How should a free people treat libels?

OCR: 8 cited passage(s) are machine-read (OCR) text of old printings; quotations reproduce the stored OCR text, misreadings included.

1. WHAT THEY SAID (the record)

Record ledger

• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that people with false or no religion should be met with pity and exhortation, not sourness or asperity, as such treatment only hardens them. They argued that opinions are part of the soul's 'features' and that all men like their own best, and that ill usage for differing opinions is cruel and shows a lack of humanity. "Men that have no Religion, or a false one, are intitled to our Pity and Exhortation... it is avowed Cruelty to add, by ill Usage, one Misfortune to another, and to shew our own Want of Humanity, for their Want of Grace." [1]
• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') argue that libels, particularly those in sermons, are harmful to religion and government and should be addressed. They suggest that without restraint on preaching, it is inconsistent to call for restraint on the press. "Your Lordship is justly angry at Libels: Can there be greater or more poisonous Libels, than such Sermons as these, or worse Libels against Religion or Government?" [2]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believe that in a free country, libels should not be punished more than they deserve, and that the liberty of the press should not be infringed, even if it means some libels may escape punishment. They argue that suppressing libels under the pretense of maintaining order risks stifling liberty, as seen in historical examples like King James. (key quote above) [3]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believe that attempts to prevent real libels are ineffective and that such efforts will only prevent the public from being informed of what they ought to know, while increasing the harm of other libels. They argue that dangerous and forbidden libels are more effectively dispersed, enquired after, and do more mischief than openly published ones. (key quote above) [4]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') argue that exposing public wickedness is a duty and cannot be a libel in the nature of things. They believe that truths which harm the public by revealing crimes against it are not libels, and that calling such revelations libels is a disservice to truth and the country. [5]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believe that a free people should despise libels and not take notice of them, as doing so prevents them from gaining force. They argue that guilty men alone fear libels, and that truth does not need protection from examination. (key quote above) [6]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that the best way to escape the virulence of libels is not to suppress them, but to punish them when necessary. They argued that suppressing libels is as unreasonable as proposing a law to restrain people from traveling on the highway because some who use it commit robberies. [7]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believed that in a free country, it is difficult to punish libels adequately by a general law, as such a law would make all writing and speaking unsafe. They argued that while libels are an evil arising from the greater good of free expression, it is better to tolerate some harm from this freedom than to lose it entirely. "And yet it is fcafce pofTible in a free Country, to punifh by, a general Law any Libel to much as it de-;ftrves ; fincefiich a Law, confiding of fo many Branches, and of fuch vaft Latitude, woukL inake all Writing whatfoever, how innocent ibever, and even all Speaking, unfafe" [8]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believe that libels against government are always 'base and unlawful,' especially when they falsely accuse the government of actions it did not commit. They argue that while some libels are purely personal and unwise, laws should protect reputation, just as they protect property. "As to Libels againft Government, like all others, they are always bale and unlawful, and often mifchievous; efpecially when Govern-ments are impudently charged with AiSlions and Defigns of which they are nit guilty." [9]
• BELIEF (undated; OCR of an old printing): Trenchard and Gordon ('Cato') believe that libels, while sometimes harmful, provide more benefits than mischiefs by keeping great men in awe and acting as a check on their behavior. They argue that the advantages of such liberty outweigh the harms, and that the mischiefs of libels (like fomenting discontent or rebellion) are much rarer than the benefits. [10]

What cuts against it

• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") believed that false, scurrilous, and foolish attacks upon religion are ineffective, scorned, and shocking. They argued that the many will always have religion, which is rarely gained by inquiry but generally taken implicitly and retained by rote, and that every man professes morality, which is the surest demonstration of having religion. [11]

• BELIEF (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") believed that public libels, especially those that propagate discord and falsehood, are harmful and should be viewed with disdain. "What can be a greater Crime, what can argue a worse Spirit, than, for Vengeance, for a Peny, or a Place, to propagate Discord and Falshood?" [12]

• ACTION (undated): Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") wrote that some of their own writings were used to support Jacobite conspiracies, including seditious libels against the government and the king. [13]

2. HOW IT APPLIES (reasoning; inference is marked)

1. Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") believed that the liberty of the press should not be infringed, even if it means some libels may escape punishment. (key quote above) [3].

2. They argued that suppressing libels under the pretense of maintaining order risks stifling liberty, as seen in historical examples like King James. [3].

3. Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") believed that a free people should despise libels and not take notice of them, as doing so prevents them from gaining force. "The beft Way to prevent Libels, is not to deferve them, and to defpiie them, and then they always lofe their Force" [6].

4. They argued that guilty men alone fear libels, and that truth does not need protection from examination. [6].

5. Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") believed that attempts to prevent real libels are ineffective and that such efforts will only prevent the public from being informed of what they ought to know, while increasing the harm of other libels. [4].

3. THEIR TAKE

Record coverage: PARTIAL

The record is silent on the specific modern context of digital libels and the role of social media in spreading them. However, Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato")'s principles on the liberty of the press and the dangers of suppressing speech suggest that they would oppose heavy-handed regulation of online speech, even if it includes harmful content. They would likely argue that the best way to combat libels is through public discernment and the strength of truth, not censorship.

Extrapolation: Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") would likely argue that a free people should despise libels and not take notice of them, as doing so prevents them from gaining force. They would emphasize the importance of preserving the liberty of the press, even if it means some libels may escape punishment. They would argue that the best way to combat libels is through public discernment and the strength of truth, not censorship.

Competing readings: One reading is that Trenchard and Gordon ("Cato") would support some form of regulation to prevent the spread of harmful libels, particularly those that threaten public order or national security. Another reading is that they would oppose any form of regulation, emphasizing the importance of preserving the liberty of the press at all costs. The record itself does not state either of these readings explicitly, but both are inferences based on their principles.

Confidence: Moderate

The confidence is moderate because the record provides clear principles on the liberty of the press and the dangers of suppressing speech, but it is silent on the specific modern context of digital libels and the role of social media in spreading them. The extrapolation is based on reasoning from stated principles, but the specific application to modern contexts involves some inference.