Kootut teokset | Samlade skrifter | Selected Works
Writing: The Causes of Emigration

The Causes of Emigration, § 33

Previous Section:

Next Section:

Font size: A A A A


Viewing Options:

§ 33

But if constraints in lawsuits are ever to be prevented among us, it is necessary to make officials more answerable and punishable than is generally the case, so that someone who regards himself as having been wronged by them can at least receive satisfaction from them as easily as from any other citizens. Is it not said that the law is sufficiently strict in that respect, regarding misdemeanours by officials? The law would indeed suffice to keep the officials within bounds, but it is a dead letter that in itself can never affect anyone; the question here is not what could or ought to happen under the law but what actually does happen.

It is not unusual for one and the same official to pronounce two completely contradictory judgments in two identical cases. How many officials can be shown to take responsibility for their actions? Or what is the level of that responsibility? Does it correspond to what the others have suffered from their actions? The events referred to in § 21, with many others that could be adduced, will bear witness to that.

Could it not be ameliorated, as some have imagined, first, by not allowing any official who is accountable to the Estates to be eligible to represent any estate during the Diets; second, by ensuring, when cases are revised and appeals are dealt with, that those officials who have acted deliberately, that is, contrary to manifest law, and have departed from the truth should promptly and without any protracted process be punished by the rigours of the law as a warning to others, including the higher officials, not only for their own actions but also for what they have connived at with regard to their subordinates?

It is by no means enough for the Estates to establish good laws; they should also be the first to put them into execution. Imagine if we were to hear three times a year that the legal penalty had been increased for thieves yet were nonetheless to see one after another being allowed to keep their stolen goods, with a warning; how would such a law protect our property? Would such humanity towards malefactors not be to turn the law into a shadow and put the lives and property of the other citizens at risk of being arbitrarily plundered by them?

The officials of the kingdom really ought to be the ones who attend to the execution of the laws among the people, but how is that possible if they do not themselves apply them in their official capacity? They have other officials above them, it is said, who order them to do so. But I ascend as many stairs as I can and finally ask who should be giving orders to those at the top. None but the Sovereign Power itself, for the law never touches anyone unless it is first fully applied by the Estates themselves, without the slightest respect of persons, to those who are to give it force and effect among the other subjects of the kingdom.

And precisely here is the actual point of leverage for law-abidingness throughout society. As the honourable Estates of the Realm set this wheel in motion, such will also be its motion throughout the body of the realm. But if that is left undone, even if one were then to manipulate other ones as much as one likes and attach more weights to get the clockwork moving, it will fall apart before it can be brought into any regular motion.

This is the real helm by which the whole ship is to be steered. What is the use of equipping it in the best possible way unless the Sovereign Power itself holds the tiller and sets the ship on the right tack?

For impartial legislation it is also, third, necessary to have complete reciprocity between the judge and the one who is judged; for the greatest joy of a Swedish man ought to consist in his right to proceed boldly, secure in his innocence, from the magistrates’ court all the way to the royal throne, without risking anything, and to smile at the frenzy of evil, as long as the law protects his back, extending its branches and sheltering him from the storm-winds of superior power.

These would be such splendid undertakings that Swedish subjects would for ever celebrate festivals of rejoicing on the days when these wheels were set in motion, and, even before the Estates of the Realm could conclude such blessed deliberations, these remedies would already be bringing freedom to the most distant subjects of the kingdom. A few years would reward by 100 per cent such a blessed labour; many citizens who have been exhausted by libel cases and have emigrated would listen to our joy and again begin to love the fatherland that had formerly been so hateful in their eyes, and Swedish men would never flee a native region where they are treated with such consideration.

Constraints in lawsuits should also be inhibited by shortening them. Everyone knows how much legal petitioners are burdened by the many and lengthy byways with which our judicial process is encumbered. No one can deny that some curtailment would be possible: the kingdom has indeed invested considerable sums in this matter alone and has encouraged legal experts to present proposals; a number have actually been submitted, but of all this the general public has seen nothing except that the number of officials and Crown servants increases year by year, that lower courts, government departments, appeal courts and chanceries are drowning in paper and that many petitioners do not outlive the conclusion of their cases.

I revere everything that our lawyers have formerly written and thought about this subject, but I have seen some conscientious, efficient and legally expert judges, despite their best efforts, being overwhelmed with so many and such complex court cases that one’s mind reels at the thought of it, and if all demonstrable breaches of the law had been submitted to the court, three would quite certainly have been as fully engaged as one is now. I can also testify that it has not become more common to increase the volume of court records for the sake of perquisites, nor to misdirect cases, and yet the same courts are overwhelmed with such a number of cases that there is not enough time to resolve them.

Either some curtailment should now be possible or it is not. If it is possible in other countries to decide a case with less waste of money, paper and time, then why not among us? A Swedish man is in no way more unruly than a Prussian or an Englishman; nor can he imagine that he could be dealt with more conscientiously.

I do not deny that self-interested judges and troublesome parties may often be responsible for prolonging cases, but when neither of these are present and the lawsuits nonetheless increase daily, whom are we then to blame for that?

No more than three alternatives are possible here. The fault must either lie with the judge or the parties or else in the legislation. However, apart from the fact that judges and parties must generally be such as the laws and regulations in a country have made them, it may be observed, even when neither side breaks the rules, that the lawsuits cannot be curtailed to any significant degree. I therefore ask for permission to look at the third one.

Least of all do I wish to touch upon the constitution of our government; I revere our solemnly confirmed fundamental laws; I do not wish to criticize those that concern our moral actions under divine and natural law, nor those that by the dispensation of nature distinguish between mine and yours; and finally I hold sacred that which has been found necessary in order to maintain a society and must therefore remain invariable in all societies and every epoch. But if we suppose all of these in their simplicity to be quite unalterable, there remain an incredible number of economic and political laws and regulations in Sweden that I, as a free Swedish man, may venture to discuss with the best of intentions, not with the aim of finding fault with them, still less of overturning them, but merely in order to give those who hold power some reason to consider this important subject, as to whether they could be reduced or completely repealed.

On this globe there are societies that possess very few or no such laws at all, having left all this in the hands of nature, and we realize with astonishment that they have reached the height of blessedness that may in temporal terms be desired for any country. We find on the contrary that we have by legislation sought to determine almost every step that a subject has to take, defined every branch of industry with great ingenuity, divided them into separate categories, sometimes given support to one and sometimes another, set values on commodities, and, among other things, on pains of heavy fines persuaded ourselves to believe that five mark of copper in tiny bits is equivalent to nine in larger pieces and have by all such means woven so many and such fine threads through society that the inhabitants in their movements have become trapped in them to such an extent that no human being would be able to unravel them except in the way that the Gordian knot was undone, namely by cutting through the whole bundle of bonds. It then happened that some trade that was released in that manner wished to distance itself from the others that were still entangled, which led to a spate of new concerns to get this one woven in again as soon as possible, on a different pattern, before it brought the whole of society tumbling down.

What has been the result of all this? Well, our trades are to a large extent in monopolistic fetters, which in some promote extravagance and indolence, in others stifle enterprise and drive people to desperation, making some suicidal. We infringe the law of the state and consequently that of God, wounding consciences by breaches of the law. We have been provided with so many economic regulations that a lifetime does not suffice to absorb them. Perhaps we have so many lawsuits so that they will never cease – a good source of income for public prosecutors, ombudsmen, judges and lawyers. There would be busy hands in every government department, even if they were twice as numerous as they are now. An ardent desire, indeed a proficiency in making laws for almost every casus specialis.

But what else? Well, we have become underpopulated without war and plague, hungry without years of bad harvests and destitute with the most productive mines. And that which is most lamentable of all, while we have thus entangled ourselves, the foreigners have, by the leave of a few wealthy citizens, emptied our traps and fished with an innocent air in murky waters long enough to become rich and have obtained ius patronatus1 over a large part of our most valuable manufactures, while others have pocketed the money of their fellow citizens. What a wretched situation!


  1. ius patronatus: Latin for “the right of patronage”.

Previous Section:

Next Section:

Places:

Names:

Biblical references:

Subjects: