ucensed under the hands of such person or persons OB both or either of 

 the Houses of Parliament shall appoint for the licensing of the same, 

 and entered into the register-book of the Company of Stationers, 

 according to the ancient custom. And further on it authorises or 

 requires the master and wardens of the said company, the gentleman 

 usher of the House of Peers, the sergeant of the Commons' House and 

 their deputies, together with the persons formerly appointed by the 

 committee of the House of Commons for examination, to make from 

 time to time diligent search in all places where they shall think meet, 

 for all unlicensed printing-presses, and all presses any way employed in 

 the printing of scandalous or unlicensed lepers, pamphlets, books, &c., 

 and to seize, deface, and destroy the some in the Common Hall of the 

 said company. 



It was in consequence of this order that John Milton wrote his 

 ' Areopagitica : a Speech for the Liberty of unlicensed Printing.' 

 addressed to the Parliament of Engl mil. in which he shows that the 

 system of licensing 'originated with the Papal Inquisition, and that it 

 ought not to be adopted by a Protestant community : he exhibits its 

 useleunen and injustice, and observes that the order of parliament 

 is only a revival of the former order of the Stir Chamlicr. Milton's 

 disquisition is a piece of close reasoning and eloquently written ; hut it 

 had no effect upon parliament, which continued to sanction the re- 

 straints UJMMI the press, even after the abolition of royalty. 



The parliament of 1654 appointed a committee to watch all blasphe- 

 mous publication*, on whose reports several books, religious or contro- 

 versial, were ordered to be burnt 



The |iarliameut of 1656 appointed a committee to consider the v. ,n 

 of suppressing private presses and regulating the press, and -up. 

 and preventing scandalous books and pamphlets. The Protect*" 

 well enforced these restraints, in order to prevent the agitation of 

 political question*. In October, 1653, the council at Whitehall 

 ordered that no person shall presume to publish in print any matter of 

 public news or intelligence, without leave and approbation of the 

 secretary of state. There appeared also an order of the protector and 

 council against printing unlicensed and scandalous books and pam- 

 phlets, and for regulating printing. Cromwell however was disposed 

 in general to rescue the victims of religious intolerance from the hands 

 of their persecutor*, the Independents and Presbyterians. 



After the Restoration, Roger I/estrange was appointed licenser of 

 printing. He wrote in 1663, ' Considerations and Proposals in order 

 to the Regulation of the Press.' Lestrange seems to have retained his 

 office till the revolution of 1688, when he was succeeded by Fraser, and 

 he by Edmund Bohun. 



The Act passed under Charles II., in !;':_', which was, with few 

 alterations, a copy of the Parliamentary ordinances concerning the 

 licencing of printing, expired in 107!', but was revived by statute 

 1 Jac, 11. c. 17, and continued till 1692. It was then continued for 

 two years longer by statute 4 Will. & Mary, c. 24. and it expired in 

 1094, when the licensing system finally ceased in England, lint the 

 question of iU revival was repeatedly agitated in parliament, as we see 

 by a paper dated 1 704, entitled ' Reasons against restraining the Press,' 

 which deprecates the intention of reviving the licensing xyst-em ; and 

 by a much later and bolder |>amph!et, dated 1 729, styled, ' Letter to a 

 Great Man concerning the Liberty of the Press.' 



A relic of the old licensing system yet remains in the power of the 

 i 'hanibcrUin, or his deputy, the licenser of plays, to fordid the 

 performance of any drama on the stage ; but no attempt has ever been 

 made to extend this power o far as to forbid the printing. Though, 

 however, the power is very seldom exercised, it Is still retained, and as 

 recently a* the spring of 1859, the representation of a drama ('Jack 

 Sheppard '), which hail pasted uncensured for many years, was for- 

 inuxnd was in " 



bidden, and the i-oniiu 



, i ... 



;..-: 



Under the old French monarchy, all works previous to being printed 

 were to be examined by the royal censors, and if approved were signed 

 with their permission. The French censonhip wa* originally in the 



hands of the bishops, for all matters concerning religion and 

 tioal discipline. By degree* the bishops delegated this power to the 

 faculty of theology, and the Parliament of Paris sanctioned the practice. 

 In 1624, the faculty being divided into partial on some matters of con- 

 troversy, Dr. Duval, the leader of one of the ]rties, obtained the king's 

 letters patent for himself and three of his colleague*, by which they 

 obtained the exclusive authority of appn-\ ing of all books cone, 

 religion and church discipline. The faculty remonstrated against this 

 innovation, but the king maintained his appointment. After Duvtd'n 

 death, the faculty resumed its old powers; but in 1668, the contro 

 versy concerning grace having given birth to a multitude 

 works, concerning which the faculty itself was divided in opinion, tin- 

 chancellor Seguier took from it the censorship ; and he created four 

 censors, with an annual stipend, to examine all works without dis- 

 tinction. Before that time it appears that work* unconnected with 

 religion were examined by the Maitres des Requetes. But from 1653, 

 the appointment of the censors rested with the chancellor. They 

 were styled Royal Censors, and their number was gradually increased. 

 They were distributed into seven classes, arrording to the nature o! 

 the works which they had to examine; namely, theology, juri-pm 

 dence, natural history ami medicine, surgery, mathenvr 

 and belles lettres (which class had the greatest numlx* 

 attached to it), and lastly, geography, navigation, travels, and engr.< 

 No work could be printed or sold unless it was previously examined 

 and approved by one of the Koyal Censors. The lieutenant of |,lkc 

 had under him a censor who examined all dramatic works before they 

 could be performed. 



At the Revolution the censorship was abolished. The republican 

 constitutions which were proclaimed in succe* ion. ai -know l<-i 

 principle of the liberty of the press; but amidst the struggle of parties, 

 that principle was often overlooked, and journals and other works 

 obnoxious to the ruling faction of the day were seized, and the author, 

 or editors imprisoned and transported. Throughout the whole i 

 of the so-called French republic, liberty existed in name, but not in 

 reality. After the revolution of Bmmaiie, when liona]rte was pro- 

 claimed First Consul of the French Republic, with power* more exten- 

 sive than those of most kings, the question of the press attr.l. 

 early attention. No censorship was established by the con 

 tution, but the newspaper press was left at the mercy of the executive. 

 By a decree of the 27th Nivose, 1800, the number of newspapers at 

 Paris was fixed, and the editors were forbidden to insert any article 

 " derogatory of the respect due to the institutions of the country, the 

 sovereignty of the people, and the glory of the Kivn.-h ar.ji 

 offensive to the governments and nations which were the in, i 

 allies of France, even if such articles should be extracted from : 

 journals, under |in of immediate supprc-sion. The 'Moniteur' wa.-, 

 onnouncedtobetheonlyoitici.il journal. l'ii- 



a committee of the Senate appointed to " protect the liberty of tin- 

 press;" but the protection consisted in preventing either the pi it. ting 

 or the publishing of anything contrary to the will of the auUloj 

 although in 1806 it was declared that there existed no censorship in 

 France, that any French citizen could publish any book that he 

 thought proper, being responsible for its contents before the tribunals, 

 if charged with anything derogatory of the jxiwer of : 

 and the interests of the country. 



In Napoleon's kingdom of Italy 1 1 1 



inilLshed, but on the day of the public-it ion of a work two copies 

 were to be deposited at the office of the Minister of the InU-n 

 commission, sty led likewise " of the liberty of the press," examined tie- 

 book and made ita report to the minister, who. if he- saw 

 stopped the sale of the work, ami oid> T, d the author or printer to be 

 arrested and tried. Those who wished to avoid such . llowi d 



to lay their manuscripts bet",, re the oommiaBlan, which i. -turned it with 

 such corrections or suppressions as it thought advisable. This was 

 called the facultative or optional ecu.-,, i -hip. 



In 1809-10 then- were discussion* in the council of state respecting 

 the laws of (he press, which resulted ill the decree of February. 

 appointing a director ;;,-neial of the prcs-. with auditor*, 

 and ccu.-ors. under th,- control of tin- Minuter of the Interior. The 

 ii.imb.-r of pii.it. TH was to be fixed in every d*Jp ' --ly WOK the 



numb,': fixed for I'ari*. Printers, as well as booksellers, v.' 



-wear fidelity to thcii country and the emperor. Printers 

 print anything derogatory I'jcct.-i 



toward > i-ign, or of the interests of the state. Parties offend- 



ing were to be brought before the i punished according to 



which, t) of the Interior had the 



right of depriving the \ --(ting up a work, 



transmit the title of it, with the name of the author, 

 if known, to the director-general, and likewise to the prefect of the 

 ; nig his intention to publish the work. The director- 

 1. if he chose, ask for the iM.mn-'cript . and send it to one of 

 nsors for e\ After the censor had made his report, 



would point out such alterations or suppressions in the 

 , he thought proper, and which became obligatory upon the 

 author or printer, who however had the right of a] 'pealing to the 

 Minister of th" Itil.iior, who forwarded the manuscript to another 

 censor, who made hi* report to the director-general ; and the director- 

 general, assisted by other censors, decided finally upon the matter. 



