468 Tllr: POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



of State-authority, is habitually regarded by citizens as having a trust- 

 worthiness beyond that of a man who wears no such uniform ; and this 

 confidence survives all disproofs. Obviously, then, if men's judgments 

 are thus ridiculously swayed, in spite of better knowledge, by the mere 

 symbols of State-power, still more must they be so swayed by State- 

 power itself, as exercised in ways that leave greater scope for the 

 imagination. If awe and faith are irresistibly called out toward things 

 which perception and reason tell us positively should not call them out, 

 still more will awe and faith be called out toward those State-actions 

 and influences on which perception and reason can less easily be 

 brought to bear. If the beliefs prompted by this feeling of reverence 

 survive even where they are flatly contradicted by common-sense, still 

 more will they survive where common-sense cannot so flatly contra- 

 dict them. 



How deeply rooted is this sentiment excited in men by embodied 

 power will be seen, on noting how it sways in common all orders of 

 politicians, from the old-world Tory to the Red Republican. Con- 

 trasted as the extreme parties are in the types of Government they 

 approve, and the theories they hold respecting the source of Govern- 

 ment authority, they are alike in their unquestioning belief in govern- 

 mental authority, and in showing almost unlimited faith in the ability 

 of a Government to achieve any desired end. Though the form of the 

 agency toward which the sentiment of loyalty is directed is much 

 changed, yet there is little change in sentiment itself, or in the general 

 conceptions it creates. The notion of the divine right of a person 

 has given place to the notion of the divine right of a representative 

 assembly. While it is held to be a self-evident falsity that the single 

 will of a despot can justly override the wills of a people, it is held to 

 be a self-evident truth that the wills of one-half of a people, plus some 

 small fraction, may with perfect justice override the wills of the other 

 half, minus this small fraction may override them in respect of any 

 matter whatever. Unlimited authority of a majority has been sub- 

 stituted for unlimited authority of an individual. So unquestioning is 

 the belief in this unlimited authority of a majority, that even the tacit 

 suggestion of a doubt produces astonishment. True, if, of one who 

 holds that power deputed by the people is subject to no restrictions, 

 you ask whether, if the majority decided that no person should be 

 allowed to live beyond sixty, the decision might be legitimately 

 executed, he would possibly hesitate. Or, if you asked him whether 

 the majority, being Catholic, might rightly require of the Protestant 

 minority that they should either embrace Catholicism or leave the 

 country, he would, influenced by the ideas of religious liberty in which 

 he has been brought up, probably say no. But, though his answers to 

 sundry such questions disclose the fact that State-authority, when an 

 embodiment of the national will, is not believed by him to be absolute- 

 ly supreme, his latent conviction, that there are limits to it, lies so 



