IcanturnandtwistasIwill，itisnotaquestionofthefacts。Myexistenceisundersuspicion，myinnermostbeing，myindividuality，isconsideredbad，anditisforthisopinionofmethatIampunished。ThelawpunishesmenotforanywrongIcommit，butforthewrongIdonotcommit。Iamreallybeingpunishedbecausemyactionisnotagainstthelaw，foronlybecauseofthatdoIcompelthelenient，well—meaningjudgetoseizeonmybadframeofmind，whichiscleverenoughnottocomeoutintheopen。
Thelawagainstaframeofmindisnotalawofthestatepromulgatedforitscitizens，butthelawofonepartyagainstanotherparty。Thelawwhichpunishestendencyabolishestheequalityofthecitizensbeforethelaw。Itisalawwhichdivides，notonewhichunites，andalllawswhichdividearereactionary。Itisnotalaw，butaprivilege。
Onemaydowhatanothermaynotdo，notbecausethelatterlackssomeobjectivequality，likeaminorinregardtoconcludingcontracts；no，becausehisgoodintentionsandhisframeofmindareundersuspicion。Themoralstateassumesitsmemberstohavetheframeofmindofthestate，eveniftheyactinoppositiontoanorganofthestate，againstthegovernment。Butinasocietyinwhichoneorganimaginesitselfthesole，exclusivepossessorofstatereasonandstatemorality，inagovernmentwhichopposesthepeopleinprincipleandhenceregardsitsanti—stateframeofmindasthegeneral，normalframeofmind，thebadconscienceofafactioninventslawsagainsttendency，lawsofrevenge，lawsagainstaframeofmindwhichhasitsseatonlyinthegovernmentmembersthemselves。Lawsagainstframeofmindarebasedonanunprincipledframeofmindonanimmoral，materialviewofthestate。
Theyaretheinvoluntarycryofabadconscience。Andhowisalawofthiskindtobeimplemented？Byameansmorerevoltingthanthelawitself：
byspies，orbypreviousagreementtoregardentireliterarytrendsassuspicious，inwhichcase，ofcourse，thetrendtowhichanindividualbelongsmustalsobeinquiredinto。Justasinthelawagainsttendencythelegalformcontradictsthecontent，justasthegovernmentwhichissuesitlashesoutagainstwhatitisitself，againsttheanti—stateframeofmind，soalsoineachparticularcaseitformsasitwerethereverseworldtoitslaws，foritappliesadoublemeasuring—rod。
Whatforonesideisright，fortheothersideiswrong。Theverylawsissuedbythegovernmentaretheoppositeofwhattheymakeintolaw。
Thenewcensorshipinstruction，too，becomesentangledinthisdialectic。Itcontainsthecontradictionofitselfdoing，andmakingitthecensor抯dutytodo，everythingthatitcondemnsasanti—stateinthecaseofthepress。
Thustheinstructionforbidswriterstocastsuspicionontheframeofmindofindividualsorwholeclasses，andinthesamebreathitbidsthecensordivideallcitizensintosuspiciousandunsuspicious，intowell—intentionedandevil—intentioned。Thepressisdeprivedoftherighttocriticise，butcriticismbecomesthedailydutyofthegovernmentalcritic。Thisreversal，however，doesnotendthematter。Withinthepresswhatwasanti—stateasregardscontentappearedassomethingparticular，butfromtheaspectofitsformitwassomethinguniversal，thatistosay，subjecttouniversalappraisal。
However，nowthethingisturnedupside—down：theparticularnowappearsjustifiedinregardtoitscontent，whatisanti—stateappearsastheviewofthestate，asstatelaw；inregardtoitsform，however，whatisanti—stateappearsassomethingparticular，thatcannotbebroughttothegenerallightofday，thatisrelegatedfromtheopenairofpublicitytotheofficefilesofthegovernmentalcritic。Thustheinstructionwantstoprotectreligion，butitviolatesthemostgeneralprincipleofallreligions，thesanctityandinviolabilityofthesubjectiveframeofmind。
ItmakesthecensorinsteadofGodthejudgeoftheheart。Thusitprohibitsoffensiveutterancesanddefamatoryjudgmentsonindividuals，butitexposesyoueverydaytothedefamatoryandoffensivejudgmentofthecensor。Thustheinstructionwantsthegossipofevil—mindedorill—informedpersonssuppressed，butitcompelsthecensortorelyonsuchgossip，onspyingbyill—informedandevil—mindedpersons，degradingjudgmentfromthesphereofobjectivecontenttothatofsubjectiveopinionorarbitraryaction。
Thussuspicionmustnotbecastontheintentionofthestate，buttheinstructionstartsoutfromsuspicioninrespectofthestate。Thusnobadframeofmindmustbeconcealedunderagoodappearance，buttheinstructionitselfisbasedonafalseappearance。Thustheinstructionwantstoenhancenationalfeeling，butitisbasedonaviewthathumiliatesthenation。
Lawfulbehaviourandrespectforthelawaredemandedofus，butatthesametimewehavetohonourinstitutionswhichputusoutsidethelawandintroducearbitrarinessinplaceoflaw。Wearerequiredtorecognisetheprincipleofpersonalitytosuchanextentthatwetrustthecensordespitethedefectsoftheinstitutionofcensorship，andyouviolatetheprincipleofpersonalitytosuchanextentthatyoucausepersonalitytobejudgednotaccordingtoitsactionsbutaccordingtoanopinionoftheopinionofitsactions。Youdemandmodestyandyourstartingpointisthemonstrousimmodestyofappointingindividualservantsofthestatetospyonpeople抯
hearts，tobeomniscient，philosophers，theologians，politicians，DelphicApollos。Ontheonehand，youmakeitourdutytorespectimmodestyand，ontheotherhand，youforbidustobeimmodest。Therealimmodestyconsistsinascribingperfectionofthegenustoparticularindividuals。Thecensorisaparticularindividual，butthepressbecomestheembodimentofthewholegenus。Youorderustohavetrust，andyougivedistrusttheforceoflaw。Youreposesomuchtrustinyourstateinstitutionsthatyouthinktheywillconvertaweakmortal，anofficial，intoasaint，andmaketheimpossiblepossibleforhim。Butyoudistrustyourstateororganismsomuchthatyouareafraidoftheisolatedopinionofaprivateperson；foryoutreatthepressasaprivateperson。Youassumethattheofficialswillactquiteimpersonally，withoutanimosity，passion，narrow—mindednessorhumanweakness。Butwhatisimpersonal，ideas，yoususpectofbeingfullofpersonalintrigueandsubjectivevileness。Theinstructiondemandsunlimitedtrustintheestateofofficials，anditproceedsfromunlimiteddistrustintheestateofnon—officials。Whyshouldwenotpaytitfortat？Whyshouldwenotlookwithsuspiciononpreciselythisestateofofficials？Equallyasregardscharacter。Fromtheoutsetonewhoisimpartialshouldhavemorerespectforthecharacterofthecriticwhoactspubliclythanforthecharacterofthecriticwhoactsinsecret。
Whatisatallbadremainsbad，whoeverpersonifiesthisbadness，whetheraprivatecriticoroneappointedbythegovernment，butinthelattercasethebadnessisauthorisedandregardedfromaboveasanecessitytorealisegoodnessfrombelow。
Thecensorshipoftendencyandthetendencyofcensorshipareagiftofthenewliberalinstruction。Noonewillblameusifweturntothefurtherprovisionsoftheinstructionwithacertainmisgiving。揙ffensiveutterancesanddefamatoryjudgmentsonindividualsarenotsuitableforpublication。擭otsuitableforpublication！Insteadofthismildnesswecouldwishthatanobjectivedefinitionofoffensiveanddefamatoryjudgmentshadbeengiven。揟hesameholdsgoodforsuspicionoftheframeofmindofindividualsor？（asignificantor）搘holeclasses，fortheuseofpartynamesandothersuchpersonalattacks。？Inadmissible，therefore，alsoareclassificationbycategories，attacksonwholeclasses，useofpartynames？andman，likeAdam，hastogiveeverythinganameforittoexistforhim；partynamesareessentialcategoriesforthepoliticalpress，揃ecause，asDr。Sassafrassupposes，EveryillnessforitscureMustfirstreceiveaname。？Allthisisincludedinpersonalattacks。Howthenisonetomakeastart？Onemustnotattackanindividual，andjustaslittletheclass，thegeneral，thejuridicalperson。Thestatewill？andhereitisright？toleratenoinsults，nopersonalattacks；butbyasimple搊r？thegeneralisalsoincludedinthepersonal。By搊r？thegeneralcomesintoit，andbymeansofalittle揳nd？welearnfinallythatthewholequestionhasbeenonlyofpersonalattacks。Butasaperfectlysimpleconsequenceitfollowsthatthepressisforbiddenallcontroloverofficialsasoversuchinstitutionsthatexistasaclassofindividuals。
揑fcensorshipisexercisedinaccordancewiththesedirectivesinthespiritofthecensorshipdecreeofOctober18，1819，adequatescopewillbeaffordedfordecorousandcandidpublicity，anditistobeexpectedthattherebygreatersympathyfortheinterestsoftheFatherlandwillbearousedandthusnationalfeelingenhanced。\"
Wearereadytoadmitthatinaccordancewiththesedirectivesfordecorouspublicity，decorousinthesenseunderstoodbythecensorship，amorethanadequatefieldofplayisafforded？thetermfieldofplayishappilychosen，forthefieldiscalculatedforasportivepressthatissatisfiedwithleapsintheair。Whetheritisadequateforacandidpublicity，andwhereitscandidnesslies，weleavetothereaders？perspicacity。
Asforexpectationsheldoutbytheinstruction，nationalfeelingmay，ofcourse，beenhancedjustasthesendingofabow—stringenhancesthefeelingofTurkishnationality：butwhetherthepress，asmodestasitisserious，willarousesympathyfortheinterestsoftheFatherlandweshallleaveittodecideforitself；ameagrepresscannotbefattenedwithquinine。Perhaps，however，wehavetakentooseriousaviewofthepassagequoted。Weshall，perhaps，getatthemeaningbetterifweregarditasmerelyathorninthewreathofroses。Perhapsthisliberalthornholdsapearlofveryambiguousvalue。Letussee。Italldependsonthecontext。TheenhancementofnationalfeelingandthearousingofsympathyfortheinterestsoftheFatherland，whichintheabove—citedpassagearespokenofasanexpectation，secretlyturnintoanorder，whichimposesanewconstraintonourpoor，consumptivedailypress。揑nthiswayitmaybehopedthatbothpoliticalliteratureandthedailypresswillrealisetheirfunctionbetter，thatwiththeacquirementofrichermaterialtheywillalsoadoptamoredignifiedtone，andinfuturewillscorntospeculateonthecuriosityoftheirreadersthroughcommunicationofbaselessreportstakenfromforeignnewspapersandoriginatingfromevil—mindedorbadlyinformedcorrespondents，bygossipandpersonalattacks？atrendagainstwhichitistheundoubteddutyofthecensorshiptotakemeasures。？Inthewayindicateditishopedthatpoliticalliteratureandthedailypresswillrealisetheirfunctionbetter，etc。However，betterrealisationcannotbeordered，moreoveritisafruitstilltoheawaited，andhoperemainshope。Buttheinstructionismuchtoopracticaltobesatisfiedwithhopesandpiouswishes。Whilethepressisgrantedthehopeofitsfutureimprovementasanewconsolation，thekindlyinstructionatthesametimedeprivesitofarightithasatpresent。Inthehopeofitsimprovementitloseswhatitstillhas。ItfareslikepoorSanchoPanza，fromwhomallthefoodwassnatchedawayunderhiseyesbythecourtdoctorinorderthathisstomachshouldnotbeupsetandmakehimincapableofperformingthedutiesimposedonhimbytheduke。
AtthesametimeweoughtnottomisstheopportunityofinvitingthePrussianwritertoadoptthiskindofdecorousstyle。Inthefirstpartofthesentenceitisstated：揑nthiswayitmaybehopedthat？
Thisthatgovernsawholeseriesofprovisions，namely，thatpoliticalliteratureandthedailypresswillrealisetheirfunctionbetter，thattheywilladoptamoredignifiedtone，etc。，etc。，thattheywillscorncommunicationofbaselessreports，etc。，takenfromforeignnewspapers。
Alltheseprovisionsarestillmattersforhope；buttheconclusion，whichisjoinedtotheforegoingbyadash：揳trendagainstwhichitistheundoubteddutyofthecensorshiptotakemeasures？absolvesthecensorfromtheboringtaskofawaitingthehoped—forimprovementofthedailypress，andinsteadempowershimtodeletewhathefindsundesirablewithoutmoreado。Internaltreatmenthasbeenreplacedbyamputation。揟oapproachthisaimmoreclosely，however，requiresthatgreatcarebetakeninagreeingtonewpublicationsandneweditors，sothatthedailypresswillbeentrustedonlytocompletelyirreproachablepersonswhosescientificability，positionandcharacterguaranteetheseriousnessoftheireffortsandtheloyaltyoftheirmodeofthought。？Beforewegointodetails，letusmakeonegeneralobservation。Theapprovalofneweditors，henceoffutureeditorsingeneral，isentrustedwhollytothe？greatcare？，naturallyofthestateofficials，ofthecensorship，whereasatleasttheoldcensorshipdecreeleftthechoiceofeditors，withcertainguarantees，tothediscretionofthepublisher：揂rticleIX。Thesupremecensorshipauthorityisentitledtoinformthepublisherofanewspaperthataproposededitorisnotsuchastoinspiretherequisitetrust，inwhichcasethepublisherisboundeithertotakeanothereditoror，ifhewantstoretaintheonedesignated，tofurnishforhimasecuritytobedeterminedbyourabove—mentionedstateministriesontheproposaloftheabove—mentionedsupremecensorshipauthority。？Thenewcensorshipinstructionexpressesaquitedifferentprofundity，onecouldcallitaromanticismofthespirit。Whereastheoldcensorshipdecreedemandsanexternal，prosaic，hencelegallydefinable，security，ontheguaranteeofwhicheventheobjectionableeditoristobeallowed，theinstructionontheotherhandtakesawayallindependentwillfromthepublisherofanewspaper。Moreover，itdrawstheattentionofthepreventivewisdomofthegovernment，thegreatcareandintellectualprofundityoftheauthorities，tointernal，subjective，externallyindefinable，qualities。If，however，theindefiniteness，delicatesensitivity，andsubjectiveextravaganceofromanticismbecomepurelyexternal，merelyinthesensethatexternalchancenolongerappearsinitsprosaicdefinitenessandlimitation，butinafantasticglory，inanimaginaryprofundityandsplendour？thentheinstruction，too，canhardlyavoidthisromanticfate。
Theeditorsofthedailypress，acategorywhichincludesalljournalisticactivity，mustbecompletelyirreproachablemen。？Scientificqualification？
isputforwardinthefirstplaceasaguaranteeofthiscompleteirreproachability。
Nottheslightestdoubtarisesastowhetherthecensorcanhavethescientificqualificationtopassjudgmentonscientificqualificationofeverykind。
IfsuchacrowdofuniversalgeniusesknowntothegovernmentaretobefoundinPrussia？everytownhasatleastonecensor？whydonottheseencyclopaedicmindscomeforwardaswriters？Iftheseofficials，overwhelmingintheirnumbersandmightyowingtotheirscientificknowledgeandgenius，wereallatoncetoriseupandsmotherbytheirweightthosemiserablewriters，eachofwhomcanwriteinonlyonegenre，andeveninthatwithoutofficiallyattestedability，anendcouldbeputtotheirregularitiesofthepressmuchbetterthanthroughthecensorship。Whydotheseexpertswho，liketheRomangeese，couldsavetheCapitolbytheircacklingremainsilent？Theirmodestyistoogreat。Thescientificpublicdoesnotknowthem，butthegovernmentdoes。
Andifthesemenareindeedsuchasnostatehassucceededindiscovering，forneverhasastateknownwholeclassescomposedsolelyofuniversalgeniusesandencyclopaedicminds？howmuchgreatermustbethegeniusoftheselectorsofthesemen！Whatsecretsciencemustbetheirsforthemtobeabletoissueacertificateofuniversalscientificqualificationtoofficialsunknownintherepublicofscience！Thehigherweriseinthisbureaucracyofintelligence，themoreremarkablearethemindsweencounter。Forastatewhichpossessessuchpillarsofaperfectpress，isitworththetrouble，isitexpedienttomakethesementheguardiansofadefectivepress，todegradetheperfectintoameansfordealingwiththeimperfect？
Themoreofthesecensorsyouappoint，themareyoudeprivetherealmofthepressofchancesofimprovement。Youtakeawaythehealthyfromyourarmyinordertomakethemphysiciansoftheunhealthy。
MerelystamponthegroundlikePompeyandaPallasAthenaincompletearmourwillspringfromeverygovernmentbuilding。Confrontedbytheofficialpress，theshallowdailypresswilldisintegrateintonothing。Theexistenceoflightsufficestoexpeldarkness。Letyourlightshine，andhideitnotunderabushel。Insteadofadefectivecensorshipwhosefulleffectivenessyouyourselvesregardasproblematic，giveusaperfectpresstowhomyouhaveonlytogiveanorderandamodelofwhichhasbeeninexistenceforcenturiesintheChinesestate。
Buttomakescientificqualificationthesole，necessaryconditionforwritersofthedailypress，isthatnotaprovisionconcerningthemind，nofavouringofprivilege，noconventionaldemand？Isitnotastipulationasregardsthematter，notastipulationasregardstheperson？
Unfortunatelythecensorshipinstructioninterruptsourpanegyric。Alongsidetheguaranteeofscientificqualificationisthedemandforthatofpositionandcharacter。Positionandcharacter！
Character，whichfollowssoimmediatelyafterposition，seemsalmosttobeamereoutcomeofthelatter。Letus，therefore，takealookatpositioninthefirstplace。Itissosqueezedinbetweenscientificqualificationandcharacterthatoneisalmosttemptedtodoubtthegoodconsciencethatcalledforit。
Thegeneraldemandforscientificqualification，howliberal！
Thespecialdemandforposition，howilliberal！Scientificqualificationandpositiontogether，howpseudo—liberal！Sincescientificqualificationandcharacterareveryindefinitethings，whereasposition，ontheotherhand，isverydefinite，whyshouldwenotconcludethatbyanecessarylawoflogictheindefinitewillbesupportedbythedefiniteandobtainstabilityandcontentfromit？Woulditthenbeagreatmistakeonthepartofthecensorifheinterpretedtheinstructionasmeaningthatpositionistheexternalforminwhichscientificqualificationandcharactermanifestthemselvessocially，themoresosincehisownpositionascensorisaguaranteeforhimthatthisviewisthestate抯view？Withoutthisinterpretationitremainsatleastquiteincomprehensiblewhyscientificqualificationandcharacterarenotadequateguaranteesforawriter，whypositionisanecessarythird。Nowifthecensorweretofindhimselfinaquandary，iftheseguaranteeswereseldomorneverpresenttogether，whereshouldhischoicefall？Achoicehastobemade，forsomeonehastoeditnewspapersandperiodicals。Scientificqualificationandcharacterwithoutpositioncouldpresentaproblemforthecensoronaccountoftheirindefiniteness，justasingeneralitmustrightlybeasurprisetohimthatsuchqualitiescouldexistseparatelyfromposition。Ontheotherhand，oughtthecensortohaveanydoubtsaboutcharacterandsciencewherepositionispresent？Inthatcasehewouldhavelessconfidenceinthejudgmentofthestatethaninhisown，whereasintheoppositecasehewouldhavemoreconfidenceinthewriterthaninthestate。Oughtacensortobesotactless，soill—disposed？Itisnottobeexpectedandwillcertainlynotbeexpected。Position，becauseitisthedecisivecriterionincaseofdoubt，isingeneraltheabsolutelydecisivecriterion。
Hence，justasearliertheinstructionwasinconflictwiththecensorshipdecreeowingtoitsorthodoxy，nowitissoowingtoitsromanticism，whichatthesametimeisalwaysthepoetryoftendency。Thecashsecurity，whichisaprosaic，realguarantee，becomesanimaginaryone，andthisimaginaryguaranteeturnsintothewhollyrealandindividualposition，whichacquiresamagicalfictitioussignificance。
Inthesamewaythesignificanceoftheguaranteebecomestransformed。
Thepublishernolongerchoosesaneditor，forwhomhegivesaguaranteetotheauthorities，insteadtheauthoritieschooseaneditorforhim，oneforwhomtheygiveaguaranteetothemselves。Theolddecreelookedfortheworkoftheeditor，forwhichthepublisher抯cashsecurityservedasguarantee。Theinstruction，however，isnotconcernedwiththeworkoftheeditor，butwithhisperson。Itdemandsadefinitepersonalindividuality，whichthepublisher抯moneyshouldprovide。Thenewinstructionisjustassuperficialastheolddecree。
Butwhereasthelatterbyitsnatureexpressedanddelimitedprosaicallydefinedprovisions，theinstructiongivesanimaginarysignificancetothepurestchanceandexpresseswhatismerelyindividualwiththefervourofgenerality。
Whereas，however，asregardstheeditor，theromanticinstructionexpressestheextremelysuperficialdefinitenessinatoneofthemosteasy—goingindefiniteness，asregardsthecensoritexpressesthevaguestindefinitenessinatoneoflegaldefiniteness。揟hesamecautionmustbeexercisedintheappointmentofcensors，sothatthepostofcensorshallbeentrustedonlytomenoftestedframeofmindandability，whofullycorrespondtothehonourabletrustwhichthatofficepresupposes；tomenwhoarebothright—thinkingandkeen—sighted，whoareabletoseparatetheformfromtheessenceofthematterandwithsuretactknowhowtosetasidedoubtwherethemeaningandtendencyofawritingdonotinthemselvesjustifythisdoubt。？Insteadofpositionandcharacterasrequiredofthewriter，wehaveherethetestedframeofmind，sincepositionisalreadythere。Moresignificantisthatwhereasscientificqualificationisdemandedofthewriter，whatisdemandedofthecensorisabilitywithoutfurtherdefinition。
Theolddecree，whichisdrawnupinarationalspiritexceptinrespectofpolitics，callsinArticleIIIfor？scientifically—trained？andeven？enlightened？censors。Intheinstructionbothattributeshavebeendropped，andinsteadofthequalificationofthewriter，whichsignifiesadefinite，well—developedabilitythathasbecomeareality，thereappearsinthecaseofthecensortheaptitudeforqualification，abilityingeneral。Hencetheaptitudeforabilityhastoactascensorofactualqualification，howevermuchinthenatureofthingstherelationshipshouldobviouslybethereverse。Finally，merelyinpassing，wenotethattheabilityofthecensorisnotmorecloselydefinedasregardsitsobjectivecontent，andthis，ofcourse，makesitscharacterambiguous。
Further，thepostofcensoristobeentrustedtomen搘hofullycorrespondtothehonourabletrustwhichthatofficepresupposes？
Thispleonasticpseudo—definition，toselectforanofficemeninwhomonehastrustthatthey（will？）fullycorrespondtothehonourabletrust，certainlyaveryfulltrust，reposedinthem，isnotworthfurtherdiscussion。
Finally，thecensorsmustbemen\"whoarebothright—thinkingandkeen—sighted，whoareabletoseparatetheformfromtheessenceofthematterandwithsuretactknowhowtosetasidedoubtwherethemeaningandtendencyofawritingdonotinthemselvesjustifythisdoubt？Earlier，ontheotherhand，theinstructionprescribes：\"Consideringthis？（namely，theinvestigationoftendency），搕hecensorsmustalsopayspecialattentiontotheformandtoneofwritingsforthepressandinsofaras，owingtopassion，vehemenceandarrogance，theirtendencyisfoundtobepernicious，mustnotallowthemtobeprinted。？Ononeoccasion，therefore，thecensorhastojudgeofthetendencyfromtheform，onanotheroccasion，oftheformfromthetendency。
Ifpreviouslycontenthadalreadydisappearedasacriterionforcensorship，nowformalsodisappears。Aslongasthetendencyisgood，faultsofformdonotmatter。Eveniftheworkcannotberegardedexactlyasveryseriousandmodest，evenifitmayappeartobevehement，passionate，arrogant，whowouldlethimselfbefrightenedbytheroughexterior？Onehastoknowhowtodistinguishbetweenformandessence。Allsemblanceofdefinitionshadtobeabandoned，theinstructionhadtoendinacompletecontradictionwithitself；foreverythingbywhichtendencyissupposedtoberecognisedis，onthecontrary，determinedbythetendencyandmustberecognisedfromthetendency。Thevehemenceofthepatriotisholyzeal，hispassionatenessisthesensitivenessofthelover，hisarroganceadevotedsympathywhichistooimmeasurabletobemoderate。
Allobjectivestandardsareabandoned，everythingisfinallyreducedtothepersonalrelation，andthecensor抯tacthastobecalledaguarantee。Whatthencanthecensorviolate？Tact。Buttactlessnessisnocrime。Whatisthreatenedasfarasthewriterisconcerned？Hisexistence。Whatstatehasevermadetheexistenceofwholeclassesdependonthetactofindividualofficials？
Irepeat，allobjectivestandardsareabandoned。Asregardsthewriter，tendencyistheultimatecontentthatisdemandedfromhimandprescribedtohim。Tendencyasformlessopinionappearsasobject。Tendencyassubject，asopinionofopinion，isthecensor抯tactandhissolecriterion。
Butwhereasthearbitrarinessofthecensor？andtosanctiontheauthorityofmereopinionistosanctionarbitrariness？isalogicalconsequencewhichwasconcealedunderasemblanceofobjectivedefinitions，theinstructionontheotherhandquiteconsciouslyexpressesthearbitrarinessoftheOberprasidium；trustisreposedinthelatterwithoutreserve，andthistrustreposedintheOberprasidentistheultimateguaranteeofthepress。Thustheessenceofthecensorshipingeneralisbasedonthearrogantimaginaryideathatthepolicestatehasofitsofficials。
Thereisnoconfidenceintheintelligenceandgoodwillofthegeneralpubliceveninthesimplestmatter；buteventheimpossibleisconsideredpossiblefortheofficials。
Thisfundamentaldefectisinherentinallourinstitutions。Thus，forexample，incriminalproceedingsjudge，accuseranddefenderarecombinedinasingleperson。Thiscombinationcontradictsallthelawsofpsychology。Buttheofficialisraisedabovethelawsofpsychology，whilethegeneralpublicremainsunderthem。Nevertheless，onecouldexcuseadefectiveprincipleofstate；itbecomesunpardonable，however，ifitisnothonestenoughtobeconsistent。Theresponsibilityoftheofficialsoughttobeasimmeasurablyabovethatofthegeneralpublicastheofficialsareabovethelatter，anditispreciselyhere，whereconsistencyalonecouldjustifytheprincipleandmakeitlegitimatewithinitssphere，itispreciselyherethatitisabandonedandtheoppositeprincipleapplied。
Thecensor，too，isaccuser，defenderandjudgeinasingleperson；controlofthemindisentrustedtothecensor；heisirresponsible。
Thecensorshipcouldhaveonlyaprovisionallyloyalcharacterifitwassubordinatedtotheregularcourts，whichofcourseisimpossiblesolongastherearenoobjectivelawsgoverningcensorship。
Buttheworstmethodofallistosubjectthecensorshiptocensorshipagain，asbyanOberprasidentorsupremecollegeofcensors。
EverythingthatholdsgoodOftherelationOfthepresstothecensorshipholdsgoodalsooftherelationofthecensorshiptothesupremecensorshipandthatofthewritertothesupremecensor，althoughanintermediatelinkisinterposed。Itisthesamerelationplacedonahigherplane，theremarkableerrorofleavingmattersaloneandwantingtogivethemanothernaturethroughotherpersons。Ifthecoercivestatewantedtobeloyal，itwouldabolishitself。Everypointwouldrequirethesamecoercionandthesamecounter—pressure。Thesupremecensorshipwouldhavetobesubjectedtocensorshipinitsturn。Inordertoescapefromthisviciouscircle，itisdecidedtobedisloyal；lawlessnessnowbeginsinthethirdorninety—ninthstage。Becausethebureaucraticstateisvaguelyconsciousofthis，ittriesatleasttoplacethesphereoflawlessnesssohighthatitescapestheeye，andthenbelievesthatlawlessnesshasdisappeared。
Thereal，radicalcureforthecensorshipwouldbeitsabolition；
fortheinstitutionitselfisabadone，andinstitutionsaremorepowerfulthanpeople。Ourviewmayberightornot，butinanycasethePrussianwritersstandtogainthroughthenewinstruction，eitherinrealfreedom，orinfreedomofideas，inconsciousness。
Raratemporumfeticitas，ubiquaevelissentireetquaesentiasdirerelicet。
Signed；ByaRhinelander