CHAPTER IX. The writings of Sidney-Introductory remarks-Extracts-Common notions of liberty are derived from nature-Men are by nature freeChoice of forms of government originally left to the people-The social contract considered-Such as enter into society in some degree diminish their liberty-The natural equality of man-Virtue only gives a preference of one man to another-There is no hereditary right of dominion-Men join together and frame greater or less societies, and give them such forms and laws as they please-They who have the right of choosing a king, have the right of making a king— As to the forms of government-Those best which comprise the three simple elements-Democracy considered-Sidney in favor of a popular or mixed government-Civil governments admit of changes in their superstructure-Man's natural love of liberty is tempered by reason-Seditions, tumults, and wars considered-In what cases justified-When necessary to overthrow a tyranny, or depose a wicked magistrate-The right of insurrection traced to the social contractThe contracts between the magistrates and the nations which created them, were real, solemn, and obligatory-Same subject continuedThe general revolt of a nation cannot be called a rebellion-Duties of magistrates as representatives of the people-No people that is not free can substitute delegates-The representative system-Legislative power not to be trusted in the hands of any who are not bound to obey the laws they make-Reflections on the writings and political opinions of Sidney-The sincerity of his motives-His religious sentiments-His private character-Conclusion. IN bringing to a close the narrative of the public career of Algernon Sidney, little remains to be added respecting a character whose best commentary is to be found in the actions of a life of entire and rigid consistency, and whose finest illustration is in his published correspondence and other writings. His polical opinions, his sentiments respecting government, human rights and public liberty, have already in the progress of this work been freely discussed. They will be more fully understood by the extracts from his once celebrated Discourses concerning Government, contained in the present chapter. These extracts have been made rather with the view of illustrating Sidney's opinions than of presenting a connected chain of his argument, or of doing full justice to the subject matter of the discourses. The plan of our work necessarily forbids the idea of attempting to do more than to glean here and there from these writings a few general truths and maxims, and to present such brief passages only as will serve to convey to the mind of the reader, in Sidney's own language, his views of popular liberty, and of the origin and ground of government. A few remarks in relation to the nature and object of the work, may be properly made here. The book is an answer to Sir Robert Filmer's Patriarcha, and is designed to refute that absurd theory of government which, under the name of the patriarchal system, was so resolutely asserted under the Stuart dynasty, and was never finally abandoned in England, until the last of that hapless family was driven from the throne by the Revolution of 1688. The ideas upon which the work of Sidney was based, were first promulgated in the reign of James I., and were strenuously insisted upon by the high churchmen and obsequious courtier of that day. It was maintained that a hereditary monarchy, as opposed to a limited or popular government, was instituted by the Supreme Being; that the authority of the hereditary prince was absolute, his person was sacred, and his throne hedged round by a higher power than constitutions or the will of the nation. Passive obedience to the will of the sovereign, and non-resistance on the part of the people, were the doctrines inculcated by this theory. The king could do no wrong; or as James I. expressed it-" to contest the power of kings is to dispute the power of God." The most celebrated philosoper of his age, Thomas Hobbes, pushed this theory still further, and maintained that the will of the monarch was the standard of right and wrong, and that every subject ought to be ready to profess any form of religion which the reigning dynasty chose to ordain-a theory, Hume himself does not hesitate to pronounce the offspring of a philosopher, whose politics are fitted only to promote tyranny, and whose ethics to encourage licentiousness. It was also maintained by the patriarchal system, * It may be said, indeed, with truth, that the doctrine was not even then finally abandoned. More than a century afterwards, England, under the administration of Pitt, practically asserted it when she joined the coalition to put down popular government in France. It was the system of Filmer-the jus divinum-as opposed to the French declaration o' rights, which turned Europe into one vast encampment and battle ground for a quarter of a century. that the laws which limited the king's prerogative were merely temporary concessions, which might, at any moment, be revoked, for a king could make no contract with his subjects which was binding upon him. Primogeniture was regarded as a divine institution, and the lineal heir of the legitimate prince was entitled to the throne of right, though centuries of adverse possession intervened. These doctrines were exactly suited to the times of the Stuarts. James I. claimed to be the heir of Egbert and William the Conqueror, and consequently, by the law of primogeniture, held the throne by a better title than Elizabeth or Henry VII. had done. It became the fashion among the statesmen and ecclesiastics of that day, who wished to flatter the monarch, to promulgate and defend these ideas; and they continued steadily to advance down to the period of the breaking out of the Revolution. That event, however, checked for a time the further progress of these absurd political dogmas. The prompt and energetic resistance of the Parliament, the revolt of the nation, and the execution of the king, were terrible commentaries on the patriarchal system. The active and vigorous intellect of the age then launched out into the boldest and freest speculation. Milton brought all the strength of his great mind to the defence of freedom of intellect, freedom of the press, and popular sovereignty: Harrington employed his ingenious pen in sketching his plans of an ideal and perfect republic; while the more practical and profound genius of Vane sought out the true foundation of free government-a written constitution, and equal popular representation. The restoration of the monarchy brought with it the reign of despotic ideas, the philosophy of Hobbes, and the patriarchal theory of government. Sir Robert Filmer laying hold of these ideas of the two last reigns, moulded them anew into a political system, which he published to the world, and which found singular favor with the enthusiastic royalists. It was in answer to this work of Filmer that Sidney's discourses upon government were written. It is remarkable as being one of the earliest if not the first complete and systematic treatise, by any English writer, on the origin and ground of government, which maintains the true principles of civil and religious liberty -traces the origin of all just power to the people— vindicates the right of the nation to frame its own laws and institutions, and defends the doctrine of the "social compact" in opposition to that of hereditary tyranny ordained by a higher law than the popular will At first glance it is almost a matter of amazement that a theory so absurd and inconsistent as the patriarchal system, should have seriously occupied a mind like Sidney's in its refutation. But our wonder ceases when we find the dogmas of Filmer universally disseminated throughout the kingdom. They were avowed in the Parliament, proclaimed from the bench, taught in the church and universities. Doctrines like Sidney's were looked upon by some with horror as re |