Star.
London, England, 1814-08-12 00:00:00

LIBERTY OF THE PRESS.

The ABBE MONTFSQUIZU entered the Hall at the
moment that M. FLEURI (the first of the persons
whose names were inscribed to speak on the Report
respecting the. Liberty of the Press), addressed the
Assembly :
M. FLEURI premised at some length on the diffi-
culty of treating a subject so hackneyed. He com-
plimented the ability of M. Reynouard, the Reporter
of the Committee of the Chamber on the subject of
the Liberty of the Press. He entered on the matter
of Vs speech by citing the common principle of the
sacrifices of individual liberty which men must make
for the general benefit on entering into society ; and,
applying this principle to the Press, he urged the
propriety of preventing, by a censorial revision, those
abuses whose injurious effects, it once committed by
publication, could not be remedied by the subsequent
punishment of a guilty individual. This precau-
tionary care he held to be not only not inconsistent
with the pledge for the Freedom of the Press given
in the Constitutional Charter, but even included and
incorporated in that pledge, which contained an ex-
press engagement for the repression of abuse. The
censorial power was as a bridle which the police
should hold. The poniard of the assassin, the poi-
sonous cup, the torch of the incendiary, should be
arrested before the guilty deeds for which they are
designed are committed ; and why not the publica-
tion which would carry desolation to the bosom of a
whole family ? He deprecated the return of the
times when it was the fashion to exclaim, • Perish
the Colonies rather than our principles.' The means
if prevention and restraint could not be too much
multiplied against the present prevailing corruptions
of mankind. It was riot enough, tha; persons of
worth, so insured, could obtain redress by law.
—Why were they to be driven to the law—to
the trouble—the vexation—the expense—the ion of
time of a suit, which would alter all afford them but
a Complete reparation ? It was possible, moreover,
for an aggrieved person to gain his suit and to lose
his honour. Passing from the private to the public
view of the ease, how few pamphlets worthy of being
.preserved gad- the last twenty-five years furnished ?
.Anti yhy should an infant Government he exposed
mosingtests which the Liberty of the Press' was
likely to pleeduce ; contests which mighl nn; always
he con fined, to paper wars ? The public always pro-
nounces against the Government—[Here mormurs
eiformed the orator that the Members were not of his
opinion] :—the public always sees despotism where
it sees a combined system, and if another pamphleteer
should arise, possessing, like Beaumarchnie, a Irept
of brass, and a pen dipped in gall, he might be con-
densate! perhaps ; but hie-sentiments would be never-
theless adopted. The opinion of the unfortnn::te Ma-
lesherbes had beer; cited in favour of the Liberty of
the Press; but Malesherbes bad afterwards seen reae
:son to change that-opinion, and the reputable med
who in the 18th century had stood up so strongly for
the Liberty of the Press, would be of a different opi-
:nion, it they lied lived to fiec that it was the principal
cause of the destruction of the Throne. The famous
letter of the Abbe Raenal to the Constituent Assem-
bly, afforded a string proof of the justice of this ob-
servati,in. But why was a restriction on the publica-
tion of the erodes of every petty pamphleteer to he
complained of, when any five Members concurring,
could close the doors of tne Chamber of Deputies on
any particular occasion, and prevent its collective
wisdom from going abroad to the public. Fonte-
nelle had well said, that " if he had his hand full of
truths, he would not let one of them escape from it."
Let love for the Prince, for their families, and for
peace, enforce the propriety of a similar observance
on the minds of the Members. It was true, times
were changed—.but men were not—and it would be
right to bear in mind that the revolutionary wars
lasted about. as long as those of the league. We,
perhaps, trust to the present calm, which, however,
is but a calm arising from lassitude; but a calm of
three months cannot be put in counterpoise with five
and twenty years of distractions. Who can say that
this calm will last ten years, two years, or even six
months longer ? You' take precautions against de..
spetism l—take them also against anarchy. An
awful responsibility rests on the Chamber if this
plan of a law be rejected—it will have
iro answer
to the King, to the nation, to posterity. It is said
that the Liberty of the Press conveys the truth
to Kings, and to the people; but what occasion
have the 'people to be instructed as to their rightst
[These. last words excited violent murmurs:
—Are not Petitieny the constitutional means of
seeking these rights, better than pamphlets ?
While asserting the necessity of a Censorship, l
wished the Censers to be properly selected from
among respectable classes, the Advocates and the
Magistrates. Useful works would thus be secure of
publicity, and defamatory libels would be suppressed
—not perhaps universally, but even if it should be
only in the proportion of one-fourth, would not the
Censorship be a benefit ? They tell us of England e
but the Liberty of the Press was not granted to the
English till they were matured for it. The nourish-
ment which suits strong stomachs does not agree with
weakly constitutions.—(Murmur:.)—Politeness, levi-
ty, delicacy, are our characteristics ; but we have no
national spirit; five and twenty years of misfortunes
have smothered that spirit in France. We are like
our ancestors, we cannuosupPort either despotism or
liberty. Love for our King was our national spirit ;
but whither has it vanished in the political changes
that have agitated us so long ? In England the Mi-
nisters care little for the clamours of the Journals,
while they are supported by the majorities in the
Parliament; but who would Wish to be a Minister in
France it exposed to the attacks of the Journals I—.
These arguments were not promoted by a love for
despotism ; let the state of the public mind be exa-
_

mined every session, and welcomesbe the day when
the King, the Nation, and the Writers may be told
that the Liberty of the 14css was proclaimed as it
would not any longer be attended with danger.—
The orator summed up, and concluded with recom-
mending the adoption of the project of a law, with
to ameodmvul, peovitling•that tbe-C. users gbould be

chosen nom among the Magistrates. The speech
was ordered to be printed.
M. Gat.t.ols warmly attacked the principle of the
projet. He maintained, that it was contradictory to
the Bth article of the Constitutional Charter, which
says—" The French have a right to print and pub-
lish their opinions, if they conform to the laws de-
signed 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 the
2d of May had announced as one of the buts of the
liberal Constitution which he wai determined to
adopt. The laws which best establish the liberty of
the press were likewise those that punish its excesses
the most severely. You could not, therefore, but
await with just impatience that repressive law which
was finally to assure to France the peaceable, con.
slant, and regular exercise of that right. In this dis-
position you must have seen with astonishment, mix-
ed with regret, that the plan of the I.lw presented to
you was contrary to the Constitutional Charter. It
fixes methods of literary jurisdiction csmtrary to the
dispositions of the Charter, and not the.methods of
judicial procedure which it announces. It specifies-
what it does not permit, but does not specify what it
enjoins.—He then contended, that the proposed mea-
sures were not a restraint on the abuse of liberty, but
on liberty itself. He shewed the dangers of a lite-
rary censorship under a bad Government, which
might make it a medium of attaining the object pro-
posed by the famous decree of the Council of State
in 1761, which forbad the writing and printing of
works on matters relating to Administration. These
dangers would be more apparent, when it was con-
sidered that four-fifths of the works tin the subject of
the public administration did not czceed 20 beets,
and would consequently come under the cognizance
of the partial tribunal which it was proposed to esta-
blish, and which could not fail to stifle tree and use-
ful ideas, together with such as were false and perni-
cious. 44 In short, Gentlemen," continued M. Gal-
lois,44 the whole system of censorship and restriction
established by the plan of the law, both in regard to
larger works and the journals, is absolutely contras y.
to the principle of a representative Constitution, It
tends to deprive the nation of the information which
it has a right to receive on all subjects of public in-
terest, to form its opinion both respecting that inte-
rest and the persons whose duty it is to defend it.—
Whatever deprives a nation of. the knowledge of its
rights and interests, also deptives the government of
its real strength toe, in 110 i-country, the strength
of the.governinent resides in the public opinion, and
in that alone ; and the liberty of the press is the in-
strument of that opinion."
The Chamber ordered the speech of M. Gallois to
be printed.
M. Tuaut.r, who succeeded, contended that a mi-

tigated censorship
was the only fmans of guarding
from the incendiary pamphlets which inundates!
France in 1789, 90, and 91, and which had again
made their appearance.
M. Deerdscri siipported the whole of the Report. .
The chants conceded liberty of thought ; that li-
berty was incompatible with previous censrnship.—
The necessity of establishing the censorship, at leas;
for a time, was talked of ; hut under the pretext of
an imaginary inconvenience, that abuse would he
perpetuated. Since the 4th of June, circurnstenccc,
far from having become more unfavourable to the
liberty of the press, were in fact more propitious :
the public mind was sensibly improving.
M. Goeutansupported the sentiments of the mi-
notify of the Committee. Let us adjourn, said Ire,
teat liberty of the Press which may endanger the
happiness of our country. He proposed, therefore,
that in the event of a previous censorship being
voted. by the Chamber, it should. also decide—lst.
That this Censorship shall only include writings of
2(1 sheets of print. 2d. That the In y charged to
examine these writings shall be permanent, in order
that, if useful truths be found in these writings. they
may be published. 3d. 'Phu the law shall only be
in force till the nett Session of the Legislatnre, and
that at that period the same question be *gem
brougirt forward for discussion
M. Duamealep.—Gentlemen, the principle of the
Liberty of the Pies cannot be tioutottUl to men tot
good faith. In our modern sialr!,, at the point d
civilizationNihicn. we have reached, the Liberty of
the Press is the necessary zgis of ci.il and political
liberty. To deprive us in the one, is to destroy the
other. The national wish and the constitutional,
charter have formed of this principle a fundamental
maxim, which it will be in vain to attempt to de.
Buoy by lan interpretation contrary to the truth. Far
is it from my wish to protect hicentinnsnesc, -under
the semblance of liberty ; liberty itself is interested
in fesessing its own abuses. The system of the plan
ordains, generally speaking, a previous censotship
on the publication of all kinds of wsifings. The
articly appears to exempt therefrom works of more
than thirty printed sheets; but the fourteenth and
fifteenth articles destroy the effect of this exemption.
It is there said, that no writing can be published be-
fore having been declared or deposited ; and that the.
work will be seized if information is given against it.
to the Tribunals. Observe this expression : it is not
merely an examination. a decision of the Tribunal—
it is sufficient that it be informed against Py the
lowest agent of the Police, in order to us publication
being detayed for an indefinite time, which it is so
easy to prolong. As well might the law have de-
clared—nothing shall be published, nothing said in
France, but by order. Soon no book would apneas
but under the good pleasure of the Miiiisters—(A
laugh.) We have heard much of a Jury. which pre.
noancing in the last resort, will remedy the wrongs
of the Censorship. Reflect a lime • oil air mass of
writings which will annually by in waiting' for the
scissars of the Censor : view the Director-eknesal of
bgblei
cutahnt
three
neeenr
Peers
rsmsh
aaa
nsl
isd oh: wrve
eel teniDi tigeosip,a,
da
It: es:
ldßooaesltalkyyse,otlfhliewnrgi:ismsienukpsitun
to read minutely all these writings, and to decide oe
the opinion of each Censor. /led where shah be to,
responsibility of the Director ? he will be only a
gigantic tantom ; the Ministers will bug themselves
with impunity on the success of their despotic mea-
sures. The Meister, on presenting the plan of the
law, said that tne character tit use Frencti
was not suited to more liberty : that we hx.. tecrive,
from nature a mobility Of ini.tgittation, v.hic:. mus
Absolutely be teidrained ! fl.O not some one (laic
Alsu to calumm:tte our molotao y xlory in a pernehie..
which was profusely. disttibtged Cu you on the ver,

day when the plan was submitted to you ? Tou were
there told that that military glory was founded only
on individual selfishness. Ah l the justification of our
warriors will be fund in our history and in our
hearts. All France is equally tired of servitude and.
of licentiousness. French hone ur remains untouched.
The Kings of Europe acknowledged it; they van-
quished Bonaparte, but did rot pretend to triumph
over the French.-1 repeat it. without the LBwrty of
the Preis there can be no civil libcrty. Frenchmen!
will you permit the Statue of Liberty to be covered
with funeral crape I The King who governs us has
promised the- Liberty of the Press as one of the bless-
ings of his reign i it is upon it that the foundAtios of
die monarchy must be seated.
The printing of this discourse was demanded, put
to the vote, and rejected by a small majority.
The assembly then rose. and the discussion was
ordered to be continued on Monday.
The auditors were very numerous. brilliant, and
attentive. At one of the most vehement pawl's of
M. Dumolird's speech, it was apprehended Cog ap.
phrases were about to burst forth Irom all parts, but
a proper restraint toms observed by the public.