ill not be duly weighed without
taking into consideration the state of opinion then prevalent in
England. The general principles of government were there little
understood and less examined. The whole substance of human authority was
centred in the simple doctrine of royal prerogative, the origin of which
was always traced in theory to divine institution. Twenty years later,
the subject was more industriously sifted, and for half a century became
one of the principal topics of controversy between the ablest and most
enlightened men in the nation. The instrument of voluntary association
executed on board the "Mayflower" testifies that the parties to it had
anticipated the improvement of their nation.
Another incident, from which we may derive occasion for important
reflections, was the attempt of these original settlers to establish
among them that community of goods and of labor, which fanciful
politicians, from the days of Plato to those of Rousseau, have
recommended as the fundamental law of a perfect republic. This theory
results, it must be acknowledged, from principles of reasoning
most flattering to the human character. If industry, frugality, and
disinterested integrity were alike the virtues of all, there would,
apparently, be more of the social spirit, in making all property a
common stock, and giving to each individual a proportional title to the
wealth of the whole. Such is the basis upon which Plato forbids, in
his Republic, the division of property. Such is the system upon which
Rousseau pronounces the first man who inclosed a field with a fence, and
said, "This is mine," a traitor to the human species. A wiser and more
useful philosophy, however, directs us to consider man according to the
nature in which he was formed; subject to infirmities, which no wisdom
can remedy; to weaknesses, which no institution can strengthen; to
vices, which no legislation can correct. Hence, it becomes obvious that
separate property is the natural and indisputable right of separate
exertion; that community of goods without community of toil is
oppressive and unjust; that it counteracts the laws of nature, which
prescribe that he only who sows the seed shall reap the harvest; that
it discourages all energy, by destroying its rewards; and makes the most
virtuous and active members of society the slaves and drudges of the
worst. Such was the issue of this experiment among our forefathers,
and the same event demonstrated the err
|