in order; harbors and lighthouses must be constructed; letters and newspapers must be carried from place to place; schools and education must be furnished; the arts, sciences, and good morals must be fostered. Nor can these things be provided by single men, or by a few men associated together, even if they are disposed to provide them; they call for the united strength of the community. Hence the promotion of its own progress is the second duty of society. II. GOVERNMENT. 5. The Office of Government.—Government is the instrument or agent which society uses directly to secure these ends, viz., justice and progress. On the one side, government consists of customs, rules, or laws commanding what society wishes to have done and forbidding what it does not wish to have done; on the other, it consists of rulers or officers whose business it is to have these rules or laws enforced. It is easy to see what would be the result if a society were without government. Not only would progress be impossible, but society could not exist. First would come anarchy, or that social state in which every man does as he pleases, and then destruction. Society and social order go together. Government is a universal fact. Man, society, and government are always found together; these are the broadest terms in the vocabulary of political science. A group of savages eating shell-fish on the seashore has no written laws, no legislature, no courts, no president; but it has some customs that take the place of laws, and a head, as the father of the family or the chief of the tribe, who sees that these customs are enforced. Government will always be rude and simple when society is rude and simple, but there will be government. Aristotle says: "Man is more of a political animal than bees or any other gregarious animals," Govern and governor are from the Latin gubernare and gubernator, which primarily mean to steer a ship and a pilot or steersman. 6. Government Coercive.-Government then is coercive by its very nature. Its first duty is to compel obedience to its mandates. A government that is not obeyed is no government at all. This coercive power comes from society; whenever it is necessary government has the right, and is in duty bound, to summon to its aid all the powers that society possesses to secure its ends. This it does in the name of society and for its defense. 7. Politics Defined.-Politics, or Political Science, relates to the principles of government. It is the same thing as the science of government. It is also the same thing as political philosophy, unless indeed we conceive of political philosophy as dealing with the more speculative and theoretical aspect of Politics. In its broadest scope, this science is a view of society considered under its governmental aspects. Sir Frederick Pollock says its field comes into view when, passing by such related sciences as political economy and ethics, "we come to consider man, not only as a member of society, but as a member of some particular society, organized in a particular way, and exercising supreme authority over its members; in other words, when we consider man as a citizen, and the citizen in his relations to the state." He mentions as the natural heads of this science, "the foundation and general constitution of the state," "the form and administration of government," " ‘the principles and method of legislation," and the "state as a single and complete unit of a high order, capable of definite relations to other like units.” 1 The present treatise will not deal with the Science of Politics as thus outlined. It is not a general contribution to political philosophy. It deals with a specific and concrete theme rather than with a general and abstract one. Nevertheless, it will conduce to clearness and strength of treatment to devote the preliminary pages to defining the leading terms of the science. III. THE STATE AND THE NATION. 8. The State.—Mr. Wheaton, following Cicero and most modern jurists, defines a state as “a body politic, or society of men united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual advantage by their combined strength."2 Professor Burgess says it is "a particular portion of mankind viewed as an organized unit."3 Such a society occupies its own territory and is called sovereign. Mr. Wheaton remarks that this definition excludes all corporations, both public and private, that the state itself creates, such as the London and Plymouth Companies, to be mentioned hereafter. It excludes all voluntary associations of robbers and pirates, and all hordes of wandering savages not yet formed into a settled society. The definition also excludes the States of the American Union, because they are not sovereigns in the sense of International Law. The United States, France, Germany, and Russia are states in that sense. 9. The Nation.—By its etymology the term nation belongs to the science of ethnology rather than to the Science of Politics. It comes from the Latin verb nascor, to be born, and has primary reference to birth or race kinship. In this view a nation is properly one people, having a common ancestry and descent, a common language, 1 Page 8. 2 Part I., Chap. II. 3 Vol. I., p. 50. common traditions, manners, civilization, and customs. It also suggests a common home, present or past, from which, however, portions of the nation, or even the whole nation, may have emigrated. But nation has become a political word, and this we may call its secondary meaning. In this sense the state and the nation are the same thing. It is good usage, therefore, to call the Germans or the Poles a nation although they are found in a number of states, and to call the Jews or the Gypsies a nation, although scattered over the world; and it is equally good usage to say that the British State, the Austrian State, or the Russian State, comprises a great number of nations. This is the ethnological sense of the word. It is equally good usage to call the three states just mentioned, as units, nations. This is the political sense of the word, and in this sense it will generally be used in the present work. In Germany the tendency is to confine nation to its original meaning; but in English-speaking countries the secondary meaning is too firmly established to be disturbed. In recent times there has been a strong tendency to make nationality, in the primal sense, or race kinship, the basis of the state. Examples are seen in the efforts to realize national unity met with in the history of Germany and Italy since the downfall of Napoleon, and also in the Balkan Peninsula. There is still another, and a less definite, meaning of nation. Before the Declaration of Independence the Thirteen Colonies were not uncommonly called a nation, but never a state; and the Dominion of Canada might be so-called to-day. Here the bonds of unity appear to be race kinship and common interests, the emphasis being thrown upon the latter element. IO. The State and the Government.—It is important to observe that the state is one thing, the government quite another. The state is the corporate people; the government, a system of agents and powers that the people have either organized, or permitted to be organized, to carry on the public functions of society. Therefore, government is not an end but a means. This doctrine, which was explicitly taught by Aristotle, has not been better stated than by Dante : "And the aim of such rightful Commonwealths is liberty, to wit, that men may live for their own sake. For citizens are not for the sake of the Consuls, nor a nation for the King; but contrariwise the Consuls are for the sake of the citizens, the King for the sake of the nation. For as a Commonwealth is not subordinate to laws, but laws to the Commonwealth; so men who live according to the law are not for the service of the lawgiver, but he for theirs; which is the Philosopher [Plato's] opinion in that which he hath left us concerning the present matter. Hence it is plain also that though a Consul or King in regard of means be the lords of others, yet in regard of the end they are the servants of others; and most of all, the Monarch, who, without doubt, is to be deemed the servant of all." 1 II. Sovereignty.—In defining the state this much-used word has been employed. In every independent society, such as a state, there must be some authority from which the whole law and administration ultimately proceed. This authority is sovereignty, and the person of persons who wield it are called the sovereign or sovereigns. The following particulars are essentials to a full understanding of the subject: I. Sovereignty is unlimited power over the individual member of the state and all associations of members. This is sometimes denied as savoring of despotism. The difficulty lies in the fact that men do not carefully distinguish between the state and the government. For example, the people of the United States, in their Constitutions, have delegated certain powers to their governments, National and State; their governments are, therefore, relative and limited governments. But, plainly, the power of the people of the United States to change these governments to please themselves is absolute and unlimited. The discussion of this topic will be renewed when we come to discuss the relations of the American States to the Union. 2. As sovereignty makes the law, it is necessarily superior to it and cannot be bound by it. It is not, however, higher than duty or moral obligation. 3. In the absolute sense, sovereignty cannot be divided; the very supposition implies two highest, or sovereign, authorities in the state, which is impossible. Still, the sovereign authority may delegate certain powers to one government and certain other powers to another, as is done in the United States; but this is not dividing the ultimate supreme power which resides in the people. 4. Sovereignty may vest in one person, in the few, or in the many, according to the nature of the state. In a democratic state, like the United States, it is vested in the many-that is, in the people or the nation. IV. THEORIES OF THE STATE. 12. The Historical Theory.-The true account of the origin of the state is that given by Aristotle, which may be thus summarized: Man cannot exist in solitude; the union of the two sexes is necessary for the perpetuation of the race, and to its proper direction and guidThe relations of husband and wife, parent and child, master and servant, determine the household or family. Families coming ance. 1 Quoted y Pollock, pp. 37, 38. together form the village or tribe, and a union of tribes, or the expansion of the single tribe, forms the state. The units of the family are individuals, the units of the tribe are families, the units of the state are tribes or villages. The family is the first step, the tribe the second step, and the state the last step in social development. Man becomes perfect only in the state. The state is not the result of agreement, contract, or convention among men; it is an organic development, and so, perfectly natural. It is imposed on man by the conditions of his highest life; it is the only condition in which he can achieve all that he is capable of achieving. Hence the maxim, "Man is born to be a citizen." The state differs from the family, and the tribe, therefore, in the number of its members, and in the number and nature of their relations. 13. Patriarchal Societies.-Family and tribal societies are called patriarchal societies, their governments patriarchal governments. Such societies well illustrate a certain stage in the development of the state, or of civil society. The first two syllables of the word patriarchal mean father, the second two government; so that, in the original sense, patriarchal government is government by a father. It is applied to tribes as well as families, because the original rulers of the tribe were the fathers of the oldest family. It is a form of govern. ment well-adapted to the purposes of the tribe, but will not answer the purposes of a large and progressive society. Accordingly, we find patriarchal government in the savage or half-civilized states of soci⚫ ety, although not to the exclusion of other forms in the half-civilized state, but we never find it in civilized societies. They have outgrown it. But human society, at some stage of its progress, universally presents this type of social organization. We have an excellent example of a patriarchal ruler in Abraham, and of the development of a patriarchal tribe into a nation and a state in his descendants, as narrated in the Book of Genesis. The same history is also a good example of the manner in which early states were formed. 14. The Theory of Contract.-Once it was the fashion to say that the state is an artificial product or mechanism. Those who held this doctrine reasoned that at first there was no society or govern ment. Men lived in a free, natural condition, everyone doing what hé pleased. In this condition they enjoyed a great many rights and privileges that they could not enjoy when they came to live together in society. For example, men living alone in the forest, or in small numbers, could safely do a great many things that they could not do living in a town or city. But living in this way, men suffered the want of those advantages that spring out of society and government. Hence, they agreed to enter into society, and to constitute government. According to this agreement, they surrendered those natural |