332 
cietiés, which (originally fet on foot, I 
believe univerlally, by the friends of 
jiberal difcuffion) have fince, in many 
~ places, been artfully got into other hands, 
and have been fuffered either entirely to 
goto decay, or perverted to the exclu- 
five fupport of a particular fet of opinions. 
A. kind cf power, entirely new in this 
country, has been exercifed in fome of 
thefe focieties—that of pafling an in- 
quifitorial cenfure wpon books already , 
voted in, and expelling them as unfit for 
the perufal of the members. Ann inftance 
of fome notoriety has lately occurred in 
a provincial capital on the borders of 
- Wales, in which a@ junto of clergymen 
(whether through divine right, or ‘dele- 
gated authority, I cannot fay) have ex- 
ercifed this power very freely, and have 
nade a complete expurgation of the cir- 
culating library. Did I poffefs an au- 
thentie lift of the books expelled on this 
occafion, I would copy it; tince an zzdex 
expurgatorius has always been accounted 
an excellent guide to good works. I 
underftand that even approved friends 
were not entirely {pared ; for ‘* Burke's 
Letter to the Duke of Bedford,’ I fuppofe 
as containing fome irreverent ftrictures 
on the privileged orders, incurred ex- 
pulfion. Thefe clerical inquifitors are, 
iam told, fmooth civil gentlemen as one 
would with to meet with, and fome of 
them have formerly affected the praife 
of liberality. Idoubt not that they ima- 
gine they have a¢ted right in a profeflional 
view; nor do I. prefume to call their 
judgment in queftion. At the fame time, 
i think it not inexpedient to give a little 
advice to the {upporters of an oppofite 
intereft. - . 
From pretty large experience in the 
management of book-focieties, I know 
that the candour and liberality of the 
founders have been unbounded, and they 
have ever fhewn themfelves fuperior to 
the narrownefs of party. Friends from 
principle to the utmoft freedom of dif- 
cuffion, they have not only readily voted 
for books on both fides of every queftion, 
but they have with pleafure affociated in 
the management’ of the concern, perfons 
the mot oppofite to them im principle. 
With refpect to the firft point, I think 
they have done unqueftionably right ; 
but their compliant difpofition as to the 
fecond has produced the effects above 
hinted at. It has eventually thrown the 
power into the hands of thofe who have 
employed it for purpofes direétly oppofite . 
Obfervations refpetting Book-Societies. 
[ Nov 
to the intention of the inftitution. Per- 
haps, indeed, it was‘not to be expected, 
previoufly to experience, that Englifhmen 
of education would affume the office of 
Jefuits and Dominicans.. The mifchief 
is now in many places done; but where 
it has yet been prevented, and efpecially 
in new inititutions of the kind, I would 
ferioufly recommend a much greater care 
in admitting members than has ufually . 
been exercifed ; and that merely putting 
down a name and a guinea fhould never 
be the mode of acquiring the right of 
management. I do not fay that I would 
ftigmatife any body of men with abfolute 
exclufion; yet where there are known 
prejudices and interelts operating againft 
the very exiftence of free book-iocieties, 
very great caution in admiffion is furely 
juttifiable.. Were it poffible by a rule to 
guard againft the vote of a majority, I 
would propofe that the difcarding of a 
book once fairly received fhould be de- 
clared abfoluteiy. illegal, and never to be 
‘brought into debate; but Iam well aware 
of the hopeleffnefs of contending by law 
and reafcn againft thofe who have the 
power in their hands. 
I fhall conclude with a fhort digreffion, 
not, however, unconnefted with my fub- 
jet. It has been made a heinous crime 
by thofe who have written againit the 
free-mafons and illuminées of the con- 
tinent, that thofe focieties have conducted 
their reforming f{chemes in Jfecrecy, and 
have ina private way circulated among 
themfeives the writings which ferved ta 
fupport their caufe. But who are to 
blame for this? Surely thofe perfons in 
power who have rendered the fair and 
open magtenance of any opinions, ob- 
noxious to themfelves, a public crime, to 
be punithed by fine, imprifonment, and 
exile. If ever it fhould happen in this 
country, that the efforts of proiccuting 
bigots, backed by the fubfervience of 
juries, fhould fucceed in deftroying all 
freedom of the prefs, and render it unfafe 
publicly to circulate works in any degree 
hoftile to the eftablithed fyftems in church 
and ftate, a fimilar plan of fecrecy muft 
of neceflity be adopted by the friends of 
free inquiry ; and the difgrace of it ought 
to’ fall upon thofe who fhall have com- 
pelled them to fuch a meafure. 
With bett wifhes for the fuccefS of your 
liberal publication, I remain, Mr. Editor, 
your’s, &c. 
Nov. sth. INDAGATOR« 
Je 
