FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123  
124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   >>   >|  
hould bear in mind that this phrase, now used vaguely, had for Paine and his political school a special significance; it implied a fundamental Declaration of individual rights, of supreme force and authority, invasion which, either by legislatures, law courts, majorities, or administrators, was to be regarded as the worst treason and despotism.--_Editor._ 2. _The Legislature might usurp authority, and a king is needed to restrain it_. With representatives, frequently renewed, who neither administer nor judge, whose functions are determined by the laws; with national conventions, with primary assemblies, which can be convoked any moment; with a people knowing how to read, and how to defend itself; with good journals, guns, and pikes; a Legislature would have a good deal of trouble in enjoying any months of tyranny. Let us not suppose an evil for the sake of its remedy. 3. _A king is needed to give force to executive power_. This might be said while there existed nobles, a priesthood, parliaments, the privileged of every kind. But at present who can resist the Law, which is the will of all, whose execution is the interest of all? On the contrary the existence of an hereditary prince inspires perpetual distrust among the friends of liberty; his authority is odious to them; in checking despotism they constantly obstruct the action of government. Observe how feeble the executive power was found, after our recent pretence of marrying Royalty with Liberty. Take note, for the rest, that those who talk in this way are men who believe that the King and the Executive Power are only one and the same thing: readers of _La Feuille Villageoise_ are more advanced.(*) * See No. 50.--_Author_ Others use this bad reasoning: "Were there no hereditary chief there would be an elective chief: the citizens would side with this man or that, and there would be a civil war at every election." In the first place, it is certain that hereditary succession alone has produced the civil wars of France and England; and that beyond this are the pre-tended rights, of royal families which have twenty times drawn on these nations the scourge of foreign wars. It is, in fine, the heredity of crowns that has caused the troubles of Regency, which Thomas Paine calls Monarchy at nurse. But above all it must be said, that if there be an elective chief, that chief will not be a king surrounded by courtiers, burde
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123  
124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

authority

 

hereditary

 

Legislature

 
needed
 
despotism
 

executive

 

elective

 

rights

 
caused
 

troubles


Regency
 

heredity

 

readers

 

Feuille

 

crowns

 

Executive

 

Observe

 

feeble

 
government
 

action


checking

 

constantly

 

obstruct

 

recent

 

Liberty

 

Villageoise

 

Thomas

 

Monarchy

 

pretence

 

marrying


Royalty

 

succession

 
election
 

produced

 

surrounded

 

tended

 

England

 
families
 
France
 

twenty


nations

 
Author
 

Others

 

advanced

 
reasoning
 
citizens
 

courtiers

 

scourge

 

foreign

 

priesthood