The 1809 Instrument of Government and the Origin of "Liberal" as a Political Concept

The Principles of the "men of 1809"

In the literature on liberalism the early roots of “liberal” as a political concept is mostly attributed to France and Spain. There is, however, a curious but little-known period in Swedish history during which a group of men, calling their cause “liberal” placed themselves at the forefront of the liberal tradition. This overlooked history is mentioned in passing by Helena Rosenblatt in The Lost History of Liberalism. She rightfully traces the origin of liberal principles to Benjamin Constant and Madame de Staël in post-revolutionary and Napoleonic France. Curiously she also notes in relation to Sweden how:

It was around this time [1809] that a group calling itself “the liberal party” came into existence. Not much is known about its members except that they were influenced by French revolutionary ideas.

Rosenblatt goes on to briefly mention the values of this unknown group. In most other works, however, the Swedish connection is omitted completely. This is the case in Why Concepts Matter. Translating Social and Political Thought where one of the authors, Jörn Leonhard, states that:

The political meaning of liberal as a party denomination originated from the first Spanish constitution of 1812. The adherents of this new constitution called themselves liberales and spoke of their opponents who supported the principles of absolute monarchy as serviles.

Clearly, light needs to be shed on Sweden’s role in the history of liberal government. I will therefore briefly sketch out how “liberal” came to be used in Sweden in a (party) political sense in 1809 – 1810. I owe most of what is written below to the Swedish political scientist Arthur Thomson who already in 1926 established the important and usually overlooked role of Sweden in the history of “liberal” as a political concept.

---

“Liberal” was used in the Swedish language during the 18th century as it was used in many other European languages, that is, as a (apolitical) synonym for “generous” (“frikostig”). This meaning dominated into the 19th century. In the Swedish translation of Madame de Staël’s work Corinne (1807) published one year after the original libéral is translated into “frikostig” (generous), libéralité into “jämlikhet” (equality) or “ädelmod” (noble-mindedness). In the 1824 Swedish translation of Edward Gibbon’s History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire the term liberal (“A Grecian philosopher…published his liberal opinions”) is translated into “frimodig” (uninhibited or fearless).

In April 1810 Edward Gustaf Geijer made a note in his diary describing liberalitet (liberality) as the “cause or effect” of freedom of expression and speech as well as a plurality of parties in politics and religion. Geijer considered liberality an English concept that meant

a virtue of both the mind and the heart (as all other virtues). It is the ability to distinguish matter from person – or to act and judge without being blinded by one’s own interests.

In the spring of 1809 Sweden was rapidly losing the ongoing war with Russia that would put an end to 600 years of common Swedish-Finnish history. The eastern part of the Swedish realm – Finland – was lost to the Russian Empire under which it was to become a semi-independent Grand Duchy under the rule of the Russian emperor. In Sweden disgruntled officers staged a coup d’état and deposed of king Gustav IV Adolf. A new king – Charles XIII – was proclaimed and a new constitution ratified.

Among these “men of 1809”, namely those of the constitutional party, was Axel Gabriel Silverstolpe who that same year published a brochure titled Hvad synes allmänna opinionen önska till en, nu möjlig, förbättring af svenska statsförfattningen? (What does the public opinion seem to wish for a now possible improvement of the Swedish constitution?). In it he asked regarding the prevailing thought among the different social classes whether an “liberal inclination” towards “enlightened sacrifices” could be discerned. Silverstolpe was referring to sacrificing one’s class-related privileges, giving “liberal” the meaning of both generosity and willingness to make sacrifices. Similarly, Baltzar Bogislaus von Platen wrote the same year how those who subscribed to the principle of “king first, constitution second” put their fate in king Charles’ “well-known liberal and noble intent”.

There is further evidence of “liberal” being used in the political sense in various brochures published in 1809, in opposition to the perceived egoism of class-related privileges. Another among the men of 1809, Gustaf Abraham Silverstolpe, had already before de coup penned the first work on Swedish constitutionalism up to that point in which he described the emergence of a “government on more liberal principles” (en statsinrättning på mera liberala grundsatser), meaning a form of society in which equal rights under the law had replaced the old privileges of the estates.

The constitutional party explicitly sought to establish a government on the principle of “freedom”, and frequently used the term “liberal” to formulate their politics in opposition to the reactionary Gustavians supported by Charles XIII. On the 4th of December in the House of Nobility in Stockholm which housed the Riksdag of the Estates a summary of the views of the constitutional party written by Hans Järta who was one of the drafters of the constitution was read out:

Is it believed that the majority of the Swedish nation should wish an aristocratic regency government in the name of a child? Is it believed that it would like to replace with aristocratic governing principles the liberal and just ones now adopted?

Adolf Göran Mörner who was also among the leading figures in the constitutional party wrote about the “heroes” who already in 1800 had dared to stand up for “more liberal principles” (liberalare grundsatser) in the face of the Union and Security Act which had been proposed by Gustav III and passed into law in 1789 with the nobles initially rejecting it and then finally approving it in 1800. Many of these “heroes” were later the foremost champions of the constitutional party.

The term “liberal”, however, was not only used to describe “liberal principles”, but also used as a party name in opposition to the Gustavians. They referred to themselves as “the liberal side” (den liberala sidan), “the liberals” (de liberala) and “the liberal party” (det liberala partiet). In a diary entry dated 11 of January 1810 Jacob Adlerbeth referred to the party as “liberalists” (liberalister).

As seen above the liberal party pushed for estate privileges to be surrendered voluntarily and be replaced by “civil rights”. This “liberal” core principle might have pushed the members of the party to accept “liberal” as a name for the party at large. The leitmotiv of the liberal party, however, was the wider idea of “freedom under the law” (frihet under lagen) – meaning freedom of the press and religion as well as a Montesquieu-inspired constitutionalism. All this was to a certain extent rested on the idea of popular sovereignty. Additionally, the liberals called for a free economy, that is, they opposed privileges not only for ideals of equality, but also for economic reasons.

As Thomson points out only a slight shift in the meaning of “liberal” was needed to make the transition from “free from narrowminded views on caste” to “freedom of enterprise”. During the riksdag (diet) of 1815 even the conservatives admitted in relation to guilds that they be organized on more “liberal principles”, still adding that it must be ensured that “the greater remaining freedom does not degenerate to licence or that is leaves room for self-interested intentions on the expense of the public”.

Thomson describes the aim of the liberals as one of getting rid of all forms of esprit de corps and replacing it with equality and freedom under the law. Using 20th century vocabulary, he sees three main aims: the political aim of building a constitutional government, the social aim of ridding society of the old privileges, and the economic aim of guaranteeing freedom of enterprise and competition. The liberal view was thus built on both liberal economic principles and constitutionalism, highlighting the fact that “liberal” and “constitutional” seem to have been used interchangeably between the years 1815 and 1830 (here Thomson refers to Nefftzer).

---

The concept of “Liberal” seems to have been picked up by the “men of 1809” from the French language although it remains uncertain whether “liberal” as a party name was also inspired by the French or if it was a natural step for the Swedish liberals to take. Certainly “liberal” was not adopted from English as the concept was used in a laudatory sense and considered a foreign term by the English until the 1820s and had not fully supplanted the older term “Whig” until the 1840s. Evidence of Spanish influence cannot be noted before 1818 when Erik Gustaf Greijer in his Feodalism och republikanism (Feodalism and Republicanism) talks about “liberal” in opposition to “servile” which is clearly taken from a Spanish context.

In 1817 Esaias Tegnér, who was a writer and professor at Lund University, still called for “more liberal relations between the estates”, meaning “liberal” in the new sense of politically and economically open-minded had not yet solidified. Still, as Thomson notes, the evolvement of “liberal” as a political concept can be observed in Swedish history according to the following scheme: “generous” – “willing to sacrifice one’s own privileges” – “free from narrowminded views” – “free from class-related egoism” – “economically and politically broad-minded”.

The men of 1809 were mostly influenced by Montesquieu and Rousseau as well as the “theoreticians of the French revolution” and French literature though they also feared the risks of too far-reaching “freedom”. The inspiration for the principles of economic liberty originated in Adam Smith as can be seen in Georg Adlersparre’s partial translation and publication of The Wealth of Nations. Interestingly, Thomson does not mention Anders Chydenius (1729 – 1803), the Finnish-born Enlightenment thinker who in his work The National Gain (Den nationnale winsten) laid out theories on economic liberty 11 years before Smith. Despite his modern role as the “father of Swedish liberalism” Chydenius seems to have been irrelevant for much of the 19th century, and was only rediscovered in 1877 by Ernst Gustaf Palmén. Therein possibly lies the historical anonymity of the “men of 1809” – they were caught between the “enlightened values” of the 18th century, and liberalism proper that would take off in the 1830s.