[ vi ]
Sovereignty of another, is, at the same time supposed to have agreed to all the future Acts of that Sovereignty[1].” (He has nevertheless thought proper to add an observation which makes strongly against his own argument,) “Though it would really be very useful,” (says he,) “and contribute much to engaging the Subjects in a voluntary Obedience, if the Laws could be made with their consent and Approbation; especially such as are to pass into their Lives and Manners.”
Now it would be impossible (I apprehend) to find so just a reason, in favour of the former part of the learned Baron’s assertion, as he himself has here given directly against it; and yet he is frequently harping upon the same harsh firing of absolute implicit obedience; which inconsistency cannot easily be accounted for, unless it be attributed to the prejudice of his education as a student in the Imperial or Civil Law. For though the Civil Law contains many excellent maxims highly worthy of our esteem, most of which have been adopted by our an-cient
- ↑ Law of Nature and Nations, Book i. c. 6. p. 55
