The National Register. — London, England, 1814-08-14 00:00:00

514 is always painfully remethhered by those to whom the rights of mankind in general have always endeared the•equal bles sings of the Bi itish Constitution. The attack upon Copen hagen, and our solemn recognition of the transfer of Nor way, are no longer solitary instaniii of our derelictiOn of the first and best ptinciples of a nation's inherent right to legis late and act for itself. Quotations from Grotius, Puffend . orf, Etc. may multiply the.al.►joetjons ofa - rmut§t, but c=tibrdffief the plain sense of the question, and that alone we arc desirous of discussing. . Yet we fear, notwithstanding-, that this topic comes home too sensibly to every man's bosom to be met-altogether with the coolness of a philosopher, or the indifference. of a diplo matist. There is about the feelings and understanding of an Englishman, an ardour which inspires investigation and supports perseverance; an innate something that is born with us, that cve.n flourishes in the-midst of our fogs and damps, and bears,_an eternal verdure. Let its then shoW ourselves deserving the character we have obtained. For the freedom of our African brethren, petitions are signed with an eager . • humanity, that delights, exalts, a►►d consoles the human mi►►d. Where then is the difference? If there be :•one, Why should we avoid the same means—why refuse to in- scribe upon the same parchment the names of Poland, Sax ony, and Norway, with the claims of Africa;. or deny to our Government the power of an instrument inscribed with the names of eleven millions of human souls, and which, if suf ficient to induce France to agree to the abolition of the Slave Trade, inay, in the hands of the Princeßegent, effectually destroy the plans now meditated for the extinction of Po land, the transfer of Norway, and the dethronement of Saxony. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE. FRENCH PAPERS. CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES, Sitting of August 6. This day the discossion was opened on the plan of the law relative to the liberty of the press. The Abbe Montesquieu, Minister of the In terior, was present during the whole of the sitting. M. FLEV rtr, (deputy from the Isere) having been a member of the Central Committee, was one, of the minori.y. who thought that the assemble should adr pt. with amendments, the law which was pro. post dto them. .I`,len iu sodetv had felt, that in order not to lose liberty altogether, they must enjoy it in common. They had in consequence cot anted to sacrifice a part 61 their independence ; in order to be able to 0r.10.r the te•t: in security. He applied this idea to the lihetty of the press ; and proposed to prove that the censorship was conformable to all good leuislation, and not contrary to ovr's. %Vio ! exclaimed the Member, can the idea be entertained of with. HI - awing troto the •vigilance of the police, writers, who have such don ccrous ni.ean . s oT distnrbing the public tranqitillity ? What, is it our duty to arrest the poniard of the assas , in, the cup of the poisoner. and e torch of - the . intendiary "; and shall we not be permitted to prevent the nutil.evion of. a writing which may carry desolation under the ✓ ,)! of a eittzen, tarnish the hon.tur of a wife or kdaughter, destroy e e t tl a letpect due to a Guy:tumult, and lead a whole people to irtvult ? AUG. 14. . - . Though he had resolved...Jo discuss the subject coolly, he could net restrain bislndienatien. Were turn made forprincieteS, or Inincip!es for men ? Did we still live in those times when a Cannibal could conic andemetentece-trait'iger !:- Trittitie, " Perish our colonies, rather than prieciples?" . they were lost ; that monster himself had pe risheel ; and even hie.p.unislonetet- might become a fruitless example t o posterity . . It was •said that the Bth -article of the Constitution decided the whole ; that it spoke merely of repressing abuses, that is punishing, not preventing before band, their occurrence. But in our language, the word " repress" signifieetsomething.tee, Woke,. ocreirrersernatis, as .4teVtisi-iiilereti;.---ile-ettsiTteefseterafinsOices of this sort from St. Eyre mond and I .llontesquieu ; but he professed himself ashamed Qf this war of words. He thee examined the argument, that the press itself furnished an antidote to its nee mischiefs. - Must n mair, then, said lie, descend into the arena against wiitersebv profession, who will have the advantage over him ? Me•t a peareful Citizen be compelled to tilt with these fencing masters? Why should an infant Goverument he exposed to the at tempts of all those who may choose to attack it lint the war of the pen, ii was said, was not dangerous. Ah ! Gentlemen, the liberty of the press hed always been amongst us the liberty Of the struegest. During the Revelutiou it had been only the club in the hands of the giant, to demolish the weaker party. the public never heard both sides with impartiality. An invincible• propensi.y led it always to listen to those who attacked the Governmese.— [Here tnermers in formed the Orator that tiie members were not of his opieion.l--Tho public always sees despotism where it sees a combined system. . If the author of a libel were n Beaumarchais, mid had, lihe him, a front of brass, au iron pen dipped in gall if lie preftiselystatteredthe most cutting irony in his wrj.iege, he would be condemned perhaps be fore the tribunals, but the public would have learned to despise wh a t it ought to fear end respect. The opinion of the unfortunate Males. fleshes had been cited in favour of the liberty of the press ; but herbei had afterwards seen reason to change that opinion; and the reputable men who in the 18th century had stood up se strongly for the Liberty of the Press, would he of a different opinion, if they had lived to see that it was the principal cause of the destruction et' 11 , e Throve. The famous letter of the Alibi; Reyna! to the Consteuveit Assembly af forded a strong proof of the justice of this observe tem. We should examine the calamities which bed been produced by the licentiousness of the Press. The times, doubtless, were changed ; but mankind were not changed. It was not merely malevolence which was to be dreaded, it was also imprudence. The publicity of the sittings of that Chamber was one of its most valuable privileges : and yet the Constitution had give!' to ally fire of its Members the dictatorial pee er of rendering its sittiligs secret ; and yet was the first upstert to arrogate to himself a publicity which was denied to our mature deliberations ! Who would derive advantage from the unlimited liberty at saying every thing ? the Kim! ? He, it was said, would find useful truths in the journals and pamphlets; but he would be much to be pitied, if he were compelled to reed them; and France also ‘vould be in a pi tiable state, if it was in them she was to fled tle elements of polities. He concluded with moving, that they should pass to the order of the day on the report of the committee ; and that the . plan of the law be adopted with amendments. The Chamber, by a !impiety of voices, or dered the printing of his speech. Ile was followed by M Ciet.l.o 15, who warmly attacked the priociple Of the projet. Ile tuaintaiued, that it was contradictory to the HO; article of the Constitutional Charter, ehich says--" The French have a rielit to print and publish their opinions, if they coolorm to the hies designed to repress the abuse of that liberty. Such, said he, is the solemn promulgation of the liberty of the press, which his Majesty in his declaration of be .2d of Mar had announced as one of the best., of the liberal Constitution which he was ,leterteined to adoet. The laws which best establish the liberty of the press were likewise those that its excesses the most severely. You could net, therefor', - but await with just impatience that repressive law e Inch was finally to as sure to France the peaceable, coustatit, and reetdar eXereise ut that right. iii this disposition you must have seen with astoni-hment, mixed with regret, that the plait of the law presented to yell was contrary to the Constitutional Charter. It fixes metheds of littrary jurisdictioe eoetrery to the fitSpo , itions of the Chatter, and not the methods of iodic - ill procedure which it announces. It specifies what it th'res not permit, but (tees not specify what it enjoins. He then contended, that the proposed measures were not a restraint on the abuse of liberty, bet en liberty itself. He skewed the dangers of a literary censorship under a had eoveroment. which :eight make it •e mullein of attaining the object proposed by the famous decree of the Connell of State in 1764, which forbade the writing and printing of works on matters relating to Administratien. These dangers would THE NATIONAL REGISTER,