on liberty-第29章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！




labour。　Opinions　similar　in　principle　to　these　already　prevail



widely　among　the　artisan　class；　and　weigh　oppressively　on　those　who



are　amenable　to　the　opinion　chiefly　of　that　class；　namely；　its　own



members。　It　is　known　that　the　bad　workmen　who　form　the　majority　of　the



operatives　in　many　branches　of　industry；　are　decidedly　of　opinion　that



bad　workmen　ought　to　receive　the　same　wages　as　good；　and　that　no　one



ought　to　be　allowed；　through　piecework　or　otherwise；　to　earn　by



superior　skill　or　industry　more　than　others　can　without　it。　And　they



employ　a　moral　police；　which　occasionally　becomes　a　physical　one；　to



deter　skilful　workmen　from　receiving；　and　employers　from　giving；　a



larger　remuneration　for　a　more　useful　service。　If　the　public　have



any　jurisdiction　over　private　concerns；　I　cannot　see　that　these　people



are　in　fault；　or　that　any　individual's　particular　public　can　be　blamed



for　asserting　the　same　authority　over　his　individual　conduct　which　the



general　public　asserts　over　people　in　general。



　　But；　without　dwelling　upon　supposititious　cases；　there　are；　in　our



own　day；　gross　usurpations　upon　the　liberty　of　private　life　actually



practised；　and　still　greater　ones　threatened　with　some　expectation



of　success；　and　opinions　propounded　which　assert　an　unlimited　right　in



the　public　not　only　to　prohibit　by　law　everything　which　it　thinks



wrong；　but；　in　order　to　get　at　what　it　thinks　wrong；　to　prohibit　a



number　of　things　which　it　admits　to　be　innocent。



　　Under　the　name　of　preventing　intemperance；　the　people　of　one　English



colony；　and　of　nearly　half　the　United　States；　have　been　interdicted　by



law　from　making　any　use　whatever　of　fermented　drinks；　except　for



medical　purposes：　for　prohibition　of　their　sale　is　in　fact；　as　it　is



intended　to　be；　prohibition　of　their　use。　And　though　the



impracticability　of　executing　the　law　has　caused　its　repeal　in　several



of　the　States　which　had　adopted　it；　including　the　one　from　which　it



derives　its　name；　an　attempt　has　notwithstanding　been　commenced；　and



is　prosecuted　with　considerable　zeal　by　many　of　the　professed



philanthropists；　to　agitate　for　a　similar　law　in　this　country。　The



association；　or　〃Alliance〃　as　it　terms　itself；　which　has　been　formed



for　this　purpose；　has　acquired　some　notoriety　through　the　publicity



given　to　a　correspondence　between　its　secretary　and　one　of　the　very



few　English　public　men　who　hold　that　a　politician's　opinions　ought



to　be　founded　on　principles。　Lord　Stanley's　share　in　this



correspondence　is　calculated　to　strengthen　the　hopes　already　built



on　him；　by　those　who　know　how　rare　such　qualities　as　are　manifested　in



some　of　his　public　appearances　unhappily　are　among　those　who　figure　in



political　life。　The　organ　of　the　Alliance；　who　would　〃deeply　deplore



the　recognition　of　any　principle　which　could　be　wrested　to　justify



bigotry　and　persecution；〃　undertakes　to　point　out　the　〃broad　and



impassable　barrier〃　which　divides　such　principles　from　those　of　the



association。　〃All　matters　relating　to　thought；　opinion；　conscience；



appear　to　me；〃　he　says；　〃to　be　without　the　sphere　of　legislation；



all　pertaining　to　social　act；　habit；　relation；　subject　only　to　a



discretionary　power　vested　in　the　State　itself；　and　not　in　the



individual；　to　be　within　it。〃



　　No　mention　is　made　of　a　third　class；　different　from　either　of　these；



viz。；　acts　and　habits　which　are　not　social；　but　individual；　although



it　is　to　this　class；　surely；　that　the　act　of　drinking　fermented



liquors　belongs。　Selling　fermented　liquors；　however；　is　trading；　and



trading　is　a　social　act。　But　the　infringement　complained　of　is　not



on　the　liberty　of　the　seller；　but　on　that　of　the　buyer　and　consumer；



since　the　State　might　just　as　well　forbid　him　to　drink　wine　as



purposely　make　it　impossible　for　him　to　obtain　it。　The　secretary；



however；　says；　〃I　claim；　as　a　citizen；　a　right　to　legislate　whenever



my　social　rights　are　invaded　by　the　social　act　of　another。〃　And　now



for　the　definition　of　these　〃social　rights。〃　〃If　anything　invades　my



social　rights；　certainly　the　traffic　in　strong　drink　does。　It　destroys



my　primary　right　of　security；　by　constantly　creating　and　stimulating



social　disorder。　It　invades　my　right　of　equality；　by　deriving　a　profit



from　the　creation　of　a　misery　I　am　taxed　to　support。　It　impedes　my



right　to　free　moral　and　intellectual　development；　by　surrounding　my



path　with　dangers；　and　by　weakening　and　demoralising　society；　from



which　I　have　a　right　to　claim　mutual　aid　and　intercourse。〃　A　theory　of



〃social　rights〃　the　like　of　which　probably　never　before　found　its　way



into　distinct　language：　being　nothing　short　of　this…　that　it　is　the



absolute　social　right　of　every　individual；　that　every　other　individual



shall　act　in　every　respect　exactly　as　he　ought；　that　whosoever　fails



thereof　in　the　smallest　particular　violates　my　social　right；　and



entitles　me　to　demand　from　the　legislature　the　removal　of　the



grievance。　So　monstrous　a　principle　is　far　more　dangerous　than　any



single　interference　with　liberty；　there　is　no　violation　of　liberty



which　it　would　not　justify；　it　acknowledges　no　right　to　any　freedom



whatever；　except　perhaps　to　that　of　holding　opinions　in　secret；



without　ever　disclosing　them：　for；　the　moment　an　opinion　which　I



consider　noxious　passes　any　one's　lips；　it　invades　all　the　〃social



rights〃　attributed　to　me　by　the　Alliance。　The　doctrine　ascribes　to　all



mankind　a　vested　interest　in　each　other's　moral；　intellectual；　and



even　physical　perfection；　to　be　defined　by　each　claimant　according



to　his　own　standard。



　　Another　important　example　of　illegitimate　interference　with　the



rightful　liberty　of　the　individual；　not　simply　threatened；　but　long



since　carried　into　triumphant　effect；　is　Sabbatarian　legislation。



Without　doubt；　abstinence　on　one　day　in　the　week；　so　far　as　the



exigencies　of　life　permit；　from　the　usual　daily　occupation；　though



in　no　respect　religiously　binding　on　any　except　Jews；　is　a　highly



beneficial　custom。　And　inasmuch　as　this　custom　cannot　be　observed



without　a　general　consent　to　that　effect　among　the　industrious



classes；　therefore；　in　so　far　as　some　persons　by　working　may　impose



the　same　necessity　on　others；　it　may　be　allowable　and　right　that　the



law　should　guarantee　to　each　the　observance　by　others　of　the　custom；



by　suspending　the　greater　operations　of　industry　on　a　particular



day。　But　this　justification；　grounded　on　the　direct　interest　which



others　have　in　each　individual's　observance　of　the　practice；　does



not　apply　to　the　self…chosen　occupations　in　which　a　person　may　think



fit　to　employ　his　leisure；　nor　does　it　hold　good；　in　the　smallest



degree；　for　legal　restrictions　on　amusements。　It　is　true　that　the



amusement　of　some　is　the　day's　work　of　others；　but　the　pleasure；　not



to　say　the　useful　recreation；　of　many；　is　worth　the　labour　of　a　few；



provided　the　occupation　is　freely　chosen；　and　can　be　freely



resigned。　The　operatives　are　perfectly　right　in　thinking　that　if　all



worked　on　Sunday；　seven　days'　work　would　have　to　be　given　for　six



days'　wages；　but　so　long　as　the　great　mass　of　employments　are



suspended；　the　small　number　who　for　the　enjoyment　of　others　must　still



work；　obtain　a　proportional　increase　of　earnings；　and　they　are　not



obliged　to　follow　those　occupations　if　they　prefer　leisure　to



emolument。　If　a　further　remedy　is　sought；　it　might　be　found　in　the



establishment　by　custom　of　a　holiday　on　some　other　day　of　the　week　for



those　particular　classes　of　persons。　The　only　ground；　therefore；　on



which　restrictions　on　Sunday　amusements　can　be　defended；　must　be



that　they　are　religiously　wrong；　a　motive　of　legislation　which　can



never　be　too　earnestly　protested　against。　Deorum　injuriae　Diis



curae。　It　remains　to　be　proved　that　society　or　any　of　its　officers



holds　a　commission　from　on