 | The Declaration of independence : |  |
But what is nature? Why is custom not natural? I greatly fear that
this nature is itself only a first custom, as custom is a second nature.
We need not feel the truth that law is but usurpation; it was introduced
without reason, it has become reasonable, it is necessary to cause it to
be regarded as authentic, eternal, and to conceal the beginning of it if
we do not wish it to come soon to an end.
As to the late Civil Wars, 'tis pretty well known, what Notions of
Government went current in those Days. When Monarchy was to be
subverted, we know what was necessary to justify the Fact; and then,
because it was convenient for the purpose, it was undoubtedly true in
the Nature of Things, that Government had its Original from the
People, and the Prince was only their Trustee. . . . This was the
Doctrine that was commonly received, and the only Doctrine that
relish'd in those times. But afterwards, when Monarchy took its place
again, . . . another Notion of Government came into Fashion. Then
Government had its Original entirely from God, and the Prince was
accountable to none but Him. . . . And now, upon another turn of
things, when people have a liberty to speak out, a new Set of Notions
is advanced, now Passive Obedience is all a mistake, and instead of
being a duty to suffer Oppression, 'tis a Glorious Act to resist it: and
instead of leaving Injuries to be redress'd by God, we have a natural
right to relieve ourselves.
The constitution of 1795, like all of its predecessors, is made for Man
. . . I have seen, in my time, Frenchmen, Italians, Russians, etc., I
even know, thanks to Montesquieu, that one may be a Persian but
as for Man, I declare I never met him in my life, if he exists, it is without
my knowledge.
| The Declaration of independence : | |