Sidor som bilder

Ibid. p. 345.

of England acted up to them, in the days of Sir Robert Walpole, the nation had been a socne of confusion from that time to this *.

Mr. Locke says farther, that “ till mischiefs are grown general,, &c. the people who are more dispofed to suffer than right themselves by relistance, are not apt to ftir." 46. There is a flowness and aversion in people to quit their old constitution-and whatever provocations have made the crown to be taken from fome of our princes' heads, they never carried the people so far as to place it in another line." p. 340. Here it is curious to see how great men differ. Mr. Humne thinks paffive obedience should be preached, without mentioning any case wherein it is to give way to resistance; because the people are far more likely to rebel in the wrong place, than to omit doing it in the right; the bias of human nature being, in the judgment of

that acute observer of it, towards rebellion. See his reflections - on the reign of Charles I. at the close of his history of that reign.

The fame inference, by the way, follows from what Mr. Locke fays, p. 340, that when people are oppressed, preach jure divino, and passwe obedience, as much as you please, they will rebel. If this be so, we inay very safely preach it; it can do no hurt to civil liberty. But surely conscience is some restraint ; and if people will rebel as soon as rebellion is proper, though you preach obedience, they are in great danger of doing it before it is proper, if you preach resistance.

In the next page, Mr. Locke is again of opinion, that the people are not disposed to rebellion. « Great mistakes in the

When the order of the constitution is violated, and bad principles are introduced, the government does not fall to pieces, but the different parts of it maiatain themselves as well as they can by mutual encroachments; the commons, by taking something from the crown, and the crown, by fubftituting pecuniary influence, to fupe ply what it loses of its lawful power. “ We may give fsays Mr. Hume) to this inQuence what name we please ;. we may call it by the invidious name of corruption and dependence : but some degree, and fome kind of it, are inseparable frem tbe very katere of sbe Conftitution, and neceffary to tbe preservation of our own mixed government." I. 674 This seems to be the true account of the matter : and it hath appeared in fad, that when the crown hath thought proper to exert itself, it has carried every question in the house of commons. Mr. Hume was of opinion, that if ever the power should do volve to the commons, and a popular government be erected, we thall be overwhelmed with faction or tyranny, and " such a violent government cannot long fubfifty but we Thal at laft, after infinite convulfions and civil wars, find repose in absolute monarchs, which it would have been happier for us to have established more peaceably from the beginning. Ablolute monarehy is therefore the easiest death, the true euthanaka af the Braila constitucion." I. 78.

yuling part, many wrong and inconvenient laws, and all the flips of human frailty will be borne by the people without mutiny or mur. mur.” p. 341. Not if they were thoroughly persuaded, that all power was originally in them, and they might change the legillative as often as they pleased, but what wrong and incomunient laws had Moses made, or of what ftips of human frailty had be been guilty, when Dathan and Abiram aflerted a design to subvert the conftitu. tion, and to make himself arbitrary, was so plain, that the people must see it, unless he “ put out their eyes!” Numb. xvi. 13, 14.

To those who object the confusion, civil wars, &c. that must follow from Mr. Locke's principle, he answers, by comparing a ruler, who violates the constitution, to a robber, a pirate, a wolf, a polyphemus (p. 343); and is very witty on a fuppofition that Ulyffes, as a prudent man, for the sake of peace, preached paffive obedience to his companions in the den, &c. But the cases are not parallel, as none of his worthies are invested with any authority of any kind, to which obedience is due. And, by the comparisons, one would really think nothing was more common than for kings to cut or tear the throats of their subjects, and fuck the blood, as it ran warm from the jugulars.

He who places all power in the people, says Mr. Locke, makes the best fence against rebellion. P. 341. How so? Why, because the ruler who breaks his trust, is properly the rebel; he does rebellaire, bring back that war, force, or violence, which it was the design of the original compact to rive and to keep away: for rebellion is not against perfors, but against the authority lodged in the constitution and the laws. But can authority cxist without a person to exist in? or can the laws execute themselves? We have an equal right to take away from the other side the persons of rebels; then may we leave rebellion and authority, in the abstract, to settle the matter by themselves: there will be no bloodthed between shem. Prerogative and privilege, considered in the same way, without a crown and a parliament, that is, without any subject to inhere in, may be the two seconds; and that the combatants may have room enough, let them fight in infinite space. If the right of government be not inherent in the persons of governors, there can be no such thing as government upon earth *

* This dißinction between persons and autbority, is plainly calculated to produce changes of governmept by insurrections and rebellions. For if authority be not resident in persons, then may any person seize upon it without offence against any other person. It was actually, so applied in the last century. It is the old diftin&ion that raised the To Mr. Locke's scheme of founding government upon corpact among peers in a state of nature, it had been objected, that men never were in such a state. Mr. Locke is so obliging as to favour us with some instances of men in that state. As first, the Floridans, Brasilians, and Cheroquees in Ainerica, who it seems have no kings, hut chuse leaders as they want them in time of war. (p. 242.) It is probable that they may. But men at the beginning were not placed by their maker in so miserable a state. It is a state, to which, by the loss of revelation, and other knowledge, through the divine judgments upon them, some generations of men have been reduced to run wild, like brutes, in the woods. This is not a state of nature, but the most unnatural state in the world, for creatures made in the image of God. And does a polite philosopher, in these enlightened days, send us to study polities under Cherokee tutors!

A second instance is the company that left Sparta, under the conduct of Palantus, whom by a free and equal vote they chose for their leader. The persons here alluded to were an extraordinary breed of bastards, begotten on the women of Sparta by certain young men sent home to cohabit with them promiscuously, from the Spartan army, detained at the siege of Meffena, under a vow not to return till the city was taken. When the issue of this proiniscuous concubinage caine to years of maturity, partly having grace enough to be ashamed of their mothers, and partly afraid of being starved for want of an inheritance from their fathers, they chose Palantůs, the pious author of the advice, for their generai, seized upon Tarentum, drove out the original inhabitants, settled, grew seditious, and at last banished for ever that same Palantus, the cause of their birth, and the guide of their peregrinations. How many happy circumstances must concur to bring our posterity into this fame Spartan state of nature, in order to erect a free and equal government ? I say, our pofterity ; because we ourselves, having the misfortune to be already born of honest parents, must despair of so great a blessing *. Two other instances produced by Mr. Locke are the founders of Rome and Venice. The former were a gang of robbers; the latter were the inhabitants of Padua, Aquileia, and other cities on the continent of Italy, driven thence by the Goths in the fifth century; consequently obliged to shift as they could, and chuse governors in their distress, when they were deprived of their natural ones, in the places where they lived before. There is no question but Some men have been, and some may again, either bring themselves, or be brought by others, into this state of anarchy ; in which case, they must get out of it as well as they can. But all Mr. Locke's instances are of inen in an unnatural state ; to which they were reduced by breaking or being forced away from civil government, which was in the world tong before any of these instances happeped. “ From the beginning it was not fo."

rebellion against Charles I. and has been expressly condemned by the laws, which have obliged both clergy, corporatiuns, and militia to “abhor that traitorous position of taking arms by the king's authority against his person, or against there that are commiflioned by him."

* The narrative here referred to is very fingular, and worth a farther inquiry. The hero of the tale is also called Pbalantbus, and the fpurious race are called Paribenii, because they were born of unmarried women. They were engaged in a plot with the Heloos for cutting off the inhabitanţs of Sparta, and taking pofcllion for themfelves; but the Helsts betrayed them, and the miscarrying of this design occafioned their emigration. It is curious to obferve how fornication and sedition here go hand in hand, and how both together furnish Mr. Locke with an example which suits with his opinion on the origin of government.

Mr. Locke says only (p. 250) it is probable men were naturally free, and by their own confent submitted to the government of their father, and of his eldest son after him, finding the easiness and equality of it. Here the fact is allowed, and the compact, it seems, made by the tacit consent of the children. So faith Bishop Hoadley: “ If Adam's monarchy were founded upon, and supported by the tacit consent of his descendants, this amounts to such a compact as I am defending." See Finishing Stroke, p. 19. Confounding consent of duty with consent of authority. This did for the golden age : but afterwards when governors grew naughty, « men found it necessary to examine more carefully the original and rights of government, (p. 252) and find out ways to restrain, &c.” So that this was only a fecondary affair, and the original compact between peers in an independent state of nature is given up; only we must not fay the patria poteftas was by divine right, but by the tacit consent of the children ; which was certainly given, unless crying could be interpreted into a diffent *.

Mr. Locke's great argument against the patriarchal scheme proceeds on a supposition, that its patrons held an universal mo#archy in a right line from Adam, and desires to be shewn who that monarch now is. But this God never intended. Adam was ruler in his own family; but if a colony went off to a distance under one of his sons, he was the ruler there, and so on : which is sufficient to shew there could be no independent state of nature from the beginning. Afterwards, when conquest and usurpation made con. fusion, the general rule for the preservation of peace and order in the world could only be this, that the possessor had the right; if nobody could fhew a better. And people at this day must be guided by the constitution and laws of their own country, obeying the supreme power, wherever it is placed, for conscience sake.

* It was argued, that if government were the ordinance of God, and there could be no authority of government but from the consent of the governed, it would then follow, that the authority of God himself must be founded upon the confent of the people. And the advocates for compact did still perfift, and went so far as to affert, that God became the God of the Hebrews in virtue of a contract which the people made with him at Horeb; that is, because the people chose him. Thus a consent of duty is turned into a consent of authority.

But after all, there can be no such thing as any permanent authority in any kind of government; if it be true, as Mr. Locke asserts (p. 255) that a man born under government, is as free as one dropped in the woods; because though his father, by compact, had passed over his liberty, he could do it only for himself, not for his children *, who, it seems, are free, and consequently under no obligation to obey God, when he commands them to be subject to the powers that be, till they have given their own consent, by com. pact with those powers. The man, who, when he comes of age Should act upon this principle, and plead an authority to transgress the laws because he had never consented to them, would either feceive punishment, or be put into confinement as a person out of his wits,


[if a father have promised for his son, that he shall obey the law of God, we are sure that son can never be released from the obligation by any authority of his own. For the moral government of God is as wide as the world ; and where the laws of God are known, every man is born subject to them : and he will be judged by those laws at last. Every civil government is erected in aid to this moral government of God, and thus the peace and security of the world is preserved, though the value of government to mankind be sometimes not known till it is loft ; as

* This is a contradiction to what Mr Locke had before afferted, concerning a trid consent of tbe children,

« FöregåendeFortsätt »