Book XII.
Chap. 12.Words do not constitute an overt act; they remain only in idea. They generally, when considered by themselves, have no determinate signification; for this depends on the tone in which they are uttered. It often happens that in repeating the same words, they have not the same meaning; this meaning depends on their connection with other things; and sometimes more is expressed by silence than by any discourse whatsoever. As there can be nothing so equivocal and ambiguous as all this; how is it possible to convert it into a crime of high treason? Where-ever this law is established; there is an end not only of liberty, but even of its very shadow.
In the manifesto of the late Czarina against the family of the D'Olgorucky's[1], one of these princes is condemned to death for having uttered some indecent words concerning her person; another for having maliciously interpreted her sage regulations for the welfare of the empire, and for having offended her sacred person by disrespectful words.
Not that I pretend to diminish the indignation people ought to have against those who presume to stain the glory of their prince; what I mean is, that if despotic princes are willing to moderate their power, a simple correction would be more proper on those occasions, than an accusation of high treason, a thing always terrible even to innocence itself[2].
Overt acts are not things that happen every days; they are liable to the observation of a great many people; and a false charge in respect to facts may
