Untitled - 24grammata.com

OF POLITICAL THEORIES. 349ginal freedom and equality which the defenders of unlimitedmonarchy denied. And consequently he agreed with himalso in making the social state to proceed from a contractamong freemen.Security of person and property was held by both to bethe chief objectof civil union. And they both agreed inconsidering the legislative power as peculiarly belonging tosovereigntythat sovereignty being byeither ascribed tothe people, or bulk of the society.But then, according toLocke, the sovereignty might be transferred according toRousseau it iswholly intransferable : according to Locke itmight be divided among different parties accordingto Rousseau it must remain undivided in the hands of the people.At this point, then, the two paths separate, and it is easyto see the conclusion to which that of either necessarily ledLocke arrived at the Representative System and a limitedMonarchy, by the union of which the legislative power,although partially shared by the prince, is mainly in thehands of the representativesof the people: Rousseau couldnot, according to his principles, admit any form but pureDemocracy, as far as that consists in the legislative functionsbeing exercised by the whole body of the people withoutany transfer to representatives, or any participation of otherpowers in the government.I trust that these observations will suffice to explain thechief points which characterize the several political systemswhich we have examined, and to distinguish them from eachother. All that can be accomplished by pure speculationtowards laying the foundations of civil society, and determining the best methods for its constitution, appears to havebeen achieved by these three authors. Hobbes and Rousseau take their placeat either extreme the one in supportof the total transfer of the sovereignty into the hands of theregent the other to assert that the sovereigntyiswholly intransferableby the people whose right it is whilst Locke;holds a middle course between the two.It remains that we should consider these systems, especially that of Rousseau, with regard to their practical application.They all three proceed from a contract, which, as foundedon the supposition that it was framed by a people who never,