diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 36145-h.zip | bin | 0 -> 46739 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 36145-h/36145-h.htm | 2501 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 36145.txt | 2438 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 36145.zip | bin | 0 -> 44523 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 |
7 files changed, 4955 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/36145-h.zip b/36145-h.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..0a2e370 --- /dev/null +++ b/36145-h.zip diff --git a/36145-h/36145-h.htm b/36145-h/36145-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..47f2557 --- /dev/null +++ b/36145-h/36145-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,2501 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> +<!-- $Id: header.txt 236 2009-12-07 18:57:00Z vlsimpson $ --> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> + <head> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" /> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> + <title> + The Project Gutenberg eBook of No Treason, No. VI., The Constitution of No Authority, by Lysander Spooner. + </title> + <style type="text/css"> + +body {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + +p {margin-top: .75em; text-align: justify; margin-bottom: .75em;} + +hr {width: 33%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; clear: both;} + + +.pagenum { position: absolute; left: 92%; font-size: smaller; text-align: right;} + +.blockquot {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + +.center {text-align: center;} + +.big {font-size: 125%;} +.huge {font-size: 150%;} +.giant {font-size: 200%;} + +a {text-decoration:none;} + + +.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} + +.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} + +.fnanchor {vertical-align: super; font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;} + + + + </style> + </head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of No Treason, Vol. VI., by Lysander Spooner + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: No Treason, Vol. VI. + The Constitution of No Authority + +Author: Lysander Spooner + +Release Date: May 18, 2011 [EBook #36145] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NO TREASON, VOL. VI. *** + + + + +Produced by Susan Goble, Curtis Weyant, David E. Brown, +and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at +http://www.pgdp.net + + + + + + +</pre> + + + +<p class="center"><span class="giant">NO TREASON.</span></p> +<p> </p> +<p class="center"><span class="big">No. VI.</span></p> +<hr style="width: 10%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">The Constitution of No Authority.</span></p> +<hr style="width: 10%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">BY LYSANDER SPOONER.</span></p> +<hr style="width: 10%;" /> +<p class="center">BOSTON:<br /> +PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR.<br /> +1870.</p> + + + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span></p> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">No Treason</span></p> + +<p class="center"><span class="big">The Constitution of No Authority</span></p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">I.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no +authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and +man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between +persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract +between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be supposed to have +been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years +of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory +contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion +even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or +asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any +formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent +formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, +sixty, or seventy years. <i>And the Constitution, so far as it was their +contract, died with them.</i> They had no natural power or right to make it +obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in +the nature of things, that they <i>could</i> bind their posterity, but they +did not even attempt to bind them. That is to say, the instrument does +not purport to be an agreement between any body but "the people" <i>then</i> +existing; nor does it, either expressly or impliedly, assert any right, +power, or disposition, on their part, to bind anybody but themselves. +Let us see. Its language is:</p> + +<p class="blockquot">We, the people of the United States (that is, the people <i>then +existing</i> in the United States), in order to form a more perfect +union, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common +defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings +of liberty to ourselves <i>and our posterity</i>, do ordain and +establish this Constitution for the United States of America.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span>It is plain, in the first place, that this language, <i>as an agreement</i>, +purports to be only what it at most really was, viz., a contract between +the people then existing; and, of necessity, binding, as a contract, +only upon those then existing. In the second place, the language neither +expresses nor implies that they had any intention or desire, nor that +they imagined they had any right or power, to bind their "posterity" to +live under it. It does not say that their "posterity" will, shall, or +must live under it. It only says, in effect, that their hopes and +motives in adopting it were that it might prove useful to their +posterity, as well as to themselves, by promoting their union, safety, +tranquility, liberty, etc.</p> + +<p>Suppose an agreement were entered into, in this form:</p> + +<p>We, the people of Boston, agree to maintain a fort on Governor's Island, +to protect ourselves and our posterity against invasion.</p> + +<p>This agreement, as an agreement, would clearly bind nobody but the +people then existing. Secondly, it would assert no right, power, or +disposition, on their part, to compel their "posterity" to maintain such +a fort. It would only indicate that the supposed welfare of their +posterity was one of the motives that induced the original parties to +enter into the agreement.</p> + +<p>When a man says he is building a house for himself and his posterity, he +does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of +binding them, nor is it to be inferred that he is so foolish as to +imagine that he has any right or power to bind them, to live in it. So +far as they are concerned, he only means to be understood as saying that +his hopes and motives, in building it, are that they, or at least some +of them, may find it for their happiness to live in it.</p> + +<p>So when a man says he is planting a tree for himself and his posterity, +he does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of +compelling them, nor is it to be inferred that he is such a simpleton as +to imagine that he has any right or power to compel them, to eat the +fruit. So far as they are concerned, he only means to say that his hopes +and motives, in planting the tree, are that its fruit may be agreeable +to them.</p> + +<p>So it was with those who originally adopted the Constitution. Whatever +may have been their personal intentions, the legal meaning of their +language, so far as their "posterity" was concerned, simply was, that +their hopes and motives, in entering into the agreement, were that it +might prove useful and acceptable to their posterity;<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span> that it might +promote their union, safety, tranquility, and welfare; and that it might +tend "to secure to them the blessings of liberty." The language does not +assert nor at all imply, any right, power, or disposition, on the part +of the original parties to the agreement, to compel their "posterity" to +live under it. If they had intended to bind their posterity to live +under it, they should have said that their object was, not "to secure to +them the blessings of liberty," but to make slaves of them; for if their +"posterity" are bound to live under it, they are nothing less than the +slaves of their foolish, tyrannical, and dead grandfathers.</p> + +<p>It cannot be said that the Constitution formed "the people of the United +States," for all time, into a corporation. It does not speak of "the +people" as a corporation, but as individuals. A corporation does not +describe itself as "we," nor as "people," nor as "ourselves." Nor does a +corporation, in legal language, have any "posterity." It supposes itself +to have, and speaks of itself as having, perpetual existence, as a +single individuality.</p> + +<p>Moreover, no body of men, existing at any one time, have the power to +create a perpetual corporation. A corporation can become practically +perpetual only by the voluntary accession of new members, as the old +ones die off. But for this voluntary accession of new members, the +corporation necessarily dies with the death of those who originally +composed it.</p> + +<p>Legally speaking, therefore, there is, in the Constitution, nothing that +professes or attempts to bind the "posterity" of those who established +it.</p> + +<p>If, then, those who established the Constitution, had no power to bind, +and did not attempt to bind, their posterity, the question arises, +whether their posterity have bound themselves. If they have done so, +they can have done so in only one or both of these two ways, viz., by +voting, and paying taxes.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">II.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>Let us consider these two matters, voting and tax paying, separately. +And first of voting.</p> + +<p>All the voting that has ever taken place under the Constitution, has +been of such a kind that it not only did not pledge the whole people to +support the Constitution, but it did not even pledge any one of them to +do so, as the following considerations show.</p> + +<p>1. In the very nature of things, the act of voting could bind nobody<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span> +but the actual voters. But owing to the property qualifications +required, it is probable that, during the first twenty or thirty years +under the Constitution, not more than one-tenth, fifteenth, or perhaps +twentieth of the whole population (black and white, men, women, and +minors) were permitted to vote. Consequently, so far as voting was +concerned, not more than one-tenth, fifteenth, or twentieth of those +then existing, could have incurred any obligation to support the +Constitution.</p> + +<p>At the present time, it is probable that not more than one-sixth of the +whole population are permitted to vote. Consequently, so far as voting +is concerned, the other five-sixths can have given no pledge that they +will support the Constitution.</p> + +<p>2. Of the one-sixth that are permitted to vote, probably not more than +two-thirds (about one-ninth of the whole population) have usually voted. +Many never vote at all. Many vote only once in two, three, five, or ten +years, in periods of great excitement.</p> + +<p>No one, by voting, can be said to pledge himself for any longer period +than that for which he votes. If, for example, I vote for an officer who +is to hold his office for only a year, I cannot be said to have thereby +pledged myself to support the government beyond that term. Therefore, on +the ground of actual voting, it probably cannot be said that more than +one-ninth or one-eighth, of the whole population are usually under any +pledge to support the Constitution.</p> + +<p>3. It cannot be said that, by voting, a man pledges himself to support +the Constitution, unless the act of voting be a perfectly voluntary one +on his part. Yet the act of voting cannot properly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span> be called a +voluntary one on the part of any very large number of those who do vote. +It is rather a measure of necessity imposed upon them by others, than +one of their own choice. On this point I repeat what was said in a +former number,<a name="FNanchor_A_1" id="FNanchor_A_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_A_1" class="fnanchor">[a]</a> viz.:</p> + +<p class="blockquot">"In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is +not to be taken as proof of consent, <i>even for the time being</i>. +On the contrary, it is to be considered that, without his +consent having even been asked a man finds himself environed by +a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him +to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of +his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, +too, that other men practice this tyranny over him by the use of +the ballot. He sees further, that, if he will but use the ballot +himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this +tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, he +finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use +the ballot, he may become a master; if he does not use it, he +must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these +two. In self-defence, he attempts the former. His case is +analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, +where he must either kill others, or be killed himself. Because, +to save his own life in battle, a man attempts to take the lives +of his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is +one of his own choosing. Neither in contests with the +ballot—which is a mere substitute for a bullet—because, as his +only chance of self-preservation, a man uses a ballot, is it to +be inferred that the contest is one into which he voluntarily +entered; that he voluntarily set up all his own natural rights, +as a stake against those of others, to be lost or won by the +mere power of numbers. On the contrary, it is to be considered +that, in an exigency into which he had been forced by others, +and in which no other means of self-defence offered, he, as a +matter of necessity, used the only one that was left to him.</p> + +<p class="blockquot">"Doubtless the most miserable of men, under the most oppressive +government in the world, if allowed the ballot, would use it, if +they could see any chance of thereby meliorating their +condition. But it would not, therefore, be a legitimate +inference that the government itself, that crushes them, was one +which they had voluntarily set up, or even consented to.</p> + +<p class="blockquot">"Therefore, a man's voting under the Constitution of the United +States, is not to be taken as evidence that he ever freely +assented to the Constitution, <i>even for the time being</i>. +Consequently we have no proof that any very large portion, even +of the actual voters of the United States, ever really and +voluntarily consented to the Constitution, <i>even for the time +being</i>. Nor can we ever have such proof, until every man is left +perfectly free to consent, or not, without<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span> thereby subjecting +himself or his property to be disturbed or injured by others."</p> + +<p>As we can have no legal knowledge as to who votes from choice, and who +from the necessity thus forced upon him, we can have no legal knowledge, +as to any particular individual, that he voted from choice; or, +consequently, that by voting, he consented, or pledged himself, to +support the government. Legally speaking, therefore, the act of voting +utterly fails to pledge <i>any one</i> to support the government. It utterly +fails to prove that the government rests upon the voluntary support of +anybody. On general principles of law and reason, it cannot be said that +the government has any voluntary supporters at all, until it can be +distinctly shown who its voluntary supporters are.</p> + +<p>4. As taxation is made compulsory on all, whether they vote or not, a +large proportion of those who vote, no doubt do so to prevent their own +money being used against themselves; when, in fact, they would have +gladly abstained from voting, if they could thereby have saved +themselves from taxation alone, to say nothing of being saved from all +the other usurpations and tyrannies of the government. To take a man's +property without his consent, and then to infer his consent because he +attempts, by voting, to prevent that property from being used to his +injury, is a very insufficient proof of his consent to support the +Constitution. It is, in fact, no proof at all. And as we can have no +legal knowledge as to who the particular individuals are, if there are +any, who are willing to be taxed for the sake of voting, we can have no +legal knowledge that any particular individual consents to be taxed for +the sake of voting; or, consequently, consents to support the +Constitution.</p> + +<p>5. At nearly all elections, votes are given for various candidates for +the same office. Those who vote for the unsuccessful candidates cannot +properly be said to have voted to sustain the Constitution. They may, +with more reason, be supposed to have voted, not to support the +Constitution, but specially to prevent the tyranny which they anticipate +the successful candidate intends to practice upon them under color of +the Constitution; and therefore may reasonably be supposed to have voted +against the Constitution itself. This supposition is the more +reasonable, inasmuch as such voting is the only mode allowed to them of +expressing their dissent to the Constitution.</p> + +<p>6. Many votes are usually given for candidates who have no prospect of +success. Those who give such votes may reasonably<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span> be supposed to have +voted as they did, with a special intention, not to support, but to +obstruct the execution of, the Constitution; and, therefore, against the +Constitution itself.</p> + +<p>7. As all the different votes are given secretly (by secret ballot), +there is no legal means of knowing, from the votes themselves, who votes +for, and who against, the Constitution. Therefore, voting affords no +legal evidence that any particular individual supports the Constitution. +And where there can be no legal evidence that any particular individual +supports the Constitution, it cannot legally be said that anybody +supports it. It is clearly impossible to have any legal proof of the +intentions of large numbers of men, where there can be no legal proof of +the intentions of any particular one of them.</p> + +<p>8. There being no legal proof of any man's intentions, in voting, we can +only conjecture them. As a conjecture, it is probable, that a very large +proportion of those who vote, do so on this principle, viz., that if, by +voting, they could but get the government into their own hands (or that +of their friends), and use its powers against their opponents, they +would then willingly support the Constitution; but if their opponents +are to have the power, and use it against them, then they would <i>not</i> +willingly support the Constitution.</p> + +<p>In short, men's voluntary support of the Constitution is doubtless, in +most cases, wholly contingent upon the question whether, by means of the +Constitution, they can make themselves masters, or are to be made +slaves.</p> + +<p>Such contingent consent as that is, in law and reason, no consent at +all.</p> + +<p>9. As everybody who supports the Constitution by voting (if there are +any such) does so secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to avoid all +personal responsibility for the act of his agents or representatives, it +cannot legally or reasonably be said that anybody at all supports the +Constitution by voting. No man can reasonably or legally be said to do +such a thing as to assent to, or support, the Constitution, <i>unless he +does it openly, and in a way to make himself personally responsible for +the acts of his agents, so long as they act within the limits of the +power he delegates to them</i>.</p> + +<p>10. As all voting is secret (by secret ballot), and as all secret +governments are necessarily only secret bands of robbers, tyrants,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span> and +murderers, the general fact that our government is practically carried +on by means of such voting, only proves that there is among us a secret +band of robbers, tyrants and murderers, whose purpose is to rob, +enslave, and, so far as necessary to accomplish their purposes, murder, +the rest of the people. The simple fact of the existence of such a band +does nothing towards proving that "the people of the United States," or +any one of them, voluntarily supports the Constitution.</p> + +<p>For all the reasons that have now been given, voting furnishes no legal +evidence as to who the particular individuals are (if there are any), +who voluntarily support the Constitution. It therefore furnishes no +legal evidence that anybody supports it voluntarily.</p> + +<p>So far, therefore, as voting is concerned, the Constitution, legally +speaking, has no supporters at all.</p> + +<p>And, as matter of fact, there is not the slightest probability that the +Constitution has a single bona fide supporter in the country. That is to +say, there is not the slightest probability that there is a single man +in the country, who both understands what the Constitution really is, +<i>and sincerely supports it for what it really is</i>.</p> + +<p>The ostensible supporters of the Constitution, like the ostensible +supporters of most other governments, are made up of three classes, +viz.: 1. Knaves, a numerous and active class, who see in the government +an instrument which they can use for their own aggrandizement or wealth. +2. Dupes—a large class, no doubt—each of whom, because he is allowed +one voice out of millions in deciding what he may do with his own person +and his own property, and because he is permitted to have the same voice +in robbing, enslaving, and murdering others, that others have in +robbing, enslaving, and murdering himself, is stupid enough to imagine +that he is a "free man," a "sovereign"; that this is "a free +government"; "a government of equal rights," "the best government on +earth,"<a name="FNanchor_B_2" id="FNanchor_B_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_B_2" class="fnanchor">[b]</a> and such like absurdities. 3. A class who have some +appreciation of the evils of government, but either do not see how to +get rid of them, or do not choose to so far sacrifice their private +interests as to give themselves seriously and earnestly to the work of +making a change.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">III.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span> evidence +that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution.</p> + +<p>1. It is true that the <i>theory</i> of our Constitution is, that all taxes +are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, +voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that each man +makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are +parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much +protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and +that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay tax, as he +is to pay a tax, and be protected.</p> + +<p>But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical +fact. The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: +"Your money, or your life." And many, if not most, taxes are paid under +the compulsion of that threat.</p> + +<p>The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring +upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed +to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that +account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.</p> + +<p>The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and +crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim +to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He +does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired +impudence enough to profess to be merely a "protector," and that he +takes men's money against their will, merely to enable him to "protect" +those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect +themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He +is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, +having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does +not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to +be your rightful "sovereign," on account of the "protection" he affords +you. He does not keep "protecting" you, by commanding you to bow down +and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do +that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his +interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a +traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without +mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too +much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and +villainies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, +attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span>The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves "the +government," are directly the opposite of these of the single +highwayman.</p> + +<p>In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually +known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the +responsibility of their acts. On the contrary, they secretly (by secret +ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in +their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed. They say +to the person thus designated:</p> + +<p>Go to A—— B——, and say to him that "the government" has need of +money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property. If he +presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and +that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our +business, and not his; that we <i>choose</i> to protect him, whether he desires +us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him. If +he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon +themselves the title of "the government," and who assume to protect him, +and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract +with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that +we do not <i>choose</i> to make ourselves <i>individually</i> known to him; that +we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him +notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in +our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for +the present year. If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his +property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and +trouble beside. If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the +bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members +of our band). If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our +band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in +one of our courts) with murder; convict him, and hang him. If he should +call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to +resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his +assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that "our +country" is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; +tell him to quell the rebellion and "save the country," cost what it +may. Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of +thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed. +See that the work of murder<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span> is thoroughly done; that we may have no +further trouble of this kind hereafter. When these traitors shall have +thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good +loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a +wherefore.</p> + +<p>It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid. And +how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to +support "the government," it needs no further argument to show.</p> + +<p>2. Still another reason why the payment of taxes implies no consent, or +pledge, to support the government, is that the taxpayer does not know, +and has no means of knowing, who the particular individuals are who +compose "the government." To him "the government" is a myth, an +abstraction, an incorporeality, with which he can make no contract, and +to which he can give no consent, and make no pledge. He knows it only +through its pretended agents. "The government" itself he never sees. He +knows indeed, by common report, that certain persons, of a certain age, +are permitted to vote; and thus to make themselves parts of, or (if they +choose) opponents of, the government, for the time being. But who of +them do thus vote, and especially how each one votes (whether so as to +aid or oppose the government), he does not know; the voting being all +done secretly (by secret ballot). Who, therefore, practically compose +"the government," for the time being, he has no means of knowing. Of +course he can make no contract with them, give them no consent, and make +them no pledge. Of necessity, therefore, his paying taxes to them +implies, on his part, no contract, consent, or pledge to support +them—that is, to support "the government," or the Constitution.</p> + +<p>3. Not knowing who the particular individuals are, who call themselves +"the government," the taxpayer does not know whom he pays his taxes to. +All he knows is that a man comes to him, representing himself to be the +agent of "the government"—that is, the agent of a secret band of +robbers and murderers, who have taken to themselves the title of "the +government," and have determined to kill everybody who refuses to give +them whatever money they demand. To save his life, he gives up his money +to this agent. But as this agent does not make his principals +individually known to the taxpayer, the latter, after he has given up +his money, knows no more who are "the government"—that is, who were the +robbers—than he did before. To say, therefore, that by giving up his +money to their agent, he entered into a voluntary contract with them, +that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span> he pledges himself to obey them, to support them, and to give them +whatever money they should demand of him in the future, is simply +ridiculous.</p> + +<p>4. All political power, as it is called, rests practically upon this +matter of money. Any number of scoundrels, having money enough to start +with, can establish themselves as a "government"; because, with money, +they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort more money; and also +compel general obedience to their will. It is with government, as Caesar +said it was in war, that money and soldiers mutually supported each +other; that with money he could hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort +money. So these villains, who call themselves governments, well +understand that their power rests primarily upon money. With money they +can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money. And, when their +authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire +soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money.</p> + +<p>For this reason, whoever desires liberty, should understand these vital +facts, viz.: 1. That every man who puts money into the hands of a +"government" (so called), puts into its hands a sword which will be used +against himself, to extort more money from him, and also to keep him in +subjection to its arbitrary will. 2. That those who will take his money, +without his consent, in the first place, will use it for his further +robbery and enslavement, if he presumes to resist their demands in the +future. 3. That it is a perfect absurdity to suppose that any body of +men would ever take a man's money without his consent, for any such +object as they profess to take it for, viz., that of protecting him; for +why should they wish to protect him, if he does not wish them to do so? +To suppose that they would do so, is just as absurd as it would be to +suppose that they would take his money without his consent, for the +purpose of buying food or clothing for him, when he did not want it. 4. +If a man wants "protection," he is competent to make his own bargains +for it; and nobody has any occasion to rob him, in order to "protect" +him against his will. 5. That the only security men can have for their +political liberty, consists in their keeping their money in their own +pockets, until they have assurances, perfectly satisfactory to +themselves, that it will be used as they wish it to be used, for their +benefit, and not for their injury. 6. That no government, so called, can +reasonably be trusted for a moment, or reasonably be supposed to have +honest purposes in view, any longer than it depends wholly upon +voluntary support.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span>These facts are all so vital and so self-evident, that it cannot +reasonably be supposed that any one will voluntarily pay money to a +"government," for the purpose of securing its protection, unless he +first makes an explicit and purely voluntary contract with it for that +purpose.</p> + +<p>It is perfectly evident, therefore, that neither such voting, nor such +payment of taxes, as actually takes place, proves anybody's consent, or +obligation, to support the Constitution. Consequently we have no +evidence at all that the Constitution is binding upon anybody, or that +anybody is under any contract or obligation whatever to support it. And +nobody is under any obligation to support it.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">IV.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p><i>The Constitution not only binds nobody now, but it never did bind +anybody.</i> It never bound anybody, because it was never agreed to by +anybody in such a manner as to make it, on general principles of law and +reason, binding upon him.</p> + +<p>It is a general principle of law and reason, that a <i>written</i> instrument +binds no one until he has signed it. This principle is so inflexible a +one, that even though a man is unable to write his name, he must still +"make his mark," before he is bound by a written contract. This custom +was established ages ago, when few men could write their names; when a +clerk—that is, a man who could write—was so rare and valuable a +person, that even if he were guilty of high crimes, he was entitled to +pardon, on the ground that the public could not afford to lose his +services. Even at that time, a written contract must be signed; and men +who could not write, either "made their mark," or signed their contracts +by stamping their seals upon wax affixed to the parchment on which their +contracts were written. Hence the custom of affixing seals, that has +continued to this time.</p> + +<p>The law holds, and reason declares, that if a written instrument is not +signed, the presumption must be that the party to be bound by it, did +not choose to sign it, or to bind himself by it. And law and reason both +give him until the last moment, in which to decide whether he will sign +it, or not. Neither law nor reason requires or expects a man to agree to +an instrument, <i>until it is written</i>; for until it is written, he cannot +know its precise legal meaning. And when it is written, and he has had +the opportunity to satisfy himself of its precise legal meaning, he is +then expected to decide, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span> not before, whether he will agree to it or +not. And if he does not <i>then</i> sign it, his reason is supposed to be, +that he does not choose to enter into such a contract. The fact that the +instrument was written for him to sign, or with the hope that he would +sign it, goes for nothing.</p> + +<p>Where would be the end of fraud and litigation, if one party could bring +into court a written instrument, without any signature, and claim to +have it enforced, upon the ground that it was written for another man to +sign? that this other man had promised to sign it? that he ought to have +signed it? that he had had the opportunity to sign it, if he would? but +that he had refused or neglected to do so? Yet that is the most that +could ever be said of the Constitution.<a name="FNanchor_C_3" id="FNanchor_C_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_C_3" class="fnanchor">[c]</a> The very judges, who profess +to derive all their authority from the Constitution—from an instrument +that nobody ever signed—would spurn any other instrument, not signed, +that should be brought before them for adjudication.</p> + +<p>Moreover, a written instrument must, in law and reason, not only be +signed, but must also be delivered to the party (or to some one for +him), in whose favor it is made, before it can bind the party making it. +The signing is of no effect, unless the instrument be also delivered. +And a party is at perfect liberty to refuse to deliver a written +instrument, after he has signed it. He is as free to refuse to deliver +it, as he is to refuse to sign it. The Constitution was not only never +signed by anybody, but it was never delivered by anybody, or to +anybody's agent or attorney. It can therefore be of no more validity as +a contract, than can any other instrument, that was never signed or +delivered.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">V.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>As further evidence of the general sense of mankind, as to the practical +necessity there is that all men's <i>important</i> contracts, especially +those of a permanent nature, should be both written and signed, the +following facts are pertinent.</p> + +<p>For nearly two hundred years—that is, since 1677—there has been on the +statute book of England, and the same, in substance, if not precisely in +letter, has been re-enacted, and is now in force, in nearly or quite all +the States of this Union, a statute, the general<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span> object of which is to +declare that no action shall be brought to enforce contracts of the more +important class, <i>unless they are put in writing, and signed by the +parties to be held chargeable upon them</i>.<a name="FNanchor_D_4" id="FNanchor_D_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_D_4" class="fnanchor">[d]</a></p> + +<p>The principle of the statute, be it observed, is, not merely that +written contracts shall be signed, but also that all contracts, except +those specially exempted—generally those that are for small amounts, +and are to remain in force but for a short time—<i>shall be both written +and signed</i>.</p> + +<p>The reason of the statute, on this point, is, that it is now so easy a +thing for men to put their contracts in writing, and sign them, and +their failure to do so opens the door to so much doubt, fraud, and +litigation, that men who neglect to have their contracts—of any +considerable importance—written and signed, ought not to have the +benefit of courts of justice to enforce them. And this reason is a wise +one; and that experience has confirmed its wisdom and necessity, is +demonstrated by the fact that it has been acted upon in England for +nearly two hundred years, and has been so nearly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span> universally adopted in +this country, and that nobody thinks of repealing it.</p> + +<p>We all know, too, how careful most men are to have their contracts +written and signed, even when this statute does not require it. For +example, most men, if they have money due them, of no larger amount than +five or ten dollars, are careful to take a note for it. If they buy even +a small bill of goods, paying for it at the time of delivery, they take +a receipted bill for it. If they pay a small balance of a book account, +or any other small debt previously contracted, they take a written +receipt for it.</p> + +<p>Furthermore, the law everywhere (probably) in our country, as well as in +England, requires that a large class of contracts, such as wills, deeds, +etc., shall not only be written and signed, but also sealed, witnessed, +and acknowledged. And in the case of married women conveying their +rights in real estate, the law, in many States, requires that the women +shall be examined separate and apart from their husbands, and declare +that they sign their contracts free of any fear or compulsion of their +husbands.</p> + +<p>Such are some of the precautions which the laws require, and which +individuals—from motives of common prudence, even in cases not required +by law—take, to put their contracts in writing, and have them signed, +and, to guard against all uncertainties and controversies in regard to +their meaning and validity. And yet we have what purports, or professes, +or is claimed, to be a contract—the Constitution—made eighty years +ago, by men who are now all dead, and who never had any power to bind +<i>us</i>, but which (it is claimed) has nevertheless bound three generations +of men, consisting of many millions, and which (it is claimed) will be +binding upon all the millions that are to come; but which nobody ever +signed, sealed, delivered, witnessed, or acknowledged; and which few +persons, compared with the whole number that are claimed to be bound by +it, have ever read, or even seen, or ever will read, or see. And of +those who ever have read it, or ever will read it, scarcely any two, +perhaps no two, have ever agreed, or ever will agree, as to what it +means.</p> + +<p>Moreover, this supposed contract, which would not be received in any +court of justice sitting under its authority, if offered to prove a debt +of five dollars, owing by one man to another, is one by which—<i>as it is +generally interpreted by those who pretend to administer it</i>—all men, +women and children throughout the country, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span> through all time, +surrender not only all their property, but also their liberties, and +even lives, into the hands of men who by this supposed contract, are +expressly made wholly irresponsible for their disposal of them. And we +are so insane, or so wicked, as to destroy property and lives without +limit, in fighting to compel men to fulfill a supposed contract, which, +inasmuch as it has never been signed by anybody, is, on general +principles of law and reason—such principles as we are all governed by +in regard to other contracts—the merest waste paper, binding upon +nobody, fit only to be thrown into the fire; or, if preserved, preserved +only to serve as a witness and a warning of the folly and wickedness of +mankind.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">VI.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>It is no exaggeration, but a literal truth, to say that, by the +Constitution—<i>not as I interpret it, but as it is interpreted by those +who pretend to administer it</i>—the properties, liberties, and lives of +the entire people of the United States are surrendered unreservedly into +the hands of men who, it is provided by the Constitution itself, shall +never be "questioned" as to any disposal they make of them.</p> + +<p>Thus the Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 6) provides that, "for any speech or +debate (or vote), in either house, they (the senators and +representatives) shall not be questioned in any other place."</p> + +<p>The whole law-making power is given to these senators and +representatives (when acting by a two-thirds vote)<a name="FNanchor_E_5" id="FNanchor_E_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_E_5" class="fnanchor">[e]</a>; and this +provision protects them from all responsibility for the laws they make.</p> + +<p>The Constitution also enables them to secure the execution of all their +laws, by giving them power to withhold the salaries of, and to impeach +and remove, all judicial and executive officers, who refuse to execute +them.</p> + +<p>Thus the whole power of the government is in their hands, and they are +made utterly irresponsible for the use they make of it. What is this but +absolute, irresponsible power?</p> + +<p>It is no answer to this view of the case to say that these men are under +oath to use their power only within certain limits; for<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span> what care they, +or what should they care, for oaths or limits, when it is expressly +provided, by the Constitution itself, that they shall never be +"questioned," or held to any responsibility whatever, for violating +their oaths, or transgressing those limits?</p> + +<p>Neither is it any answer to this view of the case to say that the +particular individuals holding this power can be changed once in two or +six years; for the power of each set of men is absolute during the term +for which they hold it; and when they can hold it no longer, they are +succeeded only by men whose power will be equally absolute and +irresponsible.</p> + +<p>Neither is it any answer to this view of the case to say that the men +holding this absolute, irresponsible power, must be men chosen by the +people (or portions of them) to hold it. A man is none the less a slave +because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. +Neither are a people any the less slaves because permitted periodically +to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now +are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power +over them is, and always is to be, absolute and irresponsible.<a name="FNanchor_F_6" id="FNanchor_F_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_F_6" class="fnanchor">[f]</a></p> + +<p>The right of absolute and irresponsible dominion is the right of +property, and the right of property is the right of absolute, +irresponsible dominion. The two are identical; the one necessarily +implying the other. Neither can exist without the other. If, therefore, +Congress have that absolute and irresponsible law-making power, which +the Constitution—according to their interpretation of it—gives them, +it can only be because they own us as property. If they own us as +property, they are our masters, and their will is our law. If they do +not own us as property, they are not our masters, and their will, as +such, is of no authority over us.</p> + +<p>But these men who claim and exercise this absolute and irresponsible +dominion over us, dare not be consistent, and claim either to be our +masters, or to own us as property. They say they are only our servants, +agents, attorneys, and representatives. But this declaration involves an +absurdity, a contradiction. No man can be my servant, agent, attorney, +or representative, and be, at the same time, uncontrollable by me, and +irresponsible to me for his acts. It is of no importance that I +appointed him, and put all power<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span> in his hands. If I made him +uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me, he is no longer my +servant, agent, attorney, or representative. If I gave him absolute, +irresponsible power over my property, I gave him the property. If I gave +him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and +gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I +called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what +power did I put into his hands? Was it an absolute and irresponsible +one? or a limited and responsible one?</p> + +<p>For still another reason they are neither our servants, agents, +attorneys, nor representatives. And that reason is, that we do not make +ourselves responsible for their acts. If a man is my servant, agent, or +attorney, I necessarily make myself responsible for all his acts done +within the limits of the power I have intrusted to him. If I have +intrusted him, as my agent, with either absolute power, or any power at +all, over the persons or properties of other men than myself, I thereby +necessarily make myself responsible to those other persons for any +injuries he may do them, so long as he acts within the limits of the +power I have granted him. But no individual who may be injured in his +person or property, by acts of Congress, can come to the individual +electors, and hold them responsible for these acts of their so-called +agents or representatives. This fact proves that these pretended agents +of the people, of everybody, are really the agents of nobody.</p> + +<p>If, then, nobody is individually responsible for the acts of Congress, +the members of Congress are nobody's agents. And if they are nobody's +agents, they are themselves individually responsible for their own acts, +and for the acts of all whom they employ. And the authority they are +exercising is simply their own individual authority; and, by the law of +nature—the highest of all laws—anybody injured by their acts, anybody +who is deprived by them of his property or his liberty, has the same +right to hold them individually responsible, that he has to hold any +other trespasser individually responsible. He has the same right to +resist them, and their agents, that he has to resist any other +trespassers.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">VII.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>It is plain, then, that on general principles of law and reason—such +principles as we all act upon in courts of justice and in common +life—the Constitution is no contract; that it binds nobody, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span> never +did bind anybody; and that all those who pretend to act by its +authority, are really acting without any legitimate authority at all; +that, on general principles of law and reason, they are mere usurpers, +and that everybody not only has the right, but is morally bound, to +treat them as such.</p> + +<p>If the people of this country wish to maintain such a government as the +Constitution describes, there is no reason in the world why they should +not sign the instrument itself, and thus make known their wishes in an +open, authentic manner; in such manner as the common sense and +experience of mankind have shown to be reasonable and necessary in such +cases; <i>and in such manner as to make themselves (as they ought to do) +individually responsible for the acts of the government</i>. But the people +have never been asked to sign it. And the only reason why they have +never been asked to sign it, has been that it has been known that they +never would sign it; that they were neither such fools nor knaves as +they must needs have been to be willing to sign it; that (at least as it +has been practically interpreted) it is not what any sensible and honest +man wants for himself; nor such as he has any right to impose upon +others. It is, to all moral intents and purposes, as destitute of +obligation as the compacts which robbers and thieves and pirates enter +into with each other, but never sign.</p> + +<p>If any considerable number of the people believe the Constitution to be +good, why do they not sign it themselves, and make laws for, and +administer them upon, each other; leaving all other persons (who do not +interfere with them) in peace? Until they have tried the experiment for +themselves, how can they have the face to impose the Constitution upon, +or even to recommend it to, others? Plainly the reason for such absurd +and inconsistent conduct is that they want the Constitution, not solely +for any honest or legitimate use it can be of to themselves or others, +but for the dishonest and illegitimate power it gives them over the +persons and properties of others. But for this latter reason, all their +eulogiums on the Constitution, all their exhortations, and all their +expenditures of money and blood to sustain it, would be wanting.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">VIII.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>The Constitution itself, then, being of no authority, on what authority +does our government practically rest? On what ground can those who +pretend to administer it, claim the right to seize men's property, to +restrain them of their natural liberty of action,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span> industry, and trade, +and to kill all who deny their authority to dispose of men's properties, +liberties, and lives at their pleasure or discretion?</p> + +<p>The most they can say, in answer to this question, is, that some half, +two-thirds, or three-fourths, of the male adults of the country have a +<i>tacit understanding</i> that they will maintain a government under the +Constitution; that they will select, by ballot, the persons to +administer it; and that those persons who may receive a majority, or a +plurality, of their ballots, shall act as their representatives, and +administer the Constitution in their name, and by their authority.</p> + +<p>But this tacit understanding (admitting it to exist) cannot at all +justify the conclusion drawn from it. A tacit understanding between A, +B, and C, that they will, by ballot, depute D as their agent, to deprive +me of my property, liberty, or life, cannot at all authorize D to do so. +He is none the less a robber, tyrant, and murderer, because he claims to +act as their agent, than he would be if he avowedly acted on his own +responsibility alone.</p> + +<p>Neither am I bound to recognize him as their agent, nor can he +legitimately claim to be their agent, when he brings no <i>written</i> +authority from them accrediting him as such. I am under no obligation to +take his word as to who his principals may be, or whether he has any. +Bringing no credentials, I have a right to say he has no such authority +even as he claims to have: and that he is therefore intending to rob, +enslave, or murder me on his own account.</p> + +<p>This tacit understanding, therefore, among the voters of the country, +amounts to nothing as an authority to their agents. Neither do the +ballots by which they select their agents, avail any more than does +their tacit understanding; for their ballots are given in secret, and +therefore in a way to avoid any personal responsibility for the acts of +their agents.</p> + +<p>No body of men can be said to authorize a man to act as their agent, to +the injury of a third person, unless they do it in so open and authentic +a manner as to make themselves personally responsible for his acts. None +of the voters in this country appoint their political agents in any +open, authentic manner, or in any manner to make themselves responsible +for their acts. Therefore these pretended agents cannot legitimately +claim to be really agents. Somebody must be responsible for the acts of +these pretended agents; and if they cannot show any open and authentic +credentials from their principals, they cannot, in law or reason, be +said to have any<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span> principals. The maxim applies here, that what does not +appear, does not exist. If they can show no principals, they have none.</p> + +<p>But even these pretended agents do not themselves know who their +pretended principals are. These latter act in secret; for acting by +secret ballot is acting in secret as much as if they were to meet in +secret conclave in the darkness of the night. And they are personally as +much unknown to the agents they select, as they are to others. No +pretended agent therefore can ever know by whose ballots he is selected, +or consequently who his real principals are. Not knowing who his +principals are, he has no right to say that he has any. He can, at most, +say only that he is the agent of a secret band of robbers and murderers, +who are bound by that faith which prevails among confederates in crime, +to stand by him, if his acts, done in their name, shall be resisted.</p> + +<p>Men honestly engaged in attempting to establish justice in the world, +have no occasion thus to act in secret; or to appoint agents to do acts +for which they (the principals) are not willing to be responsible.</p> + +<p>The secret ballot makes a secret government; and a secret government is +a secret band of robbers and murderers. Open despotism is better than +this. The single despot stands out in the face of all men, and says: I +am the State: My will is law: I am your master: I take the +responsibility of my acts: The only arbiter I acknowledge is the sword: +If any one denies my right, let him try conclusions with me.</p> + +<p>But a secret government is little less than a government of assassins. +Under it, a man knows not who his tyrants are, until they have struck, +and perhaps not then. He may <i>guess</i>, beforehand, as to some of his +immediate neighbors. But he really knows nothing. The man to whom he +would most naturally fly for protection, may prove an enemy, when the +time of trial comes.</p> + +<p>This is the kind of government we have; and it is the only one we are +likely to have, until men are ready to say: We will consent to no +Constitution, except such an one as we are neither ashamed nor afraid to +sign; and we will authorize no government to do anything in our name +which we are not willing to be personally responsible for.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">IX.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>What is the motive to the secret ballot? This, and only this: Like other +confederates in crime, those who use it are not friends,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span> but enemies; +and they are afraid to be known, and to have their individual doings +known, even to each other. They can contrive to bring about a sufficient +understanding to enable them to act in concert against other persons; +but beyond this they have no confidence, and no friendship, among +themselves. In fact, they are engaged quite as much in schemes for +plundering each other, as in plundering those who are not of them. And +it is perfectly well understood among them that the strongest party +among them will, in certain contingencies, murder each other by the +hundreds of thousands (as they lately did do) to accomplish their +purposes against each other. Hence they dare not be known, and have +their individual doings known, even to each other. And this is avowedly +the only reason for the ballot: for a secret government; a government by +secret bands of robbers and murderers. And we are insane enough to call +this liberty! To be a member of this secret band of robbers and +murderers is esteemed a privilege and an honor! Without this privilege, +a man is considered a slave; but with it a free man! With it he is +considered a free man, because he has the same power to secretly (by +secret ballot) procure the robbery, enslavement, and murder of another +man, and that other man has to procure his robbery, enslavement, and +murder. And this they call equal rights!</p> + +<p>If any number of men, many or few, claim the right to govern the people +of this country, let them make and sign an open compact with each other +to do so. Let them thus make themselves individually known to those whom +they propose to govern. And let them thus openly take the legitimate +responsibility of their acts. How many of those who now support the +Constitution, will ever do this? How many will ever dare openly proclaim +their right to govern? or take the legitimate responsibility of their +acts? Not one!</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">X.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>It is obvious that, on general principles of law and reason, there +exists no such thing as a government created by, or resting upon, any +consent, compact, or agreement of "the people of the United States" with +each other; that the only visible, tangible, responsible government that +exists, is that of a few individuals only, who act in concert, and call +themselves by the several names of senators, representatives, +presidents, judges, marshals, treasurers, collectors, generals, +colonels, captains, etc., etc.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span>On general principles of law and reason, it is of no importance whatever +that those few individuals profess to be the agents and representatives +of "the people of the United States"; since they can show no credentials +from the people themselves; they were never appointed as agents or +representatives in any open, authentic manner; they do not themselves +know, and have no means of knowing, and cannot prove, who their +principals (as they call them) are individually; and consequently +cannot, in law or reason, be said to have any principals at all.</p> + +<p>It is obvious, too, that if these alleged principals ever did appoint +these pretended agents, or representatives, they appointed them secretly +(by secret ballot), and in a way to avoid all personal responsibility +for their acts; that, at most, these alleged principals put these +pretended agents forward for the most criminal purposes, viz: to plunder +the people of their property, and restrain them of their liberty; and +that the only authority that these alleged principals have for so doing, +is simply a <i>tacit understanding</i> among themselves that they will +imprison, shoot, or hang every man who resists the exactions and +restraints which their agents or representatives may impose upon them.</p> + +<p>Thus it is obvious that the only visible, tangible government we have is +made up of these professed agents or representatives of a secret band of +robbers and murderers, who, to cover up, or gloss over, their robberies +and murders, have taken to themselves the title of "the people of the +United States"; and who, on the pretense of being "the people of the +United States," assert their right to subject to their dominion, and to +control and dispose of at their pleasure, all property and persons found +in the United States.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XI.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>On general principles of law and reason, the oaths which these pretended +agents of the people take "to support the Constitution," are of no +validity or obligation. And why? For this, if for no other reason, viz., +<i>that they are given to nobody</i>. There is no privity (as the lawyers +say)—that is, no mutual recognition, consent, and agreement—between +those who take these oaths, and any other persons.</p> + +<p>If I go upon Boston Common, and in the presence of a hundred thousand +people, men, women and children, with whom I have no contract on the +subject, take an oath that I will enforce upon<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span> them the laws of Moses, +of Lycurgus, of Solon, of Justinian, or of Alfred, that oath is, on +general principles of law and reason, of no obligation. It is of no +obligation, not merely because it is intrinsically a criminal one, <i>but +also because it is given to nobody</i>, and consequently pledges my faith +to nobody. It is merely given to the winds.</p> + +<p>It would not alter the case at all to say that, among these hundred +thousand persons, in whose presence the oath was taken, there were two, +three, or five thousand male adults, who had <i>secretly</i>—by secret +ballot, and in a way to avoid making themselves <i>individually</i> known to +me, or to the remainder of the hundred thousand—designated me as their +agent to rule, control, plunder, and, if need be, murder, these hundred +thousand people. The fact that they had designated me secretly, and in a +manner to prevent my knowing them individually, prevents all privity +between them and me; and consequently makes it impossible that there can +be any contract, or pledge of faith, on my part towards them; for it is +impossible that I can pledge my faith, in any legal sense, to a man whom +I neither know, nor have any means of knowing, individually.</p> + +<p>So far as I am concerned, then, these two, three, or five thousand +persons are a secret band of robbers and murderers, who have secretly, +and in a way to save themselves from all responsibility for my acts, +designated me as their agent; and have, through some other agent, or +pretended agent, made their wishes known to me. But being, nevertheless, +individually unknown to me, and having no open, authentic contract with +me, my oath is, on general principles of law and reason, of no validity +as a pledge of faith to them. And being no pledge of faith to them, it +is no pledge of faith to anybody. It is mere idle wind. At most, it is +only a pledge of faith to an unknown band of robbers and murderers, +whose instrument for plundering and murdering other people, I thus +publicly confess myself to be. And it has no other obligation than a +similar oath given to any other unknown body of pirates, robbers, and +murderers.</p> + +<p>For these reasons the oaths taken by members of Congress, "to support +the Constitution," are, on general principles of law and reason, of no +validity. They are not only criminal in themselves, and therefore void; +but they are also void for the further reason <i>that they are given to +nobody</i>.</p> + +<p>It cannot be said that, in any legitimate or legal sense, they are<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span> +given to "the people of the United States"; because neither the whole, +nor any large proportion of the whole, people of the United States ever, +either openly or secretly, appointed or designated these men as their +agents to carry the Constitution into effect. The great body of the +people—that is, men, women and children—were never asked, or even +permitted, to signify, in any <i>formal</i> manner, either openly or +secretly, their choice or wish on the subject. The most that these +members of Congress can say, in favor of their appointment, is simply +this: Each one can say for himself:</p> + +<p>I have evidence satisfactory to myself, that there exists, scattered +throughout the country, a band of men, having a tacit understanding with +each other, and calling themselves "the people of the United States," +whose general purposes are to control and plunder each other, and all +other persons in the country, and, so far as they can, even in +neighboring countries; and to kill every man who shall attempt to defend +his person and property against their schemes of plunder and dominion. +Who these men are, <i>individually</i>, I have no certain means of knowing, +for they sign no papers, and give no open, authentic evidence of their +individual membership. They are not known individually even to each +other. They are apparently as much afraid of being individually known to +each other, as of being known to other persons. Hence they ordinarily +have no mode either of exercising, or of making known, their individual +membership, otherwise than by giving their votes secretly for certain +agents to do their will. But although these men are individually +unknown, both to each other and to other persons, it is generally +understood in the country that none but male persons, of the age of +twenty-one years and upwards, can be members. It is also generally +understood that <i>all</i> male persons, born in the country, having certain +complexions, and (in some localities) certain amounts of property, and +(in certain cases) even persons of foreign birth, are <i>permitted</i> to be +members. But it appears that usually not more than one half, two-thirds, +or, in some cases, three-fourths, of all who are thus permitted to +become members of the band, ever exercise, or consequently prove, their +actual membership, in the only mode in which they ordinarily can +exercise or prove it, viz., by giving their votes secretly for the +officers or agents of the band. The number of these secret votes, so far +as we have any account of them, varies greatly from year to year, thus +tending to prove that the band, instead of being a permanent +organization,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span> is a merely <i>pro tempore</i> affair with those who choose to +act with it for the time being. The gross number of these secret votes, +or what purports to be their gross number, in different localities, is +occasionally published. Whether these reports are accurate or not, we +have no means of knowing. It is generally supposed that great frauds are +often committed in depositing them. They are understood to be received +and counted by certain men, who are themselves appointed for that +purpose by the same secret process by which all other officers and +agents of the band are selected. According to the reports of these +receivers of votes (for whose accuracy or honesty, however, I cannot +vouch), and according to my best knowledge of the whole number of male +persons "in my district," who (it is supposed) were permitted to vote, +it would appear that one-half, two-thirds or three-fourths actually did +vote. Who the men were, individually, who cast these votes, I have no +knowledge, for the whole thing was done secretly. But of the secret +votes thus given for what they call a "member of Congress," the +receivers reported that I had a majority, or at least a larger number +than any other one person. And it is only by virtue of such a +designation that I am now here to act in concert with other persons +similarly selected in other parts of the country. It is understood among +those who sent me here, that all the persons so selected, will, on +coming together at the City of Washington, take an oath in each other's +presence "to support the Constitution of the United States." By this is +meant a certain paper that was drawn up eighty years ago. It was never +signed by anybody, and apparently has no obligation, and never had any +obligation, as a contract. In fact, few persons ever read it, and +doubtless much the largest number of those who voted for me and the +others, never even saw it, or now pretend to know what it means. +Nevertheless, it is often spoken of in the country as "the Constitution +of the United States"; and for some reason or another, the men who sent +me here, seem to expect that I, and all with whom I act, will swear to +carry this Constitution into effect. I am therefore ready to take this +oath, and to co-operate with all others, similarly selected, who are +ready to take the same oath.</p> + +<p>This is the most that any member of Congress can say in proof that he +has any constituency; that he represents anybody; that his oath "to +support the Constitution," <i>is given to anybody</i>, or pledges his faith +to <i>anybody</i>. He has no open, written, or other authentic<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span> evidence, +such as is required in all other cases, that he was ever appointed the +agent or representative of anybody. He has no written power of attorney +from any single individual. He has no such legal knowledge as is +required in all other cases, by which he can identify a single one of +those who pretend to have appointed him to represent them.</p> + +<p>Of course his oath, professedly given to them, "to support the +Constitution," is, on general principles of law and reason, an oath +given to nobody. It pledges his faith to nobody. If he fails to fulfil +his oath, not a single person can come forward, and say to him, you have +betrayed me, or broken faith with me.</p> + +<p>No one can come forward and say to him: I appointed you my attorney to +act for me. I required you to swear that, as my attorney, you would +support the Constitution. You promised me that you would do so; and now +you have forfeited the oath you gave to me. No single individual can say +this.</p> + +<p>No open, avowed, or responsible association, or body of men, can come +forward and say to him: We appointed you our attorney, to act for us. We +required you to swear that, as our attorney, you would support the +Constitution. You promised us that you would do so; and now you have +forfeited the oath you gave to us.</p> + +<p>No open, avowed, or responsible association, or body of men, can say +this to him; because there is no such association or body of men in +existence. If any one should assert that there is such an association, +let him prove, if he can, who compose it. Let him produce, if he can, +any open, written, or other authentic contract, signed or agreed to by +these men; forming themselves into an association; making themselves +known as such to the world; appointing him as their agent; and making +themselves individually, or as an association, responsible for his acts, +done by their authority. Until all this can be shown, no one can say +that, in any legitimate sense, there is any such association; or that he +is their agent; or that he ever gave his oath to them; or ever pledged +his faith to them.</p> + +<p>On general principles of law and reason, it would be a sufficient answer +for him to say, to all individuals, and all pretended associations of +individuals, who should accuse him of a breach of faith to them:</p> + +<p>I never knew you. Where is your evidence that you, either individually +or collectively, ever appointed me your attorney? that you ever required +me to swear to you, that, as your attorney, I<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span> would support the +Constitution? or that I have now broken any faith I ever pledged to you? +You may, or you may not, be members of that secret band of robbers and +murderers, who act in secret; appoint their agents by a secret ballot; +who keep themselves individually unknown even to the agents they thus +appoint; and who, therefore, cannot claim that they have any agents; or +that any of their pretended agents ever gave his oath, or pledged his +faith, to them. I repudiate you altogether. My oath was given to others, +with whom you have nothing to do; or it was idle wind, given only to the +idle winds. Begone!</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XII.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>For the same reasons, the oaths of all the other pretended agents of +this secret band of robbers and murderers are, on general principles of +law and reason, equally destitute of obligation. They are given to +nobody; but only to the winds.</p> + +<p>The oaths of the tax-gatherers and treasurers of the band, are, on +general principles of law and reason, of no validity. If any tax +gatherer, for example, should put the money he receives into his own +pocket, and refuse to part with it, the members of this band could not +say to him: You collected that money as our agent, and for our uses; and +you swore to pay it over to us, or to those we should appoint to receive +it. You have betrayed us, and broken faith with us.</p> + +<p>It would be a sufficient answer for him to say to them:</p> + +<p>I never knew you. You never made yourselves individually known to me. I +never gave my oath to you, as individuals. You may, or you may not, be +members of that secret band, who appoint agents to rob and murder other +people; but who are cautious not to make themselves individually known, +either to such agents, or to those whom their agents are commissioned to +rob. If you are members of that band, you have given me no proof that +you ever commissioned me to rob others for your benefit. I never knew +you, as individuals, and of course never promised you that I would pay +over to you the proceeds of my robberies. I committed my robberies on my +own account, and for my own profit. If you thought I was fool enough to +allow you to keep yourselves concealed, and use me as your tool for +robbing other persons; or that I would take all the personal risk of the +robberies, and pay over the proceeds to you, you were particularly +simple. As I took all the risk of my<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span> robberies, I propose to take all +the profits. Begone! You are fools, as well as villains. If I gave my +oath to anybody, I gave it to other persons than you. But I really gave +it to nobody. I only gave it to the winds. It answered my purposes at +the time. It enabled me to get the money I was after, and now I propose +to keep it. If you expected me to pay it over to you, you relied only +upon that honor that is said to prevail among thieves. You now +understand that that is a very poor reliance. I trust you may become +wise enough to never rely upon it again. If I have any duty in the +matter, it is to give back the money to those from whom I took it; not +to pay it over to such villains as you.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XIII.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>On general principles of law and reason, the oaths which foreigners +take, on coming here, and being "naturalized" (as it is called), are of +no validity. They are necessarily given to nobody; because there is no +open, authentic association, to which they can join themselves; or to +whom, as individuals, they can pledge their faith. No such association, +or organization, as "the people of the United States," having ever been +formed by any open, written, authentic, or voluntary contract, there is, +on general principles of law and reason, no such association, or +organization, in existence. And all oaths that purport to be given to +such an association are necessarily given only to the winds. They cannot +be said to be given to any man, or body of men, as individuals, because +no man, or body of men, can come forward <i>with any proof</i> that the oaths +were given to them, as individuals, or to any association of which they +are members. To say that there is a tacit understanding among a portion +of the male adults of the country, that they will call themselves "the +people of the United States," and that they will act in concert in +subjecting the remainder of the people of the United States to their +dominion; but that they will keep themselves personally concealed by +doing all their acts secretly, is wholly insufficient, on general +principles of law and reason, to prove the existence of any such +association, or organization, as "the people of the United States"; or +consequently to prove that the oaths of foreigners were given to any +such association.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XIV.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>On general principles of law and reason, all the oaths which, since the +war, have been given by Southern men, that they will<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span> obey the laws of +Congress, support the Union, and the like, are of no validity. Such +oaths are invalid, not only because they were extorted by military +power, and threats of confiscation, and because they are in +contravention of men's natural right to do as they please about +supporting the government, <i>but also because they were given to nobody</i>. +They were nominally given to "the United States." But being nominally +given to "the United States," they were necessarily given to nobody, +because, on general principles of law and reason, there were no "United +States," to whom the oaths could be given. That is to say, there was no +open, authentic, avowed, legitimate association, corporation, or body of +men, known as "the United States," or as "the people of the United +States," to whom the oaths could have been given. If anybody says there +was such a corporation, let him state who were the individuals that +composed it, and how and when they became a corporation. Were Mr. A, Mr. +B, and Mr. C members of it? If so, where are their signatures? Where the +evidence of their membership? Where the record? Where the open, +authentic proof? There is none. Therefore, in law and reason, there was +no such corporation.</p> + +<p>On general principles of law and reason, every corporation, association, +or organized body of men, having a legitimate corporate existence, and +legitimate corporate rights, must consist of certain known individuals, +who can prove, by legitimate and reasonable evidence, their membership. +But nothing of this kind can be proved in regard to the corporation, or +body of men, who call themselves "the United States." Not a man of them, +in all the Northern States, can prove by any legitimate evidence, such +as is required to prove membership in other legal corporations, that he +himself, or any other man whom he can name, is a member of any +corporation or association called "the United States," or "the people of +the United States," or, consequently, that there is any such +corporation. And since no such corporation can be proved to exist, it +cannot of course be proved that the oaths of Southern men were given to +any such corporation. The most that can be claimed is that the oaths +were given to a secret band of robbers and murderers, who called +themselves "the United States," and extorted those oaths. But that +certainly is not enough to prove that the oaths are of any obligation.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XV.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>On general principles of law and reason, the oaths of soldiers,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span> that +they will serve a given number of years, that they will obey the orders +of their superior officers, that they will bear true allegiance to the +government, and so forth, are of no obligation. Independently of the +criminality of an oath, that, for a given number of years, he will kill +all whom he may be commanded to kill, without exercising his own +judgment or conscience as to the justice or necessity of such killing, +there is this further reason why a soldier's oath is of no obligation, +viz., that, like all the other oaths that have now been mentioned, <i>it +is given to nobody</i>. There being, in no legitimate sense, any such +corporation, or nation, as "the United States," nor, consequently, in +any legitimate sense, any such government as "the government of the +United States," a soldier's oath given to, or contract made with, such +nation or government, is necessarily an oath given to, or a contract +made with, nobody. Consequently such oath or contract can be of no +obligation.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XVI.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>On general principles of law and reason, the treaties, so called, which +purport to be entered into with other nations, by persons calling +themselves ambassadors, secretaries, presidents, and senators of the +United States, in the name, and in behalf, of "the people of the United +States," are of no validity. These so-called ambassadors, secretaries, +presidents, and senators, who claim to be the agents of "the people of +the United States," for making these treaties, can show no open, +written, or other authentic evidence that either the whole "people of +the United States," or any other open, avowed, responsible body of men, +calling themselves by that name, ever authorized these pretended +ambassadors and others to make treaties in the name of, or binding upon +any one of, "the people of the United States," or any other open, +avowed, responsible body of men, calling themselves by that name, ever +authorized these pretended ambassadors, secretaries, and others, in +their name and behalf, to recognize certain other persons, calling +themselves emperors, kings, queens, and the like, as the rightful +rulers, sovereigns, masters, or representatives of the different peoples +whom they assume to govern, to represent, and to bind.</p> + +<p>The "nations," as they are called, with whom our pretended ambassadors, +secretaries, presidents, and senators profess to make treaties, are as +much myths as our own. On general principles of law and reason, there +are no such "nations." That is to say, neither<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span> the whole people of +England, for example, nor any open, avowed, responsible body of men, +calling themselves by that name, ever, by any open, written, or other +authentic contract with each other, formed themselves into any bona +fide, legitimate association or organization, or authorized any king, +queen, or other representative to make treaties in their name, or to +bind them, either individually, or as an association, by such treaties.</p> + +<p>Our pretended treaties, then, being made with no legitimate or bona fide +nations, or representatives of nations, and being made, on our part, by +persons who have no legitimate authority to act for us, have +intrinsically no more validity than a pretended treaty made by the Man +in the Moon with the king of the Pleiades.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XVII.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>On general principles of law and reason, debts contracted in the name of +"the United States," or of "the people of the United States," are of no +validity. It is utterly absurd to pretend that debts to the amount of +twenty-five hundred millions of dollars are binding upon thirty-five or +forty millions of people, when there is not a particle of legitimate +evidence—such as would be required to prove a private debt—that can be +produced against any one of them, that either he, or his properly +authorized attorney, ever contracted to pay one cent.</p> + +<p>Certainly, neither the whole people of the United States, nor any number +of them, ever separately or individually contracted to pay a cent of +these debts.</p> + +<p>Certainly, also, neither the whole people of the United States, nor any +number of them, ever, by any open, written, or other authentic and +voluntary contract, united themselves as a firm, corporation, or +association, by the name of "the United States," or "the people of the +United States," and authorized their agents to contract debts in their +name.</p> + +<p>Certainly, too, there is in existence no such firm, corporation, or +association as "the United States," or "the people of the United +States," formed by any open, written, or other authentic and voluntary<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span> +contract, and having corporate property with which to pay these debts.</p> + +<p>How, then, is it possible, on any general principle of law or reason, +that debts that are binding upon nobody individually, can be binding +upon forty millions of people collectively, when, on general and +legitimate principles of law and reason, these forty millions of people +neither have, nor ever had, any corporate property? never made any +corporate or individual contract? and neither have, nor ever had, any +corporate existence?</p> + +<p>Who, then, created these debts, in the name of "the United States"? Why, +at most, only a few persons, calling themselves "members of Congress," +etc., who pretended to represent "the people of the United States," but +who really represented only a secret band of robbers and murderers, who +wanted money to carry on the robberies and murders in which they were +then engaged; and who intended to extort from the future people of the +United States, by robbery and threats of murder (and real murder, if +that should prove necessary), the means to pay these debts.</p> + +<p>This band of robbers and murderers, who were the real principals in +contracting these debts, is a secret one, because its members have never +entered into any open, written, avowed, or authentic contract, by which +they may be individually known to the world, or even to each other. +Their real or pretended representatives, who contracted these debts in +their name, were selected (if selected at all) for that purpose secretly +(by secret ballot), and in a way to furnish evidence against none of the +principals <i>individually</i>; and these principals were really known +<i>individually</i> neither to their pretended representatives who contracted +these debts in their behalf, nor to those who lent the money. The money, +therefore, was all borrowed and lent in the dark; that is, by men who +did not see each other's faces, or know each other's names; who could +not then, and cannot now, identify each other as principals in the +transactions; and who consequently can prove no contract with each +other.</p> + +<p>Furthermore, the money was all lent and borrowed for criminal purposes; +that is, for purposes of robbery and murder; and for this reason the +contracts were all intrinsically void; and would have been so, even +though the real parties, borrowers and lenders, had come face to face, +and made their contracts openly, in their own proper names.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span>Furthermore, this secret band of robbers and murderers, who were the +real borrowers of this money, having no legitimate corporate existence, +have no corporate property with which to pay these debts. They do indeed +pretend to own large tracts of wild lands, lying between the Atlantic +and Pacific Oceans, and between the Gulf of Mexico and the North Pole. +But, on general principles of law and reason, they might as well pretend +to own the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans themselves; or the atmosphere and +the sunlight; and to hold them, and dispose of them, for the payment of +these debts.</p> + +<p>Having no corporate property with which to pay what purports to be their +corporate debts, this secret band of robbers and murderers are really +bankrupt. They have nothing to pay with. In fact, they do not propose to +pay their debts otherwise than from the proceeds of their future +robberies and murders. These are confessedly their sole reliance; and +were known to be such by the lenders of the money, at the time the money +was lent. And it was, therefore, virtually a part of the contract, that +the money should be repaid only from the proceeds of these future +robberies and murders. For this reason, if for no other, the contracts +were void from the beginning.</p> + +<p>In fact, these apparently two classes, borrowers and lenders, were +really one and the same class. They borrowed and lent money from and to +themselves. They themselves were not only part and parcel, but the very +life and soul, of this secret band of robbers and murderers, who +borrowed and spent the money. Individually they furnished money for a +common enterprise; taking, in return, what purported to be corporate +promises for individual loans. The only excuse they had for taking these +so-called corporate promises of, for individual loans by, the same +parties, was that they might have some apparent excuse for the future +robberies of the band (that is, to pay the debts of the corporation), +and that they might also know what shares they were to be respectively +entitled to out of the proceeds of their future robberies.</p> + +<p>Finally, if these debts had been created for the most innocent and +honest purposes, and in the most open and honest manner, by the real +parties to the contracts, these parties could thereby have bound nobody +but themselves, and no property but their own. They could have bound +nobody that should have come after them, and no property subsequently +created by, or belonging to, other persons.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span></p> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XVIII.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>The Constitution having never been signed by anybody; and there being no +other open, written, or authentic contract between any parties whatever, +by virtue of which the United States government, so called, is +maintained; and it being well known that none but male persons, of +twenty-one years of age and upwards, are allowed any voice in the +government; and it being also well known that a large number of these +adult persons seldom or never vote at all; and that all those who do +vote, do so secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to prevent their +individual votes being known, either to the world, or even to each +other; and consequently in a way to make no one openly responsible for +the acts of their agents, or representatives,—all these things being +known, the questions arise: <i>Who</i> compose the real governing power in +the country? Who are the men, <i>the responsible men</i>, who rob us of our +property? Restrain us of our liberty? Subject us to their arbitrary +dominion? And devastate our homes, and shoot us down by the hundreds of +thousands, if we resist? How shall we find these men? How shall we know +them from others? How shall we defend ourselves and our property against +them? Who, of our neighbors, are members of this secret band of robbers +and murderers? How can we know which are <i>their</i> houses, that we may +burn or demolish them? Which <i>their</i> property, that we may destroy it? +Which their persons, that we may kill them, and rid the world and +ourselves of such tyrants and monsters?</p> + +<p>These are questions that must be answered, before men can be free; +before they can protect themselves against this secret band of robbers +and murderers, who now plunder, enslave, and destroy them.</p> + +<p>The answer to these questions is, that only those who have the will and +the power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, +as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will +civilized men be robbed, or enslaved.</p> + +<p>Among savages, mere physical strength, on the part of one man, may +enable him to rob, enslave, or kill another man. Among barbarians, mere +physical strength, on the part of a body of men, disciplined, and acting +in concert, though with very little money or other wealth, may, under +some circumstances, enable them to rob, enslave, or kill another body of +men, as numerous, or perhaps even more numerous, than themselves. And +among both savages and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span> barbarians, mere want may sometimes compel one +man to sell himself as a slave to another. But with (so-called) +civilized peoples, among whom knowledge, wealth, and the means of acting +in concert, have become diffused; and who have invented such weapons and +other means of defense as to render mere physical strength of less +importance; and by whom soldiers in any requisite number, and other +instrumentalities of war in any requisite amount, can always be had for +money, the question of war, and consequently the question of power, is +little else than a mere question of money. As a necessary consequence, +those who stand ready to furnish this money, are the real rulers. It is +so in Europe, and it is so in this country.</p> + +<p>In Europe, the nominal rulers, the emperors and kings and parliaments, +are anything but the real rulers of their respective countries. They are +little or nothing else than mere tools, employed by the wealthy to rob, +enslave, and (if need be) murder those who have less wealth, or none at +all.</p> + +<p>The Rothschilds, and that class of money-lenders of whom they are the +representatives and agents—men who never think of lending a shilling to +their next-door neighbors, for purposes of honest industry, unless upon +the most ample security, and at the highest<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span> rate of interest—stand +ready, at all times, to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers +and murderers, who call themselves governments, to be expended in +shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and +enslaved.</p> + +<p>They lend their money in this manner, knowing that it is to be expended +in murdering their fellow men, for simply seeking their liberty and +their rights; knowing also that neither the interest nor the principal +will ever be paid, except as it will be extorted under terror of the +repetition of such murders as those for which the money lent is to be +expended.</p> + +<p>These money-lenders, the Rothschilds, for example, say to themselves: If +we lend a hundred millions sterling to the queen and parliament of +England, it will enable them to murder twenty, fifty, or a hundred +thousand people in England, Ireland, or India; and the terror inspired +by such wholesale murder, will enable them to keep the whole people of +those countries in subjection for twenty, or perhaps fifty, years to +come; to control all their trade and industry; and to extort from them +large amounts of money, under the name of taxes; and from the wealth +thus extorted from them, they (the queen and parliament) can afford to +pay us a higher rate of interest for our money than we can get in any +other way. Or, if we lend this sum to the emperor of Austria, it will +enable him to murder so many of his people as to strike terror into the +rest, and thus enable him to keep them in subjection, and extort money +from them, for twenty or fifty years to come. And they say the same in +regard to the emperor of Russia, the king of Prussia, the emperor of +France, or any other ruler, so called, who, in their judgment, will be +able, by murdering a reasonable portion of his people, to keep the rest +in subjection, and extort money from them, for a long time to come, to +pay the interest and principal of the money lent him.</p> + +<p>And why are these men so ready to lend money for murdering their fellow +men? Solely for this reason, viz., that such loans are considered better +investments than loans for purposes of honest industry. They pay higher +rates of interest; and it is less trouble to look after them. This is +the whole matter.</p> + +<p>The question of making these loans is, with these lenders, a mere +question of pecuniary profit. They lend money to be expended in robbing, +enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, solely because, on the whole, +such loans pay better than any others.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span> They are no respecters of +persons, no superstitious fools, that reverence monarchs. They care no +more for a king, or an emperor, than they do for a beggar, except as he +is a better customer, and can pay them better interest for their money. +If they doubt his ability to make his murders successful for maintaining +his power, and thus extorting money from his people in future, they +dismiss him as unceremoniously as they would dismiss any other hopeless +bankrupt, who should want to borrow money to save himself from open +insolvency.</p> + +<p>When these great lenders of blood-money, like the Rothschilds, have +loaned vast sums in this way, for purposes of murder, to an emperor or a +king, they sell out the bonds taken by them, in small amounts, to +anybody, and everybody, who are disposed to buy them at satisfactory +prices, to hold as investments. They (the Rothschilds) thus soon get +back their money, with great profits; and are now ready to lend money in +the same way again to any other robber and murderer, called an emperor +or a king, who, they think, is likely to be successful in his robberies +and murders, and able to pay a good price for the money necessary to +carry them on.</p> + +<p>This business of lending blood-money is one of the most thoroughly +sordid, cold-blooded, and criminal that was ever carried on, to any +considerable extent, amongst human beings. It is like lending money to +slave traders, or to common robbers and pirates, to be repaid out of +their plunder. And the men who loan money to governments, so called, for +the purpose of enabling the latter to rob, enslave, and murder their +people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen. +And they as much deserve to be hunted and killed (if they cannot +otherwise be got rid of) as any slave traders, robbers, or pirates that +ever lived.</p> + +<p>When these emperors and kings, so-called, have obtained their loans, +they proceed to hire and train immense numbers of professional +murderers, called soldiers, and employ them in shooting down all who +resist their demands for money. In fact, most of them keep large bodies +of these murderers constantly in their service, as their only means of +enforcing their extortions. There are now, I think, four or five +millions of these professional murderers constantly employed by the +so-called sovereigns of Europe. The enslaved people are, of course, +forced to support and pay all these murderers, as well as to submit to +all the other extortions which these murderers are employed to enforce.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span>It is only in this way that most of the so-called governments of Europe +are maintained. These so-called governments are in reality only great +bands of robbers and murderers, organized, disciplined, and constantly +on the alert. And the so-called sovereigns, in these different +governments, are simply the heads, or chiefs, of different bands of +robbers and murderers. And these heads or chiefs are dependent upon the +lenders of blood-money for the means to carry on their robberies and +murders. They could not sustain themselves a moment but for the loans +made to them by these blood-money loan-mongers. And their first care is +to maintain their credit with them; for they know their end is come, the +instant their credit with them fails. Consequently the first proceeds of +their extortions are scrupulously applied to the payment of the interest +on their loans.</p> + +<p>In addition to paying the interest on their bonds, they perhaps grant to +the holders of them great monopolies in banking, like the Banks of +England, of France, and of Vienna; with the agreement that these banks +shall furnish money whenever, in sudden emergencies, it may be necessary +to shoot down more of their people. Perhaps also, by means of tariffs on +competing imports, they give great monopolies to certain branches of +industry, in which these lenders of blood-money are engaged. They also, +by unequal taxation, exempt wholly or partially the property of these +loan-mongers, and throw corresponding burdens upon those who are too +poor and weak to resist.</p> + +<p>Thus it is evident that all these men, who call themselves by the +high-sounding names of Emperors, Kings, Sovereigns, Monarchs, Most +Christian Majesties, Most Catholic Majesties, High Mightinesses, Most +Serene and Potent Princes, and the like, and who claim to rule "by the +grace of God," by "Divine Right"—that is, by special authority from +Heaven—are intrinsically not only the merest miscreants and wretches, +engaged solely in plundering, enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, +but that they are also the merest hangers on, the servile, obsequious, +fawning dependents and tools of these blood-money loan-mongers, on whom +they rely for the means to carry on their crimes. These loan-mongers, +like the Rothschilds, laugh in their sleeves, and say to themselves: +These despicable creatures, who call themselves emperors, and kings, and +majesties, and most serene and potent princes; who profess to wear +crowns, and sit on thrones; who deck themselves with ribbons, and +feathers, and jewels; and surround themselves with hired flatterers<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span> and +lickspittles; and whom we suffer to strut around, and palm themselves +off, upon fools and slaves, as sovereigns and lawgivers specially +appointed by Almighty God; and to hold themselves out as the sole +fountains of honors, and dignities, and wealth, and power—all these +miscreants and imposters know that we make them, and use them; that in +us they live, move, and have their being; that we require them (as the +price of their positions) to take upon themselves all the labor, all the +danger, and all the odium of all the crimes they commit for our profit; +and that we will unmake them, strip them of their gewgaws, and send them +out into the world as beggars, or give them over to the vengeance of the +people they have enslaved, the moment they refuse to commit any crime we +require of them, or to pay over to us such share of the proceeds of +their robberies as we see fit to demand.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">XIX.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>Now, what is true in Europe, is substantially true in this country. The +difference is the immaterial one, that, in this country, there is no +visible, permanent head, or chief, of these robbers and murderers, who +call themselves "the government." That is to say, there is no <i>one man</i>, +who calls himself the state, or even emperor, king, or sovereign; no one +who claims that he and his children rule "by the Grace of God," by +"Divine Right," or by special appointment from Heaven. There are only +certain men, who call themselves presidents, senators, and +representatives, and claim to be the authorized agents, <i>for the time +being, or for certain short periods, of all</i> "the people of the United +States"; but who can show no credentials, or powers of attorney, or any +other open, authentic evidence that they are so; and who notoriously are +not so; but are really only the agents of a secret band of robbers and +murderers, whom they themselves do not know, and have no means of +knowing, individually; but who, they trust, will openly or secretly, +when the crisis comes, sustain them in all their usurpations and crimes.</p> + +<p>What is important to be noticed is, that these so-called presidents, +senators, and representatives, these pretended agents of all "the people +of the United States," the moment their exactions meet with any +formidable resistance from any portion of "the people" themselves, are +obliged, like their co-robbers and murderers in Europe, to fly at once +to the lenders of blood money, for the means to sustain their power. And +they borrow their money on the same<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span> principle, and for the same +purpose, viz., to be expended in shooting down all those "people of the +United States"—their own constituents and principals, as they profess +to call them—who resist the robberies and enslavement which these +borrowers of the money are practising upon them. And they expect to +repay the loans, if at all, only from the proceeds of the future +robberies, which they anticipate it will be easy for them and their +successors to perpetrate through a long series of years, upon their +pretended principals, if they can but shoot down now some hundreds of +thousands of them, and thus strike terror into the rest.</p> + +<p>Perhaps the facts were never made more evident, in any country on the +globe, than in our own, that these soulless blood-money loan-mongers are +the real rulers; that they rule from the most sordid and mercenary +motives; that the ostensible government, the presidents, senators, and +representatives, so called, are merely their tools; and that no ideas +of, or regard for, justice or liberty had anything to do in inducing +them to lend their money for the war. In proof of all this, look at the +following facts.</p> + +<p>Nearly a hundred years ago we professed to have got rid of all that +religious superstition, inculcated by a servile and corrupt priesthood +in Europe, that rulers, so called, derived their authority directly from +Heaven; and that it was consequently a religious duty on the part of the +people to obey them. We professed long ago to have learned that +governments could rightfully exist only by the free will, and on the +voluntary support, of those who might choose to sustain them. We all +professed to have known long ago, that the only legitimate objects of +government were the maintenance of liberty and justice equally for all. +All this we had professed for nearly a hundred years. And we professed +to look with pity and contempt upon those ignorant, superstitious, and +enslaved peoples of Europe, who were so easily kept in subjection by the +frauds and force of priests and kings.</p> + +<p>Notwithstanding all this, that we had learned, and known, and professed, +for nearly a century, these lenders of blood money had, for a long +series of years previous to the war, been the willing accomplices of the +slave-holders in perverting the government from the purposes of liberty +and justice, to the greatest of crimes. They had been such accomplices +<i>for a purely pecuniary consideration</i>, to wit, a control of the markets +in the South; in other words, the privilege of holding the slave-holders +themselves in industrial<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span> and commercial subjection to the manufacturers +and merchants of the North (who afterwards furnished the money for the +war). And these Northern merchants and manufacturers, these lenders of +blood-money, were willing to continue to be the accomplices of the +slave-holders in the future, for the same pecuniary consideration. But +the slave-holders, either doubting the fidelity of their Northern +allies, or feeling themselves strong enough to keep their slaves in +subjection without Northern assistance, would no longer pay the price +which these Northern men demanded. And it was to enforce this price in +the future—that is, to monopolize the Southern markets, to maintain +their industrial and commercial control over the South—that these +Northern manufacturers and merchants lent some of the profits of their +former monopolies for the war, in order to secure to themselves the +same, or greater, monopolies in the future. These—and not any love of +liberty or justice—were the motives on which the money for the war was +lent by the North. In short, the North said to the slave-holders: If you +will not pay us our price (give us control of your markets) for our +assistance against your slaves, we will secure the same price (keep +control of your markets) by helping your slaves against you, and using +them as our tools for maintaining dominion over you; for the control of +your markets we will have, whether the tools we use for that purpose be +black or white, and be the cost, in blood and money, what it may.</p> + +<p>On this principle, and from this motive, and not from any love of +liberty, or justice, the money was lent in enormous amounts, and at +enormous rates of interest. And it was only by means of these loans that +the objects of the war were accomplished.</p> + +<p>And now these lenders of blood-money demand their pay; and the +government, so called, becomes their tool, their servile, slavish, +villainous tool, to extort it from the labor of the enslaved people both +of the North and the South. It is to be extorted by every form of +direct, and indirect, and unequal taxation. Not only the nominal debt +and interest—enormous as the latter was—are to be paid in full; but +these holders of the debt are to be paid still further—and perhaps +doubly, triply, or quadruply paid—by such tariffs on imports as will +enable our home manufacturers to realize enormous prices for their +commodities; also by such monopolies in banking as will enable them to +keep control of, and thus enslave and plunder, the industry and trade of +the great body of the Northern people<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span> themselves. In short, the +industrial and commercial slavery of the great body of the people, North +and South, black and white, is the price which these lenders of blood +money demand, and insist upon, and are determined to secure, in return +for the money lent for the war.</p> + +<p>This programme having been fully arranged and systematized, they put +their sword into the hands of the chief murderer of the war, and charge +him to carry their scheme into effect. And now he, speaking as their +organ, says: "<i>Let us have peace</i>."</p> + +<p>The meaning of this is: Submit quietly to all the robbery and slavery we +have arranged for you, and you can have "peace." But in case you resist, +the same lenders of blood-money, who furnished the means to subdue the +South, will furnish the means again to subdue you.</p> + +<p>These are the terms on which alone this government, or, with few +exceptions, any other, ever gives "peace" to its people.</p> + +<p>The whole affair, on the part of those who furnished the money, has +been, and now is, a deliberate scheme of robbery and murder; not merely +to monopolize the markets of the South, but also to monopolize the +currency, and thus control the industry and trade, and thus plunder and +enslave the laborers, of both North and South. And Congress and the +president are today the merest tools for these purposes. They are +obliged to be, for they know that their own power, as rulers, so-called, +is at an end, the moment their credit with the blood-money loan-mongers +fails. They are like a bankrupt in the hands of an extortioner. They +dare not say nay to any demand made upon them. And to hide at once, if +possible, both their servility and their crimes, they attempt to divert +public attention, by crying out that they have "Abolished Slavery!" That +they have "Saved the Country!" That they have "Preserved our Glorious +Union!" and that, in now paying the "National Debt," as they call it (as +if the people themselves, <i>all of them who are to be taxed for its +payment</i>, had really and voluntarily joined in contracting it), they are +simply "Maintaining the National Honor!"</p> + +<p>By "maintaining the national honor," they mean simply that they +themselves, open robbers and murderers, assume to be the nation, and +will keep faith with those who lend them the money necessary to enable +them to crush the great body of the people under their<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span> feet; and will +faithfully appropriate, from the proceeds of their future robberies and +murders, enough to pay all their loans, principal and interest.</p> + +<p>The pretense that the "abolition of slavery" was either a motive or +justification for the war, is a fraud of the same character with that of +"maintaining the national honor." Who, but such usurpers, robbers, and +murderers as they, ever established slavery? Or what government, except +one resting upon the sword, like the one we now have, was ever capable +of maintaining slavery? And why did these men abolish slavery? Not from +any love of liberty in general—not as an act of justice to the black +man himself, but only "as a war measure," and because they wanted his +assistance, and that of his friends, in carrying on the war they had +undertaken for maintaining and intensifying that political, commercial, +and industrial slavery, to which they have subjected the great body of +the people, both white and black. And yet these imposters now cry out +that they have abolished the chattel slavery of the black man—although +that was not the motive of the war—as if they thought they could +thereby conceal, atone for, or justify that other slavery which they +were fighting to perpetuate, and to render more rigorous and inexorable +than it ever was before. There was no difference of principle—but only +of degree—between the slavery they boast they have abolished, and the +slavery they were fighting to preserve; for all restraints upon men's +natural liberty, not necessary for the simple maintenance of justice, +are of the nature of slavery, and differ from each other only in degree.</p> + +<p>If their object had really been to abolish slavery, or maintain liberty +or justice generally, they had only to say: All, whether white or black, +who want the protection of this government, shall have it; and all who +do not want it, will be left in peace, so long as they leave us in +peace. Had they said this, slavery would necessarily have been abolished +at once; the war would have been saved; and a thousand times nobler +union than we have ever had would have been the result. It would have +been a voluntary union of free men; such a union as will one day exist +among all men, the world over, if the several nations, so called, shall +ever get rid of the usurpers, robbers, and murderers, called +governments, that now plunder, enslave, and destroy them.</p> + +<p>Still another of the frauds of these men is, that they are now +establishing, and that the war was designed to establish, "a government<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span> +of consent." The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a +government of consent, is this—that it is one to which everybody must +consent, or be shot. This idea was the dominant one on which the war was +carried on; and it is the dominant one, now that we have got what is +called "peace."</p> + +<p>Their pretenses that they have "Saved the Country," and "Preserved our +Glorious Union," are frauds like all the rest of their pretenses. By +them they mean simply that they have subjugated, and maintained their +power over, an unwilling people. This they call "Saving the Country"; as +if an enslaved and subjugated people—or as if any people kept in +subjection by the sword (as it is intended that all of us shall be +hereafter)—could be said to have any country. This, too, they call +"Preserving our Glorious Union"; as if there could be said to be any +Union, glorious or inglorious, that was not voluntary. Or as if there +could be said to be any union between masters and slaves; between those +who conquer, and those who are subjugated.</p> + +<p>All these cries of having "abolished slavery," of having "saved the +country," of having "preserved the union," of establishing "a government +of consent," and of "maintaining the national honor," are all gross, +shameless, transparent cheats—so transparent that they ought to deceive +no one—when uttered as justifications for the war, or for the +government that has succeeded the war, or for now compelling the people +to pay the cost of the war, or for compelling anybody to support a +government that he does not want.</p> + +<p>The lesson taught by all these facts is this: As long as mankind +continue to pay "national debts," so-called—that is, so long as they +are such dupes and cowards as to pay for being cheated, plundered, +enslaved, and murdered—so long there will be enough to lend the money +for those purposes; and with that money a plenty of tools, called +soldiers, can be hired to keep them in subjection. But when they refuse +any longer to pay for being thus cheated, plundered, enslaved, and +murdered, they will cease to have cheats, and usurpers, and robbers, and +murderers and blood-money loan-mongers for masters.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span></p> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">APPENDIX.</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p>Inasmuch as the Constitution was never signed, nor agreed to, by +anybody, as a contract, and therefore never bound anybody, and is now +binding upon nobody; and is, moreover, such an one as no people can ever +hereafter be expected to consent to, except as they may be forced to do +so at the point of the bayonet, it is perhaps of no importance what its +true legal meaning, as a contract, is. Nevertheless, the writer thinks +it proper to say that, in his opinion, the Constitution is no such +instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; but that by false +interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in +practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the +Constitution itself purports to authorize. He has heretofore written +much, and could write much more, to prove that such is the truth. But +whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is +certain—that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, +or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to +exist.</p> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">FOOTNOTES:</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_A_1" id="Footnote_A_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_A_1"><span class="label">[a]</span></a> See <i>No Treason</i>, No. 2, pages 5 and 6.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_B_2" id="Footnote_B_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_B_2"><span class="label">[b]</span></a> Suppose it be "the best government on earth," does that +prove its own goodness, or only the badness of all other governments?</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_C_3" id="Footnote_C_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_C_3"><span class="label">[c]</span></a> The very men who drafted it, never signed it in any way to +bind themselves by it, <i>as a contract</i>. And not one of them probably +ever would have signed it in any way to bind himself by it, <i>as a +contract</i>.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_D_4" id="Footnote_D_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_D_4"><span class="label">[d]</span></a> I have personally examined the statute books of the +following States, viz.: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, +Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, +Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, +Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, +Wisconsin, Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, +Nevada, California, and Oregon, and find that in all these States the +English statute has been re-enacted, sometimes with modifications, but +generally enlarging its operations, and is now in force. +</p><p> +The following are some of the provisions of the Massachusetts statute: +</p><p> +"No action shall be brought in any of the following cases, that is to +say: ... +</p><p> +"To charge a person upon a special promise to answer for the debt, +default, or misdoings of another: ... +</p><p> +"Upon a contract for the sale of lands, tenements, hereditaments, or of +any interest in, or concerning them; or +</p><p> +"Upon an agreement that is not to be performed within one year from the +writing thereof: +</p><p> +"Unless the promise, contract, or agreement, upon which such action is +brought, or some memorandum or note thereof, is in writing, and signed +by the party to be charged therewith, or by some person thereunto by him +lawfully authorized." +</p><p> +"No contract for the sale of goods, wares, or merchandise, for the price +of fifty dollars or more, shall be good or valid, unless the purchaser +accepts and receives part of the goods so sold, or gives something in +earnest to bind the bargain, or in part payment; or unless some note or +memorandum in writing of the bargain is made and signed by the party to +be charged thereby, or by some person thereunto by him lawfully +authorized."</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_E_5" id="Footnote_E_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_E_5"><span class="label">[e]</span></a> And this two-thirds vote may be but two-thirds of a +quorum—that is two-thirds of a majority—instead of two-thirds of the +whole.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_F_6" id="Footnote_F_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_F_6"><span class="label">[f]</span></a> Of what appreciable value is it to any man, as an +individual, that he is allowed a voice in choosing these public masters? +His voice is only one of several millions.</p></div> + + + +<hr style="width: 65%;" /> +<p class="center"><span class="huge">TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES:</span></p> +<p> </p> + +<p><span style="margin-left: 1em;">Inconsistencies in spelling and hyphenation have been retained from the original.</span><br /></p> + +<p><span style="margin-left: 1em;">Obvious typographical errors have been corrected as follows:</span><br /></p> + +<p><span style="margin-left: 2em;">Page 22: <i>do</i> changed to <i>does</i></span><br /></p> + +<p><span style="margin-left: 1em;">Punctuation has been corrected without note.</span></p> + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of Project Gutenberg's No Treason, Vol. VI., by Lysander Spooner + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NO TREASON, VOL. VI. *** + +***** This file should be named 36145-h.htm or 36145-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/3/6/1/4/36145/ + +Produced by Susan Goble, Curtis Weyant, David E. Brown, +and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at +http://www.pgdp.net + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> diff --git a/36145.txt b/36145.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7345bb6 --- /dev/null +++ b/36145.txt @@ -0,0 +1,2438 @@ +The Project Gutenberg EBook of No Treason, Vol. VI., by Lysander Spooner + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: No Treason, Vol. VI. + The Constitution of No Authority + +Author: Lysander Spooner + +Release Date: May 18, 2011 [EBook #36145] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NO TREASON, VOL. VI. *** + + + + +Produced by Susan Goble, Curtis Weyant, David E. Brown, +and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at +http://www.pgdp.net + + + + + + + + + + NO TREASON. + + No. VI. + + The Constitution of no Authority. + + BY LYSANDER SPOONER. + + BOSTON: + PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR. + 1870. + + + + +No Treason + +The Constitution of No Authority + + + + +I. + + +The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no +authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and +man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between +persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract +between persons living eighty years ago. And it can be supposed to have +been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years +of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory +contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion +even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or +asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any +formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent +formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead forty, fifty, +sixty, or seventy years. _And the Constitution, so far as it was their +contract, died with them._ They had no natural power or right to make it +obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in +the nature of things, that they _could_ bind their posterity, but they +did not even attempt to bind them. That is to say, the instrument does +not purport to be an agreement between any body but "the people" _then_ +existing; nor does it, either expressly or impliedly, assert any right, +power, or disposition, on their part, to bind anybody but themselves. +Let us see. Its language is: + + We, the people of the United States (that is, the people _then + existing_ in the United States), in order to form a more perfect + union, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common + defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings + of liberty to ourselves _and our posterity_, do ordain and + establish this Constitution for the United States of America. + +It is plain, in the first place, that this language, _as an agreement_, +purports to be only what it at most really was, viz., a contract between +the people then existing; and, of necessity, binding, as a contract, +only upon those then existing. In the second place, the language neither +expresses nor implies that they had any intention or desire, nor that +they imagined they had any right or power, to bind their "posterity" to +live under it. It does not say that their "posterity" will, shall, or +must live under it. It only says, in effect, that their hopes and +motives in adopting it were that it might prove useful to their +posterity, as well as to themselves, by promoting their union, safety, +tranquility, liberty, etc. + +Suppose an agreement were entered into, in this form: + +We, the people of Boston, agree to maintain a fort on Governor's Island, +to protect ourselves and our posterity against invasion. + +This agreement, as an agreement, would clearly bind nobody but the +people then existing. Secondly, it would assert no right, power, or +disposition, on their part, to compel their "posterity" to maintain such +a fort. It would only indicate that the supposed welfare of their +posterity was one of the motives that induced the original parties to +enter into the agreement. + +When a man says he is building a house for himself and his posterity, he +does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of +binding them, nor is it to be inferred that he is so foolish as to +imagine that he has any right or power to bind them, to live in it. So +far as they are concerned, he only means to be understood as saying that +his hopes and motives, in building it, are that they, or at least some +of them, may find it for their happiness to live in it. + +So when a man says he is planting a tree for himself and his posterity, +he does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of +compelling them, nor is it to be inferred that he is such a simpleton as +to imagine that he has any right or power to compel them, to eat the +fruit. So far as they are concerned, he only means to say that his hopes +and motives, in planting the tree, are that its fruit may be agreeable +to them. + +So it was with those who originally adopted the Constitution. Whatever +may have been their personal intentions, the legal meaning of their +language, so far as their "posterity" was concerned, simply was, that +their hopes and motives, in entering into the agreement, were that it +might prove useful and acceptable to their posterity; that it might +promote their union, safety, tranquility, and welfare; and that it might +tend "to secure to them the blessings of liberty." The language does not +assert nor at all imply, any right, power, or disposition, on the part +of the original parties to the agreement, to compel their "posterity" to +live under it. If they had intended to bind their posterity to live +under it, they should have said that their object was, not "to secure to +them the blessings of liberty," but to make slaves of them; for if their +"posterity" are bound to live under it, they are nothing less than the +slaves of their foolish, tyrannical, and dead grandfathers. + +It cannot be said that the Constitution formed "the people of the United +States," for all time, into a corporation. It does not speak of "the +people" as a corporation, but as individuals. A corporation does not +describe itself as "we," nor as "people," nor as "ourselves." Nor does a +corporation, in legal language, have any "posterity." It supposes itself +to have, and speaks of itself as having, perpetual existence, as a +single individuality. + +Moreover, no body of men, existing at any one time, have the power to +create a perpetual corporation. A corporation can become practically +perpetual only by the voluntary accession of new members, as the old +ones die off. But for this voluntary accession of new members, the +corporation necessarily dies with the death of those who originally +composed it. + +Legally speaking, therefore, there is, in the Constitution, nothing that +professes or attempts to bind the "posterity" of those who established +it. + +If, then, those who established the Constitution, had no power to bind, +and did not attempt to bind, their posterity, the question arises, +whether their posterity have bound themselves. If they have done so, +they can have done so in only one or both of these two ways, viz., by +voting, and paying taxes. + + + + +II. + + +Let us consider these two matters, voting and tax paying, separately. +And first of voting. + +All the voting that has ever taken place under the Constitution, has +been of such a kind that it not only did not pledge the whole people to +support the Constitution, but it did not even pledge any one of them to +do so, as the following considerations show. + +1. In the very nature of things, the act of voting could bind nobody +but the actual voters. But owing to the property qualifications +required, it is probable that, during the first twenty or thirty years +under the Constitution, not more than one-tenth, fifteenth, or perhaps +twentieth of the whole population (black and white, men, women, and +minors) were permitted to vote. Consequently, so far as voting was +concerned, not more than one-tenth, fifteenth, or twentieth of those +then existing, could have incurred any obligation to support the +Constitution. + +At the present time, it is probable that not more than one-sixth of the +whole population are permitted to vote. Consequently, so far as voting +is concerned, the other five-sixths can have given no pledge that they +will support the Constitution. + +2. Of the one-sixth that are permitted to vote, probably not more than +two-thirds (about one-ninth of the whole population) have usually voted. +Many never vote at all. Many vote only once in two, three, five, or ten +years, in periods of great excitement. + +No one, by voting, can be said to pledge himself for any longer period +than that for which he votes. If, for example, I vote for an officer who +is to hold his office for only a year, I cannot be said to have thereby +pledged myself to support the government beyond that term. Therefore, on +the ground of actual voting, it probably cannot be said that more than +one-ninth or one-eighth, of the whole population are usually under any +pledge to support the Constitution. + +3. It cannot be said that, by voting, a man pledges himself to support +the Constitution, unless the act of voting be a perfectly voluntary one +on his part. Yet the act of voting cannot properly be called a +voluntary one on the part of any very large number of those who do vote. +It is rather a measure of necessity imposed upon them by others, than +one of their own choice. On this point I repeat what was said in a +former number,[a] viz.: + + "In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is + not to be taken as proof of consent, _even for the time being_. + On the contrary, it is to be considered that, without his + consent having even been asked a man finds himself environed by + a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him + to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of + his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, + too, that other men practice this tyranny over him by the use of + the ballot. He sees further, that, if he will but use the ballot + himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this + tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, he + finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use + the ballot, he may become a master; if he does not use it, he + must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these + two. In self-defence, he attempts the former. His case is + analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, + where he must either kill others, or be killed himself. Because, + to save his own life in battle, a man attempts to take the lives + of his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is + one of his own choosing. Neither in contests with the + ballot--which is a mere substitute for a bullet--because, as his + only chance of self-preservation, a man uses a ballot, is it to + be inferred that the contest is one into which he voluntarily + entered; that he voluntarily set up all his own natural rights, + as a stake against those of others, to be lost or won by the + mere power of numbers. On the contrary, it is to be considered + that, in an exigency into which he had been forced by others, + and in which no other means of self-defence offered, he, as a + matter of necessity, used the only one that was left to him. + + "Doubtless the most miserable of men, under the most oppressive + government in the world, if allowed the ballot, would use it, if + they could see any chance of thereby meliorating their + condition. But it would not, therefore, be a legitimate + inference that the government itself, that crushes them, was one + which they had voluntarily set up, or even consented to. + + "Therefore, a man's voting under the Constitution of the United + States, is not to be taken as evidence that he ever freely + assented to the Constitution, _even for the time being_. + Consequently we have no proof that any very large portion, even + of the actual voters of the United States, ever really and + voluntarily consented to the Constitution, _even for the time + being_. Nor can we ever have such proof, until every man is left + perfectly free to consent, or not, without thereby subjecting + himself or his property to be disturbed or injured by others." + +As we can have no legal knowledge as to who votes from choice, and who +from the necessity thus forced upon him, we can have no legal knowledge, +as to any particular individual, that he voted from choice; or, +consequently, that by voting, he consented, or pledged himself, to +support the government. Legally speaking, therefore, the act of voting +utterly fails to pledge _any one_ to support the government. It utterly +fails to prove that the government rests upon the voluntary support of +anybody. On general principles of law and reason, it cannot be said that +the government has any voluntary supporters at all, until it can be +distinctly shown who its voluntary supporters are. + +4. As taxation is made compulsory on all, whether they vote or not, a +large proportion of those who vote, no doubt do so to prevent their own +money being used against themselves; when, in fact, they would have +gladly abstained from voting, if they could thereby have saved +themselves from taxation alone, to say nothing of being saved from all +the other usurpations and tyrannies of the government. To take a man's +property without his consent, and then to infer his consent because he +attempts, by voting, to prevent that property from being used to his +injury, is a very insufficient proof of his consent to support the +Constitution. It is, in fact, no proof at all. And as we can have no +legal knowledge as to who the particular individuals are, if there are +any, who are willing to be taxed for the sake of voting, we can have no +legal knowledge that any particular individual consents to be taxed for +the sake of voting; or, consequently, consents to support the +Constitution. + +5. At nearly all elections, votes are given for various candidates for +the same office. Those who vote for the unsuccessful candidates cannot +properly be said to have voted to sustain the Constitution. They may, +with more reason, be supposed to have voted, not to support the +Constitution, but specially to prevent the tyranny which they anticipate +the successful candidate intends to practice upon them under color of +the Constitution; and therefore may reasonably be supposed to have voted +against the Constitution itself. This supposition is the more +reasonable, inasmuch as such voting is the only mode allowed to them of +expressing their dissent to the Constitution. + +6. Many votes are usually given for candidates who have no prospect of +success. Those who give such votes may reasonably be supposed to have +voted as they did, with a special intention, not to support, but to +obstruct the execution of, the Constitution; and, therefore, against the +Constitution itself. + +7. As all the different votes are given secretly (by secret ballot), +there is no legal means of knowing, from the votes themselves, who votes +for, and who against, the Constitution. Therefore, voting affords no +legal evidence that any particular individual supports the Constitution. +And where there can be no legal evidence that any particular individual +supports the Constitution, it cannot legally be said that anybody +supports it. It is clearly impossible to have any legal proof of the +intentions of large numbers of men, where there can be no legal proof of +the intentions of any particular one of them. + +8. There being no legal proof of any man's intentions, in voting, we can +only conjecture them. As a conjecture, it is probable, that a very large +proportion of those who vote, do so on this principle, viz., that if, by +voting, they could but get the government into their own hands (or that +of their friends), and use its powers against their opponents, they +would then willingly support the Constitution; but if their opponents +are to have the power, and use it against them, then they would _not_ +willingly support the Constitution. + +In short, men's voluntary support of the Constitution is doubtless, in +most cases, wholly contingent upon the question whether, by means of the +Constitution, they can make themselves masters, or are to be made +slaves. + +Such contingent consent as that is, in law and reason, no consent at +all. + +9. As everybody who supports the Constitution by voting (if there are +any such) does so secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to avoid all +personal responsibility for the act of his agents or representatives, it +cannot legally or reasonably be said that anybody at all supports the +Constitution by voting. No man can reasonably or legally be said to do +such a thing as to assent to, or support, the Constitution, _unless he +does it openly, and in a way to make himself personally responsible for +the acts of his agents, so long as they act within the limits of the +power he delegates to them_. + +10. As all voting is secret (by secret ballot), and as all secret +governments are necessarily only secret bands of robbers, tyrants, and +murderers, the general fact that our government is practically carried +on by means of such voting, only proves that there is among us a secret +band of robbers, tyrants and murderers, whose purpose is to rob, +enslave, and, so far as necessary to accomplish their purposes, murder, +the rest of the people. The simple fact of the existence of such a band +does nothing towards proving that "the people of the United States," or +any one of them, voluntarily supports the Constitution. + +For all the reasons that have now been given, voting furnishes no legal +evidence as to who the particular individuals are (if there are any), +who voluntarily support the Constitution. It therefore furnishes no +legal evidence that anybody supports it voluntarily. + +So far, therefore, as voting is concerned, the Constitution, legally +speaking, has no supporters at all. + +And, as matter of fact, there is not the slightest probability that the +Constitution has a single bona fide supporter in the country. That is to +say, there is not the slightest probability that there is a single man +in the country, who both understands what the Constitution really is, +_and sincerely supports it for what it really is_. + +The ostensible supporters of the Constitution, like the ostensible +supporters of most other governments, are made up of three classes, +viz.: 1. Knaves, a numerous and active class, who see in the government +an instrument which they can use for their own aggrandizement or wealth. +2. Dupes--a large class, no doubt--each of whom, because he is allowed +one voice out of millions in deciding what he may do with his own person +and his own property, and because he is permitted to have the same voice +in robbing, enslaving, and murdering others, that others have in +robbing, enslaving, and murdering himself, is stupid enough to imagine +that he is a "free man," a "sovereign"; that this is "a free +government"; "a government of equal rights," "the best government on +earth,"[b] and such like absurdities. 3. A class who have some +appreciation of the evils of government, but either do not see how to +get rid of them, or do not choose to so far sacrifice their private +interests as to give themselves seriously and earnestly to the work of +making a change. + + + + +III. + + +The payment of taxes, being compulsory, of course furnishes no evidence +that any one voluntarily supports the Constitution. + +1. It is true that the _theory_ of our Constitution is, that all taxes +are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, +voluntarily entered into by the people with each other; that each man +makes a free and purely voluntary contract with all others who are +parties to the Constitution, to pay so much money for so much +protection, the same as he does with any other insurance company; and +that he is just as free not to be protected, and not to pay tax, as he +is to pay a tax, and be protected. + +But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical +fact. The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: +"Your money, or your life." And many, if not most, taxes are paid under +the compulsion of that threat. + +The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring +upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed +to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that +account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. + +The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and +crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim +to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He +does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired +impudence enough to profess to be merely a "protector," and that he +takes men's money against their will, merely to enable him to "protect" +those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect +themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He +is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, +having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does +not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to +be your rightful "sovereign," on account of the "protection" he affords +you. He does not keep "protecting" you, by commanding you to bow down +and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do +that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his +interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a +traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without +mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too +much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and +villainies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, +attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave. + +The proceedings of those robbers and murderers, who call themselves "the +government," are directly the opposite of these of the single +highwayman. + +In the first place, they do not, like him, make themselves individually +known; or, consequently, take upon themselves personally the +responsibility of their acts. On the contrary, they secretly (by secret +ballot) designate some one of their number to commit the robbery in +their behalf, while they keep themselves practically concealed. They say +to the person thus designated: + +Go to A---- B----, and say to him that "the government" has need of +money to meet the expenses of protecting him and his property. If he +presumes to say that he has never contracted with us to protect him, and +that he wants none of our protection, say to him that that is our +business, and not his; that we _choose_ to protect him, whether he desires +us to do so or not; and that we demand pay, too, for protecting him. If +he dares to inquire who the individuals are, who have thus taken upon +themselves the title of "the government," and who assume to protect him, +and demand payment of him, without his having ever made any contract +with them, say to him that that, too, is our business, and not his; that +we do not _choose_ to make ourselves _individually_ known to him; that +we have secretly (by secret ballot) appointed you our agent to give him +notice of our demands, and, if he complies with them, to give him, in +our name, a receipt that will protect him against any similar demand for +the present year. If he refuses to comply, seize and sell enough of his +property to pay not only our demands, but all your own expenses and +trouble beside. If he resists the seizure of his property, call upon the +bystanders to help you (doubtless some of them will prove to be members +of our band). If, in defending his property, he should kill any of our +band who are assisting you, capture him at all hazards; charge him (in +one of our courts) with murder; convict him, and hang him. If he should +call upon his neighbors, or any others who, like him, may be disposed to +resist our demands, and they should come in large numbers to his +assistance, cry out that they are all rebels and traitors; that "our +country" is in danger; call upon the commander of our hired murderers; +tell him to quell the rebellion and "save the country," cost what it +may. Tell him to kill all who resist, though they should be hundreds of +thousands; and thus strike terror into all others similarly disposed. +See that the work of murder is thoroughly done; that we may have no +further trouble of this kind hereafter. When these traitors shall have +thus been taught our strength and our determination, they will be good +loyal citizens for many years, and pay their taxes without a why or a +wherefore. + +It is under such compulsion as this that taxes, so called, are paid. And +how much proof the payment of taxes affords, that the people consent to +support "the government," it needs no further argument to show. + +2. Still another reason why the payment of taxes implies no consent, or +pledge, to support the government, is that the taxpayer does not know, +and has no means of knowing, who the particular individuals are who +compose "the government." To him "the government" is a myth, an +abstraction, an incorporeality, with which he can make no contract, and +to which he can give no consent, and make no pledge. He knows it only +through its pretended agents. "The government" itself he never sees. He +knows indeed, by common report, that certain persons, of a certain age, +are permitted to vote; and thus to make themselves parts of, or (if they +choose) opponents of, the government, for the time being. But who of +them do thus vote, and especially how each one votes (whether so as to +aid or oppose the government), he does not know; the voting being all +done secretly (by secret ballot). Who, therefore, practically compose +"the government," for the time being, he has no means of knowing. Of +course he can make no contract with them, give them no consent, and make +them no pledge. Of necessity, therefore, his paying taxes to them +implies, on his part, no contract, consent, or pledge to support +them--that is, to support "the government," or the Constitution. + +3. Not knowing who the particular individuals are, who call themselves +"the government," the taxpayer does not know whom he pays his taxes to. +All he knows is that a man comes to him, representing himself to be the +agent of "the government"--that is, the agent of a secret band of +robbers and murderers, who have taken to themselves the title of "the +government," and have determined to kill everybody who refuses to give +them whatever money they demand. To save his life, he gives up his money +to this agent. But as this agent does not make his principals +individually known to the taxpayer, the latter, after he has given up +his money, knows no more who are "the government"--that is, who were the +robbers--than he did before. To say, therefore, that by giving up his +money to their agent, he entered into a voluntary contract with them, +that he pledges himself to obey them, to support them, and to give them +whatever money they should demand of him in the future, is simply +ridiculous. + +4. All political power, as it is called, rests practically upon this +matter of money. Any number of scoundrels, having money enough to start +with, can establish themselves as a "government"; because, with money, +they can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort more money; and also +compel general obedience to their will. It is with government, as Caesar +said it was in war, that money and soldiers mutually supported each +other; that with money he could hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort +money. So these villains, who call themselves governments, well +understand that their power rests primarily upon money. With money they +can hire soldiers, and with soldiers extort money. And, when their +authority is denied, the first use they always make of money, is to hire +soldiers to kill or subdue all who refuse them more money. + +For this reason, whoever desires liberty, should understand these vital +facts, viz.: 1. That every man who puts money into the hands of a +"government" (so called), puts into its hands a sword which will be used +against himself, to extort more money from him, and also to keep him in +subjection to its arbitrary will. 2. That those who will take his money, +without his consent, in the first place, will use it for his further +robbery and enslavement, if he presumes to resist their demands in the +future. 3. That it is a perfect absurdity to suppose that any body of +men would ever take a man's money without his consent, for any such +object as they profess to take it for, viz., that of protecting him; for +why should they wish to protect him, if he does not wish them to do so? +To suppose that they would do so, is just as absurd as it would be to +suppose that they would take his money without his consent, for the +purpose of buying food or clothing for him, when he did not want it. 4. +If a man wants "protection," he is competent to make his own bargains +for it; and nobody has any occasion to rob him, in order to "protect" +him against his will. 5. That the only security men can have for their +political liberty, consists in their keeping their money in their own +pockets, until they have assurances, perfectly satisfactory to +themselves, that it will be used as they wish it to be used, for their +benefit, and not for their injury. 6. That no government, so called, can +reasonably be trusted for a moment, or reasonably be supposed to have +honest purposes in view, any longer than it depends wholly upon +voluntary support. + +These facts are all so vital and so self-evident, that it cannot +reasonably be supposed that any one will voluntarily pay money to a +"government," for the purpose of securing its protection, unless he +first makes an explicit and purely voluntary contract with it for that +purpose. + +It is perfectly evident, therefore, that neither such voting, nor such +payment of taxes, as actually takes place, proves anybody's consent, or +obligation, to support the Constitution. Consequently we have no +evidence at all that the Constitution is binding upon anybody, or that +anybody is under any contract or obligation whatever to support it. And +nobody is under any obligation to support it. + + + + +IV. + + +_The Constitution not only binds nobody now, but it never did bind +anybody._ It never bound anybody, because it was never agreed to by +anybody in such a manner as to make it, on general principles of law and +reason, binding upon him. + +It is a general principle of law and reason, that a _written_ instrument +binds no one until he has signed it. This principle is so inflexible a +one, that even though a man is unable to write his name, he must still +"make his mark," before he is bound by a written contract. This custom +was established ages ago, when few men could write their names; when a +clerk--that is, a man who could write--was so rare and valuable a +person, that even if he were guilty of high crimes, he was entitled to +pardon, on the ground that the public could not afford to lose his +services. Even at that time, a written contract must be signed; and men +who could not write, either "made their mark," or signed their contracts +by stamping their seals upon wax affixed to the parchment on which their +contracts were written. Hence the custom of affixing seals, that has +continued to this time. + +The law holds, and reason declares, that if a written instrument is not +signed, the presumption must be that the party to be bound by it, did +not choose to sign it, or to bind himself by it. And law and reason both +give him until the last moment, in which to decide whether he will sign +it, or not. Neither law nor reason requires or expects a man to agree to +an instrument, _until it is written_; for until it is written, he cannot +know its precise legal meaning. And when it is written, and he has had +the opportunity to satisfy himself of its precise legal meaning, he is +then expected to decide, and not before, whether he will agree to it or +not. And if he does not _then_ sign it, his reason is supposed to be, +that he does not choose to enter into such a contract. The fact that the +instrument was written for him to sign, or with the hope that he would +sign it, goes for nothing. + +Where would be the end of fraud and litigation, if one party could bring +into court a written instrument, without any signature, and claim to +have it enforced, upon the ground that it was written for another man to +sign? that this other man had promised to sign it? that he ought to have +signed it? that he had had the opportunity to sign it, if he would? but +that he had refused or neglected to do so? Yet that is the most that +could ever be said of the Constitution.[c] The very judges, who profess +to derive all their authority from the Constitution--from an instrument +that nobody ever signed--would spurn any other instrument, not signed, +that should be brought before them for adjudication. + +Moreover, a written instrument must, in law and reason, not only be +signed, but must also be delivered to the party (or to some one for +him), in whose favor it is made, before it can bind the party making it. +The signing is of no effect, unless the instrument be also delivered. +And a party is at perfect liberty to refuse to deliver a written +instrument, after he has signed it. He is as free to refuse to deliver +it, as he is to refuse to sign it. The Constitution was not only never +signed by anybody, but it was never delivered by anybody, or to +anybody's agent or attorney. It can therefore be of no more validity as +a contract, than can any other instrument, that was never signed or +delivered. + + + + +V. + + +As further evidence of the general sense of mankind, as to the practical +necessity there is that all men's _important_ contracts, especially +those of a permanent nature, should be both written and signed, the +following facts are pertinent. + +For nearly two hundred years--that is, since 1677--there has been on the +statute book of England, and the same, in substance, if not precisely in +letter, has been re-enacted, and is now in force, in nearly or quite all +the States of this Union, a statute, the general object of which is to +declare that no action shall be brought to enforce contracts of the more +important class, _unless they are put in writing, and signed by the +parties to be held chargeable upon them_.[d] + +The principle of the statute, be it observed, is, not merely that +written contracts shall be signed, but also that all contracts, except +those specially exempted--generally those that are for small amounts, +and are to remain in force but for a short time--_shall be both written +and signed_. + +The reason of the statute, on this point, is, that it is now so easy a +thing for men to put their contracts in writing, and sign them, and +their failure to do so opens the door to so much doubt, fraud, and +litigation, that men who neglect to have their contracts--of any +considerable importance--written and signed, ought not to have the +benefit of courts of justice to enforce them. And this reason is a wise +one; and that experience has confirmed its wisdom and necessity, is +demonstrated by the fact that it has been acted upon in England for +nearly two hundred years, and has been so nearly universally adopted in +this country, and that nobody thinks of repealing it. + +We all know, too, how careful most men are to have their contracts +written and signed, even when this statute does not require it. For +example, most men, if they have money due them, of no larger amount than +five or ten dollars, are careful to take a note for it. If they buy even +a small bill of goods, paying for it at the time of delivery, they take +a receipted bill for it. If they pay a small balance of a book account, +or any other small debt previously contracted, they take a written +receipt for it. + +Furthermore, the law everywhere (probably) in our country, as well as in +England, requires that a large class of contracts, such as wills, deeds, +etc., shall not only be written and signed, but also sealed, witnessed, +and acknowledged. And in the case of married women conveying their +rights in real estate, the law, in many States, requires that the women +shall be examined separate and apart from their husbands, and declare +that they sign their contracts free of any fear or compulsion of their +husbands. + +Such are some of the precautions which the laws require, and which +individuals--from motives of common prudence, even in cases not required +by law--take, to put their contracts in writing, and have them signed, +and, to guard against all uncertainties and controversies in regard to +their meaning and validity. And yet we have what purports, or professes, +or is claimed, to be a contract--the Constitution--made eighty years +ago, by men who are now all dead, and who never had any power to bind +_us_, but which (it is claimed) has nevertheless bound three generations +of men, consisting of many millions, and which (it is claimed) will be +binding upon all the millions that are to come; but which nobody ever +signed, sealed, delivered, witnessed, or acknowledged; and which few +persons, compared with the whole number that are claimed to be bound by +it, have ever read, or even seen, or ever will read, or see. And of +those who ever have read it, or ever will read it, scarcely any two, +perhaps no two, have ever agreed, or ever will agree, as to what it +means. + +Moreover, this supposed contract, which would not be received in any +court of justice sitting under its authority, if offered to prove a debt +of five dollars, owing by one man to another, is one by which--_as it is +generally interpreted by those who pretend to administer it_--all men, +women and children throughout the country, and through all time, +surrender not only all their property, but also their liberties, and +even lives, into the hands of men who by this supposed contract, are +expressly made wholly irresponsible for their disposal of them. And we +are so insane, or so wicked, as to destroy property and lives without +limit, in fighting to compel men to fulfill a supposed contract, which, +inasmuch as it has never been signed by anybody, is, on general +principles of law and reason--such principles as we are all governed by +in regard to other contracts--the merest waste paper, binding upon +nobody, fit only to be thrown into the fire; or, if preserved, preserved +only to serve as a witness and a warning of the folly and wickedness of +mankind. + + + + +VI. + + +It is no exaggeration, but a literal truth, to say that, by the +Constitution--_not as I interpret it, but as it is interpreted by those +who pretend to administer it_--the properties, liberties, and lives of +the entire people of the United States are surrendered unreservedly into +the hands of men who, it is provided by the Constitution itself, shall +never be "questioned" as to any disposal they make of them. + +Thus the Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 6) provides that, "for any speech or +debate (or vote), in either house, they (the senators and +representatives) shall not be questioned in any other place." + +The whole law-making power is given to these senators and +representatives (when acting by a two-thirds vote)[e]; and this +provision protects them from all responsibility for the laws they make. + +The Constitution also enables them to secure the execution of all their +laws, by giving them power to withhold the salaries of, and to impeach +and remove, all judicial and executive officers, who refuse to execute +them. + +Thus the whole power of the government is in their hands, and they are +made utterly irresponsible for the use they make of it. What is this but +absolute, irresponsible power? + +It is no answer to this view of the case to say that these men are under +oath to use their power only within certain limits; for what care they, +or what should they care, for oaths or limits, when it is expressly +provided, by the Constitution itself, that they shall never be +"questioned," or held to any responsibility whatever, for violating +their oaths, or transgressing those limits? + +Neither is it any answer to this view of the case to say that the +particular individuals holding this power can be changed once in two or +six years; for the power of each set of men is absolute during the term +for which they hold it; and when they can hold it no longer, they are +succeeded only by men whose power will be equally absolute and +irresponsible. + +Neither is it any answer to this view of the case to say that the men +holding this absolute, irresponsible power, must be men chosen by the +people (or portions of them) to hold it. A man is none the less a slave +because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. +Neither are a people any the less slaves because permitted periodically +to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now +are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power +over them is, and always is to be, absolute and irresponsible.[f] + +The right of absolute and irresponsible dominion is the right of +property, and the right of property is the right of absolute, +irresponsible dominion. The two are identical; the one necessarily +implying the other. Neither can exist without the other. If, therefore, +Congress have that absolute and irresponsible law-making power, which +the Constitution--according to their interpretation of it--gives them, +it can only be because they own us as property. If they own us as +property, they are our masters, and their will is our law. If they do +not own us as property, they are not our masters, and their will, as +such, is of no authority over us. + +But these men who claim and exercise this absolute and irresponsible +dominion over us, dare not be consistent, and claim either to be our +masters, or to own us as property. They say they are only our servants, +agents, attorneys, and representatives. But this declaration involves an +absurdity, a contradiction. No man can be my servant, agent, attorney, +or representative, and be, at the same time, uncontrollable by me, and +irresponsible to me for his acts. It is of no importance that I +appointed him, and put all power in his hands. If I made him +uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me, he is no longer my +servant, agent, attorney, or representative. If I gave him absolute, +irresponsible power over my property, I gave him the property. If I gave +him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and +gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I +called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what +power did I put into his hands? Was it an absolute and irresponsible +one? or a limited and responsible one? + +For still another reason they are neither our servants, agents, +attorneys, nor representatives. And that reason is, that we do not make +ourselves responsible for their acts. If a man is my servant, agent, or +attorney, I necessarily make myself responsible for all his acts done +within the limits of the power I have intrusted to him. If I have +intrusted him, as my agent, with either absolute power, or any power at +all, over the persons or properties of other men than myself, I thereby +necessarily make myself responsible to those other persons for any +injuries he may do them, so long as he acts within the limits of the +power I have granted him. But no individual who may be injured in his +person or property, by acts of Congress, can come to the individual +electors, and hold them responsible for these acts of their so-called +agents or representatives. This fact proves that these pretended agents +of the people, of everybody, are really the agents of nobody. + +If, then, nobody is individually responsible for the acts of Congress, +the members of Congress are nobody's agents. And if they are nobody's +agents, they are themselves individually responsible for their own acts, +and for the acts of all whom they employ. And the authority they are +exercising is simply their own individual authority; and, by the law of +nature--the highest of all laws--anybody injured by their acts, anybody +who is deprived by them of his property or his liberty, has the same +right to hold them individually responsible, that he has to hold any +other trespasser individually responsible. He has the same right to +resist them, and their agents, that he has to resist any other +trespassers. + + + + +VII. + + +It is plain, then, that on general principles of law and reason--such +principles as we all act upon in courts of justice and in common +life--the Constitution is no contract; that it binds nobody, and never +did bind anybody; and that all those who pretend to act by its +authority, are really acting without any legitimate authority at all; +that, on general principles of law and reason, they are mere usurpers, +and that everybody not only has the right, but is morally bound, to +treat them as such. + +If the people of this country wish to maintain such a government as the +Constitution describes, there is no reason in the world why they should +not sign the instrument itself, and thus make known their wishes in an +open, authentic manner; in such manner as the common sense and +experience of mankind have shown to be reasonable and necessary in such +cases; _and in such manner as to make themselves (as they ought to do) +individually responsible for the acts of the government_. But the people +have never been asked to sign it. And the only reason why they have +never been asked to sign it, has been that it has been known that they +never would sign it; that they were neither such fools nor knaves as +they must needs have been to be willing to sign it; that (at least as it +has been practically interpreted) it is not what any sensible and honest +man wants for himself; nor such as he has any right to impose upon +others. It is, to all moral intents and purposes, as destitute of +obligation as the compacts which robbers and thieves and pirates enter +into with each other, but never sign. + +If any considerable number of the people believe the Constitution to be +good, why do they not sign it themselves, and make laws for, and +administer them upon, each other; leaving all other persons (who do not +interfere with them) in peace? Until they have tried the experiment for +themselves, how can they have the face to impose the Constitution upon, +or even to recommend it to, others? Plainly the reason for such absurd +and inconsistent conduct is that they want the Constitution, not solely +for any honest or legitimate use it can be of to themselves or others, +but for the dishonest and illegitimate power it gives them over the +persons and properties of others. But for this latter reason, all their +eulogiums on the Constitution, all their exhortations, and all their +expenditures of money and blood to sustain it, would be wanting. + + + + +VIII. + + +The Constitution itself, then, being of no authority, on what authority +does our government practically rest? On what ground can those who +pretend to administer it, claim the right to seize men's property, to +restrain them of their natural liberty of action, industry, and trade, +and to kill all who deny their authority to dispose of men's properties, +liberties, and lives at their pleasure or discretion? + +The most they can say, in answer to this question, is, that some half, +two-thirds, or three-fourths, of the male adults of the country have a +_tacit understanding_ that they will maintain a government under the +Constitution; that they will select, by ballot, the persons to +administer it; and that those persons who may receive a majority, or a +plurality, of their ballots, shall act as their representatives, and +administer the Constitution in their name, and by their authority. + +But this tacit understanding (admitting it to exist) cannot at all +justify the conclusion drawn from it. A tacit understanding between A, +B, and C, that they will, by ballot, depute D as their agent, to deprive +me of my property, liberty, or life, cannot at all authorize D to do so. +He is none the less a robber, tyrant, and murderer, because he claims to +act as their agent, than he would be if he avowedly acted on his own +responsibility alone. + +Neither am I bound to recognize him as their agent, nor can he +legitimately claim to be their agent, when he brings no _written_ +authority from them accrediting him as such. I am under no obligation to +take his word as to who his principals may be, or whether he has any. +Bringing no credentials, I have a right to say he has no such authority +even as he claims to have: and that he is therefore intending to rob, +enslave, or murder me on his own account. + +This tacit understanding, therefore, among the voters of the country, +amounts to nothing as an authority to their agents. Neither do the +ballots by which they select their agents, avail any more than does +their tacit understanding; for their ballots are given in secret, and +therefore in a way to avoid any personal responsibility for the acts of +their agents. + +No body of men can be said to authorize a man to act as their agent, to +the injury of a third person, unless they do it in so open and authentic +a manner as to make themselves personally responsible for his acts. None +of the voters in this country appoint their political agents in any +open, authentic manner, or in any manner to make themselves responsible +for their acts. Therefore these pretended agents cannot legitimately +claim to be really agents. Somebody must be responsible for the acts of +these pretended agents; and if they cannot show any open and authentic +credentials from their principals, they cannot, in law or reason, be +said to have any principals. The maxim applies here, that what does not +appear, does not exist. If they can show no principals, they have none. + +But even these pretended agents do not themselves know who their +pretended principals are. These latter act in secret; for acting by +secret ballot is acting in secret as much as if they were to meet in +secret conclave in the darkness of the night. And they are personally as +much unknown to the agents they select, as they are to others. No +pretended agent therefore can ever know by whose ballots he is selected, +or consequently who his real principals are. Not knowing who his +principals are, he has no right to say that he has any. He can, at most, +say only that he is the agent of a secret band of robbers and murderers, +who are bound by that faith which prevails among confederates in crime, +to stand by him, if his acts, done in their name, shall be resisted. + +Men honestly engaged in attempting to establish justice in the world, +have no occasion thus to act in secret; or to appoint agents to do acts +for which they (the principals) are not willing to be responsible. + +The secret ballot makes a secret government; and a secret government is +a secret band of robbers and murderers. Open despotism is better than +this. The single despot stands out in the face of all men, and says: I +am the State: My will is law: I am your master: I take the +responsibility of my acts: The only arbiter I acknowledge is the sword: +If any one denies my right, let him try conclusions with me. + +But a secret government is little less than a government of assassins. +Under it, a man knows not who his tyrants are, until they have struck, +and perhaps not then. He may _guess_, beforehand, as to some of his +immediate neighbors. But he really knows nothing. The man to whom he +would most naturally fly for protection, may prove an enemy, when the +time of trial comes. + +This is the kind of government we have; and it is the only one we are +likely to have, until men are ready to say: We will consent to no +Constitution, except such an one as we are neither ashamed nor afraid to +sign; and we will authorize no government to do anything in our name +which we are not willing to be personally responsible for. + + + + +IX. + + +What is the motive to the secret ballot? This, and only this: Like other +confederates in crime, those who use it are not friends, but enemies; +and they are afraid to be known, and to have their individual doings +known, even to each other. They can contrive to bring about a sufficient +understanding to enable them to act in concert against other persons; +but beyond this they have no confidence, and no friendship, among +themselves. In fact, they are engaged quite as much in schemes for +plundering each other, as in plundering those who are not of them. And +it is perfectly well understood among them that the strongest party +among them will, in certain contingencies, murder each other by the +hundreds of thousands (as they lately did do) to accomplish their +purposes against each other. Hence they dare not be known, and have +their individual doings known, even to each other. And this is avowedly +the only reason for the ballot: for a secret government; a government by +secret bands of robbers and murderers. And we are insane enough to call +this liberty! To be a member of this secret band of robbers and +murderers is esteemed a privilege and an honor! Without this privilege, +a man is considered a slave; but with it a free man! With it he is +considered a free man, because he has the same power to secretly (by +secret ballot) procure the robbery, enslavement, and murder of another +man, and that other man has to procure his robbery, enslavement, and +murder. And this they call equal rights! + +If any number of men, many or few, claim the right to govern the people +of this country, let them make and sign an open compact with each other +to do so. Let them thus make themselves individually known to those whom +they propose to govern. And let them thus openly take the legitimate +responsibility of their acts. How many of those who now support the +Constitution, will ever do this? How many will ever dare openly proclaim +their right to govern? or take the legitimate responsibility of their +acts? Not one! + + + + +X. + + +It is obvious that, on general principles of law and reason, there +exists no such thing as a government created by, or resting upon, any +consent, compact, or agreement of "the people of the United States" with +each other; that the only visible, tangible, responsible government that +exists, is that of a few individuals only, who act in concert, and call +themselves by the several names of senators, representatives, +presidents, judges, marshals, treasurers, collectors, generals, +colonels, captains, etc., etc. + +On general principles of law and reason, it is of no importance whatever +that those few individuals profess to be the agents and representatives +of "the people of the United States"; since they can show no credentials +from the people themselves; they were never appointed as agents or +representatives in any open, authentic manner; they do not themselves +know, and have no means of knowing, and cannot prove, who their +principals (as they call them) are individually; and consequently +cannot, in law or reason, be said to have any principals at all. + +It is obvious, too, that if these alleged principals ever did appoint +these pretended agents, or representatives, they appointed them secretly +(by secret ballot), and in a way to avoid all personal responsibility +for their acts; that, at most, these alleged principals put these +pretended agents forward for the most criminal purposes, viz: to plunder +the people of their property, and restrain them of their liberty; and +that the only authority that these alleged principals have for so doing, +is simply a _tacit understanding_ among themselves that they will +imprison, shoot, or hang every man who resists the exactions and +restraints which their agents or representatives may impose upon them. + +Thus it is obvious that the only visible, tangible government we have is +made up of these professed agents or representatives of a secret band of +robbers and murderers, who, to cover up, or gloss over, their robberies +and murders, have taken to themselves the title of "the people of the +United States"; and who, on the pretense of being "the people of the +United States," assert their right to subject to their dominion, and to +control and dispose of at their pleasure, all property and persons found +in the United States. + + + + +XI. + + +On general principles of law and reason, the oaths which these pretended +agents of the people take "to support the Constitution," are of no +validity or obligation. And why? For this, if for no other reason, viz., +_that they are given to nobody_. There is no privity (as the lawyers +say)--that is, no mutual recognition, consent, and agreement--between +those who take these oaths, and any other persons. + +If I go upon Boston Common, and in the presence of a hundred thousand +people, men, women and children, with whom I have no contract on the +subject, take an oath that I will enforce upon them the laws of Moses, +of Lycurgus, of Solon, of Justinian, or of Alfred, that oath is, on +general principles of law and reason, of no obligation. It is of no +obligation, not merely because it is intrinsically a criminal one, _but +also because it is given to nobody_, and consequently pledges my faith +to nobody. It is merely given to the winds. + +It would not alter the case at all to say that, among these hundred +thousand persons, in whose presence the oath was taken, there were two, +three, or five thousand male adults, who had _secretly_--by secret +ballot, and in a way to avoid making themselves _individually_ known to +me, or to the remainder of the hundred thousand--designated me as their +agent to rule, control, plunder, and, if need be, murder, these hundred +thousand people. The fact that they had designated me secretly, and in a +manner to prevent my knowing them individually, prevents all privity +between them and me; and consequently makes it impossible that there can +be any contract, or pledge of faith, on my part towards them; for it is +impossible that I can pledge my faith, in any legal sense, to a man whom +I neither know, nor have any means of knowing, individually. + +So far as I am concerned, then, these two, three, or five thousand +persons are a secret band of robbers and murderers, who have secretly, +and in a way to save themselves from all responsibility for my acts, +designated me as their agent; and have, through some other agent, or +pretended agent, made their wishes known to me. But being, nevertheless, +individually unknown to me, and having no open, authentic contract with +me, my oath is, on general principles of law and reason, of no validity +as a pledge of faith to them. And being no pledge of faith to them, it +is no pledge of faith to anybody. It is mere idle wind. At most, it is +only a pledge of faith to an unknown band of robbers and murderers, +whose instrument for plundering and murdering other people, I thus +publicly confess myself to be. And it has no other obligation than a +similar oath given to any other unknown body of pirates, robbers, and +murderers. + +For these reasons the oaths taken by members of Congress, "to support +the Constitution," are, on general principles of law and reason, of no +validity. They are not only criminal in themselves, and therefore void; +but they are also void for the further reason _that they are given to +nobody_. + +It cannot be said that, in any legitimate or legal sense, they are +given to "the people of the United States"; because neither the whole, +nor any large proportion of the whole, people of the United States ever, +either openly or secretly, appointed or designated these men as their +agents to carry the Constitution into effect. The great body of the +people--that is, men, women and children--were never asked, or even +permitted, to signify, in any _formal_ manner, either openly or +secretly, their choice or wish on the subject. The most that these +members of Congress can say, in favor of their appointment, is simply +this: Each one can say for himself: + +I have evidence satisfactory to myself, that there exists, scattered +throughout the country, a band of men, having a tacit understanding with +each other, and calling themselves "the people of the United States," +whose general purposes are to control and plunder each other, and all +other persons in the country, and, so far as they can, even in +neighboring countries; and to kill every man who shall attempt to defend +his person and property against their schemes of plunder and dominion. +Who these men are, _individually_, I have no certain means of knowing, +for they sign no papers, and give no open, authentic evidence of their +individual membership. They are not known individually even to each +other. They are apparently as much afraid of being individually known to +each other, as of being known to other persons. Hence they ordinarily +have no mode either of exercising, or of making known, their individual +membership, otherwise than by giving their votes secretly for certain +agents to do their will. But although these men are individually +unknown, both to each other and to other persons, it is generally +understood in the country that none but male persons, of the age of +twenty-one years and upwards, can be members. It is also generally +understood that _all_ male persons, born in the country, having certain +complexions, and (in some localities) certain amounts of property, and +(in certain cases) even persons of foreign birth, are _permitted_ to be +members. But it appears that usually not more than one half, two-thirds, +or, in some cases, three-fourths, of all who are thus permitted to +become members of the band, ever exercise, or consequently prove, their +actual membership, in the only mode in which they ordinarily can +exercise or prove it, viz., by giving their votes secretly for the +officers or agents of the band. The number of these secret votes, so far +as we have any account of them, varies greatly from year to year, thus +tending to prove that the band, instead of being a permanent +organization, is a merely _pro tempore_ affair with those who choose to +act with it for the time being. The gross number of these secret votes, +or what purports to be their gross number, in different localities, is +occasionally published. Whether these reports are accurate or not, we +have no means of knowing. It is generally supposed that great frauds are +often committed in depositing them. They are understood to be received +and counted by certain men, who are themselves appointed for that +purpose by the same secret process by which all other officers and +agents of the band are selected. According to the reports of these +receivers of votes (for whose accuracy or honesty, however, I cannot +vouch), and according to my best knowledge of the whole number of male +persons "in my district," who (it is supposed) were permitted to vote, +it would appear that one-half, two-thirds or three-fourths actually did +vote. Who the men were, individually, who cast these votes, I have no +knowledge, for the whole thing was done secretly. But of the secret +votes thus given for what they call a "member of Congress," the +receivers reported that I had a majority, or at least a larger number +than any other one person. And it is only by virtue of such a +designation that I am now here to act in concert with other persons +similarly selected in other parts of the country. It is understood among +those who sent me here, that all the persons so selected, will, on +coming together at the City of Washington, take an oath in each other's +presence "to support the Constitution of the United States." By this is +meant a certain paper that was drawn up eighty years ago. It was never +signed by anybody, and apparently has no obligation, and never had any +obligation, as a contract. In fact, few persons ever read it, and +doubtless much the largest number of those who voted for me and the +others, never even saw it, or now pretend to know what it means. +Nevertheless, it is often spoken of in the country as "the Constitution +of the United States"; and for some reason or another, the men who sent +me here, seem to expect that I, and all with whom I act, will swear to +carry this Constitution into effect. I am therefore ready to take this +oath, and to co-operate with all others, similarly selected, who are +ready to take the same oath. + +This is the most that any member of Congress can say in proof that he +has any constituency; that he represents anybody; that his oath "to +support the Constitution," _is given to anybody_, or pledges his faith +to _anybody_. He has no open, written, or other authentic evidence, +such as is required in all other cases, that he was ever appointed the +agent or representative of anybody. He has no written power of attorney +from any single individual. He has no such legal knowledge as is +required in all other cases, by which he can identify a single one of +those who pretend to have appointed him to represent them. + +Of course his oath, professedly given to them, "to support the +Constitution," is, on general principles of law and reason, an oath +given to nobody. It pledges his faith to nobody. If he fails to fulfil +his oath, not a single person can come forward, and say to him, you have +betrayed me, or broken faith with me. + +No one can come forward and say to him: I appointed you my attorney to +act for me. I required you to swear that, as my attorney, you would +support the Constitution. You promised me that you would do so; and now +you have forfeited the oath you gave to me. No single individual can say +this. + +No open, avowed, or responsible association, or body of men, can come +forward and say to him: We appointed you our attorney, to act for us. We +required you to swear that, as our attorney, you would support the +Constitution. You promised us that you would do so; and now you have +forfeited the oath you gave to us. + +No open, avowed, or responsible association, or body of men, can say +this to him; because there is no such association or body of men in +existence. If any one should assert that there is such an association, +let him prove, if he can, who compose it. Let him produce, if he can, +any open, written, or other authentic contract, signed or agreed to by +these men; forming themselves into an association; making themselves +known as such to the world; appointing him as their agent; and making +themselves individually, or as an association, responsible for his acts, +done by their authority. Until all this can be shown, no one can say +that, in any legitimate sense, there is any such association; or that he +is their agent; or that he ever gave his oath to them; or ever pledged +his faith to them. + +On general principles of law and reason, it would be a sufficient answer +for him to say, to all individuals, and all pretended associations of +individuals, who should accuse him of a breach of faith to them: + +I never knew you. Where is your evidence that you, either individually +or collectively, ever appointed me your attorney? that you ever required +me to swear to you, that, as your attorney, I would support the +Constitution? or that I have now broken any faith I ever pledged to you? +You may, or you may not, be members of that secret band of robbers and +murderers, who act in secret; appoint their agents by a secret ballot; +who keep themselves individually unknown even to the agents they thus +appoint; and who, therefore, cannot claim that they have any agents; or +that any of their pretended agents ever gave his oath, or pledged his +faith, to them. I repudiate you altogether. My oath was given to others, +with whom you have nothing to do; or it was idle wind, given only to the +idle winds. Begone! + + + + +XII. + + +For the same reasons, the oaths of all the other pretended agents of +this secret band of robbers and murderers are, on general principles of +law and reason, equally destitute of obligation. They are given to +nobody; but only to the winds. + +The oaths of the tax-gatherers and treasurers of the band, are, on +general principles of law and reason, of no validity. If any tax +gatherer, for example, should put the money he receives into his own +pocket, and refuse to part with it, the members of this band could not +say to him: You collected that money as our agent, and for our uses; and +you swore to pay it over to us, or to those we should appoint to receive +it. You have betrayed us, and broken faith with us. + +It would be a sufficient answer for him to say to them: + +I never knew you. You never made yourselves individually known to me. I +never gave my oath to you, as individuals. You may, or you may not, be +members of that secret band, who appoint agents to rob and murder other +people; but who are cautious not to make themselves individually known, +either to such agents, or to those whom their agents are commissioned to +rob. If you are members of that band, you have given me no proof that +you ever commissioned me to rob others for your benefit. I never knew +you, as individuals, and of course never promised you that I would pay +over to you the proceeds of my robberies. I committed my robberies on my +own account, and for my own profit. If you thought I was fool enough to +allow you to keep yourselves concealed, and use me as your tool for +robbing other persons; or that I would take all the personal risk of the +robberies, and pay over the proceeds to you, you were particularly +simple. As I took all the risk of my robberies, I propose to take all +the profits. Begone! You are fools, as well as villains. If I gave my +oath to anybody, I gave it to other persons than you. But I really gave +it to nobody. I only gave it to the winds. It answered my purposes at +the time. It enabled me to get the money I was after, and now I propose +to keep it. If you expected me to pay it over to you, you relied only +upon that honor that is said to prevail among thieves. You now +understand that that is a very poor reliance. I trust you may become +wise enough to never rely upon it again. If I have any duty in the +matter, it is to give back the money to those from whom I took it; not +to pay it over to such villains as you. + + + + +XIII. + + +On general principles of law and reason, the oaths which foreigners +take, on coming here, and being "naturalized" (as it is called), are of +no validity. They are necessarily given to nobody; because there is no +open, authentic association, to which they can join themselves; or to +whom, as individuals, they can pledge their faith. No such association, +or organization, as "the people of the United States," having ever been +formed by any open, written, authentic, or voluntary contract, there is, +on general principles of law and reason, no such association, or +organization, in existence. And all oaths that purport to be given to +such an association are necessarily given only to the winds. They cannot +be said to be given to any man, or body of men, as individuals, because +no man, or body of men, can come forward _with any proof_ that the oaths +were given to them, as individuals, or to any association of which they +are members. To say that there is a tacit understanding among a portion +of the male adults of the country, that they will call themselves "the +people of the United States," and that they will act in concert in +subjecting the remainder of the people of the United States to their +dominion; but that they will keep themselves personally concealed by +doing all their acts secretly, is wholly insufficient, on general +principles of law and reason, to prove the existence of any such +association, or organization, as "the people of the United States"; or +consequently to prove that the oaths of foreigners were given to any +such association. + + + + +XIV. + + +On general principles of law and reason, all the oaths which, since the +war, have been given by Southern men, that they will obey the laws of +Congress, support the Union, and the like, are of no validity. Such +oaths are invalid, not only because they were extorted by military +power, and threats of confiscation, and because they are in +contravention of men's natural right to do as they please about +supporting the government, _but also because they were given to nobody_. +They were nominally given to "the United States." But being nominally +given to "the United States," they were necessarily given to nobody, +because, on general principles of law and reason, there were no "United +States," to whom the oaths could be given. That is to say, there was no +open, authentic, avowed, legitimate association, corporation, or body of +men, known as "the United States," or as "the people of the United +States," to whom the oaths could have been given. If anybody says there +was such a corporation, let him state who were the individuals that +composed it, and how and when they became a corporation. Were Mr. A, Mr. +B, and Mr. C members of it? If so, where are their signatures? Where the +evidence of their membership? Where the record? Where the open, +authentic proof? There is none. Therefore, in law and reason, there was +no such corporation. + +On general principles of law and reason, every corporation, association, +or organized body of men, having a legitimate corporate existence, and +legitimate corporate rights, must consist of certain known individuals, +who can prove, by legitimate and reasonable evidence, their membership. +But nothing of this kind can be proved in regard to the corporation, or +body of men, who call themselves "the United States." Not a man of them, +in all the Northern States, can prove by any legitimate evidence, such +as is required to prove membership in other legal corporations, that he +himself, or any other man whom he can name, is a member of any +corporation or association called "the United States," or "the people of +the United States," or, consequently, that there is any such +corporation. And since no such corporation can be proved to exist, it +cannot of course be proved that the oaths of Southern men were given to +any such corporation. The most that can be claimed is that the oaths +were given to a secret band of robbers and murderers, who called +themselves "the United States," and extorted those oaths. But that +certainly is not enough to prove that the oaths are of any obligation. + + + + +XV. + + +On general principles of law and reason, the oaths of soldiers, that +they will serve a given number of years, that they will obey the orders +of their superior officers, that they will bear true allegiance to the +government, and so forth, are of no obligation. Independently of the +criminality of an oath, that, for a given number of years, he will kill +all whom he may be commanded to kill, without exercising his own +judgment or conscience as to the justice or necessity of such killing, +there is this further reason why a soldier's oath is of no obligation, +viz., that, like all the other oaths that have now been mentioned, _it +is given to nobody_. There being, in no legitimate sense, any such +corporation, or nation, as "the United States," nor, consequently, in +any legitimate sense, any such government as "the government of the +United States," a soldier's oath given to, or contract made with, such +nation or government, is necessarily an oath given to, or a contract +made with, nobody. Consequently such oath or contract can be of no +obligation. + + + + +XVI. + + +On general principles of law and reason, the treaties, so called, which +purport to be entered into with other nations, by persons calling +themselves ambassadors, secretaries, presidents, and senators of the +United States, in the name, and in behalf, of "the people of the United +States," are of no validity. These so-called ambassadors, secretaries, +presidents, and senators, who claim to be the agents of "the people of +the United States," for making these treaties, can show no open, +written, or other authentic evidence that either the whole "people of +the United States," or any other open, avowed, responsible body of men, +calling themselves by that name, ever authorized these pretended +ambassadors and others to make treaties in the name of, or binding upon +any one of, "the people of the United States," or any other open, +avowed, responsible body of men, calling themselves by that name, ever +authorized these pretended ambassadors, secretaries, and others, in +their name and behalf, to recognize certain other persons, calling +themselves emperors, kings, queens, and the like, as the rightful +rulers, sovereigns, masters, or representatives of the different peoples +whom they assume to govern, to represent, and to bind. + +The "nations," as they are called, with whom our pretended ambassadors, +secretaries, presidents, and senators profess to make treaties, are as +much myths as our own. On general principles of law and reason, there +are no such "nations." That is to say, neither the whole people of +England, for example, nor any open, avowed, responsible body of men, +calling themselves by that name, ever, by any open, written, or other +authentic contract with each other, formed themselves into any bona +fide, legitimate association or organization, or authorized any king, +queen, or other representative to make treaties in their name, or to +bind them, either individually, or as an association, by such treaties. + +Our pretended treaties, then, being made with no legitimate or bona fide +nations, or representatives of nations, and being made, on our part, by +persons who have no legitimate authority to act for us, have +intrinsically no more validity than a pretended treaty made by the Man +in the Moon with the king of the Pleiades. + + + + +XVII. + + +On general principles of law and reason, debts contracted in the name of +"the United States," or of "the people of the United States," are of no +validity. It is utterly absurd to pretend that debts to the amount of +twenty-five hundred millions of dollars are binding upon thirty-five or +forty millions of people, when there is not a particle of legitimate +evidence--such as would be required to prove a private debt--that can be +produced against any one of them, that either he, or his properly +authorized attorney, ever contracted to pay one cent. + +Certainly, neither the whole people of the United States, nor any number +of them, ever separately or individually contracted to pay a cent of +these debts. + +Certainly, also, neither the whole people of the United States, nor any +number of them, ever, by any open, written, or other authentic and +voluntary contract, united themselves as a firm, corporation, or +association, by the name of "the United States," or "the people of the +United States," and authorized their agents to contract debts in their +name. + +Certainly, too, there is in existence no such firm, corporation, or +association as "the United States," or "the people of the United +States," formed by any open, written, or other authentic and voluntary +contract, and having corporate property with which to pay these debts. + +How, then, is it possible, on any general principle of law or reason, +that debts that are binding upon nobody individually, can be binding +upon forty millions of people collectively, when, on general and +legitimate principles of law and reason, these forty millions of people +neither have, nor ever had, any corporate property? never made any +corporate or individual contract? and neither have, nor ever had, any +corporate existence? + +Who, then, created these debts, in the name of "the United States"? Why, +at most, only a few persons, calling themselves "members of Congress," +etc., who pretended to represent "the people of the United States," but +who really represented only a secret band of robbers and murderers, who +wanted money to carry on the robberies and murders in which they were +then engaged; and who intended to extort from the future people of the +United States, by robbery and threats of murder (and real murder, if +that should prove necessary), the means to pay these debts. + +This band of robbers and murderers, who were the real principals in +contracting these debts, is a secret one, because its members have never +entered into any open, written, avowed, or authentic contract, by which +they may be individually known to the world, or even to each other. +Their real or pretended representatives, who contracted these debts in +their name, were selected (if selected at all) for that purpose secretly +(by secret ballot), and in a way to furnish evidence against none of the +principals _individually_; and these principals were really known +_individually_ neither to their pretended representatives who contracted +these debts in their behalf, nor to those who lent the money. The money, +therefore, was all borrowed and lent in the dark; that is, by men who +did not see each other's faces, or know each other's names; who could +not then, and cannot now, identify each other as principals in the +transactions; and who consequently can prove no contract with each +other. + +Furthermore, the money was all lent and borrowed for criminal purposes; +that is, for purposes of robbery and murder; and for this reason the +contracts were all intrinsically void; and would have been so, even +though the real parties, borrowers and lenders, had come face to face, +and made their contracts openly, in their own proper names. + +Furthermore, this secret band of robbers and murderers, who were the +real borrowers of this money, having no legitimate corporate existence, +have no corporate property with which to pay these debts. They do indeed +pretend to own large tracts of wild lands, lying between the Atlantic +and Pacific Oceans, and between the Gulf of Mexico and the North Pole. +But, on general principles of law and reason, they might as well pretend +to own the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans themselves; or the atmosphere and +the sunlight; and to hold them, and dispose of them, for the payment of +these debts. + +Having no corporate property with which to pay what purports to be their +corporate debts, this secret band of robbers and murderers are really +bankrupt. They have nothing to pay with. In fact, they do not propose to +pay their debts otherwise than from the proceeds of their future +robberies and murders. These are confessedly their sole reliance; and +were known to be such by the lenders of the money, at the time the money +was lent. And it was, therefore, virtually a part of the contract, that +the money should be repaid only from the proceeds of these future +robberies and murders. For this reason, if for no other, the contracts +were void from the beginning. + +In fact, these apparently two classes, borrowers and lenders, were +really one and the same class. They borrowed and lent money from and to +themselves. They themselves were not only part and parcel, but the very +life and soul, of this secret band of robbers and murderers, who +borrowed and spent the money. Individually they furnished money for a +common enterprise; taking, in return, what purported to be corporate +promises for individual loans. The only excuse they had for taking these +so-called corporate promises of, for individual loans by, the same +parties, was that they might have some apparent excuse for the future +robberies of the band (that is, to pay the debts of the corporation), +and that they might also know what shares they were to be respectively +entitled to out of the proceeds of their future robberies. + +Finally, if these debts had been created for the most innocent and +honest purposes, and in the most open and honest manner, by the real +parties to the contracts, these parties could thereby have bound nobody +but themselves, and no property but their own. They could have bound +nobody that should have come after them, and no property subsequently +created by, or belonging to, other persons. + + + + +XVIII. + + +The Constitution having never been signed by anybody; and there being no +other open, written, or authentic contract between any parties whatever, +by virtue of which the United States government, so called, is +maintained; and it being well known that none but male persons, of +twenty-one years of age and upwards, are allowed any voice in the +government; and it being also well known that a large number of these +adult persons seldom or never vote at all; and that all those who do +vote, do so secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to prevent their +individual votes being known, either to the world, or even to each +other; and consequently in a way to make no one openly responsible for +the acts of their agents, or representatives,--all these things being +known, the questions arise: _Who_ compose the real governing power in +the country? Who are the men, _the responsible men_, who rob us of our +property? Restrain us of our liberty? Subject us to their arbitrary +dominion? And devastate our homes, and shoot us down by the hundreds of +thousands, if we resist? How shall we find these men? How shall we know +them from others? How shall we defend ourselves and our property against +them? Who, of our neighbors, are members of this secret band of robbers +and murderers? How can we know which are _their_ houses, that we may +burn or demolish them? Which _their_ property, that we may destroy it? +Which their persons, that we may kill them, and rid the world and +ourselves of such tyrants and monsters? + +These are questions that must be answered, before men can be free; +before they can protect themselves against this secret band of robbers +and murderers, who now plunder, enslave, and destroy them. + +The answer to these questions is, that only those who have the will and +the power to shoot down their fellow men, are the real rulers in this, +as in all other (so-called) civilized countries; for by no others will +civilized men be robbed, or enslaved. + +Among savages, mere physical strength, on the part of one man, may +enable him to rob, enslave, or kill another man. Among barbarians, mere +physical strength, on the part of a body of men, disciplined, and acting +in concert, though with very little money or other wealth, may, under +some circumstances, enable them to rob, enslave, or kill another body of +men, as numerous, or perhaps even more numerous, than themselves. And +among both savages and barbarians, mere want may sometimes compel one +man to sell himself as a slave to another. But with (so-called) +civilized peoples, among whom knowledge, wealth, and the means of acting +in concert, have become diffused; and who have invented such weapons and +other means of defense as to render mere physical strength of less +importance; and by whom soldiers in any requisite number, and other +instrumentalities of war in any requisite amount, can always be had for +money, the question of war, and consequently the question of power, is +little else than a mere question of money. As a necessary consequence, +those who stand ready to furnish this money, are the real rulers. It is +so in Europe, and it is so in this country. + +In Europe, the nominal rulers, the emperors and kings and parliaments, +are anything but the real rulers of their respective countries. They are +little or nothing else than mere tools, employed by the wealthy to rob, +enslave, and (if need be) murder those who have less wealth, or none at +all. + +The Rothschilds, and that class of money-lenders of whom they are the +representatives and agents--men who never think of lending a shilling to +their next-door neighbors, for purposes of honest industry, unless upon +the most ample security, and at the highest rate of interest--stand +ready, at all times, to lend money in unlimited amounts to those robbers +and murderers, who call themselves governments, to be expended in +shooting down those who do not submit quietly to being robbed and +enslaved. + +They lend their money in this manner, knowing that it is to be expended +in murdering their fellow men, for simply seeking their liberty and +their rights; knowing also that neither the interest nor the principal +will ever be paid, except as it will be extorted under terror of the +repetition of such murders as those for which the money lent is to be +expended. + +These money-lenders, the Rothschilds, for example, say to themselves: If +we lend a hundred millions sterling to the queen and parliament of +England, it will enable them to murder twenty, fifty, or a hundred +thousand people in England, Ireland, or India; and the terror inspired +by such wholesale murder, will enable them to keep the whole people of +those countries in subjection for twenty, or perhaps fifty, years to +come; to control all their trade and industry; and to extort from them +large amounts of money, under the name of taxes; and from the wealth +thus extorted from them, they (the queen and parliament) can afford to +pay us a higher rate of interest for our money than we can get in any +other way. Or, if we lend this sum to the emperor of Austria, it will +enable him to murder so many of his people as to strike terror into the +rest, and thus enable him to keep them in subjection, and extort money +from them, for twenty or fifty years to come. And they say the same in +regard to the emperor of Russia, the king of Prussia, the emperor of +France, or any other ruler, so called, who, in their judgment, will be +able, by murdering a reasonable portion of his people, to keep the rest +in subjection, and extort money from them, for a long time to come, to +pay the interest and principal of the money lent him. + +And why are these men so ready to lend money for murdering their fellow +men? Solely for this reason, viz., that such loans are considered better +investments than loans for purposes of honest industry. They pay higher +rates of interest; and it is less trouble to look after them. This is +the whole matter. + +The question of making these loans is, with these lenders, a mere +question of pecuniary profit. They lend money to be expended in robbing, +enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, solely because, on the whole, +such loans pay better than any others. They are no respecters of +persons, no superstitious fools, that reverence monarchs. They care no +more for a king, or an emperor, than they do for a beggar, except as he +is a better customer, and can pay them better interest for their money. +If they doubt his ability to make his murders successful for maintaining +his power, and thus extorting money from his people in future, they +dismiss him as unceremoniously as they would dismiss any other hopeless +bankrupt, who should want to borrow money to save himself from open +insolvency. + +When these great lenders of blood-money, like the Rothschilds, have +loaned vast sums in this way, for purposes of murder, to an emperor or a +king, they sell out the bonds taken by them, in small amounts, to +anybody, and everybody, who are disposed to buy them at satisfactory +prices, to hold as investments. They (the Rothschilds) thus soon get +back their money, with great profits; and are now ready to lend money in +the same way again to any other robber and murderer, called an emperor +or a king, who, they think, is likely to be successful in his robberies +and murders, and able to pay a good price for the money necessary to +carry them on. + +This business of lending blood-money is one of the most thoroughly +sordid, cold-blooded, and criminal that was ever carried on, to any +considerable extent, amongst human beings. It is like lending money to +slave traders, or to common robbers and pirates, to be repaid out of +their plunder. And the men who loan money to governments, so called, for +the purpose of enabling the latter to rob, enslave, and murder their +people, are among the greatest villains that the world has ever seen. +And they as much deserve to be hunted and killed (if they cannot +otherwise be got rid of) as any slave traders, robbers, or pirates that +ever lived. + +When these emperors and kings, so-called, have obtained their loans, +they proceed to hire and train immense numbers of professional +murderers, called soldiers, and employ them in shooting down all who +resist their demands for money. In fact, most of them keep large bodies +of these murderers constantly in their service, as their only means of +enforcing their extortions. There are now, I think, four or five +millions of these professional murderers constantly employed by the +so-called sovereigns of Europe. The enslaved people are, of course, +forced to support and pay all these murderers, as well as to submit to +all the other extortions which these murderers are employed to enforce. + +It is only in this way that most of the so-called governments of Europe +are maintained. These so-called governments are in reality only great +bands of robbers and murderers, organized, disciplined, and constantly +on the alert. And the so-called sovereigns, in these different +governments, are simply the heads, or chiefs, of different bands of +robbers and murderers. And these heads or chiefs are dependent upon the +lenders of blood-money for the means to carry on their robberies and +murders. They could not sustain themselves a moment but for the loans +made to them by these blood-money loan-mongers. And their first care is +to maintain their credit with them; for they know their end is come, the +instant their credit with them fails. Consequently the first proceeds of +their extortions are scrupulously applied to the payment of the interest +on their loans. + +In addition to paying the interest on their bonds, they perhaps grant to +the holders of them great monopolies in banking, like the Banks of +England, of France, and of Vienna; with the agreement that these banks +shall furnish money whenever, in sudden emergencies, it may be necessary +to shoot down more of their people. Perhaps also, by means of tariffs on +competing imports, they give great monopolies to certain branches of +industry, in which these lenders of blood-money are engaged. They also, +by unequal taxation, exempt wholly or partially the property of these +loan-mongers, and throw corresponding burdens upon those who are too +poor and weak to resist. + +Thus it is evident that all these men, who call themselves by the +high-sounding names of Emperors, Kings, Sovereigns, Monarchs, Most +Christian Majesties, Most Catholic Majesties, High Mightinesses, Most +Serene and Potent Princes, and the like, and who claim to rule "by the +grace of God," by "Divine Right"--that is, by special authority from +Heaven--are intrinsically not only the merest miscreants and wretches, +engaged solely in plundering, enslaving, and murdering their fellow men, +but that they are also the merest hangers on, the servile, obsequious, +fawning dependents and tools of these blood-money loan-mongers, on whom +they rely for the means to carry on their crimes. These loan-mongers, +like the Rothschilds, laugh in their sleeves, and say to themselves: +These despicable creatures, who call themselves emperors, and kings, and +majesties, and most serene and potent princes; who profess to wear +crowns, and sit on thrones; who deck themselves with ribbons, and +feathers, and jewels; and surround themselves with hired flatterers and +lickspittles; and whom we suffer to strut around, and palm themselves +off, upon fools and slaves, as sovereigns and lawgivers specially +appointed by Almighty God; and to hold themselves out as the sole +fountains of honors, and dignities, and wealth, and power--all these +miscreants and imposters know that we make them, and use them; that in +us they live, move, and have their being; that we require them (as the +price of their positions) to take upon themselves all the labor, all the +danger, and all the odium of all the crimes they commit for our profit; +and that we will unmake them, strip them of their gewgaws, and send them +out into the world as beggars, or give them over to the vengeance of the +people they have enslaved, the moment they refuse to commit any crime we +require of them, or to pay over to us such share of the proceeds of +their robberies as we see fit to demand. + + + + +XIX. + + +Now, what is true in Europe, is substantially true in this country. The +difference is the immaterial one, that, in this country, there is no +visible, permanent head, or chief, of these robbers and murderers, who +call themselves "the government." That is to say, there is no _one man_, +who calls himself the state, or even emperor, king, or sovereign; no one +who claims that he and his children rule "by the Grace of God," by +"Divine Right," or by special appointment from Heaven. There are only +certain men, who call themselves presidents, senators, and +representatives, and claim to be the authorized agents, _for the time +being, or for certain short periods, of all_ "the people of the United +States"; but who can show no credentials, or powers of attorney, or any +other open, authentic evidence that they are so; and who notoriously are +not so; but are really only the agents of a secret band of robbers and +murderers, whom they themselves do not know, and have no means of +knowing, individually; but who, they trust, will openly or secretly, +when the crisis comes, sustain them in all their usurpations and crimes. + +What is important to be noticed is, that these so-called presidents, +senators, and representatives, these pretended agents of all "the people +of the United States," the moment their exactions meet with any +formidable resistance from any portion of "the people" themselves, are +obliged, like their co-robbers and murderers in Europe, to fly at once +to the lenders of blood money, for the means to sustain their power. And +they borrow their money on the same principle, and for the same +purpose, viz., to be expended in shooting down all those "people of the +United States"--their own constituents and principals, as they profess +to call them--who resist the robberies and enslavement which these +borrowers of the money are practising upon them. And they expect to +repay the loans, if at all, only from the proceeds of the future +robberies, which they anticipate it will be easy for them and their +successors to perpetrate through a long series of years, upon their +pretended principals, if they can but shoot down now some hundreds of +thousands of them, and thus strike terror into the rest. + +Perhaps the facts were never made more evident, in any country on the +globe, than in our own, that these soulless blood-money loan-mongers are +the real rulers; that they rule from the most sordid and mercenary +motives; that the ostensible government, the presidents, senators, and +representatives, so called, are merely their tools; and that no ideas +of, or regard for, justice or liberty had anything to do in inducing +them to lend their money for the war. In proof of all this, look at the +following facts. + +Nearly a hundred years ago we professed to have got rid of all that +religious superstition, inculcated by a servile and corrupt priesthood +in Europe, that rulers, so called, derived their authority directly from +Heaven; and that it was consequently a religious duty on the part of the +people to obey them. We professed long ago to have learned that +governments could rightfully exist only by the free will, and on the +voluntary support, of those who might choose to sustain them. We all +professed to have known long ago, that the only legitimate objects of +government were the maintenance of liberty and justice equally for all. +All this we had professed for nearly a hundred years. And we professed +to look with pity and contempt upon those ignorant, superstitious, and +enslaved peoples of Europe, who were so easily kept in subjection by the +frauds and force of priests and kings. + +Notwithstanding all this, that we had learned, and known, and professed, +for nearly a century, these lenders of blood money had, for a long +series of years previous to the war, been the willing accomplices of the +slave-holders in perverting the government from the purposes of liberty +and justice, to the greatest of crimes. They had been such accomplices +_for a purely pecuniary consideration_, to wit, a control of the markets +in the South; in other words, the privilege of holding the slave-holders +themselves in industrial and commercial subjection to the manufacturers +and merchants of the North (who afterwards furnished the money for the +war). And these Northern merchants and manufacturers, these lenders of +blood-money, were willing to continue to be the accomplices of the +slave-holders in the future, for the same pecuniary consideration. But +the slave-holders, either doubting the fidelity of their Northern +allies, or feeling themselves strong enough to keep their slaves in +subjection without Northern assistance, would no longer pay the price +which these Northern men demanded. And it was to enforce this price in +the future--that is, to monopolize the Southern markets, to maintain +their industrial and commercial control over the South--that these +Northern manufacturers and merchants lent some of the profits of their +former monopolies for the war, in order to secure to themselves the +same, or greater, monopolies in the future. These--and not any love of +liberty or justice--were the motives on which the money for the war was +lent by the North. In short, the North said to the slave-holders: If you +will not pay us our price (give us control of your markets) for our +assistance against your slaves, we will secure the same price (keep +control of your markets) by helping your slaves against you, and using +them as our tools for maintaining dominion over you; for the control of +your markets we will have, whether the tools we use for that purpose be +black or white, and be the cost, in blood and money, what it may. + +On this principle, and from this motive, and not from any love of +liberty, or justice, the money was lent in enormous amounts, and at +enormous rates of interest. And it was only by means of these loans that +the objects of the war were accomplished. + +And now these lenders of blood-money demand their pay; and the +government, so called, becomes their tool, their servile, slavish, +villainous tool, to extort it from the labor of the enslaved people both +of the North and the South. It is to be extorted by every form of +direct, and indirect, and unequal taxation. Not only the nominal debt +and interest--enormous as the latter was--are to be paid in full; but +these holders of the debt are to be paid still further--and perhaps +doubly, triply, or quadruply paid--by such tariffs on imports as will +enable our home manufacturers to realize enormous prices for their +commodities; also by such monopolies in banking as will enable them to +keep control of, and thus enslave and plunder, the industry and trade of +the great body of the Northern people themselves. In short, the +industrial and commercial slavery of the great body of the people, North +and South, black and white, is the price which these lenders of blood +money demand, and insist upon, and are determined to secure, in return +for the money lent for the war. + +This programme having been fully arranged and systematized, they put +their sword into the hands of the chief murderer of the war, and charge +him to carry their scheme into effect. And now he, speaking as their +organ, says: "_Let us have peace_." + +The meaning of this is: Submit quietly to all the robbery and slavery we +have arranged for you, and you can have "peace." But in case you resist, +the same lenders of blood-money, who furnished the means to subdue the +South, will furnish the means again to subdue you. + +These are the terms on which alone this government, or, with few +exceptions, any other, ever gives "peace" to its people. + +The whole affair, on the part of those who furnished the money, has +been, and now is, a deliberate scheme of robbery and murder; not merely +to monopolize the markets of the South, but also to monopolize the +currency, and thus control the industry and trade, and thus plunder and +enslave the laborers, of both North and South. And Congress and the +president are today the merest tools for these purposes. They are +obliged to be, for they know that their own power, as rulers, so-called, +is at an end, the moment their credit with the blood-money loan-mongers +fails. They are like a bankrupt in the hands of an extortioner. They +dare not say nay to any demand made upon them. And to hide at once, if +possible, both their servility and their crimes, they attempt to divert +public attention, by crying out that they have "Abolished Slavery!" That +they have "Saved the Country!" That they have "Preserved our Glorious +Union!" and that, in now paying the "National Debt," as they call it (as +if the people themselves, _all of them who are to be taxed for its +payment_, had really and voluntarily joined in contracting it), they are +simply "Maintaining the National Honor!" + +By "maintaining the national honor," they mean simply that they +themselves, open robbers and murderers, assume to be the nation, and +will keep faith with those who lend them the money necessary to enable +them to crush the great body of the people under their feet; and will +faithfully appropriate, from the proceeds of their future robberies and +murders, enough to pay all their loans, principal and interest. + +The pretense that the "abolition of slavery" was either a motive or +justification for the war, is a fraud of the same character with that of +"maintaining the national honor." Who, but such usurpers, robbers, and +murderers as they, ever established slavery? Or what government, except +one resting upon the sword, like the one we now have, was ever capable +of maintaining slavery? And why did these men abolish slavery? Not from +any love of liberty in general--not as an act of justice to the black +man himself, but only "as a war measure," and because they wanted his +assistance, and that of his friends, in carrying on the war they had +undertaken for maintaining and intensifying that political, commercial, +and industrial slavery, to which they have subjected the great body of +the people, both white and black. And yet these imposters now cry out +that they have abolished the chattel slavery of the black man--although +that was not the motive of the war--as if they thought they could +thereby conceal, atone for, or justify that other slavery which they +were fighting to perpetuate, and to render more rigorous and inexorable +than it ever was before. There was no difference of principle--but only +of degree--between the slavery they boast they have abolished, and the +slavery they were fighting to preserve; for all restraints upon men's +natural liberty, not necessary for the simple maintenance of justice, +are of the nature of slavery, and differ from each other only in degree. + +If their object had really been to abolish slavery, or maintain liberty +or justice generally, they had only to say: All, whether white or black, +who want the protection of this government, shall have it; and all who +do not want it, will be left in peace, so long as they leave us in +peace. Had they said this, slavery would necessarily have been abolished +at once; the war would have been saved; and a thousand times nobler +union than we have ever had would have been the result. It would have +been a voluntary union of free men; such a union as will one day exist +among all men, the world over, if the several nations, so called, shall +ever get rid of the usurpers, robbers, and murderers, called +governments, that now plunder, enslave, and destroy them. + +Still another of the frauds of these men is, that they are now +establishing, and that the war was designed to establish, "a government +of consent." The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a +government of consent, is this--that it is one to which everybody must +consent, or be shot. This idea was the dominant one on which the war was +carried on; and it is the dominant one, now that we have got what is +called "peace." + +Their pretenses that they have "Saved the Country," and "Preserved our +Glorious Union," are frauds like all the rest of their pretenses. By +them they mean simply that they have subjugated, and maintained their +power over, an unwilling people. This they call "Saving the Country"; as +if an enslaved and subjugated people--or as if any people kept in +subjection by the sword (as it is intended that all of us shall be +hereafter)--could be said to have any country. This, too, they call +"Preserving our Glorious Union"; as if there could be said to be any +Union, glorious or inglorious, that was not voluntary. Or as if there +could be said to be any union between masters and slaves; between those +who conquer, and those who are subjugated. + +All these cries of having "abolished slavery," of having "saved the +country," of having "preserved the union," of establishing "a government +of consent," and of "maintaining the national honor," are all gross, +shameless, transparent cheats--so transparent that they ought to deceive +no one--when uttered as justifications for the war, or for the +government that has succeeded the war, or for now compelling the people +to pay the cost of the war, or for compelling anybody to support a +government that he does not want. + +The lesson taught by all these facts is this: As long as mankind +continue to pay "national debts," so-called--that is, so long as they +are such dupes and cowards as to pay for being cheated, plundered, +enslaved, and murdered--so long there will be enough to lend the money +for those purposes; and with that money a plenty of tools, called +soldiers, can be hired to keep them in subjection. But when they refuse +any longer to pay for being thus cheated, plundered, enslaved, and +murdered, they will cease to have cheats, and usurpers, and robbers, and +murderers and blood-money loan-mongers for masters. + + + + +APPENDIX. + + +Inasmuch as the Constitution was never signed, nor agreed to, by +anybody, as a contract, and therefore never bound anybody, and is now +binding upon nobody; and is, moreover, such an one as no people can ever +hereafter be expected to consent to, except as they may be forced to do +so at the point of the bayonet, it is perhaps of no importance what its +true legal meaning, as a contract, is. Nevertheless, the writer thinks +it proper to say that, in his opinion, the Constitution is no such +instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; but that by false +interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in +practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the +Constitution itself purports to authorize. He has heretofore written +much, and could write much more, to prove that such is the truth. But +whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is +certain--that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, +or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to +exist. + + + + +FOOTNOTES: + + +[a] See _No Treason_, No. 2, pages 5 and 6. + +[b] Suppose it be "the best government on earth," does that prove its +own goodness, or only the badness of all other governments? + +[c] The very men who drafted it, never signed it in any way to bind +themselves by it, _as a contract_. And not one of them probably ever +would have signed it in any way to bind himself by it, _as a contract_. + +[d] I have personally examined the statute books of the following +States, viz.: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode +Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, +Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, +Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, +Wisconsin, Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Kansas, +Nevada, California, and Oregon, and find that in all these States the +English statute has been re-enacted, sometimes with modifications, but +generally enlarging its operations, and is now in force. + +The following are some of the provisions of the Massachusetts statute: + +"No action shall be brought in any of the following cases, that is to +say: ... + +"To charge a person upon a special promise to answer for the debt, +default, or misdoings of another: ... + +"Upon a contract for the sale of lands, tenements, hereditaments, or of +any interest in, or concerning them; or + +"Upon an agreement that is not to be performed within one year from the +writing thereof: + +"Unless the promise, contract, or agreement, upon which such action is +brought, or some memorandum or note thereof, is in writing, and signed +by the party to be charged therewith, or by some person thereunto by him +lawfully authorized." + +"No contract for the sale of goods, wares, or merchandise, for the price +of fifty dollars or more, shall be good or valid, unless the purchaser +accepts and receives part of the goods so sold, or gives something in +earnest to bind the bargain, or in part payment; or unless some note or +memorandum in writing of the bargain is made and signed by the party to +be charged thereby, or by some person thereunto by him lawfully +authorized." + +[e] And this two-thirds vote may be but two-thirds of a quorum--that is +two-thirds of a majority--instead of two-thirds of the whole. + +[f] Of what appreciable value is it to any man, as an individual, that +he is allowed a voice in choosing these public masters? His voice is +only one of several millions. + + + + +Transcriber's Notes: + + + Passages in italics are indicated by _italics_. + + Inconsistencies in spelling and hyphenation have been retained from + the original. + + Obvious typographical errors have been corrected as follows: + + Page 22: "do" changed to "does" + + Punctuation has been corrected without note. + + + + + + + + + +End of Project Gutenberg's No Treason, Vol. VI., by Lysander Spooner + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK NO TREASON, VOL. VI. *** + +***** This file should be named 36145.txt or 36145.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/3/6/1/4/36145/ + +Produced by Susan Goble, Curtis Weyant, David E. Brown, +and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at +http://www.pgdp.net + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/36145.zip b/36145.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..d90d0cd --- /dev/null +++ b/36145.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b93123a --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #36145 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/36145) |