The True Principles of Human Government:
James Dodson
STATED AND EXPLAINED
BY
JAMES BRYDON,
MINISTER OF THE GOSPEL.
“The Lord reigneth, let the earth rejoice.”—Ps. xcvii. 1.
KELSO:
SOLD BY J. RUTHERFURD.
EDINBURGH; C. ZEIGLER: GLASGOW; JOHN KEITH
AND W. MARSHALL.
MDCCCXLIV.
PREFACE.
THE writer of these pages has often had his mind directed with some measure of attention and interest to the principles of government, and he makes public the result of his reflections, under the desire of spreading sound views of truth and duty. He has been induced to refrain from advancing arguments in support of the positions he has asserted, and has only stated his principles with a brief explanation, leaving them to be examined and tested by the inspired standard of truth, and received or rejected according as they harmonise or disagree with it. If his labours be instrumental in advancing the interests of Christ’s kingdom and the welfare of men, he will feel himself abundantly rewarded; and to God be all the praise.
KELSO,
September, 1844.
THE
TRUE PRINCIPLES
OF
HUMAN GOVERNMENT.
IN such an important matter as the government of the affairs of this world, it is exceedingly desirable that clear and sound doctrinal opinions should be acquired and maintained: and in this, as in all other matters, the appeal must be made to the Word of the Living God. We are not left at liberty to trust only to the direction of human reason and political expediency; but, convinced of our own blindness and inaptitude to discover the path of duty without an instructor, recourse must be had to the Law and to the Testimony for guidance in all things—personal, domestic, ecclesiastical, and civil. And if there be not in the Holy Scriptures particular directions given respecting every point and circumstance of duty, there are, at least, principles exhibited there, embracing every position which a human being can occupy on earth; and such practical illustrations given of doctrine and precept, as are sufficient, by the aid of careful examination and earnest prayer, to afford clear and satisfactory guidance in every department of moral obligation with which we have to do. And, discarding the maxims of the world, and the long-established customs and usages of worldly men, our knowledge of truth and duty in the constitution and laws of civil associations, must be drawn from the written testimony of the Lord of Hosts.
[6]
I.—Every man is responsible for himself alone.
It is inconsistent with the laws of the universal government that a human being should be responsible for the acts of another, except in so far as he has intentionally exercised influence in producing these acts. Men have often suffered in consequence of the misdeeds of others; but in all cases, except that of the Lord Jesus Christ, who was perfectly free from moral evil, their sufferings have been deserved from the hand of the Supreme Ruler, on account of their own acts of disobedience to His will; although, in many instances, the sufferings thus endured have been increased in severity, and prolonged in duration, that they might serve in some measure as substitutionary for still more extensive troubles, that would otherwise have been visited on those to whom they were related by kindred, or voluntary compact, or proximity of place.—Thus Joseph had to endure lengthened and painful affliction in his youth, though characterised by a greater measure of moral probity than any of his brethren; while they experienced the benefit of his sufferings, in themselves being more lightly dealt with for a season, and in their being provided with the means of temporal subsistence when the famine overspread the land in which they dwelt. But Joseph was responsible only for his own acts, and in all his suffering was not enduring more than his own offences had merited. Moses was distinguished for his faith in the God of Israel, and devotedness to His service; yet he was made to endure painful and lengthened affliction, in being driven from his kindred, and caused to sojourn in a land of strangers for the space of forty years; and his brethren in Egypt experienced the benefit of his suffering, as appears from the fact, that the male children had been spared after his exposure in the ark of bulrushes, so that when he returned to lead them out of the land of their bondage, they were increased to the number of six hundred thousand, exclusive of the tribe of Levi. But his exposure in the ark, while yet incapable of moral action, was a punishment of his parents, inflicted proba-
7
bly on account of their marriage within the prescribed degree of consanguinity; and his subsequent dangers, privations, and sorrows, were deserved by his own transgressions, (perhaps his having on some occasion joined with the worshippers of idols, when residing at the court of Pharaoh;) and he was responsible only for his own personal acts, and the influence which he intentionally exercised on the minds and conduct of others. Let this principle be applied in every case. A parent is not responsible for the misconduct of his child, except in so far as that misconduct has arisen from his own neglect and evil influence; nor is a child responsible for the transgressions of his parents, though he be made to suffer in their room, and in consequence of their sins. A husband is not responsible for the misdemeanours of his wife, except in so far as his own conduct has led to them; nor is a wife responsible for the sins of her husband though she endure pain and sorrow on account of them. A minister is not responsible for the religious acts of the people committed to his charge, unless these acts have sprung from his own unfaithfulness and injurious influence in doctrine and example; nor are the people responsible for the sins of the minister set over them, except in so far as they have led to them by their own voluntary acts. A governor is not responsible for the mischief practised in the territory over which he presides, unless his own misconduct and misgovernment have caused it; nor are subjects responsible for the wrong exercise of authority on the part of their rulers, except in so far as they have themselves produced it, by appointing improper persons to places of power, or by encouraging these persons in the adoption and prosecution of measures that are sinful. But if a nation appoint to places of power, and invest with authority, persons that are
8
known to be enemies to the truth and Church of God; or submit without remonstrance and opposition to legislative enactments and courses of administration that are contrary to the written Word, that nation must be held responsible for the damage that is done by such governors to the interests of the Church of Christ, of truth, and of godliness. But if a nation be careful to commit the reins of government to such persons only as professedly and in appearance are friends of liberty and assertors of human rights; and these persons throw off the mask when once seated in power, and commence a course of tyranny and oppression, the responsibility is thrown upon the governors themselves, until the people have an opportunity of changing the administration. And if a people be careful to appoint such rulers only as profess to acknowledge the truth of the Gospel, and to yield obedience to the law of Christ; and if the rulers so appointed employ their power to corrupt the doctrines and laws of the Church, to impair her integrity, and mar her efficiency and beauty, the responsibility for such mischief must rest for the time on the rulers themselves, until the people have opportunity to change their courses, or appoint other governors in their room; but in so far as the people, or a portion of them, acquiesce in such misgovernment, and assist in the continuance of it, they are themselves responsible for its pernicious effects.
II.—Every man is primarily responsible to God only.
Jehovah is King and Lord, and to Him the obedience of every intelligent creature is due. Every act and exercise ought therefore to be in exact harmony with His will, and we are under an obligation to give obedience to the commands of earthly superiors only in so far as they have received a delegated power from Himself, and exercise that power in the manner and for the ends which He has appointed. The idea may be illustrated by an example. In an army there are a commander, subordinate officers of different degrees, and private soldiers. To the commander belongs the power of regu-
9
lating the movements of the whole, and to him both the under officers and private soldiers owe obedience. To the subordinate officers is delegated power within certain limits, and over a certain number of soldiers; and to the power of these officers, exercised within the prescribed limits, the respective soldiers are bound to pay deference as readily as to the power of the general; and any act of rebellion against the proper and warrantable exercise of power by these officers, is also rebellion against the source from which their authority has been received; and soldiers chargeable with such insubordination are as justly liable to punishment as if they had resisted the authority of the chief. But if these officers abuse their power, by issuing commands respecting matters beyond their proper sphere, or by requiring services that are contrary to the orders of their superior, this abuse of power may and ought to be opposed. Now, God has all power in and of himself, and to Him primarily and supremely all obedience is due; and as He delegates power within certain limits to certain persons, that power thus received is to be recognised and obeyed as the power of the Lord of Hosts. But if persons either assume authority to themselves unwarrantably; or having been invested with it through a legitimate channel, afterwards employ it to advance their own selfish and wicked designs; no obedience is due to such persons in these circumstances; they have not received power from the true fountain of authority; and they have no just warrant or title to demand the obedience of their fellow-mortals, and especially obedience which is inconsistent with the duty which all owe to the Sovereign Ruler of heaven and earth. A private soldier starting up in the ranks, causing himself to be proclaimed as an officer of high degree, and proceeding without further warrant to demand the obedience of his comrades, ought instantly to be rejected; but let him produce the order for his promotion from the crown, and his comrades are bound by their oath of allegiance and fidelity, to receive him as their superior without further delay. And, on the same principle, the person who contrives by physical force, or by wicked ingenuity, to seize the reins of empire, is not to be acknowledged
A 2
10
as invested by God with rightful authority over men; his assumption of power is itself rebellion, and those who support and obey him are violating their duty to the Lord of all. But let him manifest those properties that are needful to qualify him for the proper exercise of government, and let him be raised to authority by lawful means, and he will thus be furnished with a writ of promotion, entitling him to claim subjection and obedience. Still obedience is due to him only in so far as his legitimate authority extends, and within the sphere in which he has been appointed to govern; and compliance with any unwarrantable stretch of power is not obedience to God, but rebellion against Him; and our primary responsibility to Him requires us to refuse it. A parent has received a right from the Creator to rule over his children, and to demand obedience within certain limits; but if he give them orders to do what is sinful, or to refrain from the performance of positive duty, they are bound to refuse compliance with these orders, being responsible to a Higher Authority.
III.—Every man must judge for himself of truth and duty by the light of the Holy Scriptures.
Truth is certain and duty is fixed; and the source from which a knowledge of the one and of the other should be sought, is the written word of the living God. Proceeding from the Father of Lights, the Holy Scriptures afford a clear and certain exhibition of what we ought to believe and practise, and every one is bound to receive the truth there revealed, and perform the duties there enjoined. But though there be no uncertainty, nor variation in the truth itself, nor in the rule of duty, there is a great difference of opinion even among those who have access to the written Word, about what is true and what is dutiful. On account of difference in disposition, habit, intellectual capacity, worldly interest, means of instruction, and exposure to other blinding and misdirecting influences, one man receives an opinion as true, and founded upon the authority of the Scriptures, which another man pronounces a false and
11
groundless delusion; one recognises a course as right and dutiful, which another denounces as heinously criminal; though the contending parties unite in making their appeal to the same infallible standard. In such circumstances, no human arbitrator is entitled to assume the prerogative of settling the dispute, by deciding the questions about which the parties differ. All are equally responsible to God, and each must think and judge and determine for himself. One man cannot think for another, nor remove from him the responsibility which he owes to the Author of Truth, and Sovereign Lawgiver: one is not entitled to say to his neighbour, “believe this doctrine on my authority, and I will protect you from all loss or damage if it afterwards be found untrue: or perform this act which I inculcate as dutiful, and I will shield you from all blame and punishment, if the Supreme Judge decide that it is sinful.” The responsibility of each thus continuing immoveable, no one has a right to compel others to embrace his opinions, however firmly he be himself persuaded of their truth; and no one is warranted to yield compliance with the requirements of others, unless he be persuaded in his own mind that they are, at least, not contrary to the laws of the Most High. Remembering that we are responsible to Him for the opinions we adopt, and the line of conduct we pursue; and that we are to receive His truth and His law rather than the doctrines and commands of men, we must, by careful searching of the Scriptures, and the use of such helps to the understanding of them as may be within our reach, and by earnest prayer for the guidance of the Divine Spirit, endeavour each for himself to ascertain what is true and dutiful, without yielding our sentiments and conduct to be determined by the judgment of other men, however gifted and faithful.
IV.—The majority of a nation enlightened by the Word of God, and acting according to it, are entitled to demand the subjection of the minority.
It is seldom that entire harmony of sentiment exists among
12
the members of even a small community, about every point of faith and duty; and the more numerous the individuals are, and the greater diversity of interest that intervenes, there is the greater probability of a difference occurring in opinion and practice. One man not being warranted to claim a greater weight for his sentiments, merely on his own account, than others are warranted to claim for theirs, there would necessarily ensue a dismemberment of any association, so soon as a difference arose, unless there were some preponderating power by which disputed points may be determined, and the bond of union preserved. Such a power is provided in a majority of numbers. Each individual, having access to the inspired standard of truth and duty, being responsible for himself alone, and primarily to God, and exercising the right of judging for himself by the light of the Holy Scriptures in matters religious or civil, is understood to form his own decision free and untrammelled. And that side on which the greatest number of such decisions are found, is allowed the superiority. Each person acting on his own responsibility to the Judge of all, and guided by the light of revealed truth, is warranted to follow out the decision which he has formed; and a majority of persons are equally warranted, in their associated capacity, to carry out in action, the judgment at which they have unitedly arrived. They are individually and collectively responsible to the Prince of the Kings of the earth, and are bound to render faithful obedience to his will made known to them; and though a minority have arrived at a different decision, and firmly oppose their procedure, they must obey their Divine Lord rather than their fellows. They are not warranted to coerce the minority into the adoption of their sentiments, nor to use means, except those of argument and persuasion, to alter their position; but neither are they warranted to desist from carrying into effect the practical measures on which they have unitedly resolved, merely because a minority are opposed to them. Let it be remembered, however, that, as an individual is entitled to do only what is right, and is liable to punishment if he do what is wrong, so a majority of a church or a nation are also
13
entitled to do only what is right; and if they adopt measures that are sinful, and proceed in courses opposed to Divine authority, they are, both as individuals and as a collective body, liable to the just displeasure of the Lord, and the infliction of punishment by his authority and power. It is not a mere majority of numbers, but a majority acting in obedience to the revealed will of the Supreme Governor, that are entitled to claim subjection from others; but every individual and every association being under obligation to perform his will, they have a right to the subjection of others, in so far as that subjection is necessary to the faithful accomplishment of his service, and the advancement of the true interests of the community.
V.—A minority, acting under an enlightened sense of duty towards God, are warranted and bound to refuse compliance with the sinful demands of a majority.
It is possible for a majority to err,—to adopt opinions and follow courses in public matters that are contrary to the will of the Divine Lawgiver; and in such cases they have no just right to claim obedience from the minority. No man, nor body of men, has a right to do what is sinful. But the larger number being possessed of greater physical power, can unwarrantably and unjustly coerce the smaller number; and it has often been that, in the event of the minority’s refusal, they have been subjected to grievous suffering. Now, as the larger number are accountable to God for the principles on which they act, and the course which they pursue; so the smaller number are accountable to the same High authority for the opinions they entertain, and the line of conduct they follow. And, having formed their sentiments by a careful investigation of revealed truth, and feeling their primary responsibility to God only; when the majority require them to do what is contrary to their enlightened convictions of duty, they are warranted and bound to refuse. Daniel and his fellows were in the minority when commanded by Nebuchadnezzar to bow down and worship the golden image; but, being satisfied that they ought to worship
14
the God of Israel only, they followed the path of duty in refusing, at the risk of their lives, to yield to the unrighteous decree of the heathenish tyrant. The Apostles Peter and John were in the minority when called before the chief priests and rulers of Jerusalem, and straitly threatened that they should speak thenceforth to no man in the name of Jesus; but knowing their responsibility to a higher power than the Jewish Council, and feeling their obligation to serve their glorified Master even unto death, they followed the path of duty in obeying Him rather than men. Paul was in the minority when he stood on the stairs of the castle of Jerusalem, and followed the way of duty in endeavouring to still the tumult of the furious multitude, and in rehearsing to them the wonderful doings of the Lord: And he was still in the minority when he appeared before Agrippa, and obeyed his heavenly Master in not merely pleading his own cause, but also boldly maintaining and publishing the truths of the Gospel, when it was on account of these very truths that his liberty and life were in danger. But it is possible for a minority likewise to err, and being either deceived, or wilfully perverse, respecting truth and duty, they may set themselves in opposition to what is right, and by resisting the exercise of proper authority, may bring upon themselves severe tribulation. In such a case they are themselves responsible for the mischief. The majority are doing what is right in adopting their laws, and maintaining their legitimate authority; the minority are doing wrong in entertaining such sentiments, and in making such resistance; and they are accountable to God for that wrong, and are justly punished for it, except in so far as their minds have been blinded and misled by the conduct of others. A thief may conceive a desire to possess the property of his neighbour, and by some process of self-deception, may persuade himself that he is warranted to steal it; and his own act is the cause of his righteous punishment. A band of ruffians may league together for purposes of villainy, and bid defiance to the power both of man and of God, and may contrive to persuade themselves that they may warrantably exert their individual and united energies in
15
damaging the property, the persons, and characters of their neighbours; and when their power is ineffectual for the execution of their mischievous designs, and for their defence when their mischief is detected, they have themselves to blame for all the suffering and misery they subsequently endure as the punishment of their offences. A band of fanatics blinded by delusion, may imagine their duty to consist in propagating, even by force, their pernicious tenets, and may actually employ unlawful means in furthering their ends; and when their attempts are defeated, and suffering in consequence returns upon themselves, they are to be regarded as the original producers of that suffering, and as experiencing a just reward. If they have been deceived by superior craft, and others have taken advantage of their simplicity, their guilt is thereby palliated; but there is still criminality in yielding to the deceitful temptations, and in prosecuting, with such hearty zeal, the designs of the tempter. But if a company of men, enlightened by the Word of God, inspired with zeal for the honour of Christ, firm in the maintenance of truth, and unflinching in the performance of duty, be assailed by their adversaries; and attempts be made by the existing powers of the land to coerce them into courses of disobedience to the King of heaven; they are warranted and bound to retain their steadfastness at the cost of fines, and imprisonment, and banishment, and death; and those by whom such sufferings are inflicted on them, and those by whom their persecutors are encouraged and assisted in their work of mischief, are accountable to the King of kings for the pains thus endured by his faithful subjects. It is right for a man to defend himself against assault, if defence be in his power; and if a company of such devoted men be assailed when engaged in the peaceable performance of their duty, they may stand on the defensive; but they are not warranted to make forcible aggressive movements, even against usurped authority, unless there be some rational prospect of their being able successfully to destroy the power of the oppressor; and when they have such a prospect, they will no longer be in the position of a minority, but in that of a triumphant majority of the nation;
16
and for the attainment of that position, they must endure, with patience and labour, to disseminate a knowledge of truth and duty throughout the land; and when this is accomplished, their deliverance will be achieved. In a case of foreign invasion, the way of duty has fewer restrictions. The invader must be dealt with on the same principles on which a man should deal with a lawless ruffian that had entered his house for purposes of wickedness, except that an individual can have recourse to the protection of the existing authorities in his neighbourhood, while an invaded nation may have no such earthly protection against the superior force of the invader. But as the individual is warranted, if he can, to drive the ruffian from his premises, so is a nation warranted to drive the invader from its shores, if circumstances concur to give success. It is prudent to refrain from such an attempt, when there is no probability of success, because such an abortive measure would only give the hostile bands occasion for further misdeeds; but it is a regard to their own safety alone, that, in such circumstances, should restrain the injured and oppressed from expelling the invaders by force.
VI.—The persons appointed to exercise authority over men ought to be fearers and servants of the Lord.
All power and authority belonging primarily to God, and being derived originally from Him, are to be employed in obedience to His directions; even the authority which a parent possesses over his offspring, is to be exercised only in accordance with the will of the Creator from whom it has been received. And authority, whether Ecclesiastical or civil, must be used, not for purposes of selfishness, but in serving the Lord of all. But it is impossible that an enemy to Divine truth and law, can fulfil the end for which authority is conferred; and the people who appoint over them the known and avowed enemies of true religion, have no rational prospect that the proper ends of authority shall be accomplished. It is only those who know and serve the true God, and whose hearts are set on the ad-
17
vancement of His glory in the performance of His wise and righteous command, that can understand, and willingly carry into effect the purposes He contemplates. There are many who have the appearance of godliness, who are destitute of the reality; and there are many who succeed in concealing from the view of others the immoralities in which they deliberately indulge, so that it is often difficult to determine whether persons proposed for filling places of power, are the friends or the enemies of Christ and His truth; and consequently the people may often be mistaken or over-reached, and their brightest expectations may be blasted, by the aspect in which the objects of their admiration afterwards appear, and by the course of administration they pursue. But there are also many respecting whose conduct and character no doubt need be entertained, who live in the practice of open wickedness, and avowedly despise the truths of God; and when such persons are appointed to places of authority, there can be no rational ground to expect that in their official station they will respect the Divine law, and encourage the spread and practice of the religion of Jesus. It is possible for persons that have been placed in power while still ungodly, to be afterwards changed in heart and conduct, and by their subsequent faithfulness and zeal to disappoint the fears which their past history was calculated to awaken; but the people are not to reckon on such probabilities. The power to be exercised, and the kind of persons suitable for sustaining it, and the ends for which it ought to be employed, are clearly exhibited in the Holy Scriptures; and the persons by whom office-bearers are appointed, are not at liberty to disregard the instructions and warnings of revealed truth, and to act on their own groundless imaginations under the influence of vain and sinful hopes.
It should be remembered, however, that no man in the present world has arrived at perfection, and that even those who fear God are still chargeable with numerous transgressions and shortcomings; and consequently a man is not to be deprived of his authority because he does not fully come up to the standard of duty; nor is another to be refused because infirmities
18
and blemishes have appeared in his life. It is not occasional failing, but confirmed and habitual wickedness without signs of repentance, that constitutes a proper barrier in the way of a man’s appointment; and it is not an occasional wrong act of administration, that forms a sufficient reason for the deposition of a ruler, but an habitual course of misgovernment and continued perversion of authority. Saul was appointed by the direction of the Lord to regal power in Israel, but no one is warranted to say that his previous life was free from blame; and he was continued in the possession and exercise of power, until he had proved himself unfit for it by a long course of mismanagement. David was raised to authority in his stead, and Israel enjoyed much advantage through his skilful administration; but amid various blemishes there is one heinous act conspicuous in his history; yet though guilty before God and his crime known to the people over whom he ruled, he was not deposed from the high office which he filled. Had his life, like the lives of many others, been characterised by habitual acts of adultery and murder, he would have been declared unfit to sway the sceptre of the consecrated tribes of Israel, and would have been cast from his high position by the power of God, if not by the hands of the people. But it is indispensable that respect be had to the general tenor of the lives of those who are proposed as candidates for office; and other qualifications being equal in different persons, those only should be appointed who give evidence of being men that fear and serve the Lord. Intellectual vigour, lengthened experience, or diplomatic skill, will not compensate for the want of religious principle and conduct; and while it is groundless imagination to suppose that high gifts of wisdom and sagacity cannot be found among the pious, or in connection with religious feeling, it is yet better and safer to appoint a true hearted subject of the Almighty though his other gifts be even inferior to many of the servants of wickedness, than to select and invest with power an individual, who, however splendid his other talents and attainments, is yet a stranger to the power of Divine truth.
19
VII.—The Rulers should be chosen by the People.
Except in the relation of parents and children, all men are naturally equal in the matter of rule; and no one is entitled on his own responsibility to place himself in the seat of authority and to demand obedience and homage from his neighbours. And as one is not entitled to prefer such a claim of superiority, so neither are a few entitled to place the object of their choice in power without the concurrence and approbation of the majority. If a small number of a community assume the right of appointing office-bearers over the whole without consulting the general voice, they are depriving others of a right received from God, and are exercising an undelegated power which amounts to an assumption of the prerogatives of Deity. Had the people generally committed to the few, the trust to select persons fit for office, and place them in the seat of authority, there would have been some ground for their procedure; but when there is no such trust committed to them by the voice of the larger number, their whole proceedings are unwarrantable and void of moral sanction; and the person whom they see meet to appoint, is no more entitled to official authority than the meanest beggar in the land. They may be able by force to keep him where they have placed him; and he may occupy for many years the room which another should have filled; and by the over-ruling Providence of God, who often brings good out of evil, he may be even instrumental in doing some good; and after he has been appointed it is possible for the people over whom he has been set, to give either a tacit or explicit acquiescence in the arrangement that has been made to their hands; and such acquiescence and approbation given by the people, will furnish him with a title to official dignity and power which the few could never have conferred; and when matters are thus settled there must be other reasons in existence before the relation formed can be warrantably broken, though the mode of appointment be still objected to. But let the voice of the majority be lifted up against the appointment of
20
such a man as the few have selected for them, and refuse all consent to his investiture with office, and the signal is given for that man to withdraw; and no power on earth but that which has rejected him can give him the authority after which he was aspiring. The right of choosing and appointing has been given by the Lord to the people themselves; and while the concurrence of other powers is needful to the actual investment with office, there can be no conveyance of a right to govern, except through the channel of the people’s voice.
In a regularly organized community, the minority are bound to accept of the choice of the majority, unless there be reasons on account of which the minority judge and feel it to be sinful to submit. If these reasons which influence the minds of the smaller number be unknown to the majority, and if they be true in fact and can be proved, they ought to be made public, that opportunity may be given to all the electors to consider them, so that no party may be deceived and led astray by the untimely concealment of facts, that may afterwards become public, and that would have altered the choice if known in time; and if these reasons be in themselves sufficient to disqualify the person on whom the majority are disposed to agree, it is their duty to abandon their object and to choose another that is judged more suitable. But if the reasons alleged be insufficient to constitute a valid ground of objection, the minority are bound to dismiss them, and acquiesce in the choice. The same reasons will weigh differently on different minds; and when the same facts which influence the fewer party, are made known to the others, they may still judge them insufficient to form a valid ground of objection, and proceed as they had previously resolved; and in doing so they act on their own responsibility to God, being accountable, if their judgment be wrong, for the course which the minority are constrained by a sense of duty to pursue, and for the suffering and deprivation of privilege to which they are subjected. But if the reasons urged by the objectors be insufficient, and the judgment which they have formed be wrong, they are themselves accountable for the course they adopt, and for the evil which their opposi-
21
tion produces, except in so far as their minds have been unwarrantably influenced by others. If, however, the objections urged by the minority be in themselves sufficient, and the majority still persevere in the course on which they had previously resolved, instead of the smaller number being bound to acquiesce and submit, they are bound to continue their opposition at whatever cost, in such a manner as their circumstances and the Word of God may direct.
VIII.—The proper mode of election is by delegation.
It is impossible for the inhabitants of an extensive tract of country, and especially when the population is dense, to assemble at any time in one place; so that the choice of a person, or of persons to govern an extensive territory, cannot be accomplished by one assemblage of the people. But let the country be divided into districts; let the inhabitants of each district meet in some convenient spot, and choose a representative from among themselves; let these representatives meet with others of the same class from the adjoining districts, and elect from among themselves a representative of a still higher degree; and let these secondary representatives meet in one assembly, and choose a president or chief. There would thus be a following out of the same plan of government, recommended by Jethro the father-in-law of Moses, approved of God, and exemplified in the rulers of tens, and rulers of fifties, and rulers of hundreds, and rulers of thousands among the Hebrews in the wilderness, with Moses as their Chief.