友情提示:如果本网页打开太慢或显示不完整,请尝试鼠标右键“刷新”本网页!阅读过程发现任何错误请告诉我们,谢谢!! 报告错误
九色书籍 返回本书目录 我的书架 我的书签 TXT全本下载 进入书吧 加入书签

the science of right-第24章

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!




executive or governor; for the governor; as administrator; should

stand under the authority of the law; and is bound by it under the

supreme control of the legislator。 The legislative authority may

therefore deprive the governor of his power; depose him; or reform his

administration; but not punish him。 This is the proper and only

meaning of the common saying in England; 〃The King… as the supreme

executive power… can do no wrong。〃 For any such application of

punishment would necessarily be an act of that very executive power to

which the supreme right to compel according to law pertains; and which

would itself be thus subjected to coercion; which is

self…contradictory。

  3。 Further; neither the legislative power nor the executive power

ought to exercise the judicial function; but only appoint judges as

magistrates。 It is the people who ought to judge themselves; through

those of the citizens who are elected by free choice as their

representatives for this purpose; and even specially for every process

or cause。 For the judicial sentence is a special act of public

distributive justice performed by a judge or court as a constitutional

administrator of the law; to a subject as one of the people。 Such an

act is not invested inherently with the power to determine and

assign to any one what is his。 Every individual among the people being

merely passive in this relation to the supreme power; either the

executive or the legislative authority might do him wrong in their

determinations in cases of dispute regarding the property of

individuals。 It would not be the people themselves who thus

determined; or who pronounced the judgements of 〃guilty〃 or 〃not

guilty〃 regarding their fellow…citizens。 For it is to the

determination of this issue in a cause that the court has to apply the

law; and it is by means of the executive authority; that the judge

holds power to assign to every one his own。 Hence it is only the

people that properly can judge in a cause… although indirectly

representatives elected and deputed by themselves; as in a jury。 It

would even be beneath the dignity of the sovereign head of the state

to play the judge; for this would be to put himself into a position in

which it would be possible to do wrong; and thus to subject himself to

the demand for an appeal to a still higher power (a rege male

informato ad regem melius informandum)。

  It is by the co…operation of these three powers… the legislative;

the executive; and the judicial… that the state realizes its autonomy。

This autonomy consists in its organizing; forming; and maintaining

itself in accordance with the laws of freedom。 In their union the

welfare of the state is realized。 Salus reipublicae suprema lex。* By

this is not to be understood merely the individual well…being and

happiness of the citizens of the state; for… as Rousseau asserts… this

end may perhaps be more agreeably and more desirably attained in the

state of nature; or even under a despotic government。 But the

welfare of the state; as its own highest good; signifies that

condition in which the greatest harmony is attained between its

constitution and the principles of right… a condition of the state

which reason by a categorical imperative makes it obligatory upon us

to strive after。



  *'〃The health of the state is the highest law。〃'



      Constitutional and Juridical Consequences arising from

                 the Nature of the Civil Union。



       A。 Right of the Supreme Power; Treason; Dethronement;

                      Revolution; Reform。



  The origin of the supreme power is practically inscrutable by the

people who are placed under its authority。 In other words; the subject

need not reason too curiously in regard to its origin in the practical

relation; as if the right of the obedience due to it were to be

doubted (jus controversum)。 For as the people; in order to be able

to abjudicate with a title of right regarding the supreme power in the

state; must be regarded as already united under one common legislative

will; it cannot judge otherwise than as the present supreme head of

the state (summus imperans) wills。 The question has been raised as

to whether an actual contract of subjection (pactum subjectionis

civilis) originally preceded the civil government as a fact; or

whether the power arose first; and the law only followed afterwards;

or may have followed in this order。 But such questions; as regards the

people already actually living under the civil law; are either

entirely aimless; or even fraught with subtle danger to the state。

For; should the subject; after having dug down to the ultimate

origin of the state; rise in opposition to the present ruling

authority; he would expose himself as a citizen; according to the

law and with full right; to be punished; destroyed; or outlawed。 A law

which is so holy and inviolable that it is practically a crime even to

cast doubt upon it; or to suspend its operation for a moment; is

represented of itself as necessarily derived from some supreme;

unblameable lawgiver。 And this is the meaning of the maxim; 〃All

authority is from God〃; which proposition does not express the

historical foundation of the civil constitution; but an ideal

principle of the practical reason。 It may be otherwise rendered

thus: 〃It is a duty to obey the law of the existing legislative power;

be its origin what it may。〃

  Hence it follows; that the supreme power in the state has only

rights; and no (compulsory) duties towards the subject。 Further; if

the ruler or regent; as the organ of the supreme power; proceeds in

violation of the laws; as in imposing taxes; recruiting soldiers;

and so on; contrary to the law of equality in the distribution of

the political burdens; the subject may oppose complaints and

objections (gravamina) to this injustice; but not active resistance。

  There cannot even be an Article contained in the political

constitution that would make it possible for a power in the state;

in case of the transgression of the constitutional laws by the supreme

authority; to resist or even to restrict it in so doing。 For;

whoever would restrict the supreme power of the state must have

more; or at least equal; power as compared with the power that is so

restricted; and if competent to command the subjects to resist; such a

one would also have to be able to protect them; and if he is to be

considered capable of judging what is right in every case; he may also

publicly order resistance。 But such a one; and not the actual

authority; would then be the supreme power; which is contradictory。

The supreme sovereign power; then; in proceeding by a minister who

is at the same time the ruler of the state; consequently becomes

despotic; and the expedient of giving the people to imagine… when they

have properly only legislative influence… that they act by their

deputies by way of limiting the sovereign authority; cannot so mask

and disguise the actual despotism of such a government that it will

not appear in the measures and means adopted by the minister to

carry out his function。 The people; while represented by their

deputies in parliament; under such conditions; may have in these

warrantors of their freedom and rights; persons who are keenly

interested on their own account and their families; and who look to

such a minister for the benefit of his influence in the army; navy;

and public offices。 And hence; instead of offering resistance to the

undue pretensions of the government… whose public declarations ought

to carry a prior accord on the part of the people; which; however;

cannot be allowed in peace; they are rather always ready to play

into the hands of the government。 Hence the so…called limited

political constitution; as a constitution of the internal rights of

the state; is an unreality; and instead of being consistent with

right; it is only a principle of expediency。 And its aim is not so

much to throw all possible obstacles in the way of a powerful violator

of popular rights by his arbitrary influence upon the government; as

rather to cloak it over under the illusion of a right of opposition

conceded to the people。

  Resistance on the part of the people to the supreme legislative

power of the state is in no case legitimate; for it is only by

submission to the universal legislative will; that a condition of

law and order is possible。 Hence there is no right of sedition; and

still less of rebellion; belonging to the people。 And least of all;

when the supreme power is embodied in an individual monarch; is

there any justification; under the pretext of his abuse of power;

for seizing his person or taking away his life (monarchomachismus

sub specie tyrannicidii)。 The slightest attempt of this kind is high

treason (proditio eminens); and a traitor of this sort who aims at the

overthrow of his country may be punished; as a political parricide;

even with death。 It is the duty of the
返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 0 0
未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
温馨提示: 温看小说的同时发表评论,说出自己的看法和其它小伙伴们分享也不错哦!发表书评还可以获得积分和经验奖励,认真写原创书评 被采纳为精评可以获得大量金币、积分和经验奖励哦!