My propoſal then is, to leave the liberty of the preſs untouched, to be exerciſed in its full extent, force, and vigour, but to permit the liberty of the cudgel to go with it, pari paſſu, Thus, my fellow citizens, if an impudent writer attacks your reputation—dearer perhaps to you than your life, and puts his name to the charge you may go to him as openly, and break his head. If he conceals himſelf behind the printer, and you can nevertheleſs diſcover who he is, you may, in like manner way-lay him in the night, attack him behind, and give him a good drubbing. If your adverſary hires better writers than himſelf, to abuſe you more effectually, you may hire brawney porters, ſtronger than yourſelf, to aſſiſt you in giving him a more effectual drubbing. Thus far goes my project, as to private reſentment and retribution. But if the public ſhould ever happen to be affronted, as it ought to be, with the conduct of ſuch writers, I would not adviſe proceeding immediately to theſe extremities, but that we ſhould in moderation content ourſelves with tarring and feathering, and toſſing them in a blanket.
If, however, it ſhould be thought that this propoſal of mine may diſturb the public peace, I ſhould then humbly recommend to our legiſlators to take up the conſideration of both liberties, that of the preſs, and that of the cudgel; and by an explicit law mark their extent and limits: and at the ſame time that they ſecure the perſon of a citizen from aſſaults, they would like wiſe provide for the ſecurity of his reputation.
