ishing from their society those who differed from them in the mode of worshipping God. Their first assumption I conceive to be an error. If society be an ordinance of God, whenever and wherever men form it, they must form it in obedience to his laws. But he has never intended that religious belief, or religious practice, if they interfere not with the rights of others, should be subject to human legislation. Secondly. OF THE NATURE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE CONTRACT entered into between the individual and civil society. It has been already remarked, that every society is essentially a mutual compact, entered into between every individual and all the rest of those who form the society. As all these individuals enter the society upon the same terms, that is, put themselves under the power of society in the same respects, the power of the society over the individual is derived from the concession of every individual, and is no other, and in no wise different from what these individuals have made it. And, on the other hand, as every member of the society is a party to the contract which the society has made with the individual, every member of the society is bound faithfully to execute the contract thus entered into. But, as it was also remarked, this society differs from a simple or voluntary society, inasmuch as it is an ordinance of God, and it is subject to the laws which he has imposed upon it. That every man is bound to become a member of civil society, need not be asserted; all that I affirm is, that, if men form a civil society, they are bound to form it according to the laws which God has appointed. They cannot form it according to any other principles, without violating the rights of their fellow-men, and disobeying the laws of God. The question, then, which meets us as of the first importance, is this: What are the laws under which God has subjected civil society? On this question I now proceed to offer a few suggestions, considering, first, what is essential to the existence of society; and, secondly, what is merely accidental 1. Of what is essential to the existence of civil society. 1. As God wills the existence of civil society, it is manifest that he must forbid whatever would be inconsistent with its existence. And, on the other hand, he who chooses to enter society, virtually contracts to abstain from. whatever is, from the constitution of things, inconsistent with its existence. This, I think, is as evident as that a man cannot honestly enter into a contract to do any two things in their nature essentially at variance. 2. Suppose, now, a number of men to meet together to form a society, all being perfectly acquainted with the law of reciprocity, and all perfectly inclined to obey it. I think it is manifest that such persons would have to surrender nothing whatever, in order to form a civil society. Every one would do just as he pleased, and yet every one would enjoy fully all the benefit of the social nature of man; that is, every one would enjoy all the blessings arising both from his individual and from his social constitution. This, I suppose, would be the most perfect state of human society of which we are able to conceive. As, therefore, society, in its most perfect state, may exist without the individual's surrendering up the right to do any thing which is consistent with the law of reciprocity, the existence of society presents no reason why he should surrender any right which he may enjoy consistently with this law. Whatever other reasons there may be, as those of benevolence, mercy, or religion, they belong not to this question. As every man has, originally, the right to do as he pleases, provided he interferes not with the rights of his neighbors, and as the existence of civil society presents no reason why this right should be restricted, it remains, notwithstanding the existence of such society, just as it was before; that is, the right vests, without change, in the individual himself. 3. Suppose, now, any individual to violate the law of reciprocity; as, for instance, that A steals the property of B, or violates a contract into which they have mutually entered. If this be allowed, that is, if every man were to steal at will the property of his neighbor, it is manifest that the right of property would be at an end, and every man would be obliged to retire as far as possible from every other man; that is, society would be dissolved. This 4. Again, suppose that B takes the work of redress into his own hands, being, at once, his own legislator, judge and executioner. From the native principles of the human heart, it is evident that, from being the aggrieved party, he would, in turn, become the aggressor. would lead to revenge on the part of A, -a revenge to be repeated by the other party, until it ended either in the destruction of one or of both. Hence, every difference would lead to interminable war and unbridled ferocity; and society would cease, because every man would prefer quiet solitude to ceaseless hostility. To allow one's self, therefore, in any violation of the law of reciprocity, or to assume the right of redressing one's own wrongs, is to pursue a course inconsistent with the existence of society; for, were such a course to be pursued universally, society could not exist. Again, on the other hand, since, in a company of morally imperfect beings, injury is liable to occur, and since, if injury were not prevented, the virtuous would become the prey of the vicious, and society would, as before, be destroyed by universal violence, it is manifestly necessary that injury be prevented, that is, that the virtuous be protected, and that wrongs be redressed. But, as we have shown that the rights of individual self-protection and redress are inconsistent with the existence of society, and as the individual must not redress them, the duty devolves upon the other party, that is, upon society. Society is, therefore, bound to do for the individual what he has relinquished the right to do for himself; that is, to protect him from violation of the law of reciprocity, or to redress his wrong, if this right be violated. Hence, we see the nature of the compact entered into between the individual and society. It essentially involves the following particulars : 1. Every individual, by entering society, promises that he will abstain from every violation of the law of reciprocity, which, if universally permitted, would destroy society. For, if he be allowed to violate it, the allowance to violate it must be extended to all, since all are equals; and thus society would be destroyed. But as, by the destruction of society, he would gain nothing but solitude, which he could enjoy without depriving others of what is to them a source of happiness, there can be no reason assigned why he should diminish their happiness, to procure what he could equally well enjoy by leaving them alone. If he join the society, he must conform to whatever is necessary to its existence; if he be unwilling to do so, he must remain alone. 2. Every individual promises to surrender to society the right of self-protection. 3. And, lastly, every individual promises to surrender to society the right to redress his own wrongs. And, on the other hand, society promises, 1. To protect the individual in the enjoyment of all his rights; that is, to enforce upon every individual, within certain limits, obedience to the law of reciprocity. 2. To redress wrongs whenever they may occur, either by obliging the offender to do justly, or else by inflicting such punishment as may be most likely to prevent a repetition of the injury, either by the offender or by others. It is important here to remark, that this surrender on the one part, and this obligation on the other part, are mutual and universal: that is to say, the individual, on his part, surrenders wholly and entirely the right either to defend or to redress himself; and, on the other hand, society guarantees to defend him, and to do him justice to the utmost; that is, no matter in how small a right, and no matter at how great an expense. Hence, we see the anti-social tendency of all those secret societies, of which the object, either avowed or in fact, is to protect the individual members in opposition to the laws, that is, in opposition to society. In this case, while the individual receives from civil society the same benefits as other men, and expects from it the fulfilment of its part of the contract, he does not make, on his part, the correspondent surrender. He expects to be protected and redressed, but he reserves also the right of protecting and redressing himself, and it may be in opposition to the just operation of those laws which he enforces upon others. And hence, also, we see the obligation of every one to exert himself to the uttermost, in order to enforce the execution of the laws, no matter in how small a matter, or in the case of how obscure an individual. The execution of the laws is what we all promise, and we are all bound to fulfil it. And if laws are not executed, that is, if individuals be not protected, and wrongs be not redressed by society, the individuals will redress them themselves, and thus society will be dissolved. The frequent occurrence of mobs, that is, of extra-legal modes of redress for supposed grievances, are among the most decisive indications of a state of society verging towards dissolution. But, while this contract is thus universal and obligatory, it is to be remarked, that it is so only in respect to those things in which the parties have respectively bound themselves. The individual, by entering into society, promises to abstain from whatever is inconsistent with the existence of society; but, by entering into society, he promises nothing more. Society promises to restrain and to redress whatever would be destructive to society, but it promises no more. In all other respects, the parties are exactly in the situation in which they were before the establishment of society. Thus freedom, therefore, both of person, of intellect, and of conscience, remain, by the fact of the existence of society, untouched. Thus also freedom of property remains as before, except simply in so far as a portion of every man's property is pledged to meet the necessary expenses of government. So long as he obey the law of reciprocity, society has no further demands upon him, unless his assistance be demanded in enforcing this obedience upon others. By this compact, every individual is very greatly the gainer. 1. He promises to obey the law of reciprocity, which is the law of his nature, and by the obedience to which alone he can be happy. 2. He surrenders the right of self-protection, which without society he can exert in but a very imperfect man |