FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316  
317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   >>   >|  
in pursuance of rights derived from the individual. Sec. IV. _The distinction between rights and liberty._ In the foregoing discussion we have, in conformity to the custom of others, used the terms _rights_ and _liberty_ as words of precisely the same import. But, instead of being convertible terms, there seems to be a very clear difference in their signification. If a man be taken, for example, and without cause thrown into prison, this deprives him of his _liberty_, but not of his _right_, to go where he pleases. The right still exists; and his not being allowed to enjoy this right, is precisely what constitutes the oppression in the case supposed. If there were no right still subsisting, then there would be no oppression. Hence, as the _right_ exists, while the _liberty_ is extinguished, it is evident they are distinct from each other. The liberty of a man in such a case, as in all others, would consist in an opportunity to enjoy his right, or in a state in which it might be enjoyed if he so pleased. This distinction between rights and liberty is all-important to a clear and satisfactory discussion of the doctrine of human freedom. The great champions of that freedom, from a Locke down to a Hall, firmly and passionately grasping the natural rights of man, and confounding these with his liberty, have looked upon society as the restrainer, and not as the author, of that liberty. On the other hand, the great advocates of despotic power, from a Hobbes down to a Whewell, seeing that there can be no genuine liberty--that is, no secure enjoyment of one's rights--in a state of nature, have ascribed, not only our liberty, but all our existing rights also, to the State. But the error of Locke is a noble and generous sentiment when compared with the odious dogma of Hobbes and Whewell. These learned authors contend that we derive all our existing rights from society. Do we, then, live and move and breathe and think and worship God only by rights derived from the State? No, certainly. We have these rights from a higher source. God gave them, and all the powers of earth combined cannot take them away. But as for our liberty, this we freely own is, for the most part, due to the sacred bonds of civil society. Let us render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's. Sec. V. _The relation between the state of nature and of civil society._ Herein, then, consists the true relation be
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316  
317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

liberty

 

rights

 
society
 

oppression

 
freedom
 

nature

 

existing

 
exists
 

derived

 

Whewell


precisely

 

discussion

 

Hobbes

 
things
 

distinction

 

relation

 
Caesar
 

compared

 

odious

 

sentiment


genuine
 

despotic

 
secure
 
enjoyment
 

ascribed

 
generous
 

higher

 

freely

 

sacred

 

Herein


consists

 

render

 

combined

 
breathe
 

authors

 

contend

 

derive

 

worship

 

source

 

powers


advocates

 

learned

 
enjoyed
 

prison

 

deprives

 

thrown

 

constitutes

 

supposed

 

allowed

 
pleases