concerning civil government-第7章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


father　over　the　life；　liberty；　or　estate　of　his　son；　whether　they　be

only　in　the　state　and　under　the　law　of　Nature；　or　under　the　positive

laws　of　an　established　government。

　　60。　But　if　through　defects　that　may　happen　out　of　the　ordinary

course　of　Nature；　any　one　comes　not　to　such　a　degree　of　reason　wherein

he　might　be　supposed　capable　of　knowing　the　law；　and　so　living

within　the　rules　of　it；　he　is　never　capable　of　being　a　free　man；　he　is

never　let　loose　to　the　disposure　of　his　own　will；　because　he　knows

no　bounds　to　it；　has　not　understanding；　its　proper　guide；　but　is

continued　under　the　tuition　and　government　of　others　all　the　time

his　own　understanding　is　incapable　of　that　charge。　And　so　lunatics　and

idiots　are　never　set　free　from　the　government　of　their　parents：

〃Children　who　are　not　as　yet　come　unto　those　years　whereat　they　may

have；　and　innocents；　which　are　excluded　by　a　natural　defect　from

ever　having。〃　Thirdly：　〃Madmen；　which；　for　the　present；　cannot

possibly　have　the　use　of　right　reason　to　guide　themselves；　have；　for

their　guide；　the　reason　that　guideth　other　men　which　are　tutors　over

them；　to　seek　and　procure　their　good　for　them；〃　says　Hooker　（Eccl。

Pol。；　lib。　i。；　s。　7）。　All　which　seems　no　more　than　that　duty　which　God

and　Nature　has　laid　on　man；　as　well　as　other　creatures；　to　preserve

their　offspring　till　they　can　be　able　to　shift　for　themselves；　and

will　scarce　amount　to　an　instance　or　proof　of　parents'　regal

authority。

　　61。　Thus　we　are　born　free　as　we　are　born　rational；　not　that　we

have　actually　the　exercise　of　either：　age　that　brings　one；　brings　with

it　the　other　too。　And　thus　we　see　how　natural　freedom　and　subjection

to　parents　may　consist　together；　and　are　both　founded　on　the　same

principle。　A　child　is　free　by　his　father's　title；　by　his　father's

understanding；　which　is　to　govern　him　till　he　hath　it　of　his　own。

The　freedom　of　a　man　at　years　of　discretion；　and　the　subjection　of　a

child　to　his　parents；　whilst　yet　short　of　it；　are　so　consistent　and　so

distinguishable　that　the　most　blinded　contenders　for　monarchy；　〃by

right　of　fatherhood；〃　cannot　miss　of　it；　the　most　obstinate　cannot　but

allow　of　it。　For　were　their　doctrine　all　true；　were　the　right　heir

of　Adam　now　known；　and；　by　that　title；　settled　a　monarch　in　his

throne；　invested　with　all　the　absolute　unlimited　power　Sir　Robert

Filmer　talks　of；　if　he　should　die　as　soon　as　his　heir　were　born；

must　not　the　child；　notwithstanding　he　were　never　so　free；　never　so

much　sovereign；　be　in　subjection　to　his　mother　and　nurse；　to　tutors

and　governors；　till　age　and　education　brought　him　reason　and　ability

to　govern　himself　and　others？　The　necessities　of　his　life；　the

health　of　his　body；　and　the　information　of　his　mind　would　require

him　to　be　directed　by　the　will　of　others　and　not　his　own；　and　yet　will

any　one　think　that　this　restraint　and　subjection　were　inconsistent

with；　or　spoiled　him　of；　that　liberty　or　sovereignty　he　had　a　right

to；　or　gave　away　his　empire　to　those　who　had　the　government　of　his

nonage？　This　government　over　him　only　prepared　him　the　better　and

sooner　for　it。　If　anybody　should　ask　me　when　my　son　is　of　age　to　be

free；　I　shall　answer；　just　when　his　monarch　is　of　age　to　govern。

〃But　at　what　time；〃　says　the　judicious　Hooker　（Eccl。　Pol。；　lib。　i。；　s。

6）；　〃a　man　may　be　said　to　have　attained　so　far　forth　the　use　of　reason

as　sufficeth　to　make　him　capable　of　those　laws　whereby　he　is　then

bound　to　guide　his　actions；　this　is　a　great　deal　more　easy　for　sense

to　discern　than　for　any　one；　by　skill　and　learning；　to　determine。〃

　　62。　Commonwealths　themselves　take　notice　of；　and　allow　that　there　is

a　time　when　men　are　to　begin　to　act　like　free　men；　and　therefore；　till

that　time；　require　not　oaths　of　fealty　or　allegiance；　or　other

public　owning　of；　or　submission　to；　the　government　of　their　countries。

　　63。　The　freedom　then　of　man；　and　liberty　of　acting　according　to

his　own　will；　is　grounded　on　his　having　reason；　which　is　able　to

instruct　him　in　that　law　he　is　to　govern　himself　by；　and　make　him　know

how　far　he　is　left　to　the　freedom　of　his　own　will。　To　turn　him　loose

to　an　unrestrained　liberty；　before　he　has　reason　to　guide　him；　is

not　the　allowing　him　the　privilege　of　his　nature　to　be　free；　but　to

thrust　him　out　amongst　brutes；　and　abandon　him　to　a　state　as

wretched　and　as　much　beneath　that　of　a　man　as　theirs。　This　is　that

which　puts　the　authority　into　the　parents'　hands　to　govern　the

minority　of　their　children。　God　hath　made　it　their　business　to

employ　this　care　on　their　offspring；　and　hath　placed　in　them

suitable　inclinations　of　tenderness　and　concern　to　temper　this

power；　to　apply　it　as　His　wisdom　designed　it；　to　the　children's　good

as　long　as　they　should　need　to　be　under　it。

　　64。　But　what　reason　can　hence　advance　this　care　of　the　parents　due

to　their　offspring　into　an　absolute；　arbitrary　dominion　of　the　father；

whose　power　reaches　no　farther　than　by　such　a　discipline　as　he　finds

most　effectual　to　give　such　strength　and　health　to　their　bodies；

such　vigour　and　rectitude　to　their　minds；　as　may　best　fit　his　children

to　be　most　useful　to　themselves　and　others；　and；　if　it　be　necessary　to

his　condition；　to　make　them　work　when　they　are　able　for　their　own

subsistence；　but　in　this　power　the　mother；　too；　has　her　share　with　the

father。

　　65。　Nay；　this　power　so　little　belongs　to　the　father　by　any

peculiar　right　of　Nature；　but　only　as　he　is　guardian　of　his

children；　that　when　he　quits　his　care　of　them　he　loses　his　power

over　them；　which　goes　along　with　their　nourishment　and　education；　to

which　it　is　inseparably　annexed；　and　belongs　as　much　to　the

foster…father　of　an　exposed　child　as　to　the　natural　father　of　another。

So　little　power　does　the　bare　act　of　begetting　give　a　man　over　his

issue；　if　all　his　care　ends　there；　and　this　be　all　the　title　he　hath

to　the　name　and　authority　of　a　father。　And　what　will　become　of　this

paternal　power　in　that　part　of　the　world　where　one　woman　hath　more

than　one　husband　at　a　time？　or　in　those　parts　of　America　where；　when

the　husband　and　wife　part；　which　happens　frequently；　the　children

are　all　left　to　the　mother；　follow　her；　and　are　wholly　under　her

care　and　provision？　And　if　the　father　die　whilst　the　children　are

young；　do　they　not　naturally　everywhere　owe　the　same　obedience　to

their　mother；　during　their　minority；　as　to　their　father；　were　he

alive？　And　will　any　one　say　that　the　mother　hath　a　legislative　power

over　her　children　that　she　can　make　standing　rules　which　shall　be　of

perpetual　obligation；　by　which　they　ought　to　regulate　all　the　concerns

of　their　property；　and　bound　their　liberty　all　the　course　of　their

lives；　and　enforce　the　observation　of　them　with　capital　punishments？

For　this　is　the　proper　power　of　the　magistrate；　of　which　the　father

hath　not　so　much　as　the　shadow。　His　command　over　his　children　is　but

temporary；　and　reaches　not　their　life　or　property。　It　is　but　a　help　to

the　weakness　and　imperfection　of　their　nonage；　a　discipline

necessary　to　their　education。　And　though　a　father　may　dispose　of　his

own　possessions　as　he　pleases　when　his　children　are　out　of　danger　of

perishing　for　want；　yet　his　power　extends　not　to　the　lives　or　goods

which　either　their　own　industry；　or　another's　bounty；　has　made　theirs；

nor　to　their　liberty　neither　when　they　are　once　arrived　to　the

enfranchisement　of　the　years　of　discretion。　The　father's　empire　then

ceases；　and　he　can　from　thenceforward　no　more　dispose　of　the　liberty

of　his　son　than　that　of　any　other　man。　And　it　must　be　far　from　an

absolute　or　perpetual　jurisdiction　from　which　a　man　may　withdraw

himself；　having　licence　from　Divine　authority　to　〃leave　father　and

mother　and　cleave　to　his　wife。〃

　　66。　But　though　there　be　a　time　when　a　child　comes　to　be　as　free　from

subjection　to　the　will　and　command　of　his　father　as　he　himself　is　free

from　subjection　to　the　will　of　anybody　else；　and　they　are　both　under

no　other　restraint　but　that　which　is　common　to　them　both；　whether　it

be　the　law　of　Nature　or　municipal　law　of　their　country；　yet　this

freedom　exempts　not　a　son　from　that　honour　which　he　ought；　by　the

law　of　God　and　Nature；　to　pay　his　parents；　God　having　made　the　parents

instruments　in　His　great　design　of　continuing　the　race　of　mankind

and　the　occasions　of　life　to　their　children。　As　He　hath　laid　on　them

an　obligation　to　nourish；　preserve；　and　bring　up　their　offspring；　so

He　has　laid　on　the　children　a　perpetual　obligation　of　honouring

their　parents；　which；　containing　in　it　an　inward　esteem　and

reverence　to　be　shown　by　all　outward　expressions；　ties　up　the　child

from　anything　that　may　ever　injure　or　affront；　disturb　or　endanger　the

happiness　or　life　of　those　from　whom　he　received　his；　and　engages

him　in　all　actions　of　defence；　relief；　assistance；　and　comfort　of

those　by　whose　means　he　entered　into　being　and　has　been　made　capable

of　any　enjoyments　of　life。　From　this　obligation　no　state；　no

freedom；　can　absolve　children。　But　this　is　very　far　from　giving

parents　a　power　of　command　over　their　children；　or　an　authority　to

make　laws　and　dispose　as　they　please　of　their　lives　or　liberties。　It

is　one　thing　to　owe　honour；　respect；　gratitude；　and　assistance；

another　to　require　an　absolute　obedience　and　submission。　The　honour

due　to　parents　a　monarch　on　his　throne　owes　his　mother；　and　yet　this

lessens　not　his　authority　nor　subjects　him　to　her　government。

　　67。　The　subjection　of　a　minor　places　in　the　father　a　temporary

government　which　terminates　with　the　minority　of　the　child；　and　the

honour　due　from　a　child　places　in　the　parents　a　perpetual　right　to

respect；　reverence；　support；　and　compliance；　to　more　or　less；　as　the

father's　care；　cost；　and　kindness　in　his　education　has　been　more　or

less；　and　this　ends　not　with　minority；　but　holds　in　all　parts　and

conditions　of　a　man's　life。　The　want　of　distinguishing　these　two

powers　which　the　father　hath；　in　the　right　of　tuition；　during

minority；　and　the　right　of　honour　all　his　life；　may　perhaps　have

caused　a　great　part　of　the　mistakes　about　this　matter。　For；　to　speak

properly　of　them；　the　first　of　these　is　rather　the　privilege　of

children　and　duty　of　parents　than　any　prerogative　of　paternal　power。

The　nourishment　and　education　of　their　children　is　a　charge　so

incumbent　on　parents　for　their　children's　good；　that　nothing　can

absolve　them　from　taking　care　of　it。　And　though　the　power　of

commanding　and　chastising　them　go　along　with　it；　yet　God　hath　woven

into　the　principles　of　human　nature　such　a　tenderness　for　their

offspring；　that　there　is　little　fear　that　parents　should　use　their

power　with　too　much　rigour；　the　excess　is　seldom　on　the　severe　side；

the　strong　bias　of　nature　drawing　the　other　way。　And　therefore　God

Almighty；　when　He　would　express　His　gentle　dealing　with　the

Israelites；　He　tells　them　that　though　He　chastened　them；　〃He　chastened

them　as　a　man　chastens　his　son〃　（Deut。　8。　5）…　i。e。；　with　tenderness

and　affection；　and　kept　them　under　no　severer　discipline　than　what　was

absolutely　best　for　them；　and　had　been　less　kindness；　to　have

slackened。　This　is　that　power　to　which　children