The Labor enquirer., 1886-06-05
RIGHT.
Continued from first PAGE.

bv the scholarly English clergyman
s. Barring Gould, M. A., and beliey'
the premises correct and the reasonin,
gound. He says the rights of man ar
founded on dogma. The definition o
dogma is, a settled principle, maxim
an established doctrine, decision by
somebody having authority. 1t may
seem to many a strange place to look fol
the basis of Right. in theological
dogma. But gold is gold, no matter
where it may be found. I shall con-
dense as much as possible. The idea oi
Right requires that of Liberty to COM
plete it. If 1 haye right to live, l de
mand liberty to enable me to acquire
the food necessary to sustain life. Lib
erty is q first necessity of existence
Right is somewhat difficult of definition
Liberty is not Right, for man NAV be
deprived of hislibertY, but not of his
right-that is inherent.
If we want to establish rig ht upon ar
enduring basis, we must find an immu
table principle of universal application
This is what every philosopher has
failed to effect. Hobbs laid down thai
man naturally has right to everything
that bis will is the criterion of right,
and that its law ls utility that self-in-
terest is the bass of social and political
morality, and every man is therefore a
supreme law to himself. Hobbies IN his
definition mistakes will for right. Spin
oza, starting from the assumption that
nature is God, draws the conclusion
that the right of the individual is moth
ing other than the power of the in
divldual, which is the power of God.
Spinozl mistakes force for God.
Grotus makes right consist in the fac
ulty of doing that which will not dis
turb the social state. This is confusing
the law of society with the law of the
individual. The vice of this definition
is, that it subjects right to all the fuctu-
ations which NAV result from the neces
sities-welI or i'll understood-ofsociety
Kant derived right from equality.
Every action is just which is not an OBJ
stacle to the agreement of the will of all
with the liberty of each. This is a
maxim, but not principle Of right.
Krause, on the Other nand, founds the
basis of right on necessity, the right OF
one to take from others anything that
his nature demands as requisite for its
perfection. krause's doctrine is salts
factory enough If the idea of duty be ad
mitted that is, if it be under-propped
by dogma, but without dogma it must
fall. To realize our destiny, it is either
a duty or it is optional If 1t is at our
option we are reduced to the position Of
assuming evil to be the basis Of right.
Right cannot emanate from societY-it
cannot found individual right for right
Is not of human creation. The only
principle on which it may be perma-
nently based Is the idea of duty to God.
Duty is the faculty of doing freely and
if necessary forcihly, that which is i'm
posed upon man by God. We can have
our rights and demand onr liberty on nc
other condition. If We are creatures OF
God, we are morally bound to accom-,
plish our destiny, and have right to dc
so freely, and resist to the uttermost
every assault upon our rights or liber.
ties. Seek for any other basis of right
anl you are precipitated into the despot,
ism of inconsequence.
Right is form of Truth 1t must re
side primarily in God, and relatively ir
man by communicate on If 1t be abso
Lutte in man there are no such things as
duty, responsibility, morality. The re
suit is the despotism of every man, az
far as his force can control the wills and
actions of others. If l have right tc
the fruits of my toll 1t is because to pro
vide for the sustenance of nv life is E
duty l owe to the glver of my life.
demand the liberty of the press because
it is nv duty to teach what | believe tc
be the truth. There is not single righ
to be discovered without 9 duty from
which it springs.
The moral law is the law of creation
All rights are equal. Tor God being tht
author Of our naturs, the right of ont
man must be equal to the right of an
other man. All infringement of rights
are immoral. For man is of divine ori-
gin, and and any infringement of MI
rights Is therefore crime against God
All primitive rights are morally in
alienable. Without their exercise l am
unable to accomplish my function in thu
world. | cannot surrender them or any
of them without treason to nv Creator
the author of my right. No primary
rights are opposed to one another, TO
God is the source from which all rights
how. 1t is my duty to exact even bv
force respect for my own prlmarl rights
and it is my duty without compulsion
to acknowledge the primary rights ot
everyone else.
Individual liberty is light by itself
and is a condition of the exercise O
other rights. The only person who cal
ALLEVIATE this right is the possessor of it
and the alienation Of 1t is violation O
right-a crime.
What is living religion? 1t is the hu
man soul growing towards the Ideal