270 
Farther, where the decifion is committed 
to juries, conviction depends chiefly upon 
the fpirit of the times. If thatis favour- 
able to free enquiry, in vain. fhall an offi- 
cer of the crown declaim on the wicked 
and dangerous defigns of anauthor. The 
juror, bound by no determinate rules of 
judging, may view the matter in a totally 
different light; and may inhis own mind 
applaud, asa Jaudable employment of rea- 
fon and argumeut, what the minifter of 
power may confider as criminal prefaump- 
tion. 
Not contefting, then, the propriety of 
making, as is done with us, authors and 
ublifhers refponfidle for the works they 
offer to the public eye, I thall next con- 
fides the mode in which fuch works, when 
of afufpected tendency, are to be brought 
to the bar of the country for the purpofe 
of undergoing the ordeal whichis to give 
the ftamp of innocence or guilt. In this 
matter there are two objecis in view—to 
fupprefs the progrefs of a dangerous pub- 
lication, and to punifn thofe by whole 
fault it has been circulated. Both thefe 
intentions concur.in the perfon of the au- 
thor ; and perhaps, alfo, of his publifher, 
who may, if he pleafes, require adequate 
proof of the charaéter of a work to which 
he is to ftand in a peculiar relation. But 
the firt only, namely the fuppreffion, 
feems to regard the mere vender, who, in 
‘common cates, cannot reafonably be fup- 
pofed to have made particular enquiry 
inte the merit of a book of which he re- 
ceives 2 few copies in the way of trade. 
That there fhould be a power of ftopping 
it in his hands, and preventing him by 
the fear of future refponfidility from con- 
tributing to its further circulation, is ob- 
vioufly effential to that end of public 
utility which is the foundation of the- 
whole procefs ; but why fhould a power 
exift of inflicting more evil than tne cafe 
demands, or of making that vindiétive, 
which ought to be only remedial? Here 
then, it would appear, that the Arft fixed 
point fhould be eftablifhed; and that the 
profecutor of a libel fhould be obliged to 
call upon the author and publifher, when 
Known and avowed perfons, in preference 
to, and exclufively of, the common vender. 
But it muft be confeffed that this matter 
is not fo clearas on a curfory view it would 
feem. ‘That advanced ftate of fociety to 
which we owe our refinements in civiliza- 
tion has, in this, as in innumerable other 
inftances, fuggefted the~practice of fo 
many tricks and evafions, that the real 
culprit might efcape, while the thunders 
ef the law were {pending themielves upon 
Enquirer, No. XVH. 
[May 
imaginary or impaffible beings. An au- 
thor may be cne of Curl’s garreteers, com- 
pofing in a cock-Joit whence his landlord 
has taken away the ladder of communi- 
cation, in order to fecure his weekly rent. 
The publither may be an inmate of New- ~ 
gate or the Rules, defended by poverty 
again{t fines, and by want of fhame againft 
the pillory. And both thefe gentlemen 
may be fet to work by the fnug reputable 
fhop-keeper. I believe, therefore, that 
the honourable part of the profeffion, fen- 
fible of the exiftence of fuch praétices 
among the difhonourable, are ready to ac- 
quieice in the neceffity of the general re- 
Jponjibility of bookjellers with refpeé to all 
the works which pafs through thew hands 
in their way to the public. The confe- 
quences of this legal principle they know 
to be highly ferious; but they truft to 
the good fenfe and juftice of their coun- 
trymen to render them as httle mifchiev- 
ous as poflible. This important confi- 
deration well deferves to be fully opened, 
and placed in the cleareft light. 
The power of felecting at pleafure its 
victims in a prefecution for libel may, it is 
evident, be abufed by government fo as to 
become an engine oi the moft grievous op- 
preffion, and even to render the whole bufi- 
nefs of publifhing fo infecure, as-to reduce 
it to mere connivance. Suppole a work of 
dubious chara&ter, but of confiderable 
literary merit, to be fent abroad with its 
authcr’s name. Cautious bookfellers for 
a time refufe to admit it into their fhops ; 
but obferving, that weeks and months 
elapfe without any notice of it from the 
Attorney General—that it is honoured 
with replies by writers known to be at- 
tached to, or employed by Government— 
that it is warmly cenfured, indeed, but 
read and quoted, perhaps in the great 
fenate of the nation—they begin to fuppole 
that it is confidered as within the limits 
of free difcuffion ; and yielding at length 
to the importunity ef their cuitomers, 
procure copies of it for common fale. 
Meantime, the crown officers keep their 
eyes open—the law winks, but does not 
{leep—and obnoxious perfons are clofely 
watched.till they are fairly got into the 
net. Then, ona fudden, come informa- 
tions, indiftments, profecutions, and all the 
apparatus of legal warfare; and while 
the whole body of bookfellers are within 
reach of the battery, it is dire€ted againft 
thofe only whom vengeance, not particular 
delinquency, point out as objects of de- 
ftruction. 
tion ; yet in the cafe of the publication of 
the Rights of Man how nearly was it re- 
, alized 2 
I {peak here folely upon /uppofi- 
