友情提示:如果本网页打开太慢或显示不完整,请尝试鼠标右键“刷新”本网页!阅读过程发现任何错误请告诉我们,谢谢!! 报告错误
飞读中文网 返回本书目录 我的书架 我的书签 TXT全本下载 进入书吧 加入书签

the american republic-第10章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!



ght; wise; just; and good。  The despot is a man attempting  to be God upon earth; and to exercise a usurped power。  Despotism  is based on; the parental right; and the parental right is  assumed to be absolute。  Hence; your despotic rulers claim to  reign; and to be loved and worshipped as gods。  Even the Roman  emperors; in the fourth and fifth centuries; were addressed as  divinities; and Theodosius the Great; a Christian ; was addressed  as 〃Your Eternity;〃 Eternitas vestrasso far did barbarism  encroach on civilization; even under Christian emperors。

The right of the father over his child is an imperfect right; for  he is the generator; not the creator of his child。  Generation is  in the order of second causes; and is simply the development or  explication of the race。  The 41                               early Roman law; founded on the  confusion of generation with creation; gave the father absolute  authority over the childthe right of life and death; as over  his servants or slaves; but this was restricted under the Empire;  and in all Christian nations the authority of the father is  treated; like all power; as a trust。  The child; like the father  himself; belongs to the state; and to the state the father is  answerable for the use he makes of his authority。  The law fixes  the age of majority; when the child is completely emancipated;  and even during his nonage; takes him from the father and places  him under guardians; in case the father is incompetent to fulfil  or grossly abuses his trust。  This is proper; because society  contributes to the life of the child; and has a right as well as  an interest in him。  Society; again; must suffer if the child is  allowed to grow up a worthless vagabond or a criminal; and has a  right to intervene; both in behalf of itself and of the child; in  case his parents neglect to train him up in the nurture and  admonition of the Lord; or are training him up to be a liar; a  thief; a drunkard; a murderer; a pest to the community。  How;  then; base the right of society on the right of the father;  since; in point of fact; the 42                              right of society is paramount to the  right of the parent?

But even waiving this; and granting what is not the fact that the  authority of the father is absolute; unlimited; it cannot be the  ground of the right of society to govern。  Assume the parental  right to be perfect and inseparable from the parental relation;  it is no right to govern where no such relation exists。  Nothing  true; real; solid in government can be founded on what Carlyle  calls a 〃sham。〃  The statesman; if worthy of the name; ascertains  and conforms to the realities; the verities of things; and all  jurisprudence that accepts legal fictions is imperfect; and even  censurable。  The presumptions or assumptions of law or politics  must have a real and solid basis; or they are inadmissible。  How;  from the right of the father to govern his own child; born from  his loins; conclude his right to govern one not his child?  Or  how; from my right to govern my child; conclude the right of  society to found the state; institute government; and exercise  political authority over its members?





CHAPTER IV。

ORIGIN OF GOVERNMENTCONTINUED。


II。 Rejecting the patriarchal theory as untenable; and shrinking  from asserting the divine origin of government; lest they should  favor theocracy; and place secular society under the control of  the clergy; and thus disfranchise the laity; modern political  writers have sought to render government purely human; and  maintain that its origin is conventional; and that it is founded  in compact or agreement。  Their theory originated in the  seventeenth century; and was predominant in the last century and  the first third of the present。  It has been; and perhaps is yet;  generally accepted by American politicians and statesmen; at  least so far as they ever trouble their heads with the question  at all; which it must be confessed is not far。

The moral theologians of the Church have generally spoken of  government as a social pact or compact; and explained the  reciprocal rights and obligations of subjects and rulers by the  44 general law of contracts; but they have never held that  government originates in a voluntary agreement between the people  and their rulers; or between the several individuals composing  the community。  They have never held that government has only a  conventional origin or authority。  They have simply meant; by the  social compact; the mutual relations and reciprocal rights and  duties of princes and their subjects; as implied in the very  existence and nature of civil society。  Where there are rights  and duties on each side; they treat the fact; not as an agreement  voluntarily entered into; and which creates them; but as a  compact which binds alike sovereign and subject; and in  determining whether either side has sinned or not; they inquire  whether either has broken the terms of the social compact。  They  were engaged; not with the question whence does government derive  its authority; but with its nature; and the reciprocal rights and  duties of governors and the governed。  The compact itself they  held was not voluntarily formed by the people themselves; either  individually or collectively; but was imposed by God; either  immediately; or mediately; through the law of nature。  〃Every  man;〃 says Cicero; 〃is born in society; and remains there。〃  They  held the 45          same; and maintained that every one born into society  contracts by that fact certain obligations to society; and  society certain obligations to him; for under the natural law;  every one has certain rights; as life; liberty; and the pursuit  of happiness; and owes certain duties to society for the  protection and assistance it affords him。

But modern political theorists have abused the phrase borrowed  from the theologians; and made it cover a political doctrine  which they would have been the last to accept。  These theorists  or political speculators have imagined a state of nature  antecedently to civil society; in which men lived without  government; law; or manners; out of which they finally came by  entering into a voluntary agreement with some one of their number  to be king and to govern them; or with one another to submit to  the rule of the majority。  Hobbes; the English materialist; is  among the earliest and most distinguished of the advocates of  this theory。  He held that men lived; prior to the creation of  civil society; in a state of nature; in which all were equal; and  every one had an equal right to every thing; and to take any  thing on which he could lay his hands and was strong enough to  hold。  There was no law but the will of the strongest。  Hence;  the state of nature was a state of con… 46                                       tinual war。  At length;  wearied and disgusted; men sighed for peace; and; with one  accord; said to the tallest; bravest; or ablest among them: Come;  be our king; our master; our sovereign lord; and govern us; we  surrender our natural rights and our natural independence to you;  with no other reserve or condition than that you maintain peace  among us; keep
返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0
未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
温馨提示: 温看小说的同时发表评论,说出自己的看法和其它小伙伴们分享也不错哦!发表书评还可以获得积分和经验奖励,认真写原创书评 被采纳为精评可以获得大量金币、积分和经验奖励哦!