FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   382   383   384   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   396   397   398   399   400   401   402   403   404   405   406  
407   408   409   410   411   412   413   414   415   416   417   418   419   420   421   422   423   424   425   426   427   428   429   430   431   >>   >|  
ntempt as is the necessary outcome of scientific knowledge. In the third place, hatred and contempt of a given institutional arrangement or expedient is by no means the same thing as hatred and contempt of those persons who profit by the arrangement in question; whereas section 100 deals only with hatred of persons,--so that we have here the third break in the public prosecutor's argument, and it is a veritable _saltomortale_. In the fourth place I have to present an argument of fact. The prosecutor's argument presents the most remarkable _quid pro quo_[56] that has ever come to light in a legal discussion. The point which I here touch upon constitutes the transition to the second part of my argument, showing that all proof touching the second condition to be fulfilled by the indictment is wanting; viz.: that even if there were ground for speaking of hatred and contempt in this connection, it is still quite plain that there has been no instigation to hatred or contempt of those against whom I am charged with having incited to hatred and contempt. As to this second part of the indictment: I am accused of instigating the unpropertied classes to hatred and contempt of the propertied classes. "By this presentation," says the indictment, "working men will plainly be incited to hatred and contempt of the bourgeoisie, that is to say, the unpropertied classes will be inflamed against the propertied classes." And after having in this way, quietly and by subreption, introduced this its definition of the term "_bourgeoisie_," the indictment goes on to formulate its final charge as follows: "It is accordingly charged that the above named citizen, F.L., (1), by his lecture etc., and (2) by publishing the pamphlet containing this same lecture, has publicly instigated the unpropertied classes of the State's subjects to hatred and contempt of the propertied classes." It is true, in my address I speak of the "_bourgeoisie_." But what is my definition of this term? It will be sufficient to cite a single passage which contains the definition of "_bourgeoisie_" as used by me in this pamphlet. This will show what an incomprehensible, unheard-of, uncharacterisable _quid pro quo_ the public prosecutor has attempted to impute to me in charging me with instigating the unpropertied classes to hatred and contempt of the propertied classes. On page 20 of this pamphlet is the following passage, quoted literally: "I h
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   382   383   384   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395   396   397   398   399   400   401   402   403   404   405   406  
407   408   409   410   411   412   413   414   415   416   417   418   419   420   421   422   423   424   425   426   427   428   429   430   431   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

hatred

 
contempt
 

classes

 
propertied
 
bourgeoisie
 

unpropertied

 
argument
 

indictment

 
prosecutor
 

pamphlet


definition
 

instigating

 

lecture

 

passage

 

incited

 

charged

 

persons

 

public

 
arrangement
 
inflamed

citizen

 

knowledge

 

formulate

 
introduced
 

quietly

 

subreption

 
charge
 

unheard

 

uncharacterisable

 
attempted

incomprehensible

 
ntempt
 

impute

 
charging
 

quoted

 

literally

 

subjects

 
instigated
 

publicly

 
scientific

address
 

single

 
sufficient
 

outcome

 
publishing
 
constitutes
 

transition

 

touching

 

condition

 
section