Meaning: This quote by Thomas Higginson, a clergyman, reflects the sentiment that people who have not been conditioned to accept excessive government control find it particularly burdensome. The concept of a "paternal" or "meddling" government is one that seeks to dictate various aspects of individuals' lives, including their choices in reading, speech, food, drink, and clothing. Higginson's use of the term "paternal" suggests a form of governance that is overly intrusive, akin to a parent dictating every aspect of a child's life. The idea conveyed in this quote is that such government interference is particularly irksome and offensive to individuals who have not been accustomed to it from birth.

The quote highlights the tension between individual freedom and government authority. Higginson's choice of words, such as "galling" and "meddling," conveys a sense of frustration and irritation at the imposition of such control. The image of a government telling people what to read, say, eat, drink, and wear evokes a sense of suffocation and lack of autonomy. It speaks to the fundamental human desire for personal agency and self-determination, suggesting that excessive government intervention encroaches upon these essential liberties.

Higginson's perspective on governmental interference aligns with broader debates about the role of the state in regulating individual behavior. The quote touches on themes of censorship, surveillance, and authoritarianism, all of which have been perennial concerns in discussions about governance and personal freedom. By emphasizing the impact on people "not broken in from the birth," Higginson draws attention to the formative influence of early experiences with governmental control, suggesting that those raised under such conditions may be more accepting of such intrusions.

Historically, the quote's sentiments have resonated in contexts where individuals have sought to resist oppressive or overreaching governmental authority. Whether in the realm of literature, speech, or personal choices, the idea of a government seeking to dictate these aspects of individuals' lives has often been met with resistance and defiance. Higginson's words capture the spirit of individuals striving for autonomy and self-expression in the face of overarching state control.

Moreover, the quote raises important questions about the proper limits of government power and the balance between individual liberty and collective governance. It prompts consideration of the ways in which state intervention can either safeguard or undermine personal freedoms. In contemporary contexts, discussions around privacy rights, freedom of expression, and the regulation of personal choices continue to be shaped by these fundamental tensions between individual autonomy and governmental oversight.

In conclusion, Thomas Higginson's quote encapsulates the aversion to excessive government intrusion into individuals' lives and underscores the inherent tension between personal freedom and state authority. It serves as a poignant reminder of the enduring struggle for autonomy and self-determination in the face of paternalistic governance. The quote resonates across historical and contemporary contexts, prompting reflection on the delicate balance between individual liberties and the reach of governmental control.