Text Analysis: Liberty of the Press

Leah Vickers
10/15/08
Rhetorical Analysis

AUTHOR:
The author of this primary document was not specified. But on the first page, third paragraph, he talks about England and how it has a limited monarchy. He makes an indication that he may be an English man by stating, "But in a limited monarchy, as England is, our laws are known, fixed, and established." By saying "our" laws, he testifies that he himself might be from England himself. This is the only indication that I am aware of in the document. Another reason why I believe the author is an English man is because throughout the text he mainly sides with the limited monarchy and portrays the absolute monarchy as being wrong or faulty. And as he said, a limited monarchy exists in England.

AUDIENCE:
The audience of the document is not quite clear to me. My guess would be that the document is directed towards the people who might be joining a colony that possesses a limited or an absolute monarchy. The author is informing them of the atrocities and also the virtuous things that come with each monarchy involving Liberty of the Press.

TONE:
The main tone of this piece of writing is authoritative. The way the author pieces together his thoughts is also informative to the reader. He started off with the importance of Liberty of the Press and began into the two types of monarchies that either included or denied Liberty of the Press. The authoritative tone comes from the way he tells the reader of the consequences of abusing the liberty. "...for if such an overgrown criminal, or an impudent monster in iniquity, cannot immediately be come at by ordinary Justice, let him yet receive the lash of satire, let the glaring truths of his ill administration, if possible, awaken his conscience, and if he has no conscience, rouse his fear by showing him his deserts, sting him with dread of punishment, cover him with shame, and render his actions odious to all honest minds."

PURPOSE/CONTEXT:
The purpose of the document was to tell readers of the importance of Liberty of the Press to a limited monarchy and the unimportance to an absolute monarchy. Since an absolute monarchy's government is determined solely by the ruler, there was so liberty of press. No one in an absolute monarchy was able to express any words publicly without a penalty. Such liberty was considered inconsistent with the constitution. The only laws in an absolute monarchy were those of the prince. And they weren't even considered laws, just a wills. A limited monarchy respects liberty of the press and it is incorporated and interwoven with the constitution. An offense against the law was an offense against the constitution. The author writes, "It is indeed urged that the liberty of the press ought to be restrained because not only the actions of evil ministers may be exposed, but the character of good ones traduced." Basically he is saying that in the limited monarchy where liberty of the press is practiced, anyone can say anything at anytime. This means that the evil ministers are able to persuade people into wrong thinking and it is pretty much okay. Although if this did happen, he would be considered an abuser of the right of press and would then be punished in some way. They believed that "Truth will always prevail over falsehood." Meaning, whatever is true and right will be known over anything that is slander or of wrong-doing. The author argues, "I believe every honest Briton of whatever denomination, who loves his country, if left to his own free and unbiased judgment is a friend to the liberty of the press and an enemy to any restraint upon it." Liberty of the press was intended to be used as a way of expressing praise, flattery, or tribute, and if you abuse the right you are considered an enemy of the liberty.