------------------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
XIII The Rights of Man
PART THE FIRST
BEING AN ANSWER TO MR. BURKE'S ATTACK ON
THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
*
Editor's Introduction
*
Dedication to George Washington
*
Preface to the English Edition
*
Preface to the French Edition
*
Rights of Man
*
Miscellaneous Chapter
*
Conclusion
XIV The Rights of Man
PART THE SECOND
COMBINING PRINCIPLE AND
PRACTICE
*
French Translator's Preface
*
Dedication to M. de la Fayette
*
Preface
*
Introduction
*
Chapter I Of Society and
Civilisation
*
Chapter II Of the Origin of the
Present Old Governments
*
Chapter III Of the Old and New Systems of Government
*
Chapter IV Of Constitutions
*
Chapter V Ways and Means of
Improving the Condition of Europe,
Interspersed with Miscellaneous
Observations
*
Appendix
*
Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
THE WRITINGS
OF
THOMAS PAINE
COLLECTED AND EDITED BY MONCURE
DANIEL CONWAY
VOLUME II.
1779 - 1792
--------------------------------------------------------------------
XIII.
RIGHTS
OF MAN.
EDITOR'S
INTRODUCTION.
WHEN
Thomas Paine sailed from America for France, in April, 1787, he
was
perhaps as happy a man as any in the world. His most intimate
friend,
Jefferson, was Minister at Paris, and his friend Lafayette
was the
idol of France. His fame had preceded him, and he at once
became,
in Paris, the centre of the same circle of savants and
philosophers
that had surrounded Franklin. His main reason for
proceeding
at once to Paris was that he might submit to the Academy
of
Sciences his invention of an iron bridge, and with its favorable
verdict
he came to England, in September. He at once went to his aged
mother
at Thetford, leaving with a publisher (Ridgway), his "
Prospects
on the Rubicon." He next made arrangements to patent his
bridge,
and to construct at Rotherham the large model of it exhibited
on
Paddington Green, London. He was welcomed in England by leading
statesmen,
such as Lansdowne and Fox, and above all by Edmund Burke,
who for
some time had him as a guest at Beaconsfield, and drove him
about
in various parts of the country. He had not the slightest
revolutionary
purpose, either as regarded England or France. Towards
Louis
XVI. he felt only gratitude for the services he had rendered
America,
and towards George III. he felt no animosity whatever. His
four
months' sojourn in Paris had convinced him that there was
approaching
a reform of that country after the American model, except
that
the Crown would be preserved, a compromise he approved, provided
the
throne should not be hereditary. Events in France travelled more
swiftly
than he had anticipated, and Paine was summoned by Lafayette,
Condorcet,
and others, as an adviser in the formation of a new
constitution.
Such
was the situation immediately preceding the political and
literary
duel between Paine and Burke, which in the event turned out
a
tremendous war between Royalism and Republicanism in Europe. Paine
was,
both in France and in England, the inspirer of moderate
counsels.
Samuel Rogers relates that in early life he dined at a
friend's
house in London with Thomas Paine, when one of the toasts
given
was the " memory of Joshua,"-in allusion to the Hebrew leader's
conquest
of the kings of Canaan, and execution of them. Paine
observed
that he would not treat kings like Joshua. " I 'm of the
Scotch
parson's opinion," he said, "when he prayed against Louis
XIV.-`Lord,
shake him over the mouth of hell, but don't let him drop!
'
" Paine then gave as his toast, " The Republic of the
World,"-which
Samuel
Rogers, aged twenty-nine, noted as a sublime idea. This was
Paine's
faith and hope, and with it he confronted the revolutionary
storms
which presently burst over France and England.
Until
Burke's arraignment of France in his parliamentary speech
(February
9, I790), Paine had no doubt whatever that he would
sympathize
with the movement in France, and wrote to him from that
country
as if conveying glad tidings. Burke's " Reflections on the
Revolution
in France " appeared November 1, 1790, and Paine at once
set
himself to answer it. He was then staying at the Angel Inn,
Islington.
The inn has been twice rebuilt since that time, and from
its
contents there is preserved only a small image, which perhaps was
meant
to represent " Liberty,"-possibly brought from Paris by Paine
as an
ornament for his study. From the Angel he removed to a house in
Harding
Street, Fetter Lane. Rickman says Part First of " Rights of
Man
" was finished at Versailles, but probably this has reference to
the
preface only, as I cannot find Paine in France that year until
April
8. The book had been printed by Johnson, in time for the
opening
of Parliament, in February ; but this publisher became
frightened
after a few copies were out (there is one in the British
Museum),
and the work was transferred to J. S. Jordan, 166 Fleet
Street,
with a preface sent from Paris (not contained in Johnson's
edition,
nor in the American editions). The pamphlet, though sold at
the
same price as Burke's, three shillings, had a vast circulation,
and
Paine gave the proceeds to the Constitutional Societies which
sprang
up under his teachings in various parts of the country.
Soon
after appeared Burke's " Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs."
In this
Burke quoted a good deal from " Rights of Man," but replied
to it
only with exclamation points, saying that the only answer such
ideas
merited was "criminal justice." Paine's Part Second followed,
published
February 17, 1792. In Part First Paine had mentioned a
rumor
that Burke was a masked pensioner (a charge that will be
noticed
in connection with its detailed statement in a further
publication);
and as Burke had been formerly arraigned in Parliament,
while
Paymaster, for a very questionable proceeding, this charge no
doubt
hurt a good deal. Although the government did not follow
Burke's
suggestion of a prosecution at that time, there is little
doubt
that it was he who induced the prosecution of Part Second.
Before the
trial came on, December 18, 1792, Paine was occupying his
seat in
the French Convention, and could only be outlawed.
Burke
humorously remarked to a friend of Paine and himself, " We hunt
in
pairs." The severally representative character and influence of
these
two men in the revolutionary era, in France and England,
deserve
more adequate study than they have received. While Paine
maintained
freedom of discussion, Burke first proposed criminal
prosecution
for sentiments by no means libellous (such as Paine's
Part
First). While Paine was endeavoring to make the movement in
France
peaceful, Burke fomented the league of monarchs against France
which
maddened its people, and brought on the Reign of Terror. While
Paine
was endeavoring to preserve the French throne ("phantom" though
he
believed it), to prevent bloodshed, Burke was secretly writing to
the
Queen of France, entreating her not to compromise, and to " trust
to the
support of foreign armies " (" Histoire de France depuis
1789."
Henri Martin, i., 151). While Burke thus helped to bring the
King
and Queen to the guillotine, Paine pleaded for their lives to
the
last moment. While Paine maintained the right of mankind to
improve
their condition, Burke held that " the awful Author of our
being
is the author of our place in the order of existence; and that,
having
disposed and marshalled us by a divine tactick, not according
to our
will, but according to his, he has, in and by that
disposition,
virtually subjected us to act the part which belongs to
the
place assigned us." Paine was a religious believer in eternal
principles;
Burke held that " political problems do not primarily
concern
truth or falsehood. They relate to good or evil. What in the
result
is likely to produce evil is politically false, that which is
productive
of good politically is true." Assuming thus the
visionary's
right to decide before the result what was " likely to
produce
evil," Burke vigorously sought to kindle war against the
French
Republic which might have developed itself peacefully, while
Paine
was striving for an international Congress in Europe in the
interest
of peace. Paine had faith in the people, and believed that,
if
allowed to choose representatives, they would select their best
and
wisest men; and that while reforming government the people would
remain
orderly, as they had generally remained in America during the
transition
from British rule to selfgovernment. Burke maintained that
if the
existing political order were broken up there would be no
longer
a people, but " a number of vague, loose individuals, and
nothing
more." " Alas! " he exclaims, " they little know how many a
weary
step is to be taken before they can form themselves into a
mass,
which has a true personality." For the sake of peace Paine
wished
the revolution to be peaceful as the advance of summer ; he
used
every endeavor to reconcile English radicals to some modus
vivendi
with the existing order, as he was willing to retain Louis
XVI. as
head of the executive in France : Burke resisted every
tendency
of English statesmanship to reform at home, or to negotiate
with
the French Republic, and was mainly responsible for the King's
death
and the war that followed between England and France in
February,
1793. Burke became a royal favorite, Paine was outlawed by
a
prosecution originally proposed by Burke. While Paine was demanding
religious
liberty, Burke was opposing the removal of penal statutes
from
Unitarians, on the ground that but for those statutes Paine
might
some day set up a church in England. When Burke was retiring on
a large
royal pension, Paine was in prison, through the devices of
Burke's
confederate, the American Minister in Paris. So the two men,
as
Burke said, " hunted in pairs."
So far
as Burke attempts to affirm any principle he is fairly quoted
in
Paine's work, and nowhere misrepresented. As for Paine's own
ideas,
the reader should remember that "Rights of Man" was the
earliest
complete statement of republican principles. They were
pronounced
to be the fundamental principles of the American Republic
by
Jefferson, Madison, and Jackson,-the three Presidents who above
all
others represented the republican idea which Paine first allied
with
American Independence. Those who suppose that Paine did but
reproduce
the principles of Rousseau and Locke will find by careful
study
of his well-weighed language that such is not the case. Paine's
political
principles were evolved out of his early Quakerism. He was
potential
in George Fox. The belief that every human soul was the
child
of God, and capable of direct inspiration from the Father of
all,
without mediator or priestly intervention, or sacramental
instrumentality,
was fatal to all privilege and rank. The universal
Fatherhood
implied universal Brotherhood, or human equality. But the
fate of
the Quakers proved the necessity of protecting the individual
spirit
from oppression by the majority as well as by privileged
classes.
For this purpose Paine insisted on surrounding the
individual
right with the security of the Declaration of Rights, not
to be
invaded by any government; and would reduce government to an
association
limited in its operations to the defence of those rights
which
the individual is unable, alone, to maintain.
From the
preceding chapter it will be seen that Part Second of "
Rights
of Man " was begun by Paine in the spring of 1 791. At the
close
of that year, or early in 1792, he took up his abode with his
friend
Thomas" Clio " Rickman, at No. 7 Upper Marylebone Street.
Rickman
was a radical publisher; the house remains still a
book-binding
establishment, and seems little changed since Paine
therein
revised the proofs of Part Second on a table which Rickman
marked
with a plate, and which is now in possession of Mr. Edward
Truelove.
As the plate states, Paine wrote on the same table other
works
which appeared in England in 1792.
In 1795
D. I. Eaton published an edition of " Rights of Man," with a
preface
purporting to have been written by Paine while in Luxembourg
prison.
It is manifestly spurious. The genuine English and French
prefaces
are given.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHTS OF MAN
BEING AN ANSWER TO MR. BURKE'S ATTACK
ON THE FRENCH
REVOLOUTION
BY
THOMAS PAINE
SECRETARY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO
CONGRESS IN THE
AMERICAN WAR, AND
AUTHOR OF THE WORKS ENTITLED "COMMON
SENSE' AND 'A LETTER TO ABBÉ
RAYNAL"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEDICATION
George
Washington
President
Of The United States Of America
Sir,
I
present you a small treatise in defence of those principles of
freedom
which your exemplary virtue hath so eminently contributed to
establish.
That the Rights of Man may become as universal as your
benevolence
can wish, and that you may enjoy the happiness of seeing
the New
World regenerate the Old, is the prayer of
Sir,
Your
much obliged, and
Obedient
humble Servant,
Thomas
Paine
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PAINE'S PREFACE TO THE ENGLISH
EDITION
From
the part Mr. Burke took in the American Revolution, it was
natural
that I should consider him a friend to mankind; and as our
acquaintance
commenced on that ground, it would have been more
agreeable
to me to have had cause to continue in that opinion than to
change
it.
At the
time Mr. Burke made his violent speech last winter in the
English
Parliament against the French Revolution and the National
Assembly,
I was in Paris, and had written to him but a short time
before
to inform him how prosperously matters were going on. Soon
after
this I saw his advertisement of the Pamphlet he intended to
publish:
As the attack was to be made in a language but little
studied,
and less understood in France, and as everything suffers by
translation,
I promised some of the friends of the Revolution in that
country
that whenever Mr. Burke's Pamphlet came forth, I would answer
it.
This appeared to me the more necessary to be done, when I saw the
flagrant
misrepresentations which Mr. Burke's Pamphlet contains; and
that
while it is an outrageous abuse on the French Revolution, and
the
principles of Liberty, it is an imposition on the rest of the
world.
I am
the more astonished and disappointed at this conduct in Mr.
Burke,
as (from the circumstances I am going to mention) I had formed
other
expectations.
I had
seen enough of the miseries of war, to wish it might never more
have
existence in the world, and that some other mode might be found
out to
settle the differences that should occasionally arise in the
neighbourhood
of nations. This certainly might be done if Courts were
disposed
to set honesty about it, or if countries were enlightened
enough
not to be made the dupes of Courts. The people of America had
been
bred up in the same prejudices against France, which at that
time
characterised the people of England; but experience and an
acquaintance
with the French Nation have most effectually shown to
the Americans
the falsehood of those prejudices; and I do not believe
that a
more cordial and confidential intercourse exists between any
two
countries than between America and France.
When I
came to France, in the spring of 1787, the Archbishop of
Thoulouse
was then Minister, and at that time highly esteemed. I
became
much acquainted with the private Secretary of that Minister, a
man of
an enlarged benevolent heart; and found that his sentiments
and my
own perfectly agreed with respect to the madness of war, and
the
wretched impolicy of two nations, like England and France,
continually
worrying each other, to no other end than that of a
mutual
increase of burdens and taxes. That I might be assured I had
not
misunderstood him, nor he me, I put the substance of our opinions
into
writing and sent it to him; subjoining a request, that if I
should
see among the people of England, any disposition to cultivate
a
better understanding between the two nations than had hitherto
prevailed,
how far I might be authorised to say that the same
disposition
prevailed on the part of France? He answered me by letter
in the
most unreserved manner, and that not for himself only, but for
the
Minister, with whose knowledge the letter was declared to be
written.
I put
this letter into the, hands of Mr. Burke almost three years
ago,
and left it with him, where it still remains; hoping, and at the
same
time naturally expecting, from the opinion I had conceived of
him,
that he would find some opportunity of making good use of it,
for the
purpose of removing those errors and prejudices which two
neighbouring
nations, from the want of knowing each other, had
entertained,
to the injury of both.
When
the French Revolution broke out, it certainly afforded to Mr.
Burke
an opportunity of doing some good, had he been disposed to it;
instead
of which, no sooner did he see the old prejudices wearing
away,
than he immediately began sowing the seeds of a new inveteracy,
as if
he were afraid that England and France would cease to be
enemies.
That there are men in all countries who get their living by
war,
and by keeping up the quarrels of Nations, is as shocking as it
is
true; but when those who are concerned in the government of a
country,
make it their study to sow discord and cultivate prejudices
between
Nations, it becomes the more unpardonable.
With
respect to a paragraph in this work alluding to Mr. Burke's
having
a pension, the report has been some time in circulation, at
least
two months; and as a person is often the last to hear what
concerns
him the most to know, I have mentioned it, that Mr. Burke
may
have an opportunity of contradicting the rumour, if he thinks
proper.
Thomas
Paine
PAINE'S PREFACE TO THE FRENCH
EDITION
The
astonishment which the French Revolution has caused throughout
Europe
should be considered from two different points of view: first
as it
affects foreign peoples, secondly as it affects their
governments.
The
cause of the French people is that of all Europe, or rather of
the
whole world; but the governments of all those countries are by no
means
favorable to it. It is important that we should never lose
sight
of this distinction. We must not confuse the peoples with their
governments;
especially not the English people with its government.
The
government of England is no friend of the revolution of France.
Of this
we have sufficient proofs in the thanks given by that weak
and
witless person, the Elector of Hanover, sometimes called the King
of
England, to Mr. Burke for the insults heaped on it in his book,
and in
the malevolent comments of the English Minister, Pitt, in his
speeches
in Parliament.
In
spite of the professions of sincerest friendship found in the
official
correspondence of the English government with that of
France,
its conduct gives the lie to all its declarations, and shows
us
clearly that it is not a court to be trusted, but an insane court,
plunging
in all the quarrels and intrigues of Europe, in quest of a
war to
satisfy its folly and countenance its extravagance.
The
English nation, on the contrary, is very favorably disposed
towards
the French Revolution, and to the progress of liberty in the
whole
world; and this feeling will become more general in England as
the
intrigues and artifices of its government are better known, and
the
principles of the revolution better understood. The French should
know
that most English newspapers are directly in the pay of
government,
or, if indirectly connected with it, always under its
orders;
and that those papers constantly distort and attack the
revolution
in France in order to deceive the nation. But, as it is
impossible
long to prevent the prevalence of truth, the daily
falsehoods
of those papers no longer have the desired effect.
To be
convinced that the voice of truth has been stifled in England,
the
world needs only to be told that the government regards and
prosecutes
as a libel that which it should protect.*[1] This outrage
on
morality is called law, and judges are found wicked enough to
inflict
penalties on truth.
The
English government presents, just now, a curious phenomenon.
Seeing
that the French and English nations are getting rid of the
prejudices
and false notions formerly entertained against each other,
and
which have cost them so much money, that government seems to be
placarding
its need of a foe; for unless it finds one somewhere, no
pretext
exists for the enormous revenue and taxation now deemed
necessary.
Therefore
it seeks in Russia the enemy it has lost in France, and
appears
to say to the universe, or to say to itself. "If nobody will
be so
kind as to become my foe, I shall need no more fleets nor
armies,
and shall be forced to reduce my taxes. The American war
enabled
me to double the taxes; the Dutch business to add more; the
Nootka
humbug gave me a pretext for raising three millions sterling
more;
but unless I can make an enemy of Russia the harvest from wars
will
end. I was the first to incite Turk against Russian, and now I
hope to
reap a fresh crop of taxes."
If the
miseries of war, and the flood of evils it spreads over a
country,
did not check all inclination to mirth, and turn laughter
into
grief, the frantic conduct of the government of England would
only
excite ridicule. But it is impossible to banish from one's mind
the
images of suffering which the contemplation of such vicious
policy
presents. To reason with governments, as they have existed for
ages,
is to argue with brutes. It is only from the nations themselves
that
reforms can be expected. There ought not now to exist any doubt
that
the peoples of France, England, and America, enlightened and
enlightening
each other, shall henceforth be able, not merely to give
the
world an example of good government, but by their united
influence
enforce its practice.
(Translated
from the French)
RIGHTS OF MAN
Among
the incivilities by which nations or individuals provoke and
irritate
each other, Mr. Burke's pamphlet on the French Revolution is
an
extraordinary instance. Neither the People of France, nor the
National
Assembly, were troubling themselves about the affairs of
England,
or the English Parliament; and that Mr. Burke should
commence
an unprovoked attack upon them, both in Parliament and in
public,
is a conduct that cannot be pardoned on the score of manners,
nor
justified on that of policy.
There
is scarcely an epithet of abuse to be found in the English
language,
with which Mr. Burke has not loaded the French Nation and
the
National Assembly. Everything which rancour, prejudice, ignorance
or
knowledge could suggest, is poured forth in the copious fury of
near
four hundred pages. In the strain and on the plan Mr. Burke was
writing,
he might have written on to as many thousands. When the
tongue
or the pen is let loose in a frenzy of passion, it is the man,
and not
the subject, that becomes exhausted.
Hitherto
Mr. Burke has been mistaken and disappointed in the opinions
he had
formed of the affairs of France; but such is the ingenuity of
his
hope, or the malignancy of his despair, that it furnishes him
with
new pretences to go on. There was a time when it was impossible
to make
Mr. Burke believe there would be any Revolution in France.
His opinion
then was, that the French had neither spirit to undertake
it nor
fortitude to support it; and now that there is one, he seeks
an
escape by condemning it.
Not
sufficiently content with abusing the National Assembly, a great
part of
his work is taken up with abusing Dr. Price (one of the
best-hearted
men that lives) and the two societies in England known
by the
name of the Revolution Society and the Society for
Constitutional
Information.
Dr.
Price had preached a sermon on the 4th of November, 1789, being
the
anniversary of what is called in England the Revolution, which
took
place 1688. Mr. Burke, speaking of this sermon, says: "The
political
Divine proceeds dogmatically to assert, that by the
principles
of the Revolution, the people of England have acquired
three
fundamental rights:
1. To
choose our own governors.
2. To
cashier them for misconduct.
3. To
frame a government for ourselves."
Dr.
Price does not say that the right to do these things exists in
this or
in that person, or in this or in that description of persons,
but
that it exists in the whole; that it is a right resident in the
nation.
Mr. Burke, on the contrary, denies that such a right exists
in the
nation, either in whole or in part, or that it exists
anywhere;
and, what is still more strange and marvellous, he says:
"that
the people of England utterly disclaim such a right, and that
they
will resist the practical assertion of it with their lives and
fortunes."
That men should take up arms and spend their lives and
fortunes,
not to maintain their rights, but to maintain they have not
rights,
is an entirely new species of discovery, and suited to the
paradoxical
genius of Mr. Burke.
The
method which Mr. Burke takes to prove that the people of England
have no
such rights, and that such rights do not now exist in the
nation,
either in whole or in part, or anywhere at all, is of the
same
marvellous and monstrous kind with what he has already said; for
his
arguments are that the persons, or the generation of persons, in
whom
they did exist, are dead, and with them the right is dead also.
To
prove this, he quotes a declaration made by Parliament about a
hundred
years ago, to William and Mary, in these words: "The Lords
Spiritual
and Temporal, and Commons, do, in the name of the people
aforesaid"
(meaning the people of England then living) "most humbly
and
faithfully submit themselves, their heirs and posterities, for
Ever."
He quotes a clause of another Act of Parliament made in the
same
reign, the terms of which he says, "bind us" (meaning the people
of
their day), "our heirs and our posterity, to them, their heirs and
posterity,
to the end of time."
Mr.
Burke conceives his point sufficiently established by producing
those
clauses, which he enforces by saying that they exclude the
right
of the nation for ever. And not yet content with making such
declarations,
repeated over and over again, he farther says, "that if
the
people of England possessed such a right before the Revolution"
(which
he acknowledges to have been the case, not only in England,
but
throughout Europe, at an early period), "yet that the English
Nation
did, at the time of the Revolution, most solemnly renounce and
abdicate
it, for themselves, and for all their posterity, for ever."
As Mr.
Burke occasionally applies the poison drawn from his horrid
principles,
not only to the English nation, but to the French
Revolution
and the National Assembly, and charges that august,
illuminated
and illuminating body of men with the epithet of
usurpers,
I shall, sans ceremonie, place another system of principles