The highest faculties of man, and those by which everything good is promoted in the world, and by which society is elevated in its tone, mainly depend on speech and writing. It is therefore of the last importance in all wellregulated communities that as few restrictions as possible should be put by the law on the free play of thought-1 that the satirist, the preacher, the patriot, the moralist, or the politician should be allowed to circulate his thoughts to the full extent, for it is by free discussion that public opinion is educated, and the public good promoted, by which bad laws are altered, and pain and suffering diminished among mankind; and as this can usually be done without misrepresenting or libelling individuals and unduly crippling their influence, the restraints of the law are framed only to check abuses of this primary freedom of thought and speech.

Freedom of thought as developed in public meetings. The most prominent of all the manifestations of freedom is that of public meeting. By this is meant not the liberty of corporations to meet in large numbers, or the liberty of mayors, lords lieutenant of counties, or sheriffs or justices of the peace in their official capacity to invite. together as many of the public as choose to attend and hear a discussion of any grievance or matter of interest, which the official head thinks reasonable and proper to discuss. But a public meeting is an assemblage of large numbers called together by any member of the public as a volunteer, whenever he thinks that his neighbours will be sufficiently interested to join with him in discussing some topic of the hour, and who does so without any licence of any official-without notice to any official-and without any official whatever being present, or having any participation in or power over the proceeding. So long as such public meeting can be held at the call of any voice from the crowd, and the people can meet in any numbers without let or hindrance and discuss and exchange their

1 Besides the right which nature has given to every man to his property, his freedom, and his life, she has also conferred on him a fourth right, that of defending the former three; and government is nothing more than a systematic mode of carrying this fourth right into convenient and complete effect.-Beaufoy, M.P. 28 Parl, II. 420.

sentiments on anything and everything that concerns them -that touches their interests or their feelings-this is as near the enjoyment of perfect liberty as is attainable. No limit can be assigned to the variety of the subject matter which may thus call the public together. The only restrictions possible are those which arise out of the danger of saying something blasphemous or grossly immoral or seditious, something amounting to a contempt of Parliament or of a court of justice, or defamatory of some individual, as to each of which excesses the speaker may afterwards be called to an account. The liberty of expressing to large meetings without let or hindrance every thought as it occurs, whether wise or unwise, so long as the limits here indicated are not reached, is the characteristic of a public meeting; and the holding of public meetings is one of the most important exercises of free speech known to mankind.

Freedom of thought in lecturing or addressing audiences. It is only another form of the liberty of public meeting, when any person takes upon himself after previous notice or otherwise to deliver a lecture to many persons or make a speech or address to them on any subject to which they will consent to listen. If no previous permission or consent of any official is required, and the only limits to be observed by the lecturer or orator are those already set forth in reference to public meetings, this also is an element of public freedom which comes home to every citizen.

Freedom of petitioning the Crown and Parliament. -Akin to the right of public meeting and the right of lecturing, though not necessarily involving the formality of any large meeting of persons, is the right of petitioning the Crown or Parliament on any matter which is deemed to affect the interests of large numbers. It will be seen that this is an important mode of exercising freedom of speech and highly prized, inasmuch as it often influences the course of action of those who are in positions of the highest authority. It is to some small extent a participation in the very government of the country, for to use argument with, or even to obtain an audience of those who have in hand important issues affecting the public business, and to be able to make representations which

may or may not be accepted and acted upon is a mark of consideration, and at least a conspicuous exercise of free speech which relieves the mind and satisfies the understanding of those who are governed.

Liberty of the press restricted like free speech.While the liberty of speech is coveted by the people as indispensable to their living under any well-balanced system of government, much more so is the liberty of the press, which is nothing more than the expansion of the other by mechanical means, thereby intensifying and making universal what might otherwise be spent on a small and isolated group of listeners. When any person is free to publish whatever he deems interesting or valuable either as a mode of procuring profit to himself or as a means of influencing the minds and will of his fellow-citizens on matters on which union and combination can effect great results, this is the highest mark of freedom, -and when once enjoyed by a people will not easily be relinquished, and any attempt to tamper with it will provoke unappeasable clamour and resistance.

The freedom of the press, though exceedingly simple in its working when thoroughly attained and practised, has, like the great discoveries of science, been arrived at by painful steps and slow. All governments at first feared this new power as full of danger and charged with the seeds of anarchy, until, like the steam-engine, familiarity and skill of handling have made it thoroughly docile, and all-powerful for good. The limits imposed on the freedom of the press are precisely the same as those imposed on freedom of speech, with a slight difference as to the remedy, as will be afterwards explained. No power exists which can dictate to any author or publisher the subject matter of the publication; and the only limits to be observed are those of blasphemy, immorality, and sedition as affecting the public, and libel as affecting the individual. But in course of steering clear of those extremes there are numerous details and distinctions to be noticed, and until these are well surveyed the subject cannot be appreciated in its whole bearings on the affairs of practical life.

Freedom of thought viewed as a property and as copyright. The right of free speech, as exhibited in public meetings, lectures, and addresses, and in petitions

to the government, and the liberty of the press as exhibited in the newspapers, and journals and books which any one is free to publish, do not represent the whole of this subject. There still remains an important right, namely, that of the authors or originators of all these publications. The person who creates a work is usually impelled to do so not merely by the hope of benefiting others and influencing the action of those who control the government or destinies of mankind, but by the hope of personal profit and reward for the labour involved in obtaining the power and skill to produce such results. The motives of authors are thus chiefly threefold-either purely philanthropic or purely mercenary, or partly composed of both the others. Those who address public audiences with a view to publication, especially on political affairs, may be said to be mainly philanthropic or patriotic: they are satisfied with the publicity given or acquired, and have no care about any personal profit. They throw their thoughts among the crowd, careless who may pick them up. On the other hand, authors who publish works involving continuous labour, skill, and thought, have usually some prospect of reward and personal profit as the main inducement, like all other persons who pursue a definite occupation or business. The labour involved in creating a book differs in no respect whatever from the labour employed on any other matter, and hence it would require very singular circumstances to make it manifest how the labourer in the one case should not have the same means of preserving and perpetuating his accumulations as the labourer in the other cases. Yet, singular to say, the conduct of the legislature and courts even up to very recent times has been so confused and void of all insight into the nature and origin of this simple and natural right, that they have sometimes misapprehended its position, have all but questioned its existence, and have ended by confiscating it for the alleged good of mankind, without rendering a reason. This singular mode of treatment will be made manifest in the whole history of copyright, both in parliament and in courts of justice. It is confessedly a right of some kind, and the various circumstances in which. it originates, and the modes of dealing with and protecting it, involve many details which will be afterwards set forth.

And here again, while no constituted authority any longer dictates to authors what subjects they shall treat, or how they shall treat them, the same limits confine copyright as confine free speech. So long as the author shall not circulate any blasphemous, immoral, or seditious words, or any libel on an individual, there is no subject which he may not discuss almost at discretion, and the whole field of knowledge lies open to him.

Freedom of thought viewed as patent right and trade mark-While copyright denotes that species of right which an author has in the book which he creates, so a right closely related to it is that which an inventor has in some mechanical adaptation, namely, the exclusive right of manufacturing copies or reproductions of things mechanical. The distinctions which exist between these two rights will be found to be considerable. The chief characteristic of both is this, that the mind of the author and inventor is that which creates or brings the subject matter into existence, while the other consideration, namely, the best mode of protecting and perpetuating the right as a species of property, necessarily varies with the individual instance. It is on account of this primary quality that patent is properly arranged under the head of free thought, because the ingenuity of man is boundless, and it is capable of embracing nearly every kind of matter which can be made useful to facilitate human occupations and human comforts. And there is an inherent right of every man to turn his faculties to the best advantage and acquire as much profit out of any exercise of these and out of anything he does as the subject matter will admit. Patent right is nothing but the right to make the most of one's own originality and insight into common mechanical articles, and is as much an exercise of free thought as the production of any book can be.

And, lastly, the right to a trade mark, though in some respects identified with the modes of selling goods, is more closely allied to patent right, for the same kind of ingenuity which distinguishes the inventor often belongs to the originator of a trade mark, inasmuch as it is only in reference to some ingenious manufacture that trade marks were at first invented, though also capable of being extended to things which do not involve any original merit whatever.