Rights of Man by Thomas Paine. First published in London, 1791.
This was the second of Thomas Paine’s three 18th century bestsellers chronologically. It was written and published in England in two parts; the first in March 1791 and the second in February 1792. The first part was dedicated to George Washington and the second to the Marquis de Lafayette, who had fought in Washington’s army and was one of the early leaders of the French Revolution.
Paine returned to Europe from America in 1787, partly to visit his parents. While he was in England he met or renewed his acquaintance with leading radicals and opposition politicians including Edmund Burke. Burke had been a supporter of the American colonists so Paine was surprised and shocked when in November 1790 Burke published Reflections on the Revolution in France, which was wholly hostile to the French Revolution. Between 1789 and 1790 Paine travelled frequently to France and was an eye witness to many of the revolutionary events. The first part of the Rights of Man is subtitled Being an Answer to Mr Burke’s Attack on the French Revolution and it contains a stirring account of the events that led to the storming of the Bastille. In Part 2 Paine claims: ‘Had he (Burke) not urged the controversy, I had most probably been a silent man.’
Burke recommended the English government, founded on the Glorious Revolution of 1688 when William and Mary ascended the throne and Parliament declared that they ‘most humbly and faithfully submit themselves, their heirs and our posterity, to them, their heirs and posterity, to the end of time.’ He mourned that with the French Revolution, ‘The age of chivalry is gone! The glory of Europe is extinguished for ever!’ This provoked Paine’s celebrated response: ‘He pities the plumage but forgets the dying bird.’ Paine argued that no one generation could commit their posterity for ever. He remarked that as well as abusing the French Revolution Burke spent almost as much time abusing Dr Price, a nonconformist minister at Newington Green, one of Andy Pakula’s predecessors. Dr Price had argued in a sermon that ‘by the principles of the Revolution, the people of England have acquired three fundamental rights: 1. To choose their own governors; 2. To cashier them for incompetence; 3. To frame a government for ourselves.’ Paine agreed with him. He held that a legitimate government must arise from the Nation, not be imposed upon it.
Part 1 includes the text of the French National Assembly’s Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens. Paine argues for freedom of religion, not toleration. He argues that both prescription and toleration in religion are tantamount to telling the Almighty what type of worship he may receive!
In Part 2 Paine responds to Burke’s statement questioning whether writings such as the Rights of Man ‘deserve any other refutation than that of criminal justice,’ by saying: ‘Pardoning the pun, it must be criminal justice indeed that should condemn a work as a substitute for not being able to refute it.’ Of course, after the publication of Part 2 the authorities did have resort to criminal justice, charging Paine with seditious libel. He avoided a possible death sentence by escaping to France.
Unlike Part 1, Part 2 deals in particulars and makes several specific allegations about the misuse of tax revenue by British monarchs, such as George I’s purchase of the Duchy of Bremen. The figures he uses in discussing taxes are drawn from Sir John Sinclair’s History of the Revenue. (Sir John introduced the word ‘statistics’ to the language.) Paine uses this information to argue for better use of taxes in a rudimentary form of welfare state.
Burke’s view of the French Revolution was totally pessimistic, claiming that it must descend into violence and dictatorship and in the short term he was right. Paine was unrealistically optimistic, assuming that within seven years aristocracy would be abolished throughout Europe and that democratic republican governments would never go to war with each other. However, in the long run, it is Paine’s ideas that have gained ascendancy but I wonder what he would make of the modern United States of America – President Trump perhaps?
Barbara Burfoot is a former Chair of SOF Trustees.