No Danger in Discussion

It should never be labelled ‘dangerous’ to subject Government policy to calm and honest criticism.

1792

King George III 1760-1820

Introduction

IN 1792, the Libel Act gave the jury, not the judge, the right to decide who was guilty of libel. It was soon put to the test, when the Government charged The Morning Chronicle with libel for reproducing the Society for Political Information’s scathing critique of William Pitt’s policies. The jury acquitted the defendants, vindicating the Society’s feisty defence of free speech, reproduced below.

WE THINK, therefore, that the cause of truth and justice can never be hurt by temperate and honest discussions; and that cause which will not bear such a scrutiny, must be systematically or practically bad.

We are sensible that those who are not friends to the general good, have attempted to inflame the public mind with the cry of ‘Danger,’ whenever men have associated for discussing the principles of government; and we have little doubt but such conduct will be pursued in this place; we would, therefore caution every honest man, who has really the welfare of the nation at heart, to avoid being led away by the prostituted clamours of those who live on the sources of corruption.*

We pity the fears of the timorous, and we are totally unconcerned respecting the false alarms of the venal. We are in the pursuit of truth, in a peaceable, calm, and unbiassed manner; and wherever we recognise her features, we will embrace her as the companion of happiness, of wisdom, and of peace.

From ‘The Case of Libel, the King v. John Lambert and Others, Printer and Proprietors of the Morning Chronicle’ (1794). For a transcript of the trial, see ‘Cobbett’s Complete Collection of State Trials from 1163-1820’ VOl XXII (1817).

* That is, those critics who have a vested interest in supporting current Government policy. “In short,” said the Society, “we see, with the most lively concern, an army of placemen, pensioners, &c., fighting in the cause of corruption and prejudice, and spreading the contagion far and wide.” In this case, pensioners does not mean retired citizens but people on the Government’s payroll.

Précis
In 1792, a political society in Derby released a statement that subjected William Pitt’s Government to withering criticism. Anticipating trouble, the society warned readers not to listen when opponents branded such discussions ‘dangerous’, and hinted that their allegiance had been bought. Calm public debate, said the Society, was dangerous only to those who had something to hide.
Questions for Critics

1. What is the author aiming to achieve in writing this?

2. Note any words, devices or turns of phrase that strike you. How do they help the author communicate his ideas more effectively?

3. What impression does this passage make on you? How might you put that impression into words?

Based on The English Critic (1939) by NL Clay, drawing on The New Criticism: A Lecture Delivered at Columbia University, March 9, 1910, by J. E. Spingarn, Professor of Comparative Literature in Columbia University, USA.

Read Next

A Step Up for Captain Raleigh

When young Walter Raleigh first came to the court of Queen Elizabeth I he had little more than his wardrobe in his favour, and he wore it wisely.

The Bond of Liberty

Edmund Burke told fellow MPs that the only way to unite the peoples of the Empire was for London to set them an enviable example.

The Crimes of Mr Pitt

William Pitt was a rising star of British politics in 1741, so much so that Horace Walpole MP felt he needed his wings clipped — an operation fraught with peril.