’’’’’’爾’
(ANDREW HAMILTON)
’’’’由辨’
Defense of Freedom of the Press
對’’個’’高’’’’失’’由’不’’’
1733’’’翰’’’’曾’’’’’’’’’’’’’本雜’批評’殖民’督’’策’’’’’曾’’煽動’誹謗’’’’’獄中’’’個月’折’’’’1735’8月對’’’’止’’’’’’’’’’’爾’辨’說’曾’’雜’’’’’文章不’’’誹謗’’’’’文章裏說’都’’’’’還’’’堅’說’’據’’’’’’’’應當由陪’團而不’由’’’’’’’文’’’實’’陪’Ⅸ’’’’爾’說’’’’’對’’’督’’’’’實’’’’曾’’’’’’’’國殖民’’’’’由’重’勝’’
’’’曾’’’候’’’’’’’爾’(’1676-1741)’殖民’著’’’’之’’’’生’蘇’蘭’1770’’不’’’’’個’’僕’移民’’’尼’’’教’’’’’學習考’’’資’’’馬里蘭’議’’’’’’’’敦學習’’’’’’’’’’’’’那’’成’’個傑’’’’’
閣’’我’’檢’’’生(’’’’布’’’)關’’’’’’’說’’’’’’’’’’示’’’’折’’’個’’正當’’’’’誹謗那個’’’我’’見’’’’’’’’’’我’’那應當成’’’’那我’不’勞’’’’聽證我’’樁’’中’說’’切’
不僅’’教方面而’’’’方面’有異端邪說’而’’都’產生’’’變化’我們’’楚’個’’’’’教問’’’像今天’樣公’’’’’’’’見而’當’’異端邪說’’’’’’不’’個’’’’有’’’’’們都’有’失’’’我們不僅’’’’教’’’’’們不’而’還譴’’們’及’們’’’’我必須假’我們’樣’由’’考’談論’仰’’教問’’正’’’’’’儘管據說’’’’們對’類問’’分’’’’我還’有聽說’檢’’’生曾對’類’’問提’’’’’情’’由’我’’情’’白’’’’’個’’’對’’’’’’’’必須’’’’’講’’督’話’’’都’’’’’個’由’’’’當’們’’’’實’個’限之內’’我’望’們’談論’’’對當’’’’’’見’’應當有’’’障’我’’僅僅’’’’’管轄之’’’民’’由’’產’那部分’’’’’’種’障都’有’那麼’’’’’’把’民變成奴隸’’們’’’最’’傷’’壓迫還不’’’’’’’’說’’敢’’’’們’身體’’產’’’’’’毀’’’’種折’不’奴’’那還有什麼國’’’’’奴隸’’’
據說’而’檢’’’生’堅’’’’’’’’’’’’’應’’支援’’重’’’’’’我們’’身’’產’’’防止’’國’’殺’’’’暴亂’及’有推翻’國’國’’毀滅個’’’’’’’’’生’’’’’’’’’Ⅸ’尤’’最高’’’都’讓’們’’’’’’’’’難’那’’’’’’’’’’’’’’天’’不’忍’’’據說’’’統’’’’蔑視’’’’們’’’’’不’’重’結’’’’’不’執’’’’’我說’’及諸’’類’說’’當’’及’擁’’堅’’談’’’’目’’我’望’們’’’考’’’濫用’’’’成’’’’’’’原’’’’’’’生’’而’正’’’’’’’不公正’壓迫’’’’們’’’民’蔑視’儘管’種’’’高’’’’’’最不熟’歷’’’’’’’誰還’不’’’種當’’’用’’面偽裝’誰不’’’們’用’種偽裝’’’’統’’’’’’由’民’’由’’
’’誹謗’像檢’’’生極’’’’那樣’’’’而’限’’’’’’解’那麼’我’’’’’有什麼文章’’不’稱’誹謗’’’’’有什麼’’’不’’’誹謗’’’’’儘管摩’’謙’’’’還’誹謗’該隱’而’有誰’有誹謗’’鬼’’’據檢’’’生’’見’說’個’’’不’’不正當’’那麼伊’’’誹謗’我們’’國’’’’’內’’’’’’’中誹謗’’爾斯國’’詹’斯國’’’賓還誹謗’們’有’’’’個’應當’麼說’’麼’’’’應’聽什麼’讀什麼’’唱什麼’’’’應當什麼’候’’’’不’’’當’誹謗’’’’我誠’’’’’’有’個’走’’’街’’讀’’’’’’’’’們不’’’’’’中’’’話’那麼檢’’’生借’’’’釋技巧’’’’’’’’話說成’誹謗’’’’’賽’’’’’章第’六’’"’民’領’’’們’’’’’’’’’們領導’’’’毀’’"’’’’’’生’把’’話當’誹謗’’’’’樣’讀’個’’’"’民’領’"(’’’’’’督’市議’)"’’們"(’’’個’’’民)"’’’’"’"’們"(’’督’市議’)"’’毀"(’’’欺’而失’’們’’由)"’’最’’’種’’"’’’’’’’’’’種’’’’’不快’方式公’重
覆’’本’中五’六章’第’’第’’’’那麼檢’’’生’巧妙’用’’’釋本領方面’有’揮’技巧’’闊天’’’’話’’"’’’’’’’眼’’都’’’’’"等等’"’’’它們都’’食’’’’不’飽足’"’’’把’’話當’誹謗’’據檢’’’生’教條’’’借’’正’採用’釋’技巧’’’什麼都不需’’’’
對’’個高’’’’失’’由’不’’’’’我們’’’’個’’都有那麼’’’’’’’升’虛’’’’’幫’’壓迫’不’’’毀’們’國’’’’我’’不朽’布’’斯說’話’當’’著凱撒’那’’’’’’’都’’’’’’’不’’’’’’’’說’"’們羅馬’’’’我還’’麼稱’’們’話’那麼’們’’’’們’’什麼’’’’’們正’幫’凱’打’鎖鏈’正’’’鎖鏈’’有’天’’迫’們戴’’’"’’’’個’惜’由’’’應當考’’問’’’應當憑’’’’’’’’而不’憑’情’’’’’’’’’’情’’’’’風’’’不’考’’國’’親屬’關’’正’’’’方面’’個熱’’’國’’’’寧’’切都不考’’’’國’’’由’’’’’’楚’’有’由’生’’’’’’’
’’’正’’比’’’條’’’當’’’’’’’之內’’’’’’有用’’’’當’’溢’’’’那’變成’騰’’’’’’
抑’’它’’毀’切’’論’’’里’都’’成’’’’’’那麼’’’’’’’質’’’’讓我們’少盡我們’職’’做個’惜’由’’’’’用我們最’’關心’支援’由’’由’反對濫用’’’唯’堡’’’’個’’’濫用’’都’’最’’’’’’’’價換’’野’’欲望’’’’野心’’生’我’望’原諒我’’種場’’’’’衝動’"’’失’’’我們’’’’’’’’’"’’’個’老而’智’警’’’’’雖’托’’’福’我生’’’個’由’’’解’’由’’’’’裏’’’’驗’’’我們’’’’(我’’’驗’’’我’’)’個’’裏’’個’’’’’快’’’’’個’’裏’立’’’’’’’我’’’’當我們對當’’’’應有’’’’’我們’’應當警惕’’’我們擔心’任’’方’’’’我們’’’我們’’’’’’我’’任’’’’’個誠實’’’’任’
由’’種原’’我實’’’’勝任’樣’種’’’’們’’我’’’’’重壓’’’’’而’’身體’虛’’壓’’’’儘管我’老’’’我還’’’我有’任’’需’我’’候’’最邊遠’’方’用我’’務’幫’熄滅對’’報’’’’’’’’’由’’’’’’’目’’’剝奪’民抗’’抗議當’’’’’圖’’’’那’傷’’壓迫管轄’’’民’’’’’’民’’喊’抗議’接著’把’種抗議當’’’鎮壓’’’’基礎’我’望我’說不’’’樣’’’’’’’’而言之’’’’’面’’問’’還有’們’陪’團’’生們面’’問’’’不’’問’’’不’’’問’’’們’’’’’不’’個’’’’’’’’’不’’’’’’’’不’’’’’’’’’’’’’’陸’’國’’統’’’’’個’由’’’’’樁最’’’’’’’’由’’’’我’不’疑’今天’們’正’’’’不僅’’’們’’’’’’戴’’’’而’’’個熱’’由’不’’奴隸生’’’’都’’福’們’給’們’’’’把’們’’’’撓’暴’’圖’’’’們’公正’’’’’’’’’證我們’’’我們’’’’’’’’’由打’’’高’基礎’’種’由’’天’我們國’’’’’賦予我們’’’’’’說’話’’’話’揭’’反對’’’’(’少’’’’’’’’方)’’由’’
Defense of Freedom of the Press
May it please
your honors, I agree with Mr. Attorney [Richard Bradley] that government is a
sacred thing, but I differ very widely from him when he would insinuate that the
just complaints of a number of men, who suffer under a bad administration, is
libeling that administration. Had I believed that to be law, I should not have
given the court the trouble of hearing anything that I could say in this cause.
. . .
There is
heresy in law as well as in religion, and both have changed very much; and we
well know that it is not two centuries ago that a man would have burned as a
heretic for owning such opinions in matters of religion as are publicly written
and printed at this day. They were fallible men, it seems, and we take the
liberty, not only to differ from them in religious opinion, but to condemn them
and their opinions too; and I must presume that in taking these freedoms in
thinking and speaking about matters of faith or religion, we are in the right;
for, though it is said there are very great liberties of this kind taken in New
York, yet I have heard of no information preferred by Mr. Attorney for any
offenses of this sort. From which I think it is pretty clear that in New York a
man may make very free with his God, but he must take special care what he
says of his Governor. It is agreed upon by all men that this is a reign of
liberty, and while men keep within the bounds of truth, i hope they may with
safety both speak and write their sentiments of the conduct of men of power; I
mean of that part of their conduct only which affects the liberty or property of
the people under their administration; were this to be denied, then the next
step may make them slaves. For what notions can be entertained of slavery beyond
that of suffering the greatest injuries and oppressions without the liberty of
complaining; or if they do, to be destroyed, body and estate, for so doing?
It is
said, and insisted upon by Mr. Attorney, that government is a sacred thing; that
it is to be supported and reverenced; it is government that protects our persons
and estates; that prevents treasons, murders, robberies, riots, and all the
train of evils that overturn kingdoms and states and ruin particular persons;
and if those in the administration, especially the supreme magistrates, must
have all their conduct censured by private men, government cannot subsist. This
is called a licentiousness not to be tolerated. It is said that it brings the
rulers of the people into contempt so that their authority is not regarded, and
so that in the end the laws cannot be put in execution. These, I say, and such
as these, are the general topics insisted upon by men in power and their
advocates. But I wish it might be considered at the same time how often it has
happened that the abuse of power has been the primary cause of these evils, and
that it was the injustice and oppression of these great men which has commonly
brought them into contempt with the people. The craft and art of such men are
great, and who that is the least acquainted with history or with law can be
ignorant of the specious pretenses which have often been made use of by men in
power to introduce arbitrary rule and destroy the liberties of a free people....
If a
libel is understood in the large and unlimited sense urged by Mr. Attorney,
there is scarce a writing I know that may not be called a libel, or scarce any
person safe from being called to account as a libeler, for Moses, meek as he
was, libeled Cain; and who is it that has not libeled the devil? For, according
to Mr. Attorney, it is no justification to say one has a bad name. Eachard has
libeled our good King William; Burnet has libeled, among many others, King
Charles and King James; and Rapin has libeled them all. How must a man speak or
write, or what must he hear, read, or sing? Or when must he laugh, so as to be
secure from being taken up as a libeler? I sincerely believe that were some
persons to go through the streets of New York nowadays and read a part of the
Bible, if it were not known to be such, Mr. Attorney, with the help of his
innuendoes, would easily turn it into a libel. As for instance: Isaiah 11:16:
"The leaders of the people cause them to err, and they that are led by them are
destroyed." But should Mr. Attorney go about to make this a libel, he would read
it thus: "The leaders of the people" (innuendo, the Governor and council of New
York) "cause them" (innuendo, the people of this province) "to err, and they"
(the Governor and council meaning) "are destroyed" (innuendo, are deceived into
the loss of their liberty), "which is the worst kind of destruction." Or if some
person should publicly repeat, in a manner not pleasing to his betters, the
tenth and the eleventh verses of the fifty-sixth chapter of the same book, there
Mr. Attorney would have a large field to display his skill in the artful
application of his innuendoes. The words are: "His watchmen are blind, they are
ignorant," etc. "Yea, they are greedy dogs, they can never have enough." But to
make them a libel, there is, according to Mr. Attorney's doctrine, no more
wanting but the aid of his skill in the right adapting his innuendoes. . . .
The loss
of liberty to a generous mind is worse than death; and yet we know there have
been those in all ages who, for the sakes of preferment or some imaginary honor,
have freely lent a helping hand to oppress, nay, to destroy, their country. This
brings to my mind that saying of the immortal Brutus, when he looked upon the
creatures of Caesar, who were very great men, but by no means good men: "You
Romans," said Brutus, "if yet I may call you so, consider what you are doing;
remember that you are assisting Caesar to forge those very chains which one day
he will make yourselves wear." This is what every man that values freedom ought
to consider; he should act by judgment and not by affection or self-interest;
for where those prevail, no ties of either country or kindred are regarded; as,
upon the other hand, the man who loves his country prefers its liberty to all
other considerations, well knowing that without liberty life is a misery. ...
Power may
justly be compared to a great river; while kept within its bounds, it is both
beautiful and useful, but when it overflows its banks, it is then too impetuous
to be stemmed; it bears down all before it, and brings destruction and
desolation wherever it comes. If, then, this be the nature of power, let us at
least do our duty, and, like wdse men who value freedom, use our utmost care to
support liberty, the only bulwark against lawless power, which, in all ages, has
sacrificed to its wild lust and boundless ambition the blood of the best men
that ever lived.
I hope to
be pardoned, sir, for my zeal upon this occasion. It is an old and wise caution
that "when our neighbor's house is on fire, we ought to take care of our own."
For though, blessed be God, I live in a government where liberty is well
understood and freely enjoyed, yet experience has shown us all (I am sure it has
to me) that a bad precedent in one government is soon set up for an authority in
another; and therefore I cannot but think it mine and every honest man's duty
that, while we pay all due obedience to men in authority, we ought, at the same
time, to be upon our guard against power wherever we apprehend that it may
affect ourselves or our fellow subjects.
I am
truly very unequal to such an undertaking. on many accounts. And you see I labor
under the weight of many years and am borne down with great infirmities of body;
yet old and weak as I am, I should think it my duty, if required, to go to the
utmost part of the land, where my service could be of any use in assisting to
quench the flame of prosecutions upon informations, set on foot by the
government to deprive a people of the right of remonstrating, and complaining
too, of the arbitrary attempts of men in power. Men who injure and oppress the
people under their administration provoke them to cry out and complain, and then
make that very complaint the foundation for new oppressions and prosecutions. I
-wish I could say there were no instances of this kind. But, to conclude, the
question before the court, and you, gentlemen of the jury, is not of small nor
private concern; it is not the cause of a poor printer, nor of New York alone,
which you are now trying. No! It may, in its consequence, affect every free man
that lives under a British government on the main continent of America. It is
the best cause; it is the cause of liberty; and I make no doubt but your upright
conduct, this day, will not only entitle you to the love and esteem of your
fellow citizen, but every man who prefers freedom to a life of slavery will
bless and honor you as men who have baffled the attempt of tyranny, and, by an
impartial and uncorrupt verdict, have laid a noble foundation for securing to
ourselves, our posterity, and our neighbors that to which nature and the laws of
our country have given us a right--the liberty of both exposing and opposing
arbitrary power (in these parts of the world at least) by speaking and writing
truth. . . .
’ |