Governments, as we now see them, exist in various forms, and they exist by virtue of their power to maintain themselves. This power may bo mere force in the government and fear in the governed. Com bined with the power of the government there may be the opinion of a majority in favour of the government, or of a number sufficiently large and united to control the rest ; and this opinion may be founded either on the advantage which such number or majority conceive that they derive from the actual form of government, or the advantage which they and all the rest arc supposed to derive from such govern ment. The opinion of a considerable number may be strong enough to overthrow a government or to maintain it, but in either case it is not the opinion of all.
The real origin of government lies in the constitution of man's nature. Man is a social animal, and cannot exist out of society. is of necessity born in a society, that is, a family, the smallest element to which we can reduce a state. Ile who requires not to live in a society, says Aristotle, must be a beast or a god. (' i. '2). The nature of man compels him to seek union with tho other sex. A man by himself is not a complete being : by the constitution of their nature man and woman must unite ; and this is the foundation of a family, Those who accept the Mosaic account of the creation have then) a clear statement of the origin of a family; and the father'e authority is as much in accordance with the constitution of our nature as the union of the father and the mother. The various modes in which the descendants of a common pair might be detached from their primitive seats are infinite ; and the modes in which they might be formed into political societies are infinite also. But if we have no account of them, it is useless to speculate what the precise modes may have been. Man, says Aristotle, is by nature a political animal; and by his nature he has an impulse to political union. Ile therefore follows the law of his nature by living in political society, as much as he obeys it by uniting himself with a woman. The form of any particular government, and
the mode in which it may have been established, are the accidents, not the essentials, of political union, the real foundation of which is in our nature. But inasmuch as every community exits for some good end (Aristotle), we estimate the value of any particular government by its fitness for this end, and the accidents of its form are subordinate to that for which pursuant to its nature it exists. Its origin may in many cases have been as obscure, and as little perceived, as the origin of those customs which exist in such endless variety in the world.
Nobody supposes that customs originated in universal consent, or that people who follow them, or st least the majority who follow them, ever consider why they follow them. He who can trace the origin of customs can trace the origin of government.
The theory of men living in a state of nature and thence proceeding to form political societies, has apparently derived some countenance from the condition of many savages. There are perhaps people who may be said to have no government, if it be true that among some savages there is no bond of union except that of families. If this is so, each family is ruled by its head, like the families of the Cyclops (Aristotle, Po i. 1), so long as the head can maintain his dominion. This state, if it exists anywhere, is perhaps what some people call a state of nature ; but it is in fact a very imperfect state of nature, for the perfect state of nature is a political society, because it is that state to which the nature of our constitution impels us as the beat. The savage in his lowest condition bears the same relation to the man who is a member of a political body, that the man who has not his senses bears to the man who has his full understanding. Both the savage and the idiot are imperfect men : they are the deviations from the course of nature.