, because they are different from your own; and,
therefore, if any of you should think reform in Parliament needless, or
even dangerous, I still call upon you (though the writer of this paper
should be a reformer, and even though he is called in reproach a radical
reformer) not to condemn the defendant in this case through prejudice
against the author's opinions; but solely to enquire (be those opinions
ever so just or ever so absurd) whether he is sincere in entertaining
them; for, if he be (as I shall show you presently from the highest
authority) the law does not consider him criminal. Try him by this test,
and this test, and this alone; and then, whatever may be your verdict,
you will be free from reproach, and secure to yourselves quiet by day,
and sound slumbers by night; for you will have discharged your duty to
yourselves, to the defendant, and to the country.
With regard, gentlemen, to the other part of the alleged libel, I must
bespeak your patience; for I am afraid that I shall be drawn by my
comments upon it into considerable length. (I am afraid, gentlemen, I
weary you, and I am sorry for it. If I had had leisure, I would have
condensed my observations; but, under the circumstances I have disclosed
to you, I hope you will forgive me for occupying more of your attention
than I would otherwise have done. I really have not had time to be
short.) To return to the passage in the paper, which is first charged as
a libel: it denies the existence of any constitution in Great Britain.
Now whether there be anything malicious and criminal in this, depends
entirely upon the meaning which the author attaches to the word
constitution. I confess it is a word that gives me a very indistinct and
uncertain idea; and I believe that if any of you were now suddenly to ask
yourselves what you understood by it, you would find you were not very
ready to give yourselves an answer; and if you could even satisfactorily
answer yourselves, you would find if you were to go further and question
your neighbour, that he would give you a very different definition from
your own. In itself it means nothing more than simply a standing or
placing together; and it really seems to me rather hard and venturous to
indict a man for denying the existence of something (whatever it may be)
expressed by the most indefinite term in our whole language. But, if we
were agreed upon the ideas which should be attached to the word, let us
examine wheth
|