Since the last time I had the honour of addressing you on polemical
matters, I have met with a passage in the writings of M. Auguste Comte
which afforded me much pleasure. It seemed to be the one word for which
I had been waiting, and confirmed many of my own impressions and
speculations. He lays down two propositions: first, that the
constructive politics of the future must be based on the history of the
past; and second, that political science is a composite study, and
presupposes the complete apprehension of every branch of science,
beginning with the physical, such as astronomy, and ending with the
moral, such as ethics and sociology. M. Comte evidently does not regard
as a vain dream and imaginative speculation the theory that it will be
possible for statesmen to calculate a policy, and to determine a course
of action by purely scientific considerations. May I entertain the hope
that in this university, where all branches of physical science have
found a home, and are studied by most able and learned professors, the
science of politics may be pursued under most favourable circumstances?
I trust that each professor will bring before me the results of their
deliberations, and contribute to the growth of this particular science
for which our university has already become deservedly famous.
My present lecture is devoted to the important consideration of _Law_.
At first sight it may appear to you that the wills and passions of
mankind are so diverse and unknowable, that it would be absurd to
suppose that they can be calculated, or rendered amenable to any law.
But Professor Amos has pointed out that in proportion as we examine
history, and compare the actions present and past of different nations
and states, the more uniform does human nature appear; the more
calculable the actions, sentiments, and emotions of large masses of
people. As we have already stated, the difficulties of the study are not
likely to deter the professors of Girtham College from the pursuit of
any particular branch of science.
_A priori_ we might suppose from analogy that these polemical laws
existed, as there is no department of nature which is not governed by
law. It is an essential feature in nature, and also in government. What
is political economy but the study of certain laws of nature? These were
first discovered by Adam Smith, and have since been traced and estimated
by such men as Ricardo, the two Mills, Professor Cairnes, Jevons, and
many others. Moreover, our physical constitutions are governed by laws,
which physicians have determined, and which it is perilous to resist.
Our moral constitution is also governed by laws, which evidently exist,
although it is difficult to find them out. But the nation is only an
assemblage of individuals; and since individuals are so governed, it is
only natural to suppose that the nation, composed of individuals, is so
constituted and controlled. And not only is that true, but we shall see
that polemical laws are as permanent and universal, as invariable and
irreversible, as the laws of nature which regulate the courses of the
heavenly bodies, and raise the tides, or depress the sandstone hills.
We may notice first the preponderant impulse observable in a nation's
life in favour of supporting existing facts and institutions; and every
reformer has discovered the difficulty and danger of changing or
opposing the customs and habits of the people. As a wheel will travel
most smoothly along a well-worn groove, whereby friction is diminished,
so there is a natural national tendency always to run along those paths
with which the habits and customs of the people have made them familiar.
This law is nothing else than Newton's first law of motion, which is
quite as applicable to human masses as to lifeless matter. The tendency
of matter to remain at rest, if unmoved by any external agency, and of
persisting to move after it has once been set in motion, is a
conservative tendency; and is as true in political science as in any
other.
The special branch of our science, which we may call the _Biology of
Politics_, shows how absolute is the domain of law in polemical matters.
The law of human life is that men are born, grow, become strong and
vigorous, and then decay and die. This is the law of life, to which we
must all yield an enforced obedience. This same law is observed to be at
work in the heavenly bodies; and astronomy shows us that planets are
born, flourish, and at length die, just as our human bodies do. The moon
is, as you may have observed, a dead planet, such as our earth may be
some day. The same growth and decay are also manifest in national life.
First, there is the birth of the nation, which sometimes lies a long
time in a dormant state, and then wakes up to life and energy. China and
Russia are examples of dormant States, just waking from a long sleep of
childishness and ignorance. The next stage is the strong an healthy
period of its existence, which England is at present enjoying; and then,
after various stages of gradual decline, we come to the senile period of
national life, when every energy and faculty, every national feeling and
power of invention, are completely exhausted. As an example of this
depressing condition, we may mention Turkey and several of the effete
States of South America. Sometimes, when life is nearly extinct in the
human body, physicians have made use of the power of galvanism, in order
to revive the dying energies. This process of galvanizing a State into
life was tried by Lord Palmerston and others on the worn-out frame of
Turkey. But such attempts can only meet with partial and transitory
success; and where the loss of national power and faculty betokens the
senile period of the nation's existence, it is vain to attempt to
restore its former life and energy. The study of the biology of
politics presents many interesting and important details in this special
branch of knowledge; and I commend this part of our subject to the
special attention of the professor of physiology. The law of development
is observable in nations as in nature. Recent scientific discoveries
have tended to take away all ideas of _chance_ in the workings of
nature, and have substituted _law_ instead of it. It would be
unscientific and incorrect to speak of the world being formed by the
'fortuitous concourse of atoms.' So we cannot speak of a State being
generated in this manner. Laws--economical, geographical,
natural--preside over the formation of States and nations, and produce
their further development.
The laws of political motion occupy the same prominent place in our new
science as Newton's laws do in ordinary dynamics. These are very
important in calculating the positions which various States will occupy
in the future. First, we have the _doctrine of nationality_, which
prevented the progress of Austria into Italy, and of the Bourbons in
Naples, and produced the amalgamation of the small German States in the
great empire of Germany. The second law of political motion is the
doctrine of the _independence_ of all true States, and the equality of
all States to each other. This had its growth in feudalism; and all the
chief wars of modern times have been the result of the efforts of nature
to establish this law of independence. The doctrine of intervention is a
modification of the preceding law, and is applicable when the law of
necessity demands its use, such as the restoration of order after
protracted anarchy, the abolition of slave trade, etc. The third law is
the _law of morality_. Just as for each man there exists a _right_ and a
_wrong_; just as _duty_ and _conscience_ are certain elements in his
daily motion, which dictate his course of action, although he may chose
to neglect them; so a nation is bound by the same moral laws which
govern the individual; and a nation errs if it transgresses them.
Christianity is the agent which has produced so powerful an influence
in making men obey the dictates of conscience and walk in the path of
duty; and I read with thankfulness the conclusion of Mr. Amos, that
Christianity has triumphed quite as much in moralizing secular politics
as it has in the sphere of individual life.
* * * * *
These are some of the principal laws of motion which I have observed at
work in various States and nations. Inasmuch as political science
embraces, in addition to the physical sciences, all those branches which
are contained in ethics, economics, jurisprudence, sociology and others,
the laws of each are generally applicable to the whole grand subject of
which my lectures treat. Other general laws may be deduced, and have
been enumerated in my previous lectures, from the social properties of
curves and conics; and when our researches are complete we may hope to
produce a code of laws for the guidance of our statesmen which maybe of
immense use in determining the policies of the future. Already there is
strong evidence that the affairs of this country are being conducted on
sound scientific principles, rather than by any species of guess-work or
haphazard contrivances. The use of history is recognised as extremely
important in determining a future line of conduct; and statesmen are in
the habit of endeavouring to find from their study of the past what is
the logical sequence of events. Just as mathematicians endeavour to
determine the law of a series of figures, and having found the law, can
write down the next, and the next, _ad infinitum_; so scientific
politicians may be able soon to establish the various laws of a series
of events, and calculate their course of actions. That there is
considerable progress in this direction is manifest by the value which
they place upon statistics, and their continued use of this important
information.
There are a few great evils in our present system which are strongly
opposed to any scientific methods in politics; and in the interests of
the country as well as those of science they ought to be removed. One
great evil is the want of political and scientific knowledge on the part
of the electors, who are in the habit of choosing their representatives
on personal grounds, or party considerations, rather than on sound
principles of political science. All this is opposed to any idea of law.
Owing to the ignorance of the electors they fall an easy prey to
adventurers and unprincipled politicians, who make all kinds of specious
promises, tempt them with all manner of baits, and make self-interest
instead of the welfare of the State the principle of voting. Selfishness
is the ruin of social life and intercourse, the destroyer of all
happiness, peace, and mutual trust in family life or in society. It is
the root of most of the faults, vices, and crimes in the individual; and
who can tell the endless disasters which will befall the State, where
selfishness is the chief motive-power of the electors and the elected? A
selfish statesman, one who goes into Parliament to gain his own ends and
forward his own personal interests, is a disgrace to society--
'Feeling himself, his own low self, the whole,
When he by sacred sympathy might make
The whole one self. Self, that no alien knows!
Self, far diffused as fancy's wing can travel!
Self, spreading still, oblivious of its own,
Yet all of all possessing!'
I have said that the ignorance of the electorate makes them an easy prey
to such men; and until they have learnt to detect the false from the
true, until they become acquainted with the elements of political
science, and have been taught that their own selfish interests are not
the highest aims of social government, it is vain to hope for a
reasonable method of regulating the affairs of the nation, based upon
logical laws and scientific principles.
And how is this work of educating the electors to be accomplished? Not,
I maintain, by furious speeches and rhetorical displays; not by bribery,
baits and banter; but by patient, never-ceasing labour, by lectures on
history and science, by individual instruction, is the great work to be
accomplished upon which the security and stability of the country
depend.
Then we may hope that the 'Reign of Law' in polemical science may be
ushered in with the joyful acclamations of an enlightened and united
people, and its benign influence extend from the throne of the monarch
and the council-chamber of his ministers to the hearth of the cottager.
Politicians will rule by law; policies be calculated by laws; people
vote by law; and then methinks I see in my mind (to use the words of the
blind old poet) a noble and puissant nation rousing herself like a
strong man after sleep, and shaking her invincible locks; methinks I see
her as an eagle, renewing her mighty youth, and kindling her undazzled
eyes at the full mid-day beam; purging and unsealing her long-abused
sight at the fountain itself of heavenly radiance; while the whole noise
of timorous and flocking birds flutter about amazed at what she means.
Such is the glorious vision of the 'Reign of Law.' Let it be the
business of every Englishman and Englishwoman to arrange the framework
of our social and political system, that law may have an uninterrupted
sway; then shall we be a united, prosperous, and contented people, and
the reign of lawless agitators, bribery-mongers, and counterfeit
statesmen will have passed away into the oblivion and obscurity of a
more suitable but less favoured region.