Asregardsthecostofmaintainingtheecclesiasticalestablishment，forsimilarreasonsthismustbederivednotfromthepublicfundsofthestate，butfromthesectionofthepeoplewhoprofesstheparticularfaithofthechurch;andthusonlyoughtittofallasaburdenonthecommunity。
D。TheRightofAssigningOfficesandDignitiesintheState。
Therightofthesupremeauthorityinthestatealsoincludes：
1。Thedistributionofoffices，aspublicandpaidemployments;
2。Theconferringofdignities，asunpaiddistinctionsofrank，foundedmerelyonhonour，butestablishingagradationofhigherandlowerordersinthepoliticalscale;thelatter，althoughfreeinthemselves，beingunderobligationdeterminedbythepubliclawtoobeytheformersofarastheyarealsoentitledtocommand;
3。Besidestheserelativelybeneficentrights，thesupremepowerinthestateisalsoinvestedwiththerightofadministeringpunishment。
Asregardsciviloffices，thequestionarisesastowhetherthesovereignhastheright，afterbestowinganofficeonanindividual，totakeitagainawayathismerepleasure，withoutanycrimehavingbeencommittedbytheholderoftheoffice。Isay，\"No。\"Forwhattheunitedwillofthepeoplewouldneverresolve，regardingtheircivilofficers，cannot（constitutionally）bedeterminedbythesovereignregardingthem。Thepeoplehavetobearthecostincurredbytheappointmentofanofficial，andundoubtedlyitmustbetheirwillthatanyoneinofficeshouldbecompletelycompetentforitsduties。Butsuchcompetencycanonlybeacquiredbyalongpreparationandtraining，andthisprocesswouldnecessarilyoccupythetimethatwouldberequiredforacquiringthemeansofsupportbyadifferentoccupation。Arbitraryandfrequentchangeswouldtherefore，asarule，havetheeffectoffillingofficeswithfunctionarieswhohavenotacquiredtheskillrequiredfortheirduties，andwhosejudgementshadnotattainedmaturitybypractice。
Allthisiscontrarytothepurposeofthestate。Andbesidesitisrequisiteintheinterestofthepeoplethatitshouldbepossibleforeveryindividualtorisefromalowerofficetothehigheroffices，astheselatterwouldotherwisefallintoincompetenthands，andthatcompetentofficialsgenerallyshouldhavesomeguaranteeoflife—longprovision。
Civildignitiesincludenotonlysuchasareconnectedwithapublicoffice，butalsothosewhichmakethepossessorsofthem，withoutanyaccompanyingservicestothestate，membersofahigherclassorrank。Thelatterconstitutethenobility，whosemembersaredistinguishedfromthecommoncitizenswhoformthemassofthepeople。Therankofthenobilityisinheritedbymaledescendants;andtheseagaincommunicateittowiveswhoarenotnoblyborn。Femaledescendantsofnoblefamilies，however，donotcommunicatetheirranktohusbandswhoarenotofnoblebirth，buttheydescendthemselvesintothecommoncivilstatusofthepeople。Thisbeingso，thequestionthenemergesastowhetherthesovereignhastherighttofoundahereditaryrankandclass，intermediatebetweenhimselfandtheothercitizens？Theimportofthisquestiondoesnotturnonwhetheritisconformabletotheprudenceofthesovereign，fromregardtohisownandthepeople’sinterests，tohavesuchaninstitution;butwhetheritisinaccordancewiththerightofthepeoplethattheyshouldhaveaclassofpersonsabovethem，who，whilebeingsubjectslikethemselves，areyetbornastheircommanders，oratleastasprivilegedsuperiors？Theanswertothisquestion，asinpreviousinstances，istobederivedfromtheprinciplethat\"whatthepeople，asconstitutingthewholemassofthesubjects，couldnotdetermineregardingthemselvesandtheirassociatedcitizens，cannotbeconstitutionallydeterminedbythesovereignregardingthepeople。\"
Nowahereditarynobilityisarankwhichtakesprecedenceofmeritandishopedforwithoutanygoodreason—athingoftheimaginationwithoutgenuinereality。Forifanancestorhadmerit，hecouldnottransmitittohisposterity，buttheymustalwaysacquireitforthemselves。Naturehasinfactnotsoarrangedthatthetalentandwillwhichgiverisetomeritinthestate，arehereditary。Andbecauseitcannotbesupposedofanyindividualthathewillthrowawayhisfreedom，itisimpossiblethatthecommonwillofallthepeopleshouldagreetosuchagroundlessprerogative，andhencethesovereigncannotmakeitvalid。Itmayhappen，however，thatsuchananomalyasthatofsubjectswhowouldbemorethancitizens，inthemannerofbornofficials，orhereditaryprofessors，hasslippedintothemechanismofgovernmentinoldentimes，asinthecaseofthefeudalsystem，whichwasalmostentirelyorganizedwithreferencetowar。Undersuchcircumstances，thestatecannotdealotherwisewiththiserrorofawronglyinstitutedrankinitsmidst，thanbytheremedyofagradualextinctionthroughhereditarypositionsbeingleftunfilledastheyfallvacant。Thestatehasthereforetherightprovisorilytoletadignityintitlecontinue，untilthepublicopinionmaturesonthesubject。Andthiswillthuspassfromthethreefolddivisionintosovereign，nobles，andpeople，tothetwofoldandonlynaturaldivisionintosovereignandpeople。
Noindividualinthestatecanindeedbeentirelywithoutdignity;
forhehasatleastthatofbeingacitizen，exceptwhenhehaslosthiscivilstatusbyacrime。Asacriminalheisstillmaintainedinlife，butheismadethemereinstrumentofthewillofanother，whetheritbethestateoraparticularcitizen。Inthelatterposition，inwhichhecouldonlybeplacedbyajuridicaljudgement，hewouldpracticallybecomeaslave，andwouldbelongasproperty（dominium）toanother，whowouldbenotmerelyhismaster（herus）
buthisowner（dominus）。Suchanownerwouldbeentitledtoexchangeoralienatehimasathing，tousehimatwillexceptforshamefulpurposes，andtodisposeofhispowers，butnotofhislifeandmembers。Noonecanbindhimselftosuchaconditionofdependence，ashewouldtherebyceasetobeaperson，anditisonlyasapersonthathecanmakeacontract。Itmay，however，appearthatonemanmaybindhimselftoanotherbyacontractofhire，todischargeacertainservicethatispermissibleinitskind，butisleftentirelyundeterminedasregardsitsmeasureoramount;andthatasreceivingwagesorboardorprotectioninreturn，hethusbecomesonlyaservantsubjecttothewillofamaster（subditus）andnotaslave（servus）。Butthisisanillusion。Forifmastersareentitledtousethepowersofsuchsubjectsatwill，theymayexhaustthesepowers—ashasbeendoneinthecaseofNegroesintheSugarIsland—
andtheymaythusreducetheirservantstodespairanddeath。Butthiswouldimplythattheyhadactuallygiventhemselvesawaytotheirmastersasproperty;which，inthecaseofpersons，isimpossible。A
personcan，therefore，onlycontracttoperformworkthatisdefinedbothinqualityandquantity，eitherasaday—labourerorasadomiciledsubject。Inthelattercasehemayenterintoacontractofleasefortheuseofthelandofasuperior，givingadefiniterentorannualreturnforitsutilizationbyhimself，orhemaycontractforhisserviceasalabourerupontheland。Buthedoesnottherebymakehimselfaslave，orabondsman，oraserfattachedtothesoil（glebaeadscriptus），ashewouldthusdivesthimselfofhispersonality;hecanonlyenterintoatemporaryoratmostaheritablelease。Andevenifbycommittingacrimehehaspersonallybecomesubjectedtoanother，thissubject—conditiondoesnotbecomehereditary;forhehasonlybroughtituponhimselfbyhisownwrongdoing。Neithercanonewhohasbeenbegottenbyaslavebeclaimedaspropertyonthegroundofthecostofhisrearing，becausesuchrearingisanabsolutedutynaturallyincumbentuponparents;andincasetheparentsbeslaves，itdevolvesupontheirmastersorowners，who，inundertakingthepossessionofsuchsubjects，havealsomadethemselvesresponsiblefortheperformanceoftheirduties。
E。TheRightofPunishingandofPardoning。
I。TheRightofPunishing。
Therightofadministeringpunishmentistherightofthesovereignasthesupremepowertoinflictpainuponasubjectonaccountofacrimecommittedbyhim。Theheadofthestatecannotthereforebepunished;buthissupremacymaybewithdrawnfromhim。
Anytransgressionofthepubliclawwhichmakeshimwhocommitsitincapableofbeingacitizen，constitutesacrime，eithersimplyasaprivatecrime（crimen），oralsoasapubliccrime（crimenpublicum）。
Privatecrimesaredealtwithbyacivilcourt;publiccrimesbyacriminalcourt。Embezzlementorspeculationofmoneyorgoodsentrustedintrade，fraudinpurchaseorsale，ifdonebeforetheeyesofthepartywhosuffers，areprivatecrimes。Ontheotherhand，coiningfalsemoneyorforgingbillsofexchange，theft，robbery，etc。，arepubliccrimes，becausethecommonwealth，andnotmerelysomeparticularindividual，isendangeredthereby。Suchcrimesmaybedividedintothoseofabasecharacter（indolisabjectae）andthoseofaviolentcharacter（indolisviolentiae）。
Judicialorjuridicalpunishment（poenaforensis）istobedistinguishedfromnaturalpunishment（poenanaturalis），inwhichcrimeasvicepunishesitself，anddoesnotassuchcomewithinthecognizanceofthelegislator。juridicalpunishmentcanneverbeadministeredmerelyasameansforpromotinganothergoodeitherwithregardtothecriminalhimselfortocivilsociety，butmustinallcasesbeimposedonlybecausetheindividualonwhomitisinflictedhascommittedacrime。Foronemanoughtnevertobedealtwithmerelyasameanssubservienttothepurposeofanother，norbemixedupwiththesubjectsofrealright。Againstsuchtreatmenthisinbornpersonalityhasarighttoprotecthim，evenalthoughhemaybecondemnedtolosehiscivilpersonality。Hemustfirstbefoundguiltyandpunishable，beforetherecanbeanythoughtofdrawingfromhispunishmentanybenefitforhimselforhisfellow—citizens。Thepenallawisacategoricalimperative;andwoetohimwhocreepsthroughtheserpent—windingsofutilitarianismtodiscoversomeadvantagethatmaydischargehimfromthejusticeofpunishment，orevenfromtheduemeasureofit，accordingtothePharisaicmaxim：\"Itisbetterthatonemanshoulddiethanthatthewholepeopleshouldperish。\"Forifjusticeandrighteousnessperish，humanlifewouldnolongerhaveanyvalueintheworld。What，then，istobesaidofsuchaproposalastokeepacriminalalivewhohasbeencondemnedtodeath，onhisbeinggiventounderstandthat，ifheagreedtocertaindangerousexperimentsbeingperformeduponhim，hewouldbeallowedtosurviveifhecamehappilythroughthem？Itisarguedthatphysiciansmightthusobtainnewinformationthatwouldbeofvaluetothecommonweal。Butacourtofjusticewouldrepudiatewithscornanyproposalofthiskindifmadetoitbythemedicalfaculty;forjusticewouldceasetobejustice，ifitwerebarteredawayforanyconsiderationwhatever。
Butwhatisthemodeandmeasureofpunishmentwhichpublicjusticetakesasitsprincipleandstandard？Itisjusttheprincipleofequality，bywhichthepointerofthescaleofjusticeismadetoinclinenomoretotheonesidethantheother。Itmayberenderedbysayingthattheundeservedevilwhichanyonecommitsonanotheristoberegardedasperpetratedonhimself。Henceitmaybesaid：\"Ifyouslanderanother，youslanderyourself;ifyoustealfromanother，youstealfromyourself;ifyoustrikeanother，youstrikeyourself;ifyoukillanother，youkillyourself。\"Thisistherightofretaliation（justalionis）;and，properlyunderstood，itistheonlyprinciplewhichinregulatingapubliccourt，asdistinguishedfrommereprivatejudgement，candefinitelyassignboththequalityandthequantityofajustpenalty。Allotherstandardsarewaveringanduncertain;andonaccountofotherconsiderationsinvolvedinthem，theycontainnoprincipleconformabletothesentenceofpureandstrictjustice。Itmayappear，however，thatdifferenceofsocialstatuswouldnotadmittheapplicationoftheprincipleofretaliation，whichisthatof\"likewithlike。\"Butalthoughtheapplicationmaynotinallcasesbepossibleaccordingtotheletter，yetasregardstheeffectitmayalwaysbeattainedinpractice，bydueregardbeinggiventothedispositionandsentimentofthepartiesinthehighersocialsphere。Thusapecuniarypenaltyonaccountofaverbalinjurymayhavenodirectproportiontotheinjusticeofslander;foronewhoiswealthymaybeabletoindulgehimselfinthisoffenceforhisowngratification。Yettheattackcommittedonthehonourofthepartyaggrievedmayhaveitsequivalentinthepaininflictedupontheprideoftheaggressor，especiallyifheiscondemnedbythejudgementofthecourt，notonlytoretractandapologize，buttosubmittosomemeanerordeal，askissingthehandoftheinjuredperson。Inlikemanner，ifamanofthehighestrankhasviolentlyassaultedaninnocentcitizenofthelowerorders，hemaybecondemnednotonlytoapologizebuttoundergoasolitaryandpainfulimprisonment，whereby，inadditiontothediscomfortendured，thevanityoftheoffenderwouldbepainfullyaffected，andtheveryshameofhispositionwouldconstituteanadequateretaliationaftertheprincipleof\"likewithlike。\"Buthowthenwouldwerenderthestatement：\"Ifyoustealfromanother，youstealfromyourself？\"Inthisway，thatwhoeverstealsanythingmakesthepropertyofallinsecure;hethereforerobshimselfofallsecurityinproperty，accordingtotherightofretaliation。Suchaonehasnothing，andcanacquirenothing，buthehasthewilltolive;andthisisonlypossiblebyotherssupportinghim。Butasthestateshouldnotdothisgratuitously，hemustforthispurposeyieldhispowerstothestatetobeusedinpenallabour;andthushefallsforatime，oritmaybeforlife，intoaconditionofslavery。Butwhoeverhascommittedmurder，mustdie。Thereis，inthiscase，nojuridicalsubstituteorsurrogate，thatcanbegivenortakenforthesatisfactionofjustice。Thereisnolikenessorproportionbetweenlife，howeverpainful，anddeath;andthereforethereisnoequalitybetweenthecrimeofmurderandtheretaliationofitbutwhatisjudiciallyaccomplishedbytheexecutionofthecriminal。
Hisdeath，however，mustbekeptfreefromallmaltreatmentthatwouldmakethehumanitysufferinginhispersonloathsomeorabominable。
Evenifacivilsocietyresolvedtodissolveitselfwiththeconsentofallitsmembers—asmightbesupposedinthecaseofapeopleinhabitinganislandresolvingtoseparateandscatterthemselvesthroughoutthewholeworld—thelastmurdererlyingintheprisonoughttobeexecutedbeforetheresolutionwascarriedout。Thisoughttobedoneinorderthateveryonemayrealizethedesertofhisdeeds，andthatblood—guiltinessmaynotremainuponthepeople;forotherwisetheymightallberegardedasparticipatorsinthemurderasapublicviolationofjustice。
Theequalizationofpunishmentwithcrimeisthereforeonlypossiblebythecognitionofthejudgeextendingeventothepenaltyofdeath，accordingtotherightofretaliation。Thisismanifestfromthefactthatitisonlythusthatasentencecanbepronouncedoverallcriminalsproportionatetotheirinternalwickedness;asmaybeseenbyconsideringthecasewhenthepunishmentofdeathhastobeinflicted，notonaccountofamurder，butonaccountofapoliticalcrimethatcanonlybepunishedcapitally。Ahypotheticalcase，foundedonhistory，willillustratethis。InthelastScottishrebelliontherewerevariousparticipatorsinit—suchasBalmerinoandothers—whobelievedthatintakingpartintherebelliontheywereonlydischargingtheirdutytothehouseofStuart;buttherewerealsootherswhowereanimatedonlybyprivatemotivesandinterests。Now，supposethatthejudgementofthesupremecourtregardingthemhadbeenthis：thateveryoneshouldhavelibertytochoosebetweenthepunishmentofdeathorpenalservitudeforlife。Inviewofsuchanalternative，Isaythatthemanofhonourwouldchoosedeath，andtheknavewouldchooseservitude。Thiswouldbetheeffectoftheirhumannatureasitis;forthehonourablemanvalueshishonourmorehighlythanevenlifeitself，whereasaknaveregardsalife，althoughcoveredwithshame，asbetterinhiseyesthannottobe。Theformeris，withoutgainsaying，lessguiltythantheother;andtheycanonlybeproportionatelypunishedbydeathbeinginflictedequallyuponthemboth;yettotheoneitisamildpunishmentwhenhisnoblertemperamentistakenintoaccount，whereasitisahardpunishmenttotheotherinviewofhisbasertemperament。But，ontheotherhand，weretheyallequallycondemnedtopenalservitudeforlife，thehonourablemanwouldbetooseverelypunished，whiletheother，onaccountofhisbasenessofnature，wouldbetoomildlypunished。Inthejudgementtobepronouncedoveranumberofcriminalsunitedinsuchaconspiracy，thebestequalizerofpunishmentandcrimeintheformofpublicjusticeisdeath。Andbesidesallthis，ithasneverbeenheardofthatacriminalcondemnedtodeathonaccountofamurderhascomplainedthatthesentenceinflictedonhimmorethanwasrightandjust;andanyonewouldtreathimwithscornifheexpressedhimselftothiseffectagainstit。Otherwiseitwouldbenecessarytoadmitthat，althoughwrongandinjusticearenotdonetothecriminalbythelaw，yetthelegislativepowerisnotentitledtoadministerthismodeofpunishment;andifitdidso，itwouldbeincontradictionwithitself。
Howevermanytheymaybewhohavecommittedamurder，orhaveevencommandedit，oractedasartandpartinit，theyoughtalltosufferdeath;forsojusticewillsit，inaccordancewiththeideaofthejuridicalpower，asfoundedontheuniversallawsofreason。Butthenumberoftheaccomplices（correi）insuchadeedmighthappentobesogreatthatthestate，inresolvingtobewithoutsuchcriminals，wouldbeindangerofsoonalsobeingdeprivedofsubjects。Butitwillnotthusdissolveitself，neithermustitreturntothemuchworseconditionofnature，inwhichtherewouldbenoexternaljustice。Nor，aboveall，shoulditdeadenthesensibilitiesofthepeoplebythespectacleofjusticebeingexhibitedinthemerecarnageofaslaughteringbench。Insuchcircumstancesthesovereignmustalwaysbeallowedtohaveitinhispowertotakethepartofthejudgeuponhimselfasacaseofnecessity—andtodeliverajudgementwhich，insteadofthepenaltyofdeath，shallassignsomeotherpunishmenttothecriminalsandtherebypreserveamultitudeofthepeople。Thepenaltyofdeportationisrelevantinthisconnection。Suchaformofjudgementcannotbecarriedoutaccordingtoapubliclaw，butonlybyanauthoritativeactoftheroyalprerogative，anditmayonlybeappliedasanactofgraceinindividualcases。
Againstthesedoctrines，theMarquisBeccariahasgivenforthadifferentview。Movedbythecompassionatesentimentalityofahumanefeeling，hehasassertedthatallcapitalpunishmentiswronginitselfandunjust。Hehasputforwardthisviewonthegroundthatthepenaltyofdeathcouldnotbecontainedintheoriginalcivilcontract;for，inthatcase，everyoneofthepeoplewouldhavehadtoconsenttolosehislifeifbemurderedanyofhisfellowcitizens。
But，itisargued，suchaconsentisimpossible，becausenoonecanthusdisposeofhisownlife。Allthisismeresophistryandperversionofright。Nooneundergoespunishmentbecausehehaswilledtobepunished，butbecausehehaswilledapunishableaction;foritisinfactnopunishmentwhenanyoneexperienceswhathewills，anditisimpossibleforanyonetowilltobepunished。Tosay，\"I
willtobepunished，ifImurderanyone，\"canmeannothingmorethan，\"Isubmitmyselfalongwithalltheothercitizenstothelaws\";andifthereareanycriminalsamongthepeople，theselawswillincludepenallaws。Theindividualwho，asaco—legislator，enactspenallawcannotpossiblybethesamepersonwho，asasubject，ispunishedaccordingtothelaw;for，quacriminal，hecannotpossiblyberegardedashavingavoiceinthelegislation，thelegislatorbeingrationallyviewedasjustandholy。Ifanyone，then，enactapenallawagainsthimselfasacriminal，itmustbethepurejuridicallylaw—givingreason（homonoumenon），whichsubjectshimasonecapableofcrime，andconsequentlyasanotherperson（homophenomenon），alongwithalltheothersinthecivilunion，tothispenallaw。Inotherwords，itisnotthepeopletakendistributively，butthetribunalofpublicjustice，asdistinctfromthecriminal，thatprescribescapitalpunishment;anditisnottobeviewedasifthesocialcontractcontainedthepromiseofalltheindividualstoallowthemselvestobepunished，thusdisposingofthemselvesandtheirlives。Foriftherighttopunishmustbegroundeduponapromiseofthewrongdoer，wherebyheistoberegardedasbeingwillingtobepunished，itoughtalsotobelefttohimtofindhimselfdeservingofthepunishment;andthecriminalwouldthusbehisownjudge。Thechieferror（protonpseudos）ofthissophistryconsistsinregardingthejudgementofthecriminalhimself，necessarilydeterminedbyhisreason，thatheisunderobligationtoundergothelossofhislife，asajudgementthatmustbegroundedonaresolutionofhiswilltotakeitawayhimself;andthustheexecutionoftherightinquestionisrepresentedasunitedinoneandthesamepersonwiththeadjudicationoftheright。
Thereare，however，twocrimesworthyofdeath，inrespectofwhichitstillremainsdoubtfulwhetherthelegislaturehavetherighttodealwiththemcapitally。Itisthesentimentofhonourthatinducestheirperpetration。Theoneoriginatesinaregardforwomanlyhonour，theotherinaregardformilitaryhonour;andinbothcasesthereisagenuinefeelingofhonourincumbentontheindividualsasaduty。Theformeristhecrimeofmaternalinfanticide（infanticidiummaternale）;thelatteristhecrimeofkillingafellow—soldierinaduel（commilitonicidium）。Nowlegislationcannottakeawaytheshameofanillegitimatebirth，norwipeoffthestainattachingfromasuspicionofcowardice，toanofficerwhodoesnotresistanactthatwouldbringhimintocontempt，byaneffortofhisownthatissuperiortothefearofdeath。Henceitappearsthat，insuchcircumstances，theindividualsconcernedareremittedtothestateofnature;andtheiractsinbothcasesmustbecalledhomicide，andnotmurder，whichinvolvesevilintent（homicidiumdolosum）。Inallinstancestheactsareundoubtedlypunishable;buttheycannotbepunishedbythesupremepowerwithdeath。Anillegitimatechildcomesintotheworldoutsideofthelawwhichproperlyregulatesmarriage，anditisthusbornbeyondthepaleorconstitutionalprotectionofthelaw。Suchachildisintroduced，asitwere，likeprohibitedgoods，intothecommonwealth，andasithasnolegalrighttoexistenceinthisway，itsdestructionmightalsobeignored;
norcantheshameofthemother，whenherunmarriedconfinementisknown，beremovedbyanylegalordinance。Asubordinateofficer，again，onwhomaninsultisinflicted，seeshimselfcompelledbythepublicopinionofhisassociatestoobtainsatisfaction;and，asinthestateofnature，thepunishmentoftheoffendercanonlybeeffectedbyaduel，inwhichhisownlifeisexposedtodanger，andnotbymeansofthelawinacourtofjustice。Theduelisthereforeadoptedasthemeansofdemonstratinghiscourageasthatcharacteristicuponwhichthehonourofhisprofessionessentiallyrests;andthisisdoneevenifitshouldissueinthekillingofhisadversary。Butassucharesulttakesplacepubliclyandundertheconsentofbothparties，althoughitmaybedoneunwillingly，itcannotproperlybecalledmurder（homicidiumdolosum）。Whatthenistherightinbothcasesasrelatingtocriminaljustice？Penaljusticeishereinfactbroughtintogreatstraits，havingapparentlyeithertodeclarethenotionofhonour，whichiscertainlynomerefancyhere，to’benothingintheeyeofthelaw，ortoexemptthecrimefromitsduepunishment;andthusitwouldbecomeeitherremissorcruel。Theknotthustiedistoberesolvedinthefollowingway。
Thecategoricalimperativeofpenaljustice，thatthekillingofanypersoncontrarytothelawmustbepunishedwithdeath，remainsinforce;butthelegislationitselfandthecivilconstitutiongenerally，solongastheyarestillbarbarousandincomplete，areatfault。Andthisisthereasonwhythesubjectivemotive—principlesofhonouramongthepeopledonotcoincidewiththestandardswhichareobjectivelyconformabletoanotherpurpose;sothatthepublicjusticeissuingfromthestatebecomesinjusticerelativelytothatwhichisupheldamongthepeoplethemselves。
II。TheRightofPardoning。
Therightofpardoning（jusaggratiandi），viewedinrelationtothecriminal，istherightofmitigatingorentirelyremittinghispunishment。Onthesideofthesovereignthisisthemostdelicateofallrights，asitmaybeexercisedsoastosetforththesplendourofhisdignity，andyetsoastodoagreatwrongbyit。Itoughtnottobeexercisedinapplicationtothecrimesofthesubjectsagainsteachother;forexemptionfrompunishment（impunitascriminis）
wouldbethegreatestwrongthatcouldbedonetothem。Itisonlyanoccasionofsomeformoftreason（crimenlaesaemajestatis），asalesionagainsthimself，thatthesovereignshouldmakeuseofthisright。Anditshouldnotbeexercisedeveninthisconnection，ifthesafetyofthepeoplewouldbeendangeredbyremittingsuchpunishment。Thisrightistheonlyonewhichproperlydeservesthenameofa\"rightofmajesty。\"
50。JuridicalRelationsoftheCitizentohisCountryandtoOtherCountries。Emigration;Immigration;Banishment;
Exile。
Thelandorterritorywhoseinhabitants—invirtueofitspoliticalconstitutionandwithoutthenecessaryinterventionofaspecialjuridicalact—are，bybirth，fellow—citizensofoneandthesamecommonwealth，iscalledtheircountryorfatherland。Aforeigncountryisoneinwhichtheywouldnotpossessthiscondition，butwouldbelivingabroad。Ifacountryabroadformpartoftheterritoryunderthesamegovernmentasathome，itconstitutesaprovince，accordingtotheRomanusageoftheterm。Itdoesnotconstituteanincorporatedportionoftheempire（imperii）soastobetheabodeofequalfellow—citizens，butisonlyapossessionofthegovernment，likealowerhouse;anditmustthereforehonourthedomainoftherulingstateasthe\"mothercountry\"（regiodomina）。
1。Asubject，evenregardedasacitizen，hastherightofemigration;forthestatecannotretainhimasifhewereitsproperty。Buthemayonlycarryawaywithhimhismoveablesasdistinguishedfromhisfixedpossessions。However，heisentitledtosellhisimmovableproperty，andtakethevalueofitinmoneywithhim。
2。Thesupremepower，asmasterofthecountry，hastherighttofavourimmigrationandthesettlementofstrangersandcolonists。Thiswillholdevenalthoughthenativesofthecountrymaybeunfavourablydisposedtoit，iftheirprivatepropertyinthesoilisnotdiminishedorinterferedwith。
3。Inthecaseofasubjectwhohascommittedacrimethatrendersallsocietyofhisfellow—citizenswithhimprejudicialtothestate，thesupremepowerhasalsotherightofinflictingbanishmenttoacountryabroad。Bysuchdeportation，hedoesnotacquireanyshareintherightsofcitizensoftheterritorytowhichheisbanished。
4。Thesupremepowerhasalsotherightofimposingexilegenerally（jusexilii），bywhichacitizenissentabroadintothewideworldasthe\"out—land。\"Andbecausethesupremeauthoritythuswithdrawsalllegalprotectionfromthecitizen，thisamountstomakinghiman\"outlaw\"withintheterritoryofhisowncountry。
51。TheThreeFormsoftheState：Autocracy;
Aristocracy;Democracy。
Thethreepowersinthestate，involvedintheconceptionofapublicgovernmentgenerally（respublicalatiusdicta），areonlysomanyrelationsoftheunitedwillofthepeoplewhichemanatesfromtheapriorireason;andviewedassuchitistheobjectivepracticalrealizationofthepureideaofasupremeheadofthestate。
Thissupremeheadisthesovereign;butconceivedonlyasarepresentationofthewholepeople，theideastillrequiresphysicalembodimentinaperson，whomayexhibitthesupremepowerofthestateandbringtheideaactivelytobearuponthepopularwill。Therelationofthesupremepowertothepeopleisconceivableinthreedifferentforms：eitheroneinthestaterulesoverall;orsome，unitedinrelationofequalitywitheachother，ruleoveralltheothers;oralltogetherruleovereachandallindividually，includingthemselves。Theformofthestateisthereforeeitherautocratic，oraristocratic，ordemocratic。Theexpressionmonarchicisnotsosuitableasautocraticfortheconceptionhereintended;foramonarchisonewhohasthehighestpower，anautocratisonewhohasallpower，sothatthislatteristhesovereign，whereastheformermerelyrepresentsthesovereignty。
Itisevidentthatanautocracyisthesimplestformofgovernmentinthestate，beingconstitutedbytherelationofone，asking，tothepeople，sothatthereisoneonlywhoisthelawgiver。Anaristocracy，asaformofgovernment，is，however，compoundedoftheunionoftworelations：thatofthenoblesinrelationtooneanotherasthelawgivers，therebyconstitutingthesovereignty，andthatofthissovereignpowertothepeople。Ademocracy，again，isthemostcomplexofalltheformsofthestate，forithastobeginbyunitingthewillofallsoastoformapeople;andthenithastoappointasovereignoverthiscommonunion，whichsovereignisnootherthantheunitedwillitself。Theconsiderationofthewaysinwhichtheseformsareadulteratedbytheintrusionofviolentandillegitimateusurpersofpower，asinoligarchyandochlocracy，aswellasthediscussionofthesocalledmixedconstitutions，maybepassedoverhereasnotessential，andasleadingintotoomuchdetail。
Asregardstheadministrationofrightinthestate，itmaybesaidthatthesimplestmodeisalsothebest;butasregardsitsbearingonrightitself，itisalsothemostdangerousforthepeople，inviewofthedespotismtowhichsimplicityofadministrationsonaturallygivesrise。Itisundoubtedlyarationalmaximtoaimatsimplificationinthemachinerywhichistounitethepeopleundercompulsorylaws，andthiswouldbesecuredwereallthepeopletobepassiveandtoobeyonlyonepersonoverthem;butthemethodwouldnotgivesubjectswhowerealsocitizensofthestate。Itissometimessaidthatthepeopleshouldbesatisfiedwiththereflectionthatmonarchy，regardedasanautocracy，isthebestpoliticalconstitution，ifthemonarchisgood，thatis，ifbehasthejudgementaswellasthewilltodoright。Butthisisamereevasionandbelongstothecommonclassofwisetautologicalphrases。Itonlyamountstosayingthat\"thebestconstitutionisthatbywhichthesupremeadministratorofthestateismadethebestruler\";thatis，thatthebestconstitutionisthebest！
52。HistoricalOriginandChanges。
APureRepublic。RepresentativeGovernment。
Itisvaintoinquireintothehistoricaloriginofthepoliticalmechanism;foritisnolongerpossibletodiscoverhistoricallythepointoftimeatwhichcivilsocietytookitsbeginning。Savagesdonotdrawupadocumentaryrecordoftheirhavingsubmittedthemselvestolaw;anditmaybeinferredfromthenatureofuncivilizedmenthattheymusthavesetoutfromastateofviolence。Toprosecutesuchaninquiryintheintentionoffindingapretextforalteringtheexistingconstitutionbyviolenceisnolessthanpenal。Forsuchamodeofalterationwouldamounttorevolution，thatcouldonlybecarriedoutbyaninsurrectionofthepeople，andnotbyconstitutionalmodesoflegislation。Butinsurrectionagainstanalreadyexistingconstitution，isanoverthrowofallcivilandjuridicalrelations，andofrightgenerally;andhenceitisnotamerealterationofthecivilconstitution，butadissolutionofit。Itwouldthusformamodeoftransitiontoabetterconstitutionbypalingenesisandnotbymeremetamorphosis;anditwouldrequireanewsocialcontract，uponwhichtheformeroriginalcontract，asthenannulled，wouldhavenoinfluence。
Itmust，however，bepossibleforthesovereigntochangetheexistingconstitution，ifitisnotactuallyconsistentwiththeideaoftheoriginalcontract。Indoingsoitisessentialtogiveexistencetothatformofgovernmentwhichwillproperlyconstitutethepeopleintoastate。Suchachangecannotbemadebythestatedeliberatelyalteringitsconstitutionfromoneofthethreeformstooneoftheothertwo。Forexample，politicalchangesshouldnotbecarriedoutbythearistocratscombiningtosubjectthemselvestoanautocracy，orresolvingtofuseallintoademocracy，orconversely;asifitdependedonthearbitrarychoiceandlikingofthesovereignwhatconstitutionhemayimposeonthepeople。For，evenifassovereignheresolvedtoaltertheconstitutionintoademocracy，hemightbedoingwrongtothepeople，becausetheymightholdsuchaconstitutioninabhorrence，andregardeitheroftheothertwoasmoresuitabletotheminthecircumstances。
Theformsofthestateareonlytheletter（littera）oftheoriginalconstitutioninthecivilunion;andtheymaythereforeremainsolongastheyareconsidered，fromancientandlonghabit（andthereforeonlysubjectively），tobenecessarytothemachineryofthepoliticalconstitution。Butthespiritofthatoriginalcontract（animapactioriginarii）containsandimposestheobligationontheconstitutingpowertomakethemodeofthegovernmentconformabletoitsidea;and，ifthiscannotbeeffectedatonce，tochangeitgraduallyandcontinuouslytillitharmonizeinitsworkingwiththeonlyrightfulconstitution，whichisthatofapurerepublic。Thustheoldempiricalandstatutoryforms，whichserveonlytoeffectthepoliticalsubjectionofthepeople，willberesolvedintotheoriginalandrationalformswhichalonetakefreedomastheirprinciple，andevenastheconditionofallcompulsionandconstraint。Compulsionisinfactrequisitefortherealizationofajuridicalconstitution，accordingtotheproperideaofthestate;anditwillleadatlasttotherealizationofthatidea，evenaccordingtotheletter。Thisistheonlyenduringpoliticalconstitution，asinitthelawisitselfsovereign，andisnolongerattachedtoaparticularperson。Thisistheultimateendofallpublicright，andthestateinwhicheverycitizencanhavewhatishisownperemptorilyassignedtohim。Butsolongastheformofthestatehastoberepresented，accordingtotheletter，bymanydifferentmoralpersonsinvestedwiththesupremepower，therecanonlybeaprovisoryinternalright，andnotanabsolutelyjuridicalstateofcivilsociety。
Everytruerepublicisandcanonlybeconstitutedbyarepresentativesystemofthepeople。Sucharepresentativesystemisinstitutedinnameofthepeople，andisconstitutedbyallthecitizensbeingunitedtogether，inorder，bymeansoftheirdeputies，toprotectandsecuretheirrights。Butassoonasasupremeheadofthestateinperson—beitasking，ornobility，orthewholebodyofthepeopleinademocraticunion—becomesalsorepresentative，theunitedpeoplethendoesnotmerelyrepresentthesovereignty;buttheyarethemselvessovereign。Itisinthepeoplethatthesupremepoweroriginallyresides，anditisaccordinglyfromthispowerthatalltherightsofindividualcitizensasmeresubjects，andespeciallyasofficialsofthestate，mustbederived。
Whenthesovereigntyofthepeoplethemselvesisthusrealized，therepublicisestablished;anditisnolongernecessarytogiveupthereinsofgovernmentintothehandsofthosebywhomtheyhavebeenhithertoheld，especiallyastheymightagaindestroyallthenewinstitutionsbytheirarbitraryandabsolutewill。
Itwasthereforeagreaterrorinjudgementonthepartofapowerfulrulerinourtime，whenhetriedtoextricatehimselffromtheembarrassmentarisingfromgreatpublicdebts，bytransferringthisburdentothepeople，andleavingthemtoundertakeanddistributethemamongthemselvesastheymightbestthinkfit。Itthusbecamenaturalthatthelegislativepower，notonlyinrespectofthetaxationofthesubjects，butinrespectofthegovernment，shouldcomeintothehandsofthepeople。Itwasrequisitethattheyshouldbeabletopreventtheincurringofnewdebtsbyextravaganceorwar;andinconsequence，thesupremepowerofthemonarchentirelydisappeared，notbybeingmerelysuspended，butbypassingoverinfacttothepeople，towhoselegislativewillthepropertyofeverysubjectthusbecamesubjected。Norcanitbesaidthatatacitandyetobligatorypromisemustbeassumedashaving，undersuchcircumstances，beengivenbythenationalassembly，nottoconstitutethemselvesintoasovereignty，butonlytoadministertheaffairsofthesovereignforthetime，andafterthiswasdonetodeliverthereinsofthegovernmentagainintothemonarch’shands。
Suchasupposedcontractwouldbenullandvoid。Therightofthesupremelegislationinthecommonwealthisnotanalienableright，butisthemostpersonalofallrights。Whoeverpossessesitcanonlydisposebythecollectivewillofthepeople，inrespectofthepeople;hecannotdisposeinrespectofthecollectivewillitself，whichistheultimatefoundationofallpubliccontracts。A
contract，bywhichthepeoplewouldbeboundtogivebacktheirauthorityagain，wouldnotbeconsistentwiththeirpositionasalegislativepower，andyetitwouldbemadebindinguponthepeople;
which，ontheprinciplethat\"Noonecanservetwomasters，\"isacontradiction。
II。TheRightofNationsandInternationalLaw。
（JusGentium）。
53。NatureandDivisionoftheRightofNations。
Theindividuals，whomakeupapeople，mayberegardedasnativesofthecountrysprungbynaturaldescentfromacommonancestry（congeniti），althoughthismaynotholdentirelytrueindetail。
Again，theymaybeviewedaccordingtotheintellectualandjuridicalrelation，asbornofacommonpoliticalmother，therepublic，sothattheyconstitute，asitwere，apublicfamilyornation（gens，natio）whosemembersareallrelatedtoeachotherascitizensofthestate。Asmembersofastate，theydonotmixwiththosewholivebesidetheminthestateofnature，consideringsuchtobeignoble。Yetthesesavages，onaccountofthelawlessfreedomtheyhavechosen，regardthemselvesassuperiortocivilizedpeoples;andtheyconstitutetribesandevenraces，butnotstates。
Thepublicrightofstates（juspublicumcivitatum），intheirrelationstooneanother，iswhatwehavetoconsiderunderthedesignationofthe\"rightofnations。\"Whereverastate，viewedasamoralperson，actsinrelationtoanotherexistingintheconditionofnaturalfreedom，andconsequentlyinastateofcontinualwar，suchrighttakesitrise。
Therightofnationsinrelationtothestateofwarmaybedividedinto：1。therightofgoingtowar;2。rightduringwar;and3。rightafterwar，theobjectofwhichistoconstrainthenationsmutuallytopassfromthisstateofwarandtofoundacommonconstitutionestablishingperpetualpeace。Thedifferencebetweentherightofindividualmenorfamiliesasrelatedtoeachotherinthestateofnature，andtherightofthenationsamongthemselves，consistsinthis，thatintherightofnationswehavetoconsidernotmerelyarelationofonestatetoanotherasawhole，butalsotherelationoftheindividualpersonsinonestatetotheindividualsofanotherstate，aswellastothatstateasawhole。Thisdifference，however，betweentherightofnationsandtherightofindividualsinthemerestateofnature，requirestobedeterminedbyelementswhichcaneasilybededucedfromtheconceptionofthelatter。
54。ElementsoftheRightofNations。
Theelementsoftherightofnationsareasfollows：
1。States，viewedasnations，intheirexternalrelationstooneanother—likelawlesssavages—arenaturallyinanon—juridicalcondition;
2。Thisnaturalconditionisastateofwarinwhichtherightofthestrongerprevails;andalthoughitmaynotinfactbealwaysfoundasastateofactualwarandincessanthostility，andalthoughnorealwrongisdonetoanyonetherein，yettheconditioniswronginitselfinthehighestdegree，andthenationswhichformstatescontiguoustoeachotherareboundmutuallytopassoutofit;
3。Anallianceofnations，inaccordancewiththeideaofanoriginalsocialcontract，isnecessarytoprotecteachotheragainstexternalaggressionandattack，butnotinvolvinginterferencewiththeirseveralinternaldifficultiesanddisputes;
4。Thismutualconnectionbyalliancemustdispensewithadistinctsovereignpower，suchasissetupinthecivilconstitution;
itcanonlytaketheformofafederation，whichassuchmayberevokedonanyoccasion，andmustconsequentlyberenewedfromtimetotime。
Thisisthereforearightwhichcomesinasanaccessory（insubsidium）ofanotheroriginalright，inordertopreventthenationsfromfallingfromrightandlapsingintothestateofactualwarwitheachother。Itthusissuesintheideaofafoedusamphictyonum。
55。RightofGoingtoWarasrelatedtotheSubjectsoftheState。
Wehavethentoconsider，inthefirstplace，theoriginalrightoffreestatestogotowarwitheachotherasbeingstillinastateofnature，butasexercisingthisrightinordertoestablishsomeconditionofsocietyapproachingthejuridicalAnd，firstofall，thequestionarisesastowhatrightthestatehasinrelationtoitsownsubjects，tousetheminordertomakewaragainstotherstates，toemploytheirpropertyandeventheirlivesforthispurpose，oratleasttoexposethemtohazardanddanger;andallthisinsuchawaythatitdoesnotdependupontheirownpersonaljudgementwhethertheywillmarchintothefieldofwarornot，butthesupremecommandofthesovereignclaimstosettleanddisposeofthemthus。
Thisrightappearscapableofbeingeasilyestablished。Itmaybegroundedupontherightwhicheveryonehastodowithwhatishisownashewill。Whateveronehasmadesubstantiallyforhimself，heholdsashisincontestableproperty。Thefollowing，then，issuchadeductionasamerejuristwouldputforward。
Therearevariousnaturalproductsinacountrywhich，asregardsthenumberandquantityinwhichtheyexist，mustbeconsideredasspeciallyproduced（artefacta）bytheworkofthestate;forthecountrywouldnotyieldthemtosuchextentwereitnotundertheconstitutionofthestateanditsregularadministrativegovernment，oriftheinhabitantswerestilllivinginthestateofnature。Sheep，cattle，domesticfowlthemostusefuloftheirkind—swine，andsuchlike，wouldeitherbeusedupasnecessaryfoodordestroyedbybeastsofpreyinthedistrictinwhichIlive，sothattheywouldentirelydisappear，orbefoundinveryscantsupplies，wereitnotforthegovernmentsecuringtotheinhabitantstheiracquisitionsandproperty。Thisholdslikewiseofthepopulationitself，asweseeinthecaseoftheAmericandeserts;andevenwerethegreatestindustryappliedinthoseregions—whichisnotyetdone—theremightbebutascantypopulation。Theinhabitantsofanycountrywouldbebutsparselysownhereandtherewereitnotfortheprotectionofgovernment;becausewithoutittheycouldnotspreadthemselveswiththeirhouseholdsuponaterritorywhichwasalwaysindangerofbeingdevastatedbyenemiesorbywildbeastsofprey;andfurther，sogreatamultitudeofmenasnowliveinanyonecountrycouldnototherwiseobtainsufficientmeansofsupport。Hence，asitcanbesaidofvegetablegrowths，suchaspotatoes，aswellasofdomesticatedanimals，thatbecausetheabundanceinwhichtheyarefoundisaproductofhumanlabour，theymaybeused，destroyed，andconsumedbyman;soitseemsthatitmaybesaidofthesovereign，asthesupremepowerinthestate，thathehastherighttoleadhissubjects，asbeingforthemostpartproductionsofhisown，towar，asifitweretothechase，andeventomarchthemtothefieldofbattle，asifitwereonapleasureexcursion。
Thisprincipleofrightmaybesupposedtofloatdimlybeforethemindofthemonarch，anditcertainlyholdstrueatleastoftheloweranimalswhichmaybecomethepropertyofman。Butsuchaprinciplewillnotatallapplytomen，especiallywhenviewedascitizenswhomustberegardedasmembersofthestate，withashareinthelegislation，andnotmerelyasmeansforothersbutasendsinthemselves。Assuchtheymustgivetheirfreeconsent，throughtheirrepresentatives，notonlytothecarryingonofwargenerally，buttoeveryseparatedeclarationofwar;anditisonlyunderthislimitingconditionthatthestatehasarighttodemandtheirservicesinundertakingssofullofdanger。
Wewouldthereforededucethisrightratherfromthedutyofthesovereigntothepeoplethanconversely。Underthisrelation，thepeoplemustberegardedashavinggiventheirsanction;and，havingtherightofvoting，theymaybeconsidered，althoughthuspassiveinreferencetothemselvesindividually，tobeactiveinsofarastheyrepresentthesovereigntyitself。
56。RightofGoingtoWarinrelationtoHostileStates。
Viewedasinthestateofnature，therightofnationstogotowarandtocarryonhostilitiesisthelegitimatewaybywhichtheyprosecutetheirrightsbytheirownpowerwhentheyregardthemselvesasinjured;andthisisdonebecauseinthatstatethemethodofajuridicalprocess，althoughtheonlyonepropertosettlesuchdisputes，cannotbeadopted。
Thethreateningofwaristobedistinguishedfromtheactiveinjuryofafirstaggression，whichagainisdistinguishedfromthegeneraloutbreakofhostilities。Athreatormenacemaybegivenbytheactivepreparationofarmaments，uponwhicharightofprevention（juspraeventionis）isfoundedontheotherside，ormerelybytheformidableincreaseofthepowerofanotherstate（potestastremenda）byacquisitionofterritory。Lesionofalesspowerfulcountrymaybeinvolvedmerelyintheconditionofamorepowerfulneighbourpriortoanyactionatall;andinthestateofnatureanattackundersuchcircumstanceswouldbewarrantable。Thisinternationalrelationisthefoundationoftherightofequilibrium，orofthe\"balanceofpower，\"amongallthestatesthatareinactivecontiguitytoeachother。
Therighttogotowarisconstitutedbyanyovertactofinjury。
Thisincludesanyarbitraryretaliationoractofreprisal（retorsio）asasatisfactiontakenbyonepeopleforanoffencecommittedbyanother，withoutanyattemptbeingmadetoobtainreparationinapeacefulway。Suchanactofretaliationwouldbesimilarinkindtoanoutbreakofhostilitieswithoutapreviousdeclarationofwar。Forifthereistobeanyrightatallduringthestateofwar，somethinganalogoustoacontractmustbeassumed，involvingacceptanceonthesideofthedeclarationontheother，andamountingtothefactthattheybothwilltoseektheirrightinthisway。
57。RightduringWar。
Thedeterminationofwhatconstitutesrightinwar，isthemostdifficultproblemoftherightofnationsandinternationallaw。Itisverydifficulteventoformaconceptionofsucharight，ortothinkofanylawinthislawlessstatewithoutfallingintoacontradiction。Interarmasilentleges。*Itmustthenbejusttherighttocarryonwaraccordingtosuchprinciplesasrenderitalwaysstillpossibletopassoutofthatnaturalconditionofthestatesintheirexternalrelationstoeachother，andtoenterintoaconditionofright。
*[\"Inthemidstofarmsthelawsaresilent。\"Cicero。]
Nowarofindependentstatesagainsteachothercanrightlybeawarofpunishment（bellumpunitivum）。Forpunishmentisonlyinplaceundertherelationofasuperior（imperantis）toasubject（subditum）;
andthisisnottherelationofthestatestooneanother。Neithercananinternationalwarbe\"awarofextermination\"（belluminternicinum），noreven\"awarofsubjugation\"（bellumsubjugatorium）;
forthiswouldissueinthemoralextinctionofastatebyitspeoplebeingeitherfusedintoonemasswiththeconqueringstate，orbeingreducedtoslavery。Notthatthisnecessarymeansofattainingtoaconditionofpeaceisitselfcontradictorytotherightofastate;butbecausetheideaoftherightofnationsincludesmerelytheconceptionofanantagonismthatisinaccordancewithprinciplesofexternalfreedom，inorderthatthestatemaymaintainwhatisproperlyitsown，butnotthatitmayacquireaconditionwhich，fromtheaggrandizementofitspower，mightbecomethreateningtootherstates。
Defensivemeasuresandmeansofallkindsareallowabletoastatethatisforcedtowar，exceptsuchasbytheirusewouldmakethesubjectsusingthemunfittobecitizens;forthestatewouldthusmakeitselfunfittoberegardedasapersoncapableofparticipatinginequalrightsintheinternationalrelationsaccordingtotherightofnations。Amongtheseforbiddenmeansaretobereckonedtheappointmentofsubjectstoactasspies，orengagingsubjectsorevenstrangerstoactasassassins，orpoisoners（inwhichclassmightwellbeincludedthesocalledsharpshooterswholurkinambushforindividuals），orevenemployingagentstospreadfalsenews。Inaword，itisforbiddentouseanysuchmalignantandperfidiousmeansaswoulddestroytheconfidencewhichwouldberequisitetoestablishalastingpeacethereafter。
Itispermissibleinwartoimposeexactionsandcontributionsuponaconqueredenemy;butitisnotlegitimatetoplunderthepeopleinthewayofforciblydeprivingindividualsoftheirproperty。Forthiswouldberobbery，seeingitwasnottheconqueredpeoplebutthestateunderwhosegovernmenttheywereplacedthatcarriedonthewarbymeansofthem。Allexactionsshouldberaisedbyregularrequisition，andreceiptsoughttobegivenforthem，inorderthatwhenpeaceisrestoredtheburdenimposedonthecountryortheprovincemaybeproportionatelyborne。
58。RightafterWar。
Therightthatfollowsafterwar，beginsatthemomentofthetreatyofpeaceandreferstotheconsequencesofthewar。Theconquerorlaysdowntheconditionsunderwhichhewillagreewiththeconqueredpowertoformtheconclusionofpeace。Treatiesaredrawnup;notindeedaccordingtoanyrightthatitpertainstohimtoprotect，onaccountofanallegedlesionbyhisopponent，butastakingthisquestionuponhimself，hebasestherighttodecideituponhisownpower。Hencetheconquerormaynotdemandrestitutionofthecostofthewar;becausehewouldthenhavetodeclarethewarofhisopponenttobeunjust。Andevenalthoughheshouldadoptsuchanargument，heisnotentitledtoapplyit;becausehewouldhavetodeclarethewartobepunitive，andhewouldthusinturninflictaninjury。Tothisrightbelongsalsotheexchangeofprisoners，whichistobecarriedoutwithoutransomandwithoutregardtoequalityofnumbers。
Neithertheconqueredstatenoritssubjectslosetheirpoliticallibertybyconquestofthecountry，soasthattheformershouldbedegradedtoacolony，orthelattertoslaves;forotherwiseitwouldhavebeenapenalwar，whichiscontradictoryinitself。A
colonyoraprovinceisconstitutedbyapeoplewhichhasitsownconstitution，legislation，andterritory，wherepersonsbelongingtoanotherstatearemerelystrangers，butwhichisneverthelesssubjecttothesupremeexecutivepowerofanotherstate。Thisotherstateiscalledthemother—country。Itisruledasadaughter，buthasatthesametimeitsownformofgovernment，asinaseparateparliamentunderthepresidencyofaviceroy（civitashybrida）。SuchwasAthensinrelationtodifferentislands;andsuchisatpresent（1796）therelationofGreatBritaintoIreland。
Stilllesscanslaverybededucedasarightfulinstitution，fromtheconquestofapeopleinwar;forthiswouldassumethatthewarwasofapunitivenature。Andleastofallcanabasisbefoundinwarforahereditaryslavery，whichisabsurdinitself，sinceguiltcannotbeinheritedfromthecriminalityofanother。
Further，thatanamnestyisinvolvedintheconclusionofatreatyofpeaceisalreadyimpliedintheveryideaofapeace。
59。TheRightsofPeace。
Therightsofpeaceare：
1。Therighttobeinpeacewhenwarisintheneighbourhood，ortherightofneutrality。
2。Therighttohavepeacesecuredsothatitmaycontinuewhenithasbeenconcluded，thatis，therightofguarantee。
3。Therightoftheseveralstatestoenterintoamutualalliance，soastodefendthemselvesincommonagainstallexternaloreveninternalattacks。Thisrightoffederation，however，doesnotextendtotheformationofanyleagueforexternalaggressionorinternalaggrandizement。
60。RightasagainstanUnjustEnemy。
Therightofastateagainstanunjustenemyhasnolimits，atleastinrespectofqualityasdistinguishedfromquantityordegree。Inotherwords，theinjuredstatemayuse—not，indeedanymeans，butyet—allthosemeansthatarepermissibleandinreasonablemeasureinsofarastheyareinitspower，inordertoassertitsrighttowhatisitsown。Butwhatthenisanunjustenemyaccordingtotheconceptionsoftherightofnations，when，asholdsgenerallyofthestateofnature，everystateisjudgeinitsowncause？Itisonewhosepubliclyexpressedwill，whetherinwordordeed，betraysamaximwhich，ifitweretakenasauniversalrule，wouldmakeastateofpeaceamongthenationsimpossible，andwouldnecessarilyperpetuatethestateofnature。Suchistheviolationofpublictreaties，withregardtowhichitmaybeassumedthatanysuchviolationconcernsallnationsbythreateningtheirfreedom，andthattheyarethussummonedtouniteagainstsuchawrongandtotakeawaythepowerofcommittingit。Butthisdoesnotincludetherighttopartitionandappropriatethecountry，soastomakeastateasitweredisappearfromtheearth;forthiswouldbeaninjusticetothepeopleofthatstate，whocannotlosetheiroriginalrighttouniteintoacommonwealth，andtoadoptsuchanewconstitutionasbyitsnaturewouldbeunfavourabletotheinclinationforwar。
Further，itmaybesaidthattheexpression\"anunjustenemyinthestateofnature\"ispleonastic;forthestateofnatureisitselfastateofinjustice。AjustenemywouldbeonetowhomIwoulddowronginofferingresistance;butsuchaonewouldreallynotbemyenemy。
61。PerpetualPeaceandaPermanentCongressofNations。
Thenaturalstateofnationsaswellasofindividualmenisastatewhichitisadutytopassoutof，inordertoenterintoalegalstate。Hence，beforethistransitionoccurs，alltherightofnationsandalltheexternalpropertyofstatesacquirableormaintainablebywararemerelyprovisory;andtheycanonlybecomeperemptoryinauniversalunionofstatesanalogoustothatbywhichanationbecomesastate。Itisthusonlythatarealstateofpeacecouldbeestablished。Butwiththetoogreatextensionofsuchaunionofstatesovervastregions，anygovernmentofit，andconsequentlytheprotectionofitsindividualmembers，mustatlastbecomeimpossible;andthusamultitudeofsuchcorporationswouldagainbringroundastateofwar。Hencetheperpetualpeace，whichistheultimateendofalltherightofnations，becomesinfactanimpracticableidea。Thepoliticalprinciples，however，whichaimatsuchanend，andwhichenjointheformationofsuchunionsamongthestatesasmaypromoteacontinuousapproximationtoaperpetualpeace，arenotimpracticable;theyareaspracticableasthisapproximationitself，whichisapracticalprobleminvolvingaduty，andfoundedupontherightofindividualmenandstates。
Suchaunionofstates，inordertomaintainpeace，maybecalledapermanentcongressofnations;anditisfreetoeveryneighbouringstatetojoininit。Aunionofthiskind，sofaratleastasregardstheformalitiesoftherightofnationsinrespectofthepreservationofpeace，waspresentedinthefirsthalfofthiscentury，intheAssemblyoftheStates—GeneralattheHague。InthisAssemblymostoftheEuropeancourts，andeventhesmallestrepublics，broughtforwardtheircomplaintsaboutthehostilitieswhichwerecarriedonbytheoneagainsttheother。ThusthewholeofEuropeappearedlikeasinglefederatedstate，acceptedasumpirebytheseveralnationsintheirpublicdifferences。Butinplaceofthisagreement，therightofnationsafterwardssurvivedonlyinbooks;
itdisappearedfromthecabinets，or，afterforcehadbeenalreadyused，itwasrelegatedintheformoftheoreticaldeductionstotheobscurityofarchives。
Bysuchacongressisheremeantonlyavoluntarycombinationofdifferentstatesthatwouldbedissolubleatanytime，andnotsuchaunionasisembodiedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica，foundeduponapoliticalconstitution，andthereforeindissoluble。Itisonlybyacongressofthiskindthattheideaofapublicrightofnationscanbeestablished，andthatthesettlementoftheirdifferencesbythemodeofacivilprocess，andnotbythebarbarousmeansofwar，canberealized。
III。TheUniversalRightofMankind。
（JusCosmopoliticum）
62。NatureandConditionsofCosmopoliticalRight。
Therationalideaofauniversal，peaceful，ifnotyetfriendly，unionofallthenationsupontheearththatmaycomeintoactiverelationswitheachother，isajuridicalprinciple，asdistinguishedfromphilanthropicorethicalprinciples。Naturehasenclosedthemaltogetherwithindefiniteboundaries，invirtueofthesphericalformoftheirabodeasaglobusterraqueus;andthepossessionofthesoiluponwhichaninhabitantoftheearthmaylivecanonlyberegardedaspossessionofapartofalimitedwholeand，consequently，asaparttowhicheveryonehasoriginallyaright。Henceallnationsoriginallyholdacommunityofthesoil，butnotajuridicalcommunityofpossession（communio），norconsequentlyoftheuseorproprietorshipofthesoil，butonlyofapossiblephysicalintercourse（commercium）bymeansofit。Inotherwords，theyareplacedinsuchthoroughgoingrelationsofeachtoalltherestthattheymayclaimtoenterintointercoursewithoneanother，andtheyhavearighttomakeanattemptinthisdirection，whileaforeignnationwouldnotbeentitledtotreatthemonthisaccountasenemies。Thisright，insofarasitrelatestoapossibleunionofallnations，inrespectofcertainlawsuniversallyregulatingtheirintercoursewitheachother，maybecalled\"cosmopoliticalright\"（juscosmopoliticum）。
Itmayappearthatseasputnationsoutofallcommunionwitheachother。Butthisisnotso;forbymeansofcommerce，seasformthehappiestnaturalprovisionfortheirintercourse。Andthemorethereareofneighbouringcoastlands，asinthecaseoftheMediterraneanSea，thisintercoursebecomesthemoreanimated。Andhencecommunicationswithsuchlands，especiallywheretherearesettlementsuponthemconnectedwiththemothercountriesgivingoccasionforsuchcommunications，bringitaboutthatevilandviolencecommittedinoneplaceofourglobearefeltinall。Suchpossibleabusecannot，however，annultherightofmanasacitizenoftheworldtoattempttoenterintocommunionwithallothers，andforthispurposetovisitalltheregionsoftheearth，althoughthisdoesnotconstitutearightofsettlementupontheterritoryofanotherpeople（jusincolatus），forwhichaspecialcontractisrequired。
Butthequestionisraisedastowhether，inthecaseofnewlydiscoveredcountries，apeoplemayclaimtherighttosettle（accolatus），andtooccupypossessionsintheneighbourhoodofanotherpeoplethathasalreadysettledinthatregion;andtodothiswithouttheirconsent。
Sucharightisindubitable，ifthenewsettlementtakesplaceatsuchadistancefromtheseatoftheformerthatneitherwouldrestrictorinjuretheotherintheuseoftheirterritory。Butinthecaseofnomadicpeoples，ortribesofshepherdsandhunters（suchastheHottentots，theTungusi，andmostoftheAmericanIndians），whosesupportisderivedfromwidedeserttracts，suchoccupationshouldnevertakeplacebyforce，butonlybycontract;andanysuchcontractoughtnevertotakeadvantageoftheignoranceoftheoriginaldwellersinregardtothecessionoftheirlands。Yetitiscommonlyallegedthatsuchactsofviolentappropriationmaybejustifiedassubservingthegeneralgoodoftheworld。Itappearsasifsufficientlyjustifyinggroundswerefurnishedforthem，partlybyreferencetothecivilizationofbarbarouspeoples（asbyapretextofthiskindevenBuschingtriestoexcusethebloodyintroductionoftheChristianreligionintoGermany），andpartlybyfoundinguponthenecessityofpurgingone’sowncountryfromdepravedcriminals，andthehopeoftheirimprovementorthatoftheirposterity，inanothercontinentlikeNewHolland。Butalltheseallegedgoodpurposescannotwashoutthestainofinjusticeinthemeansemployedtoattainthem。Itmaybeobjectedthat，hadsuchscrupulousnessaboutmakingabeginninginfoundingalegalstatewithforcebeenalwaysmaintained，thewholeearthwouldstillhavebeeninastateoflawlessness。Butsuchanobjectionwouldaslittleannultheconditionsofrightinquestionasthepretextofthepoliticalrevolutionariesthat，whenaconstitutionhasbecomedegenerate，itbelongstothepeopletotransformitbyforce。Thiswouldamountgenerallytobeingunjustonceandforall，inorderthereaftertofoundjusticethemoresurely，andtomakeitflourish。
CONCLUSION
Conclusion。
Ifonecannotprovethatathingis，hemaytrytoprovethatitisnot。Andifhesucceedsindoingneither（asoftenoccurs），hemaystillaskwhetheritisinhisinteresttoacceptoneorotherofthealternativeshypothetically，fromthetheoreticalorthepracticalpointofview。Inotherwords，ahypothesismaybeacceptedeitherinordertoexplainacertainphenomenon（asinastronomytoaccountfortheretrogressionandstationarinessoftheplanets），orinordertoattainacertainend，whichagainmaybeeitherpragmatic，asbelongingmerelytothesphereofart，ormoral，asinvolvingapurposewhichitisadutytoadoptasamaximofaction。Nowitisevidentthattheassumption（suppositio）ofthepracticabilityofsuchanend，thoughpresentedmerelyasatheoreticalandproblematicaljudgement，mayberegardedasconstitutingaduty;andhenceitissoregardedinthiscase。Foralthoughtheremaybenopositiveobligationtobelieveinsuchanend，yeteveniftherewerenottheleasttheoreticalprobabilityofactionbeingcarriedoutinaccordancewithit，solongasitsimpossibilitycannotbedemonstrated，therestillremainsadutyincumbentuponuswithregardtoit。
Now，asamatteroffact，themorallypracticalreasonutterswithinusitsirrevocableveto：Thereshallbenowar。Sothereoughttobenowar，neitherbetweenmeandyouintheconditionofnature，norbetweenusasmembersofstateswhich，althoughinternallyinaconditionoflaw，arestillexternallyintheirrelationtoeachotherinaconditionoflawlessness;forthisisnotthewaybywhichanyoneshouldprosecutehisright。Hencethequestionnolongerisastowhetherperpetualpeaceisarealthingornotarealthing，orastowhetherwemaynotbedeceivingourselveswhenweadopttheformeralternative，butwemustactonthesuppositionofitsbeingreal。Wemustworkforwhatmayperhapsnotberealized，andestablishthatconstitutionwhichyetseemsbestadaptedtobringitabout（mayhaprepublicanisminallstates，togetherandseparately）。Andthuswemayputanendtotheevilofwars，whichhavebeenthechiefinterestoftheinternalarrangementsofallthestateswithoutexception。Andalthoughtherealizationofthispurposemayalwaysremainbutapiouswish，yetwedocertainlynotdeceiveourselvesinadoptingthemaximofactionthatwillguideusinworkingincessantlyforit;foritisadutytodothis。Tosupposethatthemorallawwithinusisitselfdeceptive，wouldbesufficienttoexcitethehorriblewishrathertobedeprivedofallreasonthantoliveundersuchdeception，andeventoseeoneself，accordingtosuchprinciples，degradedliketheloweranimalstothelevelofthemechanicalplayofnature。
Itmaybesaidthattheuniversalandlastingestablishmentofpeaceconstitutesnotmerelyapart，butthewholefinalpurposeandendofthescienceofrightasviewedwithinthelimitsofreason。Thestateofpeaceistheonlyconditionofthemineandthinethatissecuredandguaranteedbylawsintherelationshipofmenlivinginnumberscontiguoustoeachother，andwhoarethuscombinedinaconstitutionwhoseruleisderivednotfromthemereexperienceofthosewhohavefounditthebestasanormalguideforothers，butwhichmustbetakenbythereasonapriorifromtheidealofajuridicalunionofmenunderpubliclawsgenerally。Forallparticularexamplesorinstances，beingableonlytofurnishillustrationbutnotproof，aredeceptive，andatalleventsrequireametaphysictoestablishthembyitsnecessaryprinciples。Andthisisconcededindirectlyevenbythosewhoturnmetaphysicsintoridicule，whentheysay，astheyoftendo：\"Thebestconstitutionisthatinwhichnotmenbutlawsexercisethepower。\"Forwhatcanbemoremetaphysicallysublimeinitsownwaythanthisveryideaoftheirs，whichaccordingtotheirownassertionhas，notwithstanding，themostobjectivereality？Thismaybeeasilyshownbyreferencetoactualinstances。Anditisthisveryidea，whichalonecanbecarriedoutpractically，ifitisnotforcedoninarevolutionaryandsuddenwaybyviolentoverthrowoftheexistingdefectiveconstitution;forthiswouldproduceforthetimethemomentaryannihilationofthewholejuridicalstateofsociety。Butiftheideaiscarriedforwardbygradualreformandinaccordancewithfixedprinciples，itmayleadbyacontinuousapproximationtothehighestpoliticalgood，andtoperpetualpeace。