§. 105. I will not deny that if we look back, as far as history will direct
us, towards the original of commonwealths, we shall generally find them under
the government and administration of one man. And I am also apt to believe that
where a family was numerous enough to subsist by itself, and continued entire
together, without mixing with others, as it often happens, where there is much
land and few people, the government commonly began in the father. For the
father having, by the law of Nature, the same power, with every man else, to
punish, as he thought fit, any offences against that law, might thereby punish
his transgressing children, even when they were men, and out of their pupilage;
and they were very likely to submit to his punishment, and all join with him
against the offender in their turns, giving him thereby power to execute his
sentence against any transgression, and so, in effect, make him the law-maker
and governor over all that remained in conjunction with his family. He was
fittest to be trusted; paternal affection secured their property and interest
under his care, and the custom of obeying him in their childhood made it easier
to submit to him rather than any other. If, therefore, they must have one to
rule them, as government is hardly to be avoided amongst men that live
together, who so likely to be the man as he that was their common father,
unless negligence, cruelty, or any other defect of mind or body, made him unfit
for it? But when either the father died. and left his next heir — for want
of age, wisdom, courage, or any other qualities — less fit for rule, or
where several families met and consented to continue together, there, it is not
to be doubted, but they used their natural freedom to set up him whom they
judged the ablest and most likely to rule well over them. Conformable hereunto
we find the people of America, who — living out of the reach of the
conquering swords and spreading domination of the two great empires of Peru and
Mexico — enjoyed their own natural freedom, though, caeteris paribus, they
commonly prefer the heir of their deceased king; yet, if they find him any way
weak or incapable, they pass him by, and set up the stoutest and bravest man
for their ruler.
