imagined that these two objects are inconsistent, or that the means necessary to maintain the proud equality of a nation among other nations, are at variance with those which are to make it free within. For, what so strong defence is there to a land as the zeal of its people to guard their soil from the insulting march of a foe? And what zeal in the bosom of a people is like that which liberty has kindled? Nations yoked under the feet of a despot have sometimes poured forth their myriads to desolate or enslave other lands; but those who have defended themselves with power against aggression, have been the free. And sometimes it has been of no moment how numerous were the bands of the invader, nor how few their own. The independence of a nation is then the first object of government, which, for the most part, will be best secured by its happiness and liberty. But it is an object which may be attained even in those nations who are not so fortunate as to enjoy the blessing of freedom, and which every government that proudly, resolutely, and gallantly maintains, performs at least one great duty to its subjects, whatever others it may have neglected.

Besides the independence of a community in respect to other states, there is another great political object, derived from the same necessity of maintaining the political existence of the society, that is, the maintenance of internal order. Now, it is true, that this order appears to be required for the sake of the happiness of the nation. But this is not the first and original ground upon which it is required. If the society is to exist as a political society, or a community at all, it follows, of course, that good order must

be maintained; for all internal violence tends to the destruction of the very being of the society. And thus there appear to be two great objects to be attained, and two duties manifestly incumbent on government, without looking any further:-The first is, the maintenance of the independence of the state; and the second, the maintenance of internal peace. These are the two first objects,—because the government that maintains these, preserves the state existing, if it does nothing else; and many of the governments of the world have done nothing else. But, whatever other duties a state may busy itself with, if it neglects these, it renders all its other diligence unavailing. These, then, are the first plain duties,-not arising from any speculation on the happiness or welfare of the nation, but dictated by an irresistible necessity. If there be any force in the common maxim, "Salus populi suprema lex esto," it must be understood as comprising these two objects,-external independence, and internal security.

Now these two heads include many of the principal cares of government, since they include the maintenance of the military and the civil power; and the latter includes the legislation for crimes.

But, further than these, it is to be inquired, (supposing these objects attained which have been undertaken by all states as inherent in the very notion of a polity, however indifferently they have been conducted,) supposing that, beyond these, a nation has so much power, that its own will is admitted into judgment upon the purposes for which it is governed, and into the regulation of its own public concerns, what then will be the primary objects of its concern? First,

then, the securing of its liberty, including the security of every individual, from the highest to the lowest, from personal oppression, and the security of each and all from the power which administers the state. If the first necessity is to secure to the state effectual power over every member, the next care must be to limit that power to the public uses for which it is designed, and to protect every member from its abusive force. The laws for that purpose are of two kinds : those simply judicial; and those political, which have respect to the constitution of the government.

These objects are all of indisputable necessity. There is another object, concerning which it is a matter of dispute how far it is incumbent on the state to charge itself, that is, with respect to the instruction and morality of the nation, including their highest instruction and morality, Religion. It has hitherto been the policy of all great nations to take charge of the national religion, and, to a considerable extent, of their instruction and morals. And it would seem that such care is wise and salutary, though there have certainly been examples, as in America, where a country has been able to retain much of a national religious spirit without this support. The chief, and indeed the only evil attending a religious establishment, is that exclusive spirit which, for conscience sake, would withhold political privileges,-though here, too, that evil is guarded against, or gradually removed, by the exertions and liberality of the age.

Secondly, The means of government for the attainment of these objects are evidently no other than the means of the nation,-the persons and wealth of the people. For the defence of the nation, and those wars

L

which arise out of the necessity of maintaining its independence and honour, it needs both, and therefore it may require both in the most effectual way.

For the maintenance of liberty, the means are laws, which will watch over individual rights; and for maintaining liberty in the political constitution, a free and incorrupt spirit in the people. Since liberty in the political constitution can only be maintained by the will of some large portion of the whole society, whose interests are the same with those of the whole society, acting continually on the government, that will must be the constant source of liberty,-without it there can be none.

If the service of the state could only be performed by compelling service, it would be lawful to compel it; but it is found that it is far more effectually performed when that service is free, and only invited and recompensed.

If the means of government are no other than the wealth and the persons of the nation, there will follow certain conclusions, viz. that the prosperity of the nation is the riches of the government, and therefore that, for its own sake, the government must promote the prosperity of the nation. And hence there would be a natural incitement to every government, whether one independent of the nation, or one entirely national, to promote the public prosperity; but it would appear that, in this respect, not much is in the power of any state; that security of property, and the absence of burdensome restraints, and such conduct of the government, in all its own relations with the wealth of the people, as shall do them as little injury as possible, is all that can be desired; that the power

of prosperity is in the security and liberty of the people; that with these, it will break forth as nature will permit, the interests of each being committed to him who is best able to understand them. It is understood that such prosperity cannot be the artificial work of powerful interposition; that it must spring up by a force of life awakened in every individual mind; that this force nature has given; that it may be depressed by personal degradation; that it may be baffled by the insecurity of unequal or inefficient law; but that if these hinderances be removed, if the state have done the duty otherwise incumbent on it, in the protection of natural individual rights, it has little left to it to do for the prosperity of the country. is a form of the same conclusion, yet more important, that while it leaves its duty in these respects undone, any other endeavour it may make for that purpose must be altogether unavailing. If then the prosperity of the nation is the wealth of the state, it will follow, that, even for its own sake, the government of a country, however independent of the will of the people, should perform its duty to the nation in the perfect protection of natural rights.

It

But the great care of a free state is liberty; liberty to individuals against the oppression of individuals, which is only to be effected by equal laws, equitably administered; and what is equally, if not more necessary, the protection of the freedom of the whole nation against any usurping powers in the state itself.

This protection must arise from the public will itself. It must depend in part upon the form of the constitution, which must be such as to make a way for the national will to act upon the administering