GIFT OF 
 W. X. Porter 
 
IReabfngg tor Stubentg 
 
 SPECIMENS. 
 
 MODERN 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 COMPILED BY 
 
 GEORGE P. BAKER 
 
 Assistant Professor in English, Harvard University 
 SECOND EDITION, REVISED 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 
 
 1897 
 
COPYRIGHT, 1893, 1897, 
 
 BY 
 HENRY HOLT & CO. 
 
 
 THE MERSHON COMPANY PRESS, 
 . J. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 THIS little book has been compiled to meet two 
 needs that have arisen in the editor's experience with 
 classes in Argumentative Composition at Harvard 
 University and Wellesley College. The first need is for 
 a small, inexpensive collection of specimens of argu- 
 mentation, edited especially for classes in Argumenta- 
 tive Composition. Constantly students have asked : 
 " Where can we find the speeches from which the illus* 
 trations in the lectures are drawn, and other arguments 
 that illustrate the suggestions and the rules that have 
 been given us ? " The difficulty in referring such stu- 
 dents to the existing collections of speeches and argu- 
 ments has been of several kinds. To become really 
 familiar with the necessary illustrations, with the 
 speeches chosen, a student must own the book contain- 
 ing them, but the large collections are too expensive 
 for most students. The smaller and cheaper books al- 
 most surely lack one of the speeches most desired by the 
 instructor. To ask a student to read one illustration 
 here, another there, is to put the speeches as a set be- 
 yond his purse, or if he is to look up all in some library, 
 to make too great a demand on his time. Moreover, 
 nearly all of the collections contain many specimens 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 of oratory famous, not for their power as arguments 
 but for mere brilliancy of style or for the conditions 
 under which they were given. Students browsing 
 in such books unguided as is the case in nearly all 
 the collections by any notes to point out what is the 
 really great argumentative work and why it is great, 
 are pretty sure to be attracted by what is clever and 
 entertaining merely, rather than by what is structural!) 
 perfect and convincing in argument. It has seemed 
 worth while, then, to select a half-dozen arguments in 
 which students could find corroboration of the lectur- 
 ers' words and further illustrations of them, and to 
 edit these carefully with notes to show the condition 
 under which the arguments were uttered ; wherein 
 their power lies ; and whence it comes. 
 
 The editor has tried, also, in his selecting, to find 
 material that should show to the beginner in Argu- 
 mentative Composition what, often, he does not seem 
 to understand, that argumentation is not a thing apart, 
 confined to law courts, but has its important place in 
 literary and scientific work. For this purpose, Lord 
 Mansfield on the Evans case, the "Junius" letter, 
 and Professor Huxley's lecture, are printed side 
 by side. 
 
 The second need arose from a special feature of 
 the work in Argumentative Composition at Harvard 
 College that may require a word of explanation. All 
 the prescribed argumentative writing at the college 
 has greatly improved since a system of briefs prelimin- 
 ary to the written arguments was arranged. By this 
 system a student makes an outline for his argumenta- 
 tive essay, consisting of introductory headings and of 
 
PREFACE. V 
 
 the headings of the brief proper. The former sum- 
 marize, as briefly as possible, the facts that must be 
 made clear before the argument itself can begin ; the 
 latter are all phrased as reasons for the conclusion to 
 be reached, and are carefully correlated by numbers 
 and letters, so that the relations of the different parts, 
 the structure as a whole, and the meaning at every 
 point, shall be clear to a reader. These briefs, cor- 
 rected by the instructors for structural or other faults, 
 are returned to the students* who revise them in ac- 
 cordance with the written suggestions of the instruc- 
 tors, and make the revised briefs the bases of their 
 " Forensics," so-called. 
 
 A class, before drawing briefs from its own material, 
 is asked to make a brief of some masterpiece of argu- 
 mentation, that it may learn what a brief is, and may 
 recognize the careful structure that underlies all great 
 argumentation. To provide material for this first 
 brief of all has been a problem. As Mr. Johnston 1 
 has noted, modern public speaking is losing the care- 
 ful structure that belonged to the orations of the past 
 just what the student of brief work needs to study. 
 Therefore, much that the collections of speeches con- 
 tain is unavailable for briefs. Nor must the selection 
 be long, for in analyzing a long argument a student 
 will get hopelessly involved. Finally, a student cannot 
 be asked to buy a book to get the material for but one 
 exercise of the year. The editor hopes that this com- 
 pilation will meet these difficulties that have faced 
 him each year when a class was studying the drawing 
 of briefs. Three of the selections, Lord Mansfield's 
 speech, the " Junius" letter, and Professor Huxley's 
 1 American Orations. 
 
VI JP&EfACE. 
 
 lecture, are so marked in structure that to draw a 
 brief from any one of them should not be too difficult 
 a task for a beginner in Argumentative Composition. 
 So brilliant, too, are all of them as arguments that the 
 analysis necessary for the brief will in its results more 
 than repay the student. That the beginner may see 
 what a brief is and the way in which it may be drawn 
 from an argument, the brief of Lord Chatham's 
 speech and the original have been printed. 
 
 Because some of the speeches were to be used for 
 briefs, it has several times been difficult, in the edit- 
 ing, to point out in detail the method by which the 
 great effects are gained, without giving such an out- 
 line of the speech that a student, reading it, could 
 have no further difficulty in making a brief of the 
 speech. If in any place the analysis of a speech 
 seems inadequate the fault should be attributed to 
 this reason, for in several places it seemed wisest to 
 leave to the student, guided by his instructor, detailed 
 analysis of methods. 
 
 The editor hopes, then, that the work will be useful 
 in three ways : as a fund of illustration for lectures 
 on Argumentative Composition which a class may 
 easily possess in common with its instructor ; as 
 material for training in the drawing of briefs ; and 
 for analyses by the class or the instructor, by the 
 methods used in the notes, not merely for structure 
 but also for persuasive methods and argumentative 
 skill. - 
 
 Though the first four selections are intended espe- 
 cially to bear on the drawing of briefs, Lord Erskine's 
 speech on the handling of evidence, and Henry 
 
PREFACE. Vll 
 
 Ward Beecher's speech on persuasion, all of these 
 illustrate more than one idea, and in the book as a 
 whole, the student should find illustrations for nearly 
 all, if not all, of the rudimentary rules for argumen- 
 tation. 
 
 GEO. P, BAKER. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE, MASS., 
 
 September 18, 1893. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PACK 
 
 Preface, iii 
 
 Directions for Drawing a Brief, , . . . ix 
 Specimen Brief, .....,.! 
 
 /Material for Briefs* 
 
 Lord Chatham, on Removing Troops from Boston, . . 7 
 
 Lord Mansfield, in the Case of Evans, .... 22 
 
 Junius, Letter to the Printer of the Public Advertiser^ . 41 
 
 T. H. Huxley, Lecture I. of Three Lectures on Evolution, 60 
 
 argument in (SeneraL 
 
 Lord Erskine, Defense of Gordon, . . , . . 86 
 
 persuasion, 
 
 Henry Ward Beecher, Liverpool Speech, . . .154 
 Lord Macaulay, Speech on Copyright, .... 179 
 
DIRECTIONS FOR DRAWING 
 A BRIEF.' 
 
 A good brief should be divided into three parts : 
 (i) The Introduction ; (2) The Brief Proper ; (3) 
 The Conclusion. 
 
 1. The Introduction should state as concisely as 
 possible, by suggestive phrases of a line or two, the 
 facts necessary to an understanding of the discussion 
 itself : namely, how the question arose ; what are the 
 facts admitted by both sides ; and by definition and 
 exposition, what is the exact point at issue. It should 
 clear away all extraneous matter, and should place 
 the essential idea clearly before the reader. 
 
 2. The Brief Proper should by a series of headings 
 and subheadings very concisely make clear to any 
 intelligent reader the development of the argument 
 by which the writer expects to prove the affirmative 
 or the negative of the question he has clearly stated 
 in the Introduction. From all the evidence for and 
 against him in the case, the writer should first select 
 the main ideas that prove his conclusion. These he 
 should arrange in a climactic order leading up to his 
 conclusion, the strongest idea coming last under ordi- 
 
 1 For further details in regard to drawing briefs, see Chapter IV 
 of " Principles of Argumentation." G. P. Baker. Bostoo: Ginn 
 #Co-, 1895. 
 
X DIRECTIONS FOR DRA WING A BRIEF. 
 
 nary circumstances. Under these main ideas he 
 should next place the ideas that support these but 
 are not by themselves equal in importance to the 
 main headings. In stating these subheadings he 
 should be careful to keep the climactic order. All of 
 the main headings and the subheadings should read 
 as reasons for the conclusion. The correlation of all 
 the parts should be distinctly marked by letters and 
 numbers. 
 
 The Proof that a writer will use divides itself 
 roughly into two parts : direct proof and refutation. 
 When a writer simply states an idea of his own and 
 supports it, that is direct proof ; when he takes an 
 idea urged against him by his opponent and tries to 
 overcome it, he refutes. If the objection is a broad 
 one, to the writer's case as a whole, it should stand 
 by itself, marked refutation ; if it is an objection to 
 some division or subdivision of the writer's work, he 
 will meet it best in treating that division or subdivi- 
 sion. That is, his idea is proved not only by proving 
 #., b., and c., reasons for it, but by disproving the state- 
 ment d. made by his opponent. 
 
 3. The Conclusion simply sums up briefly the argu- 
 ment, showing clearly how it leads to the conclusion, 
 which unless it is given at the beginning as the prop- 
 osition should always be stated. 
 
SPECIMEN BRIEF.' 
 
 DRAWN FROM THE SPEECH OF LORD CHATHAM ON 
 HIS MOTION FOR THE IMMEDIATE REMOVAL OF THE 
 BRITISH TROOPS FROM BOSTON. 
 
 Introduction. 
 
 The present course of the Ministry suggests un- 
 fairness. 
 
 ii. 
 
 The Ministr)' has been guilty of unfairness, namely 
 of misrepresentation, for 
 
 (a) Their representations that led to the passage of 
 the measures obnoxious to the American people 
 have been proved false, for 
 
 (i) The ministers said that these measures would 
 overawe the Americans, but the measures have 
 solidified the resistance of the Americans. 
 
 in. 
 
 Therefore, the troops should be immediately with- 
 drawn from Boston. 
 
 1 For further illustration of briefs, good and bad, see " Principles 
 of Argumentation." 
 
2 SPECIMEN BRIEF. 
 
 IV. 
 
 But a hearer, in considering this attempt at justice, 
 should remember that to try to be just to America is 
 not necessarily to exempt her from all obedience to 
 Great Britain. 
 
 Brief Proper. 
 
 The removal of the troops is necessary, because 
 
 A. It will show the willingness of the English to 
 treat amicably. 
 
 B. The resistance of the Americans was necessary 
 because 
 
 I. The obnoxious acts of Parliament were 
 tyrannical. 
 
 C. The means of enforcing the measures of Par- 
 liament have failed, for 
 
 I. The army of General Gage is " penned up 
 pining in inglorious inactivity." 
 
 II. The objection that the presence of this 
 army in Boston is a safeguard is untrue, for 
 
 (a) It is powerless, and held in contempt. 
 
 (b) It is an irritation to the Americans. 
 
 (c) The objection that General Qage is 
 needlessly inactive is untrue, for 
 
 (i) Any activity on his part would 
 mean " civil and unnatural war." 
 
 D. If Parliament tries by the aid of the army to 
 enforce its measures, the result will be bad, for 
 
 I. If Parliament were victorious, it would be 
 over an embittered people. 
 
SPECIMEN BRIEF. 3 
 
 II. The troops are not strong enough to resist 
 three million united, courageous people. 
 
 III. Persecution of these men whose fathers left 
 their homes to escape it should cease, since 
 
 (a) The objection of the Ministry that 
 the Americans " must not be heard " is 
 unjust, since 
 
 (i) It " lumps the innocent with the 
 
 guilty."* 
 
 The statement that "the union in America can- 
 not last " is untrue, for 
 
 I. The evidence of the so-called " commercial 
 bodies " is unreliable, for 
 
 (a) They do not really represent the class 
 for whom they profess to speak, 
 
 (b) And they are paid agents of the Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 (c) Even if they did represent the com- 
 mercial class of America, their judgment 
 would be untrustworthy, for 
 
 (1) Not the commercial class, but the 
 farming class, are the strength of 
 a nation ; 
 
 (2) And the American farmers are 
 unitedly arrayed for liberty. 
 
 II. The evidence of an authority (Dr. Franklin 
 plainly hinted), proves that the Americans, 
 for the sake of liberty, would endure far 
 more than they have as yet suffered, even 
 war and rapine. 
 
 F, The statement that the Americans should be 
 punished for illegal violence is untrue, for 
 
SPECIMEN BRIEF. 
 
 I. A chance for reconciliation should not be 
 missed. 
 
 II. Thirty thousand in Boston should not be 
 punished for the fault of forty or fifty. 
 
 III. Punishment means arousing the unap- 
 peasable wrath of the whole American 
 people. 
 
 IV. Even if the English people are victorious, 
 they cannot control the great tracts of con- 
 quered country. 
 
 V. The resistance should have been foreseen, 
 for 
 
 (a) The spirit that resists in America is 
 that of all English stock, that which 
 established the essential maxim of Eng- 
 lish liberty, " No taxation without the 
 consent of the taxed." 
 
 VI. The resistance will become too strong to 
 be overcome, for 
 
 (a) The English Whigs will aid them, for 
 (i) The spirit that moves the Americans 
 
 is that which has always belonged to 
 the Whigs. 
 
 (b) The Irish will aid them, for 
 
 (i) They have always maintained the 
 ideas the Americans support. 
 
 (c) The means to oppose this united body 
 is weak, for 
 
 (i) A few regiments in America and 
 18,000 men at home must oppose 
 three million Americans, millions of 
 Englishmen, and all the Irish. 
 
SPECIMEN BRIEF. 5 
 
 (2) And ministerial tricks against it 
 will fail, for 
 
 (a) The result must inevitably be 
 A "checkmate" for the minis-- 
 ters. 
 
 G. This removal of the troops must precede any 
 other step, because 
 
 I. The fear and the resentment of the Ameri- 
 cans must first of all be remedied ; 
 
 II. While the troops remain, resentment will 
 remain, for 
 
 (a) Any measures secured by force would 
 be, with the army in Boston, doubly 
 irritating. 
 
 (fr) When, as is the case, force cannot be 
 used, the mere presence of the army, 
 though it is itself in danger, is irritating. 
 H The views of Congress are moderate and rea- 
 sonable. 
 I. It is an old maxim that the first concession 
 
 comes most fitly from the superior. 
 J. While every policy urges withdrawal of the 
 troops, every danger warns the English from 
 keeping to the old course, for 
 
 I. That means foreign war, for 
 
 (a) France and Spain are watching for an 
 advantageous chance to interfere. 
 
 II. That means domestic trouble, for 
 
 (a) The king will lose all his power. 
 
 (b) The kingdom will be utterly undone. 1 
 
 1 Note that a conclusion is not printed by itself because, as the 
 proposition, it has been given in Introduction, III. 
 
SPECIMENS OF ARGUMENTATION. 
 
 MATERIAL FOR BRIEFS. 
 
 3Lor> Gbatbam, 
 
 Born 1708. Died 1778. 
 
 ON A MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS TO HIS MAJESTY, 
 TO GIVE IMMEDIATE ORDERS FOR REMOVING HIS 
 TROOPS FROM BOSTON. 
 
 Delivered in the House of Lords, January 20, 1775. 
 
 [The insistence of the King that the duty on tea should be main- 
 tained, when all the other taxation of the Colonies had been aban- 
 doned, led, in 1773, to the outbreak at Boston, when the cargoes of 
 the English tea ships were thrown into the harbor. The King, as a 
 result of this action, seemed bent upon turning his American sub- 
 jects into rebels by treating them as rebellious. The Ministry pre- 
 sented to and carried through Parliament several very determined 
 measures, bills to close the port of Boston, to deprive the Massa- 
 chusetts Colony of its charter, to bring persons accused of capital 
 offenses to England for trial, and sent troops to Boston to enforce 
 them. It was asserted by the ministers that these measures would 
 separate Massachusetts from the rest of the colonies, and would 
 overawe her. Instead, Massachusetts called out and armed her 
 militia, and all the other states, except Georgia, took up her cause, 
 sending delegates to the Congress which in September, 1774, met 
 at Philadelphia. This Congress issued an " Address to the People 
 of Great Britain," stating the case of the Colonies. Still, though 
 
8 LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 this determined front was shown by the Colonies, they generally 
 shrank from rising against the mother country. There seemed 
 still to be a chance for reconciliation. Lord Chatham, who had 
 steadily opposed the disastrous measures of Lord North and the 
 King, hoped for much from concessions, and in January, I775 
 took Dr. Franklin into his councils. On the twentieth of the month, 
 when Lord Dartmouth, Secretary of State, laid before the House 
 of Lords various papers concerning American affairs, Lord Chat- 
 ham moved "An Address to his Majesty for the Immediate 
 Removal of the Troops from Boston," and supported his motion 
 with the following speech.] 
 
 MY LORDS : After more than six weeks' posses- 
 sion of the papers now before you, on a subject so 
 momentous, at a time when the fate of this nation 
 hangs on every hour, the Ministry have at length con- 
 descended to submit to the consideration of this \ 
 House, intelligence from America with which your 
 Lordships and the public have been long and fully 
 acquainted. 
 
 The measures of last year, my Lords, which have 
 produced the present alarming state of America, i< 
 were founded upon misrepresentation. They were 
 violent, precipitate, and vindictive. The nation was 
 told that it was only a faction in Boston which opposed 
 all lawful government ; that an unwarrantable injury 
 had been done to private property, for which the jus- ij 
 tice of Parliament was called upon to order repara- 
 tion ; that the least appearance of firmness would awe 
 the Americans into submission, and upon only passing 
 the Rubicon we should be " sine clade victor" 
 
 That the people might choose their representatives 2< 
 under the influence of those misrepresentations, the 
 Parliament was precipitately dissolved. Thus the 
 
ON REMOVING TROOPS FROM BOSTON. II 
 
 mercial restraints, as from taxation for revenue, as 
 being unrepresented here, I pronounce them futile, 
 frivolous, and groundless. 
 
 When I urge this measure of recalling the troops 
 5 from Boston, I urge it on this pressing principle, that 
 it is necessarily preparatory to the restoration of your 
 peace and the establishment of your prosperity. It 
 will then appear that you are disposed to treat amica- 
 bly and equitably ; and to consider, revise, and repeal, 
 
 10 if it should be found necessary (as I affirm it will), 
 those violent acts and declarations which have dis- 
 seminated confusion throughout your empire. 
 
 Resistance to your acts was necessary as it was 
 just ; and your vain declarations of the omnipotence 
 
 15 of Parliament, and your imperious doctrines of the 
 necessity of submission, will be found equally im- 
 potent to convince or to enslave your fellow-subjects 
 in America, who feel that tyranny, whether ambitioned 
 by an individual part of the Legislature, or the bodies 
 
 20 who compose it, is equally intolerable to British sub- 
 jects. 
 
 The means of enforcing this thraldom are found to 
 be as ridiculous and weak in practice as they are un- 
 just in principle. Indeed, I cannot but feel the most 
 
 25 anxious sensibility for. the situation of General Gage, 
 and the troops under his command ; thinking him, as 
 I do, a man of humanity and understanding; and 
 entertaining, as I ever will, the highest respect, the 
 warmest love for the British troops. Their situa- 
 
 3otion is truly unworthy ; penned up pining in inglo- 
 rious inactivity. They are an army of impotence. 
 You may call them an army of safety and of guard ; 
 
10 LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 I wish, my Lords, not to lose a day in this urgent, 
 pressing crisis. An hour now lost in allaying ferments 
 in America may produce years of calamity. For my 
 own part, I will not desert, for a moment, the conduct 
 of this weighty business, from the first to the last. 5 
 Unless nailed to my bed by the extremity of sickness, 
 I will give it unremitted attention. I will knock at 
 the door of this sleeping and confounded Ministry, 
 and will rouse them to a sense of their danger. 
 
 When I state the importance of the colonies to this 10 
 country, and the magnitude of danger hanging over 
 this country from the present plan of misadministra- 
 tion practiced against them, I desire not to be under- 
 stood to argue for a reciprocity of indulgence between 
 England and America. I contend not for indulgence, 15 
 but justice to America ; and I shall ever contend that 
 the Americans justly owe obedience to us in a limited 
 degree they owe obedience to our ordinances of 
 trade and navigation ; but let the line be skilfully 
 drawn between the objects of those ordinances and 20 
 their private internal property. Let the sacredness of 
 their property remain inviolate. Let it be taxable 
 only by their own consent, given in their provincial 
 assemblies, else it will cease to be property. As to the 
 metaphysical refinements, attempting to show that the 25 
 Americans are equally free from obedience and corn- 
 makes a hearer doubt the sincerity of the Ministry, passes to a 
 direct charge that only misrepresentation (evidently by the Ministry, 
 though this is not directly stated) led to actions of Parliament which 
 resulted in the ignominy that Lord Chatham paints by an illustra- 30 
 tion. The words of this illustration he carefully selected to goad 
 his hearers to contempt for those guilty of the misrepresentation. 
 
ON REMOVING TROOPS FROM BOSTON. II 
 
 mercial restraints, as from taxation for revenue, as 
 being unrepresented here, I pronounce them futile, 
 frivolous, and groundless. 
 
 When I urge this measure of recalling the troops 
 5 from Boston, I urge it on this pressing principle, that 
 it is necessarily preparatory to the restoration of your 
 peace and the establishment of your prosperity. It 
 will then appear that you are disposed to treat amica- 
 bly and equitably ; and to consider, revise, and repeal, 
 
 10 if it should be found necessary (as I affirm it will), 
 those violent acts and declarations which have dis- 
 seminated confusion throughout your empire. 
 
 Resistance to your acts was necessary as it was 
 just ; and your vain declarations of the omnipotence 
 
 15 of Parliament, and your imperious doctrines of the 
 necessity of submission, will be found equally im- 
 potent to convince or to enslave your fellow-subjects 
 in America, who feel that tyranny, whether ambitioned 
 by an individual part of the Legislature, or the bodies 
 
 20 who compose it, is equally intolerable to British sub- 
 jects. 
 
 The means of enforcing this thraldom are found to 
 be as ridiculous and weak in practice as they are un- 
 just in principle. Indeed, I cannot but feel the most 
 
 25 anxious sensibility fon the situation of General Gage, 
 and the troops under his command ; thinking him, as 
 I do, a man of humanity and understanding ; and 
 entertaining, as I ever will, the highest respect, the 
 warmest love for the British troops. Their situa- 
 
 3otion is truly unworthy ; penned up pining in inglo- 
 rious inactivity. They are an army of impotence. 
 You may call them an army of safety and of guard ; 
 
12 LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 but they are, in truth, an army of impotence and con. 
 tempt ; and, to make the folly equal to the disgrace, 
 they are an army of irritation and vexation. 
 
 But I find a report creeping abroad that ministers 
 censure General Gage's inactivity. Let them censure 5 
 him it becomes them it becomes their justice and 
 their honor. I mean not to censure his inactivity. 
 It is a prudent and necessary inaction ; but it is a 
 miserable condition, where disgrace is prudence, and 
 where it is necessary to be contemptible. This tame- 10 
 ness, however contemptible, cannot be censured ; for 
 the first drop of blood shed in civil and unnatural war 
 might be " immedicabile vulnus" 
 
 I therefore urge and conjure your Lordships imme- 
 diately to adopt this conciliating measure. I will 15 
 pledge myself for its immediately producing concilia- 
 tory effects, by its being thus well-timed ; but if you 
 delay till your vain hope shall be accomplished of 
 triumphantly dictating reconciliation, you delay for- 
 ever. But, admitting that this hope (which in truth 20 
 is desperate) should be accomplished, what do you 
 gain by the imposition of your victorious amity ? You 
 will be untrusted and unthanked. Adopt, then, the 
 grace, while you have the opportunity, of reconcile- 
 ment or at least prepare the way. Allay the ferment 25 
 preparing in America, by removing the obnoxious hos- 
 tile cause obnoxious and unserviceable ; for their 
 merit can be only inaction : " Non dimicare est vin- 
 cere" their victory can never be by exertions. Their 
 force would be most disproportionately exerted against 30 
 a brave, generous, and united people, with arms in 
 their hands, and courage in their hearts : three mil- 
 
ON REMOVING TROOPS FROM BOSTON. 13 
 
 lions of people, the genuine descendants of a valiant 
 and pious ancestry, driven to those deserts by the 
 narrow maxims of a superstitious tyranny. And is 
 the spirit of persecution never to be appeased ? Are 
 5 the brave sons of those brave forefathers to inherit 
 their sufferings, as they have inherited their virtues ? 
 Are they to sustain the infliction of the most oppres- 
 sive and unexampled severity, beyond the accounts of 
 history or description of poetry : " Rhadamanthus habet 
 
 lodurissima regna, castigatque AUDITQUE." So says the 
 wisest poet, and perhaps the wisest statesman and 
 politician. But our ministers say the Americans must 
 not be heard. They have been condemned unheard. 
 The indiscriminate hand of vengeance has lumped 
 
 15 together innocent and guilty ; with all the formalities 
 of hostility, has blocked up the town [Boston], and 
 reduced to beggary and famine thirty thousand in- 
 habitants. 
 
 But his Majesty is advised that the union in 
 
 20 America cannot last. Ministers have more eyes than 
 I, and should have more ears ; but, with all the in- 
 formation I have been able to procure, I can pro- 
 nounce it a union solid, permanent, and effectual. 
 Ministers may satisfy themselves, and delude the 
 
 25 public, with the report of what they call commercial 
 bodies in America. They are not commercial. They 
 are your packers and factors. They live upon noth- 
 ing, for I call commission nothing. I speak of the 
 ministerial authority for this American intelligence 
 
 3 the runners for government, who are paid for their 
 intelligence. But these are not the men, nor this the 
 influence, to be considered in America, when we esti- 
 
14 LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 mate the firmness of their union. Even to extend 
 the question, and to take in the really mercantile 
 circle, will be totally inadequate to the consideration. 
 Trade, indeed, increases the wealth and glory of a 
 country ; but its real strength and stamina are to be 5 
 looked for among the cultivators of the land. In 
 their simplicity of life is found the simpleness of 
 virtue the integrity and courage of freedom. These 
 true, genuine sons of the earth are invincible ; and 
 they surround and hem in the mercantile bodies, ic 
 even if these bodies (which supposition I totally 
 disclaim) could be supposed disaffected to the cause 
 of liberty. Of this general spirit existing in the 
 British nation (for so I wish to distinguish the real and 
 genuine Americans from the pseudo-traders I have 15 
 described) of this spirit of independence, animating 
 the nation of America, I have the most authentic in- 
 formation. It is not new among them. It is, and has 
 ever been, their established principle, their confirmed 
 persuasion. It is their nature and their doctrine. 2c 
 
 I remember, some years ago, when the repeal of 
 the Stamp Act was in agitation, conversing in a 
 friendly confidence with a person of undoubted re- 
 spect and authenticity, on that subject, and he assured 
 me with a certainty which his judgment and oppor-2$ 
 tunity gave him, that these were the prevalent and 
 steady principles of America that you might destroy 
 their towns, and cut them off from the superfluities, 
 perhaps the conveniences of life, but that they were 
 prepared to despise your power, and would not lament 30 
 their loss, while they have what, my Lords ? their 
 woods and their liberty. The name of my authority, 
 
OAT REMOVING TROOPS PROM BOSTON. 15 
 
 if I am called upon, will authenticate the opinion 
 irrefragably. a 
 
 If illegal violences have been, as it is said, com- 
 mitted in America, prepare the way, open the door 
 5 of possibility for acknowledgment and satisfaction ; 
 but proceed not to such coercion, such proscription ; 
 cease your indiscriminate inflictions ; amerce not 
 thirty thousand oppress not three millions for the 
 fault of forty or fifty individuals. Such severity of 
 
 10 injustice must forever render incurable the wounds 
 you have already given your colonies ; you irritate 
 them to unappeasable rancor. What though you 
 march from town to town, and from province to prov- 
 ince ; though you should be able to enforce a tempor- 
 
 15 ary and local submission (which I only suppose, not 
 admit), how shall you be able to secure the obedience 
 of the country you leave behind you in your progress, 
 to grasp the dominion of eighteen hundred miles of 
 continent, populous in numbers, possessing valor, 
 
 20 liberty, and resistance ? 
 
 This resistance to your arbitrary system of taxa- 
 tion might have been foreseen. It was obvious from 
 the nature of things, and of mankind ; and, above all, 
 from the Whiggish spirit flourishing in that country. 
 
 25 The spirit which now resists your taxation in 
 America is the same which formerly opposed loans, 
 benevolences, and ship-money in England ; the same 
 spirit which called all England " on its legs," and by 
 the Bill of Rights vindicated the English Constitu-, 
 
 3otion ; the same spirit which established the great 
 fundamental, essential maxim of your liberties, that no 
 9 Benjamin Franklin. 
 
16 LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 subject of England shall be taxed but by his own con* 
 sent? 
 
 This glorious spirit of Whiggism animates three 
 millions in America, who prefer poverty with liberty 
 to gilded chains and sordid affluence ; and who will $ 
 die in defense of their rights as men, as freemen. 
 What shall oppose this spirit, aided by the congenial 
 flame glowing in the breast of every Whig in England, 
 to the amount, I hope, of double the American num- 
 bers ? Ireland they have to a man. In that country, 10 
 joined as it is with the cause of the colonies, and 
 placed at their head, the distinction I contend for is 
 and must be observed. This country superintends 
 and controls their trade and navigation ; but they tax 
 themselves. And this distinction between external and 15 
 
 3 Two main ideas underlie this speech, each skilfully selected 
 for its persuasive appeal to the audience addressed and developed 
 with masterly skill. The first, that all the existing troubles with 
 America have resulted from misrepresentation by the Ministry, 
 frees the nation at large from shame, disposes them to listen 2 o 
 to Lord Chatham's plea that a bad business brought about by 
 misrepresentation cannot be bettered by pursuing the old policy. 
 When this first idea and its corollary have been stated, Lord 
 Chatham, to support his statement of the plan to be pursued, 
 brings in the second idea, that from what his hearers prize as 25 
 perhaps their greatest inheritance from their fathers, the principle 
 that a man shall not, without his consent, be taxed, the Americans, 
 inheriting this idea ^rcm the aame forefathers, took their inspira- 
 tion for resistance. Logic and fairness, then, two powerful 
 appeals to the British mind, demanded that a trouble which arose 30 
 because the English had by misrepresentation been made to mis- 
 understand the Americans when standing firm for a principle 
 equally dear to the English, should be overcome by prompt con- 
 cessions from England. 
 
 }u 
 
ON REMOVING TROOPS FROM BOSTON. I? 
 
 internal control is sacred and insurmountable ; it is 
 involved in the abstract nature of things. Property 
 is private, individual, absolute. Trade is an extended 
 and complicated consideration : it reaches as far as 
 5 ships can sail or winds can blow : it is a great and 
 various machine. To regulate the numberless move- 
 ments of its several parts, and combine them into 
 effect for the good of the whole, requires the super- 
 intending wisdom and energy of the supreme power 
 
 10 in the empire. But this supreme power has no effect 
 toward internal taxation ; for it does not exist in that 
 relation ; there is no such thing, no such idea in this 
 Constitution, as a supreme power operating upon 
 property. Let this distinction then remain forever 
 
 15 ascertained ; taxation is theirs, commercial regulation 
 is ours. As an American, I would recognize to Eng- 
 land her supreme right of regulating commerce and 
 navigation ; as an Englishman by birth and principle, 
 I recognize to the Americans their supreme, unaliena- 
 
 2oble right in their property: a right which they are 
 justified in the defense of to the last extremity. To 
 maintain this principle is the common cause of the 
 Whigs on the other side of the Atlantic and on this. 
 " 'Tis liberty to liberty engaged," that they will defend 
 
 25 themselves, their families, and their country. In this 
 great cause they are immovably allied : it is the 
 alliance of God and nature immutable, eternal 
 fixed as the firmament of heaven. 
 
 To such united force, what force shall be opposed ? 
 
 30 What, my Lords? A few regiments in America, and 
 seventeen or eighteen thousand men at home ! The 
 idea is too ridiculous to take up a moment of your 
 
1 8 LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 Lordships' time. Nor can such a national and prin- 
 cipled union be resisted by the tricks of office, or 
 ministerial manoeuvre. Laying of papers on your 
 table, or counting numbers on a division, will not 
 avert or postpone the hour of danger. It must arrive, 5 
 my Lords, unless these fatal acts are done away ; it 
 must arrive in all its horrors, and then these boastful 
 ministers, spite of all their confidence and all their 
 manoeuvres, shall be forced to hide their heads. They 
 shall be forced to a disgraceful abandonment of their 10 
 present measures and principles, which they avow, 
 but cannot defend ; measures which they presume to 
 attempt, but cannot hope to effectuate. They cannot, 
 my Lords, they cannot stir a step ; they have not a 
 move left ; they are checkmated 7 I5 
 
 But it is not repealing this act of Parliament, it is 
 not repealing a piece of parchment, that can restore 
 America to our bosom. You must repeal her fears 
 and her resentments, and you may then hope for her 
 love and gratitude. But now, insulted with an armed 2 o 
 force posted at Boston, irritated with a hostile array 
 before her eyes, her concessions, if you could force 
 them, would be suspicious and insecure ; they will be 
 " irato animo " [with angry spirit] ; they will not be 
 the sound, honorable passions of freemen ; they will 25 
 be the dictates of fear and extortions of force. But 
 it is more than evident that you cannot force them, 
 united as they are, to your unworthy terms of submis- 
 sion. It is impossible. And when I hear General 
 Gage censured for inactivity, I must retort with indig- 30 
 nation on those whose intemperate measures and 
 improvident counsels have betrayed him into his 
 
ON' REMOVING TROOPS FROM BOSTON. 19 
 
 present situation. His situation reminds me, my 
 Lords, of the answer of a French general in the civil 
 wars of France M. Conde opposed to M. Turenne. 
 He was asked how it happened that he did not take 
 5 his adversary prisoner, as he was often very near him. 
 " J'ai peur," replied Concle, very honestly, " j'ai peur 
 qu'il ne me prenne ; " Pm afraid he'll take me. 
 
 When your Lordships look at the papers transmitted 
 us from America when you consider their decency, 
 
 10 firmness, and wisdom, you cannot but respect their 
 cause, and wish to make it your own. For myself, 
 I must declare and avow, that in all my reading 
 and observation and it has been my favorite study 
 I have read Thucydides, and have studied and ad- 
 
 15 mired the master-states of the world that for solidity 
 of reasoning, force of sagacity, and wisdom of con- 
 elusion, under such a complication of difficult circum- 
 stances, no nation or body of men can stand in 
 preference to the general Congress at Philadelphia. 
 
 20 1 trust it is obvious to your Lordships that all 
 attempts to impose servitude upon such men, to 
 establish despotism over such a mighty continental 
 nation, must be vain, must be fatal. We shall be 
 forced ultimately to retract ; let us retract while we 
 
 25 can, not when we must. I say we must necessarily 
 undo these violent oppressive acts. 4 They must be 
 repealed. You will repeal them. I pledge myself 
 for it, that you will, in the end, repeal them. I stake 
 my reputation on it. I will consent to be taken for 
 
 30 an idiot if they are not finally repealed. Avoid, then, 
 
 4 The Boston Port Bill and the act taking away the charter of 
 Massachusetts. 
 
20 LORD CHATHAM. 
 
 this humiliating, disgraceful necessity. With a dig- 
 nity becoming your exalted situation, make the first 
 advances to concord, to peace, and happiness ; for 
 that is your true dignity, to act with prudence and 
 justice. That you should first concede is obvious, 5 
 from sound and rational policy. Concession comes 
 with better grace and more salutary effect from 
 superior power. It reconciles superiority of power 
 with the feelings of men, and establishes solid con- 
 fidence on the foundations of affection and gratitude. 10 
 
 So thought a wise poet and a wise man in political 
 sagacity the friend of Mecaenas, and the eulogist of 
 Augustus. To him, the adopted son and successor 
 of the first Caesar to him, the master of the world, 
 he wisely urged this conduct of prudence and dignity : 15 
 " Tuque prior , tit parce ; projice tela manu." 
 
 Every motive, therefore, of justice and of policy, of 
 dignity and of prudence, urges you to allay the fer- 
 ment in America by a removal of your troops from 
 Boston, by a repeal of your acts of Parliament, and 2$ 
 by demonstration of amicable dispositions toward 
 your colonies. On the other hand, every danger and 
 every hazard impend to deter you from perseverance 
 in your present ruinous measures. Foreign war 
 hanging over your heads by a slight and brittle 25 
 thread ; France and Spain watching your conduct, 
 and waiting for the maturity of your errors, with 
 a vigilant eye to America and the temper of your 
 colonies, more than to their own concerns, be they 
 what they may. 30 
 
 To conclude, my Lords, if the ministers thus perse- 
 vere in misadvising and misleading the King, I will 
 
ON REMOVING TROOPS FROM BOSTON. 21 
 
 not say that they can alienate the affections of his 
 subjects from his crown, but I will affirm that they 
 will make the crown not worth his wearing. I will not 
 say that the King is betrayed, but I will pronounce 
 5 that the kingdom is undone? 
 
 5 In this brief, skilfully worded paragraph, Lord Chatham did 
 much, suggesting even more than he said directly. Saying that he 
 will not say certain things, he brings to the King's ear what are 
 evidently popular charges against him, and hints at great possible 
 
 10 dangers for the King. Both of the statements should make the 
 King apprehensive, the first, that he may lose the affection of his 
 people ; the second, that they may come to regard him as a mere 
 tool of his ministers. Lord Chatham, with fine irony, apparently 
 shrinks from two bold statements only to make two others less 
 
 15 specific, but more inclusive, and for King and people more terri- 
 fying. Warning the people of the great dangers of the time, he 
 yet hints approvingly the steadiness of their loyalty to the King, 
 and throwing the blame for existing troubles on the Ministry, turns 
 tfie people toward the King. Threatening the King with great 
 
 20 possible dangers, he makes him feel his need of the support of 
 the people, and turns him away from the Ministry, who alone 
 are responsible for existing evils. 
 
5Lorb 
 
 Born 1705. Died 1793. 
 
 SPEECH IN THE CASE OF THE CHAMBERLAIN OF LON. 
 DON AGAINST ALLAN EVANS. 
 
 Delivered in the House of Lords, February 4, 1767. 
 
 [" The city of London was in want of a new mansion house 
 for the Lord Mayor, and resolved to build one on a scale of be- 
 coming magnificence. But, as the expense would be great, some 
 ingenious churchmen devised a plan for extorting a large part of 
 the money out of the Dissenters, who had for a number of years 
 been growing in business and property, under the protection of 
 the Toleration Act. The mode was this. A by-law of the city 
 was passed, imposing a fine of ^600 on any person who should be 
 elected as sheriff and decline to serve. Some wealthy individual 
 was then taken from the dissenting body, and by a concert among 
 the initiated was chosen to the office of sheriff. Of course he was 
 not expected to serve, for the Test and Corporation Acts rendered 
 him incapable. He was, therefore, compelled to decline ; and 
 was then fined ;6oo, under a by-law framed for the very purpose 
 of extorting this money ! Numerous appointments were thus made, 
 and ;i 5,000 were actually paid in ; until it became a matter of 
 mere sport to " roast a Dissenter," and bring another 600 into 
 the treasury toward the expenses of the mansion house. 
 
 ' ' At length Allan Evans, a man of spirit, who had been selected 
 as a victim, resolved to try the question. He refused to pay the 
 fine, and was sued in the Sheriff's Court. Here he pleaded his 
 rights under the Toleration Act, but lost his cause. He appealed 
 to the Court of Hustings, where the decision was affirmed. He 
 then appealed to the Court of Common Pleas, where judgment 
 went in his favor ; the decisions of the courts below being unani- 
 mously reversed. The city now brought a writ of error through 
 
 99 
 
THE CASE OF EVANS. 23 
 
 their Chamberlain, and carried the case before the House of Lords. 
 Here the subject was taken up by Lord Mansfield, who in common 
 with all the judges but one of the Court of the King's Bench, was 
 of opinion that Evans was protected by the Toleration Act, and ex- 
 empted from the obligation to act as sheriff. These views he 
 maintained in the following speech, which had great celebrity at 
 the time, and is spoken of by Lord Campbell as * one of the finest 
 specimens of forensic eloquence to be found in our books.' The 
 judgment of the Court of the King's Bench was affirmed by the 
 House of Lords." Goodrich. 1 ] 
 
 MY LORDS : As I made the motion for taking the 
 opinion of the learned judges, and proposed the ques- 
 tion your Lordships have been pleased to put to them, 
 it may be expected that I should make some farther 
 
 I motion, in consequence of the opinions they have 
 delivered.* 
 
 In moving for the opinion of the judges, I had two 
 views. The first was, that the House might have the 
 benefit of their assistance in forming a right judgment 
 
 >in this cause now before us, upon this writ of error. 
 The next was, that the question being fully discussed, 
 the grounds of our judgment, together with their 
 
 1 The notes marked " Goodrich " are reprinted by permission of 
 Messrs. Harper & Brothers from Goodrich's " Select British Elo- 
 
 ; quence," 1852. 
 
 8 In this speech a reader should note its remarkable compactness, 
 brevity, and directness, and the careful exclusion, until the main ar- 
 gument is concluded, of any appeal to the feelings. Something of 
 this compactness comes from the fact that Lord Mansfield spoke 
 
 > rather as a judge summing up a case, with the evidence of which 
 his hearers were familiar, than as a lawyer who must show the 
 value and significance of the evidence which he uses or combats. 
 As the origin of the case, and its condition at the time of his speech, 
 were Hnown to all, he could make his introduction very brief. 1$ 
 
24 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 exceptions, limitations, and restrictions, might be 
 clearly and certainly known, as a rule to be followed 
 hereafter in all future cases of the like nature ; and 
 this determined me as to the manner of wording the 
 question, " How far the defendant might, in the pres- 
 ent case, be allowed to plead- his disability in bar of 
 the action brought against him ?" 
 
 The question thus worded shows the point upon 
 which your Lordships thought this case turned ; and 
 the answer necessarily fixes a criterion, under what 
 circumstances, and by what persons, such a disability 
 may be pleaded as an exemption from the penalty 
 inflicted by this by-law, upon those who decline taking 
 upon them the office of sheriff. 
 
 In every view in which I have been able to consider 
 this matter, I think this action cannot be supported. 
 
 If they rely on the Corporation Act ; by the 
 literal and express provision of that act, no person 
 can be elected who hath not within a year taken the 
 sacrament in the Church of England. The defendant 
 hath not taken the sacrament within a year ; he is not, 
 therefore, elected. Here they fail. 
 
 If they ground it on the general design of the 
 
 was his work to select from the mass of charges and counter- 
 charges, with the evidence pro and con attaching to them, the 
 essential ideas, and to show their significance clearly to his hearers. 
 By a brilliant analysis made before his speech, he reduced the 
 case to a simple outline, and then in his speech devoted himself to 
 making this outline clear and convincing. Relying on evidence he 
 knew to be in the minds of his hearers, excluding every idea 
 that did not make clearer his main or subordinate propositions, 
 wasting not a word, he moved with neat transitions steadily to his 
 goal, 
 
THE CASE OF EVANS. 25 
 
 Legislature in passing the Corporation Act ; the de- 
 sign was to exclude Dissenters from office, and disable 
 them from serving. For, in those times, when a spirit 
 of intolerance prevailed, and severe measures were 
 pursued, the Dissenters were reputed and treated as 
 persons ill-affected and dangerous to the government. 
 The defendant, therefore, a Dissenter, and in the eye 
 of this law a person dangerous and ill-affected, is ex- 
 cluded from office, and disabled from serving. Here 
 they fail. 
 
 If they ground the action on their own by-law ; 
 that by-law was professedly made to procure fit and 
 able persons to serve the office, and the defendant is 
 not fit and able, being expressly disabled by statute 
 law. Here, too, they fail. 
 
 If they ground it on his disability's being owing to 
 a neglect of taking the sacrament at church, when he 
 ought to have done it, the Toleration Act having 
 freed the Dissenters from all obligation to take the 
 sacrament at church, the defendant is guilty of no 
 neglect no criminal neglect. Here, therefore, they 
 fail. 
 
 These points, my Lords, will appear clear and plain. 
 
 The Corporation Act, pleaded by the defendant 
 as rendering him ineligible to this office, and incapable 
 of taking it upon him, was most certainly intended by 
 the Legislature to prohibit the persons therein de- 
 scribed being elected to any corporation offices, and 
 to disable them from taking such offices upon them. 
 > The act had two parts, first, it appointed a commis- 
 sion for turning out all that were at that time in office, 
 who would not comply with what was required as 
 
26 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 the condition of their continuance therein, and even 
 gave a power to tu-rn them out, though they should 
 comply ; and then it farther enacted, that, from the 
 termination of that commission, no person hereafter, 
 who had not taken the sacrament according to the 5 
 rites of the Church of England within one year pre- 
 ceding the time of such election, should be placed, 
 chosen, or elected into any office of, or belonging to, 
 the government of any corporation ; and this was 
 done, as it was expressly declared in the preamble to 10 
 the act, in order to perpetuate the succession in cor- 
 porations in the hands of persons well-affected to 
 government in church and state. 
 
 It was not their design (as hath been said) " to 
 bring such persons into corporations by inducing 15 
 them to take the sacrament in the Church of Eng- 
 land " ; the Legislature did not mean to tempt per- 
 sons who were ill-affected to the government occa- 
 sionally to conform. It was not, I say, their design 
 to bring them in. They could not trust them, lest 20 
 they should use the power of their offices to distress 
 and annoy the state. And the reason is alleged in 
 the act itself. It was because there were " evil 
 spirits " among them ; and they were afraid of evil 
 spirits, and determined to keep them out. They 25 
 therefore put it out of the power of electors to choose 
 such persons, and out of their power to serve ; and 
 accordingly prescribed a mark or character, laid down 
 a description whereby they should be known and dis- 
 tinguished by their conduct previous to such an elec- 30 
 tion. Instead of appointing a condition of their serv- 
 ing the office, resulting from their future conduct, or 
 
THE CASE OF EVANS. 27 
 
 some consequent action to be performed by them, 
 they declared such persons incapable of being chosen 
 as had not taken the sacrament in the Church within 
 a year before such election ; and, without this mark 
 5 of their affection to the Church, they could not be in 
 office, and there could be no election. But as the 
 law then stood, no man could have pleaded this dis- 
 ability, resulting from the Corporation Act, in bar of 
 such an action as is now brought against the defend- 
 
 10 ant, because this disability was owing to what was 
 then, in the eye of the law, a crime ; every man being 
 required by the canon law (received and confirmed by 
 the statute law) to take the sacrament in the Church 
 at least once a year. The law would not then permit 
 
 15 a man to say that he had not taken the sacrament in 
 the Church of England ; and he could not be allowed 
 to plead it in bar of any action brought against him. 
 
 But the case is quite altered since the Act of 
 Toleration. It is now no crime for a man, who is 
 
 20 within the description of that act, to say he is a Dis- 
 senter ; nor is it any crime for him not to take the 
 sacrament according to the rites of the Church of 
 England ; nay, the crime is, if he does it contrary to 
 the dictates of his conscience. 
 
 25 If it is a crime not to take the sacrament at church, 
 it must be a crime by some law ; which must be either 
 common or statute law, the canon law. enforcing it 
 being dependent wholly upon the statute law. Now 
 the statute law is repealed as to persons capable of 
 
 30 pleading [under the Toleration Act] that they are so 
 and so qualified ; and therefore the canon law is re* 
 pealed with regard to those persons, 
 
28 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 If it is a crime by common law, it must be so either 
 by usage or principle. But there is no usage or cus- 
 tom, independent of positive law, which makes non- 
 conformity a crime. The eternal principles of natural 
 religion are part of the common law. The essential 5 
 principles of revealed religion are part of the common 
 law ; so that any person reviling, subverting, or ridi- 
 culing them, may be prosecuted at common law. But 
 it cannot be shown, from the principles of natural or 
 revealed religion, that, independent of positive law, 10 
 temporal punishments ought to be inflicted for mere 
 opinions with respect to particular modes of worship. 
 
 Persecution for a sincere though erroneous con- 
 science is not to be deduced from reason or the fit- 
 ness of things. It can only stand upon positive law. 15 
 
 It has been said that "the Toleration Act only 
 amounts to an exemption of the Protestant Dis- 
 senters from the penalties of certain laws therein par- 
 ticularly mentioned, and to nothing more ; that if it 
 had been intended to bear, and to have any operation 2 o 
 upon the Corporation Act, the Corporation Act ought 
 to have been mentioned therein ; and there ought to 
 have been some enacting clause, exempting Dissenters 
 from prosecution in consequence of this act, and 
 enabling them to plead their not having received the 25 
 sacrament according to the rites of the Church of 
 England in bar of such action." But this is much too 
 limited and 'narrow a conception of the Toleration 
 Act, which amounts consequentially to a great deal 
 more than this ; and it hath consequentially an infer- 30 
 ence and operation upon the Corporation Act in 
 particular. The Toleration Act renders that which 
 
THE CASE OF EVANS. 29 
 
 was illegal before, now legal. The Dissenters' way of 
 worship is permitted and allowed by this act. It is 
 not only exempted from punishment, but rendered 
 innocent and lawful. It is established ; it is put 
 
 5 under the protection, and is not merely under the 
 connivance of the law. In case those who are ap- 
 pointed by law to register dissenting places of wor- 
 ship refuse on any pretense to do it, we must, upon 
 application, send a mandamus to compel them. 
 
 10 Now there cannot be a plainer position than that 
 the law protects nothing in that very respect in which 
 it is (in the eye of the law) at the same time a crime. 
 Dissenters, within the description of the Toleration 
 Act, are restored to a legal consideration and ca- 
 
 15 pacity ; and a hundred consequences will from thence 
 follow, which are not mentioned in the act. For in- 
 stance, previous to the Toleration Act> it was unlaw- 
 ful to devise any legacy for the support of dissenting 
 congregations, or for the benefit of dissenting minis- 
 
 2oters ; for the law knew no such assemblies, and no 
 such persons ; and such a devise was absolutely void, 
 being left to what the law called superstitious pur- 
 poses. But will it be said in any court in England 
 that such a devise is not a good and valid one now ? 
 
 25 And yet there is nothing said of this in the Toleration 
 Act. By this act the Dissenters are freed, not only 
 from the pains and penalties of the laws therein par- 
 ticularly specified, but from all ecclesiastical censures 
 and from all penalty and punishment whatsoever, on 
 
 30 account of their nonconformity, which is allowed and 
 protected by this act, and is, therefore, in the eye of 
 ;he law, no longer a crime. Now, if the 
 
3 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 may say he is a Dissenter ; if the law doth not stop 
 his mouth ; if he may declare that he hath not taken 
 the sacrament according to the rites of the Church of 
 England, without being considered as criminal ; if, I 
 say, his mouth is not stopped by the law, he may then 5 
 plead his not having taken the sacrament according 
 to the rites of the Church of England, in bar of this 
 action. It is Such a disability as doth not leave him 
 liable to any action, or to any penalty whatsoever. 
 
 It is indeed said to be " a maxim in law, that a 10 
 man shall not be allowed to disable himself." But, 
 when this maxirn is applied to the present case, it is 
 laid down in too large a sense. When it is extended 
 to comprehend a legal disability, it is taken in too 
 great a latitude. What ! Shall not a man be allowed 15 
 to plead that he is not fit and able ? These words 
 are inserted in the by-law, as the ground of making it ; 
 and in the plaintiff's declaration, as the ground of his 
 action against the defendant. It is alleged that the 
 defendant was fit and able, and that he refused to 20 
 serve, not having a reasonable excuse. It is certain, 
 and it is hereby in effect admitted, that if he is not 
 fit and able, and that if he hath a reasonable excuse, 
 he may plead it in bar of this action. Surely he might 
 plead that he was not worth fifteen thousand pounds, 25 
 provided that was really the case, as a circumstance 
 that would render him not fit and able. And if the 
 law allows him to say that he hath not taken the sac- 
 rament according to the rites of the Church of Eng- 
 land, being within the description of the Toleration 30 
 Act, he may plead that likewise to show that he is not 
 fit $nd able. It is a reasonable, it is 3 lawful excuse, 
 
T&E CA$ OF 
 
 My Lords, the meaning of this maxim, " that a man 
 shall not disable himself/' is solely this : that a man 
 shall not disable himself by his own wilful crime ; 
 and such a disability the law will not allow him to 
 5 plead. If a man contracts to sell an estate to any 
 person upon certain terms at such a time, and in the 
 meantime he sells it to another, he shall not be 
 allowed to say, " Sir, I cannot fulfill my contract ; it 
 is out of my power ; I have sold my estate to an- 
 
 10 other." Such a plea would be no bar to an action, 
 because the act of his selling it to another is the very 
 breach of contract. So, likewise, a man who hath 
 promised marriage to one lady, and afterward marries 
 another, cannot plead in bar of a prosecution from 
 
 15 the first lady that he is already married, because his 
 marrying the second lady is the very breach of prom- 
 ise to the first. A man shall not be allowed to plead 
 that he was drunk in bar of a criminal prosecution, 
 though perhaps he was at the time as incapable of 
 
 20 the exercise of reason as if he had been insane, be- 
 cause his drunkenness was itself a crime. He shall 
 not be allowed to excuse one crime by another. The 
 Roman soldier, who cut off his thumbs, was not suf- 
 fered to plead his disability for the service to procure 
 
 25 his dismission with impunity, because his incapacity 
 was designedly brought on him by his own wilful 
 fault. 8 And I am glad to observe so good an agree- 
 
 * This paragraph shows well the great value in argument of con- 
 crete illustration. By means of his illustrations Lord Mansfield not 
 30 only adds life and interest to his speech, but also makes perfectly 
 clear a distinction that, when first stated, seems a little subtle, and 
 might, without the illustration, remain for most hearers a little vague. 
 
3 2 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 ment among the judges upon this point, who have 
 stated it with great precision and clearness. 
 
 When it was said, therefore, that " a man cannot 
 plead his crime in excuse for not doing what he is by 
 law required to do," it only amounts to this, that he 5 
 cannot plead in excuse what, when pleaded, is no 
 excuse ; but there is not in this the shadow of an ob- 
 jection to his pleading what is an excuse pleading a 
 legal disqualification. If he is nominated to be a 
 justice of the peace, he may say, " I cannot be a jus- 10 
 tice of the peace, for I have not a hundred pounds a 
 year." In like manner, a Dissenter may plead, " I 
 have not qualified, and I cannot qualify, and am not 
 obliged to qualify ; and you have no right to fine me 
 for not serving." 15 
 
 It hath been said that "the King hath a right 
 to the service of all his subjects." And this assertion 
 is very true, provided it be properly qualified. But 
 surely, against the operation of this general right in 
 particular cases, a man may plead a natural or civil 20 
 disability. May not a man plead that he was upon 
 the high seas ? May not idiocy or lunacy be pleaded, 
 which are natural disabilities ; or a judgment of a 
 court of law, and much more a judgment of Parlia- 
 ment, which are civil disabilities ? 25 
 
 It hath been said to be a maxim " that no man 
 can plead his being a lunatic to avoid a deed executed, 
 or excuse an act done, at that time, because, it is said, 
 " if he was a lunatic, he could not remember any action 
 he did during the period of his insanity " ; and this was 30 
 doctrine formerly laid down by some judges. But I 
 am glad to find that of late it hath been generally 
 
 
THE CASE OF EVANS. 33 
 
 exploded. For the reason assigned for it is, in my 
 opinion, wholly insufficient to support it ; because, 
 though he could not remember what passed during 
 his insanity, yet he might justly say, if he ever 
 5 executed such a deed, or did such an action, it must 
 have been during his confinement or lunacy, for he 
 did not do it either before or since that time. 
 
 As to the case in which a man's plea of insanity was 
 actually set aside, it was nothing more than this : it 
 
 10 was when they pleaded ore tenus [or verbally] ; the 
 man pleaded that he was at the time out of his senses. 
 It was replied, How do you know that you were out of 
 your senses ? No man that is so, knows himself to be 
 so. And accordingly his plea was, upon this quibble, 
 
 15 set aside ; not because it was not a valid one, if he was 
 out of his senses, but because they concluded he was 
 not out of his senses. If he had alleged that he was 
 at that time confined, being apprehended to be out of 
 his senses, no advantage could have been taken of his 
 
 20 manner of expressing himself, and his plea must have 
 been allowed to be good. 
 
 As to Larwood's case, he was not allowed the 
 benefit of the Toleration Act, because he did not plead 
 it. If he had insisted on his right to the benefit of it in 
 
 25 his plea, the judgment must have been different. His 
 inserting it in his replication was not allowed, not 
 because it was not an allegation that would have 
 excused him if it had been originally taken notice of in 
 his plea, but because its being not mentioned till after- 
 
 3^ ward was a departure from his plea. 
 
 In the case of the Mayor of Guilford, the Toleration 
 Act was pleaded. The plea was allowed good, the 
 
34 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 disability being esteemed a lawful one ; and the judg- 
 ment was right. 
 
 And here the defendant hath likewise insisted on 
 his right to the benefit of the Toleration Act. In his 
 plea he saith he is bona fide a Dissenter, within the 5 
 description of the Toleration Act ; that he hath taken 
 the oaths, and subscribed the declaration required by 
 that act, to show that he is not a popish recusant ; 
 that he hath never received the sacrament according 
 to the rites of the Church of England, and that he 10 
 cannot in conscience do it ; and that for more than 
 fifty years past he hath not been present at church at 
 the celebration of the established worship, but hath 
 constantly received the sacrament and attended divine 
 service among the Protestant Dissenters. These facts 15 
 are not denied by the plaintiff, though they might 
 easily have been traversed ; and it was incumbent 
 upon them to have done it, if they had not known 
 they should certainly fail in it. There can be no 
 doubt, therefore, that the defendant is a Dissenter 20 
 an honest, conscientious Dissenter ; and no conscien- 
 tious Dissenter can take the sacrament at church. 
 The defendant saith he cannot do it, and he is not 
 obliged to do it. And as this is the case, as the law 
 allows him to say this, as it hath not stopped his mouth, 25 
 the plea which he makes is a lawful plea, his disability 
 being through no crime or fault of his own. I say, 
 he is disabled by act of Parliament, without the con- 
 currence or intervention of any fault or crime of his 
 own ; and, therefore, he may plead this disability in 30 
 bar of the present action. 
 
 The case of " atheists and infidels " is out of 
 
THE CASE OF EVANS. 35 
 
 the present question ; they come not within the descrip- 
 tion of the Toleration Act. And this is the sole point 
 to be inquired into in all cases of the like nature with 
 that of the defendant, who here pleads the Toleration 
 5 Act. Is the man bona fide a Dissenter within the 
 description of that act ? If not, he cannot plead his 
 disability in consequence of his not having taken the 
 sacrament in the Church of England. If he is, he 
 may lawfully and with effect plead it in bar of such 
 
 loan action; and the question on which this distinction 
 is grounded must be tried by a jury. 
 
 It hath been said that, " this being a matter 
 between God and a man's own conscience, it cannot 
 come under the cognizance of a jury." But certainly 
 
 15 it may ; and, though God alone is the absolute judge 
 of a man's religious profession and of his conscience, 
 yet there are some marks even of sincerity, among 
 which there is none more certain than consistency. 
 Surely a man's sincerity may be judged of by overt 
 
 20 acts. It is a just and excellent maxim, which will 
 hold good in this, as in all other cases, " by their 
 fruits ye shall know them." Do they, I do not say 
 go to meeting now and then, but do they frequent the 
 meeting-house ? Do they join generally and statedly 
 
 25 in divine worship with dissenting congregations ? 
 Whether they do or not, may be ascertained by their 
 neighbors, and by those who frequent the same 
 places of worship. In case a man hath occasionally 
 conformed for the sake of places of trust and 
 
 30 profit ; in that case, I imagine, a jury would not 
 hesitate in their verdict. If a man then alleges 
 he is a Dissenter, and claims the protection and the 
 
36 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 advantages of the Toleration Act, a jury may justly 
 find that he is not a Dissenter within the descrip- 
 tion of the Toleration Act, so far as to render his dis- 
 ability a lawful one. If he takes the sacrament for 
 his interest, the jury may fairly conclude that this 5 
 scruple of conscience is a false pretense when set up 
 to avoid a burden. 
 
 The defendant in the present case pleads that he is 
 a Dissenter within the description of the Toleration 
 Act ; that he hath not taken the sacrament in the 10 
 Church of England within one year preceding the time 
 of his supposed election, nor ever in his whole life ; 
 and that he cannot in conscience do it. 
 
 Conscience is not controllable by human laws, nor 
 amenable to human tribunals. Persecution, or attempts 15 
 to force conscience, will never produce conviction, 
 and are only calculated to make hypocrites or martyrs. 
 
 V. My Lords, there never was a single instance, 
 from the Saxon times down to our own, in which a 
 man was ever punished for erroneous opinions con- 20 
 cerning rites or modes of worship, but upon some 
 positive law. The common law of England, which 
 is only common reason or usage, knows of no pros- 
 ecution for mere opinions. For atheism, blasphemy, 
 and reviling the Christian religion, there have been 25 
 instances of persons prosecuted and punished upon 
 the common law. But bare non-conformity is no sin 
 by the common law ; and all positive laws inflicting 
 any pains or penalties for non-conformity to the 
 established rites and modes, are repealed by the Act 30 
 of Toleration, and Dissenters are thereby exempted 
 from all ecclesiastical censures. 
 
THE CASE OF EVANS. 37 
 
 What bloodshed and confusion have been oc- 
 casioned, from the reign of Henry the Fourth, when 
 the first penal statutes were enacted, down to the 
 revolution in this kingdom, by laws made to force 
 5 conscience ! 4 There is nothing, certainly, more 
 unreasonable, more inconsistent with the rights of 
 human nature, more contrary to the spirit and pre- 
 cepts of the Christian religion, more iniquitous and 
 unjust, more impolitic, than persecution. It is against 
 10 natural religion, revealed religion, and sound policy. 
 
 4 Throughout the preceding part of the speech Lord Mansfield 
 has appealed directly only to the common-sense and the intellect 
 of his hearers. Indirectly, of course, his air of impartiality and 
 sincerity has been a persuasive appeal. Here for the first time he \ 
 
 15 directly appeals, and subtly, to the feelings of his hearers. He 
 shames them by suggesting that if they approve of the course of 
 the plaintiff, they will out-Jesuit their loathed foes, the Jesuits. 
 To say this directly might arouse anger, and so divert attention to 
 Lord Mansfield from the idea he wishes to enforce. Therefore, 
 
 20 he states his analogy so deftly that the hearer chiefly applies the 
 words, and most of the responsibility for the shame of the com- 
 parison falls on him. 
 
 In the next paragraph Lord Mansfield first phrases a suspicion 
 that for some time his words have fostered in his hearers' minds. 
 
 25 If early in his speech he had denounced the persecutors of Evans 
 as conspirators, he would have missed the impartial air of his 
 speech. Instead, as twisting and turning the case, he shows 
 a hearer that from every point of view the plaintiff is wrong anJ 
 unjust, he develops more and more a feeling that some evil plan 
 
 30 must be back of injustice so evident. This unstated suspicion he 
 strengthens when he makes the reader see the Jesuitical nature of the 
 attempt ; and finally, when the hearer himself is about to break out 
 with his suspicion, phrases it for him, supporting his accusation by 
 references to the evidence produced in the case, and by an analogy. 
 
 35 Then, with a swiff summary of the whole plea, he closes. 
 
38 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 Sad experience and a large mind taught that great 
 man, the President De Thou, this doctrine. Let any 
 man read the many admirable things which, though 
 a Papist, he hath dared to advance upon the subject, 
 in the dedication of his History to Harry the Fourth c 
 of France, which I never read without rapture, and he 
 will be fully convinced, not only how cruel, but how im- 
 politic it is to prosecute for religious opinions. I am 
 sorry that of late his countrymen have begun to open 
 their eyes, see their error, and adopt his sentiments. 10 
 I should not have broken my heart (I hope I may say 
 it without breach of Christian charity) if France had 
 continued to cherish the Jesuits and to persecute the 
 Huguenots. 
 
 There was no occasion to revoke the Edict of 15 
 Nantes. The Jesuits needed only to have advised a 
 plan similar to what is contended for in the present 
 case, Make a law to render them incapable of office, 
 make another to punish them for not serving. If they 
 accept, punish them (for it is admitted on all hands 20 
 that the defendant, in the cause before your Lordships, 
 is prosecutable for taking the office upon him) if 
 they accept, punish them ; if they refuse, punish them. 
 If they say yes, punish them ; if they say no, punish 
 them. My Lords, this is a most exquisite dilemma, 25 
 from which there is no escaping. It is a trap a mar 
 cannot get out of ; it is as bad persecution as that of 
 Procrustes. If they are too short, stretch them ; if 
 they are too long, lop them. Small would have been 
 their consolation to have been gravely told, " The 30 
 Edict of Nantes is kept inviolable. You have the full 
 benefit of that act of toleration ; you may take the 
 
THE CASE OF EVANS. 39 
 
 sacrament in your own way with impunity ; you are 
 not compelled to go to mass." Were this case but 
 told in the city of London, as of a proceeding in 
 France, how they would exclaim against the Jesuitical 
 5 distinction ! And yet, in truth, it comes from them- 
 selves. The Jesuits never thought of it. When they 
 meant to persecute by their act of toleration, the Edict 
 of Nantes was repealed. 
 
 This by-law, by which the Dissenters are to be 
 
 10 reduced to this wretched dilemma, is a by-law of the 
 city, a local corporation, contrary to an act of Parlia- 
 ment, which is the law of the land ; a modern by-law 
 of a very modern date, made long since the Corpora- 
 tion Act, long since the Toleration Act, in the face of 
 
 15 them, for they knew these laws were in being. It was 
 made in some year in the reign of the late King I 
 forget which ; but it was made about the time of 
 building the mansion house ! Now, if it could be sup- 
 posed the city have a power of making such a by-law, 
 
 20 it would entirely subvert the Toleration Act, the 
 design of which was to exempt the Dissenters from all 
 penalties ; for by such a by-law they have it in their 
 power to make every Dissenter pay a fine of six hun- 
 dred pounds, or any sum they please, for it amounts 
 
 25 to that. 
 
 The professed design of making this by-law was to 
 get fit and able persons to serve the office ; and the 
 plaintiff sets forth in his declaration, that if the 
 Dissenters are excluded, they shall want fit and able 
 
 3 persons to serve the office. But, were I to deliver my 
 own suspicion, it would be, that they did not so much 
 wish for their services as their fines. Dissenters have 
 
4 LORD MANSFIELD. 
 
 been appointed to this office, one who was blind, 
 another who was bed-ridden ; not, I suppose, on 
 account of their being fit and able to serve the office. 
 No : they were disabled both by nature and by law. 
 
 We had a case lately in the courts below, of a person 5 
 chosen mayor of a corporation while he was beyond 
 seas with his Majesty's troops in America, and they 
 knew him to be so. Did they want him to serve the 
 office? No; it was impossible. But they had a mind 
 to continue the former mayor a year longer, and to 10 
 have a pretense for setting aside him who was now 
 chosen, on all future occasions, as having been elected 
 before. 
 
 In the case before your Lordships, the defendant 
 was by law incapable at the time of his pretended 15 
 election ; and it is my firm persuasion that he was 
 chosen because he was incapable. If he had been 
 capable, he had not been chosen, for they did not 
 want him to serve the office. They chose him because, 
 without a breach of the law, and a usurpation on the 20 
 Crown, he could not serve the office. They chose 
 him, that he might fall under the penalty of their by- 
 law, made to serve a particular purpose ; in opposi- 
 tion to which, and to avoid the fine thereby imposed, 
 he hath pleaded a legal disability, grounded on two 25 
 acts of Parliament. As I am of opinion that his plea 
 is good, I conclude with moving your Lordships, 
 
 " That the judgment be affirmed/ 5 
 
Juntas, 
 
 LETTER TO THE PRINTER OF THE "PUBLIC 
 ADVERTISER." 
 
 January 21, 1769. 
 
 ["At the close of 1767 Lord Chatham's cabinet had fallen to 
 pieces, and the Duke of Grafton became minister. The Duke 
 immediately endeavored to strengthen himself on every side. 
 He yielded to the wishes of the King by making Lord North 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer, and by raising Mr. Jenkinson, the 
 organ of Lord Bute, to higher office and influence. Thus he gave 
 a decided ascendency to the Tories. On the other hand, he en- 
 deavored to conciliate Lord Rockingham and the Duke of Bedford 
 by very liberal proposals. But these gentlemen differing as to the 
 lead of the House, the Bedford interest prevailed ; Lord Wey- 
 mouth, a member of that family, was made Secretary of the Home 
 Department ; while Lord Rockingham was sent back to the ranks 
 of Opposition under a sense of wrong and insult. Six months, 
 down almost to the middle of 1768, were spent in these negoti- 
 ations and arrangements. 
 
 " These things wrought powerfully on the mind of Junius, who 
 was a Grenville or Rockingham Whig. But in addition to this, 
 he had strong private animosities. He not only saw with alarm 
 and abhorrence the triumph of Tory principles, but he cherished 
 the keenest personal resentment toward the King and most of his 
 ministers. Those, especially, who had deserted their former 
 Whig associates, he regarded as traitors to the cause of liberty. 
 He therefore now determined to give full scope to his feelings, 
 and to take up a system of attack far more galling to his oppo- 
 nents than had ever yet been adopted. One thing was favorable to 
 such a design. Parliament was to expire within a few months ; 
 and every blow now struck would give double alarm and distress 
 to the government, while it served also to inflame the minds of the 
 
 41 
 
4 2 JUNIUS. 
 
 people, and rouse them to a more determined resistance in the 
 approaching elections. Accordingly, at the close of the Christ- 
 mas holidays, when the business of the session really commences, 
 he addressed his first letter to the printer of the Public Advertiser, 
 under date of January 21, 1769." In this letter " Junius, for the 
 first time, broke through the barriers thrown around the monarch 
 by the maxim, ' the King can do no wrong/ He assailed him like 
 any other man, though in more courtly and guarded language. 
 He attacked the ministry in more direct terms/' saying, " * It 
 is not a casual concurrence of calamitous circumstances it is the 
 pernicious hand of government alone, that can make a whole peo- 
 ple desperate/ The attention of the public was strongly arrested. 
 The poet Gray, in his correspondence, speaks of the absorbing 
 power of this letter over his mind, when he took it up casually 
 for the first time at a country inn, where he had stopped for 
 refreshment on a journey. He was unable to lay it down, or 
 even to think of the food before him, until he had read it over 
 and over again with the most painful interest. The same pro- 
 found sensation was awakened in the higher political circles 
 throughout the kingdom. " Goodrich. ] 
 
 This letter, though not the first that appeared over the signa- 
 ture " Junius," is the first of the collection known as the " Junius 
 Letters.'* These came out at intervals from 1769 to 1772, when 
 " Junius " ceased to write. More than fifty persons have been 
 suggested for the author of the "Junius Letters." Popularly, 
 Sir Philip Francis (born 1740, died 1818,) has been supposed to 
 be the author of them. His authorship, however, has not been 
 conclusively proved. 
 
 SIR : The submission of a free people to the execu- 
 tive authority of government is no more than a com- 
 pliance with laws which they themselves have enacted.' 
 
 1 Junius, writing for a public already much disturbed by the 
 condition of the government, could do away with any elaborate 
 introduction. To catch the reader's attention must be his aim, 
 and this he accomplished by beginning with a sentence that at a 
 time of political uneasiness and distrust must arrest a reader's 
 
FIRST LETTER. 43 
 
 While the national honor is firmly maintained abroad, 
 and while justice is impartially administered at home, 
 the obedience of the subject will be voluntary, cheer- 
 ful, and I might say, almost unlimited. A generous 
 5 nation is grateful even for the preservation of its 
 rights, and willingly extends the respect due to the 
 office of a good prince into an affection for his per- 
 son. Loyalty, in the heart and understanding of an 
 Englishman, is a rational attachment to the guardian 
 
 ro of the laws. Prejudices and passion have sometimes 
 carried it to a criminal length ; and, whatever for- 
 eigners may imagine, we know that Englishmen have 
 erred as much in a mistaken zeal for particular 
 persons and families, as they ever did in defense of 
 
 15 what they thought most dear and interesting to them- 
 selves. 
 
 eye. Sure that the public, which had eagerly been watching state 
 affairs, would understand any references to men or events of the 
 years just preceding 1761, Junius did not, throughout his speech, 
 
 20 trouble to bring forward evidence of the truth of his references and 
 allusions, but treats them as matters the details of which are of 
 common report and belief. His method, throughout the letter, as 
 the many notes of explanation an editor to-day finds necessary 
 suggest, was to leave a good deal unsaid, letting the reader fill out 
 
 25 his allusions, apply his words, with the aid of the details in his 
 own mind. Nowhere is this better shown than in his reference 
 to the Wilkes case and Lord Mansfield. Knowing that the 
 details of this case were in every reader's mind, he avoided a 
 statement of it that might involve him in controversy, merely 
 
 30 hinting an application of it, which a reader promptly makes. This 
 method makes a reader partly responsible for the daring conclu- 
 sion to which Junius wished to lead him, makes him trust its 
 truth more because he has not been forced to it, but has come to it 
 himself. 
 
44 JUNIUS. 
 
 It naturally fills us with resentment to see such a 
 temper insulted and abused. 2 In reading the history 
 of a free people, whose rights have been invaded, 
 we are interested in their cause. Our own feelings 
 tell us how long they ought to have submitted, and at 5 
 what moment it would have been treachery to them- 
 selves not to have resisted. How much warmer will 
 be our resentment, if experience should bring the fatal 
 example home to ourselves ! 
 
 The situation of this country is alarming enough to I0 
 rouse the attention of every man who pretends to a 
 concern for the public welfare. Appearances justify 
 suspicion ; and when the safety of a nation is at stake, 
 suspicion is a just ground of inquiry. Let us enter 
 into it with candor and decency. Respect is due to 15 
 the station of ministers ; and if a resolution must at 
 
 2 " We have here the starting point of the exordium, as it lay 
 originally in the mind of Junius, viz., that the English nation was 
 * insulted and abused ' by the King and ministers. But this was 
 too strong a statement to be brought out abruptly. Junius there- 20 
 fore went back, and prepared the way by showing in successive 
 sentences, (r) Why a free people obey the laws ' because they 
 have themselves enacted them.' (2) That this obedience is ordi- 
 narily cheerful, and almost unlimited. (3) That such obedience 
 to the guardian of the laws naturally leads to a strong affection for 25 
 his person. (4) That this affection (as shown in their history) 
 had often been excessive among the English, who were, in fact, 
 peculiarly liable to a ' mistaken zeal for particular persons and 
 families/ Hence they were equally liable (this is not said, but 
 implied) to have their loyalty imposed upon ; and therefore the 30 
 feeling then so prevalent was well founded, that the King, in his 
 rash counsels and reckless choice of ministers, must have been 
 taking advantage of the generous confidence of his people, and 
 playing on the easiness of their temper. If so, they were inde*<f 
 
FIRST LETTER. 45 
 
 last be taken, there is none so likely to be supported 
 with firmness as that which has been adopted with 
 moderation. 
 
 The ruin or prosperity of a state depends so much 
 
 c upon the administration of its government, that, to be 
 acquainted with the merit of a ministry, we need only 
 observe the condition of the people. If we see them 
 obedient to the laws, prosperous in their industry, 
 united at home, and respected abroad, we may reason. 
 
 10 ably presume that their affairs are conducted by men 
 of experience, abilities, and virtue. If, on the con- 
 trary, we see a universal spirit of distrust and dissat- 
 isfaction, a rapid decay of trade, dissensions in all 
 parts of the empire, and a total loss of respect in the 
 
 15 eyes of foreign powers, we may pronounce, without 
 
 insulted and abused. The exordium, then, is a complete chain of 
 logical deduction, and the case is fully made out, provided the 
 popular feeling referred to was correct. And here v/e see where 
 the fallacy of Junius lies, whenever he is in tho v-rrong. It is in 
 
 20 taking for granted one of the steps of his reasoning He does not, 
 in this case, even mention in direct terms the feeling alluded to. 
 He knew it was beating in the hearts of the people ; his whole 
 preceding train of thought was calculated to justify and inflame it ; 
 and he therefore leaps at once to the conclusion it involves, and 
 
 25 addresses them as actually filled with resentment ' to see such a 
 temper insulted and abused/ The feeling, in this instance, was 
 to a great extent well founded, and so far his logic is complete. 
 In other cases his assumption is a false one. He lays hold of some 
 slander of the day, some distorted statement of facts, some maxim 
 
 30 which is only half true, some prevailing passion or prejudice, and 
 dexterously intermingling them with a train of thought which in 
 every other respect is logical and just, he hurries the mind to 
 a conclusion which ceems necessarily involved in the premises." 
 Goodrich* 
 
46 JUNIUS. 
 
 hesitation, that the government of that country is 
 weak, distracted, and corrupt. The multitude, in all 
 countries, are patient to a certain point. Ill usage 
 may rouse their indignation, and hurry them into ex- 
 cesses, but the original fault is in government. Perhaps 5 
 there never was an instance of a change in the cir- 
 cumstances and temper of a whole nation, so sudden 
 and extraordinary as that which the misconduct of 
 ministers has, within these very few years, produced 
 in Great Britain. When our gracious sovereign as- 10 
 cended the throne, we were a flourishing and a con- 
 tented people. If the personal virtues of a king could 
 have insured the happiness of his subjects, the scene 
 could not have altered so entirely as it has done. The 
 idea of uniting all parties, of trying all characters, and 15 
 distributing the offices of state by rotation, was gra- 
 cious and benevolent to an extreme, though it has not 
 yet produced the many salutary effects which were 
 intended by it. To say nothing of the wisdom of such 
 plan, it undoubtedly arose from an unbounded good- 20 
 ness of heart, in which folly had no share. It was not 
 a capricious partiality to new faces ; it was not a 
 natural turn for low intrigue, nor was it the treacher- 
 ous amusement of double and triple negotiations. 
 No, sir, it arose from a continued anxiety in the purest 25 
 of all possible hearts for the general welfare. 3 Unfor- 
 
 8 " In this attack on the King, there is a refined artifice, rarely if 
 ever equaled, in leading the mind gradually forward from the 
 slightest possible insinuation to the bitterest irony. First we have 
 the ' uniting of all parties,' which is proper and desirable ; next, ^ 
 'trying all characters,' which suggests decidedly a want of judg- 
 ment ; then ' distributing the offices of state by rotation,' a 
 
FIRST LETTER. 47 
 
 tunately for us, the event has not been answerable to 
 the design. After a rapid succession of changes, we 
 are reduced to that change which hardly any change 
 can mend. Yet there is no extremity of distress which 
 5 of itself ought to reduce a great nation to despair. It 
 is not the disorder, but the physician ; it is not a 
 casual concurrence of calamitous circumstances, it is 
 the pernicious hand of government, which alone can 
 make a whole people desperate. 
 
 10 charge rendered plausible, at least, by the frequent changes of 
 ministers, and involving (if true) a weakness little short of absolute 
 fatuity. The way being thus prepared, what was first insinuated 
 is now openly expressed in the next sentence. The word 'folly* 
 is applied to the conduct of the King of England in the face of his 
 
 15 subjects, and the application rendered doubly severe by the gravest 
 irony. Still, there is one relief. Allusion is made to his * un- 
 bounded goodness of heart,' from which, in the preceding chain 
 of insinuations, these errors of judgment had been deduced. The 
 next sentence takes this away. It directly ascribes to the King, 
 
 20 with an increased severity of ironical denial, some of the meanest 
 passions of royalty, ' a capricious partiality for new faces/ a 
 ' natural love of low intrigue/ * the treacherous amusement of 
 double and triple negotiations ' ! It is unnecessary to remark on 
 the admirable precision and force of the language in these expres- 
 
 25 sions, and indeed, throughout the whole passage. There had 
 been just enough in the King's conduct for the last seven years to 
 make the people suspect all this, and to weaken or destroy their 
 affection for the Crown. It was all connected with that system 
 of favoritism introduced by Lord Bute, which the nation so much 
 
 30 abhorred. Nothing but this would have made them endure for a 
 moment such an attack on their monarch, and especially the abso- 
 lute mockery with which Junius concludes the whole, by speaking 
 of * the anxiety of the purest of all possible hearts for the general 
 welfare.' His entire letter to the King, with all the rancor 
 
 35 ascribed to it by Burke, does not contain so much bitterness and 
 insult as are concentrated in this single passage." Goodrich. 
 
48 JUNIUS. 
 
 Without much political sagacity, or any extraordi- 
 nary depth of observation, we need only mark how the 
 principal departments of the state are bestowed [dis- . 
 tributed], and look no farther for the true cause of 
 every mischief that befalls us. 4 5 
 
 The finances of a nation, sinking under its debts 
 and expenses, are committed to a young nobleman 
 already ruined by play. 5 Introduced to act under the 
 auspices of Lord Chatham, and left at the head 
 of affairs by that nobleman's retreat, he became a 10 
 minister by accident ; but, deserting the principles 
 and professions which gave him a moment's popu- 
 larity, we see him, from every honorable engagement 
 to the public, an apostate by design. As for business, 
 the world yet knows nothing of his talents or resolu- *5 
 tion, unless a wavering, wayward inconsistency be a 
 a mark of genius, and caprice a demonstration of 
 spirit. It may be said, perhaps, that it is his Grace's 
 province, as surely it is his passion, rather to distribute 
 than to save the public money, and that while Lord 20 
 
 4 The two most marked qualities of this letter are its careful 
 structure and its concreteness of statement. Junius deals with 
 general statements only in the first five paragraphs, and then with 
 some specific illustration. After a reader passes the fifth para- 
 graph, he reads but concrete illustration after concrete illustration 25 
 of the truth of the proposition to which Junius worked up carefully 
 in his opening paragraphs, and is led rapidly through them to the 
 daringly direct and bare arraignment by name of the ministers at 
 fault a climax of concreteness. 
 
 6 " The Duke of Graf ton, First Lord of the Treasury. A reader 30 
 should notice the skill that leaves unfinished the thought that a 
 gambler loaded with debts is in charge of a treasury * sinking 
 under its debts and expenses/ The implied argument would be 
 weakened by any attempt to expand it." Goodrich', 
 
FIRST LETTER. 49 
 
 North is Chancellor of the Exchequer, the First Lord 
 of the Treasury may be as thoughtless and extravagant 
 as he pleases. I hope, however, he will not rely too 
 much on the fertility of Lord North's genius for 
 5 finance. His Lordship is yet to give us the first proof 
 of his abilities. It may be candid to suppose that he 
 has hitherto voluntarily concealed his talents ; intend- 
 ing, perhaps, to astonish the world, when we least 
 expect it, with a knowledge of trade, a choice of 
 
 10 expedients, and a depth of resources equal to the 
 necessities, and far beyond the hopes of his country. 
 He must now exert the whole power of his capacity, 
 if he would wish us to forget that, since he has been 
 in office, no plan has been formed, no system adhered 
 
 15 to, nor any one important measure adopted for the 
 relief of public credit. If his plan for the service of 
 the current year be not irrevocably fixed on, let me 
 warn him to think seriously of consequences before he 
 ventures to increase the public debt. Outraged and 
 
 20 oppressed as we are, this nation will not bear, after a 
 six years' peace, to see new millions borrowed, with- 
 out any eventual diminution of debt or reduction of 
 interest. The attempt might rouse a spirit of resent- 
 ment, which might reach beyond the sacrifice of a 
 
 25 minister. As to the debt upon the civil list, the people 
 of England expect that it will not be paid without a 
 strict inquiry how it was incurred. 6 If it must be paid 
 
 6 "Within about seven years, the King had run up a debt of 
 ^513,000 beyond the ample allowance made for his expenses on 
 30 the civil list, and had just applied, at the opening of Parliament, 
 for a grant to pay it off. The nation were indignant at such over- 
 reaching. The debt, however, was paid this session, and in a few 
 years there was another contracted." Goodrich. 
 
5 J UNI US. 
 
 by Parliament, let me advise the Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer to think of some better expedient than a 
 lottery. To support an expensive war, or in circum- 
 stances of absolute necessity, a lottery may perhaps be 
 allowable ; but, besides that it is at all times the very 5 
 worst way of raising money upon the people, I think 
 it ill becomes the royal dignity to have the debts of a 
 prince provided for, like the repairs of a country 
 bridge or a decayed hospital. The management of 
 the King's affairs in the House of Commons cannot 10 
 be more disgraced than it has been. A leading 
 minister repeatedly called down for absolute igno- 
 rance ridiculous motions ridiculously withdrawn 
 deliberate plans disconcerted, and a week's prepara- 
 tion of graceful oratory lost in a moment, give us 15 
 some, though not an adequate idea of Lord North's 
 parliamentary abilities and influence. Yet, before he 
 had the misfortune of being Chancellor of k the Ex- 
 chequer, he was neither an object of derision to his 
 enemies, nor of melancholy pity to his friends. 2 o 
 
 A series of inconsistent measures had alienated the 
 colonies from their duty as subjects and from their 
 natural affection to their common country. When 
 Mr. Grenville was placed at the head of the treasury, 
 he felt the impossibility of Great Britain's support- 25 
 ing such an establishment as her former successes 
 had made indispensable, and at the same time, of 
 giving any sensible relief to foreign trade and to the 
 weight of the public debt. He thought it equitable 
 that those parts of the empire which had benefited 30 
 most by the expenses of the war, should contribute 
 something to the expenses of the peace, and he had 
 
PIKS T LETTER. 51 
 
 no doubt of the constitutional right vested in Parlia- 
 ment, to raise the contribution. But, unfortunately 
 for this country, Mr. Grenville was at any rate to be 
 distressed because he was minister, and Mr. Pitt and 
 5 Lord Camden were to be patrons of America, because 
 they were in opposition. Their declaration gave 
 spirit and argument to the colonies ; and while, per- 
 haps, they meant no more than the ruin of a minister, 
 they in effect divided one-half of the empire from the 
 
 10 other. 7 
 
 Under one administration the Stamp Act is made, 
 under the second it is repealed, under the third, in 
 spite of all experience, a new mode of taxing the 
 colonies is invented, and a question revived which 
 
 I5 ought to have been buried in oblivion. In these cir- 
 cumstances, a new office is established for the busi- 
 ness of the Plantations, and the Earl of Hillsborough 
 
 7 *' This attack on Lord Chatham and his friend shows the 
 political affinities of Junius. He believed with Mr. Grenville 
 20 and Lord Rockingham in the right of Great Britain to tax Amer- 
 ica ; and in referring to Mr. Grenville's attempt to enforce that 
 right by the Stamp Act, he adopts his usual course of inter- 
 weaving an argument in its favor into the language used. He 
 thus prepares the way for his censures on Lord Chatham and 
 25 Lord Camden, affirming that they acted on the principle that 
 ' Mr. Grenville was at any rate to be distressed because he was 
 minister and they were in opposition,' thus implying that they 
 were actuated by factious and selfish views in their defense of 
 America. About a year after this letter was written, Lord Rock- 
 jo ingham was reconciled to Lord Chatham and Lord Camden, and 
 all united to break down the Grafton ministry. Junius, now 
 turning round, wrote, in his fifty-fourth letter, his celebrated 
 eulogium of Lord Chatham, and in his last letter, gave praise to 
 Lord Camden . " Goodrich . 
 
52 J UNI US. 
 
 called forth, at a most critical season, to govern 
 America. The choice at least announced to us a 
 man of superior capacity and knowledge. Whether he 
 be so or not, let his dispatches as far as they have 
 appeared, let his measures as far as they have 5 
 operated, determine for him. In the former we have 
 seen strong assertions without proof, declamation 
 without argument, and violent censures without dig- 
 nity or moderation, but neither correctness in the 
 composition nor judgment in the design. As for his 10 
 measures, let it be remembered that he was called 
 upon to conciliate and unite, and that, when he 
 entered into office, the most refractory of the colonies 
 were still disposed to proceed by the constitutional 
 methods of petition and remonstrance. Since that \\ 
 period they have been driven into excesses little short 
 of rebellion. Petitions have been hindered from 
 reaching the Throne, and the continuance of one of 
 the principal assemblies put upon an arbitrary con- 
 dition, which, considering the temper they were in, it 20 
 was impossible they should comply with, and which 
 would have availed nothing as to the general ques- 
 tion if it had been complied with. 8 So violent, and 
 I believe I may call it so unconstitutional an exertion 
 of the prerogative, to say nothing of the weak, in- 25 
 judicious terms in which it was conveyed, gives us as 
 humble an opinion of his Lordship's capacity as it 
 does of his temper and moderation. While we are at 
 peace with other nations, our military force may per- 
 
 8 * ' The ' arbitrary condition ' was that the General Court of 30 
 Massachusetts should rescind one of their own resolutions and 
 expunge it from their records." Goodrich. 
 
FIRST LETTEK. S3 
 
 haps be spared to support the Earl of Hillsborough's 
 measures in America. Whenever that force shall be 
 necessarily withdrawn or diminished, the dismission 
 of such a minister will neither console us for his 
 5 imprudence, nor remove the settled resentment of 
 a people, who, complaining of an act of the Legis- 
 lature, are outraged by an unwarrantable stretch of 
 prerogative, and supporting their claims by argu- 
 ment, are insulted with declamation. 
 
 10 Drawing lots would be a prudent and reasonable 
 method of appointing the officers of state, compared 
 to a late disposition of the secretary's office. Lord 
 Rochford was acquainted with the affairs and temper 
 of the Southern courts ; Lord Weymouth was equally 
 
 15 qualified for either department. By what unaccount- 
 able caprice has it happened that the latter, who pre- 
 tends to no experience whatsoever, is removed to the 
 most important of the two departments, and the 
 former, by preference, placed in an office where his 
 
 20 experience can be of no use to him? 9 Lord Wey- 
 
 9 "The changes here censured had taken place about three 
 months before. The office of Foreign Secretary for the Southern 
 Department was made vacant by the resignation of Lord Shel- 
 burne. Lord Rochford, who had been minister to France, and 
 
 25 thus made ' acquainted with the temper of the Southern Courts/ 
 ought naturally to have been appointed (if at all) to this depart- 
 ment. Instead of this, he was made Secretary of the Northern 
 Department, for which he had been prepared by no previous 
 knowledge ; while Lord Weymouth was taken from the Home 
 
 30 Department, and placed in the Southern, being ' equally quali- 
 fied ' [that is, wholly unqualified by any * experience whatsoever '] 
 for either department in the Foreign office, whether Southern or 
 Northern. " Goodrich. 
 
54 JUNWS. 
 
 mouth had distinguished himself in his first employ* 
 rnent by a spirited, if not judicious conduct. He had 
 animated the civil magistrate beyond the tone of civil 
 authority, and had directed the operations of the army 
 to more than military execution. Recovered from 5 
 the errors of his youth, from the distraction of play, 
 and the bewitching smiles of Burgundy, behold him 
 exerting the whole strength of his clear, unclouded 
 faculties in the service of the Crown. It was not the 
 heat of midnight excesses, nor ignorance of the laws, 10 
 nor the furious spirit of the house of Bedford ; no, 
 sir ; when this respectable minister interposed his 
 authority between the magistrate and the people, and 
 signed the mandate on which, for aught he knew, the 
 lives of thousands depended, he did it from the 15 
 deliberate motion of his heart, supported by the best 
 of his judgment. 10 
 
 10 " As Secretary of the Home Department, Lord Wey mouth 
 had addressed a letter to the magistrates of London, early in 
 1768, advising them to call in the military, provided certain dis- 20 
 turbances in the streets should continue. The idea of setting the 
 soldiery to fire on masses of unarmed men has always been 
 abhorrent to the English nation. It was, therefore, a case 
 admirably suited to the purposes of this letter. In using it to 
 inflame the people against Lord Weymouth, Junius charitably 25 
 supposes that he was not repeating the errors of his youth that 
 he was neither drunk, nor ignorant of what he did, nor impelled 
 by ' the furious spirit ' of one of the proudest families of the 
 realm all of which Lord Weymouth would certainly say and 
 therefore (which his Lordship must also admit) that he did, from 30 
 1 the deliberate motion of his heart, supported by the best of his 
 judgment/ sign a paper which the great body of the people con- 
 sidered as authorizing promiscuous murder, and which actually 
 resulted in the death of fourteen persons three weeks after. The 
 
FIRST LETTER. 55 
 
 It has lately been a fashion to pay a compliment to 
 the bravery and generosity of the Commander-in- 
 chief [the Marquess of Granby] at the expense of his 
 understanding. They who love him least make no 
 5 question of his courage, while his friends dwell 
 chiefly on the facility of his disposition. Admitting 
 him to be as brave as a total absence of all feeling 
 and reflection can make him, let us see what sort of 
 merit he derives from the remainder of his character. 
 
 10 If it be generosity to accumulate in his own person 
 and family a number of lucrative employments ; to 
 provide, at the public expense, for every creature that 
 bears the name of Manners, and neglecting the merit 
 and services of the rest of the army, to heap promo- 
 
 15 tions upon his favorites and dependents, the present 
 Commander-in-chief is the most generous man alive. 
 Nature has been sparing of her gifts to this 'noble 
 Lord ; but where birth and fortune are united, we 
 expect the noble pride and independence of a man of 
 
 20 spirit, not the servile, humiliating complaisance of a 
 courtier. As to the goodness of his heart, if a proof 
 of it be taken from the facility of never refusing, 
 what conclusion shall we draw from the indecency of 
 never performing? And if the discipline of the army 
 
 25 whole is so wrought up as to create the feeling that Lord Weymouth 
 was in both of these states of mind that he acted with delibera- 
 tion in carrying out the dictates of headlong or drunken passion. 
 '* All this, of course, is greatly exaggerated. Severe measures 
 did seem indispensable to suppress the mobs of that day, and 
 
 30 whoever stood forth to direct them, must of necessity incur the 
 popular indignation. Still, it was a question among the most 
 candid men, whether milder means might not have been 
 effectual, " 
 
56 J UNI us. 
 
 be in any degree preserved, what thanks are due to a 
 man, whose cares, notoriously confined to filling up 
 vacancies, have degraded the office of Commander-in- 
 chief into [that of] a broker of commissions. 11 
 
 With respect to the navy, I shall only say that this 5 
 country is so highly indebted to Sir Edward Hawke 
 that no expense should be spared to secure him an 
 honorable and affluent retreat. 
 
 The pure and impartial administration of justice is 
 perhaps the firmest bond to secure a cheerful submis- 10 
 sion of the people, and to engage their affections to 
 government. It is not sufficient that questions of 
 private right or wrong are justly decided, nor that 
 judges are superior to the vileness of pecuniary cor- 
 ruption. Jefferies himself, when the court had no 15 
 interest, was an upright judge. A court of justice 
 may be subject to another sort of bias, more impor- 
 tant and pernicious, as it reaches beyond the interest 
 of individuals, and affects the whole community. A 
 judge under the influence of government may be 20 
 
 11 "The Marquess of Granby, personally considered, was per- 
 haps the most popular member of the cabinet, with the exception 
 of Sir Edward Hawke. He was a warm-hearted man, of highly 
 social qualities and generous feelings. As it was the object of 
 Junius to break down the ministry, it was peculiarly necessary for 25 
 him to blast and destroy his popularity. This he attempts to do 
 by discrediting the character of the Marquess as a man of firm- 
 ness, strength of mind, and disinterestedness in managing the 
 concerns of the army. This attack is distinguished for its plausi- 
 bility and bitterness. His charges and insinuations are greatly 3 
 overstrained ; but it is certain that the army was mouldering away 
 at this time in a manner which left the country in a very defense- 
 less. eon.diti<p?i f " Goodrich, 
 
FIRST LETTER. 57 
 
 honest enough in the decision of private causes, yet a 
 traitor to the public. When a victim is marked out 
 by the ministry, this judge will offer himself to per- 
 form the sacrifice. He will not scruple to prostitute 
 5 his dignity, and betray the sanctity of his office, when- 
 ever an arbitrary point is to be carried for government, 
 or the resentment of a Court to be gratified. 
 
 These principles and proceedings, odious and con- 
 temptible as they are, in effect are no less injudicious. 
 
 10 A wise and generous people are roused by every 
 appearance of oppressive, unconstitutional measures, 
 whether those measures are supported openly by the 
 power of government, or masked under the forms of 
 a court of justice. Prudence and self-preservation 
 
 15 will oblige the most moderate dispositions to make 
 common cause, even with a man ia whose conduct they 
 
 12 John Wilkes, a member of the House of Commons, is referred 
 to here. A violent opponent of Lord Bute, he had established a 
 paper, The North Briton, in order to make his antagonism more 
 
 20 effective. His attacks on Bute in this paper were exceedingly bit- 
 ter. At about the time of Lord Bute's resignation, the issue of 
 the journal was suspended, but when the royal speech framed by 
 Grenville's ministry showed that only men, not measures, had 
 changed, a supplementary number, " 45," was published. This con- 
 
 25 tained a caustic criticism of the King's message and of his Parlia- 
 ment. Lord Halifax, the leading Secretary of State, issued a "gen- 
 eral warrant to search for authors, printers, and publishers," and to 
 bring them before him for examination. Wilkes was arrested, 
 and thrown into prison. A week after his imprisonment, he was 
 
 3 released by order of the Court of Common Pleas, on the ground 
 of his exemption from arrest as a member of Parliament. Public 
 feeling was greatly stirred by the action of the Secretary of State, 
 and the general warrants were afterward declared illegal. (See 
 Ency. Brit.) 
 
5? JUKI us. 
 
 censure, if they see him persecuted in a way which 
 the real spirit of the laws will not justify. The facts 
 on which these remarks are founded are too notorious 
 to require an application. 13 v 
 
 This, sir, is the detail. In one view, behold a na- 5 
 tion overwhelmed with debt ; her revenues wasted ; 
 her trade declining ; the affections of her colonies 
 alienated ; the duty of the magistrate transferred to 
 the soldiery ; a gallant army, which never fought un- 
 willingly but against their fellow-subjects, mouldering 10 
 away for want of the direction of a man of common 
 abilities and spirit ; and, in the last instance, the ad- 
 ministration of justice become odious and suspected 
 to the whole body of the people. This deplorable 
 scene admits but of one addition that we are gov- 15 
 erned by councils, from which a reasonable man can 
 expect no remedy but poison, no relief but death. 
 
 If, by the immediate interposition of Providence, it 
 were [be] possible for us to escape a crisis so full of 
 terror and despair, posterity will not believe the history 20 
 of the present times. They will either conclude that 
 
 13 ' ' Lord Mansfield is the judge pointed at in this paragraph. No 
 one now believes that this great jurist ever did the things here as- 
 cribed to him by Junius. All that is true is, that he was a very 
 high Tory, and was, therefore, naturally led to exalt the preroga- 25 
 tives of the Crown ; and that he was a very politic man (and this 
 was the great failing in his character), and therefore unwilling to 
 oppose the King or his ministers, when he knew in heart they 
 were wrong. This was undoubtedly the case in respect to the 
 issuing of the general warrant for apprehending Wilkes, which he 30 
 ought publicly to have condemned ; but, as he remained silent, men 
 naturally considered him, in his character of Chief Justice, as hav- 
 ing approved of the course directed by the King." Goodrich, 
 
FIRST LETTER. 59 
 
 our distresses were imaginary, or that we had the 
 good fortune to be governed by men of acknowledged 
 integrity and wisdom. They will not believe it possi- 
 ble that their ancestors could have survived, or re- 
 
 5 covered from so desperate a condition, while a Duke 
 of Grafton was Prime Minister, a Lord North Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer, a Weymouth and a Hills- 
 borough Secretaries of State, a Granby Commander, 
 in-chief, and a Mansfield chief criminal judge of the 
 
 to kingdom. 
 
 JUNIUS. 
 
ft. Ux fmxle+ 
 
 Born 1825. 
 LECTURE I OF THREE LECTURES ON EVOLUTION. 1 
 
 Delivered in New York, 1876. 
 
 [When, in 1876, Professor Huxley gave, in New York, his three 
 lectures on " Evolution," his task was by no means so simple as 
 it seems to-day, for at that time the acceptance of, or toleration 
 for the doctrine of Evolution was far less general than it is in 
 1893. Since 1860, when Professor Huxley gave a course of lec- 
 tures to workingmen on " The Relations of Man to the Lower 
 Animals," he had been a central figure in the heated controversy 
 in learned societies and in the magazines in regard to Evolution. 
 He knew that in his audience must be some ignorance of what 
 Evolution really means ; probably considerable prejudice against 
 the theory and himself ; that his success or failure to make his 
 exposition clear and convincing meant to give new impetus to 
 the spread of the doctrine or to check it.] 
 
 WE live in and form part of a system of things of 
 immense diversity and complexity, which we call 
 Nature ; and it is a matter of the deepest interest to 
 all of us that we should form just conceptions of the 
 constitution of that system and of its past history. 2 5 
 
 1 Reprinted by permission of Messrs. D. Appleton & Co., from 
 "American Addresses," 1877. 
 
 2 College students of science who wish to write on their favorite 
 subjects seem often to think it beneath them to express them- 
 selves in terms that a reader not trained in their departments of 10 
 knowledge can understand. To show such writers that masters 
 of science, in addressing a mixed audience, not only do not dis- 
 
ON EVOLUTION. 6 1 
 
 With relation to this universe, man is, in extent, little 
 more than a mathematical point ; in duration but a 
 fleeting shadow ; he is a mere reed shaken in the 
 winds of force. But, as Pascal long ago remarked, 
 5 although a mere reed, he is a thinking reed ; and in 
 virtue of that wonderful capacity of thought, he has 
 the power of framing for himself a symbolic concep- 
 tion of the universe, which, although doubtless highly 
 imperfect and inadequate as a picture of the great 
 
 lo whole, is yet sufficient to serve him as a chart for the 
 guidance of his practical affairs. It has taken long 
 ages of toilsome and often fruitless labor to enable 
 man to look steadily at the shifting scenes of the 
 phantasmagoria of Nature, to notice what is fixed 
 
 15 among her fluctuations, and what is regular among 
 her apparent irregularities ; and it is only compara- 
 tively lately, within the last few centuries, that the 
 conception of a universal order and of a definite 
 course of things, which we term the course of Nature, 
 
 20 has emerged. 
 
 But, once originated, the conception of the con- 
 stancy of the order of Nature has become the dominant 
 idea of modern thought. To any person who is famil- 
 iar with the facts upon which that conception is based, 
 
 35 dain, but even study to attain simplicity of speech, is one reason for 
 
 reprinting this lecture of Professor Huxley. Addressing an audience 
 
 that he felt was not scientific, he spoke throughout with great 
 
 simplicity, using scarcely any technical terms. Knowing that 
 
 his audience as a whole had but the popular impressions of Evo- 
 
 3olution, half false, half true, he aimed first of all at clearness, and 
 
 carefully defined every term that might be vague for some hearers. 
 
 liThe three most noteworthy characteristics of this address are its 
 
 Hsimplicity of phrasing, its clearness, and its persuasive skill, 
 
62 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 and is competent to estimate their significance, it has 
 ceased to be conceivable that chance should have any 
 place in the universe, or that events should depend 
 upon any but the natural sequence of cause and effect. 
 We have come to look upon the present as the child 5 
 of the past and as the parent of the future ; and, as 
 we have excluded chance from a place in the universe, 
 so we ignore, even as a possibility, the notion of any 
 interference with the order of Nature. Whatever 
 may be men's speculative doctrines, it is quite certain 10 
 that every intelligent person guides his life and risks 
 his fortune upon the belief that the order of Nature 
 is constant, and that the chain of natural causation 
 is never broken. 
 
 In fact, no belief which we entertain has so com- 15 
 plete a logical basis as that to which I have just 
 referred. It tacitly underlies every process of reason- 
 ing ; it is the foundation of every act of the will. It 
 is based upon the broadest induction, and it is verified 
 by the most constant, regular, and universal of deduc-2o 
 tive processes. But we must recollect that any 
 human belief, however broad its basis, however 
 defensible it may seem, is, after all, only a probable 
 belief, and that our widest and safest generalizations 
 are simply statements of the highest degree of proba- 25 
 bitity. \ Though we are quite clear about the con- 
 stancy of the order of Nature, at the present time, 
 and in the present state of things, it by no means 
 necessarily follows that we are justified in expanding 
 this generalization into the infinite past, and in deny- 3 
 ing, absolutely, that there may have been a time when 
 Nature did not follow a fixed order, when the 
 
63 
 
 relations of cause and effect were not definite, and 
 when extra-natural agencies interfered with the 
 general course of Nature. Cautious men will allow 
 that a universe so different from that which we know 
 
 5 may have existed ; just as a very candid thinker may 
 admit that a world in which two and two do not 
 make four, and in which two straight lines do inclose 
 a space, may exist. But the same caution which 
 forces the admission of such possibilities demands a 
 
 I0 great deal of evidence before it recognizes them to 
 be anything more substantial. And when it is 
 asserted that, so many thousand years ago, events 
 occurred in a manner utterly foreign to and inconsist- 
 ent with the existing laws of Nature, men, who, with- 
 
 15 out being particularly cautious, are simply honest 
 thinkers, unwilling to deceive themselves or delude 
 others, ask for trustworthy evidence of the fact. 
 
 Did things so happen or did they not ? This is a 
 historical question, and one the answer to which must 
 
 20 be sought in the same way as the solution of any 
 other historical problem. 3 
 
 3 Professor Huxley, knowing that some of his audience, as 
 strong churchmen, were probably antagonistic to him in mood, 
 made his introduction not only so clear that all must understand 
 
 25 him, but so fair that all must grant what he said. Speaking from 
 the point of view of the unprejudiced man of common sende, what 
 each of his hearers wished to be, and suggesting steadily that with 
 this man he cordially sympathized, he stated the problem of crea- 
 tion as simply as his hearers must often have stated it to them- 
 
 30 selves. Then he and his hearers were ready fora statement of the 
 three hypotheses. Thus far he had, by his simplicity made his 
 hearers understand him ; by his fairness trust him ; and by his skill 
 meet him on common ground. 
 
64 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 So far as I know, there are only three hypotheses 
 which ever have been entertained, or which well can 
 be entertained, respecting the past history of Nature. 
 I will, in the first place, state the hypotheses, and 
 then I will consider what evidence bearing upon them 5 
 is in our possession, and by what light of criticism 
 that evidence is to be interpreted. 
 
 Upon the first hypothesis, the assumption is, that 
 phenomena of Nature similar to those exhibited by 
 the present world have always existed ; in other 10 
 words, that the universe has existed from all eternity 
 in what may be broadly termed its present condition. 
 
 The second hypothesis is, that the present state 
 of things has had only a limited duration ; and that, 
 at some period in the past, a condition of the world, 15 
 essentially similar to that which we now know, came 
 into existence, without any precedent condition from 
 which it could have naturally proceeded. The assump- 
 tion that successive states of Nature have arisen, each 
 without any relation of natural causation to an ante- 20 
 cedent state, is a mere modification of this second 
 hypothesis. 
 
 The third hypothesis also assumes that the present 
 state of things has had but a limited duration ; but it 
 supposes that this state has been evolved by a natural 25 
 process from an antecedent state, and that from 
 another, and so on ; and, on this hypothesis, the 
 attempt to assign any limit to the series of past changes 
 is, usually, given up. 
 
 It is so needful to form clear and distinct notions 30 
 of what is really meant by each of these hypotheses 
 that I will ask you to imagine what, according to each, 
 
ON EVOLUTION. 65 
 
 would have been visible to a spectator of the events 
 which constitute the history of the earth. On the first 
 hypothesis, however far back in time that spectator 
 might be placed, he would see a world essentially, 
 5 though perhaps not in all its details, similar to that 
 which now exists. The animals which existed would 
 be the ancestors of those which now live, and similar 
 to them ; the plants, in like manner, would be such 
 as we know ; and the mountains, plains, and waters 
 
 10 would foreshadow the salient features of our present 
 land and water. This view was held more or less 
 distinctly, sometimes combined with the notion of 
 recurrent cycles of change, in ancient times ; and its 
 influence has been felt down to the present day. It 
 
 15 is worthy of remark that it is a hypothesis which is 
 not inconsistent with the doctrine of Uniformitarian- 
 ism, with which geologists are familiar. That doctrine 
 was held by Hutton, and in his earlier days by Lyell. 
 Hutton was struck by the demonstration of astrono- 
 
 20 mers that the perturbations of the planetary bodies, 
 however great they may be, yet sooner or later right 
 themselves ; and that the solar system possesses a 
 self-adjusting power by which these aberrations are 
 all brought back to a mean condition. Hutton 
 
 25 imagined that the like might be true of terrestrial 
 changes ; although no one recognized more clearly 
 than he the fact that the dry land is being constantly 
 washed down by rain and rivers and deposited in the 
 sea ; and that thus, in a longer or shorter time, the 
 
 30 inequalities of the earth's surface must be levelled, 
 and its high lands brought down to the ocean. But, 
 taking into account the internal forces of the earth. 
 
66 T. If. HUXLEY. 
 
 which, upheaving the sea-bottom, give rise to new 
 land, he thought that these operations of degradation 
 and elevation might compensate each other ; and that 
 thus, for any assignable time, the general features of 
 our planet might remain what they are. And inas- 5 
 much as, under these circumstances, there need be no 
 limit to the propagation of animals and plants, it is 
 clear that the consistent working-out of the uniformi- 
 tarian idea might lead to the conception of the eternity 
 of the world. Not that I mean to say that either 10 
 Hutton or Lyell held this conception assuredly not ; 
 they would have been the first to repudiate it. Never- 
 theless, the logical development of their arguments 
 tends directly toward this hypothesis. 
 
 The second hypothesis supposes that the present 15 
 order of things, at some no very remote time, had a 
 sudden origin, and that the world, such as it now is, 
 had chaos for its phenomenal antecedent. That is 
 the doctrine which you will find stated most fully and 
 clearly in the immortal poem of John Milton the 20 
 English Divina Commedia Paradise Lost. I believe 
 it is largely to the influence of that remarkable work, 
 combined with the daily teachings to which we have 
 all listened in our childhood, that this hypothesis owes 
 its general wide diffusion as one of the current beliefs 25 
 of English-speaking people. If you turn to the 
 seventh book of Paradise Lost, you will find there 
 stated the hypothesis to which I refer, which is briefly 
 this : That this visible universe of ours came into 
 existence at no great distance of time from the pres- 30 
 ent ; and that the parts of which it is composed 
 made their appearance, in a certain definite order, in 
 
Otf EVOLUTION. 67 
 
 the space of six natural days, in such a manner that, 
 on the first of these days, light appeared ; that, on 
 the second, the firmament, or sky, separated the 
 waters above, from the waters beneath the firmament ; 
 5 that, on the third day, the waters drew away from the 
 dry land, and upon it a varied vegetable life, similar 
 to that which now exists, made its appearance ; that 
 the fourth day was signalized by the apparition of the 
 sun, the stars, the moon, and the planets ; that, on the 
 
 10 fifth day, aquatic animals originated within the waters; 
 that, on the sixth day, the earth gave rise to our four- 
 footed terrestrial creatures, and to all varieties of ter- 
 restrial animals except birds, which had appeared on 
 the preceding day ; and, finally, that man appeared 
 
 15 upon the earth, and the emergence of the universe 
 from chaos was finished. Milton tells us, without the 
 least ambiguity, what a spectator of these marvellous 
 occurrences would have witnessed. I doubt not that 
 his poem is familiar to all of you, but I should like to 
 
 20 recall one passage to your minds, in order that I may 
 be justified in what I have said regarding the per- 
 fectly concrete, definite picture of the origin of the 
 animal world which Milton draws. He says : 
 
 The sixth, and of creation last, arose 
 25 With evening harps and matin, when God said, 
 
 " Let the earth bring forth soul living in her kind, 
 Cattle and creeping things, and beast of the earth, 
 Each in their kind ! " The earth obeyed, and, straight 
 Opening her fertile womb, teemed at a birth 
 30 Innumerous living creatures, perfect forms, 
 
 Limbed and full-grown. Out of the ground uprose, 
 As from his lair, the wild beast, where he wons 
 In forest wild, in thicket, brake, or den ; 
 
68 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 Among the trees in pairs they rose, they walked ; 
 
 The cattle in the fields and meadows green : 
 
 Those rare and solitary ; these in flocks 
 
 Pasturing at once, and in broad herds upsprung. 
 
 The grassy clods now calved ; now half appears e 
 
 The tawny lion, pawing to get free 
 
 His hinder parts then springs, as broke from bonds, 
 
 And rampant shakes his brinded mane ; the ounce, 
 
 The libbard, and the tiger, as the mole 
 
 Rising, the crumbled earth above them threw 10 
 
 In hillocks ; the swift stag from underground 
 
 Bore up his branching head ; scarce from his mould 
 
 Behemoth, biggest born of earth, upheaved 
 
 His vastness ; fleeced the flocks and bleating rose 
 
 As plants ; ambiguous between sea and land, 15 
 
 The river-horse and scaly crocodile. 
 
 At once came forth whatever creeps the ground, 
 
 Insect or worm. 
 
 There is no doubt as to the meaning of this state- 
 ment, nor as to what a man of Milton's genius expected 20 
 would have been actually visible to an eye-witness of 
 this mode of organization of living things. 
 
 The third hypothesis, or the hypothesis of evolution, 
 supposes that, at any comparatively late period of past 
 time, our imaginary spectator would meet with a state 25 
 af things very similar to that which now obtains ; but 
 that the likeness of the past to the present would 
 gradually become less and less, in proportion to the 
 remoteness of his period of observation from the 
 present day ; that the existing distribution of moun- 30 
 tains and plains, of rivers and seas, would show itself 
 to be product of a slow process of natural change 
 operating upon more and more widely different ante- 
 cedent conditions of the mineral framework of the 
 
ON EVOLUTION. 69 
 
 earth ; until, at length, in place of that framework, 
 he would behold only a vast nebulous mass, repre- 
 senting the constituents of the sun and of the planetary 
 bodies. Preceding the forms of life which now exist 
 5 our observer would see animals and plants not iden- 
 tical with them, but like them ; increasing their differ- 
 ences with their antiquity and, at the same time, 
 becoming simpler and simpler ; until, finally, the 
 world of life would present nothing but that undiffer- 
 
 loentiated protoplasmic matter which, so far as our 
 present knowledge goes, is the common foundation 
 of all vital activity. 
 
 The hypothesis of evolution supposes that in all 
 this vast progression there would be no breach of 
 
 15 continuity, no point at which we could say " This is a 
 natural process," and " This is not a natural process " ; 
 but that the whole might be compared to that wonder- 
 ful process of development which may be seen going 
 on every day under our eyes, in virtue of which there 
 
 20 arises, out of the semi-fluid, comparatively homoge- 
 neous substance which we call an egg, the compli- 
 cated organization of one of the higher animals. 
 That, in a few words, is what is meant by the hypoth- 
 esis of evolution. 4 
 
 25 4 Professor Huxley, stating the three hypotheses at first as 
 simply as he could, felt even then that they sounded vague, and 
 therefore brought in concrete illustration to make each clearer. 
 When he spoke, far more than to-day, discussion of the theory of 
 Evolution made church-people combative at once, because of the 
 
 30 essential contradiction they premised between it and the biblical 
 theory of creation. Knowing this, Professor Huxley carefully 
 avoided reference to the second hypothesis as biblical, lest, before 
 he had placed all the hypotheses clearly before his hearers, he 
 
70 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 I have already suggested that in dealing with these 
 three hypotheses, in endeavoring to form a judgment 
 as to which of them is the more worthy of belief, or 
 whether none is worthy of belief in which case our 
 condition of mind should be that suspension of judg- 5 
 ment which is so difficult to all but trained intellects 
 we should be indifferent to all ti priori considera- 
 tions. The question is a question of historical fact. 
 The universe has come into existence somehow or 
 other, and the problem is, whether it came into exist- 10 
 ence in one fashion, or whether it came into existence 
 in another ; and, as an essential preliminary to further 
 discussion, permit me to say two or three words as to 
 the nature and the kinds of historical evidence. 
 
 The evidence as to the occurrence of any event in 15 
 past time may be ranged under two heads which, for 
 convenience' sake, I will speak of as testimonial evi- 
 dence and circumstantial evidence. By testimonial 
 evidence I mean human testimony ; and by circum- 
 stantial evidence I mean evidence which is not human 20 
 testimony. Let me illustrate by a familiar example 
 
 should be involved in explanations of his interpretation of the 
 lines in Genesis. To avoid this danger, he called the second 
 hypothesis the Miltonic, by the newness of this term arousing the 
 curiosity of the audience and turning their thoughts from the Bible 25 
 to Paradise Lost. There could be no doubt that he interpreted 
 correctly the lines he read : there might, as he shows later, have 
 been much discussion about any interpretation he gave of the 
 words in Genesis. Moreover, all fair-minded hearers must have 
 recognized that the Miltonic statement is the legitimate working- 30 
 out of the theory taught them as children. By his skill Professor 
 Huxley got the three hypotheses before his audience without 
 treating a difficult and dangerous topic. 
 
ON EVOLUTION. M 
 
 what I understand by these two kinds of evidence, 
 and what is to be said respecting their value. 
 
 Suppose that a man tells you that he saw a person 
 strike another and kill him ; that is testimonial evi- 
 5 dence of the fact of murder. But it is possible to 
 have circumstantial evidence of the fact of murder ; 
 that is to say, you may find a man dying with a 
 wound upon his head having exactly the form and 
 character of the wound which is made by an axe, and, 
 
 10 with due care in taking surrounding circumstances 
 into account, you may conclude with the utmost cer- 
 tainty that the man has been murdered ; that his 
 death is the consequence of a blow inflicted by 
 another man with that implement. We are very much 
 
 15 in the habit of considering circumstantial evidence as 
 of less value than testimonial evidence, and it may 
 be that, where the circumstances are not perfectly 
 clear and intelligible, it is a dangerous and unsafe 
 kind of evidence ; but it must not be forgotten that, 
 
 20 in many cases, circumstantial is quite as conclusive as 
 testimonial evidence, and that, not unfrequently, it is 
 a great deal weightier than testimonial evidence. 
 For example, take the case to which I referred just 
 now. The circumstantial evidence may be better and 
 
 25 more convincing than the testimonial evidence ; for it 
 may be impossible, under the conditions that I have 
 defined, to suppose that the man met his death from 
 any cause but the violent blow of an axe wielded by 
 another man. The circumstantial evidence in favor 
 
 30 of a murder having been committed, in that case, is 
 as complete and as convincing as evidence can be. 
 It is evidence which is open to no doubt and to no 
 
7 2 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 falsification. But the testimony of a witness is open 
 to multitudinous doubts. He may have been mis- 
 taken. He may have been actuated by mali'ce. It 
 has constantly happened that even an accurate man 
 has declared that a thing has happened in this, that, 5 
 or the other way, when a careful analysis of the cir- 
 cumstantial evidence has shown that it did not happen 
 in that way, but in some other way. 5 
 
 We may now consider the evidence in favor of or 
 against the three hypotheses. Let me first direct your ic 
 attention to what is to be said about the hypothesis 
 of the eternity of the state of things in which we now 
 live. What will first strike you is, that it is a hy- 
 pothesis which, whether true or false, is not capable of 
 verification by any evidence. For, in order to obtain 15 
 either circumstantial or testimonial evidence sufficient 
 to prove the eternity of duration of the present state 
 of nature, you must have an eternity of witnesses or 
 an infinity of circumstances, and neither of these is 
 attainable. It is utterly impossible that such evidence 20 
 should be carried beyond a certain point of time ; and 
 all that could be said, at most, would be, that so 
 far as the evidence could be traced, there was nothing 
 to contradict the hypothesis. But when you look, 
 not to the testimonial evidence which, considering 25 
 
 5 This careful distinction between, and illustration of, testimonial 
 and circumstantial evidence shows how careful Professor Huxley 
 was not to leave in his hearers' minds any vagueness as to his 
 terms. There is a popular feeling that circumstantial evidence is 
 not very trustworthy, and since all of the proof Professor Huxley 30 
 intended to use in support of his theory was circumstantial evi- 
 dence, it was necessary to do away with this prejudice in the 
 minds of his hearers. 
 
OJV EVOLUTION'. 
 
 73 
 
 the relative insignificance of the antiquity of human 
 records, might not be good for much in this case 
 but to the circumstantial evidence, then you find that 
 this hypothesis is absolutely incompatible with such 
 5 evidence as we have ; which is of so plain and so 
 simple a character that it is impossible in any way 
 to escape from the conclusions which it forces 
 upon us. 
 
 You are, doubtless, all aware that the outer sub- 
 
 10 stance of the earth, which alone is accessible to direct 
 observation, is not of a homogeneous character, but 
 that it is made up of a number of layers or strata. 8 
 On careful examination, it is found that the mate- 
 rials of which each of these layers of more or less 
 
 15 hard rock are composed, are, for the most part, of the 
 same nature as those which are at present being 
 formed under known conditions on the surface of the 
 
 6 In Geology the strata bear the following names. (The Post- 
 Tertiary is the most recent. Read the main divisions from left 
 20 to right, the sub-divisions downward, within each bracket). 
 
 Tertiary and f Post-Tertiary. 
 Quaternary I Pliocene. 
 or I Miocene. 
 Cainzoic. [Eocene. 
 
 Primary or 
 Palseozoic. 
 
 Permian. 
 
 Carboniferous. 
 
 Devonian. 
 
 Silurian. 
 
 Cambrian. 
 
 Huronian. 
 
 Laurentism, 
 
 Secondary I Cretaceous. 
 
 or J Jurassic or OSlitic, 
 Mesozoic. I Triassic. 
 
74 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 earth. For example, the chalk, which constitutes a 
 great part of the Cretaceous formation in some parts 
 of the world, is practically identical in its physical 
 and chemical characters with a substance which is 
 now being formed at the bottom of the Atlantic 5 
 Ocean, and covers an enormous area ; other beds of 
 rock are comparable with the sands which are being 
 formed upon sea-shores, packed together, and so on. 
 Thus, omitting rocks of igneous origin, it is demon- 
 strable that all these beds of stone, of which a total 10 
 of not less than seventy thousand feet is known, 
 have been formed by natural agencies, either out of 
 the waste and washing of the dry land, or else by 
 the accumulation of the exuviae of plants and ani- 
 mals. Many of these strata are full of such exuviae 15 
 the so-called " fossils." Remains of thousands of 
 species of animals and plants, as perfectly recog- 
 nizable as those of existing forms of life which you 
 meet with in museums, or as the shells which you pick 
 up upon the sea-beach, have been imbedded in the 2 o 
 ancient sands, or muds, or limestones, just as they are 
 being imbedded now, in sandy, or clayey, or calcare- 
 ous subaqueous deposits. They furnish us with a 
 record, the general nature of which cannot be misin- 
 terpreted, of the kinds of things that have lived upon 25 
 the surface of the earth during the time that is regis- 
 tered by this great thickness of stratified rocks. But 
 even a superficial study of these fossils shows us that 
 the animals and plants which live at the present time 
 have had only a temporary duration ; for the remains 30 
 of such modern forms of life are met with, for the 
 most part, only in the uppermost or latest tertiaries > 
 
ON EVOLUTION. 75 
 
 and their number rapidly diminishes in the lower 
 deposits of that epoch. In the older tertiaries, the 
 places of existing animals and plants are taken by 
 other forms, as numerous and diversified as those 
 
 5 which live now in the same localities, but more or less 
 different from them; in the mesozoic rocks,these are 
 replaced by others yet more divergent from modern 
 types; and in the palaeozoic formations the contrast is 
 still more, marked. Thus the circumstantial evidence 
 
 10 absolutely negatives the conception of the eternity 
 of the present condition of things. We can say with 
 certainty that the present condition of things has ex- 
 isted for a comparatively short period ; and that, so 
 far as animal and vegetable nature are concerned, it 
 
 15 has been preceded by a different condition. We can 
 pursue this evidence until we reach the lowest of the 
 stratified rocks, in which we lose the indications of life 
 altogether. The hypothesis of the eternity of the 
 present state of Nature may therefore be put out of 
 
 20 court. 
 
 We now come to what I will term Milton's hypoth- 
 esis the hypothesis that the present condition of 
 things has endured for a comparatively short time ; 
 and, at the commencement of that time, came into 
 
 25 existence within the course of six days. I doubt not 
 that it may have excited some surprise in your minds 
 that I should have spoken of this as Milton's hypoth- 
 esis, rather than that I should have chosen the terms 
 which are more customary, such as " the doctrine of 
 
 30 creation," or " the Biblical doctrine," or " the doc- 
 trine of Moses," all of which denominations, as applied 
 to the hypothesis to which I have just referred, are 
 
76 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 certainly much more familiar to you than the title of 
 the Miltonic hypothesis. 7 But I have had what I can- 
 not but think are very weighty reasons for taking the 
 course which I have pursued. In the first place, I 
 have discarded the title of the " doctrine of creation," 5 
 because my present business is not with the question 
 why the objects which constitute Nature came into 
 existence, but when they came into existence, and in 
 what order. This is as strictly a historica.1 question 
 as the question when the Angles and the Jutes in- 10 
 vaded England, and whether they preceded or fol- 
 lowed the Romans. But the question about creation 
 is a philosophical problem, and one which cannot be 
 solved,* or even approached, by the historical method. 
 What we want to learn is, whether the facts, so far as *S 
 they are known, afford evidence that things arose in 
 the way described by Milton, or whether they do not ; 
 and, when that question is settled, it will be time 
 enough to inquire into the causes of their origination. 
 In the second place, I have not spoken of this doc- 20 
 
 7 Here Professor Huxley was obliged to meet squarely the dif- 
 ficulty he avoided on p. 69. Now that the second hypothesis 
 was to be considered, any clear-sighted hearer must see that the 
 testimony to be treated was of two kinds testimonial, from the 
 Bible, and circumstantial, from Geology. Therefore, it seemed that 2 5 
 the speaker must consider the ' ' biblical " evidence here. This Pro- 
 fessor Huxley did frankly, though very deftly, for while explain- 
 ing why he did not speak of the second hypothesis as the ' ' biblical, *' 
 he made the supporters of the second hypothesis responsible for 
 so much doubt as to the authenticity and the interpretation of 30 
 the testimonial evidence that it must be ruled out. Morever, he 
 gained, persuasively, by making these men, by his fine irony, a 
 little ridiculous. If he made the audience smile at them, he had 
 already done something to win his hearers to his view. 
 
ON EVOLUTION. 77 
 
 trine as the Biblical doctrine. It is quite true that per. 
 sons as diverse in their general views as Milton the 
 Protestant and the celebrated Jesuit Father Suarez, 
 each put upon the first chapter of Genesis the interpre- 
 
 5 tation embodied in Milton's poem. It is quite true 
 that this interpretation is that which has been instilled 
 into every one of us in our childhood ; but I do not for 
 one moment venture to say that it can properly be 
 called the Biblical doctrine. It is not my business, 
 
 10 and does not lie within my competency, to say what 
 the Hebrew text does, and what it does not signify ; 
 moreover, were I to affirm that this is the Biblical 
 doctrine, I should be met by the authority of many 
 eminent scholars, to say nothing of men of science, 
 
 15 who, at various times, have absolutely denied that any 
 such doctrine is to be found in Genesis. If we are to 
 listen to many expositors of no mean authority, we 
 must believe that what seems so clearly defined in 
 Genesis as if very great pains had been taken that 
 
 20 there should be no possibility of mistake is not the 
 meaning of the text at all. The account is -divided 
 into periods that we may make just as long or as short 
 as convenience requires. We are also to understand 
 that it is consistent with the original text to believe 
 
 25 that the most complex plants and animals may have 
 been evolved by natural processes, lasting for mil- 
 lions of years, out of structureless rudiments. A per- 
 son who is not a Hebrew scholar can only stand aside 
 and admire the marvellous flexibility of a language 
 
 30 which admits of such diverse interpretations. But 
 assuredly, in the face of such contradictions of 
 authority upon matters respecting which he is incom- 
 
7$ T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 petent to form any judgment, he will abstain, as I do, 
 from giving any opinion. 
 
 In the third place, I have carefully abstained from 
 speaking of this as the Mosaic doctrine, because we 
 are now assured upon the authority of the highest 5 
 critics, and even of dignitaries of the Church, that 
 there is no evidence that Moses wrote the Book of 
 Genesis, or knew anything about it. You will under- 
 stand that I give no judgment it would be an impert- 
 inence upon my part to volunteer even a suggestion 10 
 upon such a subject. But, that being the state of 
 opinion among the scholars and the clergy, it is well 
 for the unlearned in Hebrew lore, and for the laity, to 
 avoid entangling themselves in such a vexed question. 
 Happily, Milton leaves us no excuse for doubting what 15 
 he means, and I shall therefore be safe in speaking 
 of the opinion in question as the Miltonic hypothesis. 
 
 Now we have to test that hypothesis. For my part, 
 I have no prejudice one way or the other. If there is 
 evidence in favor of this view, I am burdened by no2c 
 theoretical difficulties in the way of accepting it ; but 
 there must be evidence. Scientific men get an awk- 
 ward habit no, I won't call it that, for it is a valuable 
 habit of believing nothing unless there is evidence 
 for it ; and they have a way of looking upon belief 2 5 
 which is not based upon evidence, not only as illogical 
 but as immoral. We will, if you please, test this view 
 by the circumstantial evidence alone ; for, from what 
 I have said, you will understand that I do not propose 
 to discuss the question of what testimonial evidence 3 
 is to be adduced in favor of it. If those whose busi- 
 ness it is to judge are not at one as to the authenticity 
 
ON- EVOLUTION. 79 
 
 of the only evidence of that kind which is offered, nor 
 as to the facts to which it bears witness, the discus- 
 sion of such evidence is superfluous. 
 
 But I may be permitted to regret this necessity of 
 
 5 rejecting the testimonial evidence the less, because 
 the examination of the circumstantial evidence leads 
 to the conclusion, not only that it is incompetent to 
 justify the hypothesis, but that, so far as it goes, it is 
 contrary to the hypothesis. 
 
 I0 The considerations upon which I base this conclu- 
 sion are of the simplest possible character. The Mil- 
 tonic hypothesis contains assertions of a very definite 
 character, relating to the succession of living forms. 
 It is stated that plants, for example, made their 
 
 15 appearance upon the third day, and not before. 
 And you will understand that what the poet means by 
 plants are such plants as now live, the ancestors, in 
 the ordinary way of propagation of like by like, of the 
 trees and shrubs which flourish in the present world. 
 
 20 It must needs be so ; for, if they were different, either 
 the existing plants have been the result of a separate 
 origination since that described by Milton, of which 
 we have no record, nor any ground for supposition 
 that such an occurrence has taken place ; or else they 
 
 25 have arisen by a process of evolution from the original 
 stocks. 8 
 
 In the second place, it is clear that there was no 
 animal life before the fifth day, and that, on the fifth 
 day, aquatic animals and birds appeared. And it is 
 
 30 further clear that terrestrial living things, other than 
 birds, made their appearance upon the sixth day, and 
 8 The use of the dilemma here and on p. 83 is very effective. 
 
So r. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 not before. Hence, it follows that, if, in the large 
 mass of circumstantial evidence as to what really has 
 happened in the past history of the globe we find indi- 
 cations of the existence of terrestrial animals, other 
 than birds, at a certain period, it is perfectly certain 5 
 that all that has taken place since that time must be 
 referred to the sixth day. 
 
 In the great Carboniferous formation, whence 
 America derives so vast a proportion of her actual 
 and potential wealth, in the beds of coal which have 10 
 been formed from the vegetation of that period, we 
 find abundant evidence of the existence of terrestrial 
 animals. They have been described, not only by 
 European but by your own naturalists. There are to 
 be found numerous insects allied to our cockroaches. 15 
 There are to be found spiders and scorpions of large 
 size, the latter so similar to existing scorpions that it 
 requires the practised eye of the naturalist to distin- 
 guish them. Inasmuch as these animals can be 
 proved to have been alive in the Carboniferous epoch, 2 o 
 it is perfectly clear that, if the Miltonic account is to 
 be accepted, the huge mass of rocks extending from 
 the middle of the Palaeozoic formations to the upper- 
 most members of the series, must belong to the day 
 which is termed by Milton the sixth. But, further, 25 
 it is expressly stated that aquatic animals took their 
 origin upon the fifth day, and not before ; hence, all 
 formations in which remains of aquatic animals can 
 be proved to exist, and which therefore testify that 
 such animals lived at the time when these formations 30 
 were in course of deposition, must have been depos- 
 ited during or since the period which Milton speaks 
 
1 Wl V tKOl 1 Y j/ 
 J 
 
 ON EVOLUTION. 8l 
 
 EVOLUTION. 
 
 of as the fifth day. But there is absolutely no fossil- 
 iferous formation in which the remains of aquatic 
 animals are absent. The oldest fossils in the Silurian 
 rocks are exuviae of marine animals ; and if the view 
 
 5 which is entertained by Principal Dawson and Dr. 
 Carpenter respecting the nature of the Eozoon be well 
 founded, aquatic animals existed at a period as far 
 antecedent to the deposition of the coal as the coal 
 is from us ; inasmuch as the Eozoon is met with in 
 
 10 those Laurentian strata which lie at the bottom of 
 the series of stratified rocks. 9 Hence it follows, 
 plainly enough, that the whole series of stratified 
 rocks, if they are to be brought into harmony with 
 Milton, must be referred to the fifth and sixth days, 
 
 15 and that we cannot hope to find the slightest trace 
 of the products of the earlier days in the geological 
 record. When we consider these simple facts, we see 
 how absolutely futile are the attempts that have been 
 made to draw a parallel between the story told by so 
 
 20 much of the crust of the earth as is known to us and 
 the story which Milton tells. The whole series of 
 fossiliferous stratified rocks must be referred to the 
 last two days ; and neither the Carboniferous, nor 
 any other, formation can afford evidence of the work 
 
 25 of the third day. 
 
 Not only is there this objection to any attempt to 
 
 ' A few years before this address, Canadian geologists gave the 
 name Eozoon to a certain aggregate of minerals viewed by them 
 as a fossilized organic body belonging to the Foraminifera. 
 30 There can, however, no longer be any doubt of the inorganic 
 nature of the Eozoon. By the geologists who named the Eozotfn, 
 it was believed to be the oldest recognized form, to represent the 
 dawn of life.* Century Diet, 
 
82 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 establish a harmony between the Miltonic account 
 and the facts recorded in the fossiliferous rocks, but 
 there is a further difficulty. According to the Mil- 
 tonic account, the order in which animals should have 
 made their appearance in the stratified rocks would 5 
 be this : Fishes, including the great whales, and 
 birds ; after them, all varieties of terrestrial animals 
 except birds. Nothing could be further from the 
 facts as we find them ; we know of not the slightest 
 evidence of the existence of birds before the Jurassic, 10 
 or perhaps the Triassic, formation ; while terrestrial 
 animals, as we have just seen, occur in the Carbonif- 
 erous rocks. 
 
 If there were any harmony between the Miltonic 
 account and the circumstantial evidence, we ought to 15 
 have abundant evidence of the existence of birds in 
 the Carboniferous, the Devonian, and the Silurian 
 rocks. I need harcjly say that this is not the case, 
 and that not a trace of birds makes its appearance 
 until the far later period which I have mentioned. 2 o 
 
 And again, if it be true that all varieties of fishes 
 and the great whales, and the like, made their appear- 
 ance on the fifth day, we ought to find the remains of 
 these animals in the older rocks in those which were 
 deposited before the Carboniferous epoch. Fishes we 25 
 do find, in considerable number and variety ; but the 
 great whales are absent, and the fishes are not such 
 as now live. Not one solitary species of fish now in 
 existence is to be found in the Devonian or Silurian 
 formations. Hence we are introduced afresh to the 30 
 dilemma which I have already placed before you : 
 either the animals which came into existence on the 
 
ON EVOLUTION. 83 
 
 fifth day were not such as those which are found at 
 present, are not the direct and immediate ancestors 
 of those which now exist ; in which case either fresh 
 creations of which nothing is said, or a process of 
 
 5 evolution must have occurred ; or else the whole story 
 must be given up, as not only devoid of any circum- 
 stantial evidence, but contrary to such evidence as 
 exists. 
 
 I placed before you in a few words, some little time 
 
 10 ago, a statementxof the sum and substance of Milton's 
 hypothesis. Let me now try to state, as briefly, the 
 effect of the circumstantial evidence bearing upon the 
 past history of the earth which is furnished, without 
 the possibility of mistake, with no chance of error as , 
 
 15 to its chief features, by the stratified rocks. What we 
 find is, that the great series of formations represents 
 a period of time of which our human chronologies 
 hardly afford us a unit of measure. I will not pretend 
 to say how we ought to estimate this time, in millions 
 
 20 or in billions of years. For my purpose, the deter- 
 mination of its absolute duration is wholly unessential. 
 But that the time was enormous there can be no 
 question. 
 
 It results from the simplest methods of interpreta- 
 
 25 tion, that leaving out of view certain patches of 
 metamorphosed rocks, and certain volcanic products, 
 all that is now dry land has once been at the bottom 
 of the waters. It is perfectly certain that, at a com- 
 paratively recent period of the world's history the 
 
 30 Cretaceous epoch none of the great physical features 
 which at present mark the surface of the globe 
 existed. It is certain that the Rocky Mountains were 
 
84 T. H. HUXLEY. 
 
 not. It is certain that the Himalaya Mountains were 
 not. It is certain that the Alps and the Pyrenees had 
 no existence. The evidence is of the plainest possi- 
 ble character, and is simply this : We find raised up 
 on the flanks of these mountains, elevated by the 5 
 forces of upheaval which have given rise to them, 
 masses of Cretaceous rock which formed the bottom 
 of the sea before those mountains existed. It is there- 
 fore clear that the elevatory forces which gave rise to 
 the mountains operated subsequently to the Cre- 10 
 taceous epoch ; and that the mountains themselves 
 are largely made up of the materials deposited in the 
 sea which once occupied their place. As we go back 
 in time, we meet with constant alternations of sea 
 and land, of estuary and open ocean ; and, in cor- 15 
 respondence with these alternations, we observe the 
 changes in the fauna and flora to which I have 
 referred. 
 
 But the inspection of these changes gives us no right 
 to believe that there has been any discontinuity in 20 
 natural processes. There is no trace of general 
 cataclysms, of universal deluges, or sudden de- 
 structions of a whole fauna or flora. The appear- 
 ances which were formerly interpreted in that way 
 have all been shown to be delusive, as our knowledge 25 
 has increased and as the blanks which formerly ap- 
 peared to exist between the different formations have 
 been filled up. That there is no absolute break be- 
 tween formation and formation, that there has been 
 no sudden disappearance of all the forms of life and 30 
 replacement of them by others, but that changes have 
 gone on slowly and gradually, that one type has died 
 
ON- EVOLUTION. 85 
 
 out and another has taken its place, and that thus, by 
 insensible degrees, one fauna has been replaced by 
 another, are conclusions strengthened by constantly 
 increasing evidence. So that within the whole of the 
 5 immense period indicated by the fossiliferous stratified 
 rocks, there is assuredly not the slightest proof of any 
 break in the uniformity of Nature's operations, no 
 indication that events have followed other than a clear 
 and orderly sequence. 
 
 10 That, I say, is the natural and obvious teaching of 
 the circumstantial evidence contained in the stratified 
 rocks. I leave you to consider how far, by any 
 ingenuity of interpretation, by any stretching of the 
 meaning of language, it can be brought into harmony 
 
 J 5 with the Miltonic hypothesis. 
 
ARGUMENT IN GENERAL. 
 
 OLorfc Ersfcfne, 
 
 Born 1750. Died 1823. 
 
 SPEECH IN BEHALF OF LORD GEORGE GORDON WHEN 
 INDICTED FOR HIGH TREASON. 
 
 Delivered before the Court of the King's Bench, February 5, 1781. 
 
 [' ' Lord George Gordon, a member of the House of Commons, 
 was a young Scottish nobleman of weak intellect and enthusiastic 
 feelings. He had been chosen president of the Protestant Asso- 
 ciation, whose object was to procure the repeal of Sir George 
 Saville's bill in favor of the Catholics. In this capacity, he 
 directed the association to meet him in St. George's Fields, and 
 proceed thence to the Parliament House with a petition for the 
 repeal of the bill. Accordingly, about forty thousand persons of 
 the middling classes assembled on Friday, the 2d of June, 1780, 
 and after forming a procession, moved forward till they blocked 
 up all the avenues to the House of Commons. They had no 
 arms of any kind, and were most of them orderly in their 
 conduct, though individuals among them insulted some members 
 of both Houses who were passing into the building, requiring 
 them to put blue cockades on their hats, and to cry ' No 
 Popery ! ' 
 
 "Lord George presented the petition, but the House refused 
 to consider it at that time, by a vote of 192 to 6. The multitude 
 now became disorderly, and after the House adjourned, bodies of 
 men proceeded to demolish the Catholic chapels at the residences 
 of the foreign ministers. From this moment the whole affair 
 changed its character. Desperate men, many of them thieves 
 
 86 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 87 
 
 and robbers, took the lead. Not only were Catholic chapels set 
 on fire, but the London prisons were broken open and destroyed ; 
 thirty-six fires were blazing at one time during the night. The 
 town was for some days completely in the power of the multitude. 
 Lord Mansfield's house was destroyed ; the breweries and dis- 
 tilleries were broken open, and the mob became infuriated with 
 liquor ; and for a period there was reason to apprehend that the 
 whole of the metropolis might be made one general scene of con- 
 flagration. The military were at last called in from the country, 
 and, after a severe conflict, the mob was put down ; but not 
 until nearly five hundred persons had been killed or wounded, 
 exclusive of those who perished from the effects of intoxi- 
 cation. 
 
 "The government had been taken by surprise. No adequate 
 provision was made to guard against violence, and as the riots 
 went on, all authority for a time seemed to be paralyzed or 
 extinct. When order was at last restored, the magistrates, as is 
 common with those who have neglected their duty, endeavored to 
 throw the blame on others they resolved to make Lord George 
 Gordon their scapegoat. He was accordingly arraigned for high 
 treason ; and such was the excitement of the public mind, such 
 the eagerness to have someone punished, that he was in immi- 
 nent danger of being made the victim of public resentment. It 
 was happy for him that, in addition to Mr. (afterward Lord) 
 Kenyon, his senior counsel, a man of sound mind, but wholly 
 destitute of eloquence, he had chosen Mr. Erskine, as a Scotch- 
 man, to aid in his defense. It was the means probably of saving 
 his life. 
 
 " The Attorney-General opened the case in behalf of the Crown, 
 contending (i) That the prisoner, in assembling the multitude round 
 the two Houses of Parliament, was guilty of high treason, if he did 
 so with a view to overawe and intimidate the Legislature, and 
 enforce his purposes by numbers and violence (a doctrine fully con- 
 firmed by the court) ; and (2) That the overt acts proved might 
 be fairly construed into such a design, and were the only evidence 
 by which a traitorous intention, in such a case, could be shown. 
 When the evidence for the Crown was received, Mr. Kenyon 
 addressed the jury in behalf of Lord George Gordon, but ip a 
 
88 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 manner so inefficient that, when he sat down, ' the friends of 
 Lord George were in an agony of apprehension.' According to 
 the usual practice Mr. Erskine should now have followed, before the 
 examination of his client's witnesses. But he adroitly changed 
 the order, claiming as a privilege of the prisoner (for which he 
 adduced a precedent) to have the evidence in his favor received at 
 once. His object was, by meeting the evidence of the Crown 
 with that of Lord George's witnesses as early as possible, to open 
 a way for being heard with more favor by the jury, and of com- 
 menting upon the evidence on both sides as compared together. 
 The Rev. Mr. Middleton, a member of the Protestant Asso- 
 ciation, swore that he had watched the prisoner's conduct, and 
 that he appeared to be always actuated by the greatest loyalty to 
 the King and attachment to the Constitution that his speeches 
 at the meetings of the association, at Coachmakers' Hall, never 
 contained an expression tending directly or indirectly to a repeal 
 of the bill by force that he desired the people not even to carry 
 sticks in the procession, and begged that riotous persons might 
 be delivered to the constables. Mr. Evans, an eminent surgeon, 
 declared that he saw Lord George Gordon in the center of one of 
 the divisions in St. George's Fields, and that it appeared from his 
 conduct and expressions that he wished and endeavored to pre- 
 vent all disorder. This was confirmed by others, and it was 
 proved by decisive evidence that the bulk of the people round the 
 Parliament House and in the lobby were not members of the 
 Association, but idlers, vagabonds, and pickpockets, who had 
 thrust themselves in ; so that the persons who insulted the mem- 
 bers were of a totally different class from those who formed the 
 original procession. The Earl of Lonsdale swore that he took 
 the prisoner home from the House in his carriage ; that great 
 multitudes surrounded Lord George, inquiring the fate of the 
 petition : that he answered it was uncertain, and earnestly en- 
 treated them to retire to their homes and be quiet. 
 
 4< The evidence was not closed until after midnight, when Mr. 
 Erskine addressed the jury in the following speech. The jury, 
 after being charged by Lord Mansfield, withdrew at three o'clock 
 in the morning, and speedily returned with the verdict FOT 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 89 
 
 GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY : 1 Mr. Kenyon having 
 informed the court that we propose to call no other 
 witnesses, it is now my duty to address myself to you 
 as counsel for the noble prisoner at the bar, the whole 
 5 evidence being closed. I use the word closed, because 
 it certainly is not finished, since I have been obliged 
 to leave the seat in which I sat, to disentangle myself 
 from the volumes of men's names, which lay there 
 under my feet, whose testimony, had it been necessary 
 10 for the defense, would have confirmed all the facts 
 that are already in evidence before you. 2 
 
 1 The construction of this speech is apparently very simple, but 
 it is the simplicity of genius, and its apparently natural develop- 
 ment helped to produce in the minds of the jury the feeling 
 
 15 Erskine sought, that the simple, the natural, the common-sense 
 belief must be that Lord Gordon was an innocent, persecuted 
 man. Analysis of the case had shown Lord Erskine before he 
 spoke that the whole case turned on the definition of treason to 
 be used in it ; and about a definition of it he made his whole case 
 
 20 center. Roughly the plan of this simplification of a case open to 
 all kinds of entanglement, which the prosecution had evidently 
 been willing to make obscure, is this : I. To make the jury feel 
 the importance, the indispensability of a clear definition of 
 treason ; 2. To state clearly a definition that even his opponents 
 
 25 must accept ; 3. To point out under what part of this the prisoner 
 might be accused, and rigorously excluding all other parts, to 
 make the jury see that to an application of this to the prisoner's 
 conduct the case must be confined ; 4. Using this accepted test, to 
 see what bearing on it the evidence of the prosecution had ; 5. 
 
 30 To apply this test to the evidence for the defendant ; 6. To recap- 
 itulate and to close. The speech flows apparently spontaneously, 
 yet the most careful analysis prepared for it ; every extraneous idea 
 was excluded ; every sentence had its work to do. If it be the high- 
 est art that conceals art, this speech is certainly a masterpiece. 
 
 35 2 " Mr. Erskine shows great dexterity in turning a slight circum- 
 
9 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 Gentlemen, I feel myself entitled to expect, both 
 from you and from the court, the greatest indulgence 
 and attention. I am, indeed, a greater object of your 
 compassion than even my noble friend whom I am 
 defending. He rests secure in conscious innocence, 5 
 and in the well-placed assurance that it can suffer no 
 stain in your hands. 3 Not so with ME. I stand before 
 you a troubled, I am afraid a guilty man, in having 
 presumed to accept of the awful task which I am 
 now called upon to perform a task which my learned 10 
 stance at the opening of his speech into a means of impressing the 
 jury from the first with a sense of his client's innocence. He had 
 sat thus far in the front row, with large files of papers at his feet, 
 but he now stepped back to obtain greater freedom of movement ; 
 and this he represents as done to escape from ' the volumes of 15 
 men's names ' who stood ready to confirm the evidence in favor 
 of Lord Gordon ! So the next paragraph, though in form a plea 
 for indulgence to himself as a young speaker, is in fact the 
 strongest possible assumption of the prisoner's innocence, since 
 the guilt referred to consisted in his venturing to endanger, by his 2 o 
 inexperience, the cause of one who stood secure himself ' in 
 conscious innocence.' There is hardly anything for which Mr. 
 Erskine deserves more to be studied, than his thus making every 
 circumstance conspire to produce the desired impression. All is 
 so easy and natural that men never think of it as the result of 25 
 design or premeditation, and here lies his consummate skill as an 
 advocate. " Goodrich. 
 
 8 The persuasive appeals in this speech are subtly handled. 
 Lord Erskine does not once make a mere appeal to the emotions. 
 When, here, he pleads for sympathy as inexperienced, or, on o O 
 P- I 3 gracefully compliments Lord Mansfield, his words subserve 
 a second purpose. The plea goes far to establish an assumption 
 of the innocence of Lord George Gordon ; the compliment makes 
 a proof of his innocence. As is pointed out later, the omission 
 at the end of the speech of any emotional appeal is far stronger 
 than any appeal could have been, 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 9 1 
 
 friend who spoke before me, though he has justly 
 risen, by extraordinary capacity and experience, to 
 the highest rank in his profession, has spoken of with 
 that distrust and diffidence which becomes every 
 5 Christian in a cause of blood. If Mr. Kenyon has 
 such feelings, think what mine must be. Alas ! gen- 
 tlemen, who am I ? A young man of little experience, 
 unused to the bar of criminal courts, and sinking 
 under the dreadful consciousness of my defects. 
 
 *o I have, however, this consolation, that no ignorance 
 nor inattention on my part can possibly prevent you 
 from seeing, under the direction of the Judges, that 
 the Crown has established no case of treason. 
 
 Gentlemen, I did expect that the Attorney-Gen- 
 
 o eral, in opening a great and solemn state prosecu- 
 tion, would have at least indulged the advocates for 
 the prisoner with his notions on the law, as applied 
 to the case before you, in less general terms. 4 It is very 
 common, indeed, in little civil actions, to make such 
 
 20 obscure introductions by way of trap. But in crim- 
 inal cases it is unusual and unbecoming ; because the 
 right of the Crown to reply, even where no witnesses 
 are called by the prisoner, gives it thereby the advan- 
 tage of replying without having given scope for 
 
 25 observations on the principles of the opening, with 
 which the reply must be consistent. 
 
 4 " The reader cannot fail to remark how admirably one thought 
 grows out of another in the transition, all of them important and 
 all preparing the mind to be deeply interested in the discussion of 
 30 the subject to which it leads, the nature of high treason. The 
 same characteristic runs throughout the whole speech." Good- 
 rich* 
 
92 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 One observation he has, however, made on the 
 subject, in the truth of which I heartily concur, viz., 
 that the crime of which the noble person at your bar 
 stands accused, is the very highest and most atrocious 
 that a member of civil life can possibly commit ; be- 5 
 cause it is not, like all other crimes, merely an injury 
 to society from the breach of some of its reciprocal 
 relations, but is an attempt utterly to dissolve and 
 destroy society altogether. 
 
 In nothing, therefore, is the wisdom and justice of 10 
 our laws so strongly and eminently manifested as in 
 the rigid, accurate, cautious, explicit, unequivocal 
 definition of what shall constitute this high offense. 
 For, high treason consisting in the breach and dis- 
 solution of that allegiance which binds society to-.i5 
 gether, if it were left ambiguous, uncertain, or unde- 
 fined, all the other laws established for the personal 
 security of the subject would be utterly useless ; since 
 this offense, which, from its nature, is so capable of 
 being created and judged of by the rules of political 20 
 expediency on the spur of the occasion, would be 
 a rod at will to bruise the most virtuous members 
 of the community, whenever virtue might become 
 troublesome or obnoxious to a bad government. 
 
 Injuries to the persons and properties of our neigh- 25 
 bors, considered as individuals, which are the subjects 
 of all other criminal prosecutions, are not only 
 capable of greater precision, but the powers of the 
 state can be but rarely interested in straining them 
 beyond their legal interpretation. But if treason, 30 
 where the government is directly offended, were left 
 to the judgment of its. ministers, without any bounda- 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 93 
 
 ries nay, without the most broad, distinct, and in- 
 violable boundaries marked out by the law there 
 could be no public freedom. The condition of an 
 Englishman would be no better than a slave's at the 
 
 5 foot of a Sultan ; since there is little difference 
 whether a man dies by the stroke of a saber, without 
 the forms of a trial, or by the most pompous cere- 
 monies of justice, if the crime could be made at 
 pleasure by the state to fit the fact that was to be 
 
 10 tried. Would to God, gentlemen' of the jury, that 
 this were an observation of theory alone, and that the 
 page of our history was not blotted with so many 
 melancholy, disgraceful proofs of its truth ! But 
 these proofs, melancholy and disgraceful as they are, 
 
 15 have become glorious monuments of the wisdom of 
 our fathers, and ought to be a theme of rejoicing and 
 emulation to us. For, from the mischiefs constantly 
 arising to the state from every extension of the ancient 
 law of treason, the ancient law of treason has been 
 
 20 always restored, and the Constitution at different 
 periods washed clean; though, unhappily, with the 
 blood of oppressed and innocent men. 
 
 I. When I speak of the ancient law of treason, I 
 mean the venerable statute of King Edward the Third, 
 
 25 on which the indictment you are now trying is framed 
 a statute made, as its preamble sets forth, for the 
 more precise definition of this crime, which has not, 
 by the common law, been sufficiently explained ; and 
 consisting of different and distinct members, the plain 
 
 3 unextended letter of which was thought to be a suffi- 
 cient protection to the person and honor of the Sover- 
 eign, anc} an adequate security to the laws committed 
 
94 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 to his execution. I shall mention only two of ttie 
 number, the others not being in the remotest degree 
 applicable to the present accusation. 5 
 
 (1) To compass or imagine the death of the King : 
 such imagination or purpose of the mind (visible only 5 
 to its great Author) being manifested by some open 
 act ; an institution obviously directed, not only to the 
 security of his natural person, but to the stability of 
 the government, since the life of the Prince is so in- 
 terwoven with the Constitution of the state, that an 10 
 attempt to destroy the one is justly held to be rebel- 
 lious conspiracy against the other. 
 
 (2) (Which is the crime charged in the indictment) 
 To levy war against him in his realm : a term that one 
 would think could require no explanation, nor admit J 5 
 of any ambiguous construction, among men who are 
 willing to read laws according to the plain significa- 
 tion of the language in which they are written ; but 
 which has, nevertheless, been an abundant source of 
 that constructive cavil which this sacred and valuable 20 
 act was made expressly to prevent. The real mean- 
 ing of this branch of it, as it is bottomed in policy, 
 reason, and justice ; as it is ordained in plain, unam- 
 biguous words ; as it is confirmed by the precedents 
 of justice, and illustrated by the writings of the great 25 
 
 6 "In this statement of the law of treason, perfectly fair and 
 accurate as it is, there is one thing which marks the consummate 
 skill of Mr. Erskine. He shapes it throughout with a distinct 
 reference to the facts of the case, as they were afterward to come 
 out in evidence. The points made most prominent are the points 30 
 he had occasion afterward to use. Thus the jury were prepared, 
 without knowing it, to look at the evidence under aspects favorable 
 \Q the prisoner." Qoodrich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 95 
 
 lights of the law in different ages of our history, I 
 shall, before I sit down, impress upon your minds as a 
 safe, unerring standard by which to measure the evi- 
 dence you have heard. At present I shall only say, 
 5 that far and wide as judicial decisions have strained 
 the construction of levying war beyond the warrant of 
 the statute, to the discontent of some of the greatest 
 ornaments of the profession, they hurt not me. As a 
 citizen I may disapprove of them, but as advocate for 
 
 10 the noble person at your bar, I need not impeach their 
 authority. For none of them have said more than 
 this, " that war may be levied against the King in his 
 realm, not only by an insurrection to change or to 
 destroy the fundamental Constitution of the govern- 
 
 15 ment itself by rebellious war ; but, by the same war, 
 to endeavor to suppress the execution of the laws it 
 has enacted, or to violate and overbear the protection 
 they afford, not to individuals (which is a private 
 wrong) but to any general class or description of the 
 
 20 community, by premeditated \ open acts of violence, hostil- 
 ity, and force" 
 
 Gentlemen, I repeat these words, and call solemnly 
 on the judges to attend to what I say, and to contra- 
 diet me if I mistake the law, " By premeditated, open acts 
 
 25 of violence, hostility, and force," nothing equivocal, noth- 
 ing ambiguous, no intimidations or overawings, which 
 signify nothing precise or certain (because what 
 frightens one man or set of men may have no effect 
 upon another), but that which compels and coerces 
 
 30 ipen violence and force. 
 
 Gentlemen, this is not only the whole text ; but I 
 submit it to the learned judges, under whose correc- 
 
9 LORD ERSK1NE. 
 
 tion I am happy to speak, an accurate explanation of 
 the statute of treason, as far as it relates to the pres- 
 ent subject, taken in its utmost extent of judicial con- 
 struction ; and which you cannot but see, not only in its 
 letter, but in its most strained signification, is confined 5 
 to acts which immediately, openly, and unambiguously 
 strike at the very root and being of government, and 
 not to any other offenses, however injurious to its 
 peace. 
 
 Such were the boundaries of high treason marked 10 
 out in the reign of Edward the Third ; and as often 
 as the vices of bad princes, assisted by weak, submis- 
 sive Parliaments, extended state offenses beyond the 
 strict letter of that act, so often the virtue of better 
 princes and wiser Parliaments brought them back X 5 
 again. A long list of new treasons, accumulated in 
 the wretched reign of Richard the Second, from which 
 (to use the language of the act that repealed them) "no 
 man knew what to do or say for doubt of the pains of " 
 death," were swept away in the first year of Henry the 20 
 Fourth, his successor; and many more, which had 
 again sprung up in the following distracted, arbitrary 
 reigns, putting tumults and riots on a footing with 
 armed rebellion, were again leveled in the first year 
 of Queen Mary, and the statute of Edward made once 2 5 
 more the standard of treasons. The acts, indeed, for 
 securing his present Majesty's illustrious House from 
 the machinations of those very Papists, who are now 
 so highly in favor, have since that time been added to 
 the list. But these not being applicable to the pres-3Q 
 ent case, the ancient statute is still our only guide ; 
 which is so plain and simple in its object, so explicit 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 97 
 
 and correct in its terms, as to leave no room for in- 
 trinsic error ; and the wisdom of its authors has shut 
 the door against all extension of its plain letter ; de- 
 claring, in the very body of the act itself, that nothing 
 5 out of that plain letter should be brought within the 
 pale of treason by inference or construction, but that, 
 if any such cases happened, they should be referred 
 to the Parliament. 
 
 This wise restriction has been the subject of much 
 
 10 just eulogium by all the most celebrated writers on 
 the criminal law of England. Lord Coke says the 
 Parliament that made it was on that account called 
 Benedictum, or Blessed ; and the learned and virtuous 
 Judge Hale, a bitter enemy and opposer of construc- 
 
 J 5 tive treason, speaks of this sacred institution with 
 
 that enthusiasm which it cannot but inspire in the 
 
 breast of every lover of the just privileges of mankind. 
 
 Gentlemen, in these mild days, when juries are so 
 
 free and judges so independent, perhaps all these ob- 
 
 2oservations might have been spared as unnecessary. 
 But they can do no harm ; and this history of treason, 
 so honorable to England, cannot (even imperfectly as 
 I have given it) be unpleasant to Englishmen. At all 
 events, it cannot bethought an inapplicable introduc- 
 
 25 tion to saying that Lord George Gordon, who stands 
 before you indicted for that crime, is not, cannot be 
 guilty of it, unless he has levied war against the King 
 in his realm, contrary to the plain letter, spirit, and 
 intention of the act of the twenty-fifth of Edward the 
 
 30 Third to be extended by no new or occasional con- 
 struction, to be strained by no fancied analogies, to be 
 measured by no rules of political expediency, to be 
 
98 LORD ERSKIXE. 
 
 judged of by no theory, to be determined by the wis- 
 dom of no individual, however wise, but to be ex- 
 pounded by the simple, genuine letter of the law. 
 
 Gentlemen, the only overt act charged in the indict- 
 ment, is the assembling the multitude, which we all 5 
 of us remember went up with the petition of the As- 
 sociated Protestants, on the second day of last June. 
 In addressing myself to a humane and sensible Jury 
 of Englishmen, sitting in judgment on the life of a 
 fellow-citizen, more especially under the direction of 10 
 a court so filled as this is, I trust I need not remind 
 you that the purposes of that multitude, as originally 
 assembled on that day, and the purposes and acts of 
 him who assembled them, are the sole object of in- 
 vestigation. 6 All the dismal consequences which fol- 15 
 lowed, and which naturally link themselves with this 
 subject in the firmest minds, must be altogether cut 
 off and abstracted from your attention, further than 
 the evidence warrants their admission. If the evi- 
 dence had been co-extensive with these consequences ; 20 
 if it had been proved that the same multitude, under 
 the direction of Lord George Gordon, had afterward 
 attacked the Bank, broke open the prisons, and set 
 London in a conflagration, I should not now be ad- 
 dressing you. Do me the justice to believe that I am 25 
 neither so foolish as to imagine I could have defended 
 him, nor so profligate to wish it if I could. But when it 
 has appeared, not only by the evidence in the cause, but 
 
 'A reader should note the insistence throughout of Lord 
 Erskine that the idea he wishes to bring out, and that idea only, 30 
 shall be considered, and the firmness with which the argument is 
 kept from wandering to side issues. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 99 
 
 by the evidence of the thing itself by the issues of life, 
 which may be called the evidence of Heaven that 
 these dreadful events were either entirely unconnected 
 with the assembling of that multitude to attend the 
 5 petition of the Protestants, or, at the very worst, the 
 unforeseen, undesigned, unabetted, and deeply re- 
 gretted consequences of it, I confess the seriousness 
 and solemnity of this trial sink and dwindle away. 
 Only abstract from your minds all that misfortune, 
 
 10 accident, and the wickedness of others have brought 
 upon the scene, and the cause requires no advocate. 
 When I say that it requires no advocate, I mean that 
 it requires no argument to screen it from the guilt of 
 treason. For though I am perfectly convinced of the 
 
 15 purity of my noble friend's intentions, yet I am not 
 bound to defend his prudence, nor to set it up as a 
 pattern for imitation : since you are net trying him for 
 imprudence, for indiscreet zeal, or for want of foresight 
 and precaution, but for a deliberate and malicious 
 
 20 predetermination to overpower the laws and govern- 
 ment of his country, by hostile, rebellious force. 
 
 The indictment, therefore, first charges that the 
 multitude assembled on the 2d of June " were armed, 
 and arrayed in a warlike manner " ; which, indeed 
 
 25 if it had omitted to charge, we should not have 
 troubled you with any defense at all, because no judg- 
 ment could have been given on so defective an indict- 
 ment. For the statute never meant to put an unarmed 
 assembly of citizens on a footing with armed rebellion ; 
 
 30 and the crime, whatever it is, must always appear on 
 the record to warrant the judgment of the court. 
 It is certainly true that it has been held to be matter 
 
loo LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 of evidence, and dependent on circumstances, what 
 numbers, or species of equipment and order, though 
 not the regular equipment and order of soldiers, shall 
 constitute an army, so as to maintain the averment in 
 the indictment of a warlike array ; and, likewise, what 5 
 kind of violence, though not pointed at the King's 
 person, or the existence of the government, shall be 
 construed to be war against the King. But as it has 
 never yet been maintained in argument, in any court 
 of the kingdom, or even speculated upon in theory, 10 
 that a multitude, without either weapons offensive or 
 defensive of any sort or kind, and yet not supplying 
 the want of them by such acts of violence as multi- 
 tudes sufficiently great can achieve without them, was 
 a hostile army within the statute ; as it has never been *5 
 asserted, by the wildest adventurer in constructive 
 treason, that a multitude, armed with nothing, threat- 
 ening nothing, and doing nothing, was an army levy- 
 ing war ; I am entitled to say that the evidence does 
 not support the first charge in the indictment; but 20 
 that, on the contrary, it is manifestly false false in the 
 knowledge of the Crown, which prosecutes it false 
 in the knowledge of every man in London, who was not 
 bed-ridden on Friday, the 2d of June, and who saw the 
 peaceable demeanor of the Associated Protestants. 25 
 
 But you will hear, no doubt, from the Solicitor- 
 General (for they have saved all their intelligence for 
 the reply) that fury supplies arms ; furor arma min- 
 istrat ; and the case of Damaree 7 will, I suppose, be 
 
 7 " In this case a mob assembled for the purpose of destroying 3 
 all the Protestant Dissenting meeting-houses, and actually pulled 
 down two. 8 State Trials, 218." Goodrich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 10 1 
 
 referred to ; where the people assembled had no ban. 
 ners or arms, but only clubs and bludgeons ; yet the 
 ringleader, who led them on to mischief, was adjudged 
 to be guilty of high treason for levying war. This 
 5 judgment it is not my purpose to impeach, for I have 
 no time for disgression to points that do not press 
 upon me. In the case of Damaree, the mob, though 
 not regularly armed, were provided with such weapons 
 as best suited their mischievous designs. Their de- 
 
 10 signs were, besides, open and avowed, and all the mis- 
 chief was done that could have been accomplished, if 
 they had been in the completest armor. They burned 
 Dissenting meeting-houses protected by law, and 
 Damaree was taken at their head, in flagrante delicto 
 
 J 5 [in the crime itself], with a torch in his hand, not only 
 in the very act of destroying one of them, but leading 
 on his followers, in person, to the avowed destruction 
 of all the rest. There could, therefore, be no doubt 
 of his purpose and intention, nor any great doubt that 
 
 20 the perpetration of such purpose was, from its gener- 
 ality, high treason, if perpetrated by such a force as 
 distinguishes a felonious riot from a treasonable levy- 
 ing of war. 8 The principal doubt, therefore, in that 
 case was, whether such an unarmed, riotous force was 
 
 2$ war, within the meaning of the statute ; and on that 
 point very learned men have differed ; nor shall I at- 
 tempt to decide between them, because in this one 
 point they all agree. Gentlemen, I beseech you to at- 
 
 8 " To constitute a treasonable levying of war there must be an 
 30 insurrection ; there must be force accompanying that insurrection ; 
 and it must be for an object of a general nature. Regina v. 
 Frost, 9 Carrington and Payne, 129." Goodrich. 
 
102 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 tend to me here. I say on this point they all agree, 
 that it is the intention of assembling them which forms 
 the guilt of treason. I will give you the words of 
 high authority, the learned Foster, whose private 
 opinions will, no doubt, be pressed upon you as a 5 
 doctrine and law, and which, if taken together, as all 
 opinions ought to be, and not extracted in smuggled 
 sentences to serve a shallow trick, I am contented to 
 consider as authority. 
 
 That great judge, immediately after supporting the 10 
 case of Damaree, as> a levying war within the statute, 
 against the opinion of Hale in a similar case, namely, 
 the destruction of bawdy-houses, which happened in 
 his time, says, " The true criterion, therefore, seems 
 to be Quo animo did the parties assemble ? with 15 
 what intention did they meet ? " On that issue, then, 
 in which I am supported by the whole body of the 
 criminal law of England, concerning which there are 
 no practical precedents of the courts that clash, nor 
 even abstract opinions of the closet that differ, I come 20 
 forth with boldness to meet the Crown. For, even 
 supposing that peaceable multitude though not hos- 
 tilely arrayed though without one species of weapon 
 among them though assembled without plot or dis- 
 guise by a public advertisement, exhorting, nay, com- 25 
 manding peace, and inviting the magistrates to be 
 present to restore it, if broken though composed of 
 thousands who are now standing around you, unim- 
 peached and unreproved, yet who are all principals in 
 treason, if such assembly was treason ; supposing, I 3 
 say, this multitude to be, nevertheless, an army within 
 the statute, still the great question would remain be- 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 103 
 
 hind, on which the guilt or innocence of the accused 
 must singly depend, and which it is your exclusive 
 province to determine, namely, whether they were 
 assembled by my noble client for the traitorous pur- 
 5 pose charged in the indictment ? For war must not 
 only be levied, but it must be levied against the King 
 in his realm ; /. e., either directly against his person 
 to alter the Constitution of the government, of which 
 he is the head, or to suppress the laws committed to his 
 
 10 execution by rebellious force. You must find that Lord 
 George Gordon assembled these men with that trai- 
 torous intention. You must find not merely a riotous, 
 illegal petitioning not a tumultuous, indecent im- 
 portunity to influence Parliament, not the compulsion 
 
 15 of motive, from seeing so great a body of people 
 united in sentiment and clamorous supplication but 
 the absolute, unequivocal compulsion of force, from 
 the hostile acts of numbers united in rebellious con- 
 spiracy and arms. 
 
 20 This is the issue you are to try, for crimes of all 
 denominations consist wholly in the purpose of the 
 human will producing the act. " Actus non facit 
 reum nisi me ns sit rea" The act does not constitute 
 guilt, unless the mind 'be guilty. This is the great text 
 
 25 from which the whole moral of penal justice is de- 
 duced. It stands at the top of the criminal page, 
 throughout all the volumes of our humane and sensi- 
 ble laws, and Lord Chief Justice Coke, whose chapter 
 on this crime is the most authoritative and masterly 
 
 30 of all his valuable works, ends almost every sentence 
 with an emphatical repetition of it. 
 
 The indictment must charge an open act, because 
 
104 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 the purpose of the mind, which is the object of trial, 
 can only be known by actions. Or, again to use the 
 words of Foster, who has ably and accurately ex- 
 pressed it, " the traitorous purpose is the treason ; the 
 overt act, the means made use of to effectuate the 5 
 intentions of the heart." But why should I borrow 
 the language of Foster, or of any other man, when 
 the language of the indictment itself is lying before 
 our eyes ? What does it say ? Does it directly 
 charge the overt act as in itself constituting the 10 
 crime ? No ; it charges that the prisoner " maliciously 
 and traitorously did compass, imagine, and intend to 
 raise and levy war and rebellion against the King "; this 
 is the malice prepense of treason ; and that to fulfill 
 and bring to effect such traitorous compassings and in- 15 
 tentions, he did, on the day mentioned in the indict- 
 ment, actually assemble them, and levy war and 
 rebellion against the King. Thus the law, which is 
 made to correct and punish the wickedness of the 
 heart, and not the unconscious deeds of the body, 20 
 goes up to the fountain of human agency, and arraigns 
 the lurking mischief of the soul, dragging it to light 
 by the evidence of open acts. The hostile mind is 
 the crime ; and, therefore, unless the matters that are 
 in evidence before you do, beyond all doubt or pos- 25 
 sibility of error, convince you that the prisoner is a 
 determined traitor in his heart, he is not guilty. 
 
 It is the same principle which creates all the various 
 degrees of homicide, from that which is excusable to 
 the malignant guilt of murder. The fact is the same 30 
 in all. The death of the man is the imputed crime ; 
 but the intention makes all the difference ; and he who 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. io 
 
 killed him is pronounced a murderer a simple felon 
 or only an unfortunate man, as the circumstances, 
 by which his mind has been deciphered to the jury, 
 show it to have been cankered by deliberate wicked- 
 5 ness or stirred up by sudden passions. 
 
 Here an immense multitude was, beyond all doubt, 
 assembled on the 2d of June. But whether HE 
 that assembled them be guilty of high treason, of a 
 high misdemeanor, or only of a breach of the act of 
 
 10 King Charles the Second 9 against tumultuous peti- 
 tioning (if such an act still exists), depends wholly 
 upon the evidence of his purpose in assembling them, 
 to be gathered by you, and by you alone, from the 
 whole tenor of his conduct ; and to be gathered, not 
 
 15 by inference, or probability, or reasonable presump- 
 tion, but, in the words of the act, provably; that is, in 
 the full, unerring force of demonstration. You are 
 called, upon your oaths, to say, not whether Lord 
 George Gordon assembled the multitudes in the place 
 
 20 charged in the indictment, for that is not denied ; but 
 
 9 "By 13 Car. II., st. I, c. 5, passed in consequence of the 
 tumults on the opening of the memorable Parliament of 1640, it 
 is provided that no petition to the King or either House of Parlia- 
 ment, for any alteration in Church or State, shall be signed by 
 
 25 above twenty persons, unless the matter thereof be approved by 
 three justices of the peace, or the major part of the grand jury in 
 the county ; and in London by the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and 
 Common Council : nor shall any petition be presented by more 
 than ten persons at a time. But under these regulations, it is 
 
 30 declared by the Bill of Rights, I W. and M., st. 2, c. 2, that the 
 subject hath a right to petition. Lord Mansfield told the jury 
 that the court were clearly of opinion that this statute, 13 Car. II., 
 was not in any degree affected by the Bill of Rights, but was 
 still in force. Doug., 571." Goodrich. 
 
106 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 whether it appears, by the facts produced in evidence 
 for the Crown when confronted with the proofs which 
 we have laid before you, that he assembled them in 
 hostile array and with a hostile mind, to take the laws 
 into his own hands by main force, and to dissolve the 5 
 Constitution of the government, unless his petition 
 should be listened to by Parliament. 
 
 That is your exclusive province to determine. The 
 court can only tell you what acts the law, in its gen- 
 eral theory, holds to be high treason, on the general 10 
 assumption that such acts proceed from traitorous pur- 
 poses. But they must leave it to your decision, and 
 to yours alone, whether the acts proved appear, in the 
 present instance, under all the circumstances, to have 
 arisen from the causes which form the essence of this 15 
 high crime. 
 
 Gentlemen, you have now heard the law of treason ; 
 first, in the abstract, and secondly, as it applies to the 
 general features of the case ; and you have heard it 
 with as much sincerity as if I had addressed you upon 20 
 my oath from the bench where the judges sit. I de- 
 clare to you solemnly, in the presence of that great 
 Being at whose bar we must all hereafter appear, that 
 I have used no one art of an advocate, but have acted 
 the plain unaffected part of a Christian man, instruct- 25 
 ing the consciences of his fellow-citizens to do justice. 
 If I have deceived you on this subject, I am myself 
 deceived ; and if I am misled through ignorance, my 
 ignorance is incurable, for I have spared no pains 
 to understand it. I am not stiff in opinions; but 30 
 before I change any of those that I have given you 
 to-day, I must see some direct monument of justice 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 107 
 
 that contradicts them. For the law of England pays 
 no respect to theories, however ingenious, or to au- 
 thors, however wise ; and therefore, unless you hear 
 me refuted by a series of direct precedents, and not 
 
 5 by vague doctrine, if you wish to sleep in peace, follow 
 me. 
 
 II. And now the most important part of our task 
 begins, namely, the application of the evidence to the 
 doctrines I have laid down. For trial is nothing more 
 
 10 than the reference of facts to a certain rule of action, 
 and a long recapitulation of them only serves to dis- 
 tract and perplex the memory, without enlightening 
 the judgment, unless the great standard principle by 
 which they are to be measured is fixed and rooted in 
 
 15 the mind. When that is done (which I am confident 
 has been done by you), everything worthy of obser- 
 vation falls naturally into its place, and the result is 
 safe and certain. 
 
 Gentlemen, it is already in proof before you (indeed 
 
 20 it is now a matter of history), that an act of Parlia- 
 ment passed in the session of 1778, for the repeal of 
 certain restrictions, which the policy of our ancestors 
 had imposed upon the Roman Catholic religion, to 
 prevent its extension, and to render its limited tolera- 
 
 25 tion harmless ; restrictions, imposed not because our 
 ancestors took upon them to pronounce that faith to 
 be offensive to God, but because it was incompatible 
 with good faith to man being utterly inconsistent 
 with allegiance to a Protestant government, from 
 
 3 o their oaths and obligations to which it gave them not 
 only a release, but a crown of glory, as the reward of 
 treachery and treason. 
 
io8 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 It was, indeed, with astonishment that I heard the 
 Attorney-General stigmatize those wise regulations of 
 our patriot ancestors with the title of factious and 
 cruel impositions on the consciences and liberties of 
 their fellow-citizens. Gentlemen, they were, at the 5 
 time, wise and salutary regulations ; regulations to 
 which this country owes its freedom, and his Majesty 
 his crown a crown which he wears under the strict 
 entail of professing and protecting that religion which 
 they were made to repress ; and which I know my ic 
 noble friend at the bar joins with me, and with all 
 good men, in wishing that he and his posterity may 
 wear forever. 10 
 
 It is not my purpose to recall to your minds the 
 fatal effects which bigotry has, in former days, pro- 1 5 
 duced in this island. I will not follow the example 
 the Crown has set me, by making an attack upon your 
 passions, on subjects foreign to the object before you. 
 I will not call your attention from those flames, kindled 
 by a villainous banditti (which they have thought fit, 20 
 in defiance of evidence, to introduce), by bringing 
 -before your eyes the more cruel flames, in which the 
 bodies of our expiring, meek, patient, Christian fathers 
 were, little more than a century ago, consuming in 
 
 10 " Erskine here gives great prominence to his views of the 25 
 original necessity of the law of 1778, confirming them by pointed 
 references in the next paragraph to the persecuting spirit of Pop- 
 ery in order to enforce his next leading thought ; namely, that the 
 Protestant Association originated in justifiable feelings, a point 
 which was important to the defense of his client. This mode of 30 
 shaping one part of his speech to prepare the way for another part, 
 and to support it, is one of the most admirable qualities of Mr. 
 Erskine. " Goodrich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 109 
 
 Smithfield. I will not call up from the graves of 
 martyrs all the precious holy blood that has been 
 spilled in this land, to save its established government 
 and its reformed religion from the secret villainy and 
 5 the open force of Papists. The cause does not stand 
 in need even of such honest arts ; and I feel my heart 
 too big voluntarily to recite such scenes, when I reflect 
 that some of my own, and my best and dearest pro- 
 genitors, from whom I glory to be descended, ended 
 
 10 their innocent lives in prisons and in exile, only because 
 they were Protestants. 
 
 Gentlemen, whether the great lights of science and 
 of commerce, which, since those disgraceful times, 
 have illuminated Europe, may, by dispelling these 
 
 15 shocking prejudices, have rendered the Papists of 
 this day as safe and trusty subjects as those who con- 
 form to the national religion established by law, I 
 shall not take upon me to determine. It is wholly 
 unconnected with the present inquiry. We are not 
 
 20 trying a question either of divinity or civil policy; 
 and I shall, therefore, not enter at all into the motives 
 or merits of the act that produced the Protestant peti- 
 tion to Parliament. It was certainly introduced by 
 persons who cannot be named by any good citizen 
 
 25 without affection and respect. 11 But this I will say, 
 without fear of contradiction, that it was sudden and 
 unexpected ; that it passed with uncommon precipita- 
 
 11 " The bill was brought in by Sir George Saville, and sup- 
 ported, among others, by Mr. Dunning, Mr. Thurlow, and Lord 
 3 Beauchamp, and passed into an act without any opposition in the 
 House of Commons, and with very slight opposition in the Lords, 
 and the King was known to have been favorable to it." Goodrich. 
 
HO LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 tion, considering the magnitude of the object ; that it 
 underwent no discussion ; and that the heads of the 
 Church, the constitutional guardians of the national 
 religion, were never consulted upon it. Under such 
 circumstances, it is no wonder that many sincere 5 
 Protestants were alarmed ; and they had a right to 
 spread their apprehensions. It is the privilege and 
 the duty of all the subjects of England to watch over 
 their religious and civil liberties, and to approach 
 either their representatives or the Throne with their 10 
 fears and their complaints a privilege which has been 
 bought with the dearest blood of our ancestors, and 
 which is confirmed to us by law, as our ancient birth- 
 right and inheritance. 
 
 Soon after the repeal of the act the Protestant 15 
 Association began, and, from small beginnings, ex- 
 tended over England and Scotland. A deed of associa- 
 tion was signed, by all legal means to oppose the growth 
 of Popery ; and which of the advocates for the Crown 
 will stand up and say that such an union was illegal ?2o 
 Their union was perfectly constitutional ; there was 
 no obligation of secrecy ; their transactions were all 
 public ; a committee was appointed for regularity and 
 correspondence ; and circular letters were sent to all 
 the dignitaries of the Church, inviting them to join 25 
 with them in the protection of the national religion. 
 
 All this happened before Lord George Gordon was 
 a member of, or the most distantly connected with it ; 
 for it was not till November, 1779, that the London 
 Association made him an offer of their chair, by a 30 
 unanimous resolution, communicated to him, unsought 
 and unexpected, in a public letter, signed by the 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. m 
 
 secretary in the name of the whole body ; and from 
 that day, to the day he was committed to the Tower, I 
 will lead him by the hand in your view, that you may 
 see there is no blame in him. Though all his behavior 
 5 was unreserved and public, and though watched by 
 wicked men for purposes of vengeance, the Crown has 
 totally failed in giving it such a context as can justify, 
 in the mind of any reasonable man, the conclusion it 
 seeks to establish. 
 
 10 This will fully appear hereafter; but let us first 
 attend to the evidence on the part of the Crown. 12 
 
 The first witness to support this prosecution is 
 William Hay a bankrupt in fortune he acknowl- 
 edges himself to be, and I am afraid he is a bankrupt 
 
 *5 in conscience. Such a scene of impudent, ridiculous 
 inconsistency would have utterly destroyed his credi- 
 bility in the most trifling civil suit ; and I am, there- 
 fore, almost ashamed to remind you of his evidence, 
 when I reflect that you will never suffer it to glance 
 
 20 across your minds on this solemn occasion. 
 
 This man, whom I may now, without offense or 
 slander, point out to you as a dark Popish spy, who 
 attended the meetings of the London Association to 
 pervert their harmless purposes, conscious that the 
 
 25 discovery of his character would invalidate all his 
 testimony, endeavored at first to conceal the activity 
 of his zeal, by denying that he had seen any of the 
 destructive scenes imputed to the Protestants. Yet, 
 
 12 There can be no better text from which to study the hand- 
 30 ling of evidence than the pages of this speech which follow. In 
 them a student will find nearly all, if not all, of the general rules 
 for sifting and valuing evidence brilliantly illustrated. 
 
H2 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 almost in the same breath, it came out, by his own 
 confession, that there was hardly a place, public or 
 private, where Riot had erected her standard, in which 
 he had not been ; nor a house, prison, or chapel that 
 was destroyed, to the demolition of which he had not 5 
 been a witness. He was at Newgate, the Fleet, at 
 Langdale's, and at Coleman Street ; at the Sardinian 
 Ambassador's, and in Great Queen Street, Lincoln's 
 Inn Fields. What took him to Coachmakers' Hall ? 
 He went there, as he told us, to watch their proceed- to 
 ings, because he expected no good from them ; and 
 to justify his prophecy of evil, he said, on his examina- 
 tion by the Crown, that, as early as December, he had 
 heard some alarming republican language. What 
 language did he remember ? " Why, that the Lord 15 
 Advocate of Scotland was called only Harry Dundas ! " 
 Finding this too ridiculous for so grave an occasion, 
 he endeavored to put some words about the breach of 
 the King's coronation oath 13 into the prisoner's mouth, 
 as proceeding from himself ; which it is notorious he 20 
 read out of an old Scotch book, published near a 
 century ago, on the abdication of King James the 
 Second. 
 
 Attend to his cross-examination. He was sure he 
 had seen Lord George Gordon at Greenwood's room 25 
 in January ; but when Mr. Kenyon, who knew Lord 
 George had never been there, advised him to recol- 
 lect himself, he desired to consult his notes. First, 
 he is positively sure, from his memory, that he had 
 seen him there ; then he says, he cannot trust his 30 
 
 13 " Hay swore that Lord Gordon had declared that the King 
 had broken his coronation oath." Goodrich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 1 13 
 
 memory without referring to his papers. On looking 
 at them, they contradict him ; and he then confesses 
 that he never saw Lord George Gordon at Green- 
 wood's room in January, when his note was taken, 
 5 nor at any other time. But why did he take notes? 
 He said it was because he foresaw what would hap- 
 pen. How fortunate the Crown is, gentlemen, to 
 have such friends to collect evidence by anticipation ! 
 When did he begin to take notes ? He said, on the 
 
 io2ist of February, which was the first time he had 
 been alarmed at what he had seen and heard, although, 
 not a minute before, he had been reading a note 
 taken at Greenwood's room in January, and had 
 sworn that he had attended their meetings, from 
 
 15 apprehensions of consequences, as early as December. 
 Mr. Kenyon, who now saw him bewildered in a 
 maze of falsehood, and suspecting his notes to have 
 been a villainous fabrication to give the show of cor- 
 rectness to his evidence, attacked him with a shrewd- 
 
 20 ness for which he was wholly unprepared. You re- 
 member the witness had said that he always took 
 notes when he attended any meetings where he ex- 
 pected their deliberations might be attended with 
 dangerous consequences. " Give me one instance/' 
 
 25 says Mr. Kenyon, " in the whole course of your life, 
 where you ever took notes before." Poor Mr. Hay 
 was thunder-struck ; the sweat ran down his face, 
 and his countenance bespoke despair not recollec- 
 tion : u Sir, I must have an instance ; tell me when 
 
 30 and where ? " Gentlemen, it was now too late ; some 
 instance he was obliged to give, and, as it was evident 
 to everybody that he had one still to choose, I think 
 
H 4 LORD ER SKINS. 
 
 he might have chosen a better. " He had taken notes 
 at the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, six- 
 and-twenty years before ! " What! did he apprehend 
 dangerous consequences from the deliberations of 
 the grave elders of the Kirk ? Were they levying 5 
 war against the King? At last, when he is called 
 upon to say to whom he communicated the intelli- 
 gence he had collected, the spy stood confessed in- 
 deed. At first he refused to tell, saying he was his 
 friend, and that he was not obliged to give him up ; 10 
 and when forced at last to speak, it came out to be 
 Mr. Butler, a gentleman universally known, and who, 
 from what I know of him, I may be sure never em- 
 ployed him, or any other spy, because he is a man 
 every way respectable, but who certainly is not only 15 
 a Papist, but the person who was employed in all 
 their proceedings, to obtain the late indulgences from 
 Parliament. 14 He said Mr. Butler was his particular 
 friend, yet professed himself ignorant of his religion. 
 I am sure he could not be desired to conceal it. Mr. 20 
 Butler makes no secret of his religion. It is no re- 
 proach to any man who lives the life he does. But 
 Mr. Hay thought it of moment to his own credit in 
 the cause, that he himself might be thought a Prot- 
 estant, unconnected with Papists, and not a Popish 25 
 spy. 
 
 So ambitious, indeed, was the miscreant of being 
 useful in this odious character, through every stage 
 of the cause, that, after staying a little in St. George's 
 Fields, he ran home to his own house in St. Dunstan^c 
 
 14 " Mr. Charles Butler, author of the Reminiscences." Good- 
 rich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 115 
 
 church-yard, and got upon the leads, where he swore 
 he saw the very same man carrying the very same flag 
 he had seen in the fields. Gentlemen, whether the 
 petitioners employed the same standard-man through 
 5 the whole course of their peaceable procession is cer- 
 tainly totally immaterial to the cause, but the cir- 
 cumstance is material to show the wickedness of the 
 man. " How," says Mr. Kenyon, " do you know 
 that it was the same person you saw in the fields ? 
 
 10 Were you acquainted with him?" " No." " How 
 then ? " " Why, he looked liked a brewer's servant." 
 Like a brewer s servant ! " What, were they not all in 
 their Sunday's clothes ? " " Oh ! yes, they were all 
 in their Sunday's clothes." "Was the man with the 
 
 15 flag then alone in the dress of his trade?" "No." 
 " Then how do you know he was a brewer's servant ? " 
 Poor Mr. Hay ! nothing but sweat and confusion 
 again ! At last, after a hesitation, which everybody 
 thought would have ended in his running out of court, 
 
 20 he said, "he knew him to be a brewer's servant, be- 
 cause there was something particular in the cut of his 
 coat, the cut of his breeches, and the cut of his stock- 
 ings /" 
 
 You see, gentlemen, by what strange means villainy 
 
 25 is detected. Perhaps he might have escaped from me, 
 but he sunk under that shrewdness and sagacity, which 
 ability, without long habits, does not provide. Gentle- 
 men, you will not, I am sure, forget, whenever you see 
 a man about whose apparel there is anything particu- 
 
 30 lar, to set him down for a brewer s servant. 
 
 Mr. Hay afterward went to the lobby of the House 
 of Commons. What took him there ? He thought 
 
Ii6 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 himself in danger ; and therefore, says Mr. Kenyon, 
 you thrust yourself voluntarily into the very centre of 
 danger. That would not do. Then he had a particu- 
 lar friend, whom he knew to be in the lobby, and whom 
 he apprehended to be in danger. " Sir, who was that 5 
 particular friend ? Out with it. Give us his name 
 instantly." All in confusion again. Not a word to 
 say for himself ; and the name of this person who 
 had the honor of Mr. Hay's friendship will probably 
 remain a secret forever. I0 
 
 It may be asked, are these circumstances material ? 
 and the answer is obvious : they are material ; because, 
 when you see a witness running into every hole and 
 corner of falsehood, and, as fast as he is made to bolt 
 out of one, taking cover in another, you will never 15 
 give credit to what that man relates, as to any possible 
 matter which is to affect the life or reputation of a 
 fellow-citizen accused before you. God forbid that 
 you should. I might, therefore, get rid of this wretch 
 altogether without making a single remark on that 20 
 part of his testimony which bears upon the issue you 
 are trying ; but the Crown shall have the full benefit 
 of it all. I will defraud it of nothing he has said. 
 Notwithstanding all his folly and wickedness, let us 
 for the present take it to be true, and see what it 25 
 amounts to. What is it he states to have passed at 
 Coachmakers' Hall ? That Lord George Gordon 
 desired the multitude to behave with unanimity and 
 firmness, as the Scotch had done. Gentlemen, there 
 is no manner of doubt that the Scotch behaved with 30 
 unanimity and firmness in resisting the relaxation of 
 the penal laws against Papists, and that by that 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 117 
 
 unanimity and firmness they succeeded ; 1B but it was 
 by the constitutional unanimity and firmness of the 
 great body of the people of Scotland whose example 
 Lord George Gordon recommended, and not by the 
 5 riots and burning which they attempted to prove had 
 been committed in Edinburgh in 1778. 
 
 I will tell you myself, gentlemen, as one of the 
 people of Scotland, that there then existed, and still 
 exist, eighty-five societies of Protestants, who have 
 
 10 been, and still are, uniformly firm in opposing every 
 change in that system of laws established to secure 
 the Revolution ; and Parliament gave way in Scotland 
 to their united voice, and not to the fire-brands of the 
 rabble. It is the duty of Parliament to listen to the 
 
 15 voice of the people, for they are the servants of the 
 people. And when the Constitution of church or state 
 is believed, whether truly or falsely, to be in danger, 
 I hope there never will be wanting men (notwithstand- 
 ing the proceedings of to-day) to desire the people to 
 
 20 persevere and be firm. Gentlemen, has the Crown 
 proved that the Protestant brethren of the London 
 Association fired the mass-houses in Scotland or acted 
 in rebellious opposition to law, so as to entitle it to 
 wrest the prisoner's expressions into an excitation of 
 
 25 rebellion against the state, or of violence against the 
 properties of English Papists, by setting up their 
 firmness as an example ? Certainly not. They have 
 not even proved the naked fact of such violences, 
 though such proof would have called for no resist- 
 
 30 16 " The violent popular opposition manifested toward the pro- 
 posed act extending the Roman Catholic Relief Bill to Scotland, 
 caused it to be abandoned." Goodrich, 
 
Ii8 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 ance ; since to make it bear as rebel'ious advice to 
 the Protestant Association of London, it must have 
 been first shown that such acts had been perpetrated 
 or encouraged by the Protestant societies in the 
 North. 5 
 
 Who has dared to say this ? No man. The rabble 
 in Scotland certainly did that which has since been 
 done by the rabble in England, to the disgrace and 
 reproach of both countries. But in neither country 
 was there found one man of character or condition, of 10 
 any description, who abetted such enormities, nor any 
 man, high or low, of any of the Associated Protestants, 
 here or there, who were either convicted, tried, or 
 taken on suspicion. 
 
 As to what this man heard on the 2Qth of May, it 15 
 was nothing more than the proposition of going up in 
 a body to St. George's Fields to consider how the peti- 
 tion should be presented, with the same exhortations 
 to firmness as before. The resolution made on the 
 motion has been read, and when I come to state the 20 
 evidence on the part of my noble friend, I will show 
 you the impossibility of supporting any criminal infer- 
 ence from what Mr. Hay afterward puts in his mouth 
 in the lobby, even taking it to be true. I wish here to 
 be accurate [looking on a card on which he had taken 25 
 down his words]. He says : " Lord George desired 
 them to continue steadfastly to adhere to so good a 
 cause as theirs was ; promised to persevere in it him- 
 self, and hoped, though there was little expectation at 
 present from the House of Commons, that, they would 30 
 meet with redress from their mild and gracious 
 Sovereign, who, no doubt, would recommend it to his 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 119 
 
 ministers to repeal it." This was all he heard, and I 
 will show you how this wicked man himself (if any 
 belief is to be given to him) entirely overturns and 
 brings to the ground the evidence of Mr. Bowen, 18 on 
 5 which the Crown rests singly for the proof of words 
 which are more difficult to explain. Gentlemen, was 
 this the language of rebellion ? If a multitude were 
 at the gates of the House of Commons to command 
 and -insist on a repeal of this law, why encourage their 
 
 10 hopes by reminding them that they had a mild and 
 gracious Sovereign ? If war was levying against him, 
 there was no occasion for his mildness and gracious- 
 ness. If he had said, "Be firm and persevere, we 
 shall meet with redress from the prudence of the Sov- 
 
 15 ereign," it might have borne a different construction ; 
 because, whether he was gracious or severe, his pru- 
 dence might lead him to submit to the necessity of 
 the times. The words sworn to were, therefore, per- 
 fectly clear and unambiguous " Persevere in your zeal 
 
 20 and supplications, and you will meet with redress from 
 a mild and gracious King, who will recommend it to 
 his ministers to repeal it." Good God ! if they were 
 to wait till the King, whether from benevolence or fear, 
 should direct his minister to influence the proceed- 
 
 25 ings of Parliament, how does it square with the charge 
 of instant coercion or intimidation of the House of 
 Commons ? If the multitude were assembled with the 
 premeditated design of producing immediate repeal by 
 terror or arms, is it possible to suppose that their 
 
 30 leader would desire them to be quiet, and refer them 
 to those qualities of the Prince, which, however emi- 
 10 " The Chaplain of the House of Commons." Goodrich, 
 
120 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 nently they might belong to him, never could be 
 exerted on subjects in rebellion to his authority ? In 
 what a labyrinth of nonsense and contradiction do 
 men involve themselves, when, forsaking the rules of 
 evidence, they would draw conclusions from words in 5 
 contradiction to language and in defiance of common 
 sense ! 
 
 The next witness that is called to you by the 
 Crown is Mr. Metcalf. He was not in the lobby, 
 but speaks only to the meeting in Coachmakers' Hall, 10 
 on the 29th of May, and in St. George's Fields. He 
 says that at the former, Lord George reminded them 
 that the Scotch had succeeded by their unanimity 
 and hoped that no one who had signed the petition 
 would be ashamed or afraid to show himself in the 15 
 cause ; that he was ready to go to the gallows for it ; 
 that he would not present the petition of a lukewarm 
 people ; that he desired them to come to St. -George's 
 Fields, distinguished with blue cockades, and that 
 they should be marshaled in four divisions. Then he 20 
 speaks to having seen them in the fields in the order 
 which has been described ; and Lord George Gordon 
 in a coach surrounded by a vast concourse of people, 
 with blue ribbons, forming like soldiers, but was not 
 near enough to hear whether the prisoner spoke to 25 
 them or not. Such is Mr. Metcalf's evidence ; and 
 after the attention you have honored me with, and 
 which I shall have occasion so often to ask again on 
 the same subject, I shall trouble you with but one 
 observation, namely, that it cannot, without absurdity, 30 
 be supposed that if the assembly at Coachmakers' Hall 
 had been such conspirators as they are represented, 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 121 
 
 their doors would have been open to strangers, like 
 this witness, to come in to report their proceedings. 
 
 The next witness is Mr. Anstruther, 17 who speaks 
 to the language and deportment of the noble prisoner, 
 5 both at Coachmakers' Hall, on the 2gth of May, and 
 afterward on the 2d of June, in the lobby of the 
 House of Commons. It will be granted to me, I am 
 sure, even by the advocates of the Crown, that this 
 gentleman, not only from the clearness and consist- 
 
 xoency of his testimony, but from his rank and character 
 in the world, is infinitely more worthy of credit than 
 Mr. Hay, who went before him. And from the cir- 
 cumstances of irritation and confusion under which 
 the Rev. Mr. Bowen confessed himself to have heard 
 
 15 and seen, what he told you he heard and saw, I may 
 likewise assert, without any offense to the reverend 
 gentleman, and without drawing any parallel between 
 their credits, that where their accounts of this trans- 
 action differ, the preference is due to the former. 
 
 20 Mr. Anstruther very properly prefaced his evidence 
 with this declaration : " I do not mean to speak 
 accurately to words ; it is impossible to recollect them 
 at this distance of time." I believe I have used his 
 very expression, and such expression it well became 
 
 25 him to use in a case of blood. But words, even if they 
 could be accurately remembered, are to be admitted 
 with great reserve and caution, when the purpose of 
 the speaker is to be measured by them. They are 
 transient and fleeting ; frequently the effect of a sud- 
 
 30 den transport, easily misunderstood, and often uncon- 
 sciously misrepresented. It may be the fate of the 
 17 " This gentleman was a member of Parliament." Goodrich. 
 
122 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 most innocent language to appear ambiguous, or even 
 malignant, when related in mutilated, detached pas- 
 sages, by people to whom it is not addressed, and who 
 know nothing of the previous design either of the 
 speaker or of those to whom he spoke. Mr. 5 
 Anstruther says that he heard Lord George Gordon 
 desire the petitioners to meet him on the Friday fol- 
 lowing, in St. George's Fields, and that if there were 
 fewer than twenty thousand people, he would not 
 present the petition, as it would not be of consequence 10 
 enough ; and that he recommended to them the ex- 
 ample of the Scotch, who, by their firmness, had car- 
 ried their point. 
 
 Gentlemen, I have already admitted that they did 
 by firmness carry it. But has Mr. Anstruther at- 15 
 tempted to state any one expression that fell from the 
 prisoner to justify the positive, unerring conclusion, 
 or even the presumption, that the firmness of the 
 Scotch Protestants, by which the point was carried in 
 Scotland, was the resistance and riots of the rabble? 20 
 No, gentlemen ; he simply states the words, as he 
 heard them in the hall on the 29th, and all that he 
 afterward speaks to in the lobby, repels so harsh and 
 dangerous a construction. The words sworn to at 
 Coachmakers' Hall are, "that he recommended tern- 25 
 perance and firmness." Gentlemen, if his motives 
 are to be judged by words, for Heaven's sake let these 
 words carry their popular meaning in language. Is 
 it to be presumed, without proof, that a man means 
 one thing because he says another ? Does the exhor- 30 
 tation to temperance and firmness apply most natu- 
 rally to the constitutional resistance of the Protestants 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 123 
 
 of Scotland, or to the outrages of ruffians who pulled 
 down the houses of their neighbors ? Is it possible, 
 with decency, to say, in a court of justice, that the 
 recommendation of temperance is the excitation to 
 5 villainy and frenzy? But the words, it seems, are to 
 be construed, not from their own signification, but 
 from that which follows them, viz., " by that the 
 Scotch carried their point." Gentlemen, is it in evi- 
 dence before you that by rebellion the Scotch carried 
 
 10 their point ? or that the indulgences to Papists were 
 not extended to Scotland because the rabble had 
 opposed their extension ? Has the Crown authorized 
 either the court or its law servants to tell you so ? Or 
 can it be decently maintained that Parliament was so 
 
 15 weak or infamous as to yield to a wretched mob of 
 vagabonds at Edinburgh what it has since refused to 
 the earnest prayers of a hundred thousand Protestants 
 of London ? No, gentlemen of the jury, Parliament 
 was not, I hope, so abandoned. But the ministers 
 
 20 knew that the Protestants of Scotland were to a man 
 abhorrent of that law. And though they never held 
 out resistance, if government should be disposed to 
 cram it down their throats by force, yet such violence 
 to the united sentiments of a whole people appeared 
 
 25 to be a measure so obnoxious, so dangerous, and 
 withal so unreasonable, that it was wisely and judi- 
 ciously dropped, to satisfy the general wishes of the 
 nation, and not to avert the vengeance of those low in- 
 cendiaries whose misdeeds have rather been talked of 
 
 30 than proved. 
 
 Thus, gentlemen, the exculpation of Lord George's 
 gonc|uct on the 2o,th of May is sufficiently established 
 
124 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 by the very evidence on which the Crown asks you to 
 convict him. For, in recommending temperance and 
 firmness after the example of Scotland, you cannot be 
 justified in pronouncing that he meant more than the 
 firmness of the grave and respectable people in that 5 
 country, to whose constitutional firmness the Legisla- 
 ture had before acceded, instead of branding it with 
 the title of rebellion ; and who, in my mind, deserve 
 thanks from the King for temperately and firmly re- 
 sisting every innovation which they conceived to be 10 
 dangerous to the national religion, independently of 
 which his Majesty (without a new limitation by Parlia- 
 ment) has no more title to the crown than I have. 
 
 Such, gentlemen, is the whole amount of all my 
 noble friend's previous communication with the peti- 15 
 tioners, whom he afterward assembled to consider 
 how their petition should be presented. This is all, 
 not only that men of credit can tell you on the part of 
 the prosecution, but all that even the worst vagabond 
 who ever appeared in a court the very scum of the 20 
 earth thought himself safe in saying, upon oath, on 
 the present occasion. Indeed, gentlemen, when I 
 consider my noble friend's situation, his open, unre- 
 served temper, and his warm and animated zeal for a 
 cause which rendered him obnoxious to so many 25 
 wicked men speaking daily and publicly to mixed 
 multitudes of friends and foes, on a subject which 
 affected his passions I confess I am astonished that 
 no other expressions than those in evidence before 
 you have found their way into this court. That they 30 
 have not found their way is surely a most satisfactory 
 proof that there was nothing in his heart which even 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 125 
 
 youthful zeal could magnify into guilt, or that want 
 of caution could betray. 
 
 Gentlemen, Mr. Anstruther's evidence, when he 
 speaks of the lobby of the House of Commons, is 
 5 very much to be attended to. He says, " I saw Lord 
 George leaning over the gallery," which position, 
 joined with what he mentioned of his talking with the 
 chaplain, marks the time and casts a strong doubt on 
 Bowen's testimony, which you will find stands, in this 
 
 10 only material part of it, single and unsupported. " I 
 then heard him," continues Mr. Anstruther, " tell 
 them they had been called a mob in the House, and 
 that peace-officers had been sent to disperse them 
 (peaceable petitioners) ; but that by steadiness and 
 
 15 firmness they might carry their point ; as he had no 
 doubt his Majesty, who was a gracious prince, would 
 send to his ministers to repeal the act, when he heard 
 his subjects were coming up for miles round, and 
 wishing its repeal." How coming up? In rebellion 
 
 20 and arms to compel it ? No ! all is still put on the 
 graciousness of the Sovereign, in listening to the unan- 
 imous wishes of his people. If the multitude then 
 assembled had been brought together to intimidate 
 the House by their firmness, or to coerce it by their 
 
 25 numbers, it was ridiculous to look forward to the 
 King's influence over it, when the collection of future 
 multitudes should induce him to employ it. The ex- 
 pressions were therefore quite unambiguous ; nor 
 could malice itself have suggested another construc- 
 
 Sotion of them, were it not for the fact that the House 
 was at that time surrounded, not by the petitioners 
 the noble prisoner had assembled, but by a 
 
126 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 mob who had mixed with them, and who, therefore, 
 when addressed by him, were instantly set down as 
 his followers. He thought he was addressing the 
 sober members of the association, who by steadiness 
 and perseverance could understand nothing more 5 
 than perseverance in that conduct he had antecedently 
 prescribed, as steadiness signifies a uniformity, not a 
 change of conduct ; and I defy the Crown to find out 
 a single expression, from the day he took the chair at 
 the association to the day I am speaking of, that jus- 10 
 tifies any other construction of steadiness and firm- 
 ness than that which I put upon it before. 
 
 What would be the feelings of our venerable ances- 
 tors, who framed the statue of treasons to prevent their 
 children being drawn into the snares of death, unless 15 
 provably convicted by overt acts, if they could hear us 
 disputing whether it was treason to desire harmless, 
 unarmed men to be firm and of good heart, and to 
 trust to the graciousness of their King ? 
 
 Here Mr. Anstruther closes his evidence, which 20 
 leads me to Mr. Bowen, who is the only man I be- 
 seech you, gentlemen of the jury, to attend to this 
 circumstance Mr. Bowen is the only man who has 
 attempted, directly or indirectly, to say that Lord 
 George Gordon uttered a syllable to the multitude in 25 
 the lobby concerning the destruction of the mass- 
 houses in Scotland. Not one of the Crown's wit- 
 nesses ; not even the wretched, abandoned Hay, who 
 was kept, as he said, in the lobby the whole afternoon, 
 from anxiety for his pretended friend, has ever 30 
 glanced at any expression resembling it. They all 
 with the expectation which he held out, from a 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 127 
 
 mild and gracious Sovereign. Mr. Bowen alone goes 
 on further, and speaks of the successful riots of the 
 Scotch. But he speaks of them in such a manner, 
 as, so far from conveying the hostile idea, which he 
 5 seemed sufficiently desirous to convey, tends directly 
 to wipe off the dark hints and insinuations which have 
 been made to supply the place of proof upon that 
 subject a subject which should not have been touched 
 on without the fullest support of evidence, and where 
 
 10 nothing but the most unequivocal evidence ought to 
 have been received. He says, " his Lordship began 
 by bidding them be quiet, peaceable, and steady " 
 not " steady " alone ; though, if that had been the ex- 
 pression, singly by itself, I should not be afraid to 
 
 15 meet it ; but, " Be quiet, PEACEABLE, and steady" 
 Gentlemen, I am indifferent what other expressions of 
 dubious interpretation are mixed with these. For 
 you are trying whether my noble friend came to the 
 House of Commons with a decidedly hostile mind ; 
 
 20 and as I shall, on the recapitulation of our own evi- 
 dence, trace him in your view, without spot or stain, 
 down to the very moment when the imputed words 
 were spoken, you will hardly forsake the whole inno- 
 cent context of his behavior, and torture your inven- 
 
 25 tions to collect the blackest system of guilt, starting 
 up in a moment, without being previously concerted, 
 or afterward carried into execution. 
 
 First, what are the words by which you are to be 
 convinced that the Legislature was to be frightened 
 
 30 into compliance, and to be coerced if terror should 
 fail? "Be quiet, peaceable, and steady; you are a 
 good people ; yours is a good cause : his Majesty is a 
 
128 LORD ERSK1NE. 
 
 gracious monarch, and when he hears that all his 
 people, ten miles round, are collecting, he will send to 
 his ministers to repeal the act." By what rules of 
 construction can such an address to unarmed, defense- 
 less men be tortured into treasonable guilt ? It is 5 
 impossible to do it without pronouncing even in the 
 total absence of all proof of fraud or deceit in the 
 speaker, that quiet signifies tumult and uproar, and 
 \h& peace signifies war and rebellion. 
 
 I have before observed that it was most important 10 
 for you to remember that, with this exhortation to 
 quiet and confidence in the King, the evidence of all 
 the other witnesses closed. Even Mr. Anstruther, 
 who was a long time afterward in the lobby, heard 
 nothing further ; so that if Mr. Bowen had been out 15 
 of the case altogether, what would the amount have 
 been ? Why, simply, that Lord George Gordon, hav- 
 ing assembled an unarmed, inoffensive multitude in 
 St. George's Fields, to present a petition to Parlia- 
 ment, and finding them becoming tumultuous, to the 20 
 discontent of Parliament and the discredit of the 
 cause, desired them not to give it up, but to continue 
 to show their zeal for the legal object in which they 
 were engaged ; to manifest that zeal quietly and peace- 
 ably, and not to despair of success ; since, though the 25 
 House was not disposed to listen to it, they had a 
 gracious Sovereign, who would second the wishes of 
 his people. This is the sum and substance of the 
 whole. They were not, even by any one ambiguous 
 expression, encouraged to trust to their numbers, as 30 
 sufficient to overawe the House, or to their strength 
 to compel it, or to the prudence of the state in yield- 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 129 
 
 ing to necessity, but to the indulgence of the King, in 
 compliance with the wishes of his people. Mr. Bowen, 
 however, thinks proper to proceed ; and I beg that 
 you will attend to the sequel of his evidence. He 
 5 stands single in all the rest that he says, which might 
 
 ' entitle me to ask you absolutely to reject it. But I 
 have no objection to your believing every word of it, 
 if you can : because, if inconsistencies prove any- 
 thing, they prove that there was nothing of that de- 
 
 10 liberation in the prisoner's expressions which can 
 justify the inference of guilt. I mean to be correct 
 as to his words [looking at his words which he had 
 noted down]. He says "that Lord George told the 
 people that an attempt had been made to introduce 
 
 15 the bill into Scotland, and that they had no redress 
 till the mass-houses were pulled down. That Lord 
 Weymouth 18 then sent official assurances that it 
 should not be extended to them." Gentlemen, why 
 is Mr. Bowen called by the Crown to tell you this ? 
 
 20 The reason is plain : because the Crown, conscious 
 that it could make no case of treason from the rest of 
 the evidence, in sober judgment of law ; aware that it' 
 had proved no purpose or act of force against the 
 House of Commons, to give countenance to the accu- 
 
 25 sation, much less to warrant a conviction, found it 
 necessary to hold up the noble prisoner as the wicked 
 and cruel author of all those calamities in which every 
 man's passions might be supposed to come in to assist 
 his judgment to decide. They therefore made him 
 
 30 speak in enigmas to the multitude : not telling them 
 to do mischief in order to succeed, but that by mis- 
 chief in Scotland success had been obtained. 
 18 "Then Secretary for the Southern Department." Goodrich. 
 
13 d LORD ERSKIXZ. 
 
 But were the mischiefs themselves that did happen 
 here of a sort to support such a conclusion? Can 
 any man living, for instance, believe that Lord George 
 Gordon could possibly have excited the mob to 
 destroy the house of that great and venerable magis- 5 
 trate, who has presided so long in this high tribunal 
 that the oldest of us do not remember him with any 
 other impression than the awful form and figure of 
 justice : a magistrate who had always been the friend . 
 of the Protestant Dissenters against the ill-timed 10 
 jealousies of the Establishment his countryman, too, 
 and, without adverting to the partiality not unjustly 
 imputed to men of that country, a man of whom any 
 country might be proud ? No, gentlemen, it is not 
 credible that a man of noble birth and liberal educa- 15 
 tion (unless agitated by the most implacable personal 
 resentment, which is not imputed to the prisoner) 
 could possibly consent to the burning of the house of 
 Lord Mansfield. 19 
 
 If Mr. Bowen, therefore, had ended here, I can 20 
 hardly conceive such a construction could be decently 
 hazarded consistent with the testimony of the wit- 
 nesses we have called. How much less, when, after 
 the dark insinuations which such expressions might 
 otherwise have been argued to convey, the very same 25 
 person, on whose veracity or memory they are only to 
 
 19 " This reference to Lord Mansfield, then seated on the bench 
 as presiding judge at the age of seventy-six, is not only appropriate 
 and beautiful in itself, but, as managed by Mr. Erskine, forms a 
 most convincing proof in favor of Lord George Gordon. This 30 
 was one of Mr. Erskine's excellences that he never went out of 
 his case for an illustration or a picture which refreshed the mind, 
 but he brought back with him an argument" Goodrich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 131 
 
 be believed, and who must be credited or discredited in 
 toto, takes out the sting himself by giving them such an 
 immediate context and conclusion as renders the pro- 
 position ridiculous, which his evidence is brought for- 
 
 5 ward to establish ; for he says that Lord George 
 Gordon instantly afterward addressed himself thus : 
 " Beware of evil-minded persons who may mix among 
 you and do mischief, the blame of which will be im- 
 puted to. you." 
 
 TO Gentlemen, if you reflect on the slander which I 
 told you fell upon the Protestants in Scotland by the 
 acts of the rabble there, I am sure you will see the 
 words are capable of an easy explanation. But as 
 Mr. Bowen concluded with telling you that he heard 
 
 15 them in the midst of noise and confusion, and as I can 
 only take them from ///>/, I shall not make an attempt 
 to collect them into one consistent discourse, so as to 
 give them a decided meaning in favor of my client, 
 because I have repeatedly told you that words imper- 
 
 20 fectly heard and partially related cannot be so recon- 
 ciled. But this I will say that he must be a ruffian, 
 and not a lawyer, who would dare to tell an English 
 jury that such ambiguous words, hemmed closely in 
 between others not only innocent but meritorious, are 
 
 25 to be adopted to constitute guilt, by rejecting both 
 introduction and sequel, with which they are absolutely 
 irreconcilable and inconsistent : for if ambiguous 
 words, when coupled with actions, decipher the mind 
 of the actor, so as to establish the presumption of 
 
 30 guilt, will not such as are plainly innocent and unam- 
 biguous go as far to repel such presumption ? Is 
 innocence more difficult of proof than the most malig- 
 
I3 2 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 nant wickedness? Gentlemen, I see your minds 
 revolt at such shocking propositions. I beseech you 
 to forgive me. I am afraid that my zeal has led me 
 to offer observations which I ought in justice to have 
 believed every honest mind would suggest to itself 5 
 with pain and abhorrence without being illustrated 
 and enforced. 
 
 I now come more minutely to the evidence on the 
 part of the prisoner. 
 
 I before told you that it was not till November, 10 
 1779, when the Protestant Association was already 
 fully established, that Lord George Gordon was elected 
 President by the unanimous voice of the whole body, 
 unlocked for and unsolicited. It is surely not an im- 
 material circumstance that at the very first meeting 15 
 where his Lordship presided, a dutiful and respectful 
 petition, the same which was afterward presented to 
 Parliament, was read and approved of ; a petition 
 which, so far from containing anything threatening or 
 offensive, conveyed not a very oblique reflection upon 20 
 the behavior of the people in Scotland. It states, that 
 as England and that country were now one, and as 
 official assurances had been given that the law should 
 not pass there, they hoped the peaceable and constitu- 
 tional deportment of the English Protestants would 25 
 entitle them to the approbation of Parliament. 
 
 It appears by the evidence of Mr. Erasmus Mid- 
 dleton, 30 a very respectable clergyman, and one of the 
 committee of the Association, that a meeting had been 
 held on the 4th of May, at which Lord George was 30 
 not present ; that at that meeting a motion had 
 80 " The first witness called for the prisoner." Goodrich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 133 
 
 been made for going up with the petition in a body, 
 but which, not being regularly put from the chair, no 
 resolution was come to upon it ; and that it was like- 
 wise agreed on, but in the same irregular manner, that 
 5 there should be no other public meeting previous to 
 the presenting the petition. That this last resolution 
 occasioned great discontent, and that Lord George 
 was applied to by a large and respectable number of 
 the Association to call another meeting to consider of 
 10 the most prudent and respectful method of presenting 
 their petition : but it appears that, before he complied 
 with their request, he consulted with the committee on 
 the propriety of compliance, who all agreeing to it 
 except the Secretary, his Lordship advertised the 
 15 meeting which was afterward held on the 2pth of May. 
 The meeting was, therefore, the act of the whole Asso- 
 ciation. As to the original difference between my 
 noble friend and the committee on the expediency of 
 the measure, it is totally immaterial ; since Mr. Mid- 
 20 dleton, who was one of the number who differed from 
 him on that subject (and whose evidence is, therefore, 
 infinitely more to be relied on), told you that his whole 
 deportment was so clear and unequivocal, as to entitle 
 him to assure you on his most solemn oath, that he in 
 25 his conscience believed his views were perfectly con- 
 stitutional and pure. This most respectable clergyman 
 further swears that he attended all the previous meet- 
 ings of the society, from the day the prisoner became 
 President to the day in question ; and that, knowing 
 30 they were objects of much jealousy and malice, he 
 watched his behavior with anxiety, lest his zeal should 
 furnish matter for misrepresentation ; but that he 
 
134 LORD ERSItltfE. 
 
 never heard an expression escape him which marked 
 a disposition to violate the duty and subordination of 
 a subject, or which could lead any man to believe that 
 his objects were different from the avowed and legal 
 objects of the Association. We could have examined 5 
 thousands to the same fact, for, as I told you when I 
 began to speak, I was obliged to leave my place to 
 disencumber myself from their names. 
 
 This evidence of Mr. Middleton's as to the 2Qth of 
 May, must, I should think, convince every man how 10 
 dangerous and unjust it is in witnesses, however per- 
 fect their memories, or however great their veracity, 
 to come into a criminal court where a man is standing 
 for his life or death, retailing scraps of sentences 
 which they had heard by thrusting themselves, from \$ 
 curiosity, into places where their business did not lead 
 them ; ignorant of the views and tempers of both 
 speakers and hearers, attending only to a part, and, 
 perhaps innocently, misrepresenting that part, from 
 not having heard the whole. 20 
 
 The witnesses for the Crown all tell you that Lord 
 George said he would not go up with the petition 
 unless he was attended by twenty thousand people who 
 had signed it. There they think proper to stop, as if 
 he had said nothing further ; leaving you to say to 25 
 yourselves, what possible purpose could he have in 
 assembling such a multitude on the very day the 
 House was to receive the petition? Why should he 
 urge it, when the committee had before thought it inex- 
 pedient ? And why should he refuse to present it 30 
 unless so attended ? Hear what Mr. Middleton says. 
 He tells you that my noble friend informed the peti- 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 135 
 
 tioners that if it was decided they were not to attend 
 to consider how their petition should be presented, 
 he would with the greatest pleasure go up with it 
 alone. But that, if it was resolved they should attend 
 5 it in person, he expected twenty thousand at the 
 least should meet him in St. George's Fields, for 
 that otherwise the petition would be considered as a 
 forgery ; it having been thrown out in the House and 
 elsewhere that the repeal of the bill was not the serious 
 
 10 wish of the people at large, and that the petition was 
 a mere list of names on parchment, and not of men in 
 sentiment. Mr. Middleton added, that Lord George 
 adverted to the same objections having been made to 
 many other petitions, and he, therefore, expressed an 
 
 15 anxiety to show Parliament how many were actually 
 interested in its success, which he reasonably thought 
 would be a strong inducement to the House to listen 
 to it. The language imputed to him falls in most 
 naturally with this purpose : " I wish Parliament to see 
 
 20 who and what you are ; dress yourselves in your best 
 clothes " which Mr. Hay (who, I suppose, had been 
 reading the indictment) thought it would be better to 
 call " ARRAY YOURSELVES." He desired that not a 
 stick should be seen among them, and that, if any man 
 
 25 insulted another, or was guilty of any breach of the 
 peace, he was to be given up to the magistrates. Mr. 
 Attorney-General, to persuade you that this was all 
 color and deceit, says, " How was a magistrate to 
 face forty thousand men ? How were offenders in 
 
 30 such a multitude to be amenable to the civil power ? " 
 What a shameful perversion of a plain, peaceable pur- 
 pose ! To be sure, if the multitude had been assem- 
 
136 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 bled to resist the magistrate, offenders could not be 
 secured. But they themselves were ordered to appre- 
 hend all offenders among them, and to deliver them 
 up to justice. They themselves were to surrender 
 their fellows to civil authority if they offended. 5 
 
 But it seems that Lord George ought to have fore- 
 seen that so great a multitude could not be collected 
 without mischief. 21 Gentlemen, we are not trying 
 whether he might or ought to have foreseen mischief, 
 but whether he wickedly and traitorously preconcerted 10 
 and designed it. But if he be an object of censure for 
 not foreseeing it, what shall we say to GOVERNMENT, 
 that took no steps to prevent it, that issued no procla- 
 mation, warning the people of the danger and illegality 
 of such an assembly ? If a peaceable multitude, with 15 
 a petition in their hands, be an army, and if the noise 
 and confusion inseparable from numbers, though with- 
 out violence or the purpose of violence, constitute 
 war, what shall be said of that GOVERNMENT which 
 remained from Tuesday to Friday, knowing that an 20 
 army was collecting to levy war by public advertise- 
 ment, yet had not a single soldier, no, nor even a con- 
 stable, to protect the state ? 
 
 Gentlemen, I come forth to do that for government 
 which its own servant, the Attorney-General, has not 25 
 done. I come forth to rescue it from the eternal 
 infamy which would fall upon its head, if the lan- 
 guage of its own advocate were to be believed. But 
 government has an unanswerable defense. It neither 
 
 21 This paragraph shows well two characteristics of this speech : 30 
 the frankness with which Lord Erskine stated an objection, and 
 the skill with which he turned it against his opponents. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON-. 137 
 
 did nor could possibly enter into the head of any man 
 in authority to prophesy human wisdom could not 
 divine that wicked and desperate men, taking ad- 
 vantage of the occasion which, perhaps, an imprudent 
 5 zeal for religion had produced, would dishonor the 
 cause of all religions, by the disgraceful acts which 
 followed. 
 
 Why, then, is it to be said that Lord George Gor- 
 don is a traitor, who, without proof of any hostile 
 
 10 purpose to the government of his country, only did not 
 foresee what nobody else foresaw what those people 
 whose business it is to foresee every danger that 
 threatens the state, and to avert it by the interference 
 of magistracy, though they could not but read the ad- 
 
 15 vertisement, neither did nor could possibly appre- 
 hend?" 
 
 How are these observations attempted to be an- 
 swered ? Only by asserting, without evidence or even 
 reasonable argument, that all this was color and 
 
 20 deceit. Gentlemen, I again say that it is scandalous 
 and reproachful, and not to be justified by any duty 
 which can possibly belong to an advocate at the bar 
 of an English court of justice, to declare, without any 
 proof or attempt at proof, that all a man's expres- 
 
 25 sions, however peaceable, however quiet, however 
 constitutional, however loyal, are all fraud and villainy. 
 Look, gentlemen, to the issues of life, which I before 
 called the evidence of Heaven : I call them so still. 
 Truly may I call them so, when, out of a book com- 
 
 30 22 it This was the great turning-point of the case, and it would 
 have been impossible to state it in more simple or more powerful 
 terms. " Goodrich. 
 
138 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 piled by the Crown from the petition in the House of 
 Commons, and containing the names of all who signed 
 it, and which was printed in order to prevent any of 
 that number being summoned upon the jury to try this 
 indictment, not one criminal, or even a suspected name is 5 
 to be found, among this defamed host of petitioners ! 
 
 After this, gentlemen, I think the Crown ought, 
 in decency, to be silent. I see the effect this circum- 
 stance has upon you, and I know I am warranted in 
 my assertion of the fact. If I am not, why did not 10 
 the Attorney-General produce the record of some con- 
 victions, and compare it with the list ? I thank them, 
 therefore, for the precious compilation, which, though 
 they did not produce, they cannot stand up and 
 deny. 15 
 
 Solomon [Job] says, " Oh that mine adversary had 
 written a book ! " My adversary has written a book, 
 and out of it I am entitled to pronounce that it can- 
 not again be decently asserted that Lord George 
 Gordon, in exhorting an innocent and unimpeached 20 
 multitude to be peaceable and quiet, was exciting 
 them to violence against the state. 
 
 What is the evidence, then, on which this connec- 
 tion with the mob is to be proved ? Only that they 
 had blue cockades Are you or am I answerable for 25 
 every man who wears a blue cockade ? If a man 
 commits murder in my livery or in yours, without 
 command, counsel, or consent, is the murder ours ? 
 In all cumulative, constructive treasons, you are to 
 
 23 " The members of the Association, at the meeting of St. 30 
 George's Fields, were distinguished by wearing cockades, on 
 which were inscribed the words ' No Popery ' ! " Goodrich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 139 
 
 judge from the tenor of a man's behavior, not from 
 crooked and disjointed parts of it. " Nemo repente 
 fuit turpissimus." No man can possibly be guilty 
 of this crime by a sudden impulse of the mind, as he 
 5 may of some others ; and, certainly, Lord George 
 Gordon stands upon the evidence at Coachmakers' 
 Hall as pure and white as snow. He stands so upon 
 the evidence of a man who had differed with him as 
 to the expediency of his conduct, yet who swears 
 
 10 that from the time -he took the chair till the period 
 which is the subject of inquiry, there was no blame 
 in him. 
 
 You, therefore, are bound as Christian men to be- 
 lieve that, when he came to St. George's Fields that 
 
 15 morning, he did not come there with the hostile pur- 
 pose of repealing a law by rebellion. 
 
 But still it seems all his behavior at Coachmakers' 
 Hall was color and deceit. Let us see, therefore, 
 whether this body of men, when assembled, answered 
 
 20 the description of that which I have stated to be the 
 purpose of him who assembled them. Were they a 
 multitude arrayed for terror or force ? On the con- 
 trary, you have heard, upon the evidence of men whose 
 veracity is not to be impeached, that they were sober, 
 
 25 decent, quiet, peaceable tradesmen ; that they were 
 all of the better sort ; all well-dressed and well-be- 
 haved ; and that there was not a man among them 
 who had any one weapon, offensive or defensive. Sir 
 Philip Jennings Clerke 24 tells you he went into the 
 
 3 24 " This gentleman, in giving evidence on behalf of the pris- 
 oner, deposed to the peaceable behavior of the members of the 
 Association who formed the original procession to carry up the 
 
140 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 Fields ; that he drove through them, talked to many 
 individuals among them, who all told him that it was 
 not their wish to persecute the Papists, but that they 
 were alarmed at the progress of their religion from 
 their schools. Sir Philip further told you that he never 5 
 saw a more peaceable multitude in his life ; and it 
 appears upon the oaths of all who were present, 26 that 
 Lord George Gordon went round among them, desir- 
 ing peace and quietness. 
 
 Mark his conduct, when he heard from Mr. Evans 26 10 
 that a low, riotous set of people were assembled in 
 Palace Yard. Mr. Evans, being a member of the 
 Protestant Association, and being desirous that noth- 
 ing bad might happen from the assembly, went in his 
 carriage with Mr. Spinage to St. George's Fields, to 15 
 inform Lord George that there were such people as- 
 sembled (probably Papists), who were determined to 
 do mischief. The moment he told him of what he 
 
 petition, and whom he distinguished from the mob which after- 
 ward assembled tumultuously about the House of Commons." 20 
 Goodrich. 
 
 25 "Sir James Lowther, another of the prisoner's witnesses, 
 proved that Lord George Gordon and Sir Philip Jennings Clerke 
 accompanied him in his carriage from the House, and the former 
 entreated the multitudes collected to disperse quietly to their 25 
 homes. " Goodrich. 
 
 26 " A surgeon, who also was examined for the defense, and de- 
 posed that he saw Lord George Gordon in the midst of one of the 
 companies in St. George's Fields, and that it appeared his wish at 
 that time, from his conduct and expressions, that, to prevent all 30 
 disorder, he should not be attended by the multitude across West- 
 minster Bridge. This gentleman's evidence was confirmed by 
 that of other witnesses." Goodrich, 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 14* 
 
 heard, whatever his original plan might have been, he 
 instantly changed it on seeing the impropriety of it. 
 " Do you intend," said Mr. Evans, " to carry up all 
 these men with the petition to the House of Com- 
 5 mons ? " " Oh no ! no ! not by any means ; I do not 
 mean to carry them all up." " Will you give me 
 leave," said Mr. Evans, " to go round to the different 
 divisions, and tell the people it is not your Lordship's 
 purpose ? " He answered, " By all means." And 
 
 10 Mr. Evans accordingly went, but it was impossible to 
 guide such a number of people, peaceable as they 
 were. They were all desirous to go forward ; and 
 Lord George was at last obliged to leave the Fields, 
 exhausted with heat and fatigue, beseeching them to 
 
 15 be peaceable and quiet. Mrs. Whitingham set him 
 down at the House of Commons ; and at the very 
 time that he thus left them in perfect harmony and 
 good order, it appears, by the evidence of Sir Philip 
 Jennings Clerke, that Palace Yard was in an uproar, 
 
 20 filled with mischievous boys and the lowest dregs of 
 the people. 
 
 Gentlemen, I have all along tolckyou that the Crown 
 was aware that it had no case of treason, without con- 
 necting the noble prisoner with Consequences, which 
 
 25 it was in some luck to find advocates to state, without 
 proof to support it. I can only speak for myself, that, 
 small as my chance is (as times go) of ever arriving 
 at high office, I would not accept of it on the terms of 
 being obliged to produce against a fellow-citizen that 
 
 30 which I have been witness to this day. For Mr. 
 Attorney-General perfectly well knew the innocent 
 and laudable motive with which the protection was 
 
142 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 given, that he exhibited as an evidence of guilt; 97 
 yet it was produced to insinuate that Lord George 
 Gordon, knowing himself to be the ruler of those 
 villains, set himself up as a savior from their fury. 
 We called Lord Stormont to explain this matter to 5 
 you, who told you that Lord George Gordon came to 
 Buckingham House, and begged to see the King, say- 
 ing, he might be of great use in quelling the riots ; 
 and can there be on earth a greater proof of conscious 
 innocence? For if he had been the wicked mover of 10 
 them, would he have gone to the King to have con- 
 fessed it, by offering to recall his followers from the 
 mischiefs he had provoked ? No ! But since, not- 
 withstanding a public protest issued by himself and 
 the Association, reviling the authors of mischief, the 15 
 Protestant cause was still made the pretext, he thought 
 his public exertions might be useful, as they might 
 tend to remove the prejudices which wicked men had 
 diffused. The King thought so likewise, and there- 
 fore (as appears by Lord Stormont) refused to see 20 
 Lord George till he ^iad given the test of his loyalty 
 by such exertions. But sure I am, our gracious Sov- 
 ereign meant no trap for innocence, nor ever recom- 
 mended it as such to his servants. 
 
 27 "A witness of the name of Richard Pond, called in support 25 
 of the prosecution, had sworn that, hearing his house was about 
 to be pulled down, he applied to the prisoner for protection, 
 and in consequence received the following document signed by 
 him : ' All true friends to Protestants, I hope, will be particular, 
 and do no injury to the property of any true Protestant, as I am 30 
 well assured the proprietor of this house is a staunch and worthy 
 friend to the cause. G. GORDON.' " Goodrich. 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 143 
 
 Lord George's language was simply this : " The 
 multitude pretend to be perpetrating these acts, under 
 the authority of the Protestant petition ; I assure 
 your Majesty they are not the Protestant Association, 
 5 and I shall be glad to be of any service in suppress- 
 ing them." I say BY GOD, that man is a ruffian who 
 shall, after this, presume to build upon such honest, 
 artless conduct, as an evidence of guilt. 28 Gentle- 
 men, if Lord George Gordon had been guilty of high 
 
 10 treason (as is assumed to-day) in the face of the 
 whole Parliament, how are all its members to defend 
 themselves from the misprision 29 of suffering such a 
 person to go at large and to approach his sovereign ? 
 The man who conceals the perpetration of treason is 
 
 15 himself a traitor ; but they are all perfectly safe, for 
 nobody thought of treason till fears arising from 
 another quarter bewildered their senses. The King, 
 
 28 " The effect produced on the jury and spectators by this sud- 
 den burst of feeling, is represented by eye-witnesses to have been 
 
 20 such as to baffle all powers of description. It was wholly unpre- 
 meditated, the instantaneous result of th^t sympathy which exists 
 between a successful speaker and his audience. In uttering this 
 appeal to his Maker, Mr. Erskine's tone was one of awe and deep 
 reverence, without the slightest approach toward the profane use 
 
 25 of the words, but giving them all the solemnity of a judicial oath. 
 The magic of his eye, gesture, and countenance beaming with 
 emotion, completed the impression, and made it irresistible. It 
 was a thing which a man could do but once in his life. Mr. 
 Erskine attempted it again in the House of Commons, and utterly 
 
 30 failed/' Goodrich. 
 
 29 " Misprision of treason consists in the bare knowledge and 
 concealment of treason, without any degree of assent thereto, for 
 any assent makes the party a principal traitor." " Blackstone's 
 Comm.,"iv. 129, I. Goodrich. 
 
144 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 therefore, and his servants, very wisely accepted his 
 promise of assistance, and he flew with honest zeal to 
 fulfill it. Sir Philip Jennings Clerke tells you that he 
 made use of every expression which it was possible for 
 a man in such circumstances to employ. Re begged 5 
 them, for God's sake, to disperse and go home ; 
 declared his hope that the petition would be granted, 
 but that rioting was not the way to effect it. Sir 
 Philip said he felt himself bound, without being par- 
 ticularly asked, to say everything he could in protec- 10 
 tion of an injured and innocent man, and repeated 
 again, that there was not an art which the prisoner 
 could possibly make use of, that he did not zealously 
 employ ; but that it was all in vain. " I began/' says 
 he, " to tremble for myself, when Lord George read 15 
 the resolution of the House, which was hostile to 
 them, and said their petition would not be taken into 
 consideration until they were quiet." But did he say, 
 " therefore go on to burn and destroy " ? On the con- 
 trary, he helped to pen that motion, and read it to the 20 
 multitude, as one which he himself had approved. 
 After this he went into the coach with Sheriff Pugh, 
 in the city ; and there it was, in the presence of the 
 very magistrate whom he was assisting to keep the 
 peace, that \\tpublicly signed the protection which has 25 
 been read in evidence against him ; although Mr. 
 Fisher, who now stands in my presence, confessed in 
 the Privy Council that he himself had granted similar 
 protections to various people yet he was dismissed as 
 having done nothing but his duty. 3 
 
 This is the plain and simple truth ; and for his just 
 obedience to his Majesty's request, do the King's serv- 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 1 45 
 
 ants come to-day into his court, where he is supposed 
 in person to sit, to turn that obedience into the crime 
 of high treason, and to ask you to put him to death 
 for it. 
 
 5 Gentlemen, you have now heard, upon the solemn 
 oaths of honest, disinterested men, a faithful history 
 of the conduct of Lord George Gordon, from the day 
 that he became a member of the Protestant Associa- 
 tion to the day that he was committed a prisoner to 
 10 the Tower. And I have no doubt, from the attention 
 with which I have been honored from the beginning, 
 that you have still kept in your minds the principles 
 to which I entreated you would apply it, and that you 
 have measured it by that standard. You have, there- 
 is fore, only to look back to the whole of it together ; to 
 reflect on all you have heard concerning him ; to trace 
 him in your recollection through every part of the 
 transaction ; and, considering it with one manly, liberal 
 view, to ask your own honest hearts, whether you can 
 20 say that this noble and unfortunate youth is a wicked 
 and deliberate traitor, who deserves by your verdict 
 to suffer a shameful and ignominious death, which 
 will stain the ancient honors of his house forever. 
 
 The crime which the Crown would have fixed upon 
 
 25 him is, that he assembled the Protestant Association 
 
 round the House of Commons, not merely to influence 
 
 and persuade Parliament by the earnestness of their 
 
 supplications, but actually to coerce it by hostile, 
 
 rebellious force ; that, finding himself disappointed 
 
 30 in the success of that coercion, he afterward incited 
 
 his followers to abolish the legal indulgences to 
 
 Papists, which the object of the petition was to repeal, 
 
146 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 by the burning of their houses of worship, and the 
 destruction of their property, which ended, at last, in 
 a general attack on the property of all orders of men, 
 religious and civil, on the public treasures of the 
 nation, and on the very being of the government. 30 5 
 
 To support a charge of so atrocious and unnatural a 
 complexion, the laws of the most arbitrary nations 
 would require the most incontrovertible proof. Either 
 the villain must have been taken in the overt act of 
 wickedness, or, if he worked in secret upon others, 10 
 his guilt must have been brought out by the discovery 
 of a conspiracy, or by the consistent tenor of crimi- 
 nality. The very worst inquisitor that ever dealt in 
 blood would vindicate the torture, by plausibility at 
 least, and by the semblance of truth. 15 
 
 What evidence, then, will a jury of Englishmen ex- 
 pect from the servants of the Crown of England, before 
 they deliver up a brother accused before them to igno- 
 miny and death ? What proof will their consciences 
 require ? AVhat will their plain and manly understand- 20 
 ings accept of ? What does the immemorial custom of 
 their fathers, and the written law of this land, warrant 
 them in demanding ? Nothing less, in any case of 
 blood, than the clearest and most unequivocal convic- 
 tion of guilt. But in this case the Act has not even 25 
 trusted to the humanity and justice of our general law, 
 but has said, in plain, rough, expressive terms -prov- 
 ably ; that is, says Lord Coke, not upon conjectural pre- 
 
 30 " At the time of the interference of the military, the mob had 
 attacked the Pay Office, and were attempting to break into the 30 
 Bank ; and to aid the work of the incendiaries, a large party had 
 been sent to cut the pipes of thr New River." 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 147 
 
 sumptions ', or infer ences y or strains of wit, but upon 
 direct and plain proof. " For the King, Lords, and 
 Commons," continues that great lawyer, " did not use, 
 the word probably, for then a common argument might 
 5 have served, but provably, which signifies the highest 
 force of demonstration." And what evidence, gentle- 
 men of the jury, does the Crown offer to you in com- 
 pliance with these sound and sacred doctrines of 
 justice ? A few broken, interrupted, disjointed words, 
 
 10 without context or connection uttered by the speaker 
 in agitation and heat heard, by those who relate 
 them to you, in the midst of tumult and confusion 
 and even those words, mutilated as they are, in direct 
 opposition to, and inconsistent with repeated and 
 
 15 earnest declarations delivered at the very same time 
 and on the very same occasion, related to you by a 
 much greater number of persons, and absolutely 
 incompatible with the whole tenor of his conduct. 
 Which of us all, gentlemen, would be safe, standing at 
 
 20 the bar of God or man, if we were not to be judged 
 by the regular current of our lives and conversations, 
 but by detached and unguarded expressions, picked 
 out by malice, and recorded, without context or cir- 
 cumstances, against us ? Yet such is the only evidence 
 
 25 on which the Crown asks you to dip your hands, and 
 to stain your consciences, in the innocent blood of the 
 noble and unfortunate youth who stands before you 
 on the single evidence of the words you have heard 
 from their witnesses (for of what but words have you 
 
 3 heard ?), which, even if they had stood uncontroverted 
 by the proofs that have swallowed them up, or unex- 
 plained by circumstances which destroy their malig- 
 
148 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 nity, could not, at the very worst, amount in law to 
 more than a breach of the Act against tumultuous 
 petitioning (if such an act still exists) ; since the 
 worst malice of his enemies has not been able to 
 bring up one single witness to say that he ever directed, 5 
 countenanced, or approved rebellious force against the 
 Legislature of this country. It is, therefore, a matter 
 of astonishment to me that men can keep the natural 
 color in their cheeks when they ask for human life, 
 even on the Crown's original case, though the prisoner 10 
 had made no defense. 
 
 But will they still continue to ask for it after what 
 they have heard ? I will just remind the Solicitor- 
 General, before he begins his reply, what matter he 
 has to encounter. He has to encounter this : that 15 
 the going up in a body was not even originated by 
 I Lord George, but by others in his absence that 
 when proposed by him officially as chairman, it was 
 adopted by the whole Association, and consequently 
 was their act as much as his that it was adopted, not 20 
 in a conclave, but with open doors, and the resolu- 
 tion published to all the world that it was known, of 
 course, to the ministers and magistrates of the country, 
 who did not even signify to him, or to anybody else, 
 its illegality or danger that decency and peace were 25 
 enjoined and commanded that the regularity of the 
 procession, and those badges of distinction, which are 
 now cruelly turned into the charge of an hostile array 
 against him, were expressly and publicly directed for 
 the preservation of peace and the prevention of 30 
 tumult that while the House was deliberating, he 
 repeatedly entreated them to behave with decency 
 
DEFENSE OP GORDON. 149 
 
 and peace, and to retire to their houses, though he- 
 knew not that he was speaking to the enemies of his, 
 cause that when they at last dispersed, no man 
 thought or imagined that treason had been committed 
 5 that he retired to bed, where he lay unconscious 
 that ruffians were ruining him by their disorders in 
 the night that on Monday he published an adver- 
 tisement, reviling the authors of the riots, and, as the 
 Protestant cause had been wickedly made the pretext 
 
 10 for them, solemnly enjoined all who wished well to it 
 to be obedient to the laws (nor has the Crown even 
 attempted to prove that he had either given, or that 
 he afterward gave secret instructions in opposition to 
 that public admonition) that he afterward begged an 
 
 15 audience to receive the King's commands that he 
 waited on the ministers that he attended his duty in 
 Parliament and when the multitude (among whom 
 there was not a man of the associated Protestants) 
 again assembled on the Tuesday, under pretense of 
 
 20 the Protestant cause, he offered his services, and read 
 a resolution of the House to them, accompanied with 
 every expostulation which a zeal for peace could 
 possibly inspire that he afterward, in pursuance of 
 the King's direction, attended the magistrates in their 
 
 25 duty, honestly and honorably exerting all his powen 
 to quell the fury of the multitude ; a conduct which, 
 to the dishonor of the Crown, has been scandalously 
 turned against him, by criminating him with protec- 
 tions granted publicly in the coach of the Sheriff of 
 
 30 London, whom he was assisting in his office of magis- 
 tracy ; although protections of a similar nature were, 
 to the knowledge of the whole Privy Council, granted 
 
15 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 by Mr. Fisher himself, who now stands in my presence 
 unaccused and unreproved, but who, if the Crown 
 that summoned him durst have called him, would 
 have dispersed to their confusion the slightest impu- 
 tation of guilt. 5 
 
 What, then, has produced this trial for high treason, 
 or given it, when produced, the seriousness and solem- 
 nity it wears ? What but the inversion of all justice, 
 by judging from consequences, instead of from causes 
 and designs ? What but the artful manner in which 10 
 the Crown has endeavored to blend the petitioning in 
 a body, and the zeal with which an animated disposi- 
 tion conducted it, with the melancholy crimes that 
 followed ? crimes which the shameful indolence of our 
 magistrates which the total extinction of all police 15 
 and government suffered to be committed in broad 
 day, and in the delirium of drunkenness, by an 
 unarmed banditti, without a head without plan or 
 object and without a refuge from the instant gripe 
 of justice : a banditti with whom the associated Prot- 20 
 estants and their president had no manner of connec- 
 tion, and whose cause they overturned, dishonored, 
 and ruined. 
 
 How unchristian, then, is it to attempt, without 
 evidence, to infect the imaginations of men who are 25 
 sworn, dispassionately and disinterestedly, to try the 
 trivial offense of assembling a multitude with a peti- 
 tion to repeal a law (which has happened so often in 
 all our memories), by blending it with the fatal catas- 
 trophe, on which every man's mind may be supposed 3 
 to retain some degree of irritation ! O fie ! O fie ! 
 Is the intellectual seat of justice to be thus impiously 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. IS 1 
 
 shaken ? Are your benevolent propensities to be 
 thus disappointed and abused ? Do they wish you, 
 while you are listening to the evidence, to connect it 
 with unforeseen consequences, in spite of reason and 
 5 truth ? Is it their object to hang the millstone of 
 prejudice around his innocent neck to sink him ? If 
 there be such men, may Heaven forgive them for the 
 attempt, and inspire you with fortitude and wisdom 
 to discharge your duty with calm, steady, and reflect- 
 10 ing minds ! 
 
 Gentlemen, I have no manner of doubt that you 
 will. 31 I am sure you cannot but see, notwithstanding 
 my great inability, increased by a perturbation of mind 
 (arising, thank God ! from no dishonest cause), that 
 15 there has been not only no evidence on the part of 
 the Crown to fix the guilt of the late commotions 
 upon the prisoner, but that, on the contrary, we have 
 been able to resist the probability, I might almost say 
 the possibility of the charge, not only by living wit- 
 so nesses, whom we only ceased to call because the trial 
 would never have ended, but by the evidence of all 
 
 31 " This peroration is remarkable for the quiet and subdued tone 
 which reigns throughout it. A less skilful advocate would have 
 closed with a powerful appeal to the feelings of the jury, but Mr. 
 
 25 Erskine, with that quick instinct which enabled him to read the 
 emotions of men in their countenances, saw that his cause was 
 gained. He chose, therefore, to throw over his concluding remarks 
 the appearance of a perfect understanding between him and the 
 jury that the verdict of acquittal was already made up in their 
 
 30 minds, so that any appeal to their feelings would be wholly 
 out of place. In his closing sentence, therefore, he does not 
 ask a decision in his fa.vor but takes, it as a matter of course."* 
 Qoodrich, 
 
152 LORD ERSKINE. 
 
 the blood that has paid the forfeit of that guilt already ; 
 an evidence that I will take upon me to say is the 
 strongest and most unanswerable which the combina- 
 tion of natural events ever brought together since the 
 beginning of the world for the deliverance of the 5 
 oppressed : since, in the late numerous trials for acts 
 of violence and depredation, though conducted by 
 the ablest servants of the Crown, with a laudable eye 
 to the investigation of the subject which now engages 
 us, no one fact appeared which showed any plan, any 10 
 object, any leader ; since, out of forty-four thousand 
 persons who signed the petition of the Protestants, not 
 one was to be found among those who were convicted, 
 tried, or even apprehended on suspicion ; and since, 
 out of all the felons who were let loose from prisons, 15 
 and who assisted in the destruction of our property, 
 not a single wretch was to be found who could even 
 attempt to save his own life by the plausible promise 
 of giving evidence to-day. 
 
 What can overturn such a proof as this ? Surely a 2 o 
 good man might, without superstition, believe that 
 such a union of events was something more than 
 natural, and that a Divine Providence was watchful 
 for the protection of innocence and truth. 
 
 I may now, therefore, relieve you from the pain of 25 
 hearing me any longer, and be myself relieved from 
 speaking on a subject which agitates and distresses 
 me. Since Lord George Gordon stands clear of every 
 hostile act or purpose against the Legislature of his 
 country, or the properties of his fellow-subjects since 30 
 the whole tenor of his conduct repels the belief of the 
 traitorous intention charged by the indictment my 
 
DEFENSE OF GORDON. 153 
 
 task is finished. I shall make no address to your 
 passions. I will not remind you of the long and 
 rigorous imprisonment he has suffered ; I will not 
 speak to you of his great youth, of his illustrious birth, 
 5 and of his uniformly animated and generous zeal in 
 Parliament for the Constitution of his country. Such 
 topics might be useful in the balance of a doubtful 
 case ; yet, even then, I should have trusted to the 
 honest hearts of Englishmen to have felt them with- 
 10 out excitation. At present, the plain and rigid rules 
 of justice and truth are sufficient to entitle me to 
 your verdict. 
 
 OF THE 
 
 [UNIVERSITY 
 
PERSUASION. 
 
 Beecber, 
 
 Born 1813. Died 1887. 
 
 SPEECH DELIVERED IN PHILHARMONIC HALL, LIVER- 
 POOL, OCTOBER l6, 1863. 
 
 [When Mr. Beecher went to England in 1863, English friends 
 of the North urged him to speak publicly for Northern interests. 
 They felt that as champions of the North they had been treated 
 with contempt and vilification, and that unless he, as a prominent 
 Abolitionist, should recognize their efforts, they were lost. More- 
 over Parliament, appealed to publicly to declare for the Southern 
 Confederacy, was willing, but not sure of the non-voting English, 
 who held great power. Therefore, friends of the South had 
 arranged to have orators go through the manufacturing districts for 
 the purpose of enlisting the sympathies of the laboring classes. 
 Mr. Beecher spoke with decided success at Manchester and Glas- 
 gow in the face of great and organized opposition, and at Edin- 
 burgh with little disturbance. The effect of these three speeches 
 was widely felt. It looked as though the backbone of opposition 
 had been broken ; but really the mob-spirit was only resting be- 
 fore making a final and more desperate effort. 
 
 Liverpool was the headquarters of the Southern sympathizers, 
 and a great many Southern men were in the city. The feeling 
 was very strong that if Mr. Beecher should succeed there, he 
 would win the day ; and a determined and desperate effort was to 
 be made to prevent the delivery of the speech. The streets were 
 placarded with abusive and scurrilous posters, urging Englishmen 
 to '* see that he gets the welcome he deserves." On the morning 
 of the i6th the leading papers came out with violent and false 
 editorials against Mr. Beecher, Jt was openly declared that if he 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 155 
 
 should dare to address the meeting, he would never leave the hall 
 alive. It was well known that the mob was armed ; not so well 
 known that a small armed band of young men were in a com- 
 manding position at the right of the stage, determined, if any out- 
 break occurred, to protect Mr. Beecher. 
 
 The great hall was packed to the crushing point. For some 
 moments before the time fixed for the commencement of the pro- 
 ceedings there were cat-calls, groans, cheers, and hisses, and it 
 was evident that a strong force of the pro-Southern (or at least of 
 the anti-Beecher) party had congregated in front of the gallery 
 and at the lower end of the body of the hall. When Mr. Beecher 
 stepped on the platform, cheer rolled after cheer, and in the 
 pauses in the hurrahing the hissing was' tremendous. The up- 
 roar was long kept up, but finally the chairman, by appealing to 
 the audience as Englishmen to stand up for fair play and not to 
 withhold justice from a stranger, quieted it. Mr. Beecher was 
 evidently prepared for some opposition ; but he could hardly have 
 expected that his appearance at the front of the platform would 
 rouse one portion of the audience to a high state of enthusiasm, 
 and cause the other portion to approach almost a state of frenzy. 
 For some time it was doubtful whether he would be allowed to 
 speak ; but those who sat near him and observed his firmly com- 
 pressed lips and imperturbable demeanor, saw at once that it 
 would require something more than noise and spasmodic hisses to 
 cause Mr. Beecher to lose heart. He stood calmly at the edge of 
 the platform, waiting for the noise to cease. At last there was a 
 lull, and the chairman made another appeal to the meeting for 
 fair play. His assurance that Mr. Beecher, after his speech, would 
 answer any questions which anyone might care to ask was not 
 very favorably received, and a series of disturbances followed. 
 When the scuffling had partly subsided, the chairman expressed 
 his determination to preserve order by calling in, if necessary, the 
 aid of the police. This announcement produced something like 
 order, and Mr. Beecher took up the advantage and began his 
 address. 
 
 After Mr. Beecher had spoken amid almost constant interrup- 
 tion for three hours his voice failed him, and he was forced to say, 
 a.s he ende4 his speech, that he could not answer any questions 
 
I5 6 HENRY WARD BEECHER. 
 
 unless there was perfect order. He replied in comparative 
 quiet to one or two written questions, but when the disturbance 
 was renewed, Mr. Beecher sat down. The speech, however, had 
 been delivered, and was reported in full next day in the papers. 
 ("Biography of H. W. Beecher/' by W. C. Beecher and Rev. 
 S. Scoville, pp. 406-26.)] 
 
 FOR more than twenty-five years I have been made 
 perfectly familiar with popular assemblies in all parts 
 of my country except the extreme South. There has 
 not for the whole of that time been a single day of 
 my life when it would have been safe for me to go 5 
 South of Mason's and Dixon's line in my own country, 
 and all for one reason : my solemn, earnest, persist- 
 ent testimony against that which I consider to be the 
 most atrocious thing under the sun the system of 
 American slavery in a great free republic. [Cheers.] 10 
 I have passed through that early period when right of 
 free speech was denied to me. Again and again I 
 have attempted to address audiences that, for no 
 other crime than that of free speech, visited me with 
 all manner of contumelious epithets ; and now since 15 
 I have been in England, although I have met with 
 greater kindness and courtesy on the part of most 
 than I deserved, yet, on the other hand, I perceive 
 that the Southern influence prevails to some extent 
 in England. [Applause and uproar.] It is my old 20 
 acquaintance ; I understand it perfectly 1 [laughter] 
 
 1 Evidently only the general outline of this speech could have 
 been arranged by Beecher before he spoke, for many places show 
 that a phrase or a sentence sprang to his lips as the suggestion of 
 the moment. All the introductory matter to "There are two 25 
 dominant races," details of the argument, methods of appeal, and 
 the appeals themselves, must have come spontaneously as the 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 157 
 
 and I have always held it to be an unfailing truth 
 that where a man had a cause that would bear exami- 
 nation he was perfectly willing to have it spoken about. 
 [Applause.] And when in Manchester I saw those 
 5 huge placards : " Who is Henry Ward Beecher ? " 
 [laughter, cries of " Quite right," and applause.] 
 and when in Liverpool I was told that there were 
 those blood-red placards, purporting to say what 
 Henry Ward Beecher had said, and calling upon 
 
 10 Englishmen to suppress free speech I tell you what 
 I thought. I thought simply this : " I am glad of it." 
 [Laughter.] Why ? Because if they had felt per- 
 fectly secure, that you are the minions of the South 
 and the slaves of slavery, they would have been per- 
 
 !5 fectly still. [Applause and uproar.] And, therefore, 
 when I saw so much nervous apprehension that, if I 
 were permitted to speak [hisses and applause] 
 when I found they were afraid to have me speak 
 [hisses, laughter, and " No, no ! "] when I found that 
 
 20 they considered my speaking damaging to their cause 
 [applause] when I found that they appealed from 
 facts and reasonings to mob law [applause and uproar] 
 I said, no man need tell me what the heart and 
 secret counsel of these men are. They tremble and 
 
 25 are afraid. 2 [Applause, laughter, hisses, " No, no ! " 
 
 speaker watched his great unruly audience, coaxing it, urging 
 it toward one or two statements which he wished them to hear. 
 The quickness with which he took advantage of any change in 
 the mood of his audience ; the aptness of his retorts, his jests, his 
 30 illustrations ; show how genuine was his self-possession, how 
 great his mastery of extemporaneous speaking. 
 
 2 There are boldness and skill in the way Beecher here used the 
 placards of his, enemies as an unanswerable argument against 
 
158 A HENRY WARD BEECHER. 
 
 and a voice : " New York mob."] Now, personally, 
 it is a matter of very little consequence to me whether 
 I speak here to-night or not. [Laughter and cheers.] 
 But, one thing is very certain, if you do permit me to 
 speak here to-night you will hear very plain talking. 5 
 [Applause and hisses.] You will not find a man 
 [interruption] you will not find me to be a man that 
 dared to speak about Great Britain three thousand 
 miles off, and then is afraid to speak to Great Britain 
 when he stands on her shores. [Immense applause 10 
 and hisses.] And if I do not mistake the tone and 
 temper of Englishmen, they had rather have a man 
 who opposes them in a manly way [applause from 
 all parts of the hall] than a sneak that agrees with 
 them in an unmanly way. [Applause and " Bravo ! "] 15 
 Now, if I can carry you with me by sound convictions, 
 I shall be immensely glad [applause] ; but if I can- 
 not carry you with me by facts and sound arguments, 
 I do not wish you to go with me at all ; and all that 
 I ask is simply FAIR PLAY. [Applause, and a voice : *o 
 "You shall have it too."] 
 
 Those of you who are kind enough to wish to 
 favor my speaking and you will observe that my 
 voice is slightly husky, from having spoken almost 
 every night in succession for some time past, those 2 5 
 who wish to hear me will do me the kindness sim- 
 ply to sit still, and to keep still ; and I and my 
 friends the Secessionists will make all the noise. 
 [Laughter.] 
 
 /^There are two dominant races in modern history 30 
 them, and roused in the audience a feeling that an effort had 
 rnade to trick 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 159 
 
 the Germanic and the Romanic races. 8 ^ The Germanic 
 races tend to personal liberty, to a sturdy individual- 
 ism, to civil and to political liberty. The Romanic 
 race tends to absolutism in government ; it is clan- 
 5 nish ; it loves chieftains ; it develops a people that 
 crave strong and showy governments to support and 
 plan for them. The Anglo-Saxon race belongs to the 
 great German family, and is a fair exponent of its 
 peculiarities. The Anglo-Saxon carries self-govern- 
 loment and self-development with him wherever he 
 goes. He has popular GOVERNMENT and popu- 
 lar INDUSTRY ; for the effects of a generous civil 
 
 3 In this speech Beecher first tried to win a hearing by making 
 his audience feel that he was undaunted, determined, sincere, ready 
 
 15 in speech, and by appealing to the innate love of all Englishmen 
 for fair play. Then, carefully avoiding any reference to the great 
 moral reasons why Englishmen should have supported the North, 
 and all the objections to the course of the North that must bring 
 exciting debate, he sought some interest of his audience to which 
 
 20 he could appeal with some certainty of a hearing. This he found 
 in the pocket-books of the manufacturers and the men employed 
 by them. Knowing that the men, at least, believed that the South 
 gave them a market for their goods, he devoted himself to showing 
 that a free South would give them a far greater market. Baldly 
 
 25 taking for his central idea the very opinion on which the opposition 
 to him most rested, he disposed of it before touching for a moment 
 on great moral reasons for supporting the North, and before tak- 
 ing up some of the objections to the course of the North that must 
 meet him. Wherever he spoke, Beecher selected with great care 
 
 30 the interest to which he wished to appeal. In Manchester he dis- 
 cussed the effect of slavery on manufacturing interests ; in Glas- 
 gow, where the Mockade runners were building and the laboring 
 classes were in a way bribed by their work to sympathize with the 
 South, he spoke of the degrading effect on labor of the growth of 
 slavery ; in Edinburgh, a literary center, he spoke of the philoso- 
 phy, the history of slavery. 
 
I6o HENRY WARD BEECHER. 
 
 liberty are not seen a whit more plain in the good 
 order, in the intelligence, and in the virtue of a self- 
 governing people, than in their amazing enterprise 
 and the scope and power of their creative industry. 
 The power to create riches is just as much a part of 5 
 the Anglo-Saxon virtues as the power to create good 
 order and social safety. The things required for 
 prosperous labor, prosperous manufactures^ and 
 prosperous commerce are three. First, liberty ; sec- 
 ond, liberty ; third, liberty. [Hear, hear !] Though I0 
 these are not merely the same liberty, as I shall show 
 you. First, there must be liberty to follow those laws 
 of business which experience has developed, without 
 imposts or restrictions or governmental intrusions. 
 Business simply wants to be let alone. [Hear, 15 
 hear !] Then, secondly, there must be liberty to 
 distribute and exchange products of industry in 
 any market without burdensome tariffs, without im- 
 posts, and without vexatious regulations. There must 
 be these two liberties liberty to create wealth, as the 20 ' 
 makers of it think best, according to the light and ex- 
 perience which business has given them ; and then 
 libertyjto. distribute what they have created without 
 unnecessary vexatious burdens. The comprehensive 
 law of the ideal industrial condition of the world is 25 
 free manufacture and free trade. [Hear, hear! A 
 voice : " The Morrill tariff." Another voice : " Mon- 
 roe."] I have said there were three elements of 
 liberty. The third is the necessity of an intelligent 
 and free race of customers. There must be freedom 30 
 among producers ; there must be freedom among the 
 distributors ; there must be freedom among the cus- 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 161 
 
 tomers. It may not have occurred to you that it 
 makes any difference what one's customers are, but it 
 does in all regular and prolonged business. The 
 condition of the customer determines how much he 
 5 will buy, determines of what sort he will buy. Poor 
 and ignorant people buy little and that of the poorest 
 kind. The richest and the intelligent, having the 
 more means to buy, buy the most, and always buy the 
 best. Here, then, are the three liberties : liberty of 
 
 10 the producer, liberty of the distributor, and liberty of 
 the consumer. The first two need no discussion ; 
 they have been long thoroughly and brilliantly illus- 
 trated by the political economists of Great Britain 
 and by her eminent statesmen ; but it seems to me 
 
 15 that enough attention has not been directed to the 
 third ; and, with-your patience, I will dwell upon that 
 for a moment, before proceeding to other topics. 
 
 It is a necessity of every manufacturing and com- 
 mercial people that their customers should be very 
 
 20 wealthy and intelligent. Let us put the subject before 
 you in the familiar light of your own local experience. 
 To whom do the tradesmen of Liverpool sell the most 
 goods at the highest profit ? To the ignorant and 
 poor, or to the educated and prosperous? [A voice : 
 
 25 " To the Southerners." Laughter.] The poor man 
 buys simply for his body ; he buys food, he buys 
 clothing, he buys fuel, he buys lodging. His rule is 
 to buy the least and the cheapest that he can. He 
 goes to the store as seldom as he can ; he brings away 
 
 30 as little as he can ; and he buys for the least he can. 
 [Much laughter.] tToverty_is_jiat-a- -misfortune to the 
 poor only who suffer it, but it is more or less a mis- 
 
162 HENRY WARD &EECHER. 
 
 fortune to all with whom he deals. On the other hand, 
 a man well off how is it with him? He buys in far 
 greater quantity. He can afford to do it ; he has the 
 money to pay for it. He buys in far greater variety, 
 because he seeks to gratify not merely physical wants, 5 
 but also mental wants. He buys for the satisfaction 
 of sentiment and taste, as well as of sense. He buys 
 silk, wool, flax, cotton ; he buys all metals iron, sil- 
 ver, gold, platinum ; in short he buys for all necessities, 
 and all substances. But that is not all. He buys a 10 
 better quality of goods. He buys richer silks, finer 
 cottons, higher grained wools. Now a rich silk means 
 so much skill and care of somebody's that has been 
 expended upon it to make it finer and richer ; and so 
 of cotton and so of wool. That is, the price of the 15 
 finer goods runs back to the very beginning, and re- 
 munerates the workman as well as the merchant. 
 Now, the whole laboring community is as much inter- 
 ested and profited as the mere merchant, in this buy- 
 ing and selling of the higher grades in the greater 20 
 varieties and quantities. The law of price is the skill ; 
 and the amount of skill expended in the work is as 
 much for the market as are the goods. A man comes 
 to market and says : " I have a pair of hands," and he 
 obtains the lowest wages. Another man comes and 25 
 says : " I have something more than a pair of hands ; 
 I have truth and fidelity." He gets a higher price. 
 Another man comes and says : " I have something 
 more ; I have hands, and strength, and fidelity, and 
 skill." He gets more than either of the others. The 30 
 next man comes and says : " I have got hands, and 
 strength, and skill, and fidelity ; but my hands work 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 163 
 
 more than that. They know how to create things for 
 the fancy, for the affections, for the moral sentiments "; 
 and he gets more than either of the others. The last 
 man comes and says : " I have all these qualities, and 
 
 5 have them so highly that it is a peculiar genius " ; and 
 genius carries the whole market and gets the highest 
 price. 4 [Loud applause.] So that both the workman 
 and the merchant are profited by having purchasers 
 that demand quality, variety, and quantity. Now, if 
 
 10 this be so in the town or the city, it can only be so 
 because it is a law. This is the specific development 
 of a general or universal law, and therefore we should 
 expect to find it as true of a nation as of a city like 
 Liverpool. I know that it is so, and you know that it 
 
 15 is true of all the world ; and it is just as important to 
 have customers educated, intelligent, moral, and rich 
 out of Liverpool as it is in Liverpool. [Applause.] 
 They are able to buy ; they want variety, they want 
 the very best ; and those are the customers you want. 
 
 20 That nation is the best customer that is freest, because 
 
 freedom works prosperity, industry, and wealth. 
 
 ( Great Britain, then, aside from moral considerations, 
 
 l ^has a direct commercial and pecuniary interest in the 
 
 Jliberty, civilization, and wealth of every nation on the 
 
 25 globe. [Loud applause.] You also have an interest 
 in this, because you are a moral and religious people. 
 [ u Oh, oh ! " Laughter and applause.] You desire it 
 from the highest motives ; and godliness is profitable 
 in all things, having the promise of the life that now is, 
 
 30 as well as of that which is to come ; but if there were 
 
 4 Note here the force and the clearness gained by specific illus- 
 tration of the general statement " The law of price is the skill/' etc 
 
1 64 HENRY WARD BEECHER. 
 
 no hereafter, and if man had no progress in this life, 
 and if there were no question of civilization at all, it 
 would be worth your while to protect civilization and 
 liberty, merely as a commercial speculation. To 
 evangelize has more than a moral and religious im- 5 
 port it comes back to temporal relations. Wherever 
 a nation that is crushed, cramped, degraded under 
 despotism is struggling to be free, you Leeds, Shef- 
 field, Manchester, Paisley all have an interest that that 
 nation should be free. When depressed and back- 10 
 ward people demand that they may have a chance to 
 rise Hungary, Italy, Poland it is a duty for human- 
 ity's sake, it is a duty for the highest moral motives, to 
 sympathize with them ; but besides all these there is a 
 material and an interested reason why you should 15 
 sympathize with them. Pounds and pence join with 
 conscience and with honor in this design. Now, Great 
 Britain's chief want is what ? 
 
 They have said that your chief want is cotton. I 
 deny it. Your chief want is consumers. [Applause 20 
 and hisses.] You have got skill, you have got capital, 
 and you have got machinery enough to manufacture 
 goods for the whole population of the globe. You could 
 turn out fourfold as much as you do, if you only had 
 the market to sell in. It is not so much the want, 2f 
 therefore, of fabric, though there may be a temporary 
 obstruction of it ; but the principal and increasing want 
 increasing from year to year is, where shall we find 
 men to buy what we can manufacture so fast ? [Inter- 
 ruption, and a voice, " The Morrill tariff," and a^-3t 
 plause.] Before the American war broke out, your ware- 
 houses were loaded with goods that you could not sell. 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 165 
 
 [Applause and hisses.] You had over-manufactured ; 
 what is the meaning of over-manufacturing but this : 
 that you had skill, capital, machinery, to create faster 
 than you had customers to take goods off your hands ? 
 5 And you know that rich as Great Britain is, vast as 
 are her manufactures, if she could have fourfold the 
 present demand, she could make fourfold riches to- 
 morrow ; and every political economist will tell you 
 that your want is not cotton primarily, but customers. 
 
 10 Therefore, the doctrine, how to make customers, is 
 a great deal more important to Great Britain than the 
 doctrine how to raise cotton. It is to that doctrine I 
 ask from you, business men, practical men, men of 
 fact, sagacious Englishmen to that point I ask a 
 
 15 moment's attention. [Shouts of " Oh, oh ! " hisses, 
 and applause.] There are no more continents to be 
 discovered. [Hear, hear !] The market of the future 
 must be found how ? There is very little hope of 
 any more demand being created by new fields. If 
 
 20 you are to have a better market there must be some 
 kind of process invented to make the old fields better. 
 [A voice, "Tell us something new," shouts of "Order," 
 and interruption.] Let us look at it, then. You 
 must civilize the world in order to make a better 
 
 25 class of purchasers. [Interruption.] If you were to 
 press Italy down again under the feet of despotism, 
 Italy, discouraged, could draw but very few supplies 
 from you. But give her liberty, kindle schools 
 throughout her valleys, spur her industry, make 
 
 3 treaties with her by which she can exchange her wine, 
 and her oil, and her silk for your manufactured goods ; 
 and for every effort that you make in that direction 
 
166 HENRY WARD BEECHER. 
 
 there will come back profit to you by increased traffic 
 with her. [Loud applause.] If Hungary asks to be 
 an unshackled nation if by freedom she will rise in 
 virtue and intelligence, then by freedom she will 
 acquire a more multifarious industry, which she will 5 
 be willing to exchange for your manufactures. Her 
 liberty is to be found where ? You will find it in the 
 Word of God, you will find it in the code of history ; 
 but you will also find it in the Price Current [Hear, 
 hear !J ; and every free nation, every civilized 10 
 people every people that rises from barbarism to 
 industry and intelligence, becomes a better customer. 
 A savage is a man of one story, and that one story 
 a cellar. When a man begins to be civilized he raises 
 another story. When you Christianize and civilize 15 
 the man, you put story upon story, for you develop 
 faculty after faculty ; and you have to supply every 
 story with your productions. The savage is a man 
 one story deep ; the civilized man is thirty stones 
 deep. [Applause.] Now, if you go to a lodging- 20 
 house, where there are three or four men, your sales 
 to them may, no doubt, be worth something ; but if 
 you go to a lodging-house like some of those which I 
 saw in Edinburgh, which seemed to contain about 
 twenty stories [" Oh, oh ! " and interruption], every 25 
 story of which is full, and all who occupy buy of you 
 which is the better customer, the man who is drawn 
 out, or the man who is pinched up? [Laughter.] 
 Now, there is in this a great and sound principle of 
 economy. ["Yah, yah!" from the passage outside 30 
 the hall, and loud laughter.] If the South should be 
 rendered independent [at this juncture mingled 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 167 
 
 cheering and hissing became immense ; half the 
 audience rose to their feet, waving hats and handker- 
 chiefs, and in every part of the hall there was the 
 greatest commotion and uproar.] You have had your 
 5 turn now ; now let me have mine again. [Loud ap- 
 plause and laughter.] It is a little inconvenient to 
 talk against the wind ; but after all, if you will just 
 keep good-natured I am not going to lose my tem- 
 per ; will you watch yours ? [Applause.] Besides 
 
 10 all that, it rests me, and gives me a chance, you know, 
 to get my breath. [Applause and hisses.] And I 
 think that the bark of those men is worse than their 
 bite. They do not mean any harm they don't know 
 any better. [Loud laughter, applause, hisses, and 
 
 15 continued uproar.] I was saying, when these responses 
 broke in, that it was worth our while to consider both 
 alternatives. What will be the result if this present 
 struggle shall eventuate in the separation of America, 
 and making the South [loud applause, hisses, hoot- 
 
 20 ing, and cries of " Bravo ! "] a slave territory exclu- 
 sively [cries of " No, no ! " and laughter] and the 
 North a free territory, what will be the final result ? 
 You will lay the foundation for carrying the slave 
 population clear through to the Pacific Ocean. This 
 
 25 is the first step. There is not a man that has been a 
 leader of the South any time within these twenty 
 years that has not had this for a plan. It was for 
 this that Texas was invaded, first by colonists, next 
 by marauders, until it was wrested from Mexico. It 
 
 30 was for this that they engaged in the Mexican War 
 itself, by which the vast territory reaching to the 
 Pacific was added to the Union. Never for a moment 
 

 1 68 HENRY WARD B EEC HER. 
 
 have they given up the plan of spreading the American 
 institutions, as they call them, straight through toward 
 the West, until the slave, who has washed his feet in 
 the Atlantic, shall be carried to wash them in the 
 Pacific. [Cries of " Question," and uproar.] There ! 5 
 I have got that statement out, and you cannot put it 
 back. [Laughter and applause.] Now, let us con- 
 sider the prospect. If the South becomes a slave 
 empire, what relation will it have to you as a customer ? 
 [A voice : " Or any other man." Laughter.] It 10 
 would be an empire of twelve millions of people. 
 Now, of these, eight millions are white, and four mil- 
 lions black. [A voice : " How many have you got ?" 
 Applause and laughter. Another voice : " Free your 
 own slaves ! "] Consider that one-third of the whole 15 
 are the miserably poor, unbuying blacks. [Cries of 
 " No, no ! " " Yes, yes ! " and interruption.] You do 
 not manufacture much for them. [Hisses, " Oh ! " 
 " No."] You have not got machinery coarse enough. 
 [Laughter, and " No."] Your labor is too skilled by 20 
 far to manufacture bagging and linsey-woolsey. [A 
 Southerner : " We are going to free them, every one."] 
 Then you and I agree exactly. [Laughter.] One 
 other third consists of a poor, unskilled, degraded 
 white population ; and the remaining one-third, which 25 
 is a large allowance, we will say, intelligent and rich. 
 Now here are twelve million of people, and only 
 one-third of them are customers that can afford to buy 
 the kind of goods that you bring to market. [Inter- 
 ruption and uproar.] My friends, I saw a man once, 30 
 who was a little late at a railway station, chase an 
 express train. He did not catch it. [Laughter.] If 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 169 
 
 you are going to stop this meeting, you have got to 
 stop it before I speak ; for after I have got the things 
 out, you may chase as long as you please you would 
 not catch them. [Laughter and interruption.] But 
 5 there is luck in leisure ; I'm going to take it easy. 
 [Laughter.] Two-thirds of the population of the 
 Southern States to-day are non-purchasers of English 
 goods. [A voice : " No, they are not ; " " No, no ! " 
 and uproar.] Now you must recollect another fact 
 
 10 namely, that this is going on clear through to the 
 Pacific Ocean ; and if by sympathy or help you estab- 
 lish a slave empire, you sagacious Britons [" Oh, 
 oh ! " and hooting] if you like it better, then, I will 
 leave the adjective out [laughter, Hear ! and ap- 
 
 15 plause] are busy in favoring the establishment of an 
 empire from ocean to ocean that should have fewest 
 customers and the largest non-buying population. 
 [Applause, " No, no ! " A voice : " I thought it was 
 the happy people that populated fastest."] 
 
 20 Now, what can England make for the poor white 
 population of such a future empire, and for her slave 
 population ? What carpets, what linens, what cottons 
 can you sell them? What machines, what looking- 
 glasses, what combs, what leather, what books, what 
 
 25 pictures, what engravings ? [A voice : " We'll sell 
 them ships."] You may sell ships to a few, but what 
 ships can you sell to two-thirds of the population of 
 poor whites and blacks ? [Applause.] A little bag- 
 ging and a little linsey-woolsey, a few whips and 
 
 30 manacles, are all that you can sell for the slave. 
 [Great applause and uproar.] This very day, in the 
 slave States of America there are eight millions out of 
 

 17 HENRY WARD BEECHER. 
 
 twelve millions that are not, and cannot be your custo- 
 mers from the very laws of trade. [A voice : " Then 
 how are they clothed ? " and interruption.]. . . 
 
 But I know that you say, you cannot help sympa- 
 thizing with a gallant people. [Hear, hear !] They 5 
 are the weaker people, the minority ; and you cannot 
 help going with the minority who are struggling for 
 their rights against the majority. Nothing could be 
 more generous, when a weak party stands for its own 
 legitimate rights against imperious pride and power, 10 
 than to sympathize with the weak. But who ever 
 sympathized with a weak thief, because three con- 
 stables had got hold of him ? [Hear, hear !] And 
 yet the one thief in three policemen's hands is the 
 weaker party. I suppose you would sympathize with 15 
 him. [Hear, hear ! laughter, and applause.] Why, 
 when that infamous king of Naples Bomba, was 
 driven into Gaeta by Garibaldi with his immortal 
 band of patriots, and Cavour sent against him the 
 army of Northern Italy, who was the weaker party 20 
 then ? The tyrant and his minions ; and the majority 
 was with the noble Italian patriots, struggling for 
 liberty. I never heard that Old England sent deputa- 
 tions to King Bomba, and yet his troops resisted 
 bravely there. [Laughter and interruption.] To-day 25 
 the majority of the people of Rome is with Italy. 
 Nothing but French bayonets keeps her from going 
 back to the kingdom of Italy, to which she belongs. 
 Do you sympathize with the minority in Rome or 
 the majority in Italy? 6 [A voice: "With Italy."] 30 
 
 5 Here Beecher, knowing that sympathy in England for the 
 Italian struggle for independence was strong, made a reductio 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH, ijl 
 
 To-day the South is the minority in America, and they 
 are righting for independence! For what? [Uproar. 
 A voice : " Three cheers for independence ! " and 
 hisses.] I could wish so much bravery had a better 
 5 cause, and that so much self-denial had been less 
 deluded ; that the poisonous and venomous doctrine 
 of State rights might have been kept aloof ; that so 
 many gallant spirits, such as Jackson, might still have 
 lived. [Great applause and loud cheers, again and 
 
 I0 again renewed.] The force of these facts, historical 
 and incontrovertible, cannot be broken, except by 
 diverting attention by an attack upon the North. It 
 is said that the North is fighting for Union, and not 
 for emancipation. The North is fighting for Union, 
 
 15 for that ensures emancipation. [Loud cheers, " Oh, 
 oh ! " " No, no ! " and cheers.] A great many men 
 say to ministers of the Gospel : "You pretend to be 
 preaching and working for the love of the people. 
 Why, you are all the time preaching for the sake of 
 
 20 the Church." What does the minister say? "It is 
 by means of the Church that we help the people," 
 and when men say that we are fighting for the Union, 
 I too say we are fighting for the Union. [Hear, hear ! 
 and a voice : " That's right."] But the motive defer- 
 
 25 mines the value ; and why are we fighting for the 
 Union ? Because we never shall forget the testimony 
 of our enemies. They have gone off declaring that the 
 Union in the hands of the North was fatal to slavery- 
 [Loud applause.] There is testimony in court for 
 
 30 you. [A voice : " See that," and laughter.] . . . 
 
 ad absurdum of the principle of his opponents by an illustration 
 of which he could speak without fear of hostile interruption. 
 
172 HENRY WARD BEECH EX. 
 
 In the first place I am ashamed to confess that such 
 was the thoughtlessness [interruption] such was 
 the stupor of the North [renewed interruption] 
 you will get a word at a time ; to-morrow will let 
 folks see what it is you don't want to hear that for 5 
 a period of twenty-five years she went to sleep, and 
 permitted herself to be drugged and poisoned with 
 the Southern prejudice against black men. [Applause 
 and uproar.] The evil was made worse, because, 
 when any object whatever has caused anger between 10 
 political parties, a political animosity arises against 
 that object, no matter how innocent in itself ; no 
 matter what were the original influences which ex- 
 cited the quarrel. Thus the colored man has been 
 the football between the two parties in the North, 15 
 and has suffered accordingly. I confess it to my 
 shame. But I am speaking now on my own ground, 
 for I began twenty-five years ago, with a small party, 
 to combat the unjust dislike of the colored man. 
 [Loud applause, dissension, and uproar. The inter- 20 
 ruption at this point became so violent that the friends 
 of Mr. Beecher throughout the hall rose to their feet, 
 waving hats and handkerchiefs, and renewing their 
 shouts and applause. The interruption lasted some 
 minutes.] Well, I have lived to see a total revolution 25 
 in the Northern feeling I stand here to bear solemn 
 witness of that. It is not my opinion ; it is my knowl- 
 edge. [Great uproar.] Those men who undertook 
 to stand up for the rights of all men black as well 
 as white have increased in number ; and now what 30 
 party in the North represents those men that resist 
 the evil prejudices of past years ? The Republicans 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 173 
 
 are that party. [Loud applause.] And who are 
 those men in the North that have oppressed the 
 negro ? They are the Peace Democrats ; and the prej- 
 udice for which in England you are attempting to pun- 
 5 ish me, is a prejudice raised by the men who have opposed 
 me all my life. These pro-slavery Democrats abuse 
 the negro. I defended him, and they mobbed me for 
 doing it. Oh, justice ! [Loud laughter, applause, 
 and hisses.] This is as if a man should commit an 
 
 10 assault, maim and wound a neighbor, and a surgeon 
 being called in should begin to dress his wounds, and 
 by and by a policeman should come and collar the 
 surgeon and haul him off to prison on account of 
 the wounds which he was healing. 
 
 15 Now, I told you I would not flinch from anything. 
 I arn going to read you some questions that were sent 
 after me from Glasgow, purporting to be from a work- 
 ingman. [Great interruption.] If those pro-slavery 
 interrupters think they will tire me out, they will do 
 
 20 more than eight millions in America could. [Applause 
 and renewed interruption.] I was reading a question 
 on your side too. " Is it not a fact that in most of 
 the Northern States laws exist precluding negroes 
 from equal civil and political rights with the whites? 
 
 25 That in the State of New York the negro has to be 
 the possessor of at least $250 worth of property to 
 entitle him to the privileges of a white citizen? That 
 in some of the Northern States the colored man, 
 whether bond or free, is by law excluded altogether, 
 
 30 and not suffered to enter the State limits, under 
 severe penalties ? and is not Mr. Lincoln's own State 
 one of them ? and in view of the fact that the 
 
174 HENRY WARD BEECHER. 
 
 twenty million dollars compensation which was 
 promised to Missouri in aid of emancipation was de- 
 feated in the last Congress (the strongest Republican 
 Congress that ever assembled), what has the North 
 done toward emancipation ? " Now, then, there's a 5 
 dose for you. [A voice : " Answer it."] And I will 
 address myself to the answering of it. And first, 
 the bill for emancipation in Missouri, to which this 
 money was denied, was a bill which was drawn by 
 what we call " log-rollers," who inserted in it an 10 
 enormously disproportioned price for the slaves. 
 The Republicans offered to give them ten million 
 dollars for the slaves in Missouri, and they outvoted 
 it because they could not get twelve million dollars. 
 Already half the slave population had been "run "15 
 down South, and yet they came up to Congress to 
 get twelve million dollars for what was not worth 
 ten millions, nor even eight millions. Now as to 
 those States that had passed " black " laws, as we 
 call them ; they are filled with Southern emigrants. 20 
 The southern parts of Ohio, the southern part 
 of Indiana, where I myself lived for years, and 
 which I knew like a book, the southern part of 
 Illinois, where Mr. Lincoln lives [great uproar] 
 these parts are largely settled by emigrants from 25 
 Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Virginia, and North 
 Carolina, and it was their vote, or the Northern 
 votes pandering for political reasons to theirs, 
 that passed in those States the infamous " black " 
 laws; and the Republicans in these States have a 3 
 record, :/can and white, as having opposed these 
 aws in every instance as " infamous." Now as to 
 
LIVERPOOL SPZECft. 175 
 
 the State of New York ; it is asked whether a negro 
 is not obliged to have a certain freehold property, or 
 a certain amount of property, before he can vote. It 
 is so still in North Carolina and Rhode Island for 
 5 white folks it is so in New York State. [Mr. Beecher's 
 voice slightly failed him here, and he was interrupted 
 by a person who tried to imitate him. Cries of 
 " Shame ! " and " Turn him out ! '*] I am not under- 
 taking to say that these faults of the North, which 
 
 10 were brought upon them by the bad example and 
 influence of the South, are all cured ; but I do say 
 that they are in process of cure which promises, if 
 unimpeded by foreign influence, to make all such 
 odious distinctions vanish. 
 
 15 There is another fact that I wish to allude to not \ 
 for the sake of reproach or blame, but by way of 
 claiming your more lenient consideration and that 
 is, that slavery was entailed upon us by your action/ 
 [Hear, hear !] Against the earnest protests of the 
 
 20 colonists the then government of Great Britain I 
 will concede not knowing what were the mischiefs 
 ignorantly, but in point of fact, forced slave traffic on 
 the unwilling colonists. [Great uproar, in the midst 
 of which one individual was lifted up and carried out 
 
 25 of the room amid cheers and hisses.] 
 
 The CHAIRMAN : If you would only sit down no 
 disturbance would take place. 
 
 6 The similarity of this attempt of Mr. Beecher's to make his 
 audience partly responsible for an evil condition of affairs in 
 America to Lord Chatham's effort, p. 7, to shame his hearers by 
 pointing out the source of the spirit of resistance of the colonists, 
 should be noticed. 
 
176 HENRY WARD BEECHER. 
 
 The disturbance having subsided, 
 
 MR. BEECHER said : I was going to ask you, sup- 
 pose a child is born with hereditary disease ; suppose 
 this disease was entailed upon him by parents who 
 had contracted it by their own misconduct, would it 5 
 be fair that those parents that had brought into the 
 world the diseased child, should rail at the child 
 because it was diseased ? [ u No, no ! "] Would not 
 the child have a right to turn round and say : " Father, 
 it was your fault that I had it, and you ought to beio 
 pleased to be patient with my deficiencies." [Applause 
 and hisses, and cries of u Order ! " Great interruption 
 and great disturbance here took place on the right of 
 the platform ; and the chairman said that if the per- 
 sons around the unfortunate individual who had caused 15 
 the disturbance would allow him to speak alone, but 
 not assist him in making the disturbance, it might 
 soon be put an end to. The interruption continued 
 until another person was carried out of the hall.] Mr. 
 Beecher continued : I do not ask that you should 20 
 justify slavery in us, because it was wrong in you two 
 hundred years ago ; but having ignorantly been the 
 means of fixing it upon us, now that we are struggling 
 with mortal struggles to free ourselves from it, we 
 have a right to your tolerance, your patience, and 25 
 charitable constructions. 
 
 No man can unveil the future ; no man can tell 
 what revolutions are about to break upon the world ; 
 no man can tell what destiny belongs to France, nor 
 to any of the European powers ; but one thing is 30 
 certain, that in the exigencies of the future there will 
 be combinations and recombinations, and that those 
 
LIVERPOOL SPEECH. 177 
 
 nations that are of the same faith, the same blood, 
 and the same substantial interests, ought not to be 
 alienated from each other, but ought to stand to- 
 gether. [Immense cheering and hisses.] I do not 
 5 say that you ought not to be in the most friendly 
 alliance with France or with Germany ; but I do say 
 that your own children, the offspring of England, ought 
 to be nearer to you than any people of strange tongue. 
 [A voice : " Degenerate sons," applause and hisses ; 
 
 10 another voice : " What about the Trent? "] If there 
 had been any feelings of bitterness in America, let 
 me tell you that they had been excited, rightly or 
 wrongly, under the impression that Great Britain was 
 going to intervene between us and our own lawful 
 
 15 struggle. [A voice : " No ! " and applause.] With 
 the evidence that there is no such intention all bitter 
 feelings will pass away. [Applause.] We do not 
 agree with the recent doctrine of neutrality as a ques- 
 tion of law. But it is past, and we are not disposed 
 
 20 to raise that question. We accept it now as a fact, 
 and we say that the utterance of Lord Russell at 
 Blairgowrie [Applause, hisses, and a voice : " What 
 about Lord Brougham ? "] together with the decla- 
 ration of the government in stopping war-steamers 
 
 25 here [Great uproar, and applause] has gone far 
 toward quieting every fear and removing every appre- 
 hension from our minds. [Uproar and shouts of 
 applause.] And now in the future it is the work of 
 every good man and patriot not to create divisions, 
 
 30 but to do the things that will make for peace. [" Oh, 
 oh ! " and- laughter.] On our part it shall be done. 
 [Applause and hisses, and " No, no ! "] On your 
 
I7 HENRY WARQ BEECHER. 
 
 part it ought to be done ; and when in any of the 
 convulsions that come upon the world, Great Britain 
 finds herself struggling single-handed against the gi- 
 gantic powers that spread oppression and darkness 
 [Applause, hisses, and uproar] there ought to 5 
 be such cordiality that she can turn and say to her 
 first-born and most illustrious child, " Come ! " 
 [Hear, hear ! applause, tremendous cheers, and up- 
 roar.] I will not 'say that England cannot again, as 
 hitherto, single-handed manage any power [applause 10 
 and uproar] but I will say that England and America 
 together for religion and liberty [A voice : " Soap, 
 soap," uproar, and great applause] are a match for 
 thejyorld. [Applause ; a voice : " They don't want 
 any more soft soap."] Now, gentlemen and ladies 15 
 [A voice : " Sam Slick " ; and another voice : " Ladies 
 and gentlemen, if you please "] when I came I was 
 asked whether I would answer questions, and I very 
 readily consented to do so, as I had in other places ; 
 but I will tell you it was because I expected to have 20 
 the opportunity of speaking with some sort of ease 
 and quiet. [A voice : " So you have."] I have for 
 an hour and a half spoken against a storm [Hear, 
 hear !] and you yourselves are witnesses that, by 
 the interruption, I have been obliged to strive with 25 
 my voice, so that I no longer have the power to con- 
 trol this assembly. [Applause.] And although I am 
 in spirit perfectly willing to answer any question, and 
 more than glad of the chance, yet I am by this very 
 unnecessary opposition to-night incapacitated physi-30 
 cally from doing it. Ladies and gentlemen, I bid 
 you good-evening. 
 
Born 1800. Died 1859. 
 
 SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, 
 FEBRUARY 5, 1841. * 
 
 [On the 2gth of January, 1841, Mr. Sergeant Talfourd obtained 
 leave to bring in a bill to extend the term of copyright in a book 
 to sixty years, reckoned from the death of the writer. "In 1814, 
 the term during which the right of printing a book was to con- 
 tinue private property had been fixed at twenty-eight years from 
 the date of publication. The shortness of this term had always 
 been regarded as a grievance by authors and by publishers, and 
 was beginning to be so regarded by the world at large. ' The 
 family of Sir Walter Scott/ says Miss Martineau in her ' History 
 of England,' ' stripped by his great losses, might be supposed to 
 have an honorable provision in his splendid array of works, which 
 the world was still buying as eagerly as ever ; but the copyright 
 of ' ' Waverley " was about to expire ; and there was no one who 
 could not see the injustice of transferring to the public a property 
 so evidently sacred as theirs.' 
 
 " An arrangement which bore hardly upon the children of the 
 great Scotchman, whose writings had been popular and profitable 
 from the first, was nothing less than cruel in the case of authors 
 who, after fighting a lifelong battle against the insensibility of 
 
 1 What should, perhaps, most be noted in this speech are the 
 careful introduction, the probative effect of the steadily concrete 
 treatment of the case, and the work in refutation, both special and 
 general. Indeed, this speech may well be analyzed with a class 
 that is studying pp. 109-125 of the " Principles of Argumenta- 
 tion," Ginn & Co. 
 
180 LORD MACAULAY. 
 
 their countrymen, had ended by creating a taste for their own 
 works. Wordsworth's poetry was at length being freely bought 
 by a generation which he himself had educated to enjoy it ; but, 
 as things then stood, his death would at once rob his heirs of all 
 share in the produce of the ' Sonnets ' and the ' Ode to Immor- 
 tality,' and would leave them to console themselves as they best 
 might with the copyright of the ' Prelude/ Sou they (firmly pos- 
 sessed, as he was, with the notion that posterity would set the 
 highest value upon those among his productions which living men 
 were the least disposed to purchase) had given it to be understood 
 that, in the existing state of the law, he should undertake no more 
 works of research like the ' History of Brazil,' and no more epic 
 poems on the scale of ' Madoc ' and ' Roderick.' But there was 
 nothing which so effectually stirred the sympathies of men in 
 power, and persuaded their reason, as a petition presented to the 
 House of Commons by ' Thomas Carlyle, a writer of books ' ; 
 which began by humbly showing ' That your petitioner has written 
 certain books, being incited thereto by certain innocent and laud- 
 able considerations ' ; which proceeded to urge ' that this his 
 labor .has found hitherto, in money or money's worth, small rec- 
 ompense or none ; that he is by no means sure of its ever find- 
 ing recompense ; but thinks that, .if so, it will be at a distant 
 time, when he, the laborer, will probably no longer be in need of 
 money, and those dear to him will still be in need of it'; and 
 which ended by a prayer to the House to forbid * extraneous per- 
 sons, entirely unconcerned in this adventure of his, to steal from 
 him his small winnings, for a space of sixty years at the shortest. 
 After sixty years, unless your honorable House provide otherwise, 
 they may begin to steal.' 
 
 '' Macaulay . . . induced a thin House to reject the bill by a few 
 votes. [45 to 38.] Talfourd, in the bitterness of his soul, ex- 
 claimed that Literature's own familiar friend, in whom she trusted, 
 and who had eaten of her bread, had lifted up his. heel against 
 her. . . But none can refuse a tribute of respect to a man who, on 
 high grounds of public expediency, thought himself bound to em- 
 ploy all that he possessed of energy and ability on the task of 
 preventing himself from being placed in a position to found a 
 fortune, which by the year 1919, might well have ranked among 
 
COPYRIGHT. 181 
 
 the largest funded estates in the country." Life and Letters 
 of Lord Macau/ay. G. O. Trevelyan ; vol. ii. pp. 119-121. 
 Harper & Bros., 1896.] 
 
 THOUGH, Sir, it is in some sense agreeable to ap- 
 proach a subject with which political animosities have 
 nothing to do, I offer myself to your notice with some 
 reluctance. J^is painful to me to take a course which 
 5 may possibly be misunderstood or misrepresented as 
 unfriendly to the interests of literature and literary 
 men. It is painful to me, I will addpto oppose my 
 honorable and learned friend on a question which he 
 has taken up from the purest motives, and which he 
 
 10 regards with a parental interest. These feelings have 
 hitherto kept me silent when the law of copyright has 
 been under discussion. But as I am, on full con- 
 sideration, satisfied that the measure before us will, if 
 adopted^ inflict grievous injury on the public, without 
 
 15 conferring any compensating advantage on men of 
 
 ^ letters, I think it my duty to avow that opinion and 
 to defend it. 
 
 ^ The first thing to be done, Sir, is to settle on what 
 principles the question is to be argued. Are we free 
 
 20 to legislate for the public good, or are we not? Is 
 this a question of expediency, or is it a question o 
 right ? cMany of those who have written and petitioned 
 against the existing state of things treat the question 
 as one of ight. \/jThe law of nature, according to them, 
 
 25 gives to every man a sacred and indefeasible property 
 in his own ideas, in the fruits of his own reason and 
 imagination. The'legislature has indeed the power to 
 take away this property, just as it has the power to 
 pass an act of attainder for cutting off an innocent 
 
l82 LORD MACAULAY. 
 
 man's head without a trial. But, as such an act of 
 attainder would be legal murder, so would an act in- 
 vading the right of an author to his copy be, accord- 
 ing to these gentlemen, legal robbery. 
 
 Now, Sir, if this be so, let justice be done, cost 5 
 what it may. I am not prepared, like my honorable 
 and learned friend, to agree to a compromise between 
 right and expediency, and to commit an injustice for 
 the public convenience. But I must say, that his 
 theory soars far beyond the reach of my faculties. '! It 10 
 is not necessary to go, on the present occasion, into a 
 metaphysical inquiry about the origin of the right of 
 property j and certainly nothing but the strongest ne- 
 cessity would lead me to discuss a subject so likely to 
 be distasteful to the House. I agree, I own, with 15 
 Paley in thinking that property is the creature of the 
 law, and that the law which creates property can be 
 defended only on this ground, that it is a law benefi- 
 cial to mankind. But it is unnecessary to debate that 
 point. For, even if I believed in a natural right of 20 
 property, independent of utility and anterior to legisla- 
 tion, I should still deny that this right could survive 
 the original proprietor Jb Few, I apprehend, even of 
 those who have studied in the most mystical and sen- 
 timental schools of moral philosophy, will be disposed 25 
 to maintain that there is a natural law of succession 
 older and of higher authority than any human code. 
 If there be, it is quite certain that we have abuses to 
 reform much more serious than any connected with 
 the question of copyright. For this natural law can 30 
 be only one ; and the modes of succession in the 
 Queen's dominions are twenty. To go no further than 
 
COPYRIGHT. 183 
 
 England, land generally descends to the eldest son. 
 In Kent the sons share and share alike. In many 
 districts the youngest takes the whole. Formerly a 
 portion of a man's personal property was secured to 
 5 his family ; and it was only of the residue that he 
 could dispose by will. Now, he can dispose of the 
 whole by will ; but you limited his power, a few years 
 ago, by enacting that the will should not be valid un- 
 less there were two witnesses. If a man dies intestate 
 
 10 his personal property generally goes according to the 
 statute of distributions ; but there are local customs 
 which modify that statute. Now which of all these 
 systems is conformed to the eternal standard of right ? 
 Is it primogeniture, or gavelkind, 2 or borough Eng- 
 
 15 lish ? 3 Are wills jure divino? Are the two witnesses 
 jure divino ? Might not the pars rationabilis of our old 
 law have a fair claim to be regarded as of celestial 
 institution ? Was the statute of distributions enacted 
 in Heaven long before it was adopted by Parliament ? 
 
 20 Or is it to Custom of York, or tp Custom of London 
 that this pre-eminence belongs ? A Surely, Sir, even those 
 who hold that there is a natural right of property 
 must admit that rules prescribing the manner in 
 which the effects of deceased persons shall be distrib- 
 
 25 uted are purely arbitrary, and originate altogether in 
 the^ will of the legislature. If so, Sir, there is no con- 
 troversy between my honorable and learned friend 
 and myself as to the principles on which this question 
 is to be argued. For the existing law gives an author 
 
 30 2 Inheritance by afi the sons together. 
 
 3 "Descent to the youngest son instead of the eldest, or, if the 
 owner leaves no son, to the youngest brother." Century 
 
184 LORD MACAULAY. 
 
 copyright during his natural life ; nor do I propose to 
 invade that privilege, which I should, on the contrary, 
 be prepared to defend strenuously against any as- 
 
 , sailant. The only point in issue between us is, how 
 long after an author's death the State shall recognize 5 
 
 " a copyright in his representatives and assigns ; and it 
 can, I think, hardly be disputed by any rational man 
 that this is a point which the legislature is free to de- 
 termine in the way which may appear to be most con- 
 ducive to the general good. 10 
 
 We may now, therefore, I think, descend from 
 these high regions, where we are in danger of being 
 lost in the clouds, to firm ground and clear light. 
 Let us look at this question like legislators, and after 
 fairly balancing conveniences and inconveniences, 15 
 pronounce between the existing law of copyright and 
 the law now proposed to us. The question of copy- 
 right, Sir, like most questions of civil prudence, is 
 neither black nor white, but gray. The system of 
 copyright has great advantages and great disadvan- 20 
 tages ; and it is our business to ascertain what these 
 are, and then to make an arrangement imder which 
 the advantages may be as far as possible secured, and 
 the disadvantages as far as possible excluded. The 
 charge which I bring against my honorable and 25 
 learned friend's bill is this, that it leaves the advan- 
 tages nearly what they are at present, and increases 
 the disadvantages at least fourfold. 
 
 The advantages arising from a system of copyright 
 are obvious. It is desirable that we should have a 30 
 supply of good books : we cannot have such a supply 
 Unless, men o.f letters are liberally remunerated ; and 
 
COPYRIGHT. 185 
 
 the least objectionable way of remunerating them is 
 by means of cqrjyright. You cannot depend for lite- 
 rary instruction and amusement on the leisure of men 
 occupied in the pursuits of active life. Such men may 
 5 occasionally produce compositions of great merit. But 
 you must not look to such men for works which re- 
 quire deep meditation and long research. v -Works of 
 that kind you can expect only from persons who 
 make literature the business of their lives. Of these 
 
 10 persons few will be found among the rich and the 
 noble. The rich and the noble are not impelled to 
 intellectual exertion by necessity. They may be im- 
 pelled to intellectual exertion by the desire of distin- 
 guishing themselves, or by the desire of benefiting the 
 
 15 community. But it is generally within these walls 
 that they seek to signalize themselves and to serve their 
 fellow-creatures. Both their ambition and their public 
 spirit, in a country like this, naturally take a political 
 turn. It is then on men whose profession is litera- 
 
 2oture, and whose private means are not ample, that 
 
 you must rely for a supply of valuable books. Such 
 
 men must be remunerated for their literary labor. 
 
 / And there are only two ways in which they can be 
 
 I j remunerated. One of those ways is patronage ; the 
 
 25 other is copyright. 
 
 There have been times in which men of letters 
 looked, not to the public, but to the government, or 
 to a few great men, for the reward of their exertions. 
 It was thus in the time of Maecenas and Pollio 4 at 
 
 30 4 Caius Asinius Pollio. Born about 76 B. c. Died 6 A. D. 
 Politician, commander, author. He was a patron of Vergil and 
 Horace. Century Diet. 
 
1 86 LORD MA CAUL AY. 
 
 Rome, of the Medici at Florence, of Lewis the Four- 
 teenth in France, of Lord Halifax 5 and Lord Oxford 6 
 in this country. Now, Sir, I well know that there 
 are cases in which it is fit and graceful, nay, in which 
 it is a sacred duty to reward the merits or to relieve 5 
 the distresses of men of genius by the exercise of this 
 species of liberality. But these cases are exceptions. 
 I can conceive no system more fatal to the integrity 
 and independence of literary men than one under 
 which they should be taught to look for their daily 10 
 bread to the favor of ministers and nobles. I can 
 conceive no system more certain to turn those minds 
 which are formed by nature to be the blessings and 
 ornaments of our species into public scandals and 
 pests. 15 
 
 ^We have, then, only one resource left. We must 
 betake ourselves to copyright, be the inconveniences 
 of copyright what they may. Those inconveniences, 
 in truth, are neither few nor small. Copyright is mo- 
 nopoly, and produces all the effects which the general 20 
 voice of mankind attributes to monopoly. My honor- 
 able and learned friend talks very contemptuously of 
 those who are led away by the theory that monopoly 
 
 5 Charles Montague. Born 1661. Died 1715. "Statesman, 
 financier, and poet. Royal Society, 1695-98. Collaborator of 25 
 Prior in the ' City Mouse and Country Mouse ' (1687)." Century 
 Diet. 
 
 6 Robert Harley. Born 1661. Died 1724. "Statesman. 
 He left a valuable collection of MSS., increased by his son and 
 eventually acquired by the government for the British Museum. 30 
 A selection of rare pamphlets from his library was published 
 under the title of the Harleian Miscellany, 1744-46." Century 
 
COPYRIGHT. 187 
 
 makes things dear. That monopoly makes things 
 dear is certainly a theory, as all the great truths which 
 have been established by the experience of all ages 
 and nations, and which are taken for granted in all 
 5 reasonings, may be said to be theories. It is a theory 
 in the same sense in which it is a theory that day 
 and night follow each other, that lead is heavier than 
 water, that bread nourishes, that arsenic poisons, that 
 alcohol intoxicates. If, as my honorable and learned 
 
 10 friend seems to think, the whole world is in the wrong 
 on this point, if the real effect of monopoly is to make 
 articles gobd and cheap, why does he stop short in- 
 his career of change ? 7 Why does he limit the opera- 
 tion of so salutary a principle to sixty years ? Why 
 
 15 does he consent to anything short of a perpetuity ? 
 He told us that in consenting to anything short of a 
 perpetuity he was making a compromise between ex- 
 treme n^l^jjid^^^edjejicy. But if his opinion about 
 monopoly be correct, extreme right and expediency 
 
 20 would coincide. Or rather why should we not restore 
 the monopoly of the East India trade to the East 
 India Company ? Why should we not revive all those 
 old monopolies which, in Elizabeth's reign, galled our 
 fathers so severely that, maddened by intolerable 
 
 25 wrong, they opposed to their sovereign a resistance 
 before which her haughty spirit quailed for the first 
 and for the last time? Was it the cheapness and ex- 
 cellence of commodities that then so violently stirred 
 the indignation of the English people. I believe, Sir, 
 
 30 that I may safely take it for granted that the effect of 
 
 1 Note the skillful use of the reductio ad absurdum in this 
 paragraph. 
 
1 88 LORD MACAULAY.. 
 
 monopoly generally is to make articles scarce, to make 
 them dear, and to make them bad. And I may with 
 equal safety challenge my honorable friend to find 
 out any distinction between copyright and other privi- 
 leges of the same kind ; any reason why a monopoly 5 
 of books should produce an effect directly the reverse 
 of that which was produced by the East India Com- 
 pany's monopoly of tea, or by Lord Essex's monopoly 
 of sweet wines. Thus, then, stands the case. It is 
 good that authors should be mTiU nprat ^ ; and the 10 
 least exceptionable way of .remunerating them is by a 
 monopoly. Yet monopoly is an evil. For the sake 
 of the good we must submit to the evil ; but the evil 
 ought not to last a day longer than is necessary for 
 the purpose of securing the good. 15 
 
 Now, I will not affirm, that the existing law is per- 
 fect, that it exactly hits the point at which the mo- 
 nopoly ought to cease ; but this I confidently say, 
 that the existing law is very much nearer that 
 point than the law proposed by my honorable and 20 
 learned friend. For consider this ;(the evil effects of 
 the monopoly are proportioned to the length of its 
 duration. But the good effects for the sake of which 
 we bear the evil effects are by no means propor- 
 tioned to the length of its duration. A monopoly of 25 
 sixty years produces twice as much evil as a monopoly 
 of thirty years, and thrice as much evil as a mo- 
 nopoly of twenty years. But it is by no means the fact 
 that a posthumous monopoly of sixty years gives to an 
 author thrice as much pleasure and thrice as strong a 30 
 motive as a posthumous monopoly of twenty years. 
 On the contrary, the difference is so small as to be 
 
COPYRIGHT. 189 
 
 hardly perceptible. We all know how faintly we are 
 affected by the prospect of very distant advantages, 
 even when they are advantages which we may 
 reasonably hope that we shall ourselves enjoy. But 
 5 an advantage that is to be enjoyed more than half a 
 century after we are dead, by somebody, we know not 
 by whom, perhaps by somebody unborn, by somebody 
 utterly unconnected with us, is really no motive at all 
 to action. It is very probable, that in the course of 
 
 10 some generations, land in the unexplored and un- 
 mapped heart of the Australasian continent will be 
 very valuable. But there is none of us who would lay 
 down five pounds for a whole province in the heart of 
 the Australasian continent. We know, that neither 
 
 15 we, nor anybody for whom we care, will ever receive a 
 farthing of rent from such a province. And a man is 
 very little moved by the thought that in the year 2000 
 or 2100, somebody who claims through him will em- 
 ploy more shepherds than Prince Esterhazy, 8 and will 
 
 20 have the finest house and gallery of pictures at Vic- 
 toria or Sydney. Now, this is the sort of boon which 
 my honorable and learned friend holds out to authors. 
 Considered as a boon to them, it is a mere nullity ; 
 but, considered as an impost on the public, it is no 
 
 25 nullity, but a veryjseripus and pmeious reality. I 
 will take an example. Dr. Johnson died fifty-six years 
 ago w If the law were what my honorable and learned 
 friend wishes to make it, somebody would now have 
 
 8 This apparently refers to Prince Nikolaus von Esterhazy, 
 30 " a Hungarian magnate, noted as a patron of the arts and 
 sciences." Born 1765. Died, 1833. H* 5 son was ambassador 
 a.t London, 1815-18 and 18^0-38. Century Diet, 
 
1 9 LORD MA CA ULA Y. 
 
 the monopoly of Dr. Johnson's works. Who that 
 somebody would be it is impossible to say ; but we 
 may venture to guess. I guess, then, that it would 
 have been some bookseller, who was the assign of 
 another bookseller, who was the grandson of a third 5 
 bookseller, who had bought the copyright from Black 
 Frank, the doctor's servant and residuary legatee, in 
 1785 or 1786. Now, would the knowledge that this 
 copyright would exist in 1841 have been a source of 
 gratification to Johnson ? Would it have stimulated 10 
 his exertions ? Would it have once drawn him out of 
 his bed before noon ? Would it have once cheered 
 him under a fit of the spleen ? Would it have in- 
 duced him to give us one more allegory, one more life 
 of a poet, one more imitation of Juvenal ? I firmly be- 15 
 lieve not. I firmly believe that a hundred years ago, 
 when he was writing our debates for the Gentleman's 
 Magazine, he would very much rather have had two- 
 pence to buy a plate of shin of beef at a cook's shop 
 underground. Considered as a reward to him, the differ- 20 
 ence between a twenty years' term and a sixty years' term 
 of posthumous copyright would have been nothing or 
 next to nothing. But is the difference nothing to us ? 
 I can buy " Rasselas " for sixpence ; I might have had 
 to give five shillings for it. I can buy the Dictionary, 25 
 the entire genuine Dictionary, for two guineas, per- 
 haps for less ; I might have had to give five or six 
 guineas for it. Do I grudge this to a man like Dr. 
 Johnson ? Not at all. Show me that the prospect of 
 this boon roused him to any vigorous effort, or sus- 30 
 tained his spirits under depressing circumstances, and 
 I am quite willing to pay the price of such an object^ 
 
copy RIGHT. 191 
 
 heavy as that price is. Bat what I do complain of is 
 that my circumstances are to be worse, and Johnson's 
 none the better ; that I am to give five pounds for 
 what to' him was not worth a farthing. 
 5 The principle of copyright is this. It is a tax on 
 readers for the purposejDJ jiving_ .a ,_ b^punty^to^jvriter^ 
 The tax is an exceedingly bad one ; it is a tax on one of 
 the most innocent and most salutary of human pleas- 
 ures ; and never let us forget, that a tax on innocent 
 
 10 pleasures is a premium on vicious pleasures. I admit, 
 however, the necessity of giving a bounty to genius and 
 learning. In order to give such a bounty, I willingly 
 submit even to this severe and burdensome tax. Nay, 
 I am ready to increase the tax, if it can be shown that 
 
 15 by so doing I should proportionally increase the bounty. 
 My complaint is, that my honorable and learned friend 
 doubles, triples, quadruples the tax, and makes scarcely 
 any perceptible addition to the bounty. Why, Sir, 
 what is the additional amount of taxation which would 
 
 20 have been levied on the public for Dr. Johnson's 
 works alone, if my honorable and learned friend's bill 
 had been the law of the land ? I have not data suffi- 
 cient to form an opinion. But I am confident that 
 the taxation on his Dictionary alone would have 
 
 25 amounted to many thousands of pounds. In reckon- 
 ing the whole additional sum which the holders of his 
 copyrights would have taken out of the pockets of 
 the public during the last half century at twenty 
 thousand pounds, I feel satisfied that I very greatly 
 
 30 underrate it. Now, I again say that I think it but 
 fair that we should pay twenty thousand pounds in 
 consideration of twenty thousand pounds' worth of 
 
192 LORD MACAULAY. 
 
 pleasure and encouragement received by Dr. Johnson. 
 But I think it very hard that we should pay twenty 
 thousand pounds for what he would not have valued 
 at five shillings. 
 
 My honorable and learned friend dwells on the 5 
 claims of the posterity of great writers. Undoubtedly, 
 Sir, it would be very pleasing to see a descendant 
 of Shakespeare living in opulence on the fruits of 
 his great ancestor's genius. A house maintained 
 in splendor by such a patrimony would be a more 10 
 interesting and striking object than Blenheim is to us, 
 or than Strathfieldsaye will be to our children. But, 
 unhappily, it is scarcely possible that, under any 
 system, such a thing can come to pass. My honor- 
 able and learned friend does not propose that copy- 15 
 right shall descend to the eldest son, or shall be 
 bound up by irrevocable entail. It is to be merely 
 personal property. It is therefore highly improbable 
 that it will descend during sixty years or half that 
 term from parent to child. The chance is that more 20 
 people than one will have an interest in it. They will 
 in all probability sell it and divide the proceeds. The 
 price which a bookseller will give for it will bear no 
 proportion to the sum which he will afterward draw 
 from the public, if his speculation proves successful. 25 
 He will give little, if anything, more for a term of 
 sixty years than for a term of thirty or five-and- 
 twenty. The present value of a distant advantage is 
 always small ; but when there is great room to doubt 
 whether a distant advantage will be any advantage at 30 
 all, the present value sinks to almost nothing. Such 
 is the inconstancy of the public taste that no sensible 
 
COPy RIGHT. 193 
 
 man will venture to pronounce, with confidence, what 
 the sale of any book published in our days will be in 
 the years between 1890 and 1900. The whole fashion 
 of thinking and writing has often undergone a change 
 5 in a much shorter period than that to which my 
 honorable and learned friend would extend posthu- 
 mous copyright. What would have been considered 
 the best literary property in the earlier part of Charles 
 the Second's reign ? I imagine Cowley's poems. 
 
 10 Overleap sixty years, and you are in the generation 
 of which Pope asked, " Who now reads Cowley ? " 
 What works were ever expected with more impatience 
 by the public than those of Lord Bolingbroke, which 
 appeared, I think, in 1754. In 1814, no bookseller 
 
 15 would have thanked you for the copyright of them 
 all, if you had offered it to him for nothing. What 
 would Paternoster Row give now for the copyright of 
 Hayley's " Triumphs of Temper," 9 so much admired 
 
 9 Born 1745. Died 1820. " Hay ley made more than one 
 
 20 attempt to succeed as a dramatic author, but first won fame by his 
 
 poetical * Essays on Painting, History, and Epic Poetry ' and by 
 
 his poem the ' Triumphs of Temper/ The success of these poems 
 
 was partly attributable to the general dearth of poetic talent at the 
 
 time, but they had also certain external qualities fitted to secure 
 
 25 for them at least a temporary popularity ; and his notes to his 
 
 poetical essays also displayed very extensive reading, and exerted 
 
 considerable influence in directing attention in England to the 
 
 literature of Italy and Spain. On the death of Warton, Hayley 
 
 was offered the laureateship, but declined it. The estimation in 
 
 30 which he was held, even during his lifetime, depended perhaps 
 
 more upon his acquirements and widely cultivated tastes and his 
 
 position in society than on his achievements in literature." Ency. 
 
 Brit. 
 
194 LORD MACAULAY. 
 
 within the memory of many people still living ? I 
 say, therefore, that, from the very nature of literary 
 property, it will almost always pass from an author's 
 family ; and I say, that the price given for it to the 
 family will bear a very small proportion to the tax 5 
 which the purchaser, if his speculation turns out well, 
 will in the course of a long series of years levy on the 
 public. 
 
 If, Sir, I wished to find a strong and perfect illustra- 
 tion of the effects which I anticipate from long copy- 10 
 right, I should select, my honorable and learned friend 
 will be surprised, I should select the case of Milton's 
 granddaughter. As often as this bill has been under 
 discussion, the fate of Milton's granddaughter has 
 been brought forward by the advocates of monopoly. 15 
 My honorable and learned friend has repeatedly told 
 the story with great eloquence and effect. He has 
 dilated on the sufferings, on the abject poverty of this 
 ill-fated woman, the last of an illustrious race. He 
 tells us that, in the extremity of her distress, Garrick 20 
 gave her a benefit, that Johnson wrote a prologue, and 
 that the public contributed some hundreds of pounds. 
 Was it fit, he asks, that she should receive, in this 
 eleemosynary form, a small portion of what was in 
 truth a debt? Why, he asks, instead of obtaining a 25 
 pittance from charity, did she not live in comfort and 
 luxury on the proceeds of the sale of her ancestor's 
 works ? But, Sir, will my honorable and learned 
 friend tell me that this event, which he has so often 
 and so pathetically described, was caused by the short- 30 
 ness of the term of copyright ? Why, at that time, the 
 duration of copyright was longer than even he, at 
 
COpy RIGHT. 195 
 
 present, proposes to make it. The monopoly lasted 
 not sixty years, but forever. At the time at which 
 Milton's granddaughter asked charity, Milton's works 
 were the exclusive property of a bookseller. Within 
 5 a few months of the day on which the benefit was 
 given at Garrick's theater, the holder of the copyright 
 of "Paradise Lost" I think it was Tonson applied 
 to the Court of Chancery for an injunction against a 
 bookseller, who had published a cheap edition of the 
 
 10 great epic poem, and obtained the injunction. The 
 representation of " Comus " was, if I remember rightly, 
 in 1750 ; the injunction in 1752. Here, then, is a 
 perfect illustration of the effect of 'long copyright. 
 Milton's works are the property of a single publisher. 
 
 15 Everybody whTwants them must buy them at Ton- 
 son's shop, and at Tonson's price. Whoever attempts 
 to undersell Tonson is harassed with legal proceedings. 
 Thousands who would gladly possess a copy of " Para- 
 dise Lost " must forego that great enjoyment. And 
 
 20 what, in the meantime, is the situation of the only 
 person for whom we can suppose that the author, 
 protected at such a cost to the public, was at all 
 interested ? She is reduced to utter destitution. 
 Milton's works are under a monopoly. Milton's 
 
 25 granddaughter is starving. The reader is pillaged ; 
 but the writer's family is not enriched. Society is 
 taxed doubly. It has to give an exorbitant price for 
 the poems ; and it has at the same time to give alms 
 to the only surviving descendant of the poet. 
 
 30 But this is not all. I think it right, Sir, to call the 
 attention of the House to an evil, which is perhaps 
 more to be apprehended when an author's copyright 
 
I9 6 LORD MACAULAY. 
 
 remains in the hands of his family, than when it is 
 transferred to booksellers. I seriously fear that, if 
 such a measure as this should be adopted, many 
 valuable works will be either totally suppressed or 
 grievously mutilated. I can prove that this danger is 5 
 not chimerical ; and I am quite certain that, if the 
 danger be real, the safeguards which my honorable 
 and learned friend has devised are altogether nugatory. 
 That the danger is not chimerical may easily be 
 shown. Most of us, I am sure, have known persons 10 
 who, very erroneously as I think, but from the best 
 motives, would not choose to reprint Fielding's novels, 
 or Gibbon's " History of the Decline and Fall of the 
 Roman Empire." Some gentlemen may perhaps be of 
 opinion, that it would be as well if " Tom Jones " and 15 
 Gibbon's History were never reprinted. I will not, 
 then, dwell on these or similar cases. I will take 
 cases respecting which it is not likely that there will 
 be any difference of opinion here ; cases, too, in which 
 the danger of which I now speak is not matter of 20 
 supposition, but matter of fact. Take Richardson's 
 novels. Whatever I may, on the present occasion, 
 think of my honorable and learned friend's judgment 
 as a legislator, I must always respect his judgment as 
 a critic. He will, I am sure, say that Richardson's 25 
 novels are among the most valuable, among the most 
 original works in our language. No writings have 
 done more to raise the fame of English genius in 
 foreign countries. No writings are more deeply 
 pathetic. No writings, those of Shakespeare excepted, 30 
 show more profound knowledge of the human 
 heart. As to their moral tendency, I can cite the 
 
COPYRIGHT. 197 
 
 most respectable testimony. Dr. Johnson describes 
 Richardson as one who had taught the passions to 
 move at the command of virtue. My dear and 
 honored friend, Mr. Wilberforce, in his celebrated 
 5 religious treatise, when speaking of the unchristian 
 tendency of the fashionable novels of the eighteenth 
 century, distinctly excepts Richardson from the cen- 
 sure. Another excellent person whom I can never 
 mention without respect and kindness, Mrs. Hannah 
 
 10 More, often declared in conversation, and has declared 
 in one of her published poems, that she first learned 
 from the writings of Richardson those principles of 
 piety by which her life was guided. I may safely say 
 that books celebrated as works of art through the 
 
 15 whole civilized world, and praised for their moral 
 tendency by Dr. Johnson, by Mr. Wilberforce, by Mrs. 
 Hannah More, ought not to be suppressed. Sir, it is 
 my firm belief, that if the law had been what my 
 honorable andjearned friend proposes to make it, they 
 
 20 would haveSeen suppre^*^ T~remember Richard- 
 son's grandson well ; he was a clergyman in the city 
 of London ; he was a most upright and excellent 
 man ; but he had conceived a strong prejudice against 
 works of fiction. He thought all novel-reading not 
 
 25 only frivolous but sinful. He said, this I state on 
 the authority of one of his clerical brethren who is now 
 a bishop, he said that he had never thought it right 
 to read one of his grandfather's books. Suppose, Sir, 
 that the law had been what my honorable and learned 
 
 30 friend would make it. Suppose that the copyright of 
 Richardson's novels had descended, as might well have 
 been the case, to this gentleman. I firmly* believe, 
 
igS LORD MACAU LAY. 
 
 that he would have thought it sinful to give them a 
 wide circulation. I firmly believe, that he would not 
 for a hundred thousand pounds have deliberately done 
 what he thought sinful. He would not have reprinted 
 them. And what protection does my honorable and 5 
 learned friend give to Uie^4)iihli^ia^uch a case ? 
 Why, Sir, what he proposes is this : if a book is not 
 reprinted during five years, any person who wishes to 
 reprint it may give notice in the London Gazette; the 
 advertisement must be repeated three times; a year 10 
 must elapse ; and then, if the proprietor of the copy- 
 right does not put forth a new edition, he loses his 
 exclusive privilege. Now, what protection is this to 
 the public ? What is a new edition ? Does the law 
 define the number of copies that makes an edition ? 15 
 Does it limit the price of a copy ? Are twelve copies 
 on large paper, charged at thirty guineas each, an 
 edition ? It has been usual, when monopolies have 
 been granted, to prescribe numbers and to limit prices. 
 But I do not find that my honorable and learned friend 20 
 proposes to do so in the present case. And, without 
 some such provision, the security which he offers is 
 manifestly illusory. It is my conviction that, under 
 such a system as that which he recommends to us, a 
 copy of " Clarissa " would have been as rare as an 25 
 Aldus or a Caxton. 
 
 I will give another instance. One of the most in- 
 structive, interesting, and delightful books in our lan- 
 guage is Boswell's " Life of Johnson." Now it is well 
 known that Boswell's eldest son considered this book, 30 
 considered the whole relation of Boswell to Johnson, 
 as a blot in the escutcheon of the family. He thought, 
 
COPYRIGHT. 199 
 
 not perhaps altogether without reason, that his father 
 had exhibited himself in a ludicrous and degrading 
 light. And thus he became so sore and irritable that 
 at last he could not bear to hear the " Life of Johnson " 
 
 5 mentioned. Suppose that the law had been what my 
 honorable and learned friend wishes to make it. Sup- 
 pose that the copyright of Boswell's " Life of Johnson " 
 had belonged, as it well might, during sixty years, to 
 Boswell's eldest son. What would have been the con- 
 
 10 sequence ? An unadulterated copy of the finest bio- 
 graphical work in the world would have been as scarce 
 as the first edition of Camden's " Britannia." 
 
 These are strong cases. I have shown you that, if 
 the law had been what you are_nQw going to make it, 
 
 15 the finest prose 'work of ^fiotipii^in^Jhe language, the 
 finest biographical work in the language, would very 
 probably have been suppressed. But I have stated my 
 case weakly. The books which I have mentioned are 
 singularly inoffensive books ; books not touching on 
 
 20 any of those questions which drive even wise men be- 
 yond the bounds of wisdom. | There are books of a 
 very different kind, books which are the rallying points 
 of great political and religious parties. What is likely 
 to happen if the copyright of one of these books should 
 
 25 by descent or transfer come into the possession of some 
 hostile zealot ? I will take a single instance. It is 
 only fifty years since John Wesley died ; and all his 
 works, if the law had been what my honorable and 
 learned friend wishes to make it, would now have been 
 
 30 the property of some person or other. The sect 
 founded by Wesley is the most numerous, the wealthi- 
 est, the most powerful, the most jealous of sects. In 
 
200 LORD MACAU LAY. 
 
 every parliamentary election it is a matter of the 
 greatest importance to obtain the support of the 
 Wesleyan Methodists. Their numerical strength is 
 reckoned by hundreds of thousands. They hold the 
 memory of their founder in the greatest reverence ; 5 
 and not without reason, for he was unquestionably a 
 great and a good man. To his authority they con- 
 stantly appeal. His works are in their eyes of the 
 highest value. His doctrinal writings they regard as 
 containing the best system of theology ever deduced 10 
 from Scripture. His journals, interesting even to the 
 common reader, are peculiarly interesting to the 
 Methodist ; for they contain the whole history of that 
 singular polity which, weak and despised in its begin- 
 ning, is now, after the lapse of a century, so strong, 15 
 so flourishing, and so formidable. The hymns to 
 which he gave his imprimatur are a most important 
 part of the public worship of his followers. Now, 
 suppose that the copyright of these works should 
 belong to some person who holds the memory of Wes- 20 
 ley and the doctrines and discipline of the Methodists 
 in abhorrence. There are many such persons. The 
 Ecclesiastical Courts are at this very time sitting on 
 the case of a clergyman of the Established Church who 
 refused Christian burial to a child baptized by a 25 
 Methodist preacher. I took up the other day a work 
 which is considered as among the most respectable 
 organs of a large and growing party in the Church 
 of England, and there I saw John Wesley designated 
 as a foresworn priest. Suppose that the works of 30 
 Wesley were suppressed. Why, Sir, such a grievance 
 would be enough to shake the foundations of Govern- 
 
COPYRIGHT. 201 
 
 ment. Let gentlemen who are attached to the Church 
 reflect for a moment what their feelings would be if 
 the Book of Common Prayer were not to be reprinted 
 for thirty or forty years, if the price of a Book of 
 5 Common Prayer were run up to five or ten guineas. 
 And then let them determine whether they will pass 
 a law under which it is possible, under which' it is 
 probable, that so intolerable a wrong may be done to 
 some sect consisting perhaps of half a million of 
 
 10 persons. 
 
 / ^\ am so sensible, Sir, of the kindness with which 
 the House has listened to me, that I will not detain 
 you longer. I will only say this, that if the measure 
 before us should pass, and should produce one-tenth 
 
 15 part of the evil which it is calculated to produce, and 
 which I fully expect it to produce, there will soon be 
 a remedy, though of a very objectionable kind. Just 
 as the absurd acts which prohibited the sale of game 
 were virtually repealed by the poacher, just as many 
 
 20 absurd revenue acts have been virtually repealed by 
 the smuggler, so will this law be virtually repealed by 
 piratical booksellers. At present the holder of copy- 
 right has the public feeling on his side. Those who 
 invade copyright are regarded as knaves who take the 
 
 25 bread out of the mouths of deserving men. Every- 
 body is well pleased to see them restrained by the 
 law, and compelled to refund their ill-gotten gains. 
 No tradesmen of good repute will have anything to do 
 with such disgraceful transactions. Pass this law ; 
 
 30 and that feeling is at an end. Men very different 
 from the present race of piratical booksellers will soon 
 infringe this intolerable_jnonopoly. Great masses of 
 
202 LORD MACAU LAY. 
 
 capital will be constantly employed in the violation OL 
 the law. Every art will be employed to evade legal 
 pursuit ; and the whole nation will be in the plot. 
 On which side indeed should the public sympathy be 
 when the question is whether some book as popular as 5 
 " Robinson Crusoe/' or the " Pilgrim's Progress," shall 
 be in every cottage, or whether it shall be confined to 
 the libraries of the rich for the advantage of the great- 
 grandson of a bookseller who, a hundred years before, 
 drove a hard bargain for the copyright with the 10 
 author when in great distress ? Remember too that, 
 when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and 
 discreditable to 'invade literary property, no person 
 can say where the invasion will stop. The public 
 seldom makes nice distinctions. The wholesome 15 
 copyright which now exists will share in the disgrace 
 and danger of the new copyright which you are about 
 to create. And you will find that, in attempting to 
 impose unreasonable restraints on the reprinting of 
 the works of the dead, you have, to a great extent, 20 
 annulled those restraints which now prevent men from 
 pillaging and defrauding the living. If I saw, Sir, any 
 probability that this bill could be so amended in the 
 Committee that my objections might be removed, I 
 would not divide the House in this stage. 10 But I am 25 
 
 10 " Admonished, but not deterred, by Sergeant Talfourd's re- 
 verse, Lord Mahon next year took up the cause of his brother 
 authors, and introduced a bill in which he proposed to carry out 
 the objectionable principle, but to carry it less far than his prede- 
 cessor. Lord Mahon was for giving protection for five-and- 30 
 twenty years, reckoned from the date of death ; and his scheme 
 was regarded with favor, until Macaulay came forward with a 
 
COPYRIGHT. 203 
 
 so fully convinced that no alteration which would not 
 seem insupportable to my honorable and learned 
 friend, could render his measure supportable to me, 
 that I must move, though with regret, that this bill be 
 5 read a second time this day six months. 
 
 counter-scheme, giving protection for forty-two years, reckoned 
 from the date of publication. He unfolded his plan in a speech, 
 terse, elegant, and vigorous ; as amusing as an essay of Elia, and 
 as convincing as a proof of Euclid. When he resumed his seat, 
 10 Sir Robert Peel walked across the floor, and assured him that the 
 last twenty minutes had radically altered his views on the law of 
 copyright. One member after another confessed to an entire 
 change of mind; and, on a question that had nothing to do with 
 party, each change of mind brought a vote with it. The bill was 
 :$ remodeled on the principle of calculating the duration of copyright 
 from the date of publication, and the term of forty -two years 
 was adopted by a large majority." Life and Letters of Lord 
 Macaulay, vol. ii. pp. 121-123. 
 
 This second speech is printed pp. 209-216, vol. viii., Mac- 
 ao aulay's Works. Longmans, Green & Co., 1875. 
 
 OF- 
 
 E 
 
 OF 
 
 [UNIVERSITY 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO 5O CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY -AND TO $1.OO ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 
 
 RtUJ'U L_L> 
 
 JUN 1 1 1960 
 
 1939 
 
 FEB 10 1942;E 
 
 30 1942 E 
 
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY