Ret ur n t o t he I nt r oduct ion t o Wilhelm v on Hum boldt and t he det ailed Table of Con t en t s. ED I TI ON U SED
The Spher e and Dut ies of Gov er nm ent . Tr an slat ed fr om t h e Ger m an of Bar on Wilh elm v on Hum boldt , by Joseph Coult har d, Jun. ( London: John Chapm an, 1854) .
TABLE OF CON TEN TS
l PREFACE.
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER I . I NTRODUCTI ON. ¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER I I . OF THE I NDI VI DUAL MAN, AND THE HI GHEST ENDS OF HI S EXI STENCE. ¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER I I I . ON THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR THE POSI TI VE WELFARE OF
THE CI TI ZEN.
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER I V. OF THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR THE NEGATI VE WELFARE OF
THE CI TI ZEN —FOR HI S SECURI TY.
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER V. ON THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR SECURI TY AGAI NST FOREI GN
ENEMI ES.
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER VI . ON THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR THE MUTUAL SECURI TY OF
THE CI TI ZENS. —MEANS FOR ATTAI NI NG THI S END. —I NSTI TUTI ONS FOR REFORMI NG THE MI ND AND CHARACTER OF THE CI TI ZEN. —NATI ONAL EDUCATI ON.
¡ ENDNOTES l CHAPTER VI I . RELI GI ON.
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER VI I I . AMELI ORATI ON OF MORALS. ¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER I X. THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR SECURI TY MORE ACCURATELY
AND POSI TI VELY DEFI NED. —FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE I DEA OF SECURI TY. l CHAPTER X. ON THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR SECURI TY WI TH RESPECT TO
ACTI ONS WHI CH DI RECTLY RELATE TO THE AGENT ONLY. ( POLI CE LAWS. )
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER XI . ON THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR SECURI TY WI TH RESPECT TO
SUCH OF THE CI TI ZENS ’ ACTI ONS AS RELATE DI RECTLY TO OTHERS. ( CI VI L LAWS. )
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER XI I . ON THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR SECURI TY AS MANI FESTED I N
THE JURI DI CAL DECI SI ON OF DI SPUTES AMONG THE CI TI ZENS.
l CHAPTER XI I I . ON THE SOLI CI TUDE FOR SECURI TY AS MANI FESTED I N THE
PUNI SHMENT OF TRANSGRESSI ONS OF THE STATE’S LAWS.
TH E ON LI N E LI BRARY OF LI BERTY
© 2 0 0 4 Lib e r t y Fu n d , I n c.
CLASSI CS I N TH E H I STORY OF LI BERTY
W I LH ELM VON H UM BOLD T , TH E SPH ERE AN D D UTI ES OF GOV ERN M EN T
( TH E LI M I TS OF STATE ACTI ON )
( 1 7 9 2 )
Livros Grátis
http://www.livrosgratis.com.br
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER XI V. ON THE SOLI CI TUDE OF THE STATE FOR THE WELFARE OF MI NORS,
LUNATI CS, AND I DI OTS.
l CHAPTER XV. MEANS FOR THE PRESERVATI ON OF THE STATE ORGANI SM.
COMPLETI ON OF THE THEORY.
¡ ENDNOTES
l CHAPTER XVI . PRACTI CAL APPLI CATI ON OF THE THEORY PROPOSED.
“ Le difficile est de ne pr om ulguer que des lois nécessair es, de r est er à j am ais f idèle à ce pr incipe v r aim ent const it ut ionnel de la sociét é, de se m et t r e en gar de cont r e la fur eur de gouv er ner , la plus funest e m aladie des gouv er nem ens m oder nes. ”
—Mir abeau l’Aîn é, sur l ’Educat ion Publique, p. 69.
PREFACE.
The book of w hich a t r anslat ion is her e offer ed t o t he English r eader w as published post hum ously at Ber lin, in t he y ear 1852, by t he Aut hor ’s y ounger br ot her , Alex ander v on Hum boldt , t he em inent Nat ur alist . I t appear ed under t he t it le of ‘I deen zu einem Ver such, die Gr änzen der Wir k sam k eit des St aat s zu best im m en; ’ for m ing par t of t he sev ent h and concluding v olum e of t he ‘Gesam m elt e Wer k e’ of it s dist inguished aut hor . Wr it t en in 1791, in his ear ly m anhood, and at a t im e w hen t he ideas w hich it unfolds w er e in st r ik ing cont r ast t o t he ev ent s and opinions of t he day , t he book w as long obnox ious t o t he scr uples of t he Ger m an Censor ship; and his fr iend Schiller , w ho t ook m uch int er est in it s publicat ion, had som e difficult y in finding a publisher w illing t o incur t he necessar y r esponsibilit y . The Aut hor t her efor e r et ained t he m anuscr ipt in his
possession, r ev ising it fr om t im e t o t im e, and r e - w r it ing consider able por t ions, w hich appear ed in Schiller ’s ‘Thalia ’ and t he ‘Ber lin Mont hly Rev iew ; ’ but , alt hough t he obst acles w hich at fir st opposed t he issue of t he book w er e subsequent ly r em ov ed, it w as nev er giv en t o t he w or ld in a com plet e for m dur ing his life. I t is pr obable t hat his im por t ant official engagem ent s,* and t hose pr ofound st udies in cr it ical philology , of w hich w e hav e such noble and endur ing m onum ent s in t he lit er at ur e of Ger m any , left him no leisur e t o r ev er t t o t his t he chosen subj ect of his ear lier labour s. But w e cannot but feel gr at eful t o his dist inguished br ot her , for giv ing publicit y t o a t r eat ise w hich has such st r ong claim s t o at t ent ion, w het her w e r egar d t he em inence of it s Aut hor as a philosopher and a st at esm an, t he int r insic v alue of it s cont ent s, or t heir peculiar int er est at a t im e w hen t he Spher e of Gov er nm ent seem s m or e t han ev er t o r equir e car eful definit ion. To Englishm en, least of all, is it lik ely t o pr ov e unat t r act iv e or uninst r uct iv e, since it endeav our s t o show t he t heor et ical ideal of a policy t o w hich t heir inst it ut ions hav e m ade a gr adual and inst inct iv e appr ox im at ion; and cont r ibut es im por t ant ideas t ow ar ds t he solut ion of quest ions w hich now lie so near t o t he hear t and conscience of t he English public.
I n con clu sion , I can n ot bu t feel t h at t h er e m ay be m an y t o w h om t h is book con t ain s lit t le t o r ecom m end it self; —lit t le of show y par adox or high - sounding declam at ion, lit t le of piquant at t ack or unhesit at ing dogm at ism , lit t le im m ediat e r efer ence t o sect s, or par t ies, or polit ical schools; but I w ould also v ent ur e t o ant icipat e t hat t her e ar e ot her s, t o w hom t he subj ect is no less congenial, w ho w ould w illingly list en t o a calm
inv est igat ion of t he m ost im por t ant quest ions t hat can occupy t he at t ent ion of t he st at esm an and t he m or alist , t o ear nest ideas clot hed in sim ple and w ell - m easur ed w or ds; and t hat t hese w ill r eceiv e w it h w elcom e any w or t hy cont r ibut ion t o t he ex panding opinions of our day and nat ion, and look in t hese “ I deas, ” per haps not
unsuccessfully , for som e t r ue and abiding m at er ials t ow ar ds t he st r uct ur e of som e fair er polit y of t he fut ur e.
Br am pt on, August 4t h, 1854.
* I n t he MS. of t he Thir d Chapt er , on “ Posit iv e Welfar e, ” t h er e occu r s an h iat u s of a few pages. This has not been supplied in t he Ger m an edit ion, published by t he Aut hor ’s br ot her ; but t he t hr ead of t he ar gum ent is sufficient ly clear , fr om t he Aut hor ’s sum m ar y , t o occasion lit t le difficult y t o t he r eader in cont inuing it in his ow n m ind.
EN D N OTES
[ * ] I n 1790 Hum boldt w as appoint ed a Councillor of Legat ion, and at t ached t o t he High Cour t of Ber lin. I n 1791 he r esigned t hese offices, and t he nex t t en y ear s of his life ( dur ing w hich t he pr esent w or k w as w r it t en) w er e spent in t r av el, lit er ar y act iv it y , and const ant int er cour se w it h Goet he, Schiller , Wolf, et c. I n 1802 he w as m ade Pr iv y Councillor of Legat ion and Am bassador at t he Papal Cour t , in w hich capacit y he r esided six y ear s at Rom e. On giv ing up his diplom at ic engagem ent s, he w as appoint ed in 1808 Pr iv y Councillor of St at e; and as Minist er of Wor ship and Public I nst r uct ion, w as one of t he m ost act iv e m em ber s of t he Pr ussian Refor m Minist r y , unt il, t hr ough t he influence of Napoleon, it w as dism issed in 1810. Am ong m any ot her im por t ant im pr ov em ent s and r efor m s, he founded t he Univ er sit y of Ber lin. Soon aft er , he w as appoint ed Am bassador and Plenipot ent iar y at t he Aust r ian Cour t , w it h t he addit ional t it le of Pr iv y Minist er of St at e. I n 1813 he w as Plenipot ent iar y at t he Peace Congr ess of Pr ague, at Chat illon, and subsequent ly at t he Congr ess of Vienna. He aft er w ar ds v isit ed Par is in a diplom at ic capacit y ; an d it w as h er e t h at Madam e de St aël w as so m uch im pr essed w it h his genius and cult ur e, t hat she called him “ la plus gr ande capacit é de l ’Eur ope. ” I n 1818 he w as appoint ed t o t he Minist r y of t he I nt er ior ; but his st r enuous adv ocacy of const it ut ional liber t y ( in opposit ion t o t he Car lsbad decr ees) w as an insuper able obst acle t o t he schem es of t he Cabinet s of Vienna and Pet er sbur g, and of som e of his colleagues in t he Minist r y of Pr ussia. He w as offer ed t he m inist er ial pension of 6000 dollar s, but , r efusing it , r et ir ed t o pr osecut e his m or e congenial lit er ar y labour s.
CH APTER I .
I N TROD U CTI ON.
super fluous labour .
Those w ho hav e eit her t hem selv es r em odelled t he fr am ew or k of St at e const it ut ions, or pr oposed schem es of polit ical r efor m , seem m ost ly t o hav e st udied how t o appor t ion t he r espect iv e pr ov inces w hich t he nat ion, and any of it s separ at e elem ent s, should j ust ly shar e in t he adm inist r at ion, —t o assign t he due funct ions of each in t he
gov er nm ent al plan, —and t o adopt t he pr ecaut ions necessar y for pr eser v ing t he int egr it y of t he sev er al int er est s at st ak e. But in ev er y at t em pt t o fr am e or r eor ganize a polit ical const it ut ion, t her e ar e t w o gr and obj ect s, it seem s t o m e, t o be dist inct ly k ept in v iew , neit her of w hich can be ov er look ed or m ade subor dinat e w it hout ser ious inj ur y t o t he com m on design; t hese ar e—fir st , t o det er m ine, as r egar ds t he nat ion in quest ion, w ho shall gov er n, w ho shall be gov er ned, and t o ar r ange t he act ual w or k ing of t he
const it ut ed pow er ; and secondly , t o pr escr ibe t he ex act spher e t o w hich t he gov er nm ent , once const r uct ed, should ex t end or confine it s oper at ions. The lat t er obj ect , w hich m or e im m ediat ely em br aces t he pr iv at e life of t he cit izen, and m or e especially det er m ines t he lim it s of his fr ee, spont aneous act iv it y , is, st r ict ly speak ing, t he t r ue ult im at e pur pose; t he for m er is only a necessar y m eans for ar r iv ing at t his im por t ant end. And y et , how ev er st r ange it m ay appear , it is t o t he at t ainm ent of t he fir st of t hese ends t hat m an dir ect s his m ost ear nest at t ent ion; and, as it becom es us t o show , t his ex clusiv e pur suit of one definit e pur pose only coincides w it h t he usual
m anifest at ion of hum an act iv it y . I t is in t he pr osecut ion of som e single obj ect , and in st r iv ing t o r each it s accom plishm ent by t he com bined applicat ion of his m or al and phy sical ener gies, t hat t he t r ue happiness of m an, in his full v igour and dev elopm ent , consist s. Possession, it is t r ue, cr ow ns ex er t ion w it h r epose; but it is only in t he illusions of fancy t hat it has pow er t o char m our ey es. I f w e consider t he posit ion of m an in t he universe, —if w e r em em ber t he const ant t endency of his ener gies t ow ar ds som e definit e act iv it y , and r ecognize t he influence of sur r ounding nat ur e, w hich is ev er pr ov ok ing him t o ex er t ion, w e shall be r eady t o ack now ledge t hat r epose and possession do not indeed ex ist but in im aginat ion. Now t he par t ial or one- sided m an finds r epose in t he
discont inuance of one line of act ion; and in him w hose pow er s ar e w holly undev eloped, one single obj ect only ser v es t o elicit a few m anifest at ions of ener gy . I t m ay be w ell t o obser v e, befor e der iv ing infer ences fr om t hese gener al consider at ions on t he usual t endency of m an ’s act iv it y , t hat t he dissat isfact ion w e not ice as at t endant on
possession, does not at all apply t o t hat ideal of hum an per fect ion w hich is conceiv able by im aginat ion; but it is t r ue, in t he fullest sense, of t he w holly uncult ur ed m an, and pr opor t ionat ely t r ue of ev er y int er m ediat e gr adat ion bet w een t his ut t er w ant of cult ur e and t hat ideal st andar d abov e m ent ioned. I t w ould appear t hen, fr om t hese gener al char act er ist ics of hum an nat ur e, t hat t o t he conquer or his t r ium ph affor ds a m or e ex quisit e sense of enj oy m ent t han t he act ual occupat ion of t he t er r it or y he has w on, and t hat t he per ilous com m ot ion of r efor m at ion it self is dear er t o t he r efor m er t han t he calm enj oy m ent of t he fr uit s w hich cr ow n it s successful issue. And t hus it is t r ue, in gener al, t hat t he ex er cise of dom inion has som et hing in it m or e im m ediat ely agr eeable t o hum an nat ur e t han t he m er e r eposeful sense of fr eedom ; or , at least , t hat t he solicit ude t o secur e fr eedom is a dear er sat isfact ion t han t hat w hich is affor ded by it s act ual possession. Fr eedom is but t he possibilit y of a v ar ious and indefinit e act iv it y ; w hile gov er nm ent , or t he ex er cise of dom inion, is a single, but y et r eal act iv it y . The ar dent desir e for fr eedom , t her efor e, is at fir st only t oo fr equent ly suggest ed by t he deep - felt consciousness of it s absence.
also of ex t ensiv e pr act ical applicat ion. Real St at e r ev olut ions, or fr esh or ganizat ions of t he gov er ning pow er , ar e alw ay s at t ended in t heir pr ogr ess w it h m any concur r ent and for t uit ous cir cum st ances, and necessar ily ent ail m or e or less inj ur y t o differ ent
int er est s; w her eas a sov er eign pow er t hat is act ually ex ist ing —w het her it be
dem ocr at ic, ar ist ocr at ic, or m onar chical—can ex t end or r est r ict it s spher e of act ion in silence and secr esy , and, in gener al, at t ains it s ends m or e sur ely , in pr opor t ion as it av oids st ar t ling innov at ions. Those pr ocesses of hum an agency adv ance m ost happily t o t heir consum m at ion, w hich m ost fait hfully r esem ble t he oper at ions of t he nat ur al w or ld. The t iny seed, for ex am ple, w hich dr ops int o t he aw ait ing soil, unseen and unheeded, br ings for t h a far r icher and m or e genial blessing in it s gr ow t h and ger m inat ion t han t he v iolent er upt ion of a v olcano, w hich, how ev er necessar y , is alw ay s at t ended w it h
dest r uct ion; and, if w e j ust ly pr ide our selv es on our super ior cult ur e and enlight enm ent , t her e is no ot her sy st em of r efor m so happily adapt ed, by it s spir it of calm and
consist ent pr ogr ession, t o t he capacit ies and r equir em ent s of our ow n t im es.
I t m ay easily be for eseen, t her efor e, t hat t he im por t ant inquir y int o t he due lim it s of St at e agency m ust conduct us t o an am pler r ange of fr eedom for hum an for ces, and a r icher div er sit y of cir cum st ances and sit uat ions. Now t he possibilit y of any higher degr ee of fr eedom pr esupposes a pr opor t ionat e adv ancem ent in civ ilizat ion,—a decr easing necessit y of act ing in lar ge, com pact ed m asses, —a r ich er v ar iet y of r esour ces in t he indiv idual agent s. I f, t hen, t he pr esent age in r ealit y possesses t his incr eased cult ur e and t his pow er and div er sit y of r esour ces, t he fr eedom of w hich t hese ar e t he pr ecious condit ions should unquest ionably be accor ded it . And so it s m et hods of r efor m w ould be happily cor r espondent w it h a pr ogr essiv e civ ilizat ion —if w e do not er r in supposing t his t o be it s fav our able char act er ist ic. Gener ally speak ing, it is t he dr aw n sw or d of t he nat ion w hich check s and ov er aw es t he phy sical st r engt h of it s r uler s; but in our case, cult ur e and enlight enm ent ser v e no less effect ually t o sw ay t heir t hought s and subdue t heir w ill, so t hat t he act ual concessions of r efor m seem r at her ascr ibable t o t hem t han t o t he nat ion. I f ev en t o behold a people br eak ing t heir fet t er s asunder , in t he full consciousness of t heir r ight s as m en and cit izens, is a beaut iful and ennobling spect acle: it m ust be st ill m or e fair , and full of uplift ing hope, t o w it ness a pr ince him self unloosing t he bonds of t hr aldom and gr ant ing fr eedom t o his people, —nor t his as t he m er e bount y of his gr acious condescension, but as t he dischar ge of his fir st and m ost indispensable dut y ; for it is nobler t o see an obj ect effect ed t hr ough a r ev er ent r egar d for law and or der , t han conceded t o t he im per ious dem ands of absolut e
necessit y ; and t he m or e so, w hen w e consider t hat t he fr eedom w hich a nat ion st r iv es t o at t ain t hr ough t he ov er t hr ow of ex ist ing inst it ut ions, is but as hope t o enj oy m ent , as pr epar at ion t o per fect ion, w hen com par ed w it h t hat w hich a St at e, once const it ut ed, can best ow .
I f w e cast a glance at t he hist or y of polit ical or ganizat ions, w e shall find it difficult t o decide, in t he case of any one of t hem , t he ex act lim it s t o w hich it s act iv it y w as confor m ed, because w e discov er in none t he sy st em at ic w or k ing out of any deliber at e schem e, gr ounded on a cer t ain basis of pr inciple. We shall obser v e, t hat t he fr eedom of t he cit izen has been lim it ed fr om t w o point s of v iew ; t hat is, eit her fr om t he necessit y of or ganizing or secur ing t he const it ut ion, or fr om t he ex pediency of pr ov iding for t he m or al and phy sical condit ion of t he nat ion. These consider at ions hav e pr ev ailed alt er nat ely , accor ding as t he const it ut ion, in it self pow er ful, has r equir ed addit ional suppor t , or as t he v iew s of t he legislat or s hav e been m or e or less ex panded. Oft en indeed bot h of t hese causes m ay be found oper at ing conj oint ly . I n t he ancient St at es, alm ost all t he inst it ut ions r elat ing t o t he pr iv at e life of t he cit izens w er e of a st r ict ly polit ical char act er . Possessed, as it w as, of but lit t le absolut e aut hor it y , t he const it ut ion w as m ainly dependent for it s dur at ion on t he w ill of t he nat ion, and hence it w as
The sam e policy is st ill obser v able in sm all r epublican St at es; and if w e w er e t o r egar d it in t he light of t hese cir cum st ances alone, w e m ight accept it as t r ue, t hat t he fr eedom of pr iv at e life alw ay s incr eases in ex act pr opor t ion as public fr eedom declines; w her eas secur it y alw ay s k eeps pace w it h t he lat t er . I t is t r ue t he ancient legislat or s v er y oft en, and t he ancient philosopher s inv ar iably , dir ect ed t heir at t ent ion t o t he inner life of t he indiv idual; and, in t heir ey es, t he m or al w or t h of hum an nat ur e seem ed t o deser v e t he highest r egar d: of t his w e hav e an illust r at ion in Plat o ’s Republic, of w hich Rousseau has v er y t r uly obser v ed t hat it has m or e t he char act er of an educat ional t han a polit ical t r eat ise. Now if w e com par e t he ex am ple of t he m ost m oder n St at es, w it h r egar d t o t his t endency , w e shall find t he design of act ing for t he indiv idual cit izen, and of pr ov iding for his w elfar e, t o be clear and unm ist ak able fr om t he num ber of law s and inst it ut ions dir ect ed t o t his end, and w hich oft en giv e a v er y det er m inat e for m t o pr iv at e life. The super ior int er nal consist ency of our const it ut ions, —t heir gr eat er independence of nat ional char act er and feeling, —t he deeper influence of m er e t hink er s, w ho ar e
nat ur ally disposed t o m or e ex panded v iew s, —t he m ult it ude of inv ent ions w hich t each us t o follow out and im pr ov e t he com m on obj ect s of nat ional act iv it y ; and last ly , and befor e all, cer t ain ideas of r eligion w hich r epr esent t he gov er ning pow er as r esponsible, t o a cer t ain ex t ent , for t he m or al and fut ur e w elfar e of t he cit izens, hav e all cont r ibut ed t o int r oduce t his change and dev elope t his posit iv e solicit ude. But if w e ex am ine int o t he or igin of par t icular inst it ut ions and police- law s, w e find t hat t hey fr equent ly
or iginat e in t he r eal or pr et ended necessit y of im posing t ax es on t he subj ect , and in t his w e m ay t r ace t he ex am ple, it is t r ue, t o t he polit ical char act er ist ics of t he ancient
St at es, inasm uch as such inst it ut ions gr ow out of t he sam e desir e of secur ing t he const it ut ion w hich w e not iced in t hem . Wit h r espect t o t hose lim it at ions of fr eedom , how ev er , w hich do not so m uch affect t he St at e as t he indiv iduals w ho com pose it , w e ar e led t o not ice a v ast differ ence bet w een ancient and m oder n gov er nm ent s. The ancient s dev ot ed t heir at t ent ion m or e ex clusiv ely t o t he har m onious dev elopm ent of t he indiv idual m an, as m an; t he m oder ns ar e chiefly solicit ous about his com for t , his
pr osper it y , his pr oduct iv eness. The for m er look ed t o v ir t ue; t he lat t er seek for
happiness. And hence it follow s, t hat t he r est r ict ions im posed on fr eedom in t he ancient St at es w er e, in som e im por t ant r espect s, m or e oppr essiv e and danger ous t han t hose w hich char act er ize our t im es. For t hey dir ect ly at t ack ed t hat inner life of t he soul, in w hich t he indiv idualit y of hum an being essent ially consist s; and hence all t he ancient nat ions bet r ay a char act er of unifor m it y , w hich is not so m uch t o be at t r ibut ed t o t heir w ant of higher r efinem ent and m or e lim it ed int er com m unicat ion, as t o t he sy st em at ic educat ion of t heir y out h in com m on ( alm ost univ er sal am ong t hem ) , and t he designedly collect iv e life of t he cit izens. But , in anot her point of v iew , it w ill be allow ed t hat t hese ancient inst it ut ions cont r ibut ed especially t o pr eser v e and elev at e t he v igor ous act iv it y of t he indiv idual m an. The v er y desir e w hich st ill anim at ed all t heir polit ical effor t s, t o t r ain up t em per at e and noblem inded cit izens, im par t ed a higher im pulse t o t heir w hole spir it and char act er . Wit h us, it is t r ue, m an is indiv idually less r est r ict ed; but t he influence of sur r ounding cir cum st ances only t he m or e oper at es t o pr oduce and cont inue a lim it ing agency , —a posit ion, how ev er , w hich does not pr eclude t he possibilit y of beginning a conflict against t hese ex t er nal hindr ances, w it h our ow n int er nal
capt iv at es us abov e all by t hat inher ent gr eat ness w hich is com pr ised in t he life of t he indiv idual, and per ishes along w it h him , —t he bloom of fancy , t he dept h of t hought , t he st r engt h of w ill, t he per fect oneness of t he ent ir e being, w hich alone confer t r ue w or t h on hum an nat ur e. Their st r ong consciousness of t his essent ial w or t h of hum an nat ur e, of it s pow er s and t heir consist ent dev elopm ent , w as t o t hem t he quick im pulse t o ev er y m anifest at ion of act iv it y ; but t hese seem t o us but as abst r act ions, in w hich t he sense of t he indiv idual is lost , or at least in w hich his inner life is not so m uch r egar ded as his ease, his m at er ial com for t , his happiness. The ancient s sought for happiness in v ir t ue; t he m oder ns hav e t oo long been endeav our ing t o dev elope t he lat t er fr om t he for m er ;*
and even he† w ho could conceiv e and por t r ay m or alit y in it s pur est for m , t hink s him self bound t o supply happiness t o his ideal of hum an nat ur e t hr ough t he m edium of a highly ar t ificial m achiner y , and t his r at her as a r ew ar d fr om w it hout , t han as a boon obt ained by m an ’s ow n ex er t ions. I need not t r ace any fur t her t he feat ur es of t his st r ik ing differ ence, but w ill dr aw t hese hint s t o a conclusion w it h an illust r at iv e passage fr om Arist ot le ’s Et hics: —“ For t hat w hich peculiar ly belongs t o each by nat ur e, is best and m ost pleasant t o ev er y one; and consequent ly , t o m an, t he life accor ding t o int ellect ( is m ost pleasant ) , if int ellect especially const it ut es Man. This life t her efor e is t he m ost h ap p y‡. ”
I t has been fr om t im e t o t im e disput ed by publicist s, w het her t he St at e should pr ov ide for t he secur it y only , or for t he w hole phy sical and m or al w ell - being of t he nat ion. The v igilant solicit ude for t he fr eedom of pr iv at e life has in gener al led t o t he for m er pr oposit ion; w hile t he idea t hat t he St at e can best ow som et hing m or e t han m er e secur it y , and t hat t he inj ur ious lim it at ion of liber t y , alt hough a possible, is not an essent ial, consequence of such a policy , has disposed m any t o t he lat t er opinion. And t his belief has undoubt edly pr ev ailed, not only in polit ical t heor y , but in act ual pr act ice. Am ple ev idence of t his is t o be found in m ost of t he sy st em s of polit ical j ur ispr udence, in t he m or e r ecent philosophical codes, and in t he hist or y of Const it ut ions gener ally . The int r oduct ion of t hese pr inciples has giv en a new for m t o t he st udy of polit ics ( as is show n for inst ance by so m any r ecent financial and legislat iv e t heor ies) , and has pr oduced m any new depar t m ent s of adm inist r at ion, as boar ds of t r ade, finance, and nat ional econom y . But , how ev er gener ally t hese pr inciples m ay be accept ed, t hey st ill appear t o m e t o r equir e a m or e r adical inv est igat ion; and t his can only pr oceed fr om a v iew of hum an nat ur e in t he abst r act , and of t he highest ends of hum an ex ist ence.
EN D N OTES
[ * ] This differ ence is nev er so st r ik ingly ev ident as w hen w e m ak e t he com par ison bet w een t he ancient and m oder n philosopher s. I n place of ot her illust r at ion, I quot e som e r em ar k s of Tiedem ann on one of t he finest passages in Plat o’s Republic: — “ Quanquam aut em per se sit j ust it ia gr at a nobis: t am en si ex er cit ium ej us nullam om nino affer r et ut ilit at em , si j ust o ea om nia essent pat ienda, qu æ fr at r es
[ † ] Kant , on t he Sum m um Bonum , in his Elem ent s of Mor al Met aphy sics ( Riga, 1785) , and in t he Cr it ique of Pr act ical Reason.
[ ‡ ] ? ? ? ? ?e ?? ??s t t ?se? ???t ?s t ?? ?a d?s t ?? s t ?? ??s t · ?a t ? ? ? ? p d ?at t ? ?? ? ß???, e p e? µ ???s t a t ? t ? ????p ??· ? t ?? ?a ?a e d a?µ ???st at ??. —Ar ist . Et h. Nich. bk . x . ch. 7 sub fin.
CH APTER I I .
OF TH E I N D I V I D U AL M AN,
AN D TH E H I GH EST EN D S OF H I S EX I STEN CE.
The t r ue end of Man, or t hat w hich is pr escr ibed by t he et er nal and im m ut able dict at es of r eason, and not suggest ed by v ague and t r ansient desir es, is t he highest and m ost har m onious dev elopm ent of his pow er s t o a com plet e and consist ent w hole. Fr eedom is t he gr and and indispensable condit ion w hich t he possibilit y of such a dev elopm ent pr esupposes; but t her e is besides anot her essent ial, —int im at ely connect ed w it h
fr eedom , it is t r ue, —a v ar iet y of sit uat ions. Ev en t he m ost fr ee and self- r eliant of m en is t hw ar t ed and hinder ed in his dev elopm ent by unifor m it y of posit ion. But as it is ev ident , on t he one hand, t hat such a div er sit y is a const ant r esult of fr eedom , and on t he ot her , t hat t her e is a species of oppr ession w hich, w it hout im posing r est r ict ions on m an
him self, giv es a peculiar im pr ess of it s ow n t o sur r ounding cir cum st ances; t hese t w o condit ions, of fr eedom and v ar iet y of sit uat ion, m ay be r egar ded, in a cer t ain sense, as one and t he sam e. St ill, it m ay cont r ibut e t o per spicuit y t o point out t he dist inct ion bet w een t hem .
Ev er y hum an being, t hen, can act w it h but one for ce at t he sam e t im e: or r at her , our w hole nat ur e disposes us at any giv en t im e t o som e single for m of spont aneous act iv it y . I t w ould t her efor e seem t o follow fr om t his, t hat m an is inev it ably dest ined t o a par t ial cult iv at ion, since he only enfeebles his ener gies by dir ect ing t hem t o a m ult iplicit y of obj ect s. But w e see t he fallacy of such a conclusion w hen w e r eflect , t hat m an has it in his pow er t o av oid t his one - sideness, by st r iv ing t o unit e t he separ at e facult ies of his nat ur e, oft en singly ex er cised; by br inging int o spont aneous co- oper at ion, at each per iod of his life, t he gleam s of act iv it y about t o ex pir e, and t hose w hich t he fut ur e alone w ill k indle int o liv ing effulgence; and endeav our ing t o incr ease and div er sify t he pow er s w it h w hich he w or k s, by har m oniously com bining t hem , inst ead of look ing for a m er e v ar iet y of obj ect s for t heir separ at e ex er cise. That w hich is effect ed, in t he case of t he indiv idual, by t he union of t he past and fut ur e w it h t he pr esent , is pr oduced in societ y by t he m ut ual co- oper at ion of it s differ ent single m em ber s; for , in all t he st ages of his ex ist ence, each indiv idual can ex hibit but one of t hose per fect ions only , w hich r epr esent t he possible feat ur es of hum an char act er . I t is t hr ough such social union, t her efor e, as is based on t he int er nal w ant s and capacit ies of it s m em ber s, t hat each is enabled t o par t icipat e in t he r ich collect iv e r esour ces of all t he ot her s. The ex per ience of all, ev en t he r udest , nat ions, fur nishes us an ex am ple of a union t hus for m at iv e of indiv idual char act er , in t he union of t he sex es. And, alt hough in t his case t he
t he com m on bond; for w hilst , w it hout t his int im acy , one indiv idual cannot sufficient ly possess him self, as it w er e, of t he nat ur e of t he ot her s, independence is no less essent ial, in or der t hat t he per ceiv ed be assim ilat ed int o t he being of t he per ceiv er . Now , it is clear ( t o apply t hese conclusions t o t he r espect iv e condit ions for cult ur e, — fr eedom , and a v ar iet y of sit uat ions) , t hat , on t he one hand, indiv idual ener gy is
essent ial t o t he per ceiv ed and per ceiv er , int o w hich social unions m ay be r esolv ed; and, on t he ot her , a differ ence bet w een t hem , neit her so gr eat as t o pr ev ent t he one fr om com pr ehending t he ot her , nor so inconsider able as t o ex clude adm ir at ion for t hat w hich t he ot her possesses, and t he desir e of assim ilat ing it int o t he per ceiv er ’s char act er . This indiv idual v igour , t hen, and m anifold div er sit y , com bine t hem selv es in or iginalit y ; and hence, t hat on w hich t he consum m at e gr andeur of our nat ur e ult im at ely depends, — t hat t ow ar ds w hich ev er y hum an being m ust ceaselessly dir ect his effor t s, and on w hich especially t hose w ho design t o influence t heir fellow m en m ust ev er k eep t heir ey es, is t he I ndiv idualit y of Pow er and Dev elopm ent . Just as t his indiv idualit y spr ings nat ur ally fr om t he per fect fr eedom of act ion, and t he gr eat est div er sit y in t he agent s, it t ends im m ediat ely t o pr oduce t hem in t ur n. Ev en inanim at e nat ur e, w hich, pr oceeding in accor dance w it h unchangeable law s, adv ances by r egular gr ades of pr ogr ession, appear s m or e indiv idual t o t he m an w ho has been dev eloped in his indiv idualit y . He t r anspor t s him self, as it w er e, int o t he v er y cent r e of nat ur e; and it is t r ue, in t he highest sense, t hat each st ill per ceiv es t he beaut y and r ich abundance of t he out er w or ld, in t he ex act m easur e in w hich he is conscious of t heir ex ist ence in his ow n soul. How m uch sw eet er and closer m ust t his cor r espondence becom e bet w een effect and cause, —t his r eact ion bet w een int er nal feeling and out w ar d per cept ion, —w hen m an is not only passiv ely open t o ex t er nal sensat ions and im pr essions, but is him self also an agent !
I f w e at t em pt t o confir m t hese pr inciples by a closer applicat ion of t hem t o t he nat ur e of t he indiv idual m an, w e find t hat ev er y t hing w hich ent er s int o t he lat t er , r educes it self t o t he t w o elem ent s of For m and Subst ance. The pur est for m , beneat h t he m ost delicat e v eil, w e call I dea; t he cr udest subst ance, w it h t he m ost im per fect for m , w e call
sensuous Per cept ion. For m spr ings fr om t he union of subst ance. The r icher and m or e v ar ious t he subst ance t hat is unit ed, t he m or e sublim e is t he r esult ing for m . A child of t he gods is t he offspr ing only of im m or t al par ent s: and as t he blossom sw ells and r ipens int o fr uit , and fr om t he t iny ger m im bedded in it s soft pulp t he new st alk shoot s for t h, laden w it h new ly - clust er ing buds; so does t he For m becom e in t ur n t he subst ance of a st ill m or e ex quisit e For m . The int ensit y of pow er , m or eov er , incr eases in pr opor t ion t o t he gr eat er v ar iet y and delicacy of t he subst ance; since t he int er nal cohesion incr eases w it h t hese. The subst ance seem s as if blended in t he for m , and t he for m m er ged in t he subst ance. Or , t o speak w it hout m et aphor , t he r icher a m an ’s feelings becom e in ideas, and his ideas in feelings, t he m or e loft y and t r anscendent his sublim it y ; for upon t his const ant int er m ingling of for m and subst ance, or of div er sit y w it h t he indiv idual unit y , depends t he per fect int er fusion of t he t w o nat ur es w hich co - ex ist in m an, and upon t his, his gr eat ness. But t he for ce of t he gener at ion depends upon t he ener gy of t he
gener at ing for ces. The consum m at ing point of hum an ex ist ence is t he flow er ing of t hese for ces*. I n t he v eget able w or ld, t he sim ple and less gr aceful for m of t he fr uit seem s t o pr efigur e t he m or e per fect bloom and sy m m et r y of t he flow er w hich it pr ecedes, and w hich it is dest ined gr adually t o unfold. Ev er y t hing conspir es t o t he beaut iful
consum m at ion of t he blossom . That w hich fir st shoot s for t h fr om t he lit t le ger m is not near ly so ex quisit e and fascinat ing. The full t hick t r unk , t he br oad leav es r apidly det aching t hem selv es fr om each ot her , seem t o r equir e som e fuller and fair er
plant s in t his t he law and pr ocess of t heir gr ow t h. The flow er fades and dies, and t he ger m of t he fr uit r epr oduces t he st em , as r ude and unfinished as t he for m er , t o ascend slow ly t hr ough t he sam e st ages of dev elopm ent as befor e. But w hen, in m an, t he blossom fades aw ay , it is only t o giv e place t o anot her st ill m or e ex quisit ely beaut iful; and t he char m of t he last and lov eliest is only hidden fr om our v iew in t he endlessly r eceding v ist as of an inscr ut able et er nit y . Now , w hat ev er m an r eceiv es ex t er nally , is only as t he gr ain of seed. I t is his ow n act iv e ener gy alone t hat can conv er t t he ger m of t he fair est gr ow t h, int o a full and pr ecious blessing for him self. I t leads t o beneficial issues only w hen it is full of v it al pow er and essent ially indiv idual. The highest ideal, t her efor e, of t he co - ex ist ence of hum an beings, seem s t o m e t o consist in a union in w hich each st r iv es t o dev elope him self fr om his ow n inm ost nat ur e, and for his ow n sak e. The r equir em ent s of our phy sical and m or al being w ould, doubt less, br ing m en t oget her int o com m unit ies; and ev en as t he conflict s of w ar far e ar e m or e honour able t han t he fight s of t he ar ena, and t he st r uggles of ex asper at ed cit izens m or e glor ious t han t he hir ed and unsy m pat hizing effor t s of m er e m er cenar ies, so w ould t he ex er t ed pow er s of such spont aneous agent s succeed in elicit ing t he highest and noblest ener gies.
And is it not ex act ly t his w hich so unspeak ably capt iv at es us in cont em plat ing t he life of Gr eece and Rom e, and w hich in gener al capt iv at es any age w hat ev er in t he
cont em plat ion of a r em ot er one? I s it not t hat t hese m en had har der st r uggles t o endur e w it h t he r ut hless for ce of dest iny , and har der st r uggles w it h t heir fellow m en? t hat gr eat er and m or e or iginal ener gy and indiv idualit y const ant ly encount er ed each ot her , and gav e r ise in t he encount er t o ev er new and beaut iful for m s? Ev er y lat er epoch, —and in w hat a r apid cour se of declension m ust t his now pr oceed! —is necessar ily infer ior in v ar iet y t o t hat w hich it succeeded: in v ar iet y of nat ur e,—t he boundless
for est s hav e been clear ed, t he v ast m or asses dr ied up; in v ar iet y of hum an life, by t he ev er - incr easing int er com m unicat ion and union of all hum an est ablishm ent s*. I t is in t his w e find one of t he chief causes w hich r ender t he idea of t he new , t he uncom m on, t he m ar v ellous, so m uch m or e r ar e, —w hich m ak e affr ight or ast onishm ent alm ost a disgr ace, —and not only r ender t he discov er y of fr esh and, t ill now , unk now n
ex pedient s, far less necessar y , but also all sudden, unpr em edit at ed and ur gent
Whilst t his is not t he place, how ev er , t o ent er on t he discussion of t his point , w e ar e j ust ified in concluding, fr om t he ot her consider at ions w e hav e ur ged, t hat w e m ust at least pr eser v e, w it h t he m ost eager solicit ude, all t he for ce and indiv idualit y w e m ay y et possess, and cher ish aught t hat can t end in any w ay t o pr om ot e t hem .
I t her efor e deduce, as t he nat ur al infer ence fr om w hat has been ar gued, t hat r eason cannot desir e for m an any ot her condit ion t han t hat in w hich each indiv idual not only enj oy s t he m ost absolut e fr eedom of dev eloping him self by his ow n ener gies, in his per fect indiv idualit y , but in w hich ex t er nal nat ur e ev en is left unfashioned by any hum an agency , but only r eceiv es t he im pr ess giv en t o it by each indiv idual of him self and his ow n fr ee w ill, accor ding t o t he m easur e of his w ant s and inst inct s, and
r est r ict ed only by t he lim it s of his pow er s and his r ight s.
Fr om t his pr inciple it seem s t o m e, t hat Reason m ust nev er y ield aught sav e w hat is absolut ely r equir ed t o pr eser v e it . I t m ust t her efor e be t he basis of ev er y polit ical
sy st em , and m ust especially const it ut e t he st ar t ing - point of t he inquir y w hich at pr esent claim s ou r at t en t ion .
EN D N OTES
[ * ] Blü t he, Reife. Neues deut sches Museum , 1791. Junius 22, 3.
[ * ] Goet he, ü ber die Met am or phose der Pflanzen.
[ * ] Rousseau has also not iced t his in his ‘Em ile. ’
CH APTER I I I .
ON TH E SOLI CI TU D E OF TH E ST AT E FO R TH E POSI TI V E W ELFARE OFTH E CI TI ZEN
.
Keeping in v iew t he conclusions ar r iv ed at in t he last chapt er , w e m ight em body in a gener al for m ula our idea of St at e agency w hen r est r ict ed t o it s j ust lim it s, and define it s obj ect s as all t hat a gov er nm ent could accom plish for t he com m on w eal, w it hout
depar t ing fr om t he pr inciple j ust est ablished; w hile, fr om t his posit ion, w e could pr oceed t o der iv e t he st ill st r ict er lim it at ion, t hat any St at e int er fer ence in pr iv at e affair s, not dir ect ly im ply ing v iolence done t o indiv idual r ight s, should be absolut ely condem ned. I t w ill be necessar y , how ev er , t o ex am ine in succession t he differ ent depar t m ent s of a St at e ’s usual or possible act iv it y , befor e w e can cir cum scr ibe it s spher e m or e posit iv ely , and ar r iv e at a full solut ion of t he quest ion pr oposed.
A St at e, t hen, has one of t w o ends in v iew ; it designs eit her t o pr om ot e happiness, or sim ply t o pr ev ent ev il; and in t his lat t er case, t he ev il w hich ar ises fr om nat ur al causes, or t hat w hich spr ings fr om m an ’s disr egar d for his neighbour ’s r ight s. I f it r est r ict s it s solicit ude t o t he second of t hese obj ect s, it aim s m er ely at secur it y ; and I w ould her e oppose t his t er m secur it y t o ev er y ot her possible end of St at e agency , and com pr ise t hese last under t he gener al head of Posit iv e Welfar e. Fur t her , t he v ar ious m eans adopt ed by a St at e, as subser v ient t o it s pur poses, affect in v er y differ ent m easur e t he ex t ension of it s act iv it y . I t m ay endeav our , for inst ance, t o secur e t he accom plishm ent of t hese im m ediat ely , eit her w it h t he aid of coer cion or by t he inducem ent s of ex am ple and ex hor t at ion; or it m ay com bine all t hese sour ces of influence in t he at t em pt t o shape t he cit izen ’s out w ar d life in accor dance w it h it s ends, and for est al act ions
ev ident , t hat it is single act ions only t hat com e under polit ical super v ision in t he fir st of t hese cases; t hat t his is ex t ended in t he second t o t he gener al conduct of life; and t hat , in t he last inst ance w e hav e supposed, it is t he v er y char act er of t he cit izen, his v iew s, and m odes of t hought , w hich ar e br ought under t he influence of St at e cont r ol. The act ual w or k ing of t his r est r ict iv e agency , m or eov er , is clear ly least consider able in t he fir st of t hese cases, m or e so in t he second, and is m ost effect iv e and appar ent in t he last ; eit her because, in t his, it r eaches t he m ost copious sour ces of act ion, or t hat t he v er y possibilit y of such an influence pr esupposes a gr eat er m ult iplicit y of inst it ut ions. But how ev er seem ingly differ ent t he depar t m ent s of polit ical act ion t o w hich t hey r espect iv ely belong, w e shall scar cely find any one inst it ut ion w hich is not m or e or less int im at ely int er w ov en, in it s obj ect s or it s consequences, w it h sev er al of t hese. We hav e but t o not ice, by w ay of illust r at ion, t he close int er dependence t hat ex ist s bet w een t he pr om ot ion of w elfar e and t he m aint enance of secur it y ; and fur t her , t o r em em ber t hat w hen any influence affect ing single act ions only , engender s a habit t hr ough t he for ce of r epet it ion, it com es ult im at ely t o m odify t he char act er it self. Hence, in v iew of t his int er dependence of polit ical inst it ut ions, it becom es v er y difficult t o discov er a sy st em at ic div ision of t he w hole subj ect befor e us, sufficient ly cor r espondent t o t he cour se of our pr esent inquir y . But , in any case, it w ill be m ost im m ediat ely conduciv e t o our design, t o ex am ine in t he out set w het her t he St at e should ex t end it s solicit ude t o t he posit iv e w elfar e of t he nat ion, or cont ent it self w it h pr ov isions for it s secur it y ; and, confining our v iew of inst it ut ions t o w hat is st r ict ly essent ial eit her in t heir obj ect s or consequences, t o ascer t ain nex t , as r egar ds bot h of t hese aim s, t he nat ur e of t he m eans t hat m ay be safely left open t o t he St at e for accom plishing t hem .
I am speak ing her e, t hen, of t he ent ir e effor t s of t he St at e t o elev at e t he posit iv e w elfar e of t he nat ion; of it s solicit ude for t he populat ion of t he count r y , and t he subsist ence of it s inhabit ant s, w het her m anifest ed dir ect ly in such inst it ut ions as poor -law s, or indir ect ly , in t he encour agem ent of agr icult ur e, indust r y , and com m er ce; of all r egulat ions r elat iv e t o finance and cur r ency , im por t s and ex por t s, et c. ( in so far as t hese hav e t his posit iv e w elfar e in v iew ) ; finally , of all m easur es em ploy ed t o r em edy or pr ev ent nat ur al dev ast at ions, and, in shor t , of ev er y polit ical inst it ut ion designed t o pr eser v e or augm ent t he phy sical w elfar e of t he nat ion. For t he m or al w elfar e is not in gener al r egar ded so m uch for it s ow n sak e, as w it h r efer ence t o it s bear ing on secur it y , and w ill t her efor e be m or e appr opr iat ely int r oduced in t he subsequent cour se of t he inquir y .
Now all such inst it ut ions, I m aint ain, ar e posit iv ely hur t ful in t heir consequences, and w holly ir r econcilable w it h a t r ue sy st em of polit y ; a sy st em w hich, alt hough conceiv able only fr om t he loft iest point s of v iew , is y et in no w ay inconsist ent w it h t he lim it s and capacit ies of hum an nat ur e.
1. A spir it of gov er ning pr edom inat es in ev er y inst it ut ion of t his k ind; and how ev er w ise and salut ar y such a spir it m ay be, it inv ar iably super induces nat ional unifor m it y , and a const r ained and unnat ur al m anner of act ion. I nst ead of m en gr ouping t hem selv es int o com m unit ies in or der t o discipline and dev elope t heir pow er s, ev en t hough, t o secur e t hese benefit s, t hey should for ego a por t ion of t heir ex clusiv e possessions and
co - oper at ion incr eases in ex t ent and efficiency , a com m on r esem blance diffuses it self, not only t hr ough all t he agent s t o w hich it is applied, but t hr ough all t he r esult s of t heir act iv it y . And t his is t he v er y design w hich St at es hav e in v iew . They desir e not hing so m uch as com for t , ease, t r anquillit y ; and t hese ar e m ost r eadily secur ed w hen t her e is lit t le or no discor dancy am ong t hat w hich is indiv idual. But t hat t o w hich m an ’s ener gies ar e ev er ur ging him , and t ow ar ds w hich he m ust ceaselessly dir ect his effor t s, is t he v er y r ev er se of t his iner t ness and unifor m it y , —it is v ar iet y and act iv it y . I t is t o t hese alone w e ar e t o look for t he fr ee dev elopm ent of char act er in all it s v igor ous and m ult ifor m div er sit y of phase and m anifest at ion; and, t o appeal t o t he inner m ot iv e of t he indiv idual m an, t her e can be no one, sur ely , so far sunk and degr aded, as t o pr efer , for him self per sonally , com for t and enj oy m ent t o gr eat ness; and he w ho dr aw s
conclusions for such a pr efer ence in t he case of ot her s, m ay j ust ly be suspect ed of m isconceiv ing t he essent ial nobleness of hum an nat ur e, and of agr eeing t o t r ansfor m his fellow - cr eat ur es int o m er e m achines.
2. Fur t her , a second hur t ful consequence ascr ibable t o such a policy is, t hat t hese posit iv e inst it ut ions t end t o w eak en t he pow er and r esour ces of t he nat ion. For as t he subst ance is annihilat ed by t he for m w hich is ex t er nally im posed upon it , so does it gain gr eat er r ichness and beaut y fr om t hat w hich is int ernally super induced by it s ow n spont aneous act ion; and in t he case under consider at ion it is t he for m w hich annihilat es t he subst ance,—t hat w hich is of it self non - ex ist ent suppr essing and dest r oy ing t hat w hich r eally is ex ist ent . The gr and char act er ist ic of hum an nat ur e is or ganizat ion. What ev er is t o r ipen in it s soil and ex pand int o a fair m at ur it y , m ust fir st hav e ex ist ed t her ein as t he lit t le ger m . Ev er y m anifest at ion of pow er pr esupposes t he ex ist ence of ent husiasm ; and but few t hings sufficient ly cher ish ent husiasm as t o r epr esent it s obj ect as a pr esent or fut ur e possession. Now m an nev er r egar ds t hat w hich he possesses as so m uch his ow n, as t hat w hich he does; and t he labour er w ho t ends a gar den is per haps in a t r uer sense it s ow ner , t han t he list less v olupt uar y w ho enj oy s it s fr uit s. I t m ay be, such r easoning appear s t oo gener al t o adm it of any pr act ical
applicat ion. Per haps it seem s ev en as t hough t he ex t ension of so m any br anches of science, w hich w e ow e chiefly t o polit ical inst it ut ions ( for t he St at e only can at t em pt ex per im ent s on a scale sufficient ly v ast ) , cont r ibut ed t o r aise t he pow er of int ellect , and collat er ally , our cult ur e and char act er in gener al. But t he int ellect ual facult ies
t hem selv es ar e not necessar ily ennobled by ev er y acquisit ion t o our k now ledge; and t hough it w er e gr ant ed t hat t hese m eans v ir t ually effect ed such a r esult , it does not so m uch apply t o t he ent ir e nat ion, as t o t hat par t icular por t ion of it w hich is connect ed w it h t he gov er nm ent . The cult iv at ion of t he under st anding, as of any ot her of m an ’s facult ies, is in gener al effect ed by his ow n act iv it y , his ow n ingenuit y , or his ow n m et hods of av ailing him self of t he facilit ies discov er ed by ot her s. Now , St at e m easur es alw ay s im ply m or e or less posit iv e cont r ol; and ev en w her e t hey ar e not char geable w it h act ual coer cion, t hey accust om m en t o look for inst r uct ion, guidance, and assist ance fr om w it hout , r at her t han t o r ely upon t heir ow n ex pedient s. The only m et hod of inst r uct ion, per haps, of w hich t he St at e can av ail it self, consist s in it s declar ing t he best cour se t o be pur sued as t hough it w er e t he r esult of it s
by follow ing out a r eally nat ional sy st em of educat ion, it can be br ought t o oper at e posit iv ely on t he ear ly t r aining and cult ur e of t he y oung. We w ill t ak e occasion, her eaft er , t o ent er on a close ex am inat ion of t he obj ect ion w hich m ight be adv anced her e in fav our of t hese inst it ut ions; v iz. t hat in t he ex ecut ion of such im por t ant designs as t hose t o w hich w e r efer , it is of far gr eat er m om ent t hat t he t hing be done, t han t hat t he per son w ho per for m s it should be t hor oughly inst r uct ed in his t ask ; t hat t he land be w ell t illed, t han t hat t he husbandm an be j ust t he m ost sk ilful agr icult ur ist .
But t o cont inue: t he ev il r esult s of a t oo ex t ended solicit ude on t he par t of t he St at e, ar e st ill m or e st r ik ingly m anifest ed in t he suppr ession of all act iv e ener gy , and t he necessar y det er ior at ion of t he m or al char act er . We scar cely need t o subst ant iat e t his posit ion by r igor ous deduct ions. The m an w ho fr equent ly subm it s t he conduct of his act ions t o for eign guidance and cont r ol, becom es gr adually disposed t o a w illing sacr ifice of t he lit t le spont aneit y t hat r em ains t o him . He fancies him self r eleased fr om an anx iet y w hich he sees t r ansfer r ed t o ot her hands, and seem s t o him self t o do enough w hen he look s for t heir leading, and follow s t he cour se t o w hich it dir ect s him . Thus, his not ions of r ight and w r ong, of pr aise and blam e, becom e confounded. The idea of t he fir st inspir es him no longer ; and t he painful consciousness of t he last assails him less fr equent ly and v iolent ly , since he can m or e easily ascr ibe his shor t com ings t o his peculiar posit ion, and leav e t hem t o t he r esponsibilit y of t hose w ho hav e shaped it for him . I f w e add t o t his, t hat he m ay not , possibly , r egar d t he designs of t he St at e as per fect ly pur e in t heir obj ect s or ex ecut ion —should he find gr ounds t o suspect t hat not his ow n adv ant age only , but along w it h it som e ot her by e - schem e is int ended, t hen, not only t he for ce and ener gy , but t he pur it y and ex cellence of his m or al nat ur e is br ought t o suffer . He now conceiv es him self not only ir r esponsible for t he per for m ance of any dut y w hich t he St at e has not ex pr essly im posed upon him , but ex oner at ed at t he sam e t im e fr om ev er y per sonal effor t t o am elior at e his ow n condit ion; nay , ev en shr ink s fr om such an effor t , as if it w er e lik ely t o open out new oppor t unit ies, of w hich t he St at e m ight not be slow t o av ail it self. And as for t he law s act ually enj oined, he labour s, as m uch as possible, t o escape t heir oper at ion, consider ing ev er y such ev asion as a posit iv e gain. I f now w e r eflect t hat , as r egar ds a lar ge por t ion of t he nat ion, it s law s and polit ical inst it ut ions hav e t he effect of cir cum scr ibing t he gr ounds of m or alit y , it cannot but appear a m elancholy spect acle t o see at once t he m ost sacr ed dut ies, and m er e t r iv ial and ar bit r ar y enact m ent s, pr oclaim ed fr om t he sam e aut hor it at iv e sour ce, and t o w it ness t he infr act ion of bot h v isit ed w it h t he sam e m easur e of punishm ent . Fur t her , t he inj ur ious influence of such a posit iv e policy is no less ev ident in it s effect s on t he m ut ual bear ing of t he cit izens, t han in t hose m anifest at ions of it s per nicious w or k ing t o w hich w e hav e j ust r efer r ed. I n pr opor t ion as each indiv idual r elies upon t he helpful v igilance of t he St at e, he lear ns t o abandon t o it s r esponsibilit y t he fat e and w ellbeing of his fellow - cit izens. But t he inev it able t endency of such abandonm ent is t o deaden t he liv ing for ce of sy m pat hy , and t o r ender t he nat ur al im pulse t o m ut ual assist ance inact iv e: or , at least , t he r ecipr ocal int er change of ser v ices and benefit s w ill be m ost lik ely t o flour ish in it s gr eat est act iv it y and beaut y , w her e t he feeling is liv eliest t hat such assist ance is t he only t hing t o r ely upon; and ex per ience t eaches us t hat t hose classes of t he com m unit y w hich suffer under oppr ession, and ar e, as it w er e, ov er look ed by t he Gov er nm ent , ar e alw ay s cem ent ed t oget her by t he closest t ies. But w her ev er t he cit izen becom es insensible t o t he int er est s of his fellow - cit izen, t he
husband w ill cont r act feelings of cold indiffer ence t o t he w ife, and t he fat her of a fam ily t ow ar ds t h e m em ber s of h is h ou seh old.
such a self - dependent posit ion fur nishes him m eans w her eby t o discipline his int ellect and cult iv at e his char act er . Ar e t her e no inst ances of such ev ils, I ask , w her e St at e agency fet t er s indiv idual spont aneit y by a t oo special int er fer ence? Ther e ar e m any , doubt less; and t he m an w hom it has habit uat ed t o lean on for eign st r engt h for suppor t , is t hus giv en up in cr it ical em er gencies t o a fat e w hich is t r uly far m or e hopeless and deplor able. For , j ust as t he v er y act of st r uggling against m isfor t une, and encount er ing it w it h v igor ous effor t s, t ends t o light en t he calam it y ; so do baffled hopes and delusiv e ex pect at ions aggr av at e and em bit t er it s sev er it y t enfold. I n shor t , t o v iew t heir agency in t he m ost fav our able light , St at es lik e t hose t o w hich w e r efer t oo oft en r esem ble t he phy sician, w ho only r et ar ds t he deat h of his pat ient in nour ishing his disease. Befor e t her e w er e phy sicians, only healt h and deat h w er e k now n.
3. Ev er y t hing t ow ar ds w hich m an dir ect s his at t ent ion, w het her it is lim it ed t o t he dir ect or indir ect sat isfact ion of his m er ely phy sical w ant s, or t o t he accom plishm ent of
ex t er nal obj ect s in gener al, pr esent s it self in a closely int er w ov en r elat ion w it h his int er nal sensat ions. Som et im es, m or eov er , t her e co- ex ist s w it h t his ex t er nal pur pose, som e im pulse pr oceeding m or e im m ediat ely fr om his inner being; and oft en, ev en, t his last is t he sole spr ing of his act iv it y , t he for m er being only im plied in it , necessar ily or incident ally . The m or e unit y a m an possesses, t he m or e fr eely do t hese ex t er nal m anifest at ions on w hich he decides em anat e fr om t he inner spr ings of his being, and t he m or e fr equent and int im at e is t he cooper at ion of t hese t w o sour ces of m ot iv e, ev en w hen he has not fr eely select ed t hese ex t er nal obj ect s. A m an, t her efor e, w hose
char act er peculiar ly int er est s us, alt hough his life does not lose t his char m in any cir cum st ances or how ev er engaged, only at t ains t he m ost m at ur ed and gr aceful consum m at ion of his act iv it y , w hen his w ay of life is in har m onious k eeping w it h his charact er.
I n v iew of t his consider at ion, it seem s as if all peasant s and cr aft sm en m ight be
elev at ed int o ar t ist s; t hat is, int o m en w ho lov e t heir labour for it s ow n sak e, im pr ov e it by t heir ow n plast ic genius and inv ent iv e sk ill, and t her eby cult iv at e t heir int ellect , ennoble t heir char act er , and ex alt and r efine t heir enj oy m ent s. And so hum anit y w ould be ennobled by t he v er y t hings w hich now , t hough beaut iful in t hem selv es, so oft en go t o degr ade it . The m or e a m an accust om s him self t o dw ell in t he r egion of higher t hought s and sensat ions, and t he m or e r efined and v igor ous his m or al and int ellect ual pow er s becom e, t he m or e he longs t o confine him self t o such ex t er nal obj ect s only as fur nish am pler scope and m at er ial for his int er nal dev elopm ent ; or , at least , t o
ov er com e all adv er se condit ions in t he spher e allot t ed him , and t r ansfor m t hem int o m or e fav our able phases. I t is im possible t o est im at e a m an ’s adv ance t ow ar ds t he Good and t he Beaut iful, w hen his unr em it t ing endeav our s ar e dir ect ed t o t his one engr ossing obj ect , t he dev elopm ent of his inner life; so t hat , super ior t o all ot her consider at ions, it m ay r em ain t he sam e unfailing sour ce, t he ult im at e goal of all his labour s, and all t hat is cor por eal and ex t er nal m ay seem but as it s inst r um ent and v eil.
unfav our able sk ies, aw ak en pr esent im ent s of t he ex ist ence of beings of a higher or der , now inst inct w it h dir e for eboding, and now full of t he liv eliest j oy —in t he r apid
alt er nat ions of fear and hope —and lead t he soul t o pr ay er and gr at eful pr aise. The v isible im age of t he sim plest sublim it y , t he m ost per fect or der , and t he gent lest beneficence, m ould t heir liv es int o for m s of sim ple gr andeur and t ender ness, and dispose t heir hear t s t o a cheer ful subm ission t o or der and law . Alw ay s accust om ed t o pr oduce, nev er t o dest r oy , agr icult ur e is essent ially peaceful, and, w hile far bey ond t he r each of w r ong and r ev enge, is y et capable of t he m ost daunt less cour age w hen r oused t o r esist t he inj ust ice of unpr ov ok ed at t ack , and r epel t he inv ader s of it s calm and happy cont ent m ent .
But , st ill, it cannot be doubt ed t hat fr eedom is t he indispensable condit ion, w it hout w hich ev en t he pur suit s m ost happily congenial t o t he indiv idual nat ur e, can nev er succeed in pr oducing such fair and salut ar y influences. What ev er m an is inclined t o, w it hout t he fr ee ex er cise of his ow n choice, or w hat ev er only im plies inst r uct ion and guidance, does not ent er int o his v er y being, but st ill r em ains alien t o his t r ue nat ur e, and is, indeed, effect ed by him , not so m uch w it h hum an agency , as w it h t he m er e ex act ness of m echanical r out ine. The ancient s, and m or e especially t he Gr eek s, w er e accust om ed t o r egar d ev er y occupat ion as hur t ful and degr ading w hich w as
im m ediat ely connect ed w it h t he ex er cise of phy sical pow er , or t he pur suit of ex t er nal adv ant ages, and not ex clusiv ely confined t o t he dev elopm ent of t he inner m an. Hence, m any of t heir philosopher s w ho w er e m ost em inent for t heir philant hr opy , appr ov ed of slav er y ; t her eby adopt ing a bar bar ous and unj ust ex pediency , and agr eeing t o sacr ifice one par t of m ank ind in or der t o secur e t o t he ot her t he highest for ce and beaut y . But r eason an d ex per ien ce com bin e t o ex pose t h e er r or w h ich lies at t h e r oot of su ch a fallacy . Ther e is no pur suit w hat ev er , not hing w it h w hich a m an can concer n him self, t hat m ay not giv e t o hum an nat ur e som e w or t hy and det er m inat e for m , and fur nish fair m eans for it s ennoblem ent . The m anner of it s per for m ance is t he only t hing t o be consider ed; and w e m ay her e lay dow n t he gener al r ule, t hat a m an ’s pursuit s re - act beneficially on his cult ur e, so long as t hese, and t he ener gies allied w it h t hem , succeed in filling and sat isfy ing t he w ant s of his soul; w hile t heir influence is not only less salut ar y , but ev en per nicious, w hen he dir ect s his at t ent ion m or e ex clusiv ely t o t he r esult s t o w hich t hey conduce, and r egar ds t he occupat ion it self m er ely as a necessar y m eans. For it is t he pr oper t y of any t hing w hich char m s us by it s ow n int r insic w or t h, t o aw ak en lov e and est eem , w hile t hat w hich only as a m eans holds out hopes of ult er ior adv ant age, m er ely int er est s us; and t he m ot iv es of lov e and est eem t end as dir ect ly t o ennoble hum an nat ur e, as t hose of int er est t o low er and degr ade it . Now , in t he
ex er cise of such a posit iv e solicit ude as t hat w e ar e consider ing, t he St at e can only cont em plat e r esult s, and est ablish r ules w hose obser v ance w ill m ost dir ect ly conduce t o t heir accom plishm ent .
Nev er does t his lim it ed point of v iew conduct t o such per nicious issues as in t hose cases w her e m or al or int ellect ual ends ar e t he obj ect of hum an endeav our ; or , at least , w her e som e end is r egar ded for it self, and apar t fr om t he consequences w hich ar e only
necessar ily or incident ally im plied in it . This becom es ev ident , for inst ance, in all scient ific r esear ches and r eligious opinions, in all k inds of hum an associat ion, and in t hat union in par t icular w hich is t he m ost nat ur al, and, w het her w e r egar d t he St at e or t he indiv idual, t he m ost v it ally im por t ant , nam ely , Mat r im ony .
Mat r im ony , or as it m ay per haps be best defined, t he union of per sons of bot h sex es, based on t he v er y differ ence of sex , m ay be r egar ded in as m any differ ent aspect s as t he concept ions t ak en of t hat differ ence, and as t he inclinat ions of t he hear t , and t he obj ect s w hich t hey pr esent t o t he r eason, assum e differ ent for m s; and such a union w ill m anifest in ev er y m an his w hole m or al char act er , and especially t he for ce and
ex t er nal obj ect s, or t o t he ex er cise of t he inner facult ies of his being; w het her r eason or feeling is t he m or e act iv e pr inciple in his nat ur e; w het her he is led t o em br ace t hings eager ly , and quick ly abandon t hem , or engages slow ly but cont inues fait hfully ; w het her he is capable of deeper int im acy , or only loosely at t aches him self; w het her he
pr eser v es, in t he closest union, m or e or less self - dependence; and an infinit e num ber of ot her consider at ions m odify , in a t housand w ay s, his r elat ions in m ar r ied life. What ev er for m t hey assum e, how ev er , t he effect s upon his life and happiness ar e unm ist ak able; and upon t he success or failur e of t he at t em pt t o find or for m a r ealit y in union w it h t he int er nal har m ony of his nat ur e, depends t he loft ier consum m at ion or t he r elax at ion of his being. This influence m anifest s it self m ost for cibly in t hose m en, so peculiar ly int er est ing in t heir char act er and act ions, w ho for m t heir per cept ions w it h t he gr eat est ease and delicacy , and r et ain t hem m ost deeply and last ingly . Gener ally speak ing, t he fem ale sex m ay be m or e j ust ly r eck oned in t his class t han t he m ale; and it is for t his r eason t hat t he fem ale char act er is m ost int im at ely dependent on t he nat ur e of t he fam ily r elat ions in a nat ion. Wholly ex em pt as she is fr om m ost out w ar d - occupat ions, and alm ost sur r ounded w it h t hose only w hich leav e t he soul undist ur bed —st r onger in w hat she can be t han in w hat she can do —m or e full of ex pr ession in her calm and quiet , t han in her m anifest ed sensat ions —m or e r ichly endow ed w it h all m eans of im m ediat e, indefinable ex pr ession, a m or e delicat e fr am e, a m or e m ov ing ey e, a m or e w inning v oice —dest ined r at her , in her r elat ions w it h ot her s, t o ex pect and r eceiv e, t han t o adv ance and appr oach—nat ur ally w eak er in her self, and y et not on t hat account , but t hr ough lov ing adm ir at ion of st r engt h and gr eat ness in anot her , clinging m or e closely — ceaselessly st r iv ing in t he union t o r eceiv e in com m on w it h t he unit ed one, t o for m t he r eceiv ed in her self, and r epr oduce it m oulded int o new for m s of cr eat ion —inspir ed at t he sam e t im e w it h t he cour age w hich t he solicit ude of lov e and t he feeling of st r engt h infuse int o t he soul —not defy ing r esist ance, but not succum bing in endur ance —Wom an is, st r ict ly speak ing, near er t o t he ideal of hum an nat ur e t han m an; and w hilst it is t r ue t hat she m or e r ar ely r eaches it , it m ay only be t hat it is m or e difficult t o ascend by t he st eep, im m ediat e pat h, t han t o appr oach slow ly by t he w inding one. Now , how m uch such a being —so delicat ely suscept ible, y et so com plet e in her self, and w it h w hom t her efor e not hing is w it hout effect —an effect t hat com m unicat es it self not t o a par t only , but t o t he w hole of her nat ur e,—how m uch w om an m ust be dist ur bed by ex t er nal m is - r elat ions, can scar cely be est im at ed. Hence t he infinit e r esult s t o societ y w hich depend on t he cult ur e of t he fem ale char act er . I f it is not som ew hat fanciful t o suppose t hat each hum an ex cellence r epr esent s and accum ulat es it self, as it w er e, in som e one species of being, w e m ight believ e t hat t he w hole t r easur e of m or alit y and or der is collect ed and enshr ined in t he fem ale char act er . As t he poet pr ofoundly say s,
“ Man st r iv es for fr eedom , w om an st ill for or der*. ”
While t he for m er st r iv es ear nest ly t o r em ov e t he ex t er nal bar r ier s w hich oppose his dev elopm ent , w om an ’s car eful hand pr escr ibes t hat inner r est r aint w it hin w hose lim it s alone t he fulness of pow er can r efine it self t o per fect issues; and she defines t he cir cle w it h m or e delicat e pr ecision, in t hat her ev er y sense is m or e fait hful t o her sim ple behest s, spar es her t hat labor ious subt ilizing w hich so oft en t ends t o enm esh and
obscur e t he t r ut h, and enables her t o see m or e clear ly t hr ough t he int r icat e confusion of hum an r elat ions, and fat hom at once t he inner m ost spr ings of hum an being.
at t em pt s t o r egulat e it by law , or t hr ough t he for ce of it s inst it ut ions t o m ak e it r epose on any t hing sav e sim ple inclinat ion. When w e r em em ber , m or eov er , t hat t he St at e can only cont em plat e t he final r esult s in such r egulat ions—as, for inst ance, Populat ion, Ear ly Tr aining, et c. —w e shall be st ill m or e r eady t o adm it t he j ust ice of t his conclusion. I t m ay r easonably be ar gued t hat a solicit ude for such obj ect s conduct s t o t he sam e r esult s as t he highest solicit ude for t he m ost beaut iful dev elopm ent of t he inner m an. For , aft er car eful obser v at ion, it has been found t hat t he unint er r upt ed union of one m an w it h one w om an is m ost conduciv e t o populat ion; and it is lik ew ise undeniable t hat no ot her union spr ings fr om t r ue, nat ur al, har m onious lov e. And fur t her , it m ay be obser v ed t hat such lov e leads t o no ot her or differ ent r esult s t han t hose v er y r elat ions w hich law and cust om t end t o est ablish, such as t he pr ocr eat ion of childr en, fam ily t r aining, com m unit y of liv ing, par t icipat ion in t he com m on goods, t he m anagem ent of ex t er nal affair s by t he husband, and t he car e of dom est ic ar r angem ent s by t he w ife. But t he r adical er r or of such a policy appear s t o be, t hat t he law com m ands, w her eas such a r elat ion cannot m ould it self accor ding t o ex t er nal ar r angem ent s, but depends w holly on inclinat ion; and w her ev er coer cion or guidance com es int o collision w it h inclinat ion, t hey div er t it st ill fur t her fr om t he pr oper pat h. Wher efor e it appear s t o m e t hat t he St at e should not only loosen t he bonds in t his inst ance, and leav e am pler fr eedom t o t he cit izen, but , if I m ay apply t he pr inciples abov e st at ed ( now t hat I am not speak ing of m at r im ony in gener al, but of one of t he m any inj ur ious consequences ar ising fr om r est r ict iv e St at e inst it ut ions, w hich ar e in t his one especially not iceable) , t hat it should ent ir ely w it hdr aw it s act iv e solicit ude fr om t he inst it ut ion of Mat r im ony , and bot h gener ally and in it s par t icular m odificat ions should r at her leav e it w holly t o t he fr ee choice of t he indiv iduals, and t he v ar ious cont r act s t hey m ay ent er int o w it h r espect t o it . I should not be det er r ed fr om t he adopt ion of t his pr inciple by t he fear t hat all fam ily r elat ions m ight be dist ur bed, or t heir m anifest at ion in gener al im peded; for alt hough such an appr ehension m ight be j ust ified by consider at ions of par t icular cir cum st ances and localit ies, it could not be fair ly ent er t ained in an inquir y int o t he nat ur e of Men and St at es in gener al. For ex per ience fr equent ly conv inces us t hat j ust w her e law has im posed no fet t er s, m or alit y m ost sur ely binds; t he idea of ex t er nal coer cion is one ent ir ely for eign t o an inst it ut ion w hich, lik e Mat r im ony , r eposes only on inclinat ion and an inw ar d sense of dut y ; and t he r esult s of such coer civ e inst it ut ions do not at all cor r espond t o t he designs in w hich t hey or iginat e.
4. The solicit ude of a St at e for t he posit iv e w elfar e of it s cit izens, m ust fur t her be hur t ful, in t hat it has t o oper at e upon a pr om iscuous m ass of indiv idualit ies, and t her efor e does har m t o t hese by m easur es w hich cannot m eet indiv idual cases.
