Textual Feature | Appearance |
---|---|
Whitman's hand | blue double overline and underline |
Highlighting | yellow background with top and bottom border |
Paste-on | gray box with black borders |
Laid in | white box with black borders |
Erasure | white text with dark gray background |
Overwritten | brown with strikethrough |
This little Treatise is extracted from a more extensive work, undertaken without consulting my resources, and long since abandoned.—The following comprises the greater part of the different fragments which had been written, and which seemed to me best worthy; all else destroyed.— (1.) Montesquieu has only spoken of positive laws, leaving his splendid structure incomplete; but we must go to the very source of these laws, to trace the origin of this primitive implied or expressed Covenant which binds all societies together.—The Contrat Social has appeared; this forms the portico of the temple, and the first chapter of L'Esprit des lois.—We may say in truth of this author—"The Human Race had Lost its Title Deeds—Jean Jaques has found Them." (Note by Brissard.)
Rousseau has given the substance of his Contrat Social in the fifth book of Emile, where traveling is discussed; and another abstract is given in Lettres de la Montagne, (letter Sixth)
I wish to inquire whether, taking men as they
are, and laws as they may be made, some just rule
of administration may not be established in the
civil order.—In this research it will be my
constant endeavor to ally that which the
right perm[illegible]its, with that which policy prescribes,
that justice and interest may not be divided.—
I begin without expatiating.—I may be
asked Who I am—a prince? a lawgiver?—No,
neither; and therefore it is I write.—Born a
citizen of a free state, and member of its sovereignty,
Man is born free, yet he is everywhere
in fetters.—He who fancies himself the master
of others is only more enslaved than they.—
Whence this anomaly?—I know not its cause.—
What can legalize it?—I think I can answer.
Did I only consider force, and the results arising
from it, I should say,: So long as a nation
is constrained to obey, and does obey, it does acts
well; So soon as ait is able to throw off
the yoke, and does throw it off, it acts
still better;—for, as it regains its liberty by
the same right which deprived it of liberty.
For all this, social order is a sacred right
upon which all others are based.—This right,
however, originates not in nature, but is founded
on covenants.—Now to investigate those covenants.
Family organization is the oldest society
and the only natural one.—Yet children only
remain subject to the father, while they need his care.
Then Afterward both father and children resume their
independence; each is free from the other.—If
they still remain united it is because they
voluntarily elect to do so.—This common liberty
is a consequence of the nature of man.—
His first law is that of watching over his own
preservation.—Subsequently, the chief is the symbol
of the father,—the people, of the children,—; and
all being born free and equal, none can alienate
their liberty except for their own interests.—The
sole difference is, that in the family the love of the
father for the children compensates him for the
cares he bestows,
—while, in the State
the Ruler is compensated by the honor and profit
of ruling?—.—
Grotius denies that all human rights?
can be established in favor of the governed,
citing slavery as an example.—His constant
manner of reasoning is to establish the right
by the deed.— (1) A more logical method may be used—but less
favorable to tyrants.—
It is doubtful, according to Grotius, whether
the human race belongs to a hundred men, or
these hundred men belong to the human race;
and but he seems inclined to the first opinion.—
This is also the sentiment of Hobbes.—See the
human species thus divided into herds of cattle,
each having its chief, who guards but to devour
it.—As a shepherd is by nature superior to his
flock, so the human shepherds.—Thus reasoned
the Emperor Caligula, according to Philon, proving
plausibly enough that the kings were gods, or
the people beasts.—
The philosophy of Caligula is revived in
that of Hobbes and Grotius.—Aristotle had
said, before them all, that men are not
equal by nature, but that some were born
for slavery, and some for dominion.—Aristotle
was right, but he mistook the effect for the cause.
Every man that is born in slavery is born for
slavery; nothing is more certain.—Slaves lose
everything in their fetters; even to the desire
of quitting them; they love their servitude, as
the companions of Ulysses loved their brutishness.
If there are slaves by nature, it is because
there have been slaves against nature.—Force
made the first slavery; cowardice has per-
petuated it.
I have said nothing of King Adam, or the Emperor Noah, the father of the three great monarchs who divided the universe, like the children of Saturn, whom we seem to recognize in them.—
The strongest man can never be strong enough to be always master, unless he transforms force into right, and obedience into duty.—From this arises the right of the strongest, a right which is seemingly claimed in irony, but really laid down as a principle.—But will they not define this word for us?—Force is a physical power; I cannot see what morality can result from its effects.—To yield to force is an act of necessity, not will.—At the most it is an act of prudence.—In what sense can this be a duty?—
Let us assume this pretended right for a moment.—Nothing but inexplicable nonsense results from it; as the effect changes with the cause, and every force which surmounts the first one, succeeds in right.—So long as we can disobey successfully, we do so lawfully; and, if the strongest is in the right, the only point is to prove who may be the strongest. Of what avail is a right which perishes when force ceases?—If we must obey by force, of what need is duty?
"Submit yourselves to the higher powers." If this means, yield to force, the precept is a good one, but superfluous.—I answer that it will never be violated.—All power comes [begin surface 9] [begin surface 10] from God, but all sickness comes from Him also.—Are we therefore to conclude that we are forbidden to call the physician?—When a robber surprises me in a forest, I must surrender my purse to force,—but when I can regain it, am I obliged by conscience to give it to him?
We admit ^then, that force does not constitute right and that we are only obliged to obey the legitimate powers.—My first question returns.
Since no man possesses a natural authority over his fellows, and since force does not produce any right, covenants therefore remain as the basis of all legitimate authority among men.
"If a private citizen," says Grotius, "has a right to ^alienate and cede himself as a slave to a master, why have not a whole nation an equal right?" There are equivocal words here, but we will confine ourselves to alienate—that is to give, or sell.—
X X X XBut if each individual could alienate himself, he could not alienate his children, and theirs, and theirs.—
X X X X X X XWe must always refer to a first Convention.—
Should I grant all the positions which I have just
refuted, the advocates of despotism would not be
benefited thereby—there will ever be a wide difference
between subduing a multitude, and governing a nation.
Uncivilized men enslaved men and their masters,
I do not regard as chief and nation—the
interest of one being opposed to that of the other,
there is no commonwealth.
I will suppose that men have reached that crisis
where the difficulties that threaten their preservation in
a state of nature, exceed their resources in that state.
They perish then unless they improve that state.
Now men cannot create new forces, but they can
unite and direct those which already exist—they
can associate, under a representative head, or
something like several heads.—
This union involves all,—yet how can each pledge his strength and liberty, without injuring his interests?
X X XGiven: To find a system of association
which shall defend and protect with the whole
common force the person and property of each
associate, and by which every member, while uniting
with all, shall be subject only to himself, thus remaining
as free as before the union.—This is the organic
problem, the solution of which is given by the
Social Compact.—Contract.—
These The articles of this Contract are so
precisely worded that they cannot be modified.—
When analyzsed, they reduce themselves into a single
point, The entire alienation of each associate
member, with all his rights, to the whole commu-
nity.
—
—This transition from the state of nature
to the civil state, produces a remarkable
change in man by substituting in his conduct
justice for instinct—forced to brought to act upon other principles,
and consult his reason before listening to his inclinations.
Although in this state he yields some of his natural advantages, he gains others, more important—and his faculties exercise and develope themselves, his ideas become enlarged, his sentiments ennobled, and his whole being is elevated to such a degree, that although abuses of this new condition may often degrade him beneath the state which he has quitted, he should unceasingly bless the happy moment which rescued him from it,—and which, from a stupid and insignificant animal, created an intelligent being and a man!
Let us reduce this balance of advantages
to terms easy of comparison:. Man's loss
by the social contract is his natural liberty,
and an unlimited right to all that he may have
the power to wrest or acquire—His gain is
civil liberty, and protection in the ownership
of what he earns or possesses.—
XX Every man has a natural right to all that is necessary to him
[begin surface 19] [begin surface 20]I shall terminate this by book by a
remark upon which every social system
should be based—namely—That instead of
destroying natural equality, the social compact,
on the contrary, substitutingtes a civil and
legitimate equality for the physical inequality
that nature has caused among men,—and
That, however unequal they may be in respect
to strength or genius, all become equalized
by strength, and by right.—
Note.—Under bad governments, this equality is but seeming and illusory, serving only to maintain the poor in their misery and the rich in their usurpations.—In this case the laws are always advantageous to the possessors, and injurious to non-possessors.—from which it follows that the social state can only be beneficial to men when all possess some, but none too much, property.—
orig.