John Locke’s treatise “An Essay Concerning the True Original, Extent, and End of Civil Government,” often called simply the Second Treatise of Government, is probably the most influential work of political theory in the English language. Locke’s essay was widely read in the English-speaking world of the eighteenth century, and his arguments about government, consent, and property rights (just to name three of its main topics) became fundamental to the way that western people have conceived of these ideas ever since. Locke (1632-1704) provided some of the intellectual underpinning for the American revolution of the 1770s and 80s; many of the writers who supported the revolt against Parliament and the British Crown, such as Samuel Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine, had read Locke, and you can see his emphasis on the need for government to have the consent of the governed reflected in their works.
Locke did not start out as a political theorist. He studied medicine and natural philosophy (what we would now call science), and was leading a fairly quiet life as a scholar and tutor at Oxford when he got to know Anthony Ashley Cooper (better known by his title as Lord Shaftesbury), who was at that time the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a very powerful position that put him in control of the nation’s finances. Locke seems to have impressed Cooper (and vice versa), and soon became a member of his household. There, Locke seems to have done a variety of things: he tutored Cooper’s son, and also seems to have supervised an operation to drain an abscess on Cooper’s liver. Cooper was forever grateful for that, crediting Locke with saving his life. Locke became Cooper’s secretary, advising him on economic policy, and collaborating with his employer on writing a new constitution for the Carolina Company, which was incorporated to colonize what are now North and South Carolina. (Cooper was the lead holder of the patent for the Carolina Company.) A key feature of the constitution was the provision for chattel slavery, for English colonists to own African slaves who would perform much of the labor on the plantations. The constitution never really took hold, and Locke (who was given property rights in the colony, probably in compensation for his work) never visited the Americas, but it is worth noting that this crucial figure of political liberty was also central in extending chattel slavery into the Carolinas.
“Of Civil Government” is one of two political treatises that Locke wrote, and is often called “the Second Treatise” because it was first published in a volume where it appeared after another essay. That first tract, sometimes called “Of Government,” was an essay responding to Robert Filmer’s Patriarcha, a very conservative tract, in which Filmer argued that all human beings are destined to be ruled by monarchs, who ultimately derive their authority from Adam. Locke thought that this was ridiculous. “Of Civil Government” then goes out to lay out the principles that Locke thought did underpin political authority. Locke argued that society was in effect a contract, one entered into freely by its members. And, too, Locke argued that individuals retained the right to property that they had gained through their labors, a right that could not be taken away from them even by the government to which they had consented. The scholar C. B. Macpherson has memorably called this a theory of “possessive individualism,” whereby an individual gains sole possession of what he or she owns through labor; one major role of the state, in this reckoning, is to protect private property.
We cannot be sure of exactly when Locke wrote these works, or the order in which they were written (as opposed to being printed). Most scholars believe that they were first composed early in the 1680s, and circulated in draft in manuscript among members among just a few of Locke’s closest friends, since at that moment, such a work would have appeared to be a radical, even treasonous document, possibly one that could be used to support the removal of a king. The early 1680s were a very contentious time in England, filled with plots against the government. Cooper fell from power, was prosecuted for treason, and eventually escaped to Holland, where he died just a few weeks after his arrival. Locke was in danger of being arrested as well, in part simply because of his long association with his now-disgraced patron. But he clearly also worried about the government getting hold of radical manuscripts such as the early drafts of “Of Civil Government”; Locke now made a point of securing the texts in safe hands. In recent years, some scholars have even suggested that Locke was involved in the “Rye House Plot,” a conspiracy to assassinate King Charles II. Other scholars disagree, and the evidence is likely to remain inconclusive, but Locke also went to Holland for several years after the Rye House Plot was uncovered, and it is a sign of how contentious the situation had become that we can even entertain the idea that Locke, who by all accounts was a fairly shy, scholarly type, not the first person you would think of as likely to participate in the violent overthrow of a government, might have joined in so dangerous a conspiracy.
The two essays were probably revised in 1688 and 1689, and finally printed published together as Two Treatises of Government in 1689. This was not long after the bloodless coup that brought William and Mary to power, at which point they seemed to be ratifications of the revolution against the alleged tyranny of the Stuart monarch James II. We offer here only the second, far more widely influential treatise. The text is adapted from the Text Creation Partnership edition.
1. It having been shewn in the foregoing Discourse.
1o. That Adam had not either by natural Right of Fatherhood, or by positive Donation from God, any such Authority over his Children, nor Dominion over the World as is pretended.
2o. That if he had his Heirs, yet, had no Right to it.
3o. That if his Heirs had, there being no Law of Nature nor positive Law of God that determins, which is the Right Heir in all Cases that may arise, the Right of Succession, and consequently of bearing Rule, could not have been certainly determined.
4o. That if even that had been determined, yet the knowledge of which is the Eldest Line of Adams Posterity, being so long since utterly lost that in the Races of Mankind and Families of the World, there remains not to
one above another, the least pretence to be the Eldest House, and to have the Right of Inheritance.
All these premises having, as I think, been clearly made out, it is impossible that the Rulers now on Earth, should make any benefit, or derive any the least shadow of Authority from that, which is held to be the Fountain of all Power, Adams Private Dominion and Paternal Iurisdiction, so that, he that will not give just occasion, to think that all Government in the World, is the product only of Force and Violence, and that Men live together by no other Rules but that of Beasts, where the strongest carries it, and so lay a Foundation for perpetual Disorder and Mischeif, Tumult, Sedition and Rebellion, (things that the followers of that Hipothesis so loudly cry out against) must of necessity find out another rise of Government, another Original of Political Power, and another way of designing and knowing the Persons that have it, then what Sr. Robt F. hath taught us.
2. To this purpose, I think it may not be amiss, to set down what I take to be Political Power. That the Power of a Magistrate over a Subject, may be distinguished from that of a Father over his Children, a Master over his Servant, a Husband over his Wife, and a Lord over his Slave. All which distinct Powers happening sometimes together in the same Man, if he be considered under these different Relations, it may help us to distinguish these Powers one from another, and shew the difference betwixt a Ruler of a Common-wealth, a Father of a Family, and a Captain of a Gally.
3. Political Power, then I take to be a Right of making Laws with Penalties of death, and consequently all less Penalties, for the Regulating and Preserving of Property, and of employing the force of the Community, in the Execution of such Laws, and in the defence of the Common-wealth from Foreign Injury, and all this only for the Public Good.
CHAP. II. Of the State of Nature.
4. To understand Political Power a right, and derive it from its Original, we must consider what Estate all Men are naturally in, and that is, a State of perfect Freedom to order their Actions, and dispose of their Possessions, and Persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the Law of Nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the Will of any other Man.
A State also of Equality, wherein all the Power and Jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more then another, there being nothing more evident, then that Creatures of the same species and rank promiscuously born to all the same advantages of Nature, and the use of the same faculties, should also be equal one amongst another without Subordination or Subjection, unless the Lord and Master of them all, should by any manifest Declaration of his Will set one above another, and confer on him by an evident and clear appointment an undoubted Right to Dominion and Sovereignty.
5. This equality of Men by Nature, the Judicious Hooker looks upon as so evident in it self, and beyond all question, that he makes it the Foundation of that Obligation to mutual Love amongst Men, on which he Builds the Duties they owe one another, and from whence he derives the great Maxims of Iustice and Charity. His words are;
The like natural inducement, hath brought Men to know that it is no less their Duty, to Love others then themselves, for seeing those things which are equal, must needs all have one measure; If I cannot but wish to receive good, even as much at every Mans hands, as any Man can wish unto his own Soul, how should I look to have any part of my desire herein satisfied, unless my self be careful to satisfie the like desire, which is undoubtedly in other Men weak, being of one and the same nature; to have any thing offered them repugnant to this desire, must needs in all respects grieve them as much as me, so that if I do harm, I must look to suffer, there being no reason that others should shew greater measure of love to me, then they have, by me, shewed unto them; my desire therefore to be loved of my equals in nature, as much as possible may be, imposeth upon me a natural Duty of bearing to themward, fully the like affection; From which relation of equality between our selves and them, that are as our selves, what several Rules and Canons, natural reason hath drawn for direction of life, no Man is Ignorant. Eccl. Pol. Li.
6. But though this be a State of Liberty, yet it is not a State of Licence, though Man in that State have an uncontroleable Liberty, to dispose of his Person or Possessions, yet he has not Liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any Creature in his Possession, but where some nobler use, then its bare Preservation calls for it. The State of Nature, has a Law of Nature to govern it, which obliges every one, and reason, which is that Law, teaches all Mankind, who will but consult it; That being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his Life, Health, Liberty or Possessions; for Men being all the Workmanship of one Omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker: All the Servants of one Sovereign Master, sent into the World by his order and about his business. They are his Property, whose Workmanship they are made to last during his, not one anothers Pleasure. And being Furnished with like Faculties, sharing all in one Community of Nature, there cannot be supposed any such Subordination among us, that may Authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one anothers uses, as the inferior ranks of Creatures are for ours, every one as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his Station willfully, so by the like reason when his own Preservation comes not in competition, ought he as much as he can to preserve the rest of Mankind, and not unless it be to do Justice on an offender, take a way, or impair the the life, or what tends to the Preservation of the Life, the Liberty, Health, Limb or Goods of another.
7. And that all Men may be restrained from invading others Rights, and from doing hurt to one another, and the Law of Nature be observed, which willeth the Peace and Preservation of all Mankind, the Execution of the Law of Nature is in that State, put into every Mans hands, whereby every one has a Right to punish the transgressors of that Law to such a Degree, as may hinder its Violation. For the Law of Nature would, as all other Laws that concern Men in this World, be in vain, if there were no body that in the State of Nature, had a Power to Execute that Law, and thereby preserve the innocent and restrain offenders, and if any one in the State of Nature may punish another, for any evil he has done, every one may do so. For in that State of perfect Equality, where naturally there is no superiority or jurisdiction of one over another, what any may do in Prosecution of that Law, every one must needs have a Right to do.
8. And thus in the State of Nature, one Man comes by a Power over another; but yet no Absolute or Arbitrary Power, to use a Criminal when he has got him in his hands, according to the passionate heats, or boundless extravagancy of his own Will, but only to retribute to him, so far as calm reason and conscience dictates, what is proportionate to his Transgression, which is so much as may serve for Reparation and Restraint. For these two are the only reasons, why one Man may lawfully do harm to another, which is that we call punishment. In trangressing the Law of Nature, the Offender declares himself to live by another Rule, then that of reason and common equity, which is that measure God has set to the actions of Men, for their mutual security, and so he becomes dangerous to Mankind, the tye, which is to secure them from injury and violence, being slighted and broken by him, which being a trespass against the whole Species, and the Peace and Safety of it, provided for by the Law of Nature, every Man upon this score, by the Right he hath to preserve Mankind in general, may restrain, or where it is necessary, destroy things noxious to them, and so may bring such evil on any one, who hath transgressed that Law, as may make him repent the doing of it, and thereby deter him, and by his Example others, from doing the like mischief. And in this case, and upon this ground, every Man hath a Right to punish the Offender, and be Executioner of the Law of Nature.
9. I doubt not but this will seem a very strange Doctrin to some Men, but before they condemn it, I desire them to resolve me by what Right any Prince or State can put to death, or punish an Alien, for any Crime he commits in their Country. ‘Tis certain their Laws by vertue of any Sanction, they receive from the promulgated Will of the Legislative, reach not a Stranger. They speak not to him, nor if they did, is he bound to hearken to them. The Legislative Authority, by which they are in Force over the Subjects of that Common-wealth, hath no Power over him. Those who have the Supream Power of making Laws in England, France or Holland, are to an Indian, but like the rest of the World, Men without Authority: And therefore if by the Law of Nature, every Man hath not a Power to punish Offences against it, as he soberly Judges the Case to require, I see not how the Magistrates of any Community, can punish an Alien of another Country, since in reference to him, they can have no more Power, then what every Man naturally may have over another.
10. Besides the Crime which consists in violating the Laws, and varying from the right Rule of reason, whereby a Man so far becomes degenerate, and declares himself to quit the Principles of Human Nature, and to be a noxious Creature, there is commonly injury done, and some Person or other, some other Man, receives damage by his transgression, in which Case he who hath received any damage, has besides the Right of punishment common to him, with other Men, a particular Right, to seek Reparation from him that has done it. And any other Person who finds it just, may also joyn with him that is injur’d, and assist him in recovering from the Offender, so much as may make satisfaction for the harm he has suffer’d.
11. From these two distinct Rights, the one of Punishing the Crime for restraint, and preventing the like Offence, which right of punishing is in every body; the other of taking reparation, which belongs only to the injured party, comes it to pass that the Magistrate, who by being Magistrate, hath the common right of punishing put into his hands, can often where the public good demands not the Execution of the Law, remit the punishment of Criminal Offences by his own Authority, but yet cannot remit the satisfaction due to any Private Man, for the damage he has received. That, he who has suffered the damage has a Right to demand in his own name, and he alone can remit; The damnified Person has this Power of appropriating to himself, the Goods or Service of the Offender, by Right of self Preservation, as every Man has a Power to punish the Crime, to prevent its being committed again, by the Right he has of Preserving all Mankind, and doing all reasonable things, he can in order to that end: And thus it is, that every Man in the State of Nature, has a Power to kill a murderer, both to deter others from doing the like injury, which no reparation can compensate, by the Example of the punishment that attends it from every body, and also to secure Men from the attempts of a Criminal, who having renounced reason, the common Rule and Measure God hath given to Mankind, hath by the unjust violence and slaughter, he hath committed upon one, declared War against all Mankind, and therefore may be destroyed as a Lion or a Tiger, one of those wild Savage Beasts, with whom Men can have no Society nor Security: And upon this is grounded that great Law of Nature, who so sheddeth Mans Blood, by Man shall his Blood be shed. And Cain was so fully convinced, that every one had a Right to destroy such a Criminal, that after the Murther of his Brother, he cries out, every one that findeth me, shall slay me, so plain was it writ in the Hearts of all Mankind.
12. By the same reason, may a Man in the State of Nature punish the lesser breaches of that Law; It will perhaps be demanded with death? I answer each transgression, may be punished to that Degree, and with so much Severity as will suffice to make it an ill bargain to the Offender, give him Cause to repent, and terrifie others from doing the like: Every Offence that can be committed in the State of Nature, may in the State of Nature, be also punished, equally, and as far forth, as it may, in a Common-wealth; for though it would be besides my present purpose, to enter here into the particulars of the Law of Nature, or its measures of punishment; yet, it is certain there is such a Law and that too, as intelligible and plain to a rational Creature, and a Studier of that Law, as the positive Laws of Common-wealths, nay possibly plainer; As much as reason is easier to be understood, then the Phansies and intricate Contrivances of Men, following contrary and hidden interests put into Words; For truly, so are a great part of the municipal Laws of Countries, which are only so far Right, as they are founded on the Law of Nature, by which they are to be regulated and interpreted.
13. To this strange Doctrine, viz. That in the State of Nature, every one has the Executive Power of the Law of Nature, I doubt not but it will be objected; That it is unreasonable for Men to be Judges in their own Cases, that self love will make Men partial to themselves and their Friends. And on the other side ill Nature, Passion and Revenge will carry them too far in punishing others. And hence nothing but confusion and disorder will follow, and that therefore God hath certainly appointed Government to restrain the partiality and violence of Men, I easily Grant, that Civil Government is the proper Remedy for the Inconveniences of the State of Nature, which must certainly be Great, where Men may be Judges in their own Case, since ’tis easiy to be imagined, that he who was so unjust as to do his Brother an Injury, will scarce be so just as to condemn himself for it: But I shall desire those who make this Objection, to remember that Absolute Monarchs are but Men, and if Government is to be the Remedy of those Evils, which necessarily follow from Mens being Judges in their own Cases, and the State of Nature is therefore not to be endured, I desire to know what kind of Government that is, and how much better it is then the State of Nature, where one Man commanding a multitude, has the Liberty to be Judge in his own Case, and may do to all his Subjects whatever he pleases,
without the least question or controle of those, who Execute his Pleasure? And in whatsoever he doth, whether lead by reason, mistake or passion, must be submitted to? Which Men in the State of Nature are not bound to do one to another. And if he that Judges, Judges amiss in his own, or any other Case, he is answerable for it, to the rest of Mankind.
14. ‘Tis often asked as a mighty Objection, where are, or ever were, there any Men in such a State of Nature? To which it may suffice as an answer at present; That since all Princes and Rulers of Independant Governments all through the World, are in a State of Nature, ’tis plain the World never was, nor never will be, without numbers of Men in that State, I have named all Governors of Independent Communities whether they are, or are not, in League with others; For ’tis not every compact, that puts an end to the State of Nature between Men, but only this one of agreeing together mutually to enter into one Community, and make one body Politic, other promises and compacts, Men may make one with another, and yet still be in the State of Nature. The promises and bargains for Truck, &c. Between the two Men, in Soldania, in or between, a Swiss and an Indian, in the Woods of America are binding to them, though they are perfectly in a State of Nature, in reference to one another for Truth, and keeping of Faith belongs to Men, as Men, and not as Members of Society.
15. To those that say, there were never any Men in the State of Nature, I will not only oppose the Authority of the Judicious Hooker, Eccl. Pol. Li. 1 Sect. 10. where he says; The Laws which have been hitherto mentioned, i. e. the Laws of Nature, do bind Men Absolutely, even as they are Men, although they have never any settled fellowship, never any Solemn Agreement amongst themselves what to do or not to do, but for as much as we are not by our selves sufficient to furnish our selves with competent store of things, needful for such a Life, as our Nature doth desire; a Life, fit for the dignity of Man, therefore to supply those defects and imperfections which are in us, as living single and solely by our selves, we are naturally induced to seek Communion and Fellowship with others, this was the Cause of Mens uniting themselves, at first in Politic Societies. But I Moreover affirm, that all Men are naturally in that State, and remain so till by their own consents, they make themselves Members of some Politic Society, and I doubt not in the Sequel of this Discourse, to make it very clear.
19. And here we have the plain difference between the State of Nature, and the State of War, which however some Men have confounded, are as far distant as a State of Peace, Goodwill, mutual Assistance, and Preservation; and a State of Enmity, Malice, Violence and Mutual Destruction are one from another. Men living together according to reason without a common Superior on Earth, with Authority to judge between them, is properly the State of Nature. But force, or a declared design of force upon the Person of another, where there is no common Superior on Earth to appeal to for relief, is the State of War: And ’tis the want of such an appeal gives a Man the Right of War even against an aggressor, though he be in Society and a fellow Subject. Thus a Theif whom I cannot harm, but by appeal to the Law, for having stolen all that I am worth, I may kill when he sets on me to rob me, but of my Horse or Coat, because the Law which was made for my Preservation, where it cannot interpose to secure my Life from present force, which if lost, is capeable of no reparation, permits me my own Defence, and the Right of War, a liberty to kill the aggressor, because the aggressor allows not time to appeal to our common Judge, nor the decision of the Law, for remedy in a Case where the mischief may be irreparable. Want of a common Judge with Authority, puts all Men in a State of Nature; Force without Right, upon a Mans Person, makes a State of War both where there is, and is not, a common Judge.
20. But when the actual force is over, the State of War ceases between those that are in Society, and are equally on both sides Subject to the Judge: And therefore in such controversies, where the question is put, who shall be Iudge? It cannot be meant, who shall decide the controversie: every one knows what Iephtha here tells us, that the Lord the Iudge, shall Judge. Where there is no Judge on Earth, the Appeal lies to God in Heaven. That question then cannot mean who shall Judge, whether another hath put himself in a State of War with me, and whether I may as Iephtha did appeal to Heaven in it? Of that I my self can only be Judge in my own Conscience, as I will answer it at the great day, to the Supream Judge of all Men.
CHAP. IV. Of SLAVERY.
22. THE natural Liberty of Man is to be free from any Superiour Power on Earth, and not to be under the Will or Legislative Authority of Man, but to have only the Law of Nature for his Rule. The Liberty of Man, in Society, is to be under no other Legislative Power, but that established, by consent, in the Commonwealth; nor under the Dominion of any Will, or Restraint of any Law, but what that Legislative shall enact, according to the Trust put in it. Freedom then is not what Sr. R. F. tells us, O. A. 55. A Liberty for every one to do what he lists, to live as he pleases, and not to be tyed by any Laws: but Freedom of Men, under Government, is, to have a standing Rule to live by, common to every one of that Society, and made by the Legislative Power erected in it. A Liberty to follow my own Will in all things, where that Rule prescribes not; not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, Arbitrary Will of another Man. As Freedom of Nature is to be under no other restraint but the Law of Nature.
23. This Freedom from Absolute, Arbitrary Power, is so necessary to, and closely joyned with a Man’s Preservation, that he cannot part with it, but by what forfeits his Preservation and Life together. For a Man, not having the Power of his own Life, cannot, by Compact, or his own Consent, enslave himself to any one, nor put himself under the Absolute, Arbitrary Power of another, to take away his Life, when he pleases. No body can give more Power than he has himself; and he that cannot take away his own Life, cannot give another Power over it. Indeed having, by his fault, forfeited his own Life, by some Act that deserves Death; he, to whom he has forfeited it, may (when he has him in his Power) delay to take it, and make use of him to his own service; and he does him no injury by it. For, whenever he finds the hardship of his Slavery out-weigh the value of his Life, ’tis in his Power, by resisting the Will of his Master, to draw on himself the Death he desires.
24. This is the perfect condition of Slavery, which is nothing else, but the State of War continued, between a lawful Conquerour, and a Captive. For, if once Compact enter between them, and make an agreement for a limited Power on the one side, and Obedience, on the other; the State of War and Slavery ceases, as long as the Compact endures. For, as has been said, no Man can, by agreement, pass over to another that which he hath not in himself, a Power over his own Life.
I confess, we find among the Iews, as well as other Nations, that Men did sell themselves; but, ’tis plain, this was only to Drudgery, not to Slavery. For, it is evident, the Person sold was not under an Absolute, Arbitrary, Despotical Power. For the Master could not have Power to kill him, at any time, whom, at a certain time, he was obliged to let go free out of his service: And the Master of such a Servant was so far from having an Arbitrary Power over his Life, that he could not, at pleasure, so much as maim him, but the Loss of an Eye, or Tooth, set him free, Exod.. XXI.
28. He that is nourished by the Acorns he pickt up under an Oak, or the Apples he gathered from the Trees in the Wood; has certainly appropriated them to himself. No Body can deny but the nourishment is his. I ask then, when did they begin to be his? When he digested? or when he eat? Or when he boiled? Or when he brought them home? Or when he pickt them up? And ’tis plain, if the first gathering made them not his, nothing else could. That labour put a distinction between them and common. That added something to them more than Nature, the common Mother of all, had done; and so they became his private right. And will any one say he had no right to those Acorns or Apples he thus appropriated, because he had not the consent of all Mankind to make them his? Was it a Robbery thus to assume to himself what belonged to all in Common? If such a consent as that was necessary, Man had starved, notwithstanding the Plenty God had given him. We see in Commons, which remain so by Compact, that ’tis the taking any part of what is common, and removing it out of the state Nature leaves it in, which begins the Property; without which the Common is of no use. And the taking of this or that part, does not depend on the express consent of all the Commoners. Thus the Grass my Horse has bit; the Turfs my Servant has cut; and the Ore I have dig’d in any place where I have a right to them in common with others, become my Property, without the assignation or consent of any body. The labour that was mine, removing them out of that common state they were in, hath fixed my Property in them.
29. By making an explicit consent of every Commoner, necessary to any ones appropriating to himself any part of what is given in common. Children or Servants could not cut the Meat which their Father or Master had provided for them in common, without assigning to every one his peculiar part. Though the Water running in the Fountain be every ones; yet who can doubt but that in the Pitcher is his only who drew it out? His labour hath taken it out of the hands of Nature where it was common, and belong’d equally to all her Children, and hath thereby appropriated it to himself.
30. Thus this Law of reason makes the Deer, that Indian’s who hath killed it; ’tis allowed to be his goods who hath bestowed his labour upon it, though before, it was the common right of every one. And amongst those who are counted the Civiliz’d part of Mankind, who have made and multiplied positive Laws to determine Property, this original Law of Nature for the beginning of Property, in what was before common, still takes places; and by vertue thereof, what Fish any one catches in the Ocean, that great and still remaining Common of Mankind; or what Ambergriese any one takes up here, is by the labour that removes it out of that common state Nature left it in, made his Property who takes that pains about it. And even amongst us the Hare that any one is Hunting, is thought his who pursues her during the Chase. For being a Beast that is still looked upon as common, and no Man’s private Possession; who-ever has imploy’d so much labour about any of that kind, as to find and pursue her, has thereby removed her from the state of Nature wherein she was common, and hath began a Property.
31. It will perhaps be objected to this, That if gathering the Acorns, or other Fruits of the Earth, &c. makes a right to them, then any one may ingross as much as he will. To which I Answer, Not so. The same Law of Nature that does by this means give us Property, does also bound that Property too. God has given us all things richly, 1 Tim. vi. 12. Is the Voice of Reason confirmed by Inspiration. But how far has he given it us, to enjoy? As much as any one can make use of to any advantage of life before it spoils; so much he may by his labour fix a Property in. Whatever is beyond this, is more than his share, and belongs to others. Nothing was made by God for Man to spoil or destroy. And thus considering the plenty of natural Provisions there was a long time in the World, and the few spenders, and to how small a part of that provision the industry of one Man could extend it self, and ingross it to the prejudice of others; especially keeping within the bounds set by reason of what might serve for his use; there could be then little room for quarrels or contentions about Property so establish’d.
32. But the chief matter of Property being now not the Fruits of the Earth, and the Beasts that subsist on it, but the Earth it self; as that which takes in and carries with it all the rest: I think it is plain, that Property in that too is acquired as the former. As much Land as a Man Tills, Plants, Improves, Cultivates, and can use the Product of; so much is his Property. He by his labour does as it were inclose it from the Common. Nor will it invalidate his right to say, Every body else has an equal title to it; and therefore he cannot appropriate, he cannot inclose, without the consent of all his Fellow-Commoners, all Mankind. God when he gave the World in common to all Mankind, commanded Man also to labour, and the penury of his Condition required it of him. God and his Reason commanded him to subdue the Earth, i. e, improve it for the benefit of Life, and therein lay out something upon it that was his own, his labour. He that in obedience to this Command of God, subdued, tilled and sowed any part of it, thereby annexed to it something that was his Property, which another had no Title to, nor could without injury take from him.
33. Nor was this appropriation of any parcel of Land, by improving it, any prejudice to any other Man, since there was still enough, and as good left; and more than the yet unprovided could use. So that in effect, there was never the less left for others because of his inclosure for himself. For he that leaves as much as another can make use of, does as good as take nothing at all. No Body could think himself injur’d by the drinking of another Man, though he took a good draught, who had a whole River of the same Water left him to quench his thirst. And the Case of Land and Water, where there is enough of both, is perfectly the same.
34. God gave the World to Men in Common, but since he gave it them for their benefit, and the greatest Conveniencies of Life they were capable to draw from it; it cannot be supposed he meant it should always remain common and uncultivated. He gave it to the use of the industrious and rational, (and labour was to be his title to it;) not to the phancy or covetousness of the quarrelsome and contentious. He that had as good left for his improvement, as was already taken up, needed not complain, ought not to meddle with what was already improved by another’s labour: if he did, ’tis plain he desired the benefit of anothers pains which he had no right to, and not the ground which God had given him in common with others to labour on, and whereof there was as good left as that already possessed; and more than he knew what to do with, or his industry could reach to.
35. ‘Tis true, in Land that is common in England, or any other Country, where there is plenty of people under Government, who have Money and commerce, no one can inclose or appropriate any part, without the consent of all his Fellow-Commoners: Because this is left common by Compact, i. e. by the Law of the Land, which is not to be violated. And though it be Common, in respect of some Men, it is not so to all Mankind; but is the joint propriety of this Country, or this Parish. Besides, the remainder, after such inclosure, would not be as good to the rest of the Commoners as the whole was, when they could all make use of the whole; whereas in the beginning and first peopling of the great Common of the World, it was quite otherwise. The Law Man was under was rather for appropriating. God Commanded, and his wants forced him to labour. That was his Property which could not be taken from him whereever he had fixed it. And hence subduing or cultivating the Earth, and having Dominion, we see, are join’d together. The one gave Title to the other. So that God, by commanding to subdue, gave Authority so far to appropriate. And the Condition of humane Life, which requires labour and materials to work on, necessarily introduce private Possessions.
36. The measure of Property, Nature well set, by the Extent of Mens Labour, and the Conveniency of Life: no Man’s Labour could subdue, or appropriate all; nor could his Enjoyment consume more than a small part; so that it was impossible for any Man, this way, to intrench upon the Right of another, or acquire, to himself, a Property, to the Prejudice of his Neighbour, who would still have room, for as good, and as large a Possession (after the other had taken out his) as before it was appropriated; which measure did confine every Man’s Possession, to a very moderate Proportion, and such as he might appropriate to himself, without Injury to any Body, in the first Ages of the World, when Men were more in danger to be lost, by wandering from their Company, in the then vast Wilderness of the Earth, than to be striatned for want of room to plant in. And the same measure may be allowed still, without prejudice to any Body, as full as the World seems. For supposing a Man, or Family, in the state they were at first, peopling of the World by the Children of Adam, or Noah; let him plant in some in-land, vacant places of America, we shall find that the Possessions, he could make himself, upon the measures we have given, would not be very large, nor, even to this day, prejudice the rest of Mankind, or give them reason to complain, or think themselves injured by this Man’s Incroachment, though the Race of Men have now spread themselves to all the corners of the World, and do infinitely exceed the small number was at the beginning. Nay the extent of Ground is of so little value, without Labour, that I have heard it affirmed, that, in Spain it self, a Man may be permitted to plough, sow, and reap, without being disturbed, upon Land he has no other Title to, but only his making use of it. But, on the contrary, the Inhabitants think themselvs beholden to him, who, by his Industry, on neglected, and consequently waste Land, has increased the stock of Corn, which they wanted. But be this as it will, which I lay no stress on; this I dare boldly affirm, That the same Rule of Propriety, (viz.) that every Man should have as much as he could make use of, would hold still in the World, without straitning any body, since there is Land enough in the World, to suffice double the Inhabitants, had not the Invention of Money, and the tacit Agreement of Men, to put a value on it, introduced (by Consent) larger Possessions, and a Right to them; which, how it has done, I shall, by and by, shew more at large.
37. This is certain, That in the beginning, before the desire of having more than Men needed, had altered the intrinsick value of things, which depends only on their usefulness to the Life of Man; or had agreed, that a little piece of yellow Metal, which would keep without wasting or decay, should be worth a great piece of Flesh, or a whole heap of Corn; though Men had a Right to appropriate, by their Labour, each one to himself, as much of the things of Nature, as he could use: yet this could not be much, nor to the Prejudice of others, where the same plenty was still left, to those who would use the same Industry.
Before the Appropriation of Land, he who gathered as much of the wild Fruit, killed, caught, or tamed as many of the Beasts as he could; he that so employed his Pains about any of the spontaneous Products of Nature, as any way to alter them, from the state Nature put them in, by placing any of his Labour on them, did thereby acquire a Propriety in them: but if they perished, in his Possession, without their due use; if the Fruits rotted, or the Venison putrified, before he could spend it, he offended against the common Law of Nature, and was liable to be punished; he invaded his Neighbour’s share, for he had no Right, farther than his Use called for any of them, and they might serve to afford him Conveniencies of Life.
38. The same measures governed the Possession of Land too: Whatsoever he tilled and reaped, laid up and made use of, before it spoiled, that was his peculiar Right; whatsoever he enclosed, and could feed, and make use of, the Cattle and Product was also his. But if either the Grass of his Inclosure rotted on the Ground, or the Fruit of his planting perished without gathering, and laying up, this part of the Earth, notwithstanding his Inclosure, was still to be looked on as Waste, and might be the Possession of any other. Thus, at the beginning, Cain might take as much Ground as he could till, and make it his own Land, and yet leave enough to Abel’s Sheep to feed on; a few Acres would serve for both their Possessions. But as Families increased, and industry inlarged their stocks, their Possessions inlarged with the need of them; but yet it was commonly without any fixed property in the ground they made use of, till they incorporated, setled themselves together, and built Cities, and then, by consent, they came in time, so set out the bounds of their distinct Territories, and agree on limits between them and their Neighbours; and by Laws within themselves, setled the Properties of those of the same Society. For we see, that in that part of the World which was first inhabited, and therefore like to be best peopled, even as low down as Abraham’s time, they wandered with their Flocks, and their Herds, which was their substance, freely up and down; and this Abraham did, in a Country where he was a stranger. Whence it is plain, that, at least, a great part of the Land lay in Common. That the Inhabitants valued it not, nor claimed Property in any more than they made use of. But when there was not room enough in the same place, for their Herds to feed together, they, by consent, as Abraham and Lot did, Gen. xiii. 5. separated and inlarged their Pasture, where it best liked them. And for the same Reason Esau went from his Father, and his Brother, and planted in Mount Seir, Gen. xxxvi. 6.
39. And thus, without supposing any private Dominion, and property in Adam, over all the World, exclusive of all other Men, which can no way be proved, nor any ones Property be made out from it; but supposing the World given as it was to the Children of Men in common, we see how labour could make Men distinct titles to several parcels of it, for their private uses; wherein there could be no doubt of right, no room for quarrel.
40. Nor is it so strange as perhaps before consideration it may appear, that the Property of labour should be able to overballance the Community of Land. For ’tis labour indeed that puts the difference of value on every thing; and let any one consider, what the difference is between an Acre of Land planted with Tabaco, or Sugar, sown with Wheat or Barley; and an Acre of the same Land lying in common, without any Husbandry upon it; and he will find, that the improvement of labour makes the far greater part of the value. I think it will be but a very modest Computation to say, that of the Products of the Earth useful to the Life of Man 9/10 are the effects of labour: nay, if we will rightly estimate things as they come to our use, and cast up the several expences about them, what in them is purely owing to Nature, and what to labour, we shall find, that in most of them 99/100 are wholly to be put on the account of labour.
41. There cannot be a clearer demonstration of any thing, than several Nations of the Americans are of this, who are rich in Land, and poor in all the Comforts of Life; whom Nature having furnished as liberally as any other people, with the materials of Plenty, i. e. a fruitful Soil, apt to produce in abundance, what might serve for food, rayment, and delight; yet for want of improving it by labour, have not 1/100 part of the Conveniencies we enjoy. And a King of a large and fruitful Territory there, feeds, lodges, and is clad worse than a day Labourer in England.
42. To make this a little clearer, let us but trace some of the ordinary provisions of Life, through their several progresses, before they come to our use, and see how much they receive of their value from human industry. Bread, Wine and Cloth are things of daily use and great plenty, yet notwithstanding Acorns, Water, and Leaves, or Skins, must be our Bread, Drink and Cloathing, did not labour furnish us with these more useful Commodities. For whatever Bread is more worth than Acorns, Wine than Water, and Cloth or Silk than Leaves, Skins or Moss, that is wholly owing to labour and industry. The one of these being the food and rayment which unassisted Nature furnishes us with; the other Provisions which our industry and pains prepare for us, which how much they exceed the other in value, when any one hath computed, he will then see how much labour makes the far greatest part of the value of things we enjoy in this World: and the ground which produces the materials, is scarce to be reckon’d in as any, or at most, but a very small part of it: so little, that even amongst us, Land that is left wholly to Nature, that hath no improvement of Pasturage, Tillage, or Planting, is called, as indeed it is, wast; and we shall find the benefit of it amount to little more than nothing.
43. An Acre of Land that bears here Twenty Bushels of Wheat, and another in America, which, with the same Husbandry, would do the like, are, without doubt, of the same natural, intrinsick Value. But yet the Benefit Mankind receives from one in a Year is worth 5l. and the other possibly not worth a Penny; if all the Profit an Indian received from it were to be valued, and sold here; at least, I may truly say, not 1000. ‘Tis Labour then which puts the greatest part of Value upon Land, without which it would scarcely be worth any thing; ’tis to that we owe the greatest part of all its useful Products; for all that the Straw, Bran, Bread, of that Acre of Wheat, is more worth than the Product of an Acre of as good Land, which lies waste, is all the Effect of Labour. For ’tis not barely the Plough-man’s Pains, the Reaper’s and Thresher’s Toil, and the Baker’s Sweat, is to be counted into the Bread we eat; the Labour of those who broke the Oxen, who digged and wrought the Iron and Stones, who felled and framed the Timber imployed about the Plough, Mill, Oven, or any other Utensils, which are a vast Number, requisite to this Corn, from its sowing to its being made Bread, must all be charged on the account of Labour, and received as an effect of that: Nature and the Earth furnished only the almost worthless Materials, as in themselves. ‘Twould be a strange Catalogue of things, that Industry provided and made use of, about every Loaf of Bread before it came to our use, if we could trace them; Iron, Wood, Leather, Bark, Timber, Stone, Bricks, Coals, Lime, Cloth, Dying, Drugs, Pitch, Tar, Masts, Ropes, and all the Materials made use of in the Ship, that brought any of the Commodities, made use of by any of the Work-men, to any part of the Work, all which, ‘twould be almost impossible, at least too long, to reckon up.
44. From all which it is evident, that tho’ the things of Nature are given in common: Man (by being Master of himself, and Proprietor of his own Person, and the Actions or Labour of it) had still in himself the great Foundation of Property: and that which made up the great part of what he applyed to the Support or Comfort of his being, when Invention and Arts had improved the conveniencies of Life, was perfectly his own, and did not belong in common to others.
45. Thus Labour, in the beginning, gave a Right of Property, where ever any one was pleased to imploy it, upon what was common, which remained, a long while, the far greater part, and is yet more than Mankind makes use of. Men, at first, for the most part, contented themselves with what un-assisted Nature offered to their Necessities; and though afterwards, in some parts of the World, where the Increase of People and Stock, with the Use of Money, had made Land scarce, and so of some Value, the several Communities setled the Bounds of their distinct Territories, and, by Laws, within themselves, regulated the Properties of the private Men of their Society, and so, by Compact and Agreement, setled the Property which Labour and Industry began. And the Leagues, that have been made between several States and Kingdoms, either expresly or tacitly dis-owning all Claim and Right to the Land in the others Possession, have, by common Consent, given up their Pretences to their natural common Right, which originally they had to those Countries: and so have, by positive Agreement, settled a Property amongst themselves, in distinct Parts of the World; yet there are still great Tracts of Ground to be found, which the Inhabitants thereof, not having joyned with the rest of Mankind, in the consent of the Use of their common Money, lye waste, and are more than the People, who dwell on it, do, or can make use of, and so still lye in common. Though this can scarce happen amongst that part of Mankind that have consented to the Use of Money.
46. The greatest part of things really useful to the Life of Man, and such as the necessity of subsisting made the first Commoners of the World look after, as it doth the Americans now, are generally things of short duration, such as, if they are not consumed by use, will decay and perish of themselves. Gold, Silver, and Diamonds, are things, that Phancy, or Agreement hath put the Value on, more than real Use, and the necessary Support of Life: Now of those good things which Nature hath provided in common, every one hath a Right (as hath been said) to as much as he could use, and had a Property in all he could effect with his Labour: all that his Industry could extend to, to alter from the State Nature had put it in, was his. He that gathered a Hundred Bushels of Acorns or Apples, had thereby a Property in them; they were his Goods, as soon as gathered. He was only to look that he used them before they spoiled; else he took more than his share, and robb’d others. And indeed it was a foolish thing, as well as dishonest, to hoard up more than he could make use of. If he gave away a part to any body else, so that it perished not uselesly in his Possession, these he also made use of. And if he also bartered away Plumbs, that would have rotted in a Week’, for Nuts that would last good for his eating a whole Year, he did no injury; he wasted not the common Stock; destroyed no part of the portion of Goods that belonged to others, so long as nothing perished uselesly in his hands. Again, If he would give his Nuts for a piece of Metal, pleased with its colour; or exchange his Sheep for Shells, or Wooll for a sparkling Pebble or a Diamond, and keep those by him all his Life, he invaded not the Right of others; he might heap up as much of these durable things as he pleased: the exceeding of the bounds of his just Property not lying in the largeness of his Possession, but the perishing of any thing uselesly in it.
47. And thus came in the use of Money, some lasting thing that Men might keep without spoiling, and that, by mutual consent, Men would take in exchange for the truly useful, but perishable Supports of Life.
48. And as different degrees of Industry were apt to give Men Possessions in different Proportions, so this Invention of Money gave them the opportunity to continue and enlarge them. For supposing an Island, separate from all possible Commerce with the rest of the World, wherein there were but a Hundred Families, but there were Sheep, Horses and Cowes, with other useful Animals, wholesome Fruits, and Land enough for Corn, for a Hundred thousand times as many, but nothing in the Island, either because of its Commonness, or perishableness, fit to supply the Place of Money: What reason could any one have there to enlarge his Possessions, beyond the use of his Family, and a plentiful supply to its Consumption, either in what their own Industry produced, or they could barter for like perishable, useful Commodities, with others? Where there is not something both lasting and scarce, and so valuable to be hoarded up, there Men will not be apt to enlarge their Possessions of Land, were it never so rich, never so free for them to take. For I ask, What would a Man value Ten thousand, or an Hundred thousand Acres of excellent Land, ready cultivated, and well stocked too with Cattle, in the middle of the in-land Parts of America, where he had no hopes of Commerce with other parts of the World, to draw Money to him, by the Sale of the Product. It would not be worth the inclosing, and we should see him give up again to the wild Common of Nature what-ever was more than would supply the Conveniencies of Life, to be had there, for him and his Family.
49. Thus in the beginning all the World was America, and more so than that is now; for no such thing as Money was any where known. Find out something that hath the Use and Value of Money amongst his Neighbours, you shall see the same Man will begin presently to enlarge his Possessions.
50. But since Gold and Silver, being little useful to the Life of Man, in proportion to Food, Rayment, and Carriage, has its value only from the consent of Men, whereof labour yet makes in great part the measure, It is plain, that the consent of Men have agreed to a disproportionate and unequal Possession of the Earth; I mean out of the bounds of Society and Compact: for in Governments the Laws regulate it, they having by consent, found out and agreed in a way how a Man may rightfully, and without injury, possess more than he himself can make use of by receiving Gold and Silver, which may continue long in a Mans Possession, without decaying for the overplus, and agreeing those Metals should have a value.
51. And thus, I think, it is very easy to conceive, without any difficulty, how labour could at first begin a title of Property in the common things of nature, and how the spending it upon our uses bounded it. So that there could then be no reason of quarrelling about title, nor any doubt about the largeness of Possession it gave. Right and Conveniency went together. For as a Man had a right to all he could imploy his labour upon, so he had no temptation to labour for more than he could make use of. This left no room for Controversie about the title, nor for incroachment on the right of others; what Portion a Man carved to himself, was easily seen; and it was useless as well as dishonest, to carve himself too much, or take more than he needed.
CHAP. VI. Of Paternal Power.
52. It may perhaps be censured an impertinent Criticism in a discourse of this nature, to find fault with words and names that have obtained in the World: And yet possibly it may not be amiss to offer new ones when the old are apt to lead Men into mistakes, as this of Paternal Power probably has done, which seems so to place the Power of Parents over their Children wholly in the Father, as if the Mother had no share in it; whereas if we consult Reason or Revelation, we shall find she hath an equal title; which may give one reason to ask, Whether this might not be more properly called Parental Power? For whatever obligation Nature and the right of Generation lays on Children; it must certainly bind them equal to both the concurrent Causes of it. And accordingly we see the Positive Law of God every where joins them together, without distinction, when it commands the Obedience of Children, Honour thy Father and thy Mother, Exod. 20. 12. Whosoever curseth his Father or his Mother, Lev. 20. 9. Ye shall fear every Man his Mother and his Father, Lev. 19. 3. Children obey your Parents, &c. Eph. 6. 1. is the stile of the Old and New Testament.53. Had but this one thing been well consider’d, without looking any deeper into the matter, it might perhaps have kept men from running into those gross mistakes they have made about this Power of Parents, which however it might, without any great harshness, bear the name of Absolute Dominion, and Regal Authority, when under the title of Paternal Power, it seem’d appropriated to the Father; would yet have sounded but odly, and in the very name shewn the absurdity, if this supposed Absolute Power over Children had been called Parental, and thereby discover’d that it belong’d to the Mother too: For it will but very ill serve the turn of those Men who contend so much for the Absolute Power and Authority of the Fatherhood, as they call it, that the Mother should have any share in it. And it would have but ill supported the Monarchy they contend for, when by the very name it appeared, that that Fundamental Authority from whence they would derive their Government of a single Person only, was not plac’d in one, but two Persons jointly. But to let this of names pass.54. Though I have said above (2.) That all Men by Nature are equal; I cannot be supposed to understand all sorts of Equality: Age or Virtue may give Men a just Precedency: Excellency of Parts and Merit may place others above the Common Level: Birth may subject some, and Alliance or Benefits others to pay an Observance to those, to whom Nature, Gratitude or other Respects may have made it due; and yet all this consists with the Equality which all Men are in, in respect of Jurisdiction or Dominion one over another: which was the Equality I there spoke of, as proper to the Business in hand, being that equal Right that every Man hath to his Natural Freedom, without being subjected to the Will or Authority of any other Man.
55. Children, I confess, are not born in this full state of Equality, though they are born to it. Their Parents have a sort of Rule and Jurisdiction over them when they come into the World, and for some time after, but ’tis but a temporary one. The Bonds of this Subjection are like the Swadling Cloths they are wrapt up in, and supported by, in the weakness of their Infancy. Age and Reason as they grow up, loosen them till atlength they drop quite off, and leave a Man at his own free Disposal.
56. Adam was created a perfect Man, his Body and Mind in full possession of their Strength and Reason, and so was capable, from the first Instance of his being, to provide for his own Support and Preservation, and govern his Actions according to the Dictates of the Law of Reason God had implanted in him. From him the World is peopled with his Descendants, who are all born Infants, weak and helpless, without Knowledge or Understanding. But to supply the Defects of this imperfect State, till the improvement of Growth and Age had removed them, Adam and Eve, and after them all Parents were, by the Law of Nature, under an Obligation to preserve, nourish, and educate the Children they had begotten, not as their own Workmanship, but the Workmanship of their own Maker, the Almighty, to whom they were to be accountable for them.
57. The Law that was to govern Adam, was the same that was to govern all his Posterity, the Law of Reason. But his Off-spring having another way of entrance into the World, different from him, by a natural Birth, that produced them ignorant, and without the Use of Reason, they were not presently under that Law: For no Body can be under a Law that is not promulgated to him; and this Law being promulgated or made known by Reason only, he that is not come to the Use of his Reason, cannot be said to be under this Law: and Adam’s Children being not presently as soon as born, under this Law of Reason, were not presently free. For Law, in its true Notion, is not so much the Limitation as the direction of a free and intelligent Agent to his proper Interest, and prescribes no farther, than is for the general Good of those under that Law. Could they be happier without it, the Law, as an useless thing, would of it self vanish; and that ill deserves the Name of Confinement, which hedges us in only from Bogs and Precipices. So that however it may be mistaken, the end of Law, is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge Freedom. For in all the states of created Beings, capable of Laws, where there is no Law there is no Freedom. For, Liberty is, to be free from Restraint and Violence from others, which cannot be where there is no Law, and is not, as we are told, A Liberty for every Man to do what he lists: For who could be free, when every other Man’s Humour might domineer over him? But a Liberty to dispose and order freely as he lists his Person, Actions, Possessions, and his whole Property within the Allowance of those Laws, under which he is, and therein not to be subject to the the arbitrary Will of another; but freely follow his own.
58. The Power, then, that Parents have over their Children, arises from that Duty which is incumbent on them, to take care of their Off-spring, during the imperfect state of Childhood. To inform the Mind, and govern the Actions of their yet ignorant Nonage, till Reason shall take its place, and ease them of that Trouble, is what the Children want, and the Parents are bound to. For God haing given Man an Understanding to direct his Actions, has allowed him a freedom of Will, and liberty of Acting, as properly belonging thereunto, within the bounds of that Law he is under. But whilst he is in an Estate, wherein he has no Understanding of his own to direct his Will, he is not to have any Will of his own to follow: He that understands for him, must will for him too; he must prescribe to his Will, and regulate his Actions; but when he comes to the estate that made his Father a Free-man, the Son is a Free-man too.
59. This holds in all the Laws a Man is under, whether natural or civil. Is a man under the Law of Nature? what made him free of that Law? what gave him a free disposing of his Property, according to his own Will, within the compass of that Law? I answer, an Estate wherein he might be suppos’d capable to know that Law, that so he might keep his Actions within the Bounds of it. When he has acquired that state, he is presumed to know how far that Law is to be his Guide, and how far he may make use of his Freedom, and so comes to have it; till then, some body else must guide him, who is presumed to know how far the Law allows a Liberty. If such a state of Reason, such an Age of Discretion made him free, the same shall make his Son free too. Is a Man under the Law of England? what made him free of that Law? that is, to have the Liberty to dispose of his Actions and Possessions, according to his own Will, within the Permission of that Law? A capacity of knowing that Law. Which is supposed, by that Law, at the Age of Twenty one, and in some cases sooner. If this made the Father free, it shall make the Son free too. Till then, we see, the Law allows the Son to have no Will, but he is to be guided by the Will of his Father or Guardian, who is to understand for him. And if the Father die, and fail to substitute a Deputy in this Trust, if he hath not provided a Tutor to govern his Son, during
his Minority, during his Want of Understanding, the Law takes care to do it; some other must govern him, and be a Will to him, till he hath attained to a state of Freedom, and his Understanding be fit to take the Government of his Will. But after that, the Father and Son are equally free, as much as Tutor and Pupil, after Nonage; equally Subjects of the same Law together, without any Dominion left in the Father, over the Life, Liberty, or Estate of his Son, whether they be only in the State, and under the Law of Nature, or under the positive Laws of an Establish’d Government.
60. But if, through defects, that may happen, out of the ordinary Course of Nature, any one comes not to such a degree of Reason, wherein he might be supposed capable of knowing the Law, and so living within the Rules of it, he is never capable of being a Free Man; he is never let loose to the disposure of his own Will, because he knows no bounds to it, has not Understanding, its proper Guide; but is continued under the Tuition and Government of others, all the time his own Understanding is uncapable of that Charge. And so Lunaticks and Ideots are never set free from the Government of their Parents; Children, who are not as yet come unto those years whereat they may have; and Innocents, which are excluded, by a natural defect, from ever having. Thirdly, Madmen, which, for the present, cannot possibly have the use of right Reason to guide themselves, have, for their Guide, the Reason that guideth other Men, which are Tutors over them, to seek and procure their good for them, says Hooker Eccl. Pol. lib. 1. §. 7. All which seems no more than that Duty which God and Nature has laid on Man, as well as other Creatures, to preserve their Off-spring till they can be able to shift for themselves, and will scarce amount to an instance or proof of Parents Regal Authority.
61. Thus we are born free, as we are born rational; not that we have actually the Exercise of either: Age that brings one, brings with it the other too. And thus we see how natural Freedom and Subjection to Parents may consist together, and are both founded on the same Principle. A Child is free by his Father’s Title, by his Father’s Understanding, which is to govern him, till he hath it of his own. The Freedom of a man, at years of discretion, and the Subjection of a Child to his Parents, whilst yet short of it, are so consistent, and so distinguishable, that the most blinded Contenders for Monarchy, by Right of Fatherhood, cannot miss of it; the most obstinate cannot but allow of it. For were their Doctrine all true, were the right Heir of Adam now known, and, by that Title, setled a Monarch in his Throne; invested with all the Absolute, Unlimited Power Sr. R. F. talks of; If he should dye as soon as his Heir were born, must not the Child, notwithstanding he were never so free, never so much sovereign, be in subjection to his Mother and Nurse, to Tutors and Gonours, till Age and Education brought him Reason and Ability to govern himself, and others? The Necessities of his Life, the Health of his Body, and the Information of his Mind would require him to be directed by the Will of others and not his own: and yet will any one think, that this Restraint and Subjection were inconsistent with, or spoiled him of that Liberty or Sovereignty he had a Right to: or gave away his Empire to those who had the Government of his Nonage? This Government over him only prepared him the better, and sooner for it. If any body should ask me, When my Son is of Age to be free; I shall answer, Just when his Monarch is of Age to govern. But at what time, says the judicious Hooker, Eccl. Pol. l. 1. §. 6. a man may be said to have attain’d so far forth the use of Reason, as sufficeth to make him capable of those Laws whereby he is then bound to guide his Actions: this is a great deal more easie for sense to discern, than for any one, by Skill and Learning, to determine.
62. Commonwealths themselves take notice of, and allow, that there is a time when Men are to begin to act like Free Men, and therefore, till that time, require not Oaths of Fealty or Allegiance, or other publick owning of, or Submission to the Government of their Countreys.
63. The Freedom then of Man, and Liberty of acting, according to his own Will, is grounded on his having Reason, which is able to instruct him in that Law he is to govern himself by, and make him know how far he is left to the freedom of his own will. To turn him loose to an unrestrain’d Liberty, before he has Reason to guide him, is not the allowing him the priviledge of his Nature, to be free; but to thrust him out amongst Brutes, and abandon him to a state as wretched, and as much beneath that of a Man, as theirs. This is that which puts the Authority into the Parents hands to govern the Minority of their Children. God hath made it their business to imploy this Care on their Off-spring, and hath placed in them suitable Inclinations of Tenderness and Concern
to temper this power, to apply it as his Wisdom designed it, to the Childrens good, as long as they should need to be under it.
64. But what reason can hence advance this Care, of the Parents, due to their Off-spring, into an Absolute, Arbitrary Dominion of the Father, whose power reaches no farther, than by such a Discipline, as he finds most effectual, to give such strength and health to their Bodies, such vigour and rectitude to their Minds, as may best fit his Children to be most useful to themselves and others; and, if it be necessary to his Condition, to make them work, when they are able, for their own Subsistence. But, in this power, the Mother too has her share with the Father.
65. Nay this power so little belongs to the Father, by any peculiar right of Nature, but only as he is Guardian of his Children, that when he quits his Care of them, he loses his power over them, which goes along with their Nourishment and Education, to which it is inseparably annexed, and belongs as much to the Foster-Father of an exposed Child, as to the Natural Father of another. So little power does the bare act of begetting give a Man over his Issue: if all his Care ends there, and this be all the Title he hath to the Name and Authority of a Father: and what will become of this Paternal Power in that part of the World where one Woman hath more than one Husband at a time? Or in those parts of America, where, when the Husband and Wife part, which happens frequently, the Children are all left to the Mother, follow her, and are wholly under her Care and Provision? And if the Father die whilst the Children are young, do they not naturally every where owe the same Obedience to their Mother, during their Minority, as to their Father, were he alive? And will any one say, that the Mother hath a legislative Power over her Children; that she can make standing Rules, which shall be of perpetual Obligation, by which they ought to regulate all the Concerns of their Property, and bound their Liberty all the course of their Lives, and inforce the observation of them with Capital Punishments? For this is the proper power of the Magistrate, of which the Father hath not so much as the shadow. His Command over his Children, is but temporary, and reaches not their Life or Property. It is but a help to the weakness and imperfection of their Non-age; a Discipline necessary to their Education: and though a Father may dispose of his own Possessions, as he pleases, when his Children are out of danger of perishing for want; yet his power extends not to the lives or goods, which either their own industry, or anothers bounty, has made theirs; nor to their liberty neither, when they are once arrived to the infranchisement of the years of discretion. The Father’s Empire then ceases, and he can from thence forwards no more dispose of the liberty of his Son than that of any other Man. And it must be far from an absolute, or perpetual Jurisdiction, from which a Man may withdraw himself, having Licence from Divine Authority, to leave Father and Mother, and cleave to his Wife.
66. But though there be a time when a Child comes to be as free from subjection to the will and Command of his Father, as he himself is free from subjection to the will of any body else, and they are both under no other restraint, but that which is common to them both, whether it be the Law of Nature, or municipal Law of their Country; yet this freedom exempts not a Son from that honour which he ought, by the Law of God and Nature, to pay his Parents. God having made the Parents Instruments in his great design of continuing the Race of Mankind, and the occasions of Life to their Children, as he hath laid on them an obligation to nourish, preserve, and bring up their Off-spring: so he has laid on the Children a perpetual obligation of honouring their Parents, which containing in it an inward esteem and reverence to be shewn by all outward expressions, ties up the Child from any thing that may ever injure or affront, disturb, or endanger the happiness, or life of those from whom he received his: and engages him in all actions of defence, relief, assistance and comfort of those by whose means he entred into being, and has been made capable of any enjoyments of life. From this obligation no State, no freedom, can absolve Children. But this is very far from giving Parents a power of command over their Children, or an Authority to make Laws, and dispose as they please of their Lives or Liberties. ‘Tis one thing to owe honour, respect, gratitude and assistance; another to require an absolute obedience and submission. The honour due to Parents, a Monarch in his Throne owes his Mother, and yet this lessens not his Authority, nor subjects him to her Government.
67. The subjection of a minor places in the Father a temporary Government, which terminates with the minority of the Child. And the honour due from a Child, places in the Parents a perpetual right to respect, reverence, support and compliance to more, or less, as the Father’s care, cost and kindness, in his Education, has been more or less. And this ends not with minority, but holds in all parts and conditions of a Man’s Life. The want of distinguishing these two powers which the Father hath in the right of tuition, during minority, and the right of honour all his Life, may perhaps have caused a great part of the mistakes about this matter. For to speak properly of them, the first of these is rather the priviledge of Children, and duty of Parents, than any Prerogative of Paternal Power. The nourishment and Education of their Children, is a Charge so incumbent on Parents for their Childrens good, that nothing can absolve them from taking care of it. And though the power of commanding and chastising them go along with it, yet God hath woven into the principles of humane nature, such a tenderness for their Off-spring, that there is little fear that Parents should use their power with too much rigour; the excess is seldom on the severe side, the strong biass of nature drawing the other way. And therefore God Almighty, when he would express his gentle dealing with the Israelites, he tells them, that though he chasten’d them, he chasten’d them as a man chastens his Son, Deut. 8. 5. i. e. with tenderness and affection, and kept them under no severer discipline than what was absolutely best for them; and had been less kindness to have slacken’d. This is that power to which Children are commanded obedience, that the pains and care of their Parents may not be increased, or ill rewarded.
68. On the other side, honour and support all that which gratitude requires to return; for the benefits received by and from them is the indispensible duty of the Child, and the proper priviledge of the Parents. This is intended for the Parents advantage, as the other is for the Childs; though Education, the Parents duty, seems to have most power, because the ignorance and infirmities of Childhood, stand in need of restraint and correction; which is a visible exercise of Rule, and a kind of Dominion. And that duty which is comprehended in the word honour, requires less obedience, though the obligation be stronger on grown than younger Children. For who can think the Command, Children obey your Parents, requires in a Man that has Children of his own, the same submission to his Father, as it does in his yet young Children to him; and that by this Precept, he were bound to obey all his Father’s Commands, if out of a conceit of authority he should have the indiscretion to treat him still as a Boy.
69. The first part then of Paternal Power, or rather Duty, which is Education, belongs so to the Father, that it terminates at a certain season; when the business of Education is over it ceases of it self; and is also alienable before. For a Man may put the tuition of his Son in other hands; and he that has made his Son an Apprentice to another, has discharged him, during that time, of a great part of his Obedience, both to himself and to his Mother. But all the duty of honour, the other part, remains never the less entire to them; nothing can cancel that. It is so inseparable from them both, that the Father’s Authority cannot dispossess the Mother of this right, nor can any Man discharge his Son from honouring her that bore him. But both these are very far from a power to make Laws, and inforceing them with Penalties, that may reach Estate, Liberty, Limbs and Life. The power of Commanding ends with Non-age; and though after that, honour and respect, support and defence, and whatsoever gratitude can oblige a Man to, for the highest benefits he is naturally capable of, be always due from a Son to his Parents; yet all this puts no Scepter into the Father’s hand, no Soveraign Power of Commanding. He has no Dominion over his Sons property or actions, nor any right that his Will should prescribe to his Sons in all things; however it may become his Son in many things, not very inconvenient to him and his Family, to pay a Deference to it.
70. A Man may owe honour and respect to an ancient or wise Man; defence to his Child or Friend; relief and support to the distressed; and gratitude to a Benefactor; to such a degree, that all he has, all he can do, cannot sufficiently pay it. But all these give no Authority, no right of making Laws to any one over him from whom they are owing. And ’tis plain, all this is due, not to the bare title of Father; not only because, as has been said, it is owing to the Mother too: but because these obligations to Parents, and the degrees of what is required of Children, may be varied by the different care and kindness, trouble and expence, is often imployed upon one Child more than another.
71. This shews the reason how it comes to pass, that Parents in Societies, where they themselves are Subjects, retain a power over their Children, and have as much right to their Subjection, as those who are in the state of Nature, which could not possibly be, if all political Power were only paternal, and that, in truth, they were one and the same thing: for then, all paternal Power being in the Prince, the Subject could naturally have none of it; but these two Powers, political and paternal, are so perfectly distinct and separate, and built upon so different Foundations, and given to so different Ends, that every Subject, that is a Father, has as much a paternal Power over his Children, as the Prince has over his. And every Prince that has Parents, owes them as much filial Duty and Obedience, as the meanest of his Subjects do to theirs; and can therefore contain, not any part or degree of that kind of Dominion, which a Prince, or Magistrate has over his Subject.
72. Though the Obligation on the Parents to bring up their Children, and the Obligation on Children to honour their Parents, contain all the Power on the one hand, and Submission on the other, which are proper to this Relation; yet there is another Power, ordinarily, in the Father, whereby he has a tye on the Obedience of his Children, which, though it be common to him with other men, yet the Occasions of shewing it, almost constantly happening to Fathers in their private Families, and in Instances of it else-where being rare, and less taken notice of, it passes in the World for a part of paternal Iurisdiction. And this is the Power Men generally have, to bestow their Estates on those who please them best. The Possession of the Father, being the Expectation and Inheritance of the Children ordinarily, in certain proportions, according to the Law and Custom of each Country; yet it is commonly in the Father’s Power to bestow it with a more sparing or liberal hand, according as the Behaviour of this or that Child hath comported with his Will and Humour.
73. This is no small Tye to the Obedience of Children: and there being always annexed to the Enjoyment of Land, a Submission to the Government of the Country, of which that Land is a part. It has been commonly suppos’d, That, a Father could oblige his Posterity to that Government, of which he himself was a Subject, that his Compact held them, whereas, it being only a necessary Condition annex’d to the Land, which is under that Government, reaches only those who will take it on that Condition, and so is no natural Tye or Engagement, but a voluntary Submission. For every Man’s Children being, by Nature, as free as himself, or any of his Ancestours ever were, may, whilst they are in that Freedom, choose what Society they will join themselves to, what Commonwealth they will put themselves under. But if they will enjoy the Inheritance of their Ancestours, they must take it on the same terms their Ancestours had it, and submit to all the Conditions, annex’d to such a Possession. By this Power indeed, Fathers oblige their Children to Obedience to themselves, even when they are past Minority, and most commonly too, subject them to this or that political Power. But neither of these by any peculiar right of Father-hood, but by the Reward they have in their hands to inforce and recompence such a Compliance; and is no more Power than what a French-man has over an English-man, who by the hopes of an Estate he will leave him, will certainly have a strong tye on his Obedience: and if when it is left him, he will enjoy it, he must certainly take it upon the Conditions annex’d to the Possession of Land, in that Country where it lies, whether it be France or England.
74. To conclude then, though the Father’s Power of commanding, extends no farther than the Minority of his Children, and to a degree only fit for the Discipline, and Government of that Age. And though that Honour and Respect, and all that which the Latins called Piety, which they indispensibly owe to their Parents all their Life times, and in all estates, with all that Support and Defence, is due to them, gives the Father no Power of governing, i. e. making Laws and exacting Penalties on his Children. Though by this he has no Dominion over the Property or Actions of his Son; yet ’tis obvious to conceive, how easie it was, in the first Ages of the World, and in places still where the thinness of People gives Families leave to separate into unpossessed Quarters, and they have room to remove and plant themselves in yet vacant habitations,It is no improbable Opinion, therefore, which the Arch-Philosopher was of, That the chief Person in every Houshold, was always, as it were, a King; so when Numbers of Housholds joyn’d themselves in civil Societies together, Kings were the first kind of Governours amongst them, which is also, as it seemeth, the reason why the name of Fathers continued still in them, who of Fathers, were made Rulers; as also the ancient Custom of Governours to do as Melchizedec, and being Kings, to exercise the Office of Priests, which Fathers did, at the first grew, perhaps, by the same Occasion. Howbeit, this is not the only kind of Regiment that has been received in the World. The Inconveniences of one kind have caused sundry other to be devised, so that, in a word, all publique Regiment, of what kind soever, seemeth evidently to have risen from the deliberate Advice, Consultation and Composition between Men, judging it convenient, and behovefull, there being no impossibility in Nature, considered by it self, but that Man might have lived without any publique Regiment. Hooker’s Eccl. l. 1. §. 10. for the Father of the Family to become the Prince of it; he had been a Ruler from the Beginning of the infancy of his Children, and when they were grown up: since without some Government it would be hard for them to live together, it was likelyest it should, by the express or tacit Consent of the Children, be in the Father, where it seemed, without any change, barely to continue. And when indeed nothing more was required to it, than the permitting the Father to exercise alone, in his Family, that executive Power of the Law of Nature, which every Free-man naturally hath, and by that Permission resigning up to him a Monarchical Power, whilst they remained in it. But that this was not by any paternal Right, but only by the Consent of his Children, is evident from hence, That no Body doubts but if a Stranger, whom Chance or Business had brought to his Family, had there kill’d any of his Children, or committed any other Fact, he might condemn and put him to Death, or otherwise have punished him as well as any of his Children, which was impossible he should do by virtue of any paternal Authority, over one who was not his Child; but by virtue of that executive Power of the Law of Nature, which, as a Man, he had a right to: and he alone could punish him in his Family, where the Respect of his Children had laid by the Exercise of such a Power, to give way to the Dignity and Authority they were willing should remain in him above the rest of his Family.
75. Thus ’twas easie and almost natural for Children by a tacit and almost natural consent, to make way for the Father’s Authority and Government. They had been accustomed in their Child-hood, to follow his Direction, and to refer their little differences to him, and when they were Men, who fitter to rule them? Their little Properties, and less Covetousness, seldom afforded greater Controversies; and when any should arise, where could they have a fitter Umpire, than he, by whose Care they had every one been sustain’d and brought up, and who had a tenderness for them all? ‘Tis no wonder that they made no distinction betwixt Minority and full Age, nor looked after one and Twenty, or any other Age, that might make them the free Disposers of themselves and Fortunes, when they could have no desire to be out of their Pupilage. The Government they had been under, during it, continued still to be more their Protection than Restraint: and they could no where find a greater security to their Peace, Liberties, and Fortunes, than in the Rule of a Father.
76. Thus the natural Fathers of Families, by an insensible change, became the politick Monarchs of them too; and as they chanced to live long, and leave able and worthy Heirs, for several Successions, or otherwise: so they laid the Foundations of Hereditary, or Elective Kingdoms under several Constitutions, and Manors, according as Chance, Contrivance, or Occasions happen’d to mould them. But if Princes have their Titles in the Fathers Right, and it be a sufficient proof of the natural Right of Fathers to political Authority; because, they commonly were those, in whose hands, we find, de facto, the Exercise of Government: I say, if this Argument be good, it will as strongly prove that all Princes, nay Princes only, ought to be Priests, since ’tis as certain that in the Beginning, The Father of the Family was Priest, as that he was Ruler in his own Houshold.
CHAP. VII. Of Political or Civil Society.
77. GOD having made Man such a creature, that, in his own Judgment, it was not good for him to be alone, put him under strong Obligations of Necessity, Convenience, and Inclination, to drive him into Society, as well as fitted him with Understanding and Language to continue and enjoy it. The first Society was betwen Man and Wife, which gave beginning to that between Parents and Children; to which, in time, that between Master and Servant came to be added: and though all these might, and commonly did meet together, and make up but one Family, wherein, the Master or Mistriss of it had some sort of Rule, proper to a Family; each of these, or all together came short of Political Society, as we shall see if we consider the different Ends, Ties, and Bounds of each of these.
78. Conjugal Society is made by a voluntary compact between Man and Woman, and though it consist chiefly in such a Communion and Right in one anothers Bodies, as is necessary to its chief End, Procreation; yet it draws with it mutual
Support and Assistance; and a Communion of Interests too, as necessary, not only to unite their Care and Affection, but also necessary to their common Off-spring, who have a Right to be nourished and maintained by them, till they are able to provide for themselves.
79. For the end of conjunction between Male and Female, being not barely Procreation, but the continuation of the Species. This conjunction betwixt Male and Female ought to last, even after Procreation, so long as is necessary to the nourishment and support of the young Ones, who are to be sustained by those that got them, till they are able to shift and provide for themselves. This Rule, which the Infinite wise Maker hath set to the Works of his hands, we find, the inferiour Creatures steadily obey. In those viviparous Animals, which feed on Grass, the conjunction beneonate Male and Female lasts no longer than the very Act of Copulation; because the Teat of the Dam being sufficient to nourish the Young, till it be able to feed on Grass: the Male only begets, but concerns not himself for the Female or Young, to whose Sustenance he can contribute nothing. But in Beasts of Prey the conjunction lasts longer; because the Dam not being able well to subsist her self, and nourish her numerous Off-spring, by her own Prey alone, a more laborious, as well as more dangerous way of living, than by feeding on Grass: the Assistance of the Male is necessary to the Maintenance of their common Family, which cannot subsist, till they are able to prey for themselves, but by the joint Care of Male and Female. The same is to be observed in all Birds (except some domestick ones, where plenty of food excuses the Cock from feeding, and taking care of the young Brood) whose Young needing Food in the Nest, the Cock and Hen continue Mates till the Young are able to use their wing, and provide for themselves.
80. And herein, I think, lies the chief, if not the only reason, why the Male and Female, in Mankind, are tyed to a longer conjunction, than other Creatures; viz. because the Female is capable of conceiving, and de facto is commonly with Child again, and brings forth too a new Birth, long before the former is out of a dependency for support on his Parents help, and able to shift for himself, and has all the assistance is due to him from his Parents, whereby the Father, who is bound to take care for those he hath begot, is under an obligation to continue in Conjugal Society, with the same Woman, longer than other Creatures, whose Young being able to subsist of themselves, before the time of Procreation returns again, the Conjugal Bond dissolves of it self, and they are at liberty; till Hymen, at his usual anniversary Season, summons them again to chuse new Mates. Wherein one cannot but admire the Wisdom of the great Creator, who, having given to Man an Ability, to lay up for the future, as well as supply the present necessity, hath made it necessary, that Society of Man and Wife should be more lasting, than of Male and Female amongst other Creatures: that so their Industry might be encouraged, and their Interest better united, to make provision, and lay up Goods for their common Issue; which uncertain mixture, or easie, and frequent solutions of Conjugal Society would mightily disturb.
81. But though these are Ties upon Mankind, which make the Conjugal Bonds more firm and lasting, in a Man, than the other species of Animals; yet it would give one reason to enquire, why this compact, where Procreation and Education are secured, and Inheritance taken care for, may not be made determinable, either by consent, or at a certain time, or upon certain conditions, as well as any other voluntary compacts; there being no necessity, in the nature of the thing, nor to the ends of it, that it should always be for life; I mean, to such as are under no Restraint of any positive Law, which ordains all such contracts to be perpetual.
82. But the Husband and Wife, though they have but one common Concern, yet having different Understandings, will, unavoidably sometimes, have different wills too: it therefore being necessary, that the last Determination, i. e. the Rule, should be placed somewhere; it naturally falls to the Man’s share, as the abler and the stronger. But this, reaching but to the things of their common Interest and Property, leaves the Wife in the full and true possession of what, by contract, is her peculiar Right; and at least gives the Husband no more Power over her than she has over his Life. The Power of the Husband being so far from that of an absolute Monarch, that the Wife has, in many cases, a liberty to separate from him; where natural Right, or their Contract allows it; whether that Contract be made by themselves, in the state of Nature, or by the Customs or Laws of the countrey they live in, and the Children, upon such Separation, fall to the Father or Mother’s Lot, as such Contract does determine.
83. For all the ends of Marriage being to be obtained, under politick Government, as well as in the state of Nature, the civil Magistrate doth not abridge the Right or Power of either, naturally necessary to those ends, viz. Procreation, and mutual Support, and Assistance, whilst they are together; but only decides any Controversie that may arise, between Man and Wife, about them. If it were otherwise, and that absolute Soveraignty and Power of life and death naturally belong’d to the Husband, and were necessary to the Society between Man and Wife, there could be no Matrimony in any of these Countries, where the Husband is allowed no such absolute Authority; but the ends of Matrimony requiring no such Power in the Husband, it was not at all necessary to it: the condition of Conjugal Society put it not in him, but whatsoever might consist with Procreation and Support of the Children, till they could shift for themselves: mutual Assistance, Comfort, and Maintenance might be varied, and regulated, by that contract which first united them in that Society; nothing being necessary to any Society, that is not necessary to the ends for which it is made.
84. The Society betwixt Parents and Children, and the distinct Rights and Powers, belonging respectively to them, I have treated of so largely, in the foregoing Chapter, that I shall not here need to say any thing of it. And I think it is plain, that it is far different from a politick Society.
85. Master and Servant are Names as old as History, but given to those of far different condition; for a Free-man makes himself a Servant to another, by selling him, for a certain time, the Service, he undertakes to do, in exchange, for Wages he is to receive: and though this commonly puts him into the Family of his Master, and under the ordinary discipline thereof; yet it gives the Master but a Temporary Power over him, and no greater than what is contained in the Contract between them. But there is another sort of Servants, which, by a peculiar Name, we call Slaves, who, being Captives, taken in a just War, are, by the Right of Nature, subjected to the Absolute Dominion, and Arbitrary Power of their Masters. These Men having, as I say, forfeited their Lives, and, with it, their Liberties, and lost their Estates; and being in the state of Slavery, not capable of any Property, cannot, in that state, be considered as any part of civil Society; the chief end whereof is the preservation of Property.
86. Let us therefore consider a Master of a Family with all these subordinate Relations of Wife, Children, Servants and Slaves, united under the domestick rule of a Family; which what resemblance soever it may have in its order, offices, and number too, with a little Commonwealth; yet is very far from it, both in its constitution, power and end: or if it must be thought a Monarchy, and the Paterfamilias, the absolute Monarch in it, absolute Monarchy will have but a very shattered and short Power, when ’tis plain, by what has been said before, That the Master of the Family has a very distinct and differently limited Power, both as to time and extent, over those several persons that are in it; for excepting the Slave (and the Family is as much a Family, and his Power as Paterfamilias as great, whether there be any Slaves in his Family or no) he has no Legislative power of Life and Death over any of them, and none too but what a Mistress of a Family may have as well as he. And he certainly can have no absolute power over the whole Family, who has but a very limited one over every individual in it. But how a Family, or any other Society of Men differ from that which is properly political Society, we shall best see, by considering wherein political Society it self consists.
87. Man being born, as has been proved, with a title to perfect freedom, and an uncontrouled enjoyment of all the Rights and Priviledges of the Law of Nature, equally with any other Man, or number of Men in the World, hath by nature a power, not only to preserve his Property, that is, his Life, Liberty and Estate, against the injuries and attempts of other men; but to judge of and punish the breaches of that Law in others, as he is perswaded the offence deserves, even with death it self, in Crimes where the heinousness of the fact, in his opinion, requires it. But because no political Society can be, nor subsist without having in it self the power to preserve the property, and in order thereunto, punish the offences of all those of that Society; There, and there only is political Society, where every one of the Members hath quitted this natural Power, refign’d it up into the hands of the Community in all cases that exclude him not from appealing for protection to the law established by it. And thus all private judgment of every particular Member being excluded, the Community comes to be Umpire; and by understanding indifferent rules and men authorised by the community for their execution, decides all the differences that may happen between any Members of that Society, concerning any matter of right, and punishes those offences which any member hath committed against the Society with such penalties as the law has established; whereby it is easy to discern who are, and are not, in political Society together. Those who are united into one Body, and have a common establish’d Law and Judicature to appeal to, with Authority to decide Controversies between them, and punish Offenders, are in civil Society one with another; but those who have no such common Appeal, I mean on Earth, are still in the state of Nature, each being where there is no other, Judge for himself, and Executioner; which is, as I have before shew’d it, the perfect state of Nature.
88. And thus the Commonwealth comes by a power to set down what punishment shall belong to the several transgressions they think worthy of it, committed amongst the Members of that Society (which is the power of making Laws) as well as it has the power to punish any injury done unto any of its Members, by any one that is not of it, (which is the power of War and Peace;) and all this for the preservation of the property of all the Members of that Society, as far as is possible. But though every Man enter’d into Society, has quitted his power to punish offences against the Law of Nature, in prosecution of his own private Judgment; yet with the Judgment of offences which he has given up to the Legislative, in all Cases where he can appeal to the Magistrate, he has given up a right to the Commonwealth, to imploy his Force for the Execution of the Judgments of the Commonwealth, whenever he shall be called to it, which indeed are his own Judgments, they being made by himself or his representative. And herein we have the original of the Legislative and Executive Power of Civil Society, which is to judge by standing Laws how far offences are to be punished when committed within the Commonwealth; and also by occasional Judgments founded on the present circumstances of the fact, how far injuries from without are to be vindicated, and in both these to imploy all the force of all the Members when there shall be need.
89. Whereever therefore any number of Men so unite into one Society, as to quit every one his Executive Power of the Law of Nature, and to resign it to the publick, there and there only is a political, or civil Society. And this is done whereever any number of Men, in the State of Nature, enter into Society to make one People, one Body Politick under one Supream Government; or else when any one joins himself to, and incorporates with any Government already made. For hereby he authorizes the Society, or which is all one, the Legislative thereof to make Laws for him as the publick good of the Society shall require; to the Execution whereof, his own assistance (as to his own decrees) is due. And this puts men out of a state of nature into that of a Commonwealth, by setting up a Judge on Earth, with Authority to determine all the Controversies, and redress the injuries that may happen to any Member of the Commonwealth; which Judge is the Legislative or Magistrates appointed by it. And whereever there are any number of Men, however associated, that have no such decisive power to appeal to, there they are still in the state of Nature.
90. And hence it is evident, that Absolute Monarchy which by some Men is counted for the only Government in the World, is indeed inconsistent with civil Society, and so can be no Form of civil Government at all: For the end of civil Society, being to avoid and remedy those inconveniencies of the state of Nature which necessarily follow from every Man’s being Judge in his own Case, by setting up a known Authority, to which every one of that Society may appeal upon any injury received, or Controversy that may arise, and which every one of the Society ought to obey. Whereever any persons are who have not such an authority to appeal to,The publick Power of all Society is above every Soul contained in the same Society; and the principal use of that power is to give Laws unto all that are under it, which Laws in such Cases we must obey, unless there be reason shew’d which may necessarily inforce, that the Law of Reason, or of God, doth injoin the contrary, Hook. Eccl. Pol. 1. §. 16. and decide any difference between them there, those persons are still in the state of nature. And so is every absolute Prince in respect of those who are under his Dominion.
91. For he being suppos’d to have all, both Legislative and Executive Power in himself alone, there is no Judge to be found, no appeal lies open to any one, who may fairly and indifferently, and with authority decide, and from whence relief and redress may be expected of any injury or inconveniency that may be suffered from him, or by his order. So that such a Man, however intitled Czar, or Grand Signior, or how you please, is as much in the state of nature, with all under his Dominion, as he is with the rest of Mankind. For wherever any two Men are, who have no standing Rule, and common Judge to appeal to on Earth, for the determination of Controversies of Right, betwixt them, there they are still in the state of Nature,To take away all such mutual Grievances, Injuries and Wrongs, i. e. such as attend Men in the state of Nature. There was no way but only by growing into Composition and Agreement amongst themselves by ordaining some kind of Government publick, and by yielding themselves subject thereunto, that unto whom they granted Authority to rule and govern: by them the Peace, Tranquillity, and happy Estate of the rest might be procured. Men always knew that where Force and Injury was offered, they might be Defenders of themselves; they knew that however Men may seek their own Commodity; yet if this were done with Injury unto others, it was not to be suffered, but by all Men, and all good means to be withstood. Finally, they knew that no Man might, in reason, take upon him to determine his own Right, and according to his own Determination proceed in maintenance thereof, in as much as every man is towards himself, and them whom he greatly affects, partial; and therefore, that Strifes and Troubles would be endless, except they gave their common Consent, all to be ordered by some, whom they should agree upon, without which Consent, there would be no reason that one man should take upon him to be Lord or Iudge over another. Hooker’s Eccl. Pol. l. 1. §. 10. and under all the inconveniencies of it, with only this woful difference to the Subject, or rather Slave of an absolute Prince; That whereas, in the ordinary state of Nature, he has a liberty to judge of his Right, and according to the best of his power, to maintain it: but whenever his Property is invaded by the Will and Order of his Monarch; he has not only no Appeal, as those in Society ought to have, but, as if he were degraded from the common state of rational Creatures, is denied a liberty to judge of, or defend his Right, and so is exposed to all the Misery and Inconveniencies that a Man can fear from one, who being in the unrestrained state of Nature, is yet corrupted with Flattery, and armed with Power.
92. For he that thinks absolute Power purifies Mens Bloods, and corrects the baseness of humane Nature, need read but the History of this, or any other Age, to be convinced of the contrary. He that would have been insolent and injurious in the Woods of America, would not probably be much better in a Throne, where perhaps Learning and Religion shall be found out to justifie all that he shall do to his Subjects; and the Sword presently silence all those that dare question it. For what the Protection of Absolute Monarchy is; what kind of Fathers of their Countries it makes Princes to be; and to what a degree of Happiness, and Security it carries civil Society, where this sort of Government is grown to perfection, he that will look into the late Relation of Ceylon may easily see.
93. In Absolute Monarchies indeed, as well as other Governments of the World, the Subjects have an Appeal to the Law, and Judges to decide any Controversies, and restrain any violence that may happen betwixt the Subjects themselves, one amongst another. This every one thinks necessary, and believes, he deserves to be thought a declared Enemy to Society and Mankind, who should go about to take it away. But whether this be from a true Love of Mankind and Society, & such a Charity as we owe all one to another, there is reason to doubt. For this is no more than what every Man, who loves his own Power, Profit, or Greatness, may, and naturally must do; keep those Animals from hurting, or destroying one another, who labour and drudge only for his Pleasure and Advantage; and so are taken care of, not out of any Love the Master has for them, but Love of himself, and the Profit they bring him. For if it be asked what Security, what Fence is there, in such a State, against the Violence and Oppression of this Absolute Ruler? The very Question can scarce be born. They are ready to tell you, that it deserves Death only to ask after Safety. Betwixt Subject and Subject, they will grant, there must be Measures, Laws, and Judges for their mutual Peace and Security. But as for the Ruler, he ought to be Absolute, and is above all such Circumstancés; because he has a Power to do more hurt and wrong, ’tis right when he does it. To ask how you may be guarded from harm, or injury, on that side, where the strongest hand is to do it, is presently the Voice of Faction and Rebellion. As if when Men, quitting the state of Nature, entered into Society, they agreed that all of them, but one, should be under the restraint of Laws; but that he should still retain all the Liberty of the state of Nature, increased with Power, and made licentious by Impunity. This is to think that Men are so foolish, that they take care to avoid what Mischiefs may be done them by Pole-Cats, or Foxes, but are content, nay think it Safety, to be devoured by Lions.
94. But, whatever Flatterers may talk, to amuze Peoples Understandings, it never hinders Men from feeling; and when they perceive that any Man, in what Station soever, is out of the Bounds of the civil Society they are of, and that they have no Appeal, on Earth, against any harm they may receive from him, they are apt to think themselves in the state of Nature, in respect of him, whom they find to be so; and to take care, as soon as they can, to have that Safety and Security, in civil Society, for which it was first instituted, and for which only they entered into it. And therefore, though perhaps at first, as shall
be shewed more at large hereafter, in the following part of this Discourse, some one good and excellent Man having got a Preheminency, amongst the rest, had this Deference paid to his Goodness and Vertue, as to a kind of Natural Authority, that the chief Rule, with Arbitration of their differences, by a tacit Consent, devolved into his hands, without any other caution, but the assurance they had of his Uprightness and Wisdom; yet when time giving Authority, and, as some Men would perswade us, Sacredness to Customs, which the negligent, and unforeseeing Innocence of the first Ages began, had brought in Successors of another stamp, the People finding their Properties not secure under the Government as then it was.At the first; when some certain kind of Regiment was once appointed, it may be that nothing was then farther thought upon for the manner of governing, but all permitted unto their Wisdom and Discretion, which were to Rule, till, by experience, they found this for all parts very inconvenient, so as the thing, which they had devised for a Remedy, did indeed but increase the Sore, which it should have cured. They saw, that to live by one Man’s Will, became the cause of all Mens misery. This constrained them to come unto Laws wherein all Men might see their Duty beforehand, and know the Penalties of transgressing them. Hooker’s Eccl. Pol. l. 1. §. 10. (Whereas Government has no other end but the preservation of Property) could never be safe, nor at rest, nor think themselves in civil Society, till the Legislative was so placed in collective Bodies of Men, call them Senate, Parliament, or what you please, by which means every single person became subject equally, with other the meanest Men, to those Laws, which he himself, as part of the Legislative, had established; nor could any one, by his own Authority, avoid the force of the Law, when once made, nor by any pretence of Superiority plead exemption, thereby to license his own, or the Miscarriages of any of his Dependants: No Man in civil Society can be exempted from the Laws of it. For if any Man may do what he thinks fit,Civil Law, being the Act of the whole Body Politick, doth therefore over-rule each several part of the same Body. Hooker ibid. and there be no appeal on Earth, for Redress or Security against any harm he shall do; I ask, whether he be not perfectly still in the state of Nature, and so can be no Part or Member of that civil Society, unless any one will say, the state of Nature and civil Society, are one and the same thing, which I have never yet found any one so great a Patron of Anarchy as to affirm.
CHAP. VIII. Of the Beginning of Political Societies.
95. MEN being, as has been said, by Nature, all free, equal and independent; no one can be put out of this Estate, and subjected to the Political Power of another, without his own Consent, which is done by agreeing, with other Men, to join and unite into a Community, for their comfortable, safe, and peaceable living, one amongst another, in a secure Enjoyment of their Properties, and a greater Security against any that are not of it. This any number of Men may do, because it injures not the Freedom of the rest; they are left, as they were, in the Liberty of the state of Nature. When any number of Men have so consented to make one Community or Government, they are thereby presently incorporated, and make one Body Politick, wherein the Majority have a Right, to act and conclude the rest.
96. For when any number of Men, have by the consent of every individual, made a Community, they have thereby made that Community one Body, with a power to act as one Body, which is only by the will and determination of the majority.For that which acts any Community, being only the consent of the individuals of it, and it being one Body must move one way; it is necessary the Body should move that way whither the greater force carries it, which is the consent of the majority: or else it is impossible it should act or continue one Body, one Community, which the consent of every individual that united into it, agreed that it should; and so every one is bound by that consent to be concluded by the majority. And therefore we see, that in Assemblies impowred to act by positive Laws where no number is set, by that positive Law which impowers them, the act of the majority passes for the act of the whole, and of course determines, as having by the Law of Nature and Reason, the power of the whole.
97. And thus every Man by consenting with others to make one Body Politick, under one Government, puts himself under an obligation to every one of that Society, to submit to the determination of the majority, and to be concluded by it; or else this original Compact, whereby he with others incorporates into one Society, would signifie nothing, and be no Compact if he be left free, and under no other ties than he was in before in the state of Nature. For what appearance would there be of any Compact? What new engagement, if he were no farther tied by any Decrees of the Society, than he himself thought fit, and did actually consent to? This would be still as great a liberty as he himself had before his Compact, or any one else in the state of Nature, who may submit himself and consent to any acts of it if he thinks fit.
98. For if the consent of the majority shall not in reason be received as the act of the whole, and conclude every individual; nothing but the consent of every individual can make any thing to be the act of the whole, which, considering the infirmities of health, and avocations of business, which in a number, though much less than that of a Commonwealth, will necessarily keep many away from the publick Assembly; and the variety of Opinions and contrariety of interests which unavoidably happen in all Collections of Men, ’tis next impossible ever to be had. And therefore if coming into Society be upon such terms, it will be only like Cato’s coming into the Theatre, tantum at exiret. Such a Constitution as this would make the mighty Leviathan of a shorter duration than the feeblest Creatures; and not let it outlast the day it was born in, which cannot be suppos’d till we can think that rational Creatures should desire and constitute Societies only to be dissolved. For where the majority cannot conclude the rest, there they cannot act as one Body; and consequently, will be immediately dissolved again.
99. Whosoever therefore, out of a state of Nature, unite into a Community, must be understood to give up all the power necessary to the ends for which they unite into Society, to the majority of the Community, unless they expresly agreed in any number greater than the majority. And this is done by barely agreeing to unite into one political Society, which is all the Compact that is, or needs be, beneonate the individuals that enter into or make up a Commonwealth. And thus that which begins and actually constitutes any Political Society, is nothing but the consent of any number of Freemen capable of majority, to unite and incorporate into such a Society. And this is that, and that only, which did or could give beginning to any lawful Government in the World.
100. To this I find two Objections made. 1. That there are no instances to be found in story, of a Company of Men independant and equal one amongst another, that met together, and in this way began and set up a Government. 2. ‘Tis impossible of right that Men should do so; because all Men being born under Government, they are to submit to that, and are not at liberty to begin a new one.
101. To the first, there is this to Answer, That it is not at all to be wonder’d that History gives us but a very little account of Men that lived together in the state of Nature. The inconveniencies of that condition, and the love and want of Society, no sooner brought any number of them together, but they presently united and incorporated, if they designed to continue together. And if we may not suppose Men ever to have been in the state of Nature, because we hear not much of them in such a state; we may as well suppose the Armies of Salmanasser, or Xerxes, were never Children, because we hear little of them till they were Men, and imbodied in Armies. Government is every where antecedent to Records, and Letters seldom come in amongst a People till a long continuation of Civil Society, has by other more necessary arts, provided for their Safety, Ease and Plenty. And then they begin to look after the History of their Founders, and search into their original when they have outlived the memory of it. For ’tis with Commonwealths as with particular Persons, they are commonly ignorant of their own Births and Infancies: and if they know any thing of it, they are beholding for it to the accidental Records that others have kept of it. And those that we have of the beginning of any Polities in the World, excepting that of the Jews, where God himself immediately interpos’d, and which favours not at all Paternal Dominion; are all either plain instances of such a beginning as I have mentioned, or at least have manifest footsteps of it.
102. He must shew a strange inclination to deny evident matter of fact when it agrees not with his Hypothesis; who will not allow, that the beginning of Rome and Venice were by the uniting together of several Men free and independent one of another, amongst whom there was no natural Superiority or Subjection. And if Iosephus Acosta’s word may be taken, he tells us, that in many parts of America there was no Government at all. There are great and apparent Conjectures, says he, that these men, speaking of those of Peru, for a long time had neither Kings nor Commonwealths, but lived in Troops, as they do this day in Florida, the Cheriquanas, those of Bresil, and many other Nations, which have no certain Kings, but as occasion is offered in Peace or War, they choose their Captains as they please. l. 1. c. 25. If it be said, that every Man there was born subject to his Father, or the head of his Family. That the subjection due from a Child to a Father, took not away his freedom of uniting into what political Society he thought fit, has been already proved. But be that as it will, these Men, ’tis evident, were actually free; and whatever superiority some Politicians now would place in any of them, they themselves claimed it not; but by consent were all equal, till by the same consent they set Rulers over themselves. So that their politick Societies all began from a voluntary Union, and the mutual agreement of Men freely acting in the choice of their Governours, and forms of Government.
103. And I hope those who went away from Sparta, with Palantus, mentioned by Iustin l. will be allowed to have been Freemen independent one of another, and to have set up a Government over themselves, by their own consent. Thus I have given several Examples out of History, of people free and in the state of Nature, that being met together incorporated and began a Commonwealth. And if the want of such instances be an argument to prove, that Government were not, nor could not be so begun, I suppose the Contenders for Paternal Empire were better let it alone, than urge it against natural Liberty. For if they can give so many instances out of History, of Governments began upon paternal Right, I think (though at least an Argument from what has been, to what should of right, be of no great force) one might, without any great danger, yield them the cause. But if I might advise them in the Case, they would do well not to search too much into the original of Governments, as they have begun de facto, lest they should find at the foundation of most of them, something very little favourable to the design they promote, and such a power as they contend for.
104. But, to conclude, Reason being plain on our side, that Men are naturally free; and the Examples of History shewing that the Governments of the World, that were begun in Peace, had their beginning laid on that foundation, and were made by the Consent of the People: There can be little room for doubt, either where the Right is, or what has been the Opinion, or Practice of Mankind about the first erecting of Governments.
105. I will not deny, that if we look back, as far as History will direct us, towards the Original of Commonwealths, we shall generally find them under the Government and Administration of one Man. And I am also apt to believe, that where a Family was numerous enough to subsist by it self, and continued entire together, without mixing with others, as it often happens; where there is much Land, and few People, the Government commonly began in the Father. For the Father having, by the Law of Nature, the same Power, with every Man else, to punish, as he thought fit, any Offences against that Law, might thereby punish his transgressing Children, even when they were Men, and out of their Pupilage; and they were very likely to submit to his punishment, and all join with him against the Offender in their turns, giving him thereby power to Execute his Sentence against any transgression, and so in effect make him the Law-maker and Governour over all that remained in Conjunction with his Family. He was fittest to be trusted; Paternal affection secured their Property and Interest under his Care, and the Custom of obeying him in their Childhood, made it easier to submit to him rather than any other. If therefore they must have one to rule them, as Government is hardly to be avoided amongst Men that live together; who so likely to be the Man as he that was their common Father, unless Negligence, Cruelty, or any other defect of Mind or Body, made him unfit for it. But when either the Father died, and left his next Heir for want of Age, Wisdom, Courage, or any other qualities less fit for Rule, or where several Families met and consented to continue together: There, ’tis not to be doubted, but they used their natural freedom to set up him whom they judged the ablest and most likely to Rule well over them. Conformable hereunto we find the People of America, who living out of the reach of the Conquering Swords and spreading domination of the two great Empires of Peru and Mexico, enjoy’d their own natural freedom; though, caeteris paribus, they commonly prefer the Heir of their deceased King; yet if they find him any way weak or uncapable, they pass him by, and set up the stoutest and bravest Man for their Ruler.
106. Thus, though looking back as far as Records give us any account of Peopling the World, and the History of Nations, we commonly find the Government to be in one hand, yet it destroys not that which I affirm (viz.) That the beginning of Politick Society depends upon the consent of the Individuals to join into and make one Society; who when they are thus incorporated, might set up what form of Government they thought fit. But this having given occasion to Men to mistake and think, that by Nature Government was Monarchical, and belong’d to the Father, it may not be amiss, here to consider, why People, in the beginning, generally pitch’d upon this form, which though perhaps the Father’s Preheminency might, in the first institution of some Commonwealths, give a rise to, and place in the beginning, the Power in one hand: yet it is plain that the reason that continued the Form of Government in a single Person, was not any Regard or Respect to Paternal Authority; since all petty Monarchies, that is, almost all Monarchies, near their Original, have been commonly, at least upon occasion, elective.
107. First then, in the beginning of things, the Father’s Government of the Childhood of those sprung from him, having accustomed them to the Rule of one Man, and taught them, that where it was exercised with Care and Skill, with Affection and Love to those under it, it was sufficient to procure and preserve Men (all the political Happiness they sought for, in Society.) It was no wonder that they should pitch upon, and naturally run into that Form of Government, which, from their Infancy, they had been all accustomed to; and which, by experience, they had found both easie and safe. To which, if we add, that Monarchy being simple, and most obvious to Men, whom neither experience had instructed in Forms of Government, nor the Ambition or Insolence of Empire had taught to beware of the Encroachments of Prerogative, or the Inconveniencies of Absolute Power; which Monarchy, in Succession, was apt to lay claim to, and bring upon them. It was not at all strange, that they should not much trouble themselves to think of methods of restraining any Exorbitances of those, to whom they had given the Authority over them; and of ballancing the Power of Government, by placing several parts of it in different hands. They had neither felt the Oppression of Tyrannical Dominion, nor did the Fashion of the Age, nor their Possessions, or way of living, which afforded little matter for Covetousness or Ambition; give them any reason to apprehend or provide against it; and therefore ’tis no wonder they put themselves into such a Frame of Government, as was, not only, as I said, most obvious and simple, but also best suited to their present State and Condition; which stood more in need of defence against foreign Invasions and Injuries, than of multiplicity of Laws, where there was but very little Property: and wanted not variety of Rulers and abundance of Officers to direct and look after their Execution, where there were but few Trespasses, and few Offenders. Since then, those who liked one another so well as to join into Society, cannot but be supposed to have some Acquaintance and Friendship together, and some Trust one in another. They could not but have greater Apprehensions of others, than of one another; and therefore their first care and thought cannot but be supposed to be how to secure themselves against foreign Force. ‘Twas natural for them to put themselves under a Frame of Government, which might best serve to that end; and chuse the wisest and bravest Man to conduct them in their Wars, and lead them out against their Enemies, and in this chiefly be their Ruler.
108. Thus we see that the Kings of the Indians, in America, which is still a Pattern of the first Ages in Asia and Europe, whilst the Inhabitants were too few for the Countrey, and want of People and Money gave Men no temptation to enlarge their Possessions of Land, or contest for wider extent of Ground; are little more than Generals of their Armies: and though they command absolutely in War, yet at home, and in time of Peace, they exercise very little Dominion, and have but a very moderate Sovereignty; the Resolutions of Peace and War, being ordinarily either in the People, or in a Council. Though the War it self, which admits not of Pluralities of Governours, naturally devolves the Command into the King’s sole Authority.
109. And thus in Israel it self, the chief Business of their Judges, and first Kings, seems to have been to be Captains in War, and Leaders of their Armies; which, (besides what is signified by, going out and in before the People, which was, to march forth to War, and home again in the Heads of their Forces) appears plainly in the story of Iephtha. The Ammonites making War upon Israel, the Gileadites, in fear, send to Iephtha, a Bastard of their Family, whom they had cast off, and article with him, if he will assist them against the Ammonites, to make him their Ruler; which they do in these Words, And the People made him head and captain over them, Iudg. 11. 11. which was, as it seems, all one as to be Judge. And he judged Israel, Iudg. 12. 7. that is, was their Captain-general, six Years. So when Iotham upbraids the Shechemites with the Obligation they had to Gideon, who had been their Judge and Ruler, he tells them, He fought for you, and adventured his life far, and delivered you out of the hands of Midian, Iudg. 9.17. Nothing mentioned of him, but what he did as a General, and indeed, that is all is found in his History, or in any of the rest of the Judges. And Abimelech particularly is called King, though at most he was but their General. And when, being weary of the ill Conduct of Samuel’s Sons, the Children of Israel desired a King, like all the nations to judge them, and to go out before them, and to fight their battels, 1 Sam. 8. 20. God granting their Desire, says to Samuel, I will send thee a man, and thou shalt anoint him to be captain over my people Israel that he may save my peole out of the hands of the Philistines, c. 9. v. 16. As if the only business of a King had been to lead out their Armies, and fight in their Defence; and, accordingly, at his Inauguration, pouring a Vial of Oyl upon him, declares to Saul, that, the Lord had anointed him to be Captain over his inheritance, c. 10. v. 1. And therefore
those, who after Saul’s being solemnly chosen, and saluted King by the Tribes, at Mispah, were unwilling to have him their King, make no other Objection but this, How shall this man save us? v. 27. as if they should have said, This Man is unfit to be our King, not having Skill and Conduct enough in War, to be able to defend us. And when God resolved to transfer the Government to David, it is in these Words, But now thy Kingdom shall not continue: the Lord hath sought him a man after his own heart, and the Lord hath commanded him to be captain over his people, c. 13. v. 14. As if the whole Kingly Authority were nothing else but to be their General: and therefore the Tribes who had stuck to Saul’s Family, and opposed David’s Reign, when they came to Hebron with terms of Submission to him, they tell him, amongst other Arguments they had to submit to him as to their King, That he was, in effect, their King in Saul’s time, and therefore, they had no reason but to receive him as their King now. Also (say they) in time past, when Saul was King over us, thou wast he that leddest out and broughtest in Israel, and the Lord said unto thee, thou shalt feed my People Israel, and thou shalt be a Captain over Israel.
110. Thus, whether a Family, by degrees, grew up into a Commonwealth, and the Fatherly Authority being continued on to the elder Son, every one in his turn growing up under it, tacitly submitted to it, and the easiness and equality of it not offending any one, every one acquiesced, till time seemed to have confirmed it, and setled a right of Succession, by Prescription: or whether several Families, or the Descendants of several Families, whom Chance, Neighbourhood, or Business brought together, united into Society; the need of a General, whose Conduct might defend them against their Enemies in War, and the great confidence the Innocence and Sincerity of that poor but vertuous Age, such as are almost all those which begin Governments that ever come to last in the World, gave Men one of another, made the first Beginners of Commonwealths generally put the Rule into one Man’s hand, without any other express Limitation or Restraint, but what the Nature of the thing, and the End of Government required. It was given them for the publick Good and Safety, and to those Ends in the Infancies of Commonwealths, they commonly used it, and unless they had done so, young Societies could not have subsisted; without such nursing Fathers: without this care of the Governours, all Governments would have sunk under the Weakness and Infirmities of their Infancy, the Prince and the People had soon perished together.
111. But the golden Age (tho’ before vain Ambition, and amor sceleratus habendi, evil Concupiscence had corrupted Mens minds into a Mistake of true Power and Honour) had more Virtue, and consequently, better Governours, as well as less vicious Subjects; and there was then no stretching Prerogative on the one side to oppress the People; nor, consequently, on the other, any Dispute about Priviledge, to lessen or restrain the Power of the Magistrate: and so no contest betwixt Rulers and People, about Governours or Government. Yet, when Ambition, and Luxury, at first, when some certain kind of Regiment was once approved, it may be, nothing was then further thought upon, for the manner of governing, but all permitted unto their Wisdom, and Discretion, which were to Rule, till, by experience, they found this for all parts very inconvenient, so as the thing, which they had devised for a Remedy, did indeed but increase the Sore, which it should have cured. They saw, that to live by one Man’s Will, became the cause of all Mens misery. This constrained them to come unto Laws wherein all Men might see their Duty beforehand, and know the Penalties of transgressing them. Hooker’s Eccl. Pol. l. 1. §. 10. in future Ages, would retain, and increase the Power, without doing the Business, for which it was given, and aided by Flattery, taught Princes to have distinct and separate Interests, from their People; Men found it necessary to examine, more carefully, the Original and Rights of Government; and to find out ways to restrain the Exorbitances, and prevent the Abuses of that Power, which they having intrusted in another’s hands, only for their own good, they found, was made use of to hurt them.
112. Thus we may see how probable it is, that People, that were naturally free, and, by their own consent, either submitted to the Government of their Father, or united together, out of different Families, to make a Government; should generally put the Rule into one Man’s hands, and chuse to be under the Conduct of a single Person; without so much, as by express Conditions, limiting or regulating his Power, which they thought safe enough in his Honesty and Prudence. Though they never dream’d of Monarchy being Iure Divino, which we never heard of among Mankind, till it was revealed to us by the Divinity of this last Age; nor ever allowed Paternal Power to have a right to Dominion, or to be the Foundation of all Government. And thus much may suffice to shew, that, as far as we have any light from History, we have reason to conclude, that all peaceful beginnings of Government have been laid in the Consent of the People. I say peaceful, because I shall have occasion, in another place, to speak of Conquest, which some esteem a way of beginning of Governments.
The other Objection, I find, urged against the beginning of Polities, in the way I have mentioned, is this, viz.
113. That all Men being born under Government, some or other, it is impossible any of them should ever be free, and at liberty, to unite together, and begin a new one, or ever be able to erect a lawful Government. If this Argument be good; I ask, how came so many lawful Monarchies into the World? For if any body, upon this supposition, can shew me any one Man, in any Age of the World, free to begin a lawful Monarchy; I will be bound to shew him Ten other free Men at liberty, at the same time, to unite and begin a new Government under a Regal, or any other Form. It being demonstration, that if any one, born under the Dominion of another, may be so free, as to have a right to command others, in a new and distinct Empire; every one that is born under the Dominion of another may be so free too, and may become a Ruler, or Subject, of a distinct separate Government. And so by this their own Principle, either all Men however born are free, or else there is but one lawful Prince, one lawful Government in the World. And then they have nothing to do but barely to shew us which that is. Which when they have done, I doubt not but all Mankind will easily agree to pay obedience to him.
114. Though it be a sufficient Answer to their Objection to shew, that it involves them in the same difficulties that it doth those they use it against; yet I shall endeavour to discover the weakness of this Argument a little farther.
All men, say they, are born under Government, and therefore they cannot be at liberty to begin a new one. Every one is born a Subject to his Father, or his Prince, and is therefore under the perpetual tie of Subjection and Allegiance. ‘Tis plain, Mankind never owned nor considered any such natural subjection that they were born in, to one or to the other, that tied them, without their own consents, to a subjection to them and their Heirs.
115. For there are no Examples so frequent in History, both sacred and prophane, as those of Men withdrawing themselves, and their Obedience, from the Jurisdiction they were born under, and the Family or Community they were bred up in, and setting up new Governments in other places, from whence sprang all that number of petty Commonwealths in the beginning of Ages, and which always multiplied as long as there was room enough, till the stronger, or more fortunate swallow’d the weaker; and those great ones again breaking to pieces, dissolved into lesser Dominions. All which are so many testimonies against paternal Soveraignty, and plainly prove, That it was not the natural right of the Father descending to his Heirs, that made Governments in the beginning; since it was impossible, upon that ground, there should have been so many little Kingdoms, but only one universal Monarchy, if Men had not been at liberty to separate themselves from their Families and their Government, be it what it will that was set up in it, and go and make distinct Commonwealths and other Governments as they thought fit.
116. This has been the practice of the World from its first beginning to this day: nor is it now any more hindrance to the freedom of Mankind, that they are born under constituted and ancient Polities,
that have established Laws and set Forms of Government, than if they were born in the Woods, amongst the unconfined Inhabitants that run loose in them. For those who would perswade us, that by being born under any Government, we are naturally Subjects to it, and have no more any title or pretence to the freedom of the state of Nature, have no other reason (bating that of Paternal Power, which we have already answer’d) to produce for it, but only because our Fathers or Progenitors passed away their natural Liberty, and thereby bound up themselves and their Posterity to a perpetual subjection to the Government, which they themselves submitted to. ‘Tis true, that whatever Engagements or Promises any one made for himself, he is under the obligation of them, but cannot by any Compact whatsoever, bind his Children or Posterity. For his Son, when a Man, being altogether as free as the Father, any act of the Father can no more give away the liberty of the Son, than it can of any body else. He may indeed annex such Conditions to the Land he enjoyed, as a Subject of any Commonwealth, as may oblige his Son to be of that Community, if he will enjoy those Possessions which were his Fathers; because that Estate being his Fathers Property, he may dispose or settle it as he pleases.
117. And this has generally given the occasion to the mistake in this matter; because Commonwealths not permitting any part of their Dominions to be dismembred, nor to be enjoyed by any but those of their Community, the Son cannot ordinarily enjoy the Possessions of his Father, but under the same Terms his Father did; by becoming a Member of the Society; whereby he puts himself presently under the Government, he finds there established, as much as any other Subject of that Commonweal. And thus the Consent of Free-men, born under Government, which only makes them Members of it, being given separately in their turns, as each comes to be of Age, and not in a multitude together; People take no notice of it, and thinking it not done at all, or not necessary, conclude they are naturally Subjects as they are Men.
118. But, ’tis plain, Governments themselves understand it otherwise; they claim no Power over the Son, because of that they had over the Father; nor look on Children as being their Subjects, by their Fathers being so. If a Subject of England have a Child, by an English Woman, in France, whose Subject is he? Not the King of England’s; for he must have leave to be admitted to the Priviledges of it. Nor the King of France’s; for how then has his Father a liberty to bring him away, and breed him as he pleases: and who ever was judged as a Traytor or Deserter, if he left, or warr’d against a Countrey, for being barely born in it of Parents that were Aliens there? ‘Tis plain then, by the Practice of Governments themselves, as well as by the Law of right Reason, that a Child is born a Subject of no Country nor Government. He is under his Father’s Tuition and Authority, till he come to Age of Discretion; and then he is a Free-man, at liberty what Government he will put himself under; what Body Politick he will unite himself to. For if an English-Man’s Son, born in France, be at liberty, and may do so, ’tis evident there is no Tye upon him, by his Father’s being a Subject of that Kingdom; nor is he bound up, by any Compact of his Ancestors: and why then hath not his Son, by the same reason, the same liberty, though he be born any where else! Since the Power that a Father hath naturally, over his Children, is the same, where-ever they be born; and the Ties of natural Obligations, are not bounded by the positive Limits of Kingdoms and Commonwealths.
119. Every Man being, as has been shewed, naturally free, and nothing being able to put him into subjection to any earthly Power, but only his own Consent: It is to be considered, what shall be understood to be a sufficient Declaration of a Man’s Consent, to make him subject to the Laws of any Government. There is a common distinction of an express, and a tacit Consent; which will concern our present Case. No body doubts but an express Consent, of any Man, entering into any Society, makes him a perfect Member of that Society, a Subject of that Government. The difficulty is, what ought to be look’d upon as a tacit Consent, and how far it binds, i. e. how far any one shall be looked on to have consented, and thereby submitted to any Government, where he has made no Expressions of it at all. And to this I say, that every Man, that hath any Possession, or Enjoyment, of any part of the Dominions of any Government, doth thereby give his tacit Consent, and is as far forth obliged to Obedience to the Laws of that Government, during such Enjoyment, as any one under it; whether this his Possession be of Land, to him and his Heirs for ever, or a Lodging only for a Week; or whether it be barely travelling freely on the Highway; and, in Effect, it reaches as far as the very being of any one within the Territories of that Government.
120. To understand this the better, it is fit to consider, that every Man, when he, at first, incorporates himself into any Commonwealth, he, by his uniting himself thereunto, annexed also, and submits to the Community those Possessions, which he has, or shall acquire, that do not already belong to any other Government. For it would be a direct Contradiction, for any one, to enter into Society with others for the securing and regulating of Property: and yet to suppose his Land, whose Property is to be regulated by the Laws of the Society, should be exempt from the Jurisdiction of that Government, to which he himself, and the Property of the Land, is a Subject. By the same Act therefore, whereby any one unites his Person, which was before free, to any Commonwealth; by the same he unites his Possessions, which were before free, to it also; and they become, both of them, Person and Possession, subject to the Government and Dominion of that Commonwealth, as long as it hath a being. Who-ever therefore, from thenceforth, by Inheritance, purchases Permission, or otherwise enjoys any part of the Land, so annext to, and under the Government of that Commonweal, must take it with the Condition it is under; that is, of submitting to the Government of the Commonwealth, under whose Jurisdiction it is, as far forth, as any Subject of it.
121. But since the Government has a direct Jurisdiction only over the Land, and reaches the Possessor of it, (before he has actually incorporated himself in the Society) only as he dwells upon, and enjoys that: the Obligation any one is under, by Virtue of such Enjoyment, to submit to the Government, begins and ends with the Enjoyment; so that when-ever the Owner, who has given nothing but such a tacit Consent, to the Government, will, by Donation, Sale, or otherwise, quit the said Possession: He is at liberty to go and incorporate himself into any other Commonwealth, or agree with others to begin a new one, in vacuis locis, in any part of the World they can find free and unpossessed: whereas he that has once, by actual Agreement, and any express Declaration, given his Consent to be of any Commonweal, is perpetually and indispensably obliged to be, and remain unalterably a Subject to it, and can never be again in the liberty of the state of Nature; unless, by any Calamity, the Government, he was under, comes to be dissolved.
122. But submitting to the Laws of any Countrey; living quietly, and enjoying Priviledges and Protection under them, makes not a Man a Member of that Society; ’tis only a local Protection and Homage due to, and from all those, who, not being in a state of War, come within the Territories belonging to any Government, to all parts whereof the force of its Law extends. But this no more makes a Man a Member of that Society, a perpetual Subject of that Commonwealth; than it would make a Man a Subject to another in whose Family he found it convenient to abide for some time; though, whilst he continued in it, he were obliged to comply with the Laws, and submit to the Government he found there. And thus we see, that Foreigners, by living all their Lives under another Government, and enjoying the Priviledges and Protection of it, though they are bound, even in Conscience, to submit to its Administration, as far forth as any Denison; yet do not thereby come to be Subjects or Members of that Commonwealth. Nothing can make any Man so, but his actually entering into it by positive Engagement, and express Promise and Compact. This is that, which I think, concerning the beginning of Political Societies, and that Consent which makes any one a Member of any Commonwealth.
124. The great and chief end therefore, of Mens uniting into Commonwealths, and putting themselves under Government, is the preservation of their Property. To which in the state of Nature there are many things wanting.First, There wants an establish’d, setled, known Law, received and allowed by common consent to be the Standard of Right and Wrong, and the common measure to decide all Controversies between them. For though the Law of Nature be plain and intelligible to all rational Creatures; yet Men being biassed by their interest, as well as ignorant for want of study of it, are not apt to allow of it as a Law binding to them in the application of it to their particular Cases.125. Secondly, In the State of Nature there wants a known and indifferent Judge, with Authority to determine all differences according to the established Law. For every one in that state being both Judge and Executioner of the Law of Nature, Men being partial to themselves, Passion and Revenge is very apt to carry them too far, and with too much heat in their own Cases, as well as negligence and unconcernedness, make them too remiss in other Mens.126. Thirdly, In the state of Nature there often wants Power to back and support the Sentence when right, and to give it due Execution. They who by any Injustice offended, will seldom fail, where they are able, by force to make good their Injustice; such resistance many times makes the punishment dangerous, and frequently destructive to those who attempt it.127. Thus Mankind, notwithstanding all the Priviledges of the state of Nature, being but in an ill condition while they remain in it, are quickly driven into Society. Hence it comes to pass, that we seldom find any number of Men live any time together in this State. The inconveniencies that they are therein exposed to, by the irregular and uncertain exercise of the Power every Man has of punishing the transgressions of others, make them take Sanctuary under the establish’d Laws of Government, and therein seek the preservation of their Property. ‘Tis this makes them so willingly give up every one his single power of punishing to be exercised by such alone as shall be appointed to it amongst them; and by such Rules as the Community, or those authorised by them, to that purpose shall agree on. And in this we have the original right and rise of both the Legislative and Executive Power, as well as of the Governments and Societies themselves.
128. For in the state of Nature, to omit the liberty he has of innocent delights, a Man has two Powers. The first is to do whatsoever he thinks fit for the preservation of himself and others within the permission of the Law of Nature; by which Law, common to them all, he and all the rest of Mankind, are one Community, make up one Society distinct from all other Creatures, and were it not for the corruption and vitiousness of degenerate Men, there would be no need of any other, no necessity that Men should separate from this great and natural Community, and associate into lesser Combinations. The other power a Man has in the state of Nature, is the power to punish the Crimes committed against that Law. Both these he gives up when he joins in a private, if I may so call it, or particular Political Society, and incorporates into any Commonwealth, separate from the rest of Mankind.
129. The first power, viz. of doing whatsoever he thought fit for the preservation of himself, and the rest of Mankind, he gives up to be regulated by Laws made by the Society, so far forth as the preservation of himself and the rest of that Society shall require; which Laws of the Society in many things confine the liberty he had by the Law of Nature.
130. Secondly, The power of punishing he wholly gives up, and engages his natural force, which he might before imploy in the Execution of the Law of Nature, by his own single Authority, as he thought fit, to assist the Executive Power of the Society, as the Law thereof shall require. For being now in a new State, wherein he is to enjoy many Conveniencies from the labour, assistance and society of others in the same Community, as well as protection from its whole strength; he is to part also with as much of his natural liberty, in providing for himself, as the good, prosperity and safety of the Society shall require; which is not only necessary but just, since the other Members of the Society do the like.
131. But though Men when they enter into Society, give up the Equality, Liberty, and Executive Power they had in the state of Nature, into the hands of the Society, to be so far disposed of by the Legislative, as the good of the Society shall require; yet it being only with an intention in every one, the better to preserve himself, his Liberty and Property. (For no rational Creature can be supposed to change his condition with an intention to be worse) the power of the Society, or Legislative, constituted by them, can never be suppos’d to extend farther than the common good; but is obliged to secure every ones Property by providing against those three defects above-mentioned, that made the state of Nature so unsafe and uneasy. And so whoever has the Legislative or supream Power of any Commonwealth, is bound to govern by establish’d standing Laws, promulgated and known to the People, and not by Extemporary Decrees; By indifferent and upright Judges, who are to decide Controversies by those Laws. And to imploy the force of the Community at home, only in the Execution of such Laws, or abroad to prevent or redress Foreign Injuries, and secure the Community from Inroads and Invasion. And all this to be directed to no other end, but the Peace, Safety, and publick good of the People.
Body can have a power to make Laws but by their own consent,The lawful Power of making Laws to Command whole Politick Societies of Men, belonging so properly unto the same intire Societies, that for any Prince or Potentate of what kind soever upon Earth, to exercise the same of himself, and not by express Commission, immediately and personally received from God, or else by authority derived at the first from their consent, upon whose persons they impose Laws, it is no better than meer Tyranny. Laws they are not therefore which publick approbation hath not made so. Hooker’s Eccl Pol. l. 1. §. 10. Of this point therefore we are to note, that sith Men naturally have no full and perfect Power to Command whole politick multitudes of Men, therefore utterly without our Consent, we could in such sort be at no Mans Commandment living. And to be commanded we do consent when that Society, whereof we be a part, hath at any time before consented, without revoking the same after by the like universal agreement.Laws therefore human, of what kind soever, are available by consent. Ibid. and by Authority received from them; and therefore-all the Obedience, which by the most solemn ties any one can be obliged to pay, ultimately, terminates in this Supream Power, and is directed by those Laws which it enacts; nor can any Oaths to any Foreign Power whatsoever, or any Domestick subordinate Power, discharge any Member of the Society from his Obedience to the Legislative, acting pursuant to their trust, nor oblige him to any Obedience contrary to the Laws so enacted, or farther than they do allow; it being ridiculous to imagine one can be tied ultimately to obey any Power in the Society which is not the Supream.135. Though the Legislative, whether placed in one or more, whether it be always in being, or only by intervals, though it be the Supream Power in every Commonwealth; yet, First, it is not, nor can possibly be absolutely Arbitrary, over the Lives and Fortunes of the People. For it being but the joint power of every Member of the Society given up to that person, or Assembly, which is Legislator; it can be no more than those persons had in a state of Nature before they enter’d into Society, and gave it up to the Community. For no Body can transfer to another more power than he has in himself; and no Body has an absolute Arbitrary Power over himself, or over any other, to destroy his own Life, or take away the Life or Property of another. A Man, as has been proved, cannot subject himself to the Arbitrary Power of another; and having in the state of Nature no Arbitrary Power over the Life, Liberty, or Possession of another, but only so much as the Law of Nature gave him for the preservation of himself, and the rest of Mankind; this is all he doth, or can give up to the Commonwealth, and by it to the Legislative Power, so that the Legislative can have no more than this. Their Power in the utmost bounds of it, is limited to the publick good of the Society. It is a Power that hath no other end but preservation, and therefore can never have a right to destroy,Two Foundations there are which bear up publick Societies; the one a natural inclination, whereby all Men desire sociable Life and Fellowship; the other an Order, expresly or secretly agreed upon, touching the manner of their union in living together; the latter is that which we call the Law of a Commonweal, the very Soul of a politick Body, the parts whereof are by Law animated, held together, and set on work in such actions as the common good requireth. Law
politick, ordain’d for external order and regiment amongst Men, are never framed as they should be, unless presuming the will of Man to be inwardly obstinate,
rebellious, and averse from all obedience to the sacred Laws of his nature; in a word, unless presuming Man to be in regard of his depraved Mind, little better than a wild Beast, they do accordingly provide notwithstanding, so to frame his outward actions, that they be no hindrance unto the common good, for which Societies are instituted. Vnless they do this they are not perfect. Hooker’s Ec. Pol. l. 1. §. 10.
enslave, or designedly to impoverish the Subjects; the obligations of the Law of Nature cease not in Society, but only in many Cases are drawn closer, and have by human Laws, known Penalties annexed to them, to inforce their observation. Thus the Law of Nature stands as an Eternal Rule to all Men, Legislators as well as others. The Rules that they make for other Mens actions, must as well as their own, and other Mens actions, be conformable to the Law of Nature, i. e. to the will of God, of which that is a Declaration, and the fundamental Law of Nature being the preservation of Mankind, no humane
Sanction can be good or valid against it.136. Secondly, The Legislative, or Supream Authority, cannot assume to its self a power to Rule by extemporary Arbitrary Decrees,Humane Laws are measures in respect of Men whose actions they must direct, howbeit such measures they are as have also their higher Rules to be measured by, which Rules are two, the Law of God, and the Law of Nature; so that Laws humane must be made according to the general Laws of Nature, and without contradiction to any positive Law of Scripture, otherwise they are ill made. Ibid. l. 3. § 9.To constrain Men to any thing inconvenient doth seem unreasonable. Ibid. l. 1. §. 10.but is bound to dispense Justice, and decide the Rights of the Subject by promulgated standing Laws, and known Authoris’d Judges. For the Law of Nature being unwritten, and so no where to be found but in the minds of Men, they who through Passion or Interest, shall mis-cite, or misapply it, cannot so easily be convinced of their mistake where there is no establish’d Judge: and so it serves not as it ought, to determine the Rights, and fence the Properties of those that live under it, especially where every one is Judge, Interpreter, and Executioner of it too, and that in his own Case: and he that has right on his side, having ordinarily but his own single strength, hath not force enough to defend himself from Injuries, or punish Delinquents. To avoid these Inconveniencies which disorder
Mens Properties in the state of Nature, Men unite into Societies, that they may have the united strength of the whole Society to secure and defend their Properties, and may have standing Rules to bound it, by which every one may know what is his. To this end it is that Men give up all their natural power to the Society they enter into, and the Community put the Legislative Power into such hands as they think fit, with this trust, that they shall be govern’d by declared Laws, or else their Peace, Quiet and Property, will still be at the same uncertainty as it was in the state of Nature.137. Absolute Arbitrary Power, or Governing without setled standing Laws, can neither of them consist with the ends of Society and Government, which Men would not quit the freedom of the state of Nature for, and tie themselves up under, were it not to preserve their Lives, Liberties and Fortunes; and by stated Rules of Right and Property to secure their Peace and Quiet. It cannot be suppos’d, that they should intend, had they a power so to do, to give any one or more an absolute Arbitrary Power over their Persons and Estates, and put a force into the Magistrates hand to execute his unlimited Will arbitrarily upon them: this were to
put themselves into a worse condition than the state of Nature, wherein they had a Liberty to defend their Right against the Injuries of others, and were upon equal terms of force to maintain it, whether invaded by a single Man, or many in Combination. Whereas by supposing they have given up themselves to the absolute Arbitrary Power and Will of a Legislator, they have disarmed themselves, and armed him to make a prey of them when he pleases. He being in a much worse condition, that is exposed to the Arbitrary Power of one Man who has the Command of 100000. than he that is expos’d to the Arbitrary Power of 100000. single Men, no Body being secure, that his Will, who has such a Command, is better than that of other Men, though his Force be 100000. times stronger. And therefore whatever Form the Commonwealth is under, the Ruling Power ought to govern by declared and received Laws, and not by extempory dictates and undetermin’d Resolutions. For then Mankind will be in a far worse condition than in the state of Nature, if they shall have armed one or a few Men with the joint power of a multitude, to force them to obey at pleasure the exorbitant and unlimited decrees of their sudden thoughts, or unrestrain’d, and till that
moment unknown Wills without having any measures set down which may guide and justifie their actions. For all the power the Government has, being only for the good of the Society, as it ought not to be Arbitrary and at Pleasure: so it ought to be exercised by established and promulgated Laws; that both the People may know their Duty, and be safe and secure within the limits of the Law, and the Rulers too kept within their due bounds, and not be tempted by the power they have in their hands to imploy it to purposes, and by such measures as they would not have known, and own not willingly.138. Thirdly, The Supream Power cannot take from any Man any part of his Property without his own consent. For the preservation of Property being the end of Government, and that for which Men enter into Society, it necessarily supposes and requires, that the People should have Property, without which they must be suppos’d to lose that by entering into Society, which was the end for which they entered into it. Too gross an absurdity for any Man to own. Men therefore in Society having Property, they have such a right to the goods, which by the Law of the Community are theirs, that no Body hath a right to take them, or any part of them,
from them, without their own consent; without this they have no Property at all. For I have truly no Property in that which another can by right take from me when he pleases, against my consent. Hence it is a mistake to think, that the Supream or Legislative Power of any Commonwealth, can do what it will, and dispose of the Estates of the Subject arbitrarily, or take any part of them at pleasure. This is not much to be fear’d in Governments where the Legislative consists wholly or in part in Assemblies which are variable, whose Members upon the dissolution of the Assembly, are Subjects under the common Laws of their Country, equally with the rest. But in Governments, where the Legislative is in one lasting Assembly, always in being, or in one Man, as in absolute Monarchies, there is danger still, that they will think themselves to have a distinct interest from the rest of the Community, and so will be apt to increase their own Riches and Power by taking what they think fit from the People. For a Mans Property is not at all secure, though there be good and equitable Laws to set the bounds of it between him and his Fellow Subjects, if he who commands those Subjects, have power to take from any private Man what part he pleases of his Property,
and use and dispose of it as he thinks good.139. But Government into whosesoever hands it is put, being as I have before shew’d, intrusted with this condition, and for this end, that Men might have and secure their Properties, the Prince or Senate, however it may have power to make Laws for the regulating of Property between the Subjects one amongst another, yet can never have a Power to take to themselves the whole, or any part of the Subjects Property, without their own consent. For this would be in effect to leave them no Property at all. And to let us see, that even absolute Power, where it is necessary, is not arbitrary by being absolute, but is still limited by that reason, and confined to those ends which required it in some Cases to be absolute, we need look no farther than the common practice of Martial Discipline. For the preservation of the Army, and in it of the whole Commonwealth, requires an absolute Obedience to the Command of every superiour Officer, and it is justly Death to disobey or dispute the most dangerous or unreasonable of them; but yet we see, that neither the Serjeant that could command a Souldier to march up to the mouth of a Cannon, or stand in a Breach where
he is almost sure to perish; can command that Souldier to give him one penny of his money: nor the General that can condemn him to Death for deserting his Post, or not obeying the most desperate Orders, cannot yet with all his absolute Power of Life and Death, dispose of one Farthing of that Souldiers Estate, or seize one jot of his Goods; whom yet he can command any thing, and hang for the least disobedience. Because such a blind Obedience is necessary to that end for which the Commander has his Power, viz. the preservation of the rest, but the disposing of his goods has nothing to do with it.140. ‘Tis true, Governments cannot be supported without great Charge, and ’tis fit every one who enjoys his share of the Protection, should pay, out of his Estate, his proportion for the maintenance of it. But still it must be with his own Consent, i. e. the Consent of the Majority, giving it either by themselves, or their Representatives chosen by them; for if any one shall claim a Power to lay and levy Taxes on the People, by his own Authority, and without such consent of the People, he thereby invades the Fundamental Law of Property, and subverts the end of Government. For what property have I in that which another may by right take when he pleases to himself.
141. Fourthly, The Legislative cannot transfer the Power of making Laws to any other hands, for it being but a delegated Power from the People, they who have it cannot pass it over to others. The People alone can appoint the Form of the Commonwealth, which is by Constituting the Legislative, and appointing in whose hands that shall be. And when the People have said, We will submit, and be govern’d by Laws made by such Men, and in such Forms; no Body else can say other Men shall make Laws for them: nor can they be bound by any Laws but such as are Enacted by those whom they have Chosen, and Authorised to make Laws for them.
142. These are the Bounds which the trust that is put in them by the Society, and the Law of God and Nature, have set to the Legislative Power of every Commonwealth, in all Forms of Government: First, They are to govern by promulgated establish’d Laws, not to be varied in particular Cases, but to have one Rule for Rich and Poor, for the Favourite at Court, and the Country Man at Plough. Secondly, These Laws also ought to be designed for no other end ultimately but the good of the People. Thirdly, They must not raise Taxes on the Property of
the People, without the Consent of the People, given by themselves, or their Deputies. And this properly concerns only such Governments where the Legislative is always in being, or at least where the People have not reserv’d any part of the Legislative to Deputies, to be from time to time chosen by themselves. Fourthly, Legislative neither must nor can transfer the Power of making Laws to any Body else, or place it any where but where the People have.
frailty, apt to grasp at Power, for the same Persons who have the Power of making Laws, to have also in their hands the power to execute them, whereby they may exempt themselves from Obedience to the Laws they make, and suit the Law, both in its making and execution, to their own private advantage, and thereby come to have a distinct interest from the rest of the Community, contrary to the end of Society and Government. Therefore in well order’d Commonwealths, where the good of the whole is so considered as it ought, the Legislative Power is put into the hands of divers Persons, who duly Assembled, have by themselves, or jointly with others, a Power to make Laws, which when they have done, being separated again, they are themselves subject to the Laws they have made; which is a new and near tie upon them to take care that they make them for the publick good.144. But because the Laws that are at once, and in a short time made, have a constant and lasting force, and need a perpetual Execution, or an attendance thereunto: Therefore ’tis necessary there should be a Power always in being, which should see to the Execution of the Laws that are made, and remain in force. And thus
the Legislative and Executive Power come often to be separated.145. There is another Power in every Commonwealth, which one may call natural, because it is that which answers to the Power every Man naturally had before he entered into Society. For though in a Commonwealth the Members of it are distinct Persons still in reference to one another, and as such are governed by the Laws of the Society; yet in reference to the rest of Mankind, they make one Body, which is, as every Member of it before was, still in the state of Nature with the rest of Mankind: so that the Controversies that happen between any Man of the Society with those that are out of it, are managed by the publick; and an injury done to a Member of their Body, engages the whole in the reparation of it. So that under this consideration, the whole Community is one Body in the state of Nature, in respect of all other States or Persons out of its Community.146. This therefore contains the Power of War and Peace, Leagues and Alliances, and all the Transactions, with all Persons and Communities without the Commonwealth, and may be called Federative, if any one pleases. So the thing be understood, I am indifferent as to the name.147. These two Powers, Executive and Federative, though they be really distinct in themselves, yet one comprehending the Execution of the Municipal Laws of the Society within its self, upon all that are parts of it; the other the management of the security and interest of the publick without, with all those, that it may receive benefit or damage from, yet they are always almost united. And though this Federative Power in the well or ill management of it be of great moment to the Commonwealth, yet it is much less capable to be directed by antecedent, standing, positive Laws, than the Executive; and so must necessarily be left to the Prudence and Wisdom of those whose hands it is in, to be managed for the publick good. For the Laws that concern Subjects one amongst another, being to direct their actions, may well enough precede them. But what is to be done in reference to Foreigners, depending much upon their actions, and the variation of designs and interests must be left in great part to the Prudence of those who have this Power committed to them, to be managed by the best of their Skill for the advantage of the Commonwealth.148. Though, as I said, the Executive and Federative Power of every Community
be really distinct in themselves, yet they are hardly to be separated and placed at the same time in the hands of distinct Persons. For both of them requiring the force of the Society for their exercise, it is almost impracticable to place the Force of the Commonwealth in distinct, and not subordinate hands; or that the Executive and Federative Power should be placed in Persons that might act separately, whereby the Force of the publick would be under different Commands, which would be apt sometime or other to cause disorder and ruin.
Supream Power to remove or alter the Legislative, when they find the Legislative act contrary to the trust reposed in them. For all Power given with trust for the attaining an end, being limited by that end, when ever that end is manifestly neglected, or opposed, the trust must necessarily be forfeited, and the Power devolve into the hands of those that gave it, who may place it a-new where they shall think best for their safety and security. And thus the Community perpetually retains a Supream Power of saving themselves from the attempts and designs of any Body, even of their Legislators, whenever they shall be so foolish, or so wicked, as to lay and carry on designs against the Liberties and Properties of the Subject. For no Man or Society of Men, having a Power to deliver up their Preservation, or consequently the means of it, to the absolute Will, and arbitrary Dominion of another; when ever any one shall go about to bring them into such a Slavish Condition, they will always have a right to preserve what they have not a Power to part with; and to rid themselves of those who invade this Fundamental, Sacred, and unalterable Law of Self-Preservation, for which they enter’d into Society. And thus the Community may be said in this respect, to be
always the Supream Power, but not as considered under any Form of Government, because this Power of the People can never take place till the Government be dissolv’d.150. In all Cases, whilst the Government subsists, the Legislative is the supream Power. For what can give Laws to another must needs be superiour to him; and since the Legislative is no otherwise Legislative of the Society, but by the right it has to make Laws for all the parts, and every Member of the Society prescribing Rules to their actions, and giving power of Execution where they are transgressed, the Legislative must needs be the Supream, and all other Powers in any Members or parts of the Society, derived from and subordinate to it.151. In some Commonwealths where the Legislative is not always in being, and the Executive is vested in a single Person, who has also a share in the Legislative; there that single Person in a very tolerable sense may also be called Supream; not that he has in himself all the Supream Power, which is that of Law-making: but because he has in him the supream Execution, from whom all inferiour Magistrates derive all their several subordinate Powers, or at least the greatest part of
them; having also no Legislative superiour to him, there being no Law to be made without his consent, which cannot be expected should ever subject him to the other part of the Legislative, he is properly enough in this sense Supream. But yet it is to be observed, that though Oaths of Allegiance and Fealty are taken to him, ’tis not to him as Supream Legislator, but as Supream Executor of the Law, made by a joint Power of him with others; Allegiance being nothing but an Obedience according to Law, which when he violates, he has no right to Obedience, nor can claim it otherwise than as the publick Person vested with the Power of the Law, and so is to be consider’d as the Image, Phantom, or Representative of the Commonwealth, acted by the will of the Society, declared in its Laws; and thus he has no Will, no Power, but that of the Law. But when he quits this Representation, this publick Will, and acts by his own private Will, he degrades himself and is but a single private Person without Power, and without Will. The Members owing no Obedience but to the publick Will of the Society.152. The Executive Power placed any where but in a Person that has also a share in the Legislative, is visibly subordinate and accountable to it, and may be at pleasure
changed and displaced; so that it is not the Supream Executive Power that is exempt from Subordination, but the Supream Executive Power vested in one, who having a share in the Legislative, has no distinct superiour Legislative to be subordinate and accountable to, father than he himself shall join and consent, so that he is no more subordinate than he himself shall think fit, which one may certainly conclude will be but very little. Of other Ministerial and subordinate Powers in a Commonwealth, we need not speak, they being so multiply’d with infinite variety in the different Customs and Constitutions of distinct Commonwealths, that it is impossible to give a particular account of them all. Only thus much which is necessary to our present purpose we may take notice of concerning them, that they have no manner of Authority any of them, beyond what is by positive Grant and Commission delegated to them, and are all of them accountable to some other Power in the Commonwealth.153. It is not necessary, no nor so much as convenient, that the Legislative should be always in being. But absolutely necessary, that the Executive Power should, because there is not always need of new Laws to be made, but always need of Execution of the Laws that are made. When
the Legislative hath put the Execution of the Laws they make into other hands, they have a power still to resume it out of those hands when they find cause, and to punish for any mall-administration against the Laws. The same holds also in regard of the Federative Power, that and the Executive being both Ministerial and subordinate to the Legislative, which as has been shew’d in a Constituted Commonwealth, is the Supream. The Legislative also in this Case being suppos’d to consist of several Persons; for if it be a single Person, it cannot but be always in being, and so will as Supream, naturally have the Supream Executive Power, together with the Legislative, may assemble and exercise their Legislative, at the times that either their original Constitution, or their own Adjournment appoints, or when they please; if neither of these hath appointed any time, or there be no other way prescribed to convoke them. For the Supream Power being placed in them by the People, ’tis always in them, and they may exercise it when they please, unless by their original Constitution, they are limited to certain Seasons, or by an Act of their Supream Power, they have Adjourned to a certain time, and when that time comes, they have a right to Assemble and act again.154. If the Legislative, or any part of it be of Representatives, chosen for that time by the People, which afterwards return into the ordinary state of Subjects, and have no share in the Legislature but upon a new choice, this power of chuseing must also be exercised by the People, either at certain appointed Seasons, or else when they are summon’d to it; and in this latter Case, the power of convokeing the Legislative, is ordinarily placed in the Executive, and has one of these two limitations in respect of time: That either the Original Constitution requires their Assembling and acting at certain intervals, and then the Executive Power does nothing but Ministerially issue directions for their Electing and Assembling, according to due Forms: Or else it is left to his Prudence to call them by new Elections, when the occasions or exigencies of the publick require the amendment of old, or making of new Laws, or the redress or prevention of any inconveniencies that lye on, or threaten the People.155. It may be demanded here, what if the Executive Power, being possessed of the force of the Commonwealth, shall make use of that force to hinder the meeting and acting of the Legislative, when the original Constitution, or the publick
Exigencies require it? I say using Force upon the People, without Authority, and contrary to the Trust put in him that does so, is a state of War with the People, who have a right to reinstate their Legislative in the Exercise of their Power. For having erected a Legislative with an intent they should exercise the Power of making Laws, either at certain set times, or when there is need of it; when they are hinder’d by any force from what is so necessary to the Society, and wherein the safety and preservation of the People consists, the People have a right to remove it by force. In all states and conditions the true remedy of Force without Authority, is to oppose Force to it. The use of Force without Authority, always puts him that uses it into a state of War, as the Aggressor, and renders him liable to be treated accordingly.156. The Power of Assembling, and dismissing the Legislative, placed in the Executive, gives not the Executive a superiority over it, but is a Fiduciary Trust placed in him for the safety of the People, in a Case where the uncertainty and variableness of humane affairs could not bear a steady fixed rule. For it not being possible, that the first Framers of the Government, should by any foresight, be so much
Masters of future Events, as to be able to prefix so just periods of return and duration to the Assemblies of the Legislative, in all times to come, that might exactly answer all the Exigences of the Commonwealth; the best remedy could be found for this defect, was to trust this to the prudence of one who was always to be present, and whose business it was to watch over the publick good. Constant frequent meetings of the Legislative, and long Continuations of their Assemblies, without necessary occasion, could not but be burthensome to the People, and must necessarily in time produce more dangerous inconveniencies, and yet the quick turn of affairs, might be sometimes such as to need their present help: any delay of their Convening might endanger the publick, and sometimes too their business might be so great, that the limited time of their sitting might be too short for their work, and rob the publick of that benefit which could be had only from their mature deliberation. What then could be done in this Case to prevent the Community from being exposed sometime or other to eminent hazard on one side, or the other, by fixed intervals and periods, set to the meeting and acting of the Legislative. But to intrust it to the prudence
of some, who being present, and acquainted with the state of publick affairs, might make use of this Prerogative for the publick good? And where else could this be so well placed as in his hands who was intrusted with the Execution of the Laws for the same end? Thus supposing the regulation of times for the Assembling and Sitting of the Legislative, not setled by the original Constitution, it naturally fell into the hands of the Executive; not as an Arbitrary Power depending on his good pleasure, but with this trust always to have it exercised only for the publick Weal, as the Occurrences of times and change of affairs might require. Whether setled periods of their Convening, or a liberty left to the Prince for Convoking the Legislative, or perhaps a mixture of both, hath the least inconvenience attending it, ’tis not my business here to inquire, but only to shew, that though the Executive Power may have the Prerogative of Convoking and dissolving such Conventions of the Legislative, yet it is not thereby superiour to it.157. Things of this World are in so constant a Flux, that nothing remains long in the same State. Thus People, Riches, Trade, Power, change their Stations; flourishing mighty Cities come to
ruine, and prove in time neglected desolate Corners, whilst other unfrequented places grow into populous Countries, fill’d with Wealth and Inhabitants. But things not always changing equally, and private interest often keeping up Customs and Priviledges when the reasons of them are ceased, it often comes to pass, that in Governments, where part of the Legislative consists of Representatives chosen by the People, that in tract of time, this Representation becomes very unequal and disproportionate to the reasons it was at first establish’d upon. To what gross absurdities the following of Custom when Reason has left it may lead, we may be satisfied when we see the bare name of a Town, of which there remains not so much as the ruins, where scarce so much Housing as a Sheepcoat, or more Inhabitants than a Shepherd is to be found, send as many Representatives to the grand Assembly of Law-makers, as a whole County numerous in People, and powerful in riches. This Strangers stand amazed at, and every one must confess needs a remedy. Though most think it hard to find one, because the Constitution of the Legislative being the original and supream act of the Society, antecedent to all positive Laws in it, and depending wholly on the People, no inferiour
Power can alter it. And therefore the People, when the Legislative is once Constituted, having in such a Government as we have been speaking of, no Power to act as long as the Government stands; this inconvenience is thought incapable of a remedy.158. Salus Populi Suprema Lex, is certainly so just and fundamental a Rule, that he who sincerely follows it cannot dangerously err. If therefore the Executive, who has the Power of Convoking the Legislative, observing rather the true proportion than fashion of Representation, regulates not by old custom, but true reason, the number of Members, in all places, that have a right to be distinctly represented, which no part of the People, however incorporated, can pretend to; but in proportion to the assistance which it affords to the publick, it cannot be judg’d to have set up a new Legislative, but to have restored the old and true one, and to have rectified the disorders which succession of time had insensibly as well as inevitably introduced; for it being the interest as well as intention of the People to have a fair and equal Representative; whoever brings it nearest to that, is an undoubted Friend to, and Establisher of the Government, and cannot miss the Consent and
Approbation of the Community. Prerogative being nothing but a Power in the hands of the Prince to provide for the publick good, in such Cases, which depending upon unforeseen and uncertain Occurrences, certain and unalterable Laws could not safely direct. Whatsoever shall be done manifestly for the good of the People, and establishing the Government upon its true Foundations, is, and always will be, just Prerogative. The Power of Erecting new Corporations, and therewith new Representatives, carries with it a supposition, that in time, the measures of representation might vary, and those have a just right to be represented which before had none; and by the same reason, those cease to have a right, and be too inconsiderable for such a priviledge which before had it. ‘Tis not a Change from the present State which perhaps Corruption or decay has introduced, that makes an Inroad upon the Government, but the tendency of it to injure or oppress the People, and to set up one part or Party with a distinction from, and an unequal subjection of the rest. Whatsoever cannot but be acknowledged to be of advantage to the Society and People in general, upon just and lasting measures, will always, when done, justify it self; and whenever the People shall chuse their
Representatives upon just and undeniably equal measures, suitable to the original Frame of the Government, it cannot be doubted to be the will and act of the Society, whoever permitted or propos’d to them so to do.
be left to the discretion of him that has the Executive Power in his hands, to be ordered by him as the publick good and advantage shall require; nay, ’tis fit that the Laws themselves, should in some Cases, give way to the Executive Power, or rather to this Fundamental Law of Nature and Government, viz. That as much as may be, all the Members of the Society are to be preserved. For since many accidents may happen wherein a strict and rigid observation of the Laws may do harm, as not to pull down an innocent Mans House to stop the Fire when the next to it is burning; and a Man may come sometimes within the reach of the Law, which makes no distinction of Persons, by an action that may deserve reward and pardon. ‘Tis fit the Ruler should have a Power in many Cases to mitigate the severity of the Law, and pardon some Offenders, since the end of Government, being the preservation of all as much as may be, even the guilty are to be spared where it can prove no prejudice to the innocent.160. This Power to act according to discretion for the publick good, without the prescription of the Law, and sometimes even against it, is that which is called Prerogative; for since in fome Governments the Law-making Power is not always in
being, and is usually too numerous, and so too slow for the dispatch requisite to Execution; and because also it is impossible to foresee, and so by Laws to provide for all accidents and necessities that may concern the publick, or make such Laws as will do no harm, if they are Executed with an inflexible rigour on all occasions, and upon all Persons that may come in their way, therefore there is a latitude left to the Executive Power, to do many things of choice which the Laws do not prescribe.161. This Power whilst imployed for the benefit of the Community, and suitably to the trust and ends of the Government, is undoubted Prerogative, and never is questioned. For the People are very seldom, or never scrupulous or nice in the point, or questioning of Prerogative, whilst it is in any tolerable degree imploy’d for the use it was meant, that is, the good of the People, and not manifestly against it. But if there comes to be a question between the Executive Power and the People, about a thing claimed as a Prerogative; the tendency of the exercise of such Prerogative, to the good or hurt of the People, will easily decide that question.162. It is easy to conceive, that in the Infancy of Governments, when Commonwealths
differed little from Families in number of People, they differ’d from them too, but little in number of Laws: and the Governours being as the Fathers of them, watching over them for their good, the Government was almost all Prerogative. A few establish’d Laws served the turn, and the discretion and care of the Ruler supply’d the rest. But when mistake or flattery prevailed with weak Princes, to make use of this Power for private ends of their own, and not for the publick good, the people were fain by express Laws, to get Prerogative determin’d in those points wherein they found disadvantage from it: And declared limitations of Prerogative in those Cases which they and their Ancestors had left in the utmost latitude, to the Wisdom of those Princes who made no other but a right use of it, that is, for the good of their People.163. And therefore they have a very wrong notion of Government, who say, that the People have incroach’d upon the Prerogative when they have got any part of it to be defined by positive Laws. For in so doing they have not pulled from the Prince any thing that of right belong’d to him, but only declared, that that Power which they indefinitely left in him, or his Ancestors hands, to be exercised for their
good, was not a thing they intended him, when he used it otherwise. For the End of Government being the good of the Community, whatsoever alterations are made in it, tending to that end, cannot be an incroachment upon any body; since no body, in Government, can have a right tending to any other end. And those only are incroachments which prejudice or hinder the publick good. Those who say otherwise, speak as if the Prince had a distinct and separate Interest from the good of the Community, and was not made for it. The Root and Source from which spring almost all those Evils and Disorders, which happen in Kingly Governments. And indeed, if that be so, the People, under his Government, are not a Society of Rational Creatures, entered into a Community, for their mutual good, such as have set Rulers over themselves, to guard and promote that good; but are to be looked on as an Herd of inferiour Creatures, under the Dominion of a Master, who keeps them, and works them, for his own Pleasure or Profit. If Men were so void of Reason, and brutish, as to enter into Society upon such Terms, Prerogative might indeed be, what some Men would have it, an Arbitrary Power to do things hurtful to the People.164. But since a Rational Creature cannot be supposed, when free, to put himself into Subjection to another, for his own harm: (though where he finds a good and a wise Ruler, he may not, perhaps, think it either necessary or useful to set precise Bounds to his Power in all things) Prerogative can be nothing but the Peoples permitting their Rulers to do several things of their own free choice, where the Law was silent, and sometimes too against the direct Letter of the Law, for the publick good, and their acquiescing in it when so done. For as a good Prince, who is mindful of the trust put into his hands, and careful of the good of his People, cannot have too much Prerogative, that is, Power to do good: So a weak and ill Prince, who would claim that Power his Predecessors exercised, without the direction of the Law, as a Prerogative belonging to him by Right of his Office, which he may exercise at his pleasure, to make or promote an Interest distinct from that of the publick, gives the People an occasion to claim their Right, and limit that Power, which, whilst it was exercised for their good, they were content should be tacitly allowed.165. And therefore he that will look into the History of England will find that
Prerogative was always largest in the hands of our wisest and best Princes: Because the People observing the whole tendency of their Actions to be the publick good, or if any humane frailty or mistake (for Princes are but Men, made as others) appear’d in some small declinations from that end; yet ’twas visible, the main of their Conduct tended to nothing but the care of the publick. The People therefore finding reason to be satisfied with these Princes, whenever they acted without, or contrary to the Letter of the Law, acquiesced in what they did, and without the least complaint, let them inlarge their Prerogative as they pleased, judging rightly that they did nothing herein to the prejudice of their Laws, since they acted conformable to the Foundation and End of all Laws, the publick good.166. Such God-like Princes indeed had some Title to Arbitrary Power, by that Argument that would prove Absolute Monarchy the best Government, as that which God himself governs the Universe by, because such Kings partake of his Wisdom and Goodness. Upon this is founded that saying, That the Reigns of good Princes have been always most dangerous to the Liberties of their People. For when their Successors, managing the Government
with different Thoughts, would draw the Actions of those good Rulers into Precedent, and make them the Standard of their Prerogative; as if what had been done only for the good of the People, was a right in them to do for the harm of the People, if they so pleased: It has often occasioned Contest, and sometimes publick Disorders, before the People could recover their original Right, and get that to be declared not to be Prerogative which truly was never so: since it is impossible any body, in the Society, should ever have a right to do the People harm, though it be very possible and reasonable that the People should not go about to set any Bounds to the Prerogative of those Kings or Rulers, who themselves transgressed not the Bounds of the publick good. For Prerogative is nothing but the Power of doing publick good, without a Rule.167. The Power of calling Parliaments in England, as to precise time, place, and duration, is certainly a Prerogative of the King, but still with this trust, that it shall be made use of for the good of the Nation, as the exigencies of the Times, and variety of Occasion shall require. For it being impossible to foresee which should always be the fittest place for them to assemble
in, and what the best season: the choice of these was left with the Executive Power, as might be best subservient to the publick good, and best suit the ends of Parliaments.168. The old Question will be asked in this matter of Prerogative, But who shall be Judge when this Power is made a right use of? I answer: Between an Executive Power in being, with such a Prerogative, and a Legislative, that depends upon his will for their convening, there can be no Judge on Earth. As there can be none between the Legislative and the People, should either the executive, or the Legislative, when they have got the Power in their hands, design, or go about to enslave or destroy them. The People have no other remedy in this, as in all other cases, where they have no Judge on earth, but to appeal to Heaven. For the Rulers, in such attempts, exercising a Power the people never put into their hands, who can never be supposed to consent that any body should rule over them for their harm, do that which they have not a right to do. And where the Body of the People, or any single Man, are deprived of their Right, or are under the Exercise of a power without right, having no Appeal on earth, they have a liberty to appeal to Heaven, when-ever they judge the Cause
of sufficient moment. And therefore, though the People cannot be Judge, so as to have, by the Constitution of that Society, any Superiour power, to determine and give effective Sentence in the case; yet they have reserv’d that ultimate Determination to themselves, which belongs to all Mankind, where there lies no Appeal on Earth; by a Law antecedent, and paramount to all positive Laws of Men, whether they have just Cause to make their Appeal to Heaven. And this Judgment they cannot part with, it being out of a Man’s power so to submit himself to another, as to give him a liberty to destroy him; God and Nature never allowing a Man so to abandon himself, as to neglect his own preservation. And since he cannot take away his own Life, neither can he give another power to take it. Nor let any one think this lays a perpetual foundation for Disorder; for this operates not till the Inconvenience is so great, that the Majority feel it, and are weary of it, and find a necessity to have it amended. And this the Executive Power, or wise Princes never need come in the danger of. And ’tis the thing, of all others, they have most need to avoid, as, of all others, the most perilous.
CHAP. XV. Of Paternal, Political, and Despotical Power, considered together.169. THough I have had occasion to speak of these separately before, yet the great mistakes, of late, about Government, having, as I suppose, arisen from confounding these distinct Powers one with another, it may not, perhaps, be amiss, to consider them here together.
170. First then, Paternal or Parental Power, is nothing but that which Parents have over their Children, to govern them, for the Childrens good, till they come to the use of Reason, or a state of Knowledge, wherein they may be supposed capable to understand that Rule, whether it be the Law of Nature, or the municipal Law of their Countrey, they are to govern themselves by: Capable, I say, to know it, as well as several others, who live as Free-men under that Law. The Affection and Tenderness God hath planted in the breasts of Parents, towards their Children, makes it evident, that this is not intended to be a severe. Arbitrary Government; but only for the Help, Instruction, and Preservation of their Off-spring.
But, happen it as it will, there is, as I have proved, no reason why it should be thought to extend to Life and Death, at any time, over their Children, more than over any body else, or keep the Child in subjection to the Will of his Parents, when grown to a Man, and the perfect use of Reason, any farther, than as having received Life and Education from his Parents, obliges him to Respect, Honour, Gratitude, Assistance, and Support, all his Life, to both Father and Mother. And thus, ’tis true, the Paternal is a natural Government; but not at all extending it self to the Ends and Jurisdictions of that which is Political. The Power of the Father doth not reach at all to the Property of the Child, which is only in his own disposing.
171. Secondly, Political Power is that Power, which every Man, having in the state of Nature, has given up into the hands of the Society, and therein to the Governours, whom the Society hath set over it self, with this express, or tacit Trust, That it shall be imployed for their good, and the preservation of their Property: Now this Power, which every Man has in the state of Nature, and which he parts with to the Society, in all such cases where the Society can secure him,
is to use such means for the preserving of his own Property, as he thinks good, and Nature allows him; and to punish the Breach of the Law of Nature in others; so as (according to the best of his Reason) may most conduce to the preservation of himself, and the rest of Mankind; so that the end and measure of this Power, when in every Man’s hands, in the state of Nature, being the preservation of all of his Society, that is, all Mankind in general. It can have no other end or measure, when in the hands of the Magistrate, but to preserve the Members of that Society, in their Lives, Liberties, and Possessions; and so cannot be an Absolute, Arbitrary Power over their Lives and Fortunes, which are as much as possible to be preserved; But a Power to make Laws, and annex such Penalties to them, as may tend to the preservation of the whole, by cutting off those Parts, and those only, which are so corrupt, that they threaten the sound and healthy, without which no severity is lawful. And this Power has its Original only from Compact and Agreement, and the mutual Consent of those who make up the Community.
172. Thirdly, Despotical Power is an Absolute, Arbitrary Power, one Man has over another, to take away his Life whenever
he pleases; and this is a Power, which neither Nature gives, for it has made no such distinction between one Man and another, nor Compact can convey. For Man, not having such an Arbitrary Power over his own Life, cannot give another Man such a Power over it, but it is the effect only of Forfeiture, which the Aggressor makes of his own Life, when he puts himself into the state of War with another. For having quitted Reason, which God hath given to be the Rule betwixt Man and Man, and the peaceable ways which that teaches, and made use of Force to compass his unjust ends upon another, where he has no right, he renders himself liable to be destroyed by his Adversary, when-ever he can, as any other noxious and brutish Creature that is destructive to his Being. And thus Captives, taken in a just and lawful War, and such only, are subject to a Despotical Power, which as it arises not from Compact, so neither is it capable of any, but is the state of War continued. For what Compact can be made with a Man that is not Master of his own Life? What Condition can he perform? And if he be once allowed to be Master of his own Life, the Despotical, Arbitrary Power of his Master ceases. He that is Master of himself,
and his own Life, has a right too to the means of preserving it; so that as soon as Compact enters, Slavery ceases, and he so far quits his Absolute Power, and puts an end to the state of War, who enters into Conditions with his Captive.
173. Nature gives the first of these, viz. Paternal Power, to Parents, for the Benefit of their Children, during their Minority, to supply their want of Ability, and understanding how to manage their Property. (By Property I must be understood here, as in other places, to mean that Property which Men have in their Persons as well as Goods.) Voluntary Agreement gives the second, viz. Political Power, to Governours, for the Benefit of their Subjects, to secure them in the Possession and Use of their Properties. And Forfeiture gives the third, Despotical Power, to Lords, for their own Benefit over those who are stripp’d of all Property.
174. He that shall consider the distinct rise and extent, and the different ends of these several Powers, will plainly see that Paternal Power comes as far short of that of the Magistrate, as Despotical exceeds it; and that Absolute Dominion, however placed, is so far from being one kind of civil Society, that it is as inconsistent
with it as Slavery is with Property. Paternal Power is only where Minority makes the Child incapable to manage his Property; Political where Men have Property in their own disposal; and Despotical over such as have no Property at all.
but, without the Consent of the People, can never erect a new one.176. That the Aggressor, who puts himself into the state of War with another, and unjustly invades another Man’s right, can, by such an unjust War, never come to have a right over the Conquered, will be easily agreed by all Men, who will not think that Robbers and Pyrates have a Right of Empire over whomsoever they have Force enough to master, or that Men are bound by Promises, which unlawful Force extorts from them. Should a Robber break into my House, and with a Dagger at my Throat, make me seal Deeds to convey my Estate to him, would this give him any Title? Just such a Title by his Sword, has an unjust Conquerour, who forces me into Submission. The Injury and the Crime is equal, whether committed by the wearer of a Crown, or some petty Villain. The Title of the Offender, and the Number of his Followers make no difference in the Offence, unless it be to aggravate it. The only difference is, Great Robbers punish little ones to keep them in their Obedience; but the great ones are rewarded with Laurels and Triumphs, because they are too big for the weak hands of Justice, in this World, and have the Power in their own
possession which should punish Offenders. What is my Remedy against a Robber that so broke into my House? Appeal to the Law for Justice. But perhaps Justice is deny’d, or I am crippled and cannot stir; Robbed and have not the means to do it. If God has taken away all means of seeking remedy, there is nothing left but Patience. But my Son, when able, may seek the Relief of the Law, which I am denyed: he or his Son may renew his Appeal, till he recover his Right. But the Conquered, or their Children, have no Court, no Arbitrator on Earth to appeal to. Then they may appeal, as Iephtha did, to Heaven, and repeat their Appeal, till they have recovered the native Right of their Ancestours, which was, to have such a Legislative over them, as the Majority should approve, and freely acquiesce in. If it be objected, this would cause endless trouble; I answer, No more than Justice does, where she lies open to all that appeal to her. He that troubles his Neighbour, without a Cause, is punished for it, by the Justice of the Court he appeals to. And he that appeals to Heaven, must be sure he has Right on his side: and a Right too that is worth the Trouble and Cost of the Appeal, as he will answer at a Tribunal that cannot be deceived, and
will be sure to retribute to every one according to the Mischiefs he hath created to his Fellow-Subjects; that is, any part of Mankind. From whence ’tis plain, that he that conquers, in an unjust War, can thereby have no Title to the Subjection and Obedience of the Conquered.177. But, supposing Victory favours the right side, let us consider a Conquerour in a lawful War, and see what Power he gets, and over whom.First, ‘Tis plain he gets no Power by his Conquest over those that Conquered with him. They that fought on his side cannot suffer by the Conquest, but must, at least, be as much Free-men as they were before. And most commonly they serve upon Terms, and on Condition to share with their Leader, and enjoy a part of the Spoil, and other Advantages that attend the conquering Sword: Or, at least, have a part of the subdued Countrey bestowed upon them. And the conquering People, are not, I hope, to be Slaves by Conquest, and wear their Laurels only to shew they are Sacrifices to their Leader’s Triumph. They that found Absolute Monarchy upon the Title of the Sword, make their Heroes, who are the Founders of such Monarchies, arrant Draw-can-Sirs, and forget they had any Officers and Souldiers
that fought on their side, in the Battles they won, or assisted them in the subduing, or shared in possessing the Countries they Master’d. We are told by some, that the English Monarchy is founded in the Norman Conquest, and that our Princes have thereby a Title to absolute Dominion: which if it were true, (as by the History it appears otherwise) and that William had a right to make War on this Island; yet his Dominion by Conquest, could reach no farther than to the Saxons and Britans, that were then Inhabitants of this Country. The Normans that came with him, and helped to Conquer, and all descended from them are Freemen, and no Subjects by Conquest; let that give what Dominion it will. And if I, or any Body else, shall claim freedom, as derived from them, it will be very hard to prove the contrary: And ’tis plain, the Law that has made no distinction between the one and the other, intends not there should be any difference in their Freedom or Priviledges.178. But supposing, which seldom happens, that the Conquerers and Conquer’d never incorporate into one People, under the same Laws and Freedom. Let us see next, what Power a lawful Conquerer has over the subdued, and that I
say is purely Despotical. He has an Absolute Power over the Lives of those, who, by an unjust War, have forfeited them; but not over the Lives or Fortunes of those, who ingaged not in the War, nor over the Possessions even of those who were actually engaged in it.179. Secondly, I say then the Conquerour gets no Power but only over those who have actually assisted, concurr’d, or consented to that unjust force that is used against him. For the People having given to their Governours no Power to do an unjust thing, such as is to make an unjust War, (for they never had such a Power in themselves:) They ought not to be charged, as guilty of the violence and injustice that is committed in an unjust War, any farther than they actually abet it, no more than they are to be thought guilty of any Violence or Oppression their Governours should use upon the People themselves, or any part of their Fellow-Subjects, they having impowered them no more to the one than to the other. Conquerours, ’tis true, seldom trouble themselves to make the distinction, but they willingly permit the confusion of War to sweep all together; but yet this alters not the Right: for the Conquerour’s Power over the Lives of the Conquered,
being only because they have used force to do or maintain an injustice, he can have that power only over those who have concur’d in that force, all the rest are innocent; and he has no more title over the people of that Country, who have done him no injury, and so have made no forfeiture of their Lives, than he has over any other, who without any injuries or provocations, have lived upon fair terms with him.180. Thirdly, The Power a Conquerer gets over those he overcomes in a just War, is perfectly despotical; he has an absolute Power over the Lives of those, who by putting themselves in a state of War, have forfeited them; but he has not thereby a right and title to their Possessions. This I doubt not, but at first sight, will seem a strange Doctrine, it being so quite contrary to the practice of the World. There being nothing more familiar in speaking of the dominion of Countries, than to say such an one Conquer’d it. As if Conquest, without any more ado, convey’d a right of Possession. But when we consider, that the practice of the strong and powerful, how universal soever it may be, is seldom the rule of Right, however it be one part of the subjection of the Conquer’d not to argue against the Conditions cut out to
them by the Conquering Swords.181. Though in all War there be usually a complication of force and damage, and the Aggressor seldom fails to harm the Estate, when he uses force against the persons of those he makes War upon; yet ’tis the use of force only that puts a Man into the State of War. For whether by force he begins the injury; or else having quietly, and by fraud, done the injury, he refuses to make reparation, and by force maintains it, which is the same thing as at first to have done it by force; ’tis the unjust use of force that makes the War. For he that breaks open my House, and violently turns me out of Doors; or having peaceably got in, by force keeps me out, does in effect the same thing; supposing we are in such a state, that we have no common Judge on Earth, whom I may appeal to, and to whom we are both obliged to submit: for of such I am now speaking. ‘Tis the unjust use of force then that puts a Man into the state of War with another, and thereby he that is guilty of it makes a forfeiture of his Life. For quitting reason, which is the rule given between Man and Man, and using force the way of Beasts, he becomes liable to be destroy’d by him he uses force against, as any savage ravenous Beast, that is dangerous to his being.182. But because the miscarriages of the Father are no faults of the Children, and they may be rational and peaceable, notwithstanding the brutishness and injustice of the Father; the Father, by his miscarriages and violence, can forfeit but his own Life, but involves not his Childten in his guilt or destruction. His goods which nature, that willeth the preservation of all Mankind as much as is possible, hath made to belong to the Children to keep them from perishing, do still continue to belong to his Children. For supposing them not to have join’d in the War, either through infancy or choice, they have done nothing to forfeit them, nor has the Conquerour any right to take them away, by the bare right of having subdued him that by force attempted his destruction, though perhaps he may have some right to them to repair the dammages he has sustained by the War, and the defence of his own right, which how far it reaches to the possessions of the Conquer’d, we shall see by and by; so that he that by Conquest has a right over a Mans Person, to destroy him if he pleases, has not thereby a right over his Estate to possess and enjoy it. For it is the brutal force the Aggressor has used, that gives his Adversary a right to take away his Life, and destroy him, if he pleases,
as a noxious Creature; but ’tis damage sustain’d that alone gives him title to another Mans Goods: For though I may kill a Thief that sets on me in the Highway, yet I may not (which seems less) take away his money, and let him go; this would be Robbery on my side. His force, and the state of War he put himself in, made him forfeit his Life, but gave me no title to his Goods. The right then of Conquest extends only to the Lives of those who join’d in the War, but not to their Estates, but only in order to make reparation for the damages received, and the Charges of the War, and that too with reservation of the right of the innocent Wife and Children.183. Let the Conquerer have as much Justice on his side as could be suppos’d, he has no right to seize more than the vanquish’d could forfeit; his Life is at the Victors Mercy, and his service and goods he may appropriate to make himself reparation; but he cannot take the goods of his Wife and Children, they too had a title to the goods he enjoy’d, and their shares in the estate he possessed. For Example, I in the state of nature (and all Commonwealths are in the state of nature one with another) have injured another Man, and refusing to give satisfaction, it is come to
a state of War, wherein my defending by force, what I had gotten unjustly, makes me the Aggressour; I am conquered: my Life, ’tis true, as forfeit, is at mercy, but not my Wives and Childrens. They made not the War, nor assisted in it. I could not forfeit their Lives, they were not mine to forfeit. My Wife had a share in my Estate, that neither could I forfeit. And my Children also, being born of me, had a right to be maintain’d out of my Labour or Substance. Here then is the Case; The Conquerour has a Title to Reparation for Damages received, and the Children have a Title to their Father’s Estate for their Subsistence. For as to the Wife’s share, whether her own Labour or Compact gave her a Title to it, ’tis plain, her Husband could not forfeit what was hers. What must be done in the case? I answer; The Fundamental Law of Nature being, that all, as much as may be, should be preserved, it follows, that if there be not enough fully to satisfie both, viz. for the Conquerour’s Losses, and Childrens Maintenance, he that hath, and to spare, must remit something of his full Satisfaction, and give way to the pressing and preferible Title of those, who are in danger to perish without it.184. But supposing the Charge and Damages of the War are to be made up to the Conquerour, to the utmost Farthing, and that the Children of the vanquished, spoiled of all their Father’s Goods, are to be left to starve, and perish
yet the satisfying of what shall, on this score, be due to the Conquerour, will scarce give him a Title to any Countrey he shall conquer. For the Damages of War can scarce amount to the value of any considerable Tract of Land, in any part of the World, where all the Land is possessed, and none lies waste. And if I have not taken away the Conquerour’s Land, which, being vanquished, it is impossible, I should; scarce any other spoil I have done him can amount to the value of mine, supposing it of an extent any way coming near what I had over-run of his, and equally cultivated too. The destruction of a Years Product or two, (for it seldom reaches four or five) is the utmost spoil that usually can be done. For as to Money, and such Riches and Treasure taken away, these are none of Natures Goods, they have but a phantastical imaginary value, Nature has put no such upon them. They are of no more account by her standard, than the Wampompeke of the Americans to an European Prince, or the
Silver Money of Europe would have been formerly to an American. And five years Product is not worth the perpetual Inheritance of Land, where all is possessed, and none remains waste, to be taken up by him that is disseiz’d: which will be easily granted, if one do but take away the imaginary value of Money, the disproportion being more than between five, and five thousand. Though, at the same time, half a years product is more worth than the Inheritance, where there being more Land than the Inhabitants possess and make use of, any one has liberty to make use of the waste: But there Conquerours take little care to possess themselves of the Lands of the vanquished. No damage therefore, that Men, in the state of Nature (as all Princes and Governments are in reference to one another) suffer from one another, can give a Conquerour Power to dispossess the Posterity of the vanquished, and turn them out of that Inheritance which ought to be the Possession of them, and their Descendants to all Generations. The Conquerour indeed will be apt to think himself Master. And ’tis the very condition of the subdued not to be able to dispute their Right: But, if that be all, it gives no other Title, than what bare Force gives to the stronger over the weaker.
And, by this reason, he that is strongest will have a right to whatever he pleases to seize on.185. Over those then that joined with him in the War, and over those of the subdued Countrey that opposed him not, and the Posterity even of those that did, the Conquerour, even in a just War, hath, by his Conquest, no right of Dominion. They are free from any subjection to him, and if their former Government be dissolved, they are at liberty to begin and erect another to themselves.186. The Conquerour, ’tis true, usually, by the Force he has over them, compels them, with a Sword at their Breasts, to stoop to his Conditions, and submit to such a Government as he pleases to afford them; but the enquiry is, What right he has to do so? If it be said, they submit by their own consent; then this allows their own consent to be necessary to give the Conquerour a Title to rule over them. It remains only to be considered, whether Promises, extorted by Force, without Right, can be thought Consent, and how far they bind. To which I shall say, they bind not at all, because whatsoever another gets from me by force, I still retain the Right of, and he is obliged presently to restore. He that forces my Horse from
me, ought presently to restore him, and I have still a right to retake him. By the same reason, he that forced a Promise from me ought presently to restore it, i. e. quit me, of the Obligation of it; or I may resume it my self, i. e. chuse whether I will perform it. For the Law of Nature laying an obligation on me, only by the Rules she prescribes, cannot oblige me by the violation of her Rules: such is the extorting any thing from me by force. Nor does it at all alter the case, to say I gave my Promise, no more than it excuses the force, and passes the right, when I put my hand in my Pocket, and deliver my Purse my self to a Thief, who demands it with a Pistol at my Breast.187. From all which it follows, that the Government of a Conquerour, impoposed, by force, on the subdued, against whom he had no right of War, or who joined not in the War against him, where he had right, has no obligation upon them.188. But let us suppose that all the Men of that Community being all Members of the same Body Politick, may be taken to have join’d in that unjust War, wherein they are subdued, and so their Lives are at the Mercy of the Conquerour.189. I say, this concerns not their Children, who are in their Minority. For since a Father hath not, in himself, a Power over the Life or Liberty of his Child; no act of his can possibly forfeit it: so that the Children, whatever may have happened to the Fathers, are Free men, and the Absolute Power of the Conquerour reaches no farther than the Persons of the Men, that were subdued by him, and dies with them; and should he govern them as Slaves, subjected to his Absolute, Arbitrary Power, he has no such Right of Dominion over their Children. He can have no Power over them, but by their own consent, whatever he may drive them to say or do; and he has no lawful Authority, whilst Force, and not Choice, compels them to submission.190. Every Man is born with a double Right, First, A Right of Freedom to his Person, which no other Man has a Power over, but the free Disposal of it lies in himself. Secondly, A Right, before any other Man, to inherit, with his Brethren, his Father’s Goods.191. By the first of these, a Man is naturally free from subjection to any Government, though he be born in a place under its Jurisdiction. But if he disclaim the lawful Government of the Countrey
he was born in, he must also quit the Right, that belong’d to him, by the Laws of it, and the Possessions there descending to him, from his Ancestors, if it were a Government made by their consent.192. By the second, the Inhabitants of any Countrey, who are descended, and derive a Title to their Estates from those who are subdued, and had a Government forced upon them, against their free consents, retain a Right to the Possession of their Ancestours, though they consent not freely to the Government, whose hard Conditions were, by force, imposed on the Possessors of that Countrey. For the first Conqueror never having had a Title to the Land of that Country, the People, who are the Descendants of, or claim under those, who were forced to submit to the Yoke of a Government by constraint, have always a Right to shake it off, and free themselves from the Usurpation, or Tyranny the Sword hath brought in upon them; till their Rulers put them under such a Frame of Government, as they willingly, and of choice consent to (which they can never be supposed to do, till either they are put in a full state of Liberty to chuse their Government and Governours, or at least till they have such standing Laws, to which they have, by themselves, or their
Representatives, given their free consent, and also till they are allowed their due Property, which is so to be Proprietors of what they have, that no body can take away any part of it without their own consent, without which, Men under any Government are not in the state of Free-men, but are direct Slaves, under the force of War.) And who doubts but the Grecian Christians, Descendants of the antient Possessors of that Countrey, may justly cast off the Turkish Yoke they have so long groaned under, when-ever they have a Power to do it?193. But granting that the Conquerour, in a just War, has a Right to the Estates, as well as Power over the Persons of the Conquered; which, ’tis plain, he hath not: nothing of Absolute Power will follow from hence, in the continuance of the Government. Because the Descendants of these being all Free-men, if he grants them Estates, and Possessions to inhabit his Countrey, without which it would be worth nothing, whatsoever he grants them, they have so far as it is granted, Property in. The nature whereof is, that, without a Man’s own consent, it cannot be taken from him.194. Their Persons are free, by a native Right, and their Properties, be they
more or less, are their own, and at their own dispose, and not at his; or else it is no Property. Supposing the Conquerour gives to one Man a Thousand Acres, to him and his Heirs for ever; to another he lets a Thousand Acres, for his Life, under the Rent of 50l. or 500l. per An. Has not the one of these a Right to his Thousand Acres for ever, and the other, during his Life, paying the said Rent? And hath not the Tenant, for Life, a Property in all that he gets over and above his Rent, by his Labour and Industry, during the said term, supposing it be double the Rent? Can any one say, the King, or Conquerour, after his Grant, may, by his Power of Conquerour, take away all, or part of the Land, from the Heirs of one, or from the other, during his Life, he paying the Rent? Or can he take away, from either, the Goods or Money they have got upon the said Land, at his pleasure? If he can, then all free and voluntary Contracts cease, and are void, in the World; there needs nothing but Power enough to dissolve them at any time. And all the Grants and Promises of Men, in Power, are but Mockery and Collusion. For can there be any thing more ridiculous than to say, I give you and yours this for ever, and that in the surest and
most solemn way of conveyance can be devised: and yet it is to be understood, that I have Right, if I please, to take it away from you again to morrow?195. I will not dispute now whether Princes are exempt from the Laws of their Countrey, but this I am sure, they owe subjection to the Laws of God, and Nature. No Body, no Power can exempt them from the Obligations of that Eternal Law. Those are so great, and so strong, in the case of Promises, that Omnipotency it self can be tyed by them. Grants, Promises, and Oaths are Bonds that hold the Almighty: what-ever some Flatterres say to Princes of the World, who, all together, with all their People joined to them, are, in comparison of the great God, but as a Drop of the Bucket, or a Dust on the Balance, inconsiderable, nothing!
196. The short of the Case, in Conquest, is this, The Conquerour, if he have a just Cause, has a Despotical Right over the Persons of all that actually aided, and concurred in the War against him, and a Right to make up his Damage and Cost, out of their Labour and Estates, so he injure not the Right of any other. Over the rest of the People, if there were any that consented not to the War, and
over the Children of the Captives themselves, or the Possessions of either he has no Power, and so can have, by Virtue of Conquest, no lawful Title himself to Dominion over them, or derive it to his Posterity; but is an Aggressour, and puts himself in a state of War against them, and has no better a Right of Principality, he, nor any of his Successours, than Hingar, or Hubba, the Danes, had here in England, or Spartacus, had he conquered Italy; which is to have their Yoke cast off, as soon as God shall give those, under their subjection, Courage, and Opportunity to do it. Thus, notwithstanding whatever Title the Kings of Assyria had over Iudah, by the Sword, God assisted Hezekiah to throw off the Dominion of that conquering Empire. And the Lord was with Hezekiah, and he prospered; wherefore he went forth, and he rebelled against the King of Assyria, and served him not, 2 Kings XVIII. vij. Whence it is plain, that shaking off a Power, which Force, and not Right, hath set over any one, though it hath the Name of Rebellion; yet is no Offence before God, but that which he allows and countenances, though even Promises and Covenants, when obtain’d by force, have intervened. For ’tis very probable, to any one that reads
the Story of Ahaz and Hezekiah, attentively, that the Assyrians subdued Ahaz, and deposed him, and made Hezekiah King in his Father’s life time; and that Hezekiah, by agreement, had done him Homage, and paid him Tribute till this time.
CHAP. XVII. Of VSVRPATION.197. AS Conquest may be called a foreign Usurpation; so Usurpation is a kind of domestick Conquest, with this difference, that an Usurper can never have Right on his side; it being no Usurpation but where one is got into the Possession of what another has Right to. This, so far as it is Usurpation, is a change only of Persons, but not of the Forms and Rules of the Government: for if the Usurper extend his Power beyond what, of Right, belonged to the lawful Princes, or Governours of the Commonwealth, ’tis Tyranny, added to Usurpation.
198. In all lawful Governments the designation of the Persons, who are to bear Rule, being as natural and necessary a
part as the Form of the Government it self, and that which had its Establishment originally from the People. The Anarchy being much alike, to have no Form of Government at all, or to agree that it shall be Monarchical; but to appoint no way, to design the Person that shall have the Power, and be the Monarch. All Commonwealths therefore, with the Form of Government established, have Rules also of appointing and conveying the Right to those, who are to have any share in the publick Authority. And who-ever gets into the exercise of any part of the Power, by other ways, than what the Laws of the Community have prescribed, hath no Right to be obeyed, though the Form of the Commonwealth be still preserved; since he is not the Person the Laws have appointed, and consequently not the Person the People have consented to. Nor can such an Usurper, or any, deriving from him, ever have a Title, till the People are both at liberty to consent, and have actually consented to allow, and confirm in him the Power he hath, till then, Usurped.
CHAP. XVIII. Of TYRANNY.199. AS Usurpation is the exercise of Power, which another hath a Right to; so Tyranny is the exercise of Power beyond Right, which no Body can have a Right to. And this is making use of the Power any one has in his hands; not for the good of those who are under it, but for his own private, separate Advantage. When the Governour, however entituled, makes not the Law, but his Will, the Rule, and his Commands, and Actions are not directed to the preservation of the Properties of his People, but the satisfaction of his own Ambition, Revenge, Covetousness, or any other irregular Passion.
200. If one can doubt this to be Truth, or Reason, because it comes from the obscure hand of a Subject; I hope the Authority of a King will make it pass with him. King Iames, in his Speech to the Parliament, 1603. tells them thus; I will ever prefer the Weale of the publick, and of the whole Commonwealth, in making of good Laws, and Constitutions, to any particular, and private Ends of mine. Thinking ever the
Wealth and Weale of the Commonwealth, to be my greatest Weale, and worldly Felicity; a Point, wherein a lawful King doth directly differ from a Tyrant. For I do acknowledge that the special and greatest point of Difference, that is between a rightful King, and an usurping Tyrant, is this, That whereas the proud and ambitious Tyrant doth think, his Kingdom and People are only ordained for satisfaction of his Desires, and unreasonable Appetites; the righteous and just King doth, by the contrary, acknowledge himself to be ordained for the procuring of the wealth and Property of his People. And again, in his Speech to the Parliament, 1609 he hath these Words; The KING binds himself, by a double Oath, to the observation of the fundamental Laws of his Kingdom. Tacitly, as by being a King, and so bound to protect, as well the People, as the Laws of his Kingdom; and expresly by his Oath at his Coronation: so as every just King, in a setled Kingdom, is bound to observe that Paction made to his People, by his Laws, in framing his Government agreeable thereunto, according to that Paction which God made with Noah, after the Deluge. Hereafter, Seed-time, and Harvest, and Cold, and Heat, and Summer, and Winter, and Day, and Night, shall not cease, while the Earth remaineth. And therefore a King, governing in a setled Kingdom, leaves
to be a King, and degenerates into a Tyrant, as soon as he leaves off to rule according to his Laws. And a little after: Therefore all Kings, that are not Tyrants, or perjured, will be glad to bound themselves within the Limits of their Laws. And they that perswade them the contrary, are Vipers, Pests both against them and the Commonwealth. Thus that learned King, who well understood the Notions of things, makes the difference, betwixt a King and a Tyrant, to consist only in this, That one makes the Laws the Bounds of his Power, and the Good of the publick the End of his Government; The other makes all give way to his own Will and Appetite.
201. ‘Tis a Mistake, to think this Fault is proper only to Monarchies, other Forms of Government are liable to it, as well as that: for where-ever the Power, that is put in any hands, for the Government of the People, and the Preservation of their Properties, is applied to other ends, and made use of to impoverish, harass, or subdue them to the Arbitrary, and Irregular Commands of those that have it: There it presently becomes Tyranny, whether those, that thus use it, are one, or many. Thus we read of the Thirty Tyrants at Athens, as well as one at Syracuse; and the intolerable Dominion of
the Decemviri, at Rome, was nothing better.
202. Where-ever Law ends, Tyranny begins, if the Law be transgressed to another’s harm. And whosoever, in Authority, exceeds the Power given him by the Law, and makes use of the Force, he has under his Command, to compass that upon the Subject which the Law allows not; ceases, in that, to be a Magistrate, and acting without Authority, may be opposed, as any other Man, who by force invades the Right of another. This is acknowledged in subordinate Magistrates. He that hath Authority to seize my Person in the street, may be opposed as a Thief, and a Robber, if he indeavours to break into my House to execute a Writ, notwithstanding that I know he has such a Warrant, and such a legal Authority as will impower him to arrest me abroad. And why this should not hold in the highest, as well as in the most inferiour Magistrate, I would gladly be informed. Is it reasonable that the eldest Brother, because he has the greatest part of his Father’s Estate, should thereby have a Right to take away any of his younger Brothers Portions? Or that a rich Man, who possessed a whole Countrey, should from thence have a Right to seize, when he pleased,
the Cottage and Garden of his poor Neighbour? The being rightfully possessed of great Power and Riches, exceedingly beyond the greatest part of the Son of Adam, is so far from being an excuse, much less a reason for Rapine and Oppression, which the endamaging another, without Authority, is; that it is a great Aggravation of it. For the exceeding the Bounds of Authority, is no more a Right, in a great, than a petty Officer: no more justifiable in a King, than a Constable. But so much the worse in him, as that he has more trust put in him, is supposed, from the advantage of Education, and Counsellours to have better Knowledge, and less reason to do it, having already a greater share than the rest of his Brethren.
203. May the Commands then of a Prince be opposed? May he be resisted, as often as any one shall find himself aggrieved, and but imagine he has not Right done him? This will unhinge and overturn all Politi
s, and, instead of Government and Order, leave nothing but Anarchy and Confusion.
204. To this I answer: That Force is to be opposed to nothing but to unjust and unlawful Force; who ever makes any opposition, in any other Case, draws on
himself a just Condemation, both from God and Man; and so no such Danger or Confusion will follow, as is often suggested. For,
205. First, As, in some Countries, the Person of the Prince, by the Law, is Sacred, and so, what-ever he commands, or does, his Person is still free from all Question or Violence; not liable to Force, or any judicial Censure or Condemnation. But yet opposition may be made to the illegal Acts of any inferiour Officer, or other commissioned by him; unless he will, by actually putting himself into a State of War with his People, dissolve the Government, and leave them to that defence, which belongs to every one in the state of Nature. For of such things who can tell what the end will be? And a Neighbour Kingdom has shewed the World an odd Example. In all other Cases the Sacredness of the Person exempts him from all Inconveniencies, whereby he is secure, whilst the Government stands, from all violence and harm whatsoever. Than which, there cannot be a wiser Constitution. For the harm he can do, in his own Person, not being likely to happen often, nor to extend it self far; nor being able, by his single strength, to subvert the Laws, nor oppress the Body of the People, should
any Prince have so much Weakness, and ill Nature as to be willing to do it. The Inconveniency of some particular mischiefs that may happen, sometimes, when a heady Prince comes to the Throne, are well recompenced by the peace of the Publick, and security of the Government, in the Person of the chief Magistrate, thus set out of the reach of danger. It being safer for the Body, that some few private Men should be sometimes in danger to suffer, than that the Head of the Republick should be easily, and upon slight occasions exposed.
206. Secondly, But this Priviledge belonging only to the King’s Person, hinders not but they may be questioned, opposed, and resisted, who use unjust force, though they pretend a Commission from him, which the Law authorizes not. As is plain, in the Case of him that has the King’s Writ to arrest a Man, which is a full Commission from the King; and yet he that has it cannot break open a Man’s House to do it, nor execute this Command of the King upon certain days, nor in certain places, though this Commission have no such exception in it; but they are the Limitations of the Law, which, if any one transgress, the King’s Commission excuses him not. For the King’s Authority
being given him only by the Law, he cannot impower any one to act against the Law, or justifie him, by his Commission, in so doing. The Commission, or Command of any Magistrate, where he has no Authority, being as void and insignificant as that of any private Man. The difference, between the one and the other, being, that the Magistrate has some Authority, so far, and to such ends, and the private Man has none at all. For ’tis not the Commission, but the Authority, that gives the Right of acting; and against the Laws there can be no Authority. But, notwithstanding such Resistance, the King’s Person and Authority are still both secured, and so no danger to Governour or Government.
207. Thirdly, Supposing a Government, wherein the Person of the chief Magistrate is not thus Sacred; yet this Doctrine, of the lawfulness of resisting all unlawful exercises of his Power, will not, upon every slight occasion, indanger him, or imbroil the Government. For, where the injured Party may be relieved, and his damages repaired, by Appeal to the Law, there can be no pretence for Force; which is only to be used, where a Man is intercepted from appealing to the Law. For nothing is to be accounted Hostile Force, but
where it leaves not the remedy of such an Appeal. And ’tis such Force alone, that puts him that uses it, into a state of War, and makes it lawful to resist him. A Man, with a Sword in his hand, demands my Purse, in the High-way, when, perhaps, I have not 12d. in my Pocket; This Man I may lawfully kill. To another I deliver 100l. to hold, only whilst I alight,
hich he refuses to restore me when I am got up again, but draws his Sword to defend the possession of it, by force: I endeavour to retake it. The mischief, this Man does me, is a hundred, or possibly a thousand times more than the other perhaps intended me, (whom I kill’d, before he really did me any) and yet I might lawfully kill the one, and cannot so much as hurt the other lawfully. The Reason whereof is plain; because the one using force, which threatned my Life, I could not have time to appeal to the Law to secure it: And when it was gone, ’twas too late to appeal. The Law could not restore Life to my dead Carcass. The Loss was irreparable; which, to prevent, the Law of Nature gave me a Right to destroy him, who had put himself into a state of War with me, and threatned my destruction. But, in the other case, my Life not being in danger, I might have
the benefit of appealing to the Law, and have Reparation, for my 100l. that way.
208. Fourthly, But if the unlawful acts, done by the Magistrate, be maintained, (by the Power he has got) and the remedy, which is due by Law, be, by the same Power, obstructed; ye
the Right of resisting, even in such manifest Acts of Tyranny, will not suddenly, or on slight occasions, disturb the Government. For if it reach no farther than some private Mens Cases, though they have a right to defend themselves, and to recover, by force, what, by unlawful force, is taken from them; yet the Right to do so, will not easily ingage them in a Contest, wherein they are sure to perish: It being as impossible, for one or a few oppressed Men, to disturb the Government, where the Body of the People do not think themselves concerned in it, as for a raving mad Man, or heady Male content to overturn a well setled State; the People being as little apt to follow the one, as the other.
209. But if either these illegal Acts, have extended to the Majority of the People; or if the Mischief and Oppression has light only on some few, but in such Cases as the Precedent and Consequences seem to threaten all; and they are perswaded
in their Consciences that their Laws, and with them, their Estates, Liberties, and Lives are in danger, and perhaps their Religion too; how they will be hindred from resisting illegal Force, used against them, I cannot tell. This is an Inconvenience, I confess, that attends all Governments whatsoever, when the Governours have brought it to this pass, to be generally suspected of their People, the most dangerous state they can possibly put themselves in; wherein they are the less to be pityed, because it is so easie to be avoided. It being as impossible, for a Governour, if he really means the good of his People, and the preservation of them, and their Laws together, not to make them see and feel it; as it is for the Father of a Family not to let his Children see he loves, and takes care of them.
210. But if all the World shall observe Pretences of one kind, and Actions of another; Arts used to elude the Law, and the Trust of Prerogative (which is an Arbitrary Power in some things, left in the Prince’s hand, to do good, not harm, to the People) employed contrary to the end, for which it was given, If the People shall find the Ministers, and subordinate Magistrates chosen, suitable to such ends, and favoured, or laid by proportionably
as they promote, or oppose them: If they see several Experiments made of Arbitrary Power, and that Religion underhand favoured, though publickly proclaimed against, which is readiest to introduce it, and the Operators in it supported as much as may be; and when that cannot be done, yet approved still, and liked the better, and a long Train of Actings shew the Councils all tending that way: how can a Man any more hinder himself from being perswaded in his own Mind, which way things are going; or from casting about how to save himself, than he could from believing the Captain of the Ship he was in, was carrying him, and the rest of the Company, to Algiers, when he found him always stearing that Course, though cross Winds, Leaks in his Ship, and want of Men, and Provisions, did often force him to turn his Course another way, for some time, which he steadily returned to again, as soon as the Wind, Weather, and other Circumstances would let him?
often cut up Governments by the Roots, and mangle Societies to pieces, separating the subdued or scattered multitude from the Protection of, and Dependence on that Society which ought to have preserved them from violence. The World is too well instructed in, and too forward to allow of this way of dissolving of Governments, to need any more to be said of it; and there wants not much Argument to prove, that where the Society is dissolved, the Government cannot remain: that being as impossible, as for the Frame of an house to subsist when the Materials of it are scattered and displaced by a Whirl-wind, or jumbled into a confused heap by an Earthquake.212. Besides this over-turning, from without, Governments are dissolved from within,First, When the Legislative is altered, Civil Society being a state of Peace amongst those who are of it, from whom the state of War is excluded by the Umpirage, which they have provided in their Legislative, for the ending all differences, that may arise amongst any of them. ‘Tis in their Legislative, that the Members of a Commonwealth are united and combined together into one coherent, living Body. This is the Soul that gives Form,
Life, and Unity to the Commonwealth: from hence the several Members have their mutual Influence, Sympathy, and Connexion: and therefore, when the Legislative is broken, or dissolved, Dissolution and Death follows. For the Essence, and Union of the Society consisting in having one Will, the Legislative, when once established by the Majority, has the declaring, and, as it were, keeping of that Will. The Constitution of the Legislative is the first and fundamental Act of Society, whereby provision is made for the Continuation of their Union, under the Direction of Persons, and Bonds of Laws, made by Persons authorized thereunto, by the Consent and Appointment of the People, without which no one Man, or number of Men, amongst them, can have Authority of making Laws that shall be binding to the rest. When any one, or more, shall take upon them to make Laws, whom the People have not appointed so to do, they make Laws without Authority, which the People are not therefore bound to obey; by which means they come again to be out of subjection, and may constitute to themselves a new Legislative, as they think best, being in full liberty to resist the force of those, who, without Authority, would
impose any thing upon them. Every one is at the disposure of his own Will, when those, who had, by the delegation of the Society, the declaring of the publick Will, are excluded from it, and others usurp the place, who have no such Authority or Delegation.213. This being usually brought about by such, in the Commonwealth, who mis-use the Power they have: It is hard to consider it aright, and know at whose door to lay it, without knowing the Form of Government in which it happens. Let us suppose then the Legislative placed in the Concurrence of three distinct Persons. First, A single, hereditary Person having the constant, supream, executive Power, and, with it, the Power of convoking, and dissolving the other two, within certain Periods of Time. Secondly, An Assemby of hereditary Nobility. Thirdly, An Assembly of Representatives chosen, pro tempore, by the People: Such a Form of Government supposed, it is evident,214. First, That when such a single Person, or Prince sets up his own Arbitrary Will, in place of the Laws, which are the Will of the Society, declared by the Legislative, then the Legislative is changed. For that being, in effect, the
Legislative whose Rules and Laws are put in execution, and required to be obeyed, when other Laws are set up, and other Rules pretended and inforced, than what the Legislative, constituted by the Society, have enacted, ’tis plain that the Legislative is changed. Who-ever introduces new Laws, not being thereunto authorized, by the fundamental Appointment of the Society, or subverts the old, disowns and overturns the Power, by which they were made, and so sets up a new Legislative.215. Secondly, When the Prince hinders the Legislative from assembling in its due time, or from acting freely, pursuant to those ends for which it was constituted, the Legislative is altered. For ’tis not a certain number of Men, no, nor their meeting, unless they have also Freedom of debating, and Leisure of perfecting what is for the good of the Society, wherein the Legislative consists, when these are taken away, or altered, so as to deprive the Society, of the due exercise of their Power, the Legislative is truly altered. For it is not Names that constitute Governments, but the use and exercise of those Powers that were intended to accompany them: so that he who takes away the Freedom, or hinders the acting
of the Legislative in its due seasons, in effect takes away the Legislative, and puts an end to the Government.
216. Thirdly, When, by the Arbitrary Power of the Prince, the Electours, or ways of Election are altered, without the Consent, and contrary to the common Interest of the People, there also the Legislative is altered. For if others, then those whom the Society hath authorized thereunto, do chuse, or in another way than what the Society hath prescribed, those chosen are not the Legislative appointed by the People.
217. Fourthly, The delivery also of the People into the subjection of a foreign Power, either by the Prince, or by the Legislative, is certainly a change of the Legislative, and so a Dissolution of the Government. For the end, why People entered into Society, being to be preserved one intire, free, independent Society, to be governed by its own Laws; this is lost when-ever they are given up into the Power of another.
218. Why, in such a Constitution as this, the Dissolution of the Government, in these Cases, is to be imputed to the Prince, is evident, because he having the Force, Treasure, and Offices of the State, to imploy, and often perswading himself,
or being flattered by others, that as supreme Magistrate, he is uncapable of controul; he alone is in a Condition to make great Advances toward such Changes, under pretence of lawful Authority, and has it in his hands to terrifie, or suppress Opposers, as factious, seditious, and Enemies to the Government: whereas no other part of the Legislative, or People, is capable, by themselves, to attempt any alteration of the Legislative, without open and visible Rebellion, apt enough to be taken notice of; which, when it prevails, produces Effects very little different from foreign Conquest. Besides the Prince, in such a Form of Government, having the Power of dissolving the other Parts of the Legislative, and thereby rendring them private Persons, they can never, in opposition to him, or without his Concurrence, alter the Legislative by a Law; his Consent being necessary to give any of their Decrees that Sanction. But yet so far as the other parts of the Legislative any way contribute to any attempt upon the Government, and do either promote, or not, what lies in them, hinder such designs, they are guilty, and partake in this, which is certainly the greatest Crime Men can be guilty of one towards another.
219. There is one way more, whereby such a Government may be dissolved, and that is; When he, who has the supreme, executive Power, neglects, and abandons that charge, so that the Laws, already made, can no longer be put in execution. This is demonstratively to reduce all to Anarchy, and so effectually to dissolve the Government. For Laws not being made for themselves, but to be, by their execution, the Bonds of the Society, to keep every part of the Body Politick in its due place, and function. When that totally ceases, the Government visibly ceases, and the People become a confused Multitude, without Order or Connexion. Where there is no longer the administration of Justice, for the securing of Mens Rights; nor any remaining Power within the Community to direct the Force, or provide for the Necessities of the publick; there certainly is no Government left. Where the Laws cannot be executed it is all one as if there were no Laws; and a Government without Laws, is, I suppose, a Mystery in Politicks, unconceivable to humane Capacity, and inconsistent with humane Society.
220. In these, and the like Cases, when the Government is dissolved, the People are at liberty to provide for themselves,
by erecting a new Legislative, differing from the other, by the change of Persons, or Form, or both, as they shall find it most for their safety and good. For the Society can never, by the fault of another, lose the native and original Right it has to preserve it self; which can only be done by a setled Legislative, and a fair and impartial execution of the Laws made by it. But the state of Mankind is not so miserable, that they are not capable of using this Remedy, till it be too late to look for any. To tell People they may provide for themselves, by erecting a new Legislative; when, by Oppression, Artitifice, or being delivered over to a foreign Power, their old one is gone, is only to tell them, they may expect Relief, when it is too late, and the evil is past Cure. This is, in Effect, no more, than to bid them, first be Slaves, and then to take care of their Liberty; and, when their Chains are on, tell them, they may act like Free-men. This, if barely so, is rather Mockery than Relief, and Men can never be secure from Tyranny, if there be no means to escape it, till they are perfectly under it: And therefore it is, that they have not only a Right to get out of it, but to prevent it.
221. There is therefore Secondly another way, whereby Governments are dissolved; and that is, when the Legislative, or the Prince, either of them act contrary to their Trust.
First, The Legislative acts against the Trust reposed in them, when they
deavour to invade the Property of the Subject, and to make themselves, or any part of the Community, Masters, or Arbitrary Disposers of the Lives, Liberties, or Fortunes of the People.
222. The Reasons why Men enter into Society, is the preservation of their Property; and the end why they chuse, and authorize a Legislative, is, that there may be Laws made, and Rules set, as Guards and Fences to the Properties of all the Society, to limit the Power, and moderate the Dominion of every Part and Member of the Society. For since it can never be supposed to be the Will of the Society, that the Legislative should have a Power to destroy that which every one designs to secure, by entering into Society, and for which the People submitted themselves to Legislators of their own making; whenever the Legislators endeavour to take away, and destroy the Poperty of the People, or to reduce them to Slavery, under Arbitrary Power, they put themselves into
a state of War with the People, who are thereupon absolved from any farther Obedience, and are left to the common Refuge, which God hath provided for all Men, against Force and Violence. Whensoever therefore the Legislative shall transgress this fundamental Rule of Society; and either by Ambition, Fear, Folly or Corruption, endeavour to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an Absosolute Power, over the Lives, Liberties, and Estates of the People: by this breach of Trust they forfeit the Power, the People had put into their hands, for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the People; who have a Right to resume their original Liberty, and, by the Establishment of a new Legislative (such as they shall think fit) provide for their own Safety and Security, which is the end for which they are in Society. What I have said here, concerning the Legislative, in general, holds true also concerning the supreme Executor, who having a double Trust put in him, both to have a part in the Legislative; and the supreme Execution of the Law, acts against both, when he goes about to set up his own Arbitrary Will, as the Law of the Society. He acts also contrary to his Trust, when he imploys the Force, Treasure, and Offices of the
Society, to corrupt the Representatives, and gain them to his purposes: when he openly pre-ingages the Electors, and prescribes, to their choice, such, whom he has, by Sollicitation, Threats, Promises, or othewise, won to his designs; and imploys them to bring in such, who have promised before-hand what to vote, and what to enact. Thus to regulate Candidates and Electors, and new model the ways of Election, what is it, but to cut up the Government by the Roots, and poison the very Fountain of publick Security? For the People having reserved to themselves the Choice of their Representatives, as the Fence to their Properties, could do it for no other end, but that they might always be freely chosen, and so chosen, freely act and advise, as the necessity of the Commonwealth, and the publick Good should, upon examination, and mature debate, be judged to require. This, those who give their Votes before they hear the Debate, and have weighed the Reasons on all sides, are not capable of doing. To prepare such an Assembly as this, and endeavour to set up the declared Abettors of his own Will, for the true Representatives of the People, and the Law-makers of the Society, is certainly as great a breach of trust, and as perfect
a Declaration of a design to subvert the Government, as is possible to be met with. To which, if one shall add rewards and punishments visibly imploy’d to the same end, and all the arts of perverted Law made use of to take off and destroy all that stand in the way of such a design, and will not comply and consent to betray the Liberties of their Country, ’twill be past doubt what is doing. What Power they ought to have in the Society who thus imploy it contrary to the trust went along with it in its first Institution, is easy to determine; and one cannot but see, that he who has once attempted any such thing as this, cannot any longer be trusted.
223. To this perhaps it will be said, that the People being ignorant and always discontented; to lay the Foundation of Government in the unsteady opinion and uncertain humour of the People, is to expose it to certain ruin: and no Government will be able long to subsist, if the People may set up a new Legislative whenever they take offence at the old one. To this I Answer quite the contrary. People are not so easily got out of their old Forms as some are apt to suggest. They are hardly to be prevailed with to amend the acknowledg’d Faults in the Frame they have been
accustom’d to. And if there be any original defects, or adventitious ones introduced by time or corruption; ’tis not an easy thing to get them changed, even when all the World sees there is an opportunity for it. This slowness and aversion in the People to quit their old Constitutions, has in the many Revolutions have been seen in this Kingdom, in this and former Ages, still kept us to, or aftersome interval of fruitless attempts, still brought us back again to our old Legislative of King, Lords and Commons: and whatever provocations have made the Crown be taken from some of our Princes Heads, they never carried the people so far as to place it in another Line.
224. But ’twill be said, this Hypothesis lays a ferment for frequent Rebellion. To which I Answer,
First, No more than any other Hypothesis. For when the People are made miserable, and find themselves exposed to the ill usage of Arbitrary Power; cry up their Governours as much as you will for Sons of Iupiter, let them be Sacred and Divine, descended or authoriz’d from Heaven; give them out for whom or what you please, the same will happen. The People generally ill treated, and contrary to right, will be ready upon any occasion to ease themselves of a burden that sits
heavy upon them. They will wish and seek for the opportunity, which in the change, weakness and accidents of human affairs seldom delays long to offer it self. He must have lived but a little while in the World, who has not seen Examples of this in his time; and he must have read very little, who cannot produce Examples of it in all sorts of Governments in the World.
225. Secondly, I Answer, such Revolutions happen not upon every little mismanagement in publick affairs. Great mistakes in the ruling part, many wrong and inconvenient Laws, and all the slips of human frailty will be born by the People, without mutiny or murmur. But if a long train of Abuses, Prevarications and Artifices, all tending the same way, make the design visible to the People, and they cannot but feel what they lye under, and see whither they are going; ’tis not to be wonder’d that they should then rouze themselves, and endeavour to put the rule into such hands which may secure to them the ends for which Government was at first erected; and without which, ancient Names and specious Forms, are so far from being better, that they are much worse than the state of Nature, or pure Anarchy; the inconveniencies being all
as great and as near, but the remedy farther off and more difficult.
226. Thirdly, I Answer, that this Power in the People of providing for their safety anew, by a new Legislative, when their Legislators have acted contrary to their trust, by invading their Property, is the best fence against Rebellion, and the probablest means to hinder it. For Rebellion being an Opposition, not to Persons but Authority, which is founded only in the Constitutions and Laws of the Government; those, whoever they be, who by force break through, and by force j
stify their violation of them, are truly and properly Rebels. For when Men by entering into Society and civil Government, have excluded force, and introduced Laws for the preservation of Property, Peace and Unity amongst themselves; those who set up force again in opposition to the Laws, do rebellare, that is, bring back again the state of War, and are properly Rebels: which they who are in Power, by the pretence they have to Authority, the temptation of force they have in their hands, and the Flattery of those about them being likeliest to do; the properest way to prevent the evil, is to shew them the danger and injustice of it, who are under the greatest temptation to run into it.
227. In both the forementioned Cases, when either the Legislative is changed, or the Legislators act contrary to the end for which they were constituted; those who are guilty are guilty of Rebellion. For if any one by force takes away the establish’d Legislative of any Society, and the Laws by them made, pursuant to their trust, he thereby takes away the Umpirage which every one had consented to, for a peaceable decision of all their Controversies, and a bar to the state of War amongst them. They who remove, or change the Legislative, take away this decisive power, which no Body can have but by the appointment and consent of the People; and so destroying the Authority which the People did, and no Body else can set up, and introducing a Power which the People hath not authoriz’d; actually introduce a state of War, which is, that of Force without Authority: and thus by removing the Legislative establish’d by the Society, in whose decisions the People acquiesced and united, as to that of their own will; they unty the Knot, and expose the People anew to the state of War. And if those, who by force take away the Legislative, are Rebels, the Legislators themselves, as has been shewn, can be no less esteemed so; when they who were
set up for the protection and preservation of the People, their Liberties and Properties, shall by force invade and indeavour to take them away; and so they, putting themselves into a state of War with those who made them the Protectors and Guardians of their Peace, are properly, and with the greatest aggravation, Rebellantes Rebels.
228. But if they who say it lays a foundation for Rebellion, mean that it may occasion civil Wars, or intestine Broils, to tell the People they are absolved from Obedience, when illegal attempts are made upon their Liberties or Properties, and may oppose the unlawful violence of those who were their Magistrates when they invade their Properties, contrary to the trust put in them; and that therefore this Doctrine is not to be allow’d, being so destructive to the Peace of the World. They may as well say upon the same ground, that honest Men may not oppose Robbers or Pirars, because this may occasion disorder or bloodshed. If any mischief come in such Cases, it is not to be charged upon him who defends his own right, but on him that invades his Neighbours. If the innocent honest Man, must quietly quit all he has for Peace sake, to him who will lay violent hands upon it,
I desire it may be consider’d, what a kind of Peace there will be in the World, which consists only in Violence and Rapine; and which is to be maintain’d only for the benefit of Robbers and Oppressors. Who would not think it an admirable Peace betwixt the Mighty and the Mean, when the Lamb, without resistance, yielded his Throat to be torn by the imperious Wolf? Polyphemus’s Den gives us a perfect Pattern of such a Peace. Such a Government wherein Vlysses and his Companions had nothing to do, but quietly to suffer themselves to be devour’d. And no doubt, Vlysses, who was a prudent Man, preach’d up Passive Obedience, and exhorted them to a quiet Submission, by representing to them of what concernment Peace was to Mankind; and by shewing the inconveniencies might happen, if they should offer to resist Polyphemus, who had now the Power over them.
229. The end of Government is the good of Mankind, and which is best for Mankind, that the People should be always expos’d to the boundless will of Tyranny, or that the Rulers should be sometimes liable to be oppos’d, when they grow exorbitant in the use of their Power, and imploy it for the destruction, and not the preservation of the Properties of their People?
230. Nor let any one say, that mischief can arise from hence, as often as it shall please a busy head or turbulent spirit to desire the alteration of the Government. ‘Tis true, such Men may stir whenever they please, but it will be only to their own just ruin and perdition. For till the mischief be grown general, and the ill designs of the Rulers become visible, or their attempts sensible to the greater part, the People, who are more disposed to suffer, than right themselves by Resistance, are not apt to stir. The examples of particular Injustice, or Oppression of here and there an unfortunate Man, moves them not. But if they universally have a perswasion grounded upon manifest evidence, that designs are carrying on against their Liberties, and the general course and tendency of things cannot but give them strong suspicions of the evil intention of their Governours, who is to be blamed for it? Who can help it, if they, who might avoid it, bring themselves into this suspicion? Are the People to be blamed, if they have the sence of rational Creatures, and can think of things no otherwise than as they find and feel them? And is it not rather their fault who put things in such a posture that they would not have them thought as they
are? I grant, that the Pride, Ambition, and Turbulency of private Men have sometimes caused great Disorders in Commonwealths, and Factions have been fatal to States and Kingdoms. But whether the mischief hath oftner began in the Peoples Wantonness, and a Desire to cast off the lawful Authority of their Rulers; or in the Rulers Insolence, and Endeavours to get, and exercise an Arbitrary Power over their People; whether Oppression, or Disobedience gave the first rise to the Disorder, I leave it to impartial History to determine. This I am sure, who-ever, either Ruler or Subject, by force goes about to invade the Rights of either Prince or People, and lays the foundation for overturning the Constitution and Frame of any Just Government; he is guilty of the greatest Crime, I think, a Man is capable of, being to answer for all those mischiefs, of Blood, Rapine, and Desolation, which the breaking to pieces of Governments bring on a Countrey. And he, who does it, is justly to be esteemed the common Enemy and Pest of Mankind; and is to be treated accordingly.
231. That Subjects or Foreigners attempting by force, on the Properties of any People, may be resisted with force, is agreed on all hands. But that Magistrates,
doing the same thing, may be resisted, hath of late been denied: As if those who had the greatest Priviledges and Advantages by the Law, had thereby a Power to break those Laws, by which alone they were set in a better place than their Brethren: whereas their Offence is thereby the greater, both as being ungrateful for the greater share they have by the Law, and breaking also that Trust which is put into their hands by their Brethren.
232. Whosoever uses force without Right, as every one does in Society, who does it without Law; puts himself into a state of War with those, against whom he so uses it, and in that state all former Ties are cancelled, all other Rights cease, and every one has a Right to defend himself, and to resist the Aggressour. This is so evident, that Barclay himself, that great Assertor of the Powe
and Sacredness of Kings, is forced to confess, That it is lawful for the People, in some Cases, to resist their King; and that too in a Chapter, wherein he pretends to shew that the Divine Law shuts up the People from all manner of Rebellion. Whereby it is evident, even by his own Doctrine, that, since they may, in some Cases, resist, all resisting of Princes is not Rebellion.
His Words are these.
Quod siquis dicat, Ergone populus tyrannicae crudelitati & furori jugulum semper praebebit? Ergone multitudo civitates suas fame, ferro, & flammâ vastari, seque, conjuges, & liberos fortunae ludibrio & tyranni libidini exponi, inque omnia vitae pericula omnesque miserias & molestias à Rege deduci patientur? Num illis quod omni animantium generi est à naturâ tributum, denegari debet, ut s
. vim vi repellant, sese
ab injuriâ tueantur? Huic breviter responsum sit, Populo universo negari defensionem, quae juris naturalis est, neque ultionem quae praeter naturam est adversus Regem concedi debere. Quapropter si Rex non in singulares tantum personas aliquot privatum odium exerceat, sed corpus etiam Reipublicae, cujus ipse caput est, i.e. totum populum, vel insignem aliquam ejus partem immani & intolerandâ saevitiâ seu tyrannide divexet; populo, quidem hoc casu resistendi ac tuendi se ab injuriâ potestas competit, sed tuendi se tantum, non enim in principem invadendi: & restituendae injuriae illatae, non recedendi à debitâ reverentiâ propter acceptam injuriam. Praesentem denique impetum propulsandi non vim praeteritam ulciscendi jus habet. Horum enim alterum à naturâ est, ut vitam scilicet corpus
tueamur. Alterum vero contra naturam, ut inserior de superiori supplicium sumat. Quod itaque populus malum, antequam factum sit, impedire
potest, ne fiat, id postquam factum est, in Regem authorem sceleris vindicare non potest: populus igitur hoc ampliùs quam privatus quispiam habet: Quod huic, vel ipsis adversariis judicibus, excepto Buchanano, nullum nisi in patientia remedium superest. Cùm ille si intolerabilis tyrannis est (modicum enim ferre omnino debet) resistere cum reverentiâ possit,
Barclay contra Monarchom. l. 3. c. 8.
In English thus:
But if any one should ask, Must the People then always lay themselves open to the Cruelty and Rage of Tyranny? Must they see their Cities pillaged, and laid in ashes, their Wives and Children exposed to the Tyrant’s Lust, and Fury, and themselves and Families reduced, by their King, to Ruine, and all the Miseries of Want and Oppression, and yet sit still? Must Men alone be debarred the common Priviledge of opposing force with force, which Nature allows so freely to all other Creatures, for their preservation from Injury? I answer: Self-defence is a part of the Law of Nature; nor can it be denied the Community, even against the King himself: but to revenge themselves upon him, must by no means, be allowed them; it being not agreeable to that Law. Wherefore if the King shall shew
an hatred, not only to some particular Persons, but sets himself against the Body of the Commonwealth, whereof he is the Head, and shall, with intolerable ill usage, cruelly tyrannize over the whole, or a considerable part of the People; in this case, the People have a right to resist and defend themselves from Injury: but it must be with this Caution, that they only defend themselves, but do not attack their Prince: They may repair the Damages received, but must not, for any provocation, exceed the bounds of due Reverence and Respect. They may repulse the present attempt, but must not revenge past violences. For it is natural for us to defend Life and Limb, but that an Inferiour should punish a Superiour is against Nature. The mischief which is designed them, the People may prevent before it be done, but when it is done, they must not revenge it on the King, though Author of the Villany. This therefore is the Priviledge of the People in general, above what any private Person hath; That particular Men are allowed, by our Adversaries themselves, (Buchanan only excepted) to have no other Remedy but Patience; but the Body of the People may, with Respect,
resist intolerable Tyranny; for when it is but moderate, they ought to endure it.
234. Thus far that great Advocate of Monarchical Power allows of Resistance.
235. ‘Tis true, he has annexed two Limitations to it, to no purpose;
First, He says, it must be with Reverence.
Secondly, It must be without Retribution, or Punishment; and the Reason he gives, is, Because an Inferiour cannot punish a Superiour.
First, How to resist Force without striking again, or how to strike with Reverence, will need some Skill to make intelligible. He that shall oppose an Assault only with a Shield to receive the Blows, or in any more respectful Posture, without a Sword in his hand, to abate the Confidence and Force of the Assailant, will quickly be at an end of his Resistance, and will find such a defence serve only to draw on himself the worse usage. This is as ridiculous a way of resisting, as Iuvenal thought it of fighting; ubi tu pulsas, ego vapulo tantum. And the Success of the Combat, will be unavoidably the same he there describes it:
— Libertas pauperis haec est:
Pulsatus rogat, & pugnis concisus, adorat,
Vt liceat paucis cum dentibus inde reverti.
This will always be the event of such an imaginary Resistance, where Men may not strike again. He therefore who may resist, must be allowed to strike. And then let our Author, or any Body else, join a Knock on the Head, or a Cut on the Face, with as much Reverence, and Respect as he thinks fit. He that can reconcile Blows and Reverence, may, for ought I know, deserve for his pains, a Civil, Respectful Cudgelling, where-ever he can meet with it.
Secondly, As to his Second, An Inferiour cannot punish a Superiour; that’s true, generally speaking, whilst he is his Superiour. But to resist Force with Force, being the State of War, that levells the Parties, cancels all former relation of Reverence, Respect, and Superiority: and then the odds, that remains, is, That he, who opposes the unjust Aggressour, has this Superiority over him, that he has a Right, when he prevails, to punish the Offender, both for the Breach of the Peace, and all the Evils that followed upon it. Barclay therefore, in another place, more coherently to himself, denies it to be lawful to resist a King in any Case. But he there assigns Two Cases, whereby a King may Un-king himself. His Words are,
Quid ergo, nulline casus incidere possunt quibus populo sese erigere at
in Regem impotentius dominantem arma capere & invadere jure suo suâ
authoritate liceat? Nulli certe quamdiu Rex manet. Semper enim ex divinis id obstat, Regem honorificato; & qui potestati resistit, Dei ordinationi resistit: Non aliàs igitur in eum populo potestas est quam si id committat propter quod ipso jure rex esse desinat. Tunc enim se ipse principatu exuit at
in privatis constituit liber: hoc modo populus & superior efficitur, reverso ad eum sc. jure illo quod ante regem inauguratum in interregno habuit. At sunt paucorum generum commissa ejusmodi quae hunc effectum pariunt. At ego cum plurima animo perlustrem, duo tantum invenio, duos, inquam, casus quibus rex ipso facto ex Rege non regem se facit & omni honore & dignitate regali at
in subditos potestate destituit; quorum etiam meminit Winzerus. Horum unus est, Si regnum disperdat, quemadmodum de Nerone fertur, quod is nempe senatum populum
adeo urbem ipsam ferro flamma
vastare, ac novas sibi sedes quaerere decrevisset. Et de Caligula, quod palam denunciarit se ne
principem senatui amplius fore, in
animo habuerit, interempto utrius
ordinis Electissimo quo
Alexandriam commigrare, ac ut populum uno ictu interimeret, unam ei cervicem optavit. Talia cum rex aliquis meditatur
& molitur serio, omnem regnandi curam & animum ilico abjicit, ac proinde imperium in subditos amittit, ut dominus servi pro derelicto habiti, dominium.
r casus est, Si rex in alicujus olientelam se contulit, ac regnum quod liberum à majoribus & populo traditum accepit, alienae ditioni mancipavit. Nam tunc quamvis forte non eâ mente id agit populo plane ut incommodet: tamen quia quod praecipuum est regiae dignitatis amisit, ut summus scilicet in regno secundum Deum sit, & solo Deo inferior, at
populum etiam totum ignorantem vel invitum, cujus libertatem sartam & tectam conservare debuit, in alterius gentis ditionem & potestatem dedidit; hác velut quadam regni abalienatione effecit, ut nec quod ipse in regno imperium habuit r
tineat, nec in eum cui collatum voluit, juris quicquam transera
ita eo facto liberum jam & suae potestatis populum relinquit, cujus rei exemplum unum annales Scotici suppeditant.
Barclay contra Monarchom. l. 3. c. 16. which may be thus Englished.
What then, Can there no Case happen wherein the people may of right, and by their own Authority, help themselves, take Arms, and set upon their King, imperiously domineering over them? None at all, whilst he remains a King. Honour the King, and he that resists the
Power, resists the Ordinance of God; are divine Oracles that will never permit it. The People therefore can never come by a Power over him, unless he does something that makes him cease to be a King. For then he divests himself of his Crown and Dignity, and returns to the state of a private Man, and the People become free and superiour; the Power which they had in the Interregnum, before they Crown’d him King, devolving to them again. But there are but few miscarriages which bring the matter to this state. After considering it well on all sides, I can find but two. Two Cases there are, I say, whereby a King, ipso facto, becomes no King, and loses all Power and Regal Authority over his People; which are also taken notice of by Winzerus. The first is, if he indeavour to overturn the Government, that is, if he have a purpose and design to ruin the Kingdom and Commonwealth, as it is recorded of Nero, that he resolved to cut off the Senate and People of Rome, lay the City wast with Fire and Sword, and then remove to some other place. And of Caligula, that he openly declar’d, that he would be no longer a head to the People or Senate, and that he had it in his thoughts to cut off the worthiest Men of
both Ranks, and then retire to Alexandria: and he wisht that the People had but one Neck, that he might dispatch them all at a blow. Such designs as these, when any King harbours in his thoughts, and seriously promotes, he immediately gives up all care and thought of the Commonwealth; and consequently forfeits the Power of Governing his Subjects, as a Master does the dominion over his Slaves whom he hath abandon’d.
The other Case is, When a King makes himself the dependent of another, and subjects his Kingdom which his Ancestors left him, and the People put free into his hands, to the Dominion of another. For however perhaps it may not be his intention to prejudice the People; yet because he has hereby lost the principal part of Regal Dignity, viz. to be next and immediately under God, Supream in his Kingdom; and also because he betray’d or forced his People, whose liberty he ought to have carefully preserved, into the Power and Dominion of a Foreign Nation. By this as it were alienation of his Kingdom, he himself loses the Power he had in it before, without transferring any the least right to those on whom he would have bestowed it; and so by this act sets the People free,
and leaves them at their own disposal. One Example of this is to be found in the Scotch Annals.
239. In these Cases Barclay, the great Champion of Absolute Monarchy, is forced to allow, That a King may be resisted, and ceases to be a King. That is in short, not to multiply Cases: In whatsoever he has no Authority, there he is no King, and may be resisted: For wheresoever the Authority ceases, the King ceases too, and becomes like other Men who have no Authority. And these two Cases he instances in, differ little from those above mention’d, to be destructive to Governments, only that he has omitted the Principle from which his Doctrine flows; and that is, The breach of trust, in not preserving the Form of Government agreed on, and in not intending the end of Government it self; which is the publick good and preservation of Property. When a King has Dethron’d himself, and put himself in a state of War with his People, what shall hinder them from prosecuting him who is no King, as they would any other Man, who has put himself into a state of War with them. Barclay, and those of his Opinion, would do well to tell us. Bilson, a Bishop of our Church, and a great Stickler for the Power and Prerogative of Princes,
does, if I mistake not, in his Treatise of Christian Subjection, acknowledge, That Princes may forfeit their Power, and their title, to the Obedience of their Subjects; and if there needed authority in a Case where reason is so plain, I could send my Reader to Bracton, Fortescue, and the Author of the Mirror, and others, Writers, that cannot be suspected to be ignorant of our Government, or Enemies to it. But I thought Hooker alone might be enough to satisfie those Men, who relying on him for their Ecclesiastical Polity, are by a strange fate carried to deny those Principles upon which he builds it. Whether they are herein made the Tools of Cunninger Workmen, to pull down their own Fabrick, they were best look. This I am sure, their civil Policy is so new, so dangerous, and so destructive to both Rulers and People, that as former Ages never could bear the broaching of it; so it may be hoped, those to come, redeem’d from the Impositions of these Egyptian Under-Taskmasters, will abhor the Memory of such servile Platterers, who whilst it seem’d to serve their turn, resolv’d all Government into absolute Tyranny, and would have all Men born to what their mean Souls fitted them, Slavery.
240. Here, ’tis like, the common Question will be made, who shall be Judge whether the Prince, or Legislative, act contrary to their Trust? This, perhaps, ill-affected, and factious Men may spread amongst the People, when the Prince only makes use of his due Prerogative. To this I reply; The People shall be Judge; for who shall be Judge whether his Trustee or Deputy acts well, and according to the Trust reposed in him, but he who deputes him, and must, by having deputed him; have still a Power to discard him, when he fails in his Trust? If this be reasonable, in particular Cases of private Men, why should it be otherwise in that of the greatest moment, where the Welfare of Millions is concerned, and also where the evil, if not prevented, is greater, and the Redress very difficult, dear, and dangerous?
241. But farther, this Question, (Who shall be Judge?) cannot mean, that there is no Judge at all. For where there is no Judicature on Earth, to decide Controversies amongst Men, God in Heaven is Judge. He alone, ’tis true, is Judge of the Right. But every Man is Judge for himself, as in all other Cases, so in this, whether another hath put himself into a State of War with him, and whether he
should appeal to the Supreme Judge, as Iephtha did.
242. If a Controversie arise betwixt a Prince, and some of the People, in a matter where the Law is silent, or doubtful, and the thing be of great Consequence, I should think, the proper Umpire, in such a Case, should be the Body of the People. For in Cases, where the Prince hath a Trust reposed in him, and is dispensed from the common, ordinary Rules of the Law; there, if any Men find themselves aggrieved, and think the Prince acts contrary to, or beyond that Trust, who so proper to judge, as the Body of the People, (who, at first, lodg’d that Trust in him) how far they meant it should extend? But if the Prince, or who-ever they be in the Administration, decline that way of Determination, the Appeal then lies no where but to Heaven. Force beneonate either Persons, who have no known Superiour on Earth, or which permits no Appeal to a Judge on Earth, being properly a State of War, wherein the Appeal lies only to Heaven, and in that State the injured Party must judge for himself, when he will think fit to make use of that Appeal, and put himself upon it.
243. To conclude, The Power that every
individual gave the Society, when he entered into it, can never revert to the Individuals again, as long as the Society lasts, but will always remain in the Community; because without this, there can be no Community, no Commonwealth, which is contrary to the original Agreement: so also when the Society hath placed the Legislative in any Assembly of Men, to continue in them and their Successors, with Direction and Authority for providing such Successors, the Legislative can never revert to the People whilst that Government lasts: Because having provided a Legislative with Power, to continue for ever, they have given up their Political Power to the Legislative, and cannot resume it. But if they have set Limits to the Duration of their Legislative, and made this Supreme Power, in any Person, or Assembly, only temporary: Or else when, by the Miscarriages of those in Authority, it is forfeited; upon the Forfeiture of their Rulers, or at the Determination of the Time set, it reverts to the Society, and the People have a Right to act as Supreme, and continue the Legislative in themselves, or place it in a new Form, or new hands, as they think good.