嗔秤戻幣�哉膵�云利匈嬉蝕湊蛸賜�塋床四衲���萩晦編報炎嘔囚^泡仟 ̄云利匈�《超噌�殻窟�嵌虜隆輓麈觚翹瀘卉韮�仍仍�。� 烏御危列
湘弼慕汐 卦指云慕朕村 厘議慕尺 厘議慕禰 TXT畠云和墮 序秘慕杏 紗秘慕禰

the american republic-及14嫗

梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈��梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈��梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何��
!!!!隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��




83 But even this limitation of popular sovereignty is not all。  The  people can be sovereign only in the sense in which they exist and  act。  The people are not God�察�whatever some theorists may  pretendare not independent�察�self´existent�察�and self´sufficing。   They are as dependent collectively as individually�察�and therefore  can exist and act only as second cause�察�never as first cause。   They can�察�then�察�even in the limited sphere of their sovereignty�察 �be sovereign only in a secondary sense�察�never absolute sovereign  in their own independent right。  They are sovereign only to the  extent to which they impart life to the individual members of  society�察�and only in the sense in which she imparts it�察�or is its  cause。  She is not its first cause or creator�察�and is the medial  cause or medium through which they derive it from God�察�not its  efficient cause or primary source。  Society derives her own life  from God�察�and exists and acts only as dependent on him。  Then she  is sovereign over individuals only as dependent on God。  Her  dominion is then not original and absolute�察�but secondary and  derivative。

This third theory does not err in assuming that the people  collectively are more than the people individually�察�or in denying  society to be a mere aggregation of individuals with no life�察 �84                                                               and  no rights but what it derives from them�察�nor even in asserting  that the people in the sense of society are sovereign�察�but in  asserting that they are sovereign in their own native or  underived right and might。  Society has not in herself the  absolute right to govern�察�because she has not the absolute  dominion either of herself or her members。  God gave to man  dominion over the irrational creation�察�for he made irrational  creatures for man�察�but he never gave him either individually or  collectively the dominion over the rational creation。  The theory  that the people are absolutely sovereign in their own independent  right and might�察�as some zealous democrats explain it�察�asserts  the fundamental principle of despotism�察�and all despotism is  false�察�for it identifies the creature with the Creator。  No  creature is creator�察�or has the rights of creator�察�and  consequently no one in his own right is or can be sovereign。   This third theory�察�therefore�察�is untenable。

IV。 A still more recent class of philosophers�察�if philosophers  they may be called�察�reject the origin of government in the people  individually or collectively。  Satisfied that it has never been  instituted by a voluntary and deliberate act of the people�察�and  confounding government as a 85                             fact with government as authority�察 �maintain that government is a spontaneous development of nature。   Nature develops it as the liver secretes bile�察�as the bee  constructs her cell�察�or the beaver builds his dam。  Nature�察 �working by her own laws and inherent energy�察�develops society�察 �and society develops government。  That is all the secret。   Questions as to the origin of government or its rights�察�beyond  the simple positive fact�察�belong to the theological or  metaphysical stage of the development of nature�察�but are left  behind when the race has passed beyond that stage�察�and has  reached the epoch of positive science�察�in which all�察�except the  positive fact�察�is held to be unreal and non´existent。   Government�察�like every thing else in the universe�察�is simply a  positive development of nature。  Science explains the laws and  conditions of the development�察�but disdains to ask for its origin  or ground in any order that transcends the changes of the world  of space and time。

These philosophers profess to eschew all theory�察�and yet they  only oppose theory to theory。  The assertion that reality for the  human mind is restricted to the positive facts of the sensible  order�察�is purely theoretic�察�and is any thing but a positive fact。   Principles are as really objects of science as facts�察�and it is  only 86      in the light of principles that facts themselves are  intelligible。  If the human mind had no science of reality that  transcends the sensible order�察�or the positive fact�察�it could  have no science at all。  As things exist only in their principles  or causes�察�so can they be known only in their principles and  causes�察�for things can be known only as they are�察�or as they  really exist。  The science that pretends to deduce principles  from particular facts�察�or to rise from the fact by way of  reasoning to an order that transcends facts�察�and in which facts  have their origin�察�is undoubtedly chimerical�察�and as against that  the positivists are unquestionably right。  But to maintain that  man has no intelligence of any thing beyond the fact�察�no  intuition or intellectual apprehension of its principle or cause�察 �is equally chimerical。  The human mind cannot have all science�察 �but it has real science as far as it goes�察�and real science is  the knowledge of things as they are�察�not as they are not。   Sensible facts are not intelligible by themselves�察�because they  do not exist by themselves�察�and if the human mind could not  penetrate beyond the individual fact�察�beyond the mimetic to the  methexic�察�or transcendental principle�察�copied or imitated by the  individual fact�察�it could never know the fact itself。  The error  of modern 87           philosophers�察�or philosopherlings�察�is in supposing the  principle is deduced or inferred from the fact�察�and in denying  that the human mind has direct and immediate intuition of it。

Something that transcends the sensible order there must be�察�or  there could be no development�察�and if we had no science of it�察�we  could never assert that development is development�察�or  scientifically explain the laws and conditions of development。   Development is explication�察�and supposes a germ which precedes  it�察�and is not itself a development�察�and development�察�however far  it may be carried�察�can never do more than realize the  possibilities of the germ。  Development is not creation�察�and  cannot supply its own germ。  That at least must be given by the  Creator�察�for from nothing nothing can be developed。  If authority  has not its germ in nature�察�it cannot be developed from nature  spontaneously or otherwise。  All government has a governing will�察 �and without a will that commands�察�there is no government�察�and  nature has in her spontaneous developments no will�察�for she has  no personality。  Reason itself�察�as distinguished from will�察�only  presents the end and the means�察�but does not govern�察�it  prescribes a rule�察�but cannot ordain a law。  An imperative will�察 �the will of a superior who has the right to 88                                             command what reason  dictates or approves�察�is essential to government�察�and that will  is not developed from nature�察�because it has no germ in nature。   So something above and beyond nature must be asserted�察�or  government itself cannot be asserted�察�even as a development。   Nature is no more self´sufficing than are the people�察�or than is  the individual man。

No doubt there is a natural law�察�which is law in the proper sense  of the word law�察�but this is a positive law under which nature is  placed by a sovereign above herself�察�and is never to be  confounded with those laws of nature so´called�察�according to  which she is productive as second cause�察�or produces her effects�察 �which are not properly laws at all。  Fire burns�察�water flows�察 �rain falls�察�birds fly�察�fishes swim�察�food nourishes�察�poisons kill�察 �one substance has a chemical affinity for another�察�the needle  points to the pole�察�by a natural law�察�it is said�察�that is�察�the  effects are produced by an inherent and uniform natural force。   Laws in this sense are simply physical forces�察�and are nature  herself。  The natural law�察�in an ethical sense�察�is not a physical  law�察�is not a natural force�察�but a law impose by the Creator on  all moral creatures�察�that is�察�all creatures endowed with reason  and free´will�察�and is called natural because promul´ 89                                                    gated in  natural reason�察�or the reason common and essential to all moral  creatures。  This is the moral law。  It is what the French call le  droit naturell�察�natural right�察�and�察�as the theologians teach us�察 �is the transcript of the eternal law�察�the eternal will or reason  of God。  It is the foundation of all law�察�and all acts of a state  that contravene it are�察�as St。 Augustine maintains�察�violences  rather than laws。  The moral law is no development of nature�察�for  it is above nature�察�and is imposed on nature。  The only  development there is about it is in our understanding of it。

There is�察�of course�察�development in nature�察�for nature considered  as creation has been created in germ�察�and is completed only in  successive developments。  Hence the origin of space and time。   There would have been no space if there had been no external  creation�察�and no time if the creation had been completed  externally at once�察�as it was in relation to the Creator。  Ideal  space is simply the ability of God to externize his creative act�察 �and actual space is the relation of coexistence in the things  created�察�ideal time is the ability of God to create existences  with the capacity of being completed by successive d
卦指朕村 貧匯匈 和匯匈 指欺競何 壘��0�� 家��0��
隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��
梁椣戻幣�� 梁心弌傍議揖扮窟燕得胎��傍竃徭失議心隈才凪万弌誌育断蛍�輌臆惨軼僑〃�燕慕得珊辛參資誼持蛍才将刮襲潜��範寔亟圻幹慕得 瓜寡追葎娼得辛參資誼寄楚署衛、持蛍才将刮襲潜填��