Government and Rebellion - E. E. Adams
GOVERNMENT AND REBELLION
A sermon delivered in the North Broad Street Presbyterian Church,
Sunday Morning, April 28 1861,
By
Rev. E. E. Adams.
Published by Request.
1861.
Government and Rebellion.
An evil man seeketh only rebellion; therefore a cruel messenger shall be
sent against him.--Prov. xvii. 11.
We have in these words this plain announcement--that Rebellion is a crime,
and shall be visited with terrible judgment. Solomon here speaks his own
convictions; God declares his thought, and utters his sanction of law.
This is also the expression of natural conscience,--vindicating in our
breast the Divine procedure, when the majesty of insulted government is
asserted, and penalty applied.
God never overlooks rebellion against his throne--never pardons the rebel
until he repent and submit. God does not command us to forgive our
offending fellow-men, unless they repent. "If thy brother trespass against
thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn to thee, saying,
I repent, thou shalt forgive him." God is in a forgiving attitude; so
ought we to be. But he does not _express_ forgiveness until the rebel
expresses penitence; neither are we under obligation to _pronounce_ an
enemy forgiven until he signify his compunction and sorrow, and desist
from his injurious conduct. If my child rebel against my law and my
rightful discipline, I am not allowed by the spirit of love to pursue him
with vengeance; neither am I bound by the law of God to release him from
the penalty of his sin, until he shall have exhibited signs of submission,
of sorrow, and of obedience. I may pity him, and cherish toward him the
_spirit_ of forgiveness; but for his own sake, for the order of the
household, and on account of my innate sense of justice, I must not
pronounce his acquittal, nor declare the controversy ended, until he shall
have satisfied my governmental authority, and the sentiment of justice
which both his own conscience and mine, constitutionally, and therefore by
necessity, cherish. And I do not see that Government can safely pardon a
rebel against its statutes, its honor and its common brotherhood, until
his rebellion cease; until he bow to law, confess his crime, and signify
his sorrow. I speak not of oppressive government, of iniquitous law; but
of _good_ government, of statutes healthful, humane, equal. Although in
the former case rebellion cannot be justified until every constitutional
measure has been resorted to for redress,--then, if redress be not given,
the voice of the people in all representative governments may legally
change oppressive for just laws, and oppressors for rulers who shall
regard the popular will. And in despotisms, when the people have the
_power_ to redress their wrongs, and to enter on a career of development
in mind and morals, in the arts of civilization,--when every other course
fails--"resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!" Man was not _made_ for
tyranny. He was not made for any form of government that crushes out his
intellect and his religious capabilities. He was made to be governed
morally; to be under righteous law; law which, while it restrains passion,
selfishness and crime, gives a man all the freedom that he is able and
willing to _use_ safely for himself, and for the commonwealth; all that is
consistent with individual development and the national good.
I am not one of those who believe that the voice of the people is, without
exception, the voice of God. It was not so at the Deluge, but quite the
reverse. It was not so when Israel clamored for a king--not in mercy but
in anger, God gave them their request. It was not so when Absalom stole
the hearts of the people, and stirred up rebellion against his father. And
yet, when a nation, independent of party, free from the excitements of
momentary interest, without the influence of ambitious leaders, under the
calm guidance of reason, history, and the spirit of the age,--rises
spontaneously against oppression, against iniquity, and _demands_ just
laws; rights for all; free thought, free speech, free labor, free worship;
when compacts are not violated; when moderation is maintained; when the
spirit of humanity is preserved,--_then_, I believe, "the voice of the
people _is_ the voice of God." I have no question that, in the great
principle, Cromwell and his puritan hosts were right in their
revolutionary action. I could never doubt that our fathers did a noble,
glorious, and Christian deed in throwing off the yoke of Britain, and
proclaiming a new government for themselves and their posterity. It was
right to contend and bleed for equal representation, for freedom of
conscience, and for an independent nationality in which these high ends
could be secured.
The first government of which we have account was a Theocracy--that is,
"the government of God." _He_ was the only King. He revealed the law,
appointed leaders, gave rules for worship, instruction and warfare. Thus
in the outset did he set up his claims among men. He established the great
precedent, which men ought to have followed, which the world has ignored;
but to which the thoughts and the will of the race shall ultimately
return. It is true _now_ that government, as such, is ordained of God. All
government, in its elemental authority, is a theocracy. All power is of
God; he ordains law. He originates the idea of civil compact. While,
therefore, the principles of governments among men may be defective, and
the administration wrong and hurtful, the great _fact_ of government is a
_Divine fact. Good_ government is _emphatically God's_ government--intended
to suppress evil, to promote holiness and happiness. "The powers that be
are ordained of God." "Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth
the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves
damnation." Despisers of government are enumerated by the Apostle as among
the most flagitious of men. There are _statutes_ in almost every government
which may not be absolutely right; some which may be oppressive. These are
to be distinguished from the principles, from the general bearing of a
government, and endured for the good therein, or be rid of by
constitutional and safe methods. It is a duty of each subject and citizen
to surrender some of his desires and preferences--some of his convictions
possibly--for the _general_ sentiment--the comprehensive good; while he has
the privilege of convincing by fair argument all others, and winning them
to his views and measures if possible, without violence, without
infringement of law. It is not to be expected that every man should be
absolutely satisfied with any government. If he is called to yield only
his share of personal interest and preference, for the sake of all the
protection and blessing in which he participates in common with the state,
his reason, his conscience, his patriotism will joyfully acquiesce; he will
freely make so much sacrifice for the interests of the whole, knowing very
well that every other citizen is likely to be under an equal sacrifice.
Natural, individual liberty, without law, is only barbarism. Where every
man is free to do whatever his worst passions prompt, there is in fact no
freedom; there is tyranny; for the strong will subdue the weak, bone and
muscle will govern mind and conscience. In laws and governments men have
their best thoughts; human _law_ is likely to be better than human
nature. Men feel the need of restraint--are convinced of the necessity of
law. They therefore make laws in self-defence; if thereby they would _not_
restrain their own selfishness, they _would_ restrain the selfishness
of others; but that which is made a barrier to _one_ bad subject is
also a defence against all;--thus men do restrain themselves by their
defences against others. Thus it is that, with healthful convictions, men
may control diseased passion; with a right _ideal_ is intimately
joined a safe actuality; with good law, a comparatively good condition.
Even in the worst administration, and when the public mind is most
demoralized, there may remain the purity of law; the sublime thought.
If the mind finds itself sinking into lawlessness and disorganism, and
borne away by the pressure of evil, it can look upward, and, catching new
energy from the unquenched light--
"Spring into the realm of the ideal."
Our destiny is ideal. We are on our way to the Unseen. The ideal draws us
upward,--_real_ now, to the spirits of just men made perfect--to be real
to us when we are perfect--_once_ ideal to them, as now to us. We must
keep above us the model of life and of law which we have not yet attained.
Let it never be dim. It is a star shining through time's night! A banner
waving from the throne of God. It tells us of the goal. It points out our
futurity--the altitude of our virtue, our exaltation, our bliss.
Our subject is GOVERNMENT AND MAN. We proceed to consider it in a
three-fold aspect, inquiring
I. _What is good government?_
II. _What constitutes rebellion against such government?_
III. _What is the duty of each citizen when rebellion exists?_
I. _What is a good government_?
No citizen looks for an absolutely perfect form of nationality--of law.
But we have a right to ask for good government. We have been accustomed to
think that it depends more on administration than on principle; and the
line of the poet, "That which is best administered, is best," is a
proverb, to the sentiment of which we too freely yield. No doubt a
government with bad statutes and wrong laws, may be so administered as to
produce a tolerable degree of national comfort and development for a
season; while a Constitution perfect in its theories and principles, may
be so maladministered as to corrupt and distract, impoverish and
demoralize, a people. And yet, I agree with an old patriot of the past
century who said, "There is no foundation to imagine that the goodness or
badness of any government depends solely upon its administration. It must
be allowed that the ultimate design of government is to restrain the
corruptions of human nature; and, since human nature is the same at all
times and in all places, the same form of government which is best for one
nation is best for all nations, if they would _only agree to adopt_ it."
There is a deep thought in this remark. We often say, for example, "France
is not fit for a republican form of government," and it is true; but that
is _not_ to say, "A republican form of government is not fit for France,"
if the population would agree to adopt and preserve it. Man, in his
fallen state, is not fit for the holy government of God; but that holy
government is, nevertheless, the _only_ one that is fit for man as a moral
being; and it is man's ignorance and folly, his guilt and ruin, that he
does not adopt it. It is owing to the ignorance and wickedness of the
world that it is not fit for a representative government; and that all do
not choose Christ to be their King.
Were a score of the professional politicians of our land to frame a
Constitution for us in full accordance with their own schemes and choice,
we would soon find ourselves under an oligarchy of schemers, who cared for
the Republic only so far as to secure from it their own fame and
emolument. Were as many brokers or merchants to make and administer our
laws, without regard to other industrial interests, we should have an
oligarchy of trade. Were as many husbandmen, or mechanics, or lawyers, to
have full control of our legislation and government, we would have one
interest towering above all others, and true equalization, true
brotherhood, just representation, healthful nationality would be
impossible. Or, were we dependent on officers in the army or navy for our
government, legislative and administrative, we would be likely to have
many of our rights circumscribed. Were as many clergymen to frame a
Constitution, and administer laws, we might be under a crushing
priesthood. A government of mere scholars, poets or orators, would be only
a sublime dream. A Constitution of philosophies alone, would glitter with
abstractions beautiful, cold, grand as the snow-capt Alps, and as distant,
too, from the actualities of men! A government of mere gentlemen who have
nothing to do but think for slaves, to enjoy the chase and the
race-ground, to extol their pedigree, and traduce labor, and lead
retainers to war--would be a government for the few over the many, an
aristocracy of blood and privilege, of curled moustache and taper fingers;
but not a republic of patriots, of self-made men, of equal privilege and
just laws. It would be a return to semi-barbarism, to the age of Louis
XIV., or even of Charles I.
This is now the strong tendency in the Rebel States: even along our free
border, but below it, such is the system of representation, that a county
containing only about 3,000 inhabitants, sends as many representatives to
the legislature as another county of 30,000, and a single proprietor casts
as many votes as a whole commune. So much liberty of citizens is already
sacrificed to the chevalier, to the system of forced service.
But were a select number of experienced men, of true statesmen, embracing
different pursuits and professions, educated in different parts of the
world, and drawn together by grand national events,--statesmen born in the
age when liberty had its first grand revival, and was guarded by soberness
of thought, and tried by every variety and extent of sacrifice--by men who
had no professional, exclusive interest to provide for, but who expected
to fight and die for their convictions, who sought only to lay the
foundation of a nationality for future generations, and for the world; who
aimed at a healthful union of all popular interests, both among poor and
rich, among masters and dependents; who provided for freedom of action
under law; of worship and education, of commerce, agriculture, and the
arts; for the easy and equitable support of government,--for its
perpetuity indeed, infusing into it elements that appeal powerfully, both
to the self-interest and the patriotism of the citizens,--I say, were such
men, with such ends in view, by such sacrifice, to frame such a
government, containing the most delicate balance of interests, with strong
checks against the encroachment of any branch, either the legislative,
executive or judicial, giving all trades and professions, and all men, an
equal chance for excellence, influence, and honor; you would not hesitate
to pronounce that a good government, even though you might find slight
exception to some of its terms, though you might not interpret as others
do, all its constitutional phrases.
In view of the protection which such a constitution affords, especially if
it had been tested, for a period of eighty years, by all the inward strain
of domestic evils, and all the outward pressure of invasion; by the
influence of foreign envy, of intrigue, of hostility; by the debasing
power of disloyalty, the incompetency of rulers, and the general
degeneracy of human nature; I say, in view of all these untoward
influences, the government which could still retain its majesty and power,
still stretch its Aegis over every national and individual right--you
would pronounce the best, both for ruler and people, that ever blessed a
nation. And you would not hesitate to declare _that_ man a _traitor_, who
should attempt _to weaken_ and destroy it!
Now we pretend to say that _our_ government was thus formed by the
choicest wisdom and patriotism of the world, with the largest liberty in
view, under the restraint of law, giving equitable privilege to all its
citizens, and so balancing its different departments that they are
mutually a defence. We pretend to claim for our government the loftiest
purpose, the most comprehensive views, and the best practical results. We
claim for it justice, equality, and power. It does not stand out--a thing
distinct from the people and the states. It is not an objective power
only, but subjective; it is in every State and in every freeman. It is not
in machinery, which can be set in motion and work out certain results, as
if every part of it were iron or steel, and put into action by applied
heat; but in _men_, in minds, in hearts, in the family circle, in the
church, in every throb of patriotism, in every fibre of the husbandman and
the artizan, in the pastor's prayers, and the student's living thoughts.
It is in the _nation_ like latent fire, like a hidden life--evoked in time
of peril, and flashing along the telegraph, breathed in song, uttered in
oratory, thundered from the cannon's mouth, hung out in streaming banners
whose "every hue was born in heaven," felt in firm resolve, illustrated in
response to the call of country and of law. Where is our government? Not
at Washington alone. That is but its symbol. It is throughout all our
Loyal States. It is enthroned on the granite hills of New Hampshire, sends
its voice along the Alleghanies, and on the swelling floods of the
Mississippi, and spreads its wing over the children of the West, even to
the shores of Oregon. It lives in every cottage, and every mansion, and
has a throne in every true, free, noble, Christian heart.
That it is a _good_ government, you have only in imagination to blot from
the face of the earth whatever has grown up under its protection and
encouragement, by the will and the blessing of the Almighty, during the
fourscore years of its existence; level all the cities, sink the commerce,
prostrate the schools and churches, obliterate all the science, history
and thought it has fostered, quench the light of oratory, turn back the
wheel of improvement, and leave us at the opening of 1776; estimate all
the freedom of act, of utterance, of industry; reckon the sum of human
comforts, even of luxuries, it has brought to our hand. Look at all our
ships, our mechanism, our homes, our sanctuaries, our institutions of
morality, of mercy and of religion; our wealth, intelligence, order,
power; consider the elevation given to millions in the worst form of
civilization in the land, showing that such is the vitalizing force of our
national life, that even slavery here, bad as it is--and we know of
nothing worse as a system--lifts men above the natural license of savage
existence. Consider all this, and much more, that I may not stop to utter,
and you cannot--you _do_ not--no sane mind _can_ question the supreme
excellence--I had almost said the _divine_ excellence--of our
government. And if there were need of other proof, we have only to remind
you with what promptness the call of our noble Chief Magistrate was
answered from every free State--from the city and the hamlet; from the
bank, the bar, the press and the pulpit; from the workshop and the soil;
from the calm and comfort of home and ease and affluence, and from the
cottage of the poor, as if the pulse of the government were beating in
every vein, and the will of the Cabinet had its home in every bosom!
Strong men, young men, aged men, men of leisure, Christian men--all ready
to march under the stars and stripes, or to pour out their treasure for
others. Mothers and wives and sisters, with breaking hearts and tremulous
benedictions, bidding the heroes go--offering them on their country's
altar. Oh, it would not be thus but for the true manhood which our
government infuses into loyal citizens. It would not be so, but for the
Christianity it protects without dictation, and acknowledges without
ostentation.
II. We come now to the question, _What constitutes rebellion against good
government_?
There may be criminal rebellion even against a wicked and oppressive
government. The people may take the law into their own hands, and put to
death, or imprison their rulers, without _first_ having tried
constitutional methods of redress. But I speak of rebellion against _good_
government--such as we have already had in review. There is a difference
between insurrection and rebellion. The former is an act of a people or
population against a single statute, or against a portion of the
legislative enactments, without necessarily growing into warfare, or
revolt against the whole constitution and the laws. This may become
rebellion. There is also a difference between rebellion and revolution.
The latter, in a political sense, is a change, either wholly or in part,
of the constitution. This may be effected by argument and a peaceful
vote--by abdication, by a change of national policy in view of some new
relation, and by general consent, or by warfare. "The revolution in
England in 1688, was occasioned by the abdication of James II., the
establishment of the House of Orange on the throne, and the restoring of
the constitution to its primitive state."
Our revolution of '76, and onward, was not a rebellion; it was resistance
of oppression, of burdensome taxation without equal representation, and it
resulted in our distinct nationality.
The revolutions of France have been of a similar character; they have
sprung from oppression of the most severe and unnatural kind. This was the
fact, at least, in 1797 and in 1830. In 1848, when it was my lot to be in
the midst of it, the revolution arose from the selfish conduct of Louis
Philippe, who enriched himself and his family out of the national
treasury, and encouraged his sons in a course which was at war with
national precedent, with the commercial interests and democratic
individualism of the French; for with their imperial prestiges and tastes
they are extreme in their personal democracy.
But all these revolutions resulted in good to the people. Education,
public spirit, enterprise, labor, all the arts of civilization, and even
evangelical Christianity received a new impulse. Mind was opened and
enlarged; the people thought for themselves, and sighed for knowledge and
a better faith.
Revolution is going on silently, from year to year, in England. The
nobility yield by slow, almost imperceptible degrees, to the demands of
the people. It is by this process that the Government avoids the shocks
which startle Austria, France and Italy.
Such is the variety of honest opinion among men on all subjects; so
different are the degrees of information, and the opportunities of judging
with regard to the best measures of government; such a diversity exists in
the interests and abilities of a people,--that they may be good citizens
without being satisfied altogether with the constitution, or with those
who administer its laws. There will be different political parties. It is
the glory of a government that the people are allowed to think and vote as
they please, and to express their honest opinions. Perhaps with us,
expression is too free, especially in regard to public men and measures.
We may have diverse views and convictions, and yet feel and act loyally.
But men who endeavor by any influence or means to lessen the loyalty of
others, to alienate the love of the people from the government, and who
signify their own aversion, not by condemning a single statute and seeking
its lawful repeal, but by heaping abuse on the constitution and on those
who are chosen to administer the laws, by avowing their hostility to the
government and its policy, or their purpose to resist and war against
it,--are in a posture of rebellion. Those who, being in office, commanding
the arms and other property of the government, cause them to be removed so
as to weaken its power and strengthen those in actual rebellion, or who
are threatening the same; those who aid and comfort a population or
soldiery who are in a state of actual resistance, and finally, those who
do openly and avowedly renounce the authority of the government to which
they have sworn allegiance, or take up arms to attack its strongholds,
seize or destroy its property, or injure the soldiers and citizens who are
sent to protect it,--are in a state of rebellion against its laws and
against the commonwealth over which it holds the shield of its authority.
Korah was a rebel and a traitor, who having, by intrigue, inspired some
other leaders with the spirit of sedition, succeeded in drawing from their
allegiance to Moses and Aaron, a large number of the people, who came
together in a mob to demand a different administration. They were invited
to refer the matter to the Divine decision, but they stoutly refused,
accusing Moses of assumption, thus endeavoring to destroy his authority
over the nation. That was rebellion. Again, in the reign of David, his son
Absalom drew the people from their allegiance, then seized the reins of
government and pursued his father with an army. That was rebellion against
wholesome law, against the will of God.
Now we have the painful fact before us, that rebellion has sprung up
against our good government. Men in many quarters have secretly plotted,
and openly avowed hostility to our Federal Union. Eight of our States have
passed the Ordinance of Secession, four or five others are assuming an
attitude of hostility to the General Government, or refusing to comply
with the Executive, who calls on them to aid in the defence of the
Capital. This state of things has been preceded by acts of treachery on
the part of leading men in the States, by seizure of arms, money, and
public defences,--the property of the government. A new Confederacy is
formed, contrary to oaths and compacts, for the purpose of destroying our
Union, and giving perpetuity to slavery. It has attacked our forts,
adulterated our coin, stolen our arms, proclaimed piracy against our
commerce, set a price on the head of our Chief Magistrate, threatened our
Capital, and raised armies to exterminate, if possible, our nationality.
And all this it has done without one act of the Government to provoke such
procedure; without any oppression; without any threat; but in the face of
every honorable proposal on our part, after long and patient endurance of
their encroachment and plunders; even until foreign journals deride us for
our forbearance, and the rebels themselves insult our delay.