Abbildungen der Seite

three relations: he may disregard law; he may submit to law; he may use law.

A boy grows up at home, where his health is not cared for; where he eats what he likes, exercises as he likes, sleeps when he likes; in short, is physically lawless. He is taken seriously ill. The doctor finds that he has undermined his constitution, and tells him if he does not reform his life

eat, sleep, and exercise according to law-he has not long to live. The boy reluctantly abandons his imagined freedom and submits to the laws of health. He comes into the second relation to the law, the relation of submission. His health improves and becomes measurably normal. He goes to college and desires to join the crew. The trainer says to him, If to him, If you wish to join the crew, you must accept the conditions of the crew. He tells the boy what he must eat and what he must not eat; what he may drink and what he must not drink; when he must go to bed and what exercise he must take. The boy, ambitious to get on the crew, accepts these directions, loyally and even gladly. He is now not merely submitting to the laws of health, he is using the laws of health in order to equip himself for the position to which his ambition calls him. Disregard of law is suicide, obedience to law is health, use of law is power.

A community which disregards the four fundamental rights of man- the rights of person, of property, of the family, and of reputation - lives in anarchy and perpetual turmoil; the end thereof is social death. A community of individuals who yield obedience to these laws just in so far as they must and no further may have a certain measure of social health, may at least be preserved from social death. But no community is strong, no community is on the highway to a great and common prosperity, which does not recognize in these laws the conditions of wellbeing, which does not by its united action promote the health and life of its members, the social purity of its members, the material prosperity of its members, and the reputation and honor of its members. Only such a community is a strong, self-governing community; only such a community is truly free.



GOVERNMENT is power to enforce command; government is just when the commands enforced are in accord with the great eternal laws of right and wrong. The function of government in the enforcement of these laws is primarily the protection of the four fundamental rights of man, the rights of the person, the rights of the family, the rights of property, and the rights of reputation. Government may exercise other functions; but if it does not exercise this function, it is inefficient and incompetent. On whom is the duty of protecting the rights of persons and property laid? Upon whom does it devolve in a self-governing community?

Says Abraham Lincoln: "When the white man governs himself, that is self-government, but when he governs himself and also another man, that is more than self-government; that is despotism." That is true in its immediate application to slavery; absolutely and unqualifiedly true. For one man to govern another man, to take charge of him, determine what are his interests and con

trol his actions, is despotism. It may be a benevolent despotism; it may be a just despotism; but whether benevolent and just or malevolent and unjust, it is despotism. When a criminal is put into State prison, where all his actions are determined for him by another, he is living under a despotism.

But Abraham Lincoln also said: "The legitimate object of government is to do for the people what needs to be done, but which they cannot by individual effort do at all, or do as well for themselves." When the people do collectively what needs to be done, but what they cannot by individual effort do at all, or do as well for themselves, that is not despotism: that is social selfgovernment, although in that social self-government each individual exercises a certain amount of control over the actions of every other individual. The community, by its collective action, not only establishes a public school, but compels the parents to send their child to school; it not only digs a sewer, but it compels the individual householder to connect his house with the sewer and send the waste, which otherwise would be a nuisance to the community, through the sewer; it not only constructs a highway, but it determines the rate of speed at which the automobile may be driven along the highway. Social self-government

necessarily involves the government of one individual by other individuals. That is, the compelling of one individual to do what he does not wish to do, or to abstain from what he does wish to do, because his will is oppugnant to the will of the community. Who have the right to take part in this social self-government, in its determining what the individual may do or may not do? The advocates of universal suffrage claim that every member of the community of adult age may take part in this social self-government. Starting with the assertion, as an axiom, that every man has a right to govern himself, they deduce the conclusion that every man has a right to take part in the government of others. The conclusion does not follow from the premise. On the contrary, I believe it may be laid down as a political axiom, on which all self-governments should be based, that

No man has a right to take part in governing others who has not the intellectual and moral capacity to govern himself.

The close of the eighteenth century was an epoch of revolution. It was characterized by an uprising of an oppressed people against their oppressors. In France and in America, following the example which had been set in the preceding century by the Puritans in England, the common

« ZurückWeiter »