The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1908-03-29

inc pa~tflAfonal ORGANIZATION OF tho Ilpo
the bestandh appisSt.
In HE exposltlon Of the Social Contract
our lecturer r~eproduces with scrupulous
eIactitude, though In q condensed form,
the fundamental principles propounded by
the author Of that work from which all the
rest Of II is deduoed. For example; Man
IL born free, yet everywhere he 10 enslayed.'
To NJ. Lemaitre the assertion born free
seems void Of sense; but he goes on With
his reproduction Of Rousseau's postulate:
How did this change take plaoei know
I not. What car make It legitimateT |
think that | can answer this question
Rousseau answers II by assuming that at
the origin Of human society there was =
compact, known or understood, From the
outset these inquiries must have been
mooted: How should the compact be formu-
lated9 What should be its clauses and how
should II work. The difficulty which had
TO be surmountC6 10 thus stated In the book
before US: Find a form OF association which
defends and protects, by means Of the
common force. the person and the goods OF
each member, and by which each, uniting
for the veal OF all. should yet obey only
himself and remain as free a. he was before.
Such 10 the fundamental problem Of which
the Social Contract should give the solu-
tion.F Rousseau's solution Of the problem
Was the REIMBURSEMENT Of all an individuals
rights 10 the community considered an a
whole; each giving himself up entirely, the
| resultant condition would be the same for
all; and the condition being the same for all
no one would have any interest In making
II heavy for his neighbor, Moreover, each
giving himself up 10 all, collectively, really
gives himself TO no one in particular, and
as there is no member over whom one
does not possess the same rights which he
comedies TO the other a man gains the
| equivalent OF what he loses and the
greater power 10 keep what he has, Rous-
seau's deduction IL that instantly, instead
| Of the particular person OF each contract
ing party, this act OF consolation produces
a collective moral body, composed OF as
many members as the assembly has votes;
which moral body receives, thanks to the
act Of consolation, unity, a common per-
sonality, a common life, a common will
Rousseau goes on 10 explain that this
collective body is called the state when II
Is passive. a sovereign when it Ia active.
With regard 10 the members, they take
collectively the name OF people; they call
themselves citizens, as partiopators in the
sovereign authority, and subjects, as being
subject to the laws Of the state. How
would the system work 30 that men may
he as happy and az free as poSsible' Rous-
seau answers that the people as sovereign
make laws. As subjects the people obey
these laws, The people apply the laws,
as prince or magistrate. by naming, in
order to enforce them, not representa-
tives,' but commissioner In other
words, we should witness II Rousseau's
conception OF the social contract we're car
ned out, a direct and continuous govern
mont Of the people by the people. What,
according 10 him, would the system imply1
In the hrst place, absolute equality Of the
citizens. In order that this equality may
last, a citizen must not belong 10 any other
group except that constituting the state;
he must not submit to any private HER
archy. Therefore no esoterio society, no
interior association, no corporation. Other
wise one might say that there are not as
many voters as there are men, but only as
many as there are associations As to
the inequality Of fortunes. our lecturer
finds communism latent in Rousseau. The
author Of the Social Contract says: 'The
state with regard to its members Ia master
OF their possessions by virtue Of the social
contract. The individual owners are con-
sidered az 'depositaries' Of the public
wealth. He had already said in Emile
that -the sovereign The assumes that
the people are the sovereignl can legiti-
mately take possession Of what belongs
to all, as vas the case in Sparta in the days
Of Lycurgus,'
What would be the scope OF the SOW
ereignty Of the people, as conceived in the
Social Contract? Rousseau replies that
"all that each man. in consideration Of the
social compact, alienates OF his power, OF
his possessions and Of his liberty only con-
stitutes that part the use Of which is i'm
portant to the community, but one must
also agree that the people, as sovereign,
must be the judge as to that Importance
In other words, the people must decide
what II is right TO leave 70 each citizen in
the way Of liberty and fortune. This
although in the same Social Contract
Rousseau refuses ~ recognize in the people
forethought and clearsightedness, and calls
il a blind multitude that often does not
know what II wants, because II rarely
knows what is good for Il.
In the third place, the system propounded
in the Social Contract implies the I'M
limited right Of the sovereign people, ever
in the matter Of conscience, The people.
as sovereign. impose their law upon the
people conceived as subjects. even In philo-
sophioal and theological matters, Herein
Jean Jacques ~retrogrades as far as did
Calvin. There u.s. says Rousseau, "a pro-
fession Of faith purely civil, Of which the
sovereign people has the right to fix the
articles not precisely as religious dogmas
but as sentiments Of ~sociabilty (civism)
without which it is impossible 10 be either
a good citizen or a faithful subject What
according 10 Rousseau would be the dog
mas OF this civil relgionl He answers:
The existence OF a divinity, omnipotent,
intelli gent. benehcent and helpful; a future
life; the happiness Of the just, the punish
ment Of the wicked; the sanctity OF the
social contract and Of the law On this
head he concludes in the following words,
which, II will be noted, justify and reestab-
lsh the most atrocious intelligence; With
out being able to force anybody to beievein
these dogmas the people can Danish from
the state all who do not believe in them;