PASSIVE, in general, denotes something that suffers the action of another, which is called an agent or active power. In grammar, the verb or word which expresses this passion is termed a passive verb, and, in the learned languages, has a peculiar termination; as, amor, doceor, legor, in Latin, that is, an r is added to the actives, amo, doceo, lego; and, in [7:17:111]the Greek, the inflection is made by changing ω into ομaι, as τυπτω, τυπτομαι, and πειθω, πειθομαι. But in, the modern languages the passive inflection is effected by means of auxiliary verbs, joined to the participle of the past tense; as, I am praised, in Latin laudor, and in Greek ∖ παινεομαι ; or, I am loved, in Latin amor, and in Greek φι ∖ εομαι. Thus it appears that the auxiliary verb am serves to form the passives of English verbs: and the same thing holds of the French, as Je suis loué, I am praised; j ’ ai été loué, I have been praised, and so forth. See the article Grammar. Passive Obedience, a political doctrine, very obnoxious to the friends of freedom. Some nonjurors, imagining that monarchy is the only lawful form of government, and that hereditary monarchy is the only lawful species of that government, have coupled with passive obedience the ridiculous notion of a divine, hereditary, indefeasible right in certain families to govern with despotic sway all other families of the same nation. The absurdity of this notion scarcely needs refutation; but it may not be improper to observe, that it has nothing to do with passive obedience.

This, as taught by the ablest reasoners, who think that they are supported by the Holy Scripture, is as much a duty under republican as under monarchical governments; and it means no more than that private individuals are bound, both by moral and religious ties, not to resist the supreme power, wheresoever it may be placed, in any nation. The supreme power can only be the legislature; and no man or body of men, who have not the power of enacting and abrogating laws, can, upon this principle, claim passive obedience from any subject. Whether the principle be well or ill founded, the absurdity which commonly attaches to the phrase passive obedience originates from the mistaken loyalty of the adherents of the house of Stuart, who, to aggravate the illegality of the Revolution, were accustomed to represent James II. as supreme over both houses of parliament, and of course also over all law. That such reveries were foolish, we need no other evidence than the statute-book, which shows, that in the office of legislation, the King, Lords, and Commons, are co-ordinate; and that when any one of these powers shall take upon itself to counteract the other two, even the duty of passive obedience will oblige the subject to support the legislature. That resistance to the legislature can only be lawful to oppose insupportable tyranny, has been shown by Mr Hume with great cogency of argument. That it can never be lawful on any occasion, Bishop Berkeley has endeavoured to prove by a chain of reasoning, which must, at least, be allowed to display considerable ingenuity and force. On this subject we refer our readers to Hume’s Essays, Berkeley’s tract on Passive Obedience and Non-resistance, and Locke’s Essay on Government.