liberty-第9节
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
t not at the day appointed； kill me。 Another thing if thus： If I doe it not； though you should offer to kill me； I will not resist： All men； if need be； contract the first way； but there is need sometimes。 This second way； none； neither is it ever needfull； for in the meer state of nature； if you have a mind to kill； that state it selfe affords you a Right； insomuch as you need not first trust him； if for breach of trust you will afterward kill him。 But in a Civill State； where the Right of life； and death； and of all corporall punishment is with the Supreme； that same Right of killing cannot be granted to any private person。 Neither need the Supreme himselfe contract with any man patiently to yeeld to his punishment； but onely this； that no man offer to defend others from him。 If in the state of nature； as between two Cities； there should a Contract be made； on condition of killing； if it were not perform'd； we must presuppose another Contract of not killing before the appointed day。 Wherefore on that day； if there be no performance； the right of Warre returnes； that is； an hostile state； in which all things are lawfull； and therefore resistance also。 Lastly； by the contract of not resisting； we are oblig'd of two Evills to make choice of that which seemes the greater； for certaine Death is a greater evill then Fighting； but of two Evills it is impossible not to chuse the least： By such a Compact therefore we should be tyed to impossibilities； which is contrary to the very nature of compacts。 XIX。 Likewise no man is tyed by any Compacts whatsoever to accuse himself； or any other； by whose dammage he is like to procure himselfe a bitter life； wherefore neither is a Father oblig'd to bear witnesse against his Sonne； nor a Husband against his Wife； nor a Sonne against his Father； nor any man against any one； by whose meanes he hath his subsistance； for in vain is that testimony which is presum'd to be corrupted from nature； but although no man be tyed to accuse himself by any compact； yet in a publique tryall he may； by torture； be forc'd to make answer； but such answers are no testimony of the fact； but helps for the searching out of truth； insomuch as whether the party tortur'd his answer be true； or false； or whether he answer not at all； whatsoever he doth； he doth it by Right。 XX。 Swearing is a speech joyned to a promise； whereby the promiser declares his renouncing of Gods mercy； unlesse he perform his word； which definition is contained in the words themselves； which have in them the very essence of an Oath； to wit； so God help me； or other equivalent； as with the Romans； Doe thou Jupiter so destroy the deceiver； as I slay this same Beast： neither is this any let； but that an Oath may as well sometimes be affirmatory； as promissory； for he that confirmes his affirmation with an Oath； promiseth that he speaks truth。 But though in some places it was the fashion for Subjects to Swear by their Kings； that custome took its Originall hence； That those Kings took upon them Divine Honour； for Oathes were therefore introduc'd that by Religion； and consideration of the Divine Power men might have a greater dread of breaking their Faiths； then that wherewith they fear men； from whose eyes their actions may lie hid。 XXI。 Whence it followes； that an Oath must be conceived in that forme which he useth； who takes it； for in vain is any man brought to Swear by a God whom he beleeves not； and therefore neither feares him。 For though by the light of nature it may be known that there is a God； yet no man thinks he is to Swear by him in any other fashion； or by any other name then what is contain'd in the precepts of his own proper； that is； （as he who Swears imagines） the true Religion。 XXII。 By the definition of an Oath we may understand； that a bare Contract obligeth no lesse； then that to which we are Sworn； for it is the contract which binds us； the Oath relates to the Divine punishment； which it could not provoke； if the breach of contract were not in its selfe unlawfull； but it could not be unlawfull if the Contract were not obligatory。 Furthermore； he that renounceth the mercy of God obligeth himselfe not to any punishment； because it is ever lawfull to deprecate the punishment howsoever provok'd； and to enjoy Gods Pardon if it be granted。 The onely effect therefore of an Oath is this； To cause men who are naturally inclin'd to break all manner of faith； through fear of punishment； to make the more Conscience of their words and actions。 XXIII。 To exact an Oath； where the breach of contract； if any be made； cannot but be known； and where the party compacted； withall wants not power to punish； is to do somewhat more then is necessary unto self…defence； and shewes a mind desirous not so much to benefit it selfe； as to prejudice another。 For an Oath； out of the very form of swearing； is taken in order to the provocation of Gods anger； that is to say； of him that is Omnipotent against those who think； that by their own therefore violate their Faith； because they strength they can escape the punishment of men； and of him that is Omniscient against those； who therefore usually break their trust； because they hope that no man shall see them。
Chap。 III。
Of the other Lawes of Nature。
I。 Another of the Lawes of Nature is； to performe Contracts； or to keep trust； for it hath been shewed in the foregoing Chapter that the Law of Nature commands every man； as a thing necessary； to obtain Peace； to conveigh certain rights from each to other； and that this （as often as it shall happen to be done） is called a Contract： But this is so farre forth onely conducible to peace； as we shall performe Our selves； what we contract with others； shall be done； or omitted； and in vaine would Contracts be made； unlesse we stood to them。 Because therefore； to stand to our Covenants； Or to keep faith； is a thing necessary for the obtaining of peace； it will prove by the second Article of the second Chapter to be a precept of the naturall Law。 II。 Neither is there in this matter； any exception of the persons； with whom we Contract； as if they keep no faith with others； Or hold； that none ought to be kept； or are guilty of any other kind of vice： for he that Contracts； in that he doth contract； denies that action to be in vaine； and it is against reason for a knowing man to doe a thing in vain； and if he think himself not bound to keep it； in thinking so； he affirms the Contract to be made in vain： He therefore； who Contracts with one with whom he thinks he is not bound to keep faith； he doth at once think a Contract to be a thing done in vaine； and not in vaine； which is absurd。 Either therefore we must hold trust with all men； or else not bargain with them； that is； either there must be a declared Warre； Or a sure and faithfull Peace。 III。 The breaking of a Bargain； as also the taking back of a gift； （which ever consists in some action； Or omission） is called an INJURY： But that action； or omission； is called unjust； insomuch as an injury； and an unjust action； or omission； signifie the same thing； and both are the same with breach of Contract and trust： And it seemes the word Iniury came to be given to any action； or omission； because they were without Right。 He that acted； or omitted； having before conveyed bis Right to some other。 And there is some likenesse between that； which in the common course of life we call Injury； and that； which in the Schools is usually called absurd。 For even as he； who by Arguments is driven to deny the Assertion which he first maintain'd； is said to be brought to an absurdity； in like manner； he who through weaknesse of mind does； or omits that which before he had by Contract promis'd not to doe； or omit； commits an Injury； and falls into no lesse contradiction； then he； who in the Schools is reduc'd to an Absurdity。 For by contracting for some future action； he wills it done； by not doing it； he wills it not done； which is to will a thing done； and not done at the same time； which is a contradiction。 An Injury therefore is a kind of absurdity in conversation； as an absurdity is a kind of injury in disputation。 IV。 From these grounds it followes； that an injury can be done to no man but him with whom we enter Covenant； or to whom somewhat is made over by deed of gift； or to whom somwhat is promis'd by way of bargain。 And therefore damaging and injuring are often disjoyn'd： for if a Master command his Servant； who hath promis'd to obey him； to pay a summe of money； or carry some present to a third man； the Servant； if he doe it not； hath indeed damag'd this third party； but he injur'd his Master onely。 So also in a civill government； if any man offend another； with whom he hath made no Contract； he damages him to whom the evill is done； but he injures none but him to whom the power of government belongs： for if he； who receives the hurt； should expostulate the mischief。 and he that did it； should answer thus； What art thou to me？ Why should I rather doe according to yours； then mine owne will； since I do not hinder； but you may do your own； and not my mind？ In which speech； where there hath no manner of pre…contract past； I see not； I confesse； what is reprehensible。 Injury can be done against no
