Welfare as Dependent on Policy.
As generally at all points, so the materialism of the age particularly
appears, in that the political economists take _wealth_, defining their
science in the vulgar acceptation, rather than in the good old English
sense, _welfare_, _well-being_. If they occasionally venture a remark
of a more liberal bearing on the general subject of public welfare;
such is the exception to the general rule. Money, with its equivalents
and exchangeables, is their usual theme in treating of wealth; thought
the common use of the word economy might suggest a higher science. For
he does not exhaust our idea of a good economist, who manages to have
at command abundant materials for rendering home happy; while, for lack
of wisdom to turn such materials to account, that home may be less
happy than the next-door neighbor's, where want is hardly staved off.
We exact, for fulfilling that character, wisdom in using the material
means--provision for physical, intellectual, and moral training of the
household--the just apportionment between labor and recreation-the
true contentment, which frets not at present imperfection, while it
still presses on to that perfection conceived to be attainable. Our
writers on political economy would do well, to give the word as liberal
a latitude of sense, as it legitimately assumes, when used in its
primitive meaning of _household management_.
But, rather than attempt to raise a scientific term so much above its
received sense, I use another word, and say, Policy must begin with the
admission, that self-love is the mightiest mover of human conduct; and
not a self-love enlightened, deep, calculating, directed to the sources
of fullest contentment; but following the groveling estimate, that
riches, power, office, ease, being the object of envy or admiration,
are the chief goods of life.
Every business man admits, that his security for men's conduct must be
found in their self-interest. He admits thus much practically, so for
as his own business is concerned; the exceptions being so rare, as not
to justify neglect of the general rule. Yet, neither business men nor
politicians grasp the principle clearly, nor consequently apply it
consistently. And he who would make a new application of it, is met
with charges of great uncharitableness.
This backwardness to generalize a rule, found so necessary practically
to be followed, may be resolved into that flattering conceit of human
dignity, which is yielded reluctantly, inch by inch, as plain
demonstration wrests it away. And further, self-love conceals itself,
because generally it operates first to pervert the judgment. The
consciousness of preferring private interest to worthier
considerations, is too painful to be endured. The man therefore
strives, but too successfully, to misrepresent the case to himself.
He contrives to make that seem right, which tends to his own advantage.
But though indirect, the operation of self-love is none the less sure.
Whether the individual be any the less blamable, because self-love
assumes this disguise, is not now to be considered.
There are individuals, to whom implicit confidence in their unguarded
honesty, proves but an added motive to be more tremulously sensitive,
not to abuse such confidence. There are, whom respect for their
calling binds wholly to more carefulness, to prove worthy of such
respect. So always if one is thoroughly pervaded with the right
spirit. But dealing with bodies of men, as men yet are, these two
rules should shape political institutions and social relations.
First, so far as men can command confidence and respect, for the sake
of birth, calling, or office, so far they are relieved from the
necessity of seeking the same by personal qualifications; and
accordingly a body of men so protected, will perceptibly fall short
of the average, in the staple elements of respectability.
Respect for station or calling so ample is here meant, as to satisfy
the average desire of approbation. The extent, to which this is
satisfied by the respect paid by the child, to the parent, for the
relation's sake, is so moderate, as one of the elements tending to the
formation of character, that it may be expected to operate generally as
it universally would, where the right spirit fully reigns. The remark
holds good, with moderate abatement, in the relation of teacher and
pupil.
In the infancy of the Christian church, the relation between pastor and
flock was closely analogous to that between parents and children. On
the one side were men of a disinterested and paternal spirit, so
earnestly living the new life hid with Christ in God, that hardly the
possibility could be conceived of a desire to exalt and magnify self,
over the ignorance and degradation of their spiritual charge. On the
other side were men, children in knowledge, incapable of estimating the
ministry simply after the consciousness of benefits received. We are
not then to condemn the arrangement, which clothed the ministry with an
official dignity, the office being revered independently of the claims
of the man; nor to wonder, if the arrangement outlived the necessity,
or passed the bounds of moderation; or if it was not fully calculated,
the danger, lest men of the primitive spirit yield places to those of
an inferior stamp; and how truly eternal vigilance is the cost, at
which all things here must be saved from their tendencies to
deterioration. Accordingly the history of the Papacy for centuries
has been, that its ministers are sure of unbounded respect from the
populace, independently of their personal claims. The consequence is,
that while a few are thus moved to heroic and almost angelic devotion
to the spiritual good of their flocks, the many would never command
respect for what they are as men.
Similar remarks may be applied to the infancy of civil society. The
prevalence of monarchy and aristocracy has been too universal, to be
charged wholly upon force or chance. And yet in the origin, rational
considerations can hardly be supposed to have been distinctly
entertained. Still there may have been a dim consciousness of thoughts
like these: It is so necessary that civil rulers be at all events
respected, and so uncertain how to secure due respect to men meriting
it, that we must invest a class of men with a factitious official
dignity, and take the risk--rather the certainty--of its proving, in
most cases, a cover for personal unworthiness, some degrees below the
ordinary standard of humanity. If there existed a dim consciousness of
such reasoning, it might have been well entertained.
The second rule of Policy--the master maxim of political wisdom--is,
that no class of men must be expected to concur heartily, for
extirpating the evils, from which its own revenues and importance are
derived. Speaking of men acting in a body, there is no room for the
many exceptions, necessarily admitted to the rule, that with the
individual self-love is the ruling motive. The individual sometimes
yields to nobler considerations, than the calculations of self-interest.
In the corporation, the _esprit du corps_--the clannish
spirit--is sure to master it over public spirit. Devotion to the
honor, aggrandizement, wealth and power of the order, company, or
corporation, is more sure to control their acts as individuals. It is
less liable to self-rebuke for conscious meanness. It looks somewhat
more like the public spirit which ought to be. It is less liable to
occasional counteractions from impulses of honor, humanity, or regard
to reputation.
Accordingly a body of men, so constituted as to find its best flourish
short of the perfection of the whole social system, will inevitably,
sooner or later, prove an obstacle to the onward march of improvement.
A corporation is not necessarily a grievance and a sore on the body
politic. If it can have its full flourish, without let to the progress
of society, it may be harmless or beneficent.
"_Sooner or later_;" be this condition marked, in estimating the
spiritual policy of Rome. The body of reverends, which mediates
between God and men, finds its best flourish, in just such degree of
popular intelligence as suffices for comprehending the specious
arguments, on which rest the claims of Holy Mother Church; and such
amount of conscientiousness as galls the offender, till he has
purchased absolution. More intelligence generally prevailing, and
better appreciation of the divine law as a living rule of duty, would
abate the awe in which the priesthood is held, and diminish the
revenues accruing from mediating between offending man and his offended
Maker. But Christianity found the world sunk below this moderate
standard of intelligence and morals. The best flourish of the
priesthood required in the people cultivation of understanding and
conscience, up to the point of caring for their account in heaven's
record. So the faulty relation between priesthood and people did not
at once appear in the results; and, accordingly, the weight of the
qualification, _sooner or later_.
But in the early growth of society, considerations like the above have
been little attended to, compared with the obvious advantages of the
division of labor. As ordinarily each handicraft is best exercised by
those earliest and steadiest in their devotion to the trade; so it is
argued, universally, that the several departments of the public service
will be best attended to, by being left to their respective trades,
guilds, faculties, orders, or corporations, each strictly guarded from
unhallowed intrusion. So religion has been left to its official
functionaries, prescribing articles of belief and terms of salvation by
a divine right,--legislation to princes and nobles, equally claiming by
the same right to give law in temporals; and so of other general
interests.
Now a movement has been slowly going on, through some centuries, for
working society into conformity with a rational rule; a rule not
overlooking the advantages of the division of labor, but taking in too
such qualifying considerations as the healthful stimulus of free
competition, watchfulness over public functionaries, and the necessity
of harmonizing private and corporate interests, with public duty.
The movement has been slow; for the actors have dimly apprehended the
part they were acting, and the principles by themselves vindicated.
It has consisted of two principle acts. The Reformation carried
republicanism into religion: our own Revolution into legislation.
The two movements were parts of one whole; and, to get at the
principles at bottom, either will serve for both, as well as for what
may remain for finishing the work begun.
The Reformation having been conducted by theologians, it was natural
that disproportionate importance should have been attached to
theological niceties. So far as Luther was right in regarding the
doctrine of justification by faith only as the great article at issue,
it must have been, because the opposite doctrine favored the conceit of
a mysterious mediating power vested in a priesthood--a conceit so
favorable to the aggrandizement of the order thus distinguished. But
considered as a _politic_ movement--as an advance in rightly adjusting
the social relations--the Reformation aimed principally at that ill
arrangement, by which the authorized expounders of the law divine found
their account, in involving that law in a glorious uncertainty, and
entrapping people in a frequent violation thereof. Considered as a
politic institution, Protestantism differs essentially from Popery, in
that it makes more of prevention than of remedy; gives the ministry its
best flourish, in the best welfare of the whole body; and pays for
spiritual health, rather than for spiritual sickness. If all
Protestants do not consistently so, the fact accords with the dim
understanding, on both sides, of the essential points contested.
This dim understanding further appears, in that after all the political
discussion which has been, the success of republican institutions is
still appealed to, as vindicating the reign of justice and benevolence
in the public mind; mankind have within so much of the divine, are so
self-disposed to do right, that they do not need much control, but may
pretty safely be left to their own guidance. Nor is it left to the
mere demagogue to talk thus.
Doubtful it may be, whether it should be called dimness of
understanding, or rather perverse ingenuity, that men reason thus, when
the facts are: So general is the disposition to abuse power, that
wherever it is accumulated, it will surely be abused; accordingly it
must be distributed as equally as possible. If government be made the
business of one part of the community--one tenth, or one hundredth, or
one thousandth--that part will inevitably exalt self, at the cost of
the others. So strong is self-love, turned towards temporal interests,
so acute to discern what tends to the one desired end, and so sure to
bend every thing that way, that men's temporal interests are pretty
safe in their own hands, and safe no where else. Now the legitimate
end of civil government being, to secure the temporal welfare of _all_,
_all_ must have a share in it, or the excluded portions must find their
rights neglected.
It may have favored the common mistake, that the leaders in successful
republican movements have so often shown a heroic self-devotion and
disinterestedness--men like Luther, and Washington. But these are the
exceptions, the rare gems of humanity. If they were the fair
specimens, their work would never have been needed. Then we might
leave to a class the regulation, whether of our spirituals or
temporals, with the like advantage, that we leave the making of our
watches or our shoes to their respective trades. But the indistinct
apprehension, why the advantages of the division of labor fail in the
matter of government, accords well with the observation, that
republican principles make slow progress in the world, are held in
gross inconsistencies; and the most zealous assertors thereof in one
department, are oft found most strenuously opposed in others.
It is thus that we are so slow to conform to one rule, our arrangements
for spiritual instruction; for preserving health; for preventing crime;
for cheaply, expeditiously, and satisfactorily settling disputed
claims; for furnishing the whole people with instruction in their
rights, interests, and duties; as well as that thorough cultivation of
the whole man, which the full success of republicanism requires.