SOVEREIGNTY. 



writer, whofe pen is not enflaved by fear, or rendered 

 venal by intereft. But fome celebrated authors maintain, 

 that if the prince is invefted with the fupreme command in 

 a full and abfolute manner, nobody has a right to refill him, 

 much lefs to curb him, and that the nation has no refource 

 left but to fuffer and obey with patience. This is founded 

 upon the fuppofition that fuch a fovcreign need not give an 

 account to any perfon of the manner in which he governs ; 

 and that if the nation might controul his aftions and refill 

 him, where they were found to be unjuft, his authority 

 would no longer be abfolute ; which would be contrary to 

 this hypothefis. They fay, that an abfolute foTereign pof- 

 feffes completely all the political authority of the fociely, in 

 which nobody can oppofe him ; if he abufes it, he docs ill, 

 indeed, and wounds his confcience, but that his commands 

 are not the lefs obligatory, as being founded on a lawful 

 right to command : that the nation, by giving him abfolute 

 authority, had referved nothing toitftlf, and had lubmitted 

 to his difcretion, &c. We might fatisfy mufelves with 

 anfwering, that in this light there is not any fovereign who 

 is completely and fully atsfolute. But in order to remove 

 all thefe vain fubtilties, let us remember the eilcntial end of 

 civil fociety : is it not to labour in concert for the common 

 happinefs of all i' Is it not with this view that every citizen 

 llrips himfelf of his rights, and refigns his libertv ? Was 

 it in the power of the fociety to make fuch ufc of its a\ilho- 

 rity as to deliver up itfelf, and all its members, without 

 relief, to the dtfcretion of a cruef tyrant? No, certainly, 

 fince it had no right itfelf, if it was difpofcd to it, to op- 

 prcfs a part of the citizens; When it, therefore, conferred 

 the fupreme and abfolute government, without an exprefs 

 referve, it was necelfarily with the tacit rcferve, that the 

 fovereign fhould ufe it for the fafety of the people, and not 

 for their ruin. If he becomes the fcourge of the itate, he 

 degrades himfelf; he is no more than a public enemy, 

 againll whom the nation may and ought to defend itfelf; 

 and if he has carried his tyranny to the utmoll height, why 

 fliould even the life of fo cruel and perfidious an enemy be 

 fpared ? Who prefumes to blame the Roman fenate, that 

 declared Nero an enemy to his country ? 



But it is of the utmolt importance to obferve, that this 

 judgment can only be palled by the nation, or by the body 

 by which it is reprelented ; and that the nation itfelf cannot 

 make any attempt on the perfon of the fovereign, but in 

 cafes of extreme neceflity, and when the prince, by violating 

 the laws, and threatening the fafety of his people, puts 

 them in a itate of war againll them. The perfon of the 

 fovereign, the very intereft of the nation declares facred and 

 inviolable ; but not that of an unnatural tyrant, and an 

 enemy of the public. We feldom fee fuch monfters as 

 Nerp. 



As foon as a nation acknowledges a prince for its lawful 

 fovereign, all the citizens owe him a faithful obedience. He 

 can neither govern the (late, nor perform what the nation 

 expects from him, if he is not punftually obeyed. Subjefts 

 then have no right, in doubtful cafes, to queftion the wif- 

 dom or juftice of tlicir fovereign's commands ; this examina- 

 tion belongs to the prince : his fubjefts ought to fuppofe, 

 if there be a poffibility of doing it, that all his orders are 

 ju(t and falutary : he alone is accountable for the evil that 

 may refult from them. 



In the mean time, this ought not to be entirely a blind 

 obedience. No engagement can oblige, or even authorize, 

 a man to violate the laws of nature. All authors who have 

 any regard to confcience, or modefty, agree, that a perfon 

 ought not to obey fuch commands as are evidently con- 

 trary to the laws of God. Thofe governors of places, 



12 



who bravely refufed to execute the barbarous orders of 

 Charles IX. to the famous St. Bartholomew, have been 

 univerfally praifed ; and the court did not dare to punilh 

 them, at leall openly. " Sire," faid the brave Orte, 

 governor of Bayonne, in his letter, " I have communicated 

 your majeity's command to your faithful inhabitants and 

 warriors in the garrifun ; and I have found there only good 

 citizens and brave foldiers : not one hangman ; therefore, 

 both they and I mod humbly entreat your majefty, to be 

 pleafed to employ our arms and lives in things that are pof- 

 fible, however hazardous they may be, and we will exert 

 ourfelves to the laft drop of our blood." The count de 

 Tende, Charney, and others, replied to thofe who brought 

 them the orders of the court, that they had too great a 

 refpcft for the king, to believe that fuch barbarous orders 

 came from him. 



It is not eafy to determine iff what cafes a fubjeft may 

 not only refufe to obey, but even refift a fovereign, and by 

 force repel force. However, when the injuVies, which fo- 

 ciety fuffers, are manifeft and atrocious ; when a prince, 

 without any apparent reafon, is refolved to deprive us of 

 life, or of thofe things, the lofs of which would render life 

 bitter, who can difpute our right to refill him ? Self-pre- 

 fervation is not only a law of nature, but an obligation im- 

 pofed by nature, and no man can entirely and abfolutely 

 give it up to another. And though he might give it up, 

 can he be confidered as having done it by his political en- 

 gagements, when he entered into fociety only to eftablifh 

 his own fafety upon a more folid bafis ? The welfare of 

 fociety does not require fuch a facrifice ; and as Barbeyrac 

 well obferves in his notes on Grotius, " If the public intereft 

 requires, that thofe who obey (hould particularly fuffer 

 fomething ; it is not lefs for the public intereft that thofe 

 who command, (hould be afraid of carrying their patience 

 to the utmoll extremity." The prince who violates all 

 laws, who obferves no meafures, and who would in his 

 tranfports of fury take away the life of an innocent perfon, 

 llrips himfelf of his royalty, and is no more than an unjuft 

 and outrageous mortal, againft whom his people are allowed 

 to defend themfelves. But he who, after having loft all the 

 fentiments of a fovereign, divells himfelt even of the ap- 

 pearances and exterior conduft of a monarch, degrades him- 

 felf; he no longer retains the facred perfon of a lovereign, 

 and cannot retain the prerogatives attached to his fublime 

 charafter. However, if this prince is not a monller, if he 

 is furious only from a juft paflion, and is fupportabie to the 

 rell of the nation ; the refpeft we ought to pay to the tran- 

 quillity of the ftate is fuch, and the refpeft of fovereign ma- 

 jefty fo powerful, that we are ftriftly obliged to feek every 

 other means of prefervation, rather than to put his perfon in 

 danger. Every one knows the example fet by David : he 

 fled ; he kept himfelf concealed, to fecure himfelf from 

 Saul's fury ; and more than once faved the life of his perfe- 

 cutor. When the reafon of Charles VI. of France was 

 fuddenly difordcred by a fatal accident, he in his fury killed 

 feveral of thofe who furrounded him : none of them thought 

 of fecuring his own fife, at the expence of that of the king ; 

 they only endeavoured to difarm him, and to make him 

 mailer of himfelf: they did their duty like brave men and 

 faithful fubjeds, in expofing their lives, to fave that of this 

 unfortunate monarch. We owe this facrifice to the Itate 

 and to fovereign majefty. Furious from the diforder of his 

 organs, Charles was not guilty ; he might recover his 

 health, and again become a good king. 



We fhall here further obferve, that a fovereign is un- 

 doubtedly allowed to take minifters, to eafe him in the 

 painful office of government ; but he ought never to aban- 

 don 



