本文旨在研究法國大革命時代英國社會輿論如何回應政治審判，以及十八世紀末英國保守派、自由派與激進派對於出版自由與公共精神的辯論。目前英美學界對於英國十八世紀末出版自由的研究，著重於探討國家如何壓迫出版與言論自由，並視趨於保守的輿論為政府介入公共領域的結果。本研究欲跳脫上述框架，藉由此時期政治審判案例與關於出版自由的論冊辯論，勾勒出各方如何各自詮釋憲法與出版自由的內涵，並強調支持憲政秩序者不僅是彼特政府一方，更是當時大部分英國人的共識。因此，十八世紀末英國對於出版自由的討論，不是從天賦人權和抽象理論論述，而是從普通法和憲法脈絡中找尋法源。1790年代末期的英國社會輿論沒有特定的支持對象，從大革命辯論、潘恩(Thomas Paine, 1737-1809)審判案到1794年叛亂罪審判，沒有哪一方能完全掌握輿論的走向，即使握有政治優勢的政府和保守派，也必須小心翼翼地面對社會大眾的輿論力量。故而憲政精神益發清晰的公共言論，不能說是政令宣導的工具，或是喪失公共精神下的結果。

This article explores the public debates among British conservatives, liberals, and radicals on press freedom and public spirit, and how public opinion responded to the political trials in the age of the French Revolution. Anglophone scholars tend to focus on the degree to which the state machine operated to repress the liberty of the press, and regard the conservative shift of public opinion as the result of state intervention in the public sphere. This article does not explain public opinion from this perspective. Instead, it stresses the power interactions of all groups during the debates and emphasizes that the participants forming public opinion were not only the radicals, but also conservative groups. From the seditious libel trial of Thomas Paine to the treason trials of 1794, no one could fully manipulate the tides of public opinion. Most political groups agreed that press freedom was one of Britain’s historical achievements and recognized that their patriotic ancestors had protected their freedom and rights properly. Neither Paine’s call for radical reform nor the government’s oppression policy won the upper hand in public opinion. All in all, the public opinion supporting constitution and monarchy was not a propaganda machine for the government; critical public spirit remained at the end of the century.

出版自由;英國憲法;柏克;福克斯;厄斯金;法國大革命

iberty of the press; British constitution; Edmund Burck; Charles James Fox; Thomas Erskine; the French Revolution