The Project Gutenberg eBook of Divorce versus Democracy
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Divorce versus Democracy
Author: G. K. Chesterton
Release date: June 24, 2020 [eBook #62467]
Most recently updated: October 18, 2024
Language: English
Credits: Produced by Tim Lindell, Chuck Greif and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DIVORCE VERSUS DEMOCRACY ***
DIVORCE
_versus_
DEMOCRACY
BY
G. K. CHESTERTON
_Reprinted from “Nash’s Magazine”_
[Illustration: IHS
Loqure ut profifiliis
ciscantur
Israel]
London
THE SOCIETY OF
SS. PETER & PAUL
_Publishers to the Church of England_
32 George St., Hanover Square,
and 302 Regent St., W.
1916
Preface
I have been asked to put forward in pamphlet form this rather hasty
essay as it appeared in “Nash’s Magazine”; and I do so by the kind
permission of the editor. The rather chaotic quality of its journalism
it is now impossible to alter. The convictions upon which it is based
are unaltered and unalterable. Indeed, in so far as circumstances have
since affected them, they are greatly strengthened. In so far as there
was something sporadic and seemingly irrelevant in the writing, it was
partly because I was contending against an evil that was diffused and
indefinable, at once tentative and ubiquitous. Since then that disease
has come to a head and burst; primarily in the North of Europe. By that
historic habit which generally makes one European people the
standard-bearer of a social tendency, which made the Empire a Roman
Empire and the Revolution a French Revolution, the North Germans have
become the peculiar champions of that modern change which would make the
State infinitely superior to the Family. It is even asserted that
Prussian political authority is now encouraging the abandonment of
common morality for the support of population; and even if this horrible
thing be untrue, it is highly significant that it can be plausibly said
of Prussia, and certainly of no other Christian State. And in the new
light of action it is possible to trace more clearly the trend towards
divorce, as also that trend towards the other pagan institution of
slavery, which would certainly have accompanied it. But the enslaving
force in Europe struck too early; and the whole movement has been
brought to a standstill.
The same circumstances have given an importance to a formula of my own
which I still think rather important. It may be summarised as the
patriotism of the household. In the experience of nationality we do not
admit that any excess of despair can come into the same logical world as
desertion. No amount of tragedy need amount to treason. The Christian
view of marriage conceives of the home as self-governing in a manner
analogous to an independent state; that is, that it may include internal
reform and even internal rebellion; but because of the bond, not against
it. In this way it is itself a sort of standing reformer of the State;
for the State is judged by whether its arrangements bear helpfully or
bear hardly on the human fulness and fertility of the free family. Thus
the Wicked Ten in Rome were condemned and cast down because their public
powers permitted a wrong against the purity of a private family. Thus
the mediæval revolt against the Poll Tax began by the authority of an
official insulting the authority of a father. Men do not now, any more
than then, become sinless by receiving a post in a bureaucracy; and if
the domestic affairs of the poor were once put into the hands of mere
lawyers and inspectors, the poor would soon find themselves in positions
from which there is no exit save by the sword of Virginius and the
hammer of Wat Tyler. As for the section of the rich who are still
seeking a servile solution, they, of course, are still seeking the
extension of divorce. It is only “_divide et impera_”; and they want the
division of sex for the division of labour. The very same economic
calculation which makes them encourage tyranny in the shop makes them
encourage licence in the family. But now the free families of five great
nations have risen against them; and their plot has failed.
G. K. CHESTERTON
Divorce _versus_ Democracy
On this question of divorce I do not profess to be impartial, for I have
never perceived any intelligent meaning in the word. I merely (and most
modestly) profess to be right. I also profess to be representative: that
is, democratic. Now, one may believe in democracy or disbelieve in it.
It would be grossly unfair to conceal the fact that there are
difficulties on both sides. The difficulty of believing in democracy is
that it is so hard to believe--like God and most other good things. The
difficulty of disbelieving in democracy is that there is nothing else to
believe in. I mean there is nothing else on earth or in earthly
politics. Unless an aristocracy is selected by gods, it must be selected
by men. It may be negatively and passively permitted, but either heaven
or humanity must permit it; otherwise it has no more moral authority
than a lucky pickpocket. It is baby talk to talk about “Supermen” or
“Nature’s Aristocracy” or “The Wise Few.” “The Wise Few” must be either
those whom others think wise--who are often fools; or those who think
themselves wise--who are always fools.
Well, if one happens to believe in democracy as I do, as a large trust
in the active and passive judgment of the human conscience, one can have
no hesitation, no “impartiality,” about one’s view of divorce; and
especially about one’s view of the extension of divorce among the
democracy. A democrat in any sense must regard that extension as the
last and vilest of the insults offered by the modern rich to the modern
poor. The rich do largely believe in divorce; the poor do mainly believe
in fidelity. But the modern rich are powerful and the modern poor are
powerless. Therefore for years and decades past the rich have been
preaching their own virtues. Now that they have begun to preach their
vices too, I think it is time to kick.
There is one enormous and elementary objection to the popularising of
divorce, which comes before any consideration of the nature of marriage.
It is like an alphabet in letters too large to be seen. It is this: That
even if the democracy approved of divorce as strongly and deeply as the
democracy does (in fact) disapprove of it--any man of common sense must
know that nowadays the thing will be worked probably against the
democracy, but quite certainly by the plutocracy. People seem to forget
that in a society where power goes with wealth and where wealth is in an
extreme state of inequality, extending the powers of the law means
something entirely different from extending the powers of the public.
They seem to forget that there is a great deal of difference between
what laws define and what laws do. A poor woman in a poor public-house
was broken with a ruinous fine for giving a child a sip of shandy-gaff.
Nobody supposed that the law verbally stigmatised the action for being
done by a poor person in a poor public-house. But most certainly nobody
will dare to pretend that a rich man giving a boy a sip of champagne
would have been punished so heavily--or punished at all. I have seen the
thing done frequently in country houses; and my host and hostess would
have been very much surprised if I had gone outside and telephoned for
the police. The law theoretically condemns any one who tries to
frustrate the police or even fails to assist them. Yet the rich
motorists are allowed to keep up an organised service of anti-police
detectives--wearing a conspicuous uniform--for the avowed purpose of
showing motorists how to avoid capture. No one supposes again that the
law says in so many words that the right to organise for the evasion of
laws is a privilege of the rich but not of the poor. But take the same
practical test. What would the police say, what would the world say, if
men stood about the streets in green and yellow uniforms, notoriously
for the purpose of warning pickpockets of the presence of a
plain-clothes officer? What would the world say if recognised officials
in peaked caps watched by night to warn a burglar that the police were
waiting for him? Yet there is no distinction of principle between the
evasion of that police-trap and the other police-trap--the police-trap
which prevents a motorist from killing a child like a chicken; which
prevents the most frivolous kind of murder, the most piteous kind of
sudden death.
Well, the Poor Man’s Divorce Law will be applied exactly as all these
others are applied. Everybody must know that it would mean in practice
that well-dressed men, doctors, magistrates, and inspectors, would have
more power over the family lives of ill-dressed men, navvies, plumbers,
and potmen. Nobody can have the impudence to pretend that it would mean
that navvies, plumbers, and potmen would (either individually or
collectively) have more power over the family lives of doctors,
magistrates, and inspectors. Nobody dare assert that because divorce is
a State affair, therefore the poor citizen will have any power, direct
or indirect, to divorce a duchess from a duke or a banker from a
banker’s wife. But no one will call it inconceivable that the power of
rich families over poor families, which is already great, the power of
the duke as landlord, the power of the banker as money-lender, might be
considerably increased by arming magistrates with more powers of
interference in private life. For the dukes and bankers often are
magistrates, always the friends and relatives of magistrates. The
navvies are not. The navvy will be the subject of the new experiments;
certainly never the experimentalist. It is the poor man who will show to
the imaginative eye of science all those horrors which, according to
newspaper correspondents, cry aloud for divorce--drunkenness, madness,
cruelty, incurable disease. If he is slow in working for his master, he
will be “defective.” If he is worn out by working for his master, he
will be “degenerate.” If he, at some particular opportunity, prefers to
work for himself to working for his master, he will be obviously insane.
If he never has any opportunity of working for any masters he will be
“unemployable.” All the bitter embarrassments and entanglements
incidental to extreme poverty will be used to break conjugal happiness,
as they are already used to break parental authority. Marriage will be
called a failure wherever it is a struggle; just as parents in modern
England are sent to prison for neglecting the children whom they cannot
afford to feed.
I will take but one instance of the enormity and silliness which is
really implied in these proposals for the extension of divorce. Take the
case quoted by many contributors to the discussion in the papers--the
case of what is called “cruelty.” Now what is the real meaning of this
as regards the prosperous and as regards the struggling classes of the
community? Let us take the prosperous classes first. Every one knows
that those who are really to be described as gentlemen all profess a
particular tradition, partly chivalrous, partly merely modern and
refined--a tradition against “laying hands upon a woman, save in a way
of kindness.” I do not mean that a gentleman hates the cowing of a woman
by brute force: any one must hate that. I mean he has a ritual, taboo
kind of feeling about the laying on of a finger. If a gentleman (real or
imitation) has struck his wife ever so lightly, he feels he has done one
of those things that thrill the thoughts with the notion of a
border-line; something like saying the Lord’s Prayer backwards, touching
a hot kettle, reversing the crucifix, or “breaking the pledge.” The
wife may forgive the husband more easily for this than for many things;
but the husband will find it hard to forgive himself. It is a purely
class sentiment, like the poor folks’ dislike of hospitals. What is the
effect of this class sentiment on divorce among the higher classes?
The first effect, of course, is greatly to assist those faked divorces
so common among the fashionable. I mean that where there is a collusion,
a small pat or push can be remembered, exaggerated, or invented; and yet
seem to the solemn judges a very solemn thing in people of their own
social class. But outside these cases, the test is not wholly
inappropriate as applied to the richer classes. For, all gentlemen
feeling or affecting this special horror, it does really look bad if a
gentleman has broken through it; it does look like madness or a personal
hatred and persecution. It may even look like worse things. If a man
with luxurious habits, in artistic surroundings, is cruel to his wife,
it may be connected with some perversion of sex cruelty, such as was
alleged (I know not how truly) in the case of the millionaire Thaw. We
need not deny that such cases are cases for separation, if not for
divorce.
But this test of technical cruelty, which is rough and ready as applied
to the rich, is absolutely mad and meaningless as applied to the poor. A
poor woman does not judge her husband as a bully by whether he has ever
hit out. One might as well say that a schoolboy judges whether another
schoolboy is a bully by whether he has ever hit out. The poor wife, like
the schoolboy, judges him as a bully by whether he is a bully. She knows
that while wife-beating may really be a crime, wife-hitting is sometimes
very like just self-defence. No one knows better than she does that her
husband often has a great deal to put up with; sometimes she means him
to; sometimes she is justified. She comes and tells all this to
magistrates again and again; in police court after police court women
with black eyes try to explain the thing to judges with no eyes. In
street after street women turn in anger on the hapless knight-errant who
has interrupted an instantaneous misunderstanding. In these people’s
lives the rooms are crowded, the tempers are torn to rags, the natural
exits are forbidden. In such societies it is as abominable to punish or
divorce people for a blow as it would be to punish or divorce a
gentleman for slamming the door. Yet who can doubt, if ever divorce is
applied to the populace, it would be applied in the spirit which takes
the blow quite seriously? If any one doubts it, he does not know what
world he is living in.
It is common to meet nowadays men who talk of what they call Free Love
as if it were something like Free Silver--a new and ingenious political
scheme. They seem to forget that it is as easy to judge what it would be
like as to judge of what legal marriage would be like. “Free Love” has
been going on in every town and village since the beginning of the
world; and the first fact that every man of the world knows about it is
plain enough. It never does produce any of the wild purity and perfect
freedom its friends attribute to it. If any paper had the pluck to head
a column “Is Concubinage a Failure?” instead of “Is Marriage a Failure?”
the answer “Yes” would be given by the personal memory of many men, and
by the historic memory of all. Modern people perpetually quote some wild
expression of monks in the wilderness (when a whole civilisation was
maddened by remorse) about the perilous quality of Woman, about how she
was a spectre and a serpent and a destroying fire. Probably the
establishment of nuns, situated a few miles off, described Man also as a
serpent and a spectre; but their works have not come down to us.
Now all this old-world wit against Benedick the married man was sensible
enough. But so was the bachelorhood of the old monks, who said it,
sensible enough. It is perfectly true that to entangle yourself with
another soul in the most tender and tragic degree is to make, in all
rational possibility, a martyr or a fool of yourself. Most of the modern
denunciations of marriage might have been copied direct from the maddest
of the monkish diaries. The attack on marriage is an argument for
celibacy. It is not an argument for divorce. For that entanglement which
celibacy avowedly avoids, divorce merely reduplicates and repeats. It
may have been a sort of solemn comfort to a gentleman of Africa to
reflect that he had no wife. It cannot be anything but a discomfort to a
gentleman of America to wonder which wife he really has. If progress
means, as in the ludicrous definition of Herbert Spencer, “an advance
from the simple to the complex,” then certainly divorce is a part of
progress. Nothing can be conceived more complex than the condition of a
man who has settled down finally four or five times. Nothing can be
conceived more complex than the position of a profligate who has not
only had ten _liaisons_, but ten legal _liaisons_. There is a real sense
in which free love might free men. But freer divorce would catch them in
the most complicated net ever woven in this wicked world.
The tragedy of love is in love, not in marriage. There is no unhappy
marriage that might not be an equally unhappy concubinage, or a far more
unhappy seduction. Whether the tie be legal or no, matters something to
the faithless party; it matters nothing to the faithful one. The pathos
reposes upon the perfectly simple fact that if any one deliberately
provokes either passions or affections, he is responsible for them as
long as they go on, as the man is responsible for letting loose a flood
or setting fire to a city. His remedy is not to provoke them, like the
hermit. His punishment, when he deserves punishment, is to spend the
rest of his life in trying to undo any ill he has done. His escape is
despair--which is called, in this connection, divorce. For every healthy
man feels one fundamental fact in his soul. He feels that he must have
a life, and not a series of lives. He would rather the human drama were
a tragedy than that it were a series of Music-hall Turns and Potted
Plays. A man wishes to save the souls of all the men that he has been:
of the dirty little schoolboy; of the doubtful and morbid youth; of the
lover; of the husband. Re-incarnation has always seemed to me a cold
creed; because each incarnation must forget the other. It would be worse
still if this short human life were broken up into yet shorter lives,
each of which was in its turn forgotten.
If you are a democrat who likes also to be an honest man--if (in other
words) you want to know what the people want and not merely what you can
somehow induce them to ask for--then there is no doubt at all that this
is what they want. You can only realise it by looking for human nature
elsewhere than in election reports; but when you have once looked for it
you see it and you never forget it. From the fact that every one thinks
it natural that young men and women should carve names on trees, to the
fact that every one thinks it unnatural that old men and women should be
separated in workhouses, millions and millions of daily details prove
that people do regard the relation as normally permanent; not as a
vision, but as a vow.
Now for the exceptions, true or false. I would note a strange and even
silly oversight in the discussion of such exceptions, which has haunted
most arguments for further divorce. The ordinary emancipated prig or
poet who urges this side of the question always talks to one tune.
“Marriage may be the best for most men,” he says, “but there are
exceptional natures that demand a more undulating experience; constancy
will do for the common herd, but there are complex natures and complex
cases where no one could recommend constancy. I do not ask (at the
present Stage of Progress) for the abolition of marriage; I hereby ask
that it may be remitted in such individual and extreme examples.”
Now it is perfectly astounding to me that any one who has walked about
this world should make such a blunder about the breed we call mankind.
Surely it is plain enough that if you ask for dreadful exceptions, you
will get them--too many of them. Let me take once again a rough parable.
Suppose I advertised in the papers that I had a place for any one who
was too stupid to be a clerk. Probably I should receive no replies;
possibly one. Possibly also (nay, probably) it would be from the one man
who was not stupid at all. But suppose I had advertised that I had a
place for any one who was too clever to be a clerk. My office would be
instantly besieged by all the most hopeless fools in the four kingdoms.
To advertise for exceptions is simply to advertise for egoists. To
advertise for egoists is to advertise for idiots. It is exactly the bore
who does think that his case is interesting. It is precisely the really
common person who does think that his case is uncommon. It is always the
dull man who does think himself rather wild. To ask solely for strange
experiences of the soul is simply to let loose all the imbecile asylums
about one’s ears. Whatever other theory is right, this theory of the
exceptions is obviously wrong--or (what matters more to our modern
atheists) is obviously unbusinesslike. It is, moreover, to any one with
popular political sympathies, a very deep and subtle sort of treason. By
thus putting a premium on the exceptional we grossly deceive the
unconsciousness of the normal. It seems strangely forgotten that the
indifference of a nation is sacred as well as its differences. Even
public apathy is a kind of public opinion--and in many cases a very
sensible kind. If I ask everybody to vote about Mineral Meals and do not
get a single ballot-paper returned, I may say that the citizens have not
voted. But they have.
The principle held by the populace, against which this plutocratic
conspiracy is being engineered, is simply the principle expressed in the
Prayer Book in the words “for better, for worse.” It is the principle
that all noble things have to be paid for, even if you only pay for them
with a promise. One does not take one’s interest out of England as one
takes it out of Consols. A man is not an Englishman unless he can endure
even the decay and death of England. And just as every citizen is a
potential soldier, so every wife or husband is a potential hospital
nurse--or even asylum attendant. For though we should all approve of
certain tragedies being mitigated by a celibate separation--yet the more
real love and honour there has been in the marriage, the less real
mitigation there will be in the parting. But this sound public instinct
both about patriotism and marriage also insists that the first vow or
obligation shall be mitigated, not merely erased and forgotten. Many a
good woman has loved and refused a doubtful man, with the proviso that
she would marry no one else; the old institution of marriage has the
same feeling about the tragedy that is post-matrimonial. The thing
remains real; it binds one to something. If I am exiled from England I
will go and live on an island somewhere and be as jolly as I can. I will
not become a patriot of any other land.
[Illustration]
End of Project Gutenberg's Divorce versus Democracy, by G. K. Chesterton
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DIVORCE VERSUS DEMOCRACY ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
