PREFACE. 



In submitting to the A.merican Ptiilosophical Society the following essay 

 upon the Theory of the State, I desire to say a word in explanation of 

 the unusual number of quotations used, and the consequent voluminous- 

 ness of the notes. This course was suggested to me by the example of 

 Roscher in his Political Economy, and has been adopted as apparently the 

 best method of considering the theory of the State, at once historically 

 and upon principle, as required by the offer of the Society. For in this 

 way only has it been practicable for the author to develop his own theory 

 briefly and consecutively, and at the same time to review other theories. 



I also desire to say a word in apology for, or rather in vindication of, the 

 somewhat free and plain-spoken criticisms of the theories of others that 

 I have found it necessary to make. In this I have followed the example of 

 the older writers on the theory of the State from Aristotle down ; whose 

 custom (to use a familiar phrase) has always been to handle the theories 

 of other writers without gloves, and by whom similar treatment has never 

 been regarded as a just subject of complaint. I admit, however, that 

 the practice is, at the present day, open to some objections. For, as will 

 be seen, the theories of modern publicists are of a delicate and somewhat 

 artificial structure, little suited to stand the rough handling of logic, and, 

 in fact, existing mainly by mutual comity. This is especially true in 

 England, and in this country, where jurists and publicists have, for over 

 half a century, been absolutely dominated by Austin's false and per- 

 nicious theory, and where, consequently, that theory must necessarily be 

 attacked in order to gain even a hearing. 



And especially I desire that these criticisms may not be regarded as evi- 

 dence of any malice or ill-feeling on my part. On the contrary, the two 

 authors that I criticise most severely, Hobbes and Austin, I have ever 

 regarded with the most profound admiration ; and their works, though 

 false in conclusions, yet seem to me, on account of their logical method, 

 and the profound and accurate analytical power displayed in them, 

 beyond comparison, the most valuable contributions made to political 

 science in modern times ; and I freely confess that from them I have 

 learned more than from all other writers, Aristotle excepted. 



I may say, therefore, in the language of the old adage (which I adopt as 

 the motto of my work): "Amicus Plato, amicus Socrates, sed magis 

 arnica Veritas." 



183 



