control of the little community, thus enlarged by successive generations, would, by common consent, be vested in the hands of that aged and honored ancestor, the patriarch of the flock, the chief of the tribe. And thus we have the second step in the formation of civil government.

The rapid increase of such a community would enlarge the boundaries of the original dominion, until, in course of time, the chief or patriarch of the tribe becomes the ruler of the nation. Large communities and empires would grow out of small ones, not only by the laws of natural growth, and increase of population, but by accessions of smaller and weaker tribes forming alliance with the stronger, for purposes of mutual advantage.

The patriarch of the tribe, or chief of the clan, would be likely to gather about him many followers, in the capacity of servants and retainers, dependent on his bounty, and obedient to his command. Possessions, also, of land, cattle, jewels, and other treasures, would accumulate in his keeping. To the aristocracy and influence of birth there would in this way be added the authority which wealth bestows. In process of time, as the wealth of the tribe increased, and its numbers augmented, the temptation would be felt to employ these resources in the subjugation of neighboring and weaker tribes. The chief who should thus employ his personal wealth and followers to enlarge the boundaries, and extend the power of his tribe, would add not only to the authority of his clan, but to his own power as ruler; and so to the aristocracy of birth and of wealth would be added that of military prowess. This latter, in process of time, and of human affairs, might come to be of more consequence than either of the former as an element of sovereignty.

It is easy to see how, in the natural course of things,

these causes, combined, or even singly, would lead to the formation of great and powerful empires, from such small beginnings as we have indicated. And it is easy also to see how, starting with the idea of paternal government as its source and germ, - that is, of a power lodged in the hands of one, to be administered at his discretion, — the form of civil government should have been, in theory and in fact, essentially the power and authority of one over the whole; that is, monarchical.

Whatever theory we adopt as the foundation of civil government, whether we regard it as of direct divine authority, or as founded in social compact, or in the nature of man, - there can be little doubt that, as a matter of history, its origin and progress have been essentially what I have now indicated.

OBJECT OF CIVIL GOVERNMENT.-Viewing civil government as an existing institution, we may naturally ask what is the end or object which it proposes to accomplish; what is the use, the advantage, the necessity for anything of the sort; why should not every man be his own ruler and sovereign?

The sovereignty of the individual, I reply, would be inconsistent with the rights and freedom of the whole. Every member of the community has an interest in the conduct of every other member. Every man is a composite element of the whole, and is bound to consult the interests and wishes of the whole. If he were to have his own way, and consult only his own pleasure in everything, his choice would often interfere with that of others, and thus would result a conflict of choices; and not only would injustice thus be done, often, to the weaker of two parties, but the general peace and order of the whole

would be disturbed. "The freedom of the individual," it has been well said, "is the bondage of the community." Objection. But will not the same thing occur if government exists? it may be asked. Will that insure to every man his choice? Will not government itself interfere with the choice of the individual, and restrain his freedom? So far as that freedom interferes with the general freedom and the general order, I reply, it will doubtless be restrained under any system of wise and efficient government; and so far as this, it needs to be restrained. In the nature of things, not every man can have his choice. The nearest approximation to this is, that the choice of the greatest number shall prevail; in other words, that the will of the majority shall govern.

In proportion as any government carries out the will of the majority, and legislates for the good of the whole, it accomplishes the great end of all civil government; and in so far as it loses sight of this, or fails of this, it fails of reaching that end.

Suppose, now, that, under existing government, an individual finds himself ill-suited, his choices interfered with, his wishes disregarded, his rights taken from him,what redress, it may be asked, remains for such a one? I reply: there will at least remain one resource, after all others have been tried in vain. If he finds it impossible to obtain justice, and to enjoy his rights in the community where he is, let him peaceably withdraw from it, and join some other which he likes better; or, if none such can be found, it is in his power to cut himself off entirely from his fellow-men, and live in a desert or a cave. It may be a hardship to do this; but it were better that a few should suffer hardship and loss, than that the many should be exposed to the dangers of lawlessness and anarchy.

Ends to be secured. There are two leading objects ever to be kept in view and secured by civil government -public order and public freedom;- the former for the sake of the latter, and the latter in the greatest degree that is compatible with the former. These ends will be most effectually secured in connection with the highest civilization and most rapid progress of the state. Whatever promotes the one, promotes also the other. While, therefore, the state may not propose to itself, directly, as an end, the moral and religious culture and character of its citizens, it may, and must, aim to secure this as a means, and a necessary means, to the end which it legitimately pursues, viz., the public order and freedom. Virtue and religion are indispensable to the highest civilization and. elevation of the people, and so to the public welfare, and cannot therefore be overlooked by any wise and intelligent government.

These not the only Objects of Civil Government. -I v have spoken of order and freedom as leading objects to be secured by civil government; I would not affirm that they are the only objects for which government exists. It is possible, certainly, to conceive of a state of society in which every man should be upright and honest; in which the most perfect order should be realized; in which there should be, therefore, no crimes to punish, no lawlessness to rebuke, no irregularity or disorder to provide against. In such a community, as there would be the most perfect order, so also there would be the highest possible degree of public freedom; consequently, there would be no need of government for these ends. If these were the only objects for which civil government exists, then there would be no need of government at all.

Yet, even in such a community, there would still be

something for government to do. Its occasion and its proper functions would not wholly cease. There are certain matters of public utility and convenience as, for example, the coining of money, the making of roads, the disposal of property left without heirs, the regulation of commerce and of intercourse with other countries- which could not well be arranged without the existence of some form of government. In such matters, it would be necessary that some persons should be authorized to act in behalf of the whole; and such authority would constitute, in fact, a government.

§ II. FOUNDATION OF CIVIL GOVERNMent.

Having considered, in the preceding section, the origin and object of civil government, we are prepared now to inquire as to its foundation. On what does this institution rest as its basis and support? Whence does it derive its authority? How comes government, in the person of magistrate, legislator, judge, and in the form of law, written or unwritten, to have power over me, to restrain and govern my conduct, a power extending to my person, my property, and even my life? What right has it to do this, and whence does it obtain this right? Suppose I should deny this right, and refuse this control-what then?

Theory of Divine Right.-There have been various theories respecting this matter. According to some, civil government is founded in the will of God: it rests on the basis of a divine right. This theory supposes that civil government is an ordinance of God; that as marriage and the family relation were of direct divine appointment, so likewise the state; and that as we had no agency in instituting, so we have no choice in submitting to either