second treatise of government-第10部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


ause　these　　obligations　to　parents；　and　the　degrees　of　what　is　required　of　　children；　may　be　varied　by　the　different　care　and　kindness；　　trouble　and　expence；　which　is　often　employed　upon　one　child　more　　than　another。　　　　　　Sec。　71。　　This　shews　the　reason　how　it　comes　to　pass；　that　　parents　in　societies；　where　they　themselves　are　subjects；　retain　　a　power　over　their　children；　and　have　as　much　right　to　their　　subjection；　as　those　who　are　in　the　state　of　nature。　　Which　could　　not　possibly　be；　if　all　political　power　were　only　paternal；　and　　that　in　truth　they　were　one　and　the　same　thing：　for　then；　all　　paternal　power　being　in　the　prince；　the　subject　could　naturally　　have　none　of　it。　　But　these　two　powers；　political　and　paternal；　　are　so　perfectly　distinct　and　separate；　are　built　upon　so　　different　foundations；　and　given　to　so　different　ends；　that　every　　subject　that　is　a　father；　has　as　much　a　paternal　power　over　his　　children；　as　the　prince　has　over　his：　and　every　prince；　that　has　　parents；　owes　them　as　much　filial　duty　and　obedience；　as　the　　meanest　of　his　subjects　do　to　their's；　and　can　therefore　contain　　not　any　part　or　degree　of　that　kind　of　dominion；　which　a　prince　　or　magistrate　has　over　his　subject。　　　　　　　　Sec。　72。　　Though　the　obligation　on　the　parents　to　bring　up　　their　children；　and　the　obligation　on　children　to　honour　their　　parents；　contain　all　the　power　on　the　one　hand；　and　submission　on　　the　other；　which　are　proper　to　this　relation；　yet　there　is　

another　power　ordinarily　in　the　father；　whereby　he　has　a　tie　on　　the　obedience　of　his　children；　which　tho'　it　be　common　to　him　　with　other　men；　yet　the　occasions　of　shewing　it；　almost　consich　　tho'　it　be　common　to　him　with　other　men；　yet　the　occasions　of　　shewing　it；　almost　constantly　happening　to　fathers　in　their　　private　families；　and　the　instances　of　it　elsewhere　being　rare；　　and　less　taken　notice　of；　it　passes　in　the　world　for　a　part　of　　paternal　jurisdiction。　　And　this　is　the　power　men　generally　have　　to　bestow　their　estates　on　those　who　please　them　best；　the　　possession　of　the　father　being　the　expectation　and　inheritance　of　　the　children；　ordinarily　in　certain　proportions；　according　to　the　　law　and　custom　of　each　country；　yet　it　is　commonly　in　the　　father's　power　to　bestow　it　with　a　more　sparing　or　liberal　hand；　　according　as　the　behaviour　of　this　or　that　child　hath　comported　　with　his　will　and　humour。　　　　　　Sec。　73。　　This　is　no　small　tie　on　the　obedience　of　children：　　and　there　being　always　annexed　to　the　enjoyment　of　land；　a　　submission　to　the　government　of　the　country；　of　which　that　land　　is　a　part；　it　has　been　commonly　supposed；　that　a　father　could　　oblige　his　posterity　to　that　government；　of　which　he　himself　was　　a　subject；　and　that　his　compact　held　them；　whereas；　it　being　only　　a　necessary　condition　annexed　to　the　land；　and　the　inheritance　of　　an　estate　which　is　under　that　government；　reaches　only　those　who　　will　take　it　on　that　condition；　and　so　is　no　natural　tie　or　　engagement；　but　a　voluntary　submission：　for　every　man's　children　　being　by　nature　as　free　as　himself；　or　any　of　his　ancestors　ever　　were；　may；　whilst　they　are　in　that　freedom；　choose　what　society　　they　will　join　themselves　to；　what　common…wealth　they　will　put　　themselves　under。　　But　if　they　will　enjoy　the　inheritance　of　　their　ancestors；　they　must　take　it　on　the　same　terms　their　　ancestors　had　it；　and　submit　to　all　the　conditions　annexed　to　　such　a　possession。　　By　this　power　indeed　fathers　oblige　their　　children　to　obedience　to　themselves；　even　when　they　are　past　　minority；　and　most　commonly　too　subject　them　to　this　or　that　　political　power：　but　neither　of　these　by　any　peculiar　right　of　　fatherhood；　but　by　the　reward　they　have　in　their　hands　to　inforce　　and　recompence　such　a　compliance；　and　is　no　more　power　than　what　　a　French　man　has　over　an　English　man；　who　by　the　hopes　of　an　　estate　he　will　leave　him；　will　certainly　have　a　strong　tie　on　his　　obedience：　and　if；　when　it　is　left　him；　he　will　enjoy　it；　he　must　　certainly　take　it　upon　the　conditions　annexed　to　the　possession　　of　land　in　that　country　where　it　lies；　whether　it　be　France　or　　England。　　　　　　　Sec。　74。　　To　conclude　then；　tho'　the　father's　power　of　　commanding　extends　no　farther　than　the　minority　of　his　children；　　and　to　a　degree　only　fit　for　the　discipline　and　government　of　　that　age；　and　tho'　that　honour　and　respect；　and　all　that　which　　the　Latins　called　piety；　which　they　indispensably　owe　to　their　　parents　all　their　life…time；　and　in　all　estates；　with　all　that　　support　and　defence　is　due　to　them；　gives　the　father　no　power　of　　governing；　i。e。　　making　laws　and　enacting　penalties　on　his　　children；　though　by　all　this　he　has　no　dominion　over　the　property　　or　actions　of　his　son：　yet　it　is　obvious　to　conceive　how　easy　it　　was；　in　the　first　ages　of　the　world；　and　in　places　still；　where　　the　thinness　of　people　gives　families　leave　to　separate　into　　unpossessed　quarters；　and　they　have　room　to　remove　or　plant　　themselves　in　yet　vacant　habitations；　for　the　father　of　the　　family　to　become　the　prince　of*　it；　he　had　been　a　ruler　from　the　　beginning　of　the　infancy　of　his　children：　and　since　without　some　　government　it　would　be　hard　for　them　to　live　together；　it　was　　likeliest　it　should；　by　the　express　or　tacit　consent　of　the　　children　when　they　were　grown　up；　be　in　the　father；　where　it　　seemed　without　any　change　barely　to　continue；　when　indeed　nothing　　more　was　required　to　it；　than　the　permitting　the　father　to　　exercise　alone；　in　his　family；　that　executive　power　of　the　law　of　　nature；　which　every　free　man　naturally　hath；　and　by　that　

permission　resigning　up　to　him　a　monarchical　power；　whilst　they　　remained　in　it。　　But　that　this　was　not　by　any　paternal　right；　but　　only　by　the　consent　of　his　children；　is　evident　from　hence；　that　　no　body　doubts；　but　if　a　stranger；　whom　chance　or　business　had　　brought　to　his　family；　had　there　killed　any　of　his　children；　or　　committed　any　other　fact；　he　might　condemn　and　put　him　to　death；　　or　other…wise　have　punished　him；　as　well　as　any　of　his　children；　　which　it　was　impossible　he　should　do　by　virtue　of　any　paternal　　authority　over　one　who　was　not　his　child；　but　by　virtue　of　that　　executive　power　of　the　law　of　nature；　which；　as　a　man；　he　had　a　　right　to：　and　he　alone　could　punish　him　in　his　family；　where　the　　respect　of　his　children　had　laid　by　the　exercise　of　such　a　power；　　to　give　way　to　the　dignity　and　authority　they　were　willing　should　　remain　in　him；　above　the　rest　of　his　family。　　　　　　　　（*It　is　no　improbable　opinion　therefore；　which　the　　archphilosopher　was　of；　that　the　chief　person　in　every　houshold　　was　always；　as　it　were；　a　king：　so　when　numbers　of　housholds　　joined　themselves　in　civil　societies　together；　kings　were　the　　first　kind　of　governors　amongst　them；　which　is　also；　as　it　　seemeth；　the　reason　why　the　name　of　fathers　continued　still　in　　them；　who；　of　fathers；　were　made　rulers；　as　also　the　ancient　　custom　of　governors　to　do　as　Melchizedec；　and　being　kings；　to　　exercise　the　office　of　priests；　which　fathers　did　at　the　first；　　grew　perhaps　by　the　same　occasion。　　Howbeit；　this　is　not　the　only　　kind　of　regiment　that　has　been　received　in　the　world。　　The　　inconveniences　of　one　kind　have　caused　sundry　others　to　be　　devised；　so　that　in　a　word；　all　public　regiment；　of　what　kind　　soever；　seemeth　evidently　to　have　risen　from　the　deliberate　　advice；　consultation　and　composition　between　men；　judging　it　　convenient　and　behoveful；　there　being　no　impossibility　in　nature　　considered　by　itself；　but　that　man　might　have　lived　without　any　　public　regiment；　Hooker's　Eccl。　Pol。　lib。　i。　sect。　10。）　　　　　　Sec。　75。　　Thus　it　was　easy；　and　almost　natural　for　children；　　by　a　tacit；　and　scarce　avoidable　consent；　to　make　way　for　the　　father's　authority　and　government。　　They　had　been　　accustomed　　in　　　their　childhood　to　follow　his　direction；　and　to　refer　their　　little　differences　to　him；　and　when　they　were　men；　who　fitter　to　　rule　them？　　Their　little　properties；　and　less　covetousness；　　seldom　afforded　greater　controversies；　and　when　any　should　arise；　　where　could　they　have　a　fitter　umpire　than　he；　by　whose　care　they　　had　every　one　been　sustained　and　brought　up；　and　who　had　a　　tenderness　for　them　aII？　　It　is　no　wonder　that　they　made　no　　distinction　betwixt　minority　and　full　age；　nor　looked　after　one　　and　twenty；　or　any　other　age　that　might　make　them　the　free　　disposers　of　themselves　and　fortunes；　when　they　could　have　no　　desire　to　be　out　of　their　pupilage：　the　government　they　had　been　　under；　during　it；　continued　still　to　be　more　their　protection　　than　restraint；　and　they　could　no　where　find　a　greater　security　　to　their　peace；　liberties；　and　fortunes；　than　in　the　rule　of　a　　father。　　　　　　　　Sec。　76。　　Thus　the　natural　fathers　of　families；　by　an　　insensible　change；　became　the　politic　monarchs　of　them　too：　and　　as　they　chanced　to　live　long；　and　leave　able　and　worthy　heirs；　　for　several　successions；　or　otherwise；　so　they　laid　the　　foundations　of　hereditary；　or　elective　kingdoms；　under　several　　constitutions　and　mannors；　according　as　chance；　contrivance；　or　　occasions　happened　to　mould　them。　　But　if　princes　have　their　　titles　in　their　fathers　right；　and　it　be　a　sufficient　proof　of　　the　natural　right　of　fathers　to　political　authority；　because　they　　commonly　were　those　in　whose　hands　we　find；　de　facto；　the　　exercise　of　government：　I　say；　if　this　argument　be　good；　it　will　　as　strongly　prove；　that　all　princes；　nay　princes　only；　ought　to　　be　priests；　since　it　is　as　certain；　that　in　the　beginning；　the　　father　of　the　family　was　priest；　as　that　he　was　ruler　in　his　own　　houshold。




　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　CHAP。　　VII。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　Of　Political　or　Civil　Society。

　　　　　Sec。　77。　　GOD　having　made　man　such　a　creature；　that　in　his　　own　judgment；　it　was　not　good　for　him　to　be　alone；　put　him　under　　strong　obligations　of　necessity；　convenience；　and　inclination　to　　drive　him　into　society；　as　well　as　fitted　him　with　understanding　　and　language　to　continue　and　enjoy　it。　　The　first　society　was　　between　man　and　wife；　which　gave　beginning　to　that　between　　parents　and　children；　to　which；　in　time；　that　between　master　and　　servant　came　to　be　added：　and　though　all　these　might；　and　　commonly　did　meet　together；　and　make　up　but　one　family；　wherein　　the　master　or　mistress　of　it　had　some　s