ission even to unjust and
wicked laws, on the part of men in their separate capacity; but it does
not deny the right of revolution as existing in the community. What the
Scriptures forbid, is that any man should undertake to resist the law.
They do not forbid either change in the laws or change in the
government. There is an obvious difference between these two things,
viz: the right of resistance on the part of individuals, and the right
of revolution on the part of the people. This latter right we argue from
the divine institution of government itself. God has revealed his will
that government should exist, but he has not prescribed the form which
it shall assume. In other words, he has commanded men to organize such
government, but has left the form to be determined by themselves. This
is a necessary inference. It follows from the mere silence of Scripture
and nature on this subject, that it is left free to the determination of
those to whom the general command is given. In the next place, this
right is to be inferred from the design of civil government. That design
is the welfare of the people. It is the promotion of their physical and
moral improvement; the security of life and property; the punishment of
evil doers, and the praise of those who do well. If such is the end
which God designs government to answer, it must be his will that it
should be made to accomplish that purpose, and consequently that it may
be changed from time to time, so as to secure that end. No one form of
government is adapted to all states of society, any more than one suit
of clothes is proper to all stages of life. The end for which clothing
is designed, supposes the right to adapt it to that end. In like manner
the end government is intended to answer, supposes the right to modify
it whenever such modification is necessary. If God commands men to
accomplish certain ends, and does not prescribe the means, he does
thereby leave the choice of the means to their discretion. And any
institution which fails to accomplish the end intended by it, if it has
not a divine sanction as to its form, may lawfully be so changed as to
suit the purpose for which it was appointed. We hold, therefore, that
the people have, by divine right, the authority to change, not only
their rulers, but their form of government, whenever the one or the
other, instead of promoting the well-being of the community, is unjust
or injurious. This is a right which, like all othe