Since the last time I had the honour of addressing you on polemical matters, I have met with a passage in the writings of M.Auguste Comte which afforded me much pleasure. It seemed to be the one word for which I had been waiting, and confirmed many of my own impressions and speculations. He lays down two propositions: first, that the constructive politics of the future must be based on the history of the past; and second, that political science is a composite study, and presupposes the complete apprehension of every branch of science, beginning with the physical, such as astronomy, and ending with the moral, such as ethics and sociology. M. Comte evidently does not regard as a vain dream and imaginative [102] speculation the theory that it will be possible for statesmen to calculate a policy, and to determine a course of action by purely scientific considerations. May I entertain the hope that in this university, where all branches of physical science have found a home, and are studied by most able and learned professors, the science of politics may be pursued under most favourable circumstances? I trust that each professor will bring before me the results of their deliberations, and contribute to the growth of this particular science for which our university has already become deservedly famous.

My present lecture is devoted to the important consideration of Law. At first sight it may appear to you that the wills and passions of mankind are so diverse and unknowable, that it would be absurd to suppose that they can be calculated, or rendered amenable to any law. But Professor Amos has pointed out that in proportion as we examine history, and compare the actions present and past of different [103] nations and states, the more uniform does human nature appear; the more calculable the actions, sentiments, and emotions of large masses of people. As we have already stated, the difficulties of the study are not likely to deter the professors of Girtham College from the pursuit of any particular branch of science.

A priori we might suppose from analogy that these polemical laws existed, as there is no department of nature which is not governed by law. It is an essential feature in nature, and also in government. What is political economy but the study of certain laws of nature? These were first discovered by Adam Smith, and have since been traced and estimated by such men as Ricardo, the two Mills, Professor Cairnes, Jevons, and many others. Moreover, our physical constitutions are governed by laws, which physicians have determined, and which it is perilous to resist. Our moral constitution is also governed by laws, which evidently exist, although it is difficult to find them out. But the nation is only an assemblage of [104] individuals; and since individuals are so governed, it is only natural to suppose that the nation, composed of individuals, is so constituted and controlled. And not only is that true, but we shall see that polemical laws are as permanent and universal, as invariable and irreversible, as the laws of nature which regulate the courses of the heavenly bodies, and raise the tides, or depress the sandstone hills.

We may notice first the preponderant impulse observable in a nation’s life in favour of supporting existing facts and institutions; and every reformer has discovered the difficulty and danger of changing or opposing the customs and habits of the people. As a wheel will travel most smoothly along a well-worn groove, whereby friction is diminished, so there is a natural national tendency always to run along those paths with which the habits and customs of the people have made them familiar. This law is nothing else than Newton’s first law of motion, which is quite as applicable to human masses as to lifeless matter. The [105] tendency of matter to remain at rest, if unmoved by any external agency, and of persisting to move after it has once been set in motion, is a conservative tendency; and is as true in political science as in any other.

The special branch of our science, which we may call the Biology of Politics, shows how absolute is the domain of law in polemical matters. The law of human life is that men are born, grow, become strong and vigorous, and then decay and die. This is the law of life, to which we must all yield an enforced obedience. This same law is observed to be at work in the heavenly bodies; and astronomy shows us that planets are born, flourish, and at length die, just as our human bodies do. The moon is, as you may have observed, a dead planet, such as our earth may be some day. The same growth and decay are also manifest in national life. First, there is the birth of the nation, which sometimes lies a long time in a dormant state, and then wakes up to life and energy. China and Russia [106] are examples of dormant States, just waking from a long sleep of childishness and ignorance. The next stage is the strong an healthy period of its existence, which England is at present enjoying; and then, after various stages of gradual decline, we come to the senile period of national life, when every energy and faculty, every national feeling and power of invention, are completely exhausted. As an example of this depressing condition, we may mention Turkey and several of the effete States of South America. Sometimes, when life is nearly extinct in the human body, physicians have made use of the power of galvanism, in order to revive the dying energies. This process of galvanizing a State into life was tried by Lord Palmerston and others on the worn-out frame of Turkey. But such attempts can only meet with partial and transitory success; and where the loss of national power and faculty betokens the senile period of the nation’s existence, it is vain to attempt to restore its former life and energy. The study of the biology [107] of politics presents many interesting and important details in this special branch of knowledge; and I commend this part of our subject to the special attention of the professor of physiology. The law of development is observable in nations as in nature. Recent scientific discoveries have tended to take away all ideas of chance in the workings of nature, and have substituted law instead of it. It would be unscientific and incorrect to speak of the world being formed by the ‘fortuitous concourse of atoms.’ So we cannot speak of a State being generated in this manner. Laws—economical, geographical, natural—preside over the formation of States and nations, and produce their further development.

The laws of political motion occupy the same prominent place in our new science as Newton’s laws do in ordinary dynamics. These are very important in calculating the positions which various States will occupy in the future. First, we have the doctrine of nationality, which prevented the progress of Austria into [108] Italy, and of the Bourbons in Naples, and produced the amalgamation of the small German States in the great empire of Germany. The second law of political motion is the doctrine of the independence of all true States, and the equality of all States to each other. This had its growth in feudalism; and all the chief wars of modern times have been the result of the efforts of nature to establish this law of independence. The doctrine of intervention is a modification of the preceding law, and is applicable when the law of necessity demands its use, such as the restoration of order after protracted anarchy, the abolition of slave trade, etc. The third law is the law of morality. Just as for each man there exists a right and a wrong; just as duty and conscience are certain elements in his daily motion, which dictate his course of action, although he may chose to neglect them; so a nation is bound by the same moral laws which govern the individual; and a nation errs if it transgresses them. Christianity is the agent which has [109] produced so powerful an influence in making men obey the dictates of conscience and walk in the path of duty; and I read with thankfulness the conclusion of Mr. Amos, that Christianity has triumphed quite as much in moralizing secular politics as it has in the sphere of individual life.

These are some of the principal laws of motion which I have observed at work in various States and nations. Inasmuch as political science embraces, in addition to the physical sciences, all those branches which are contained in ethics, economics, jurisprudence, sociology and others, the laws of each are generally applicable to the whole grand subject of which my lectures treat. Other general laws may be deduced, and have been enumerated in my previous lectures, from the social properties of curves and conics; and when our researches are complete we may hope to produce a code of laws for the guidance of our statesmen which maybe of immense use in determining [110] the policies of the future. Already there is strong evidence that the affairs of this country are being conducted on sound scientific principles, rather than by any species of guess-work or haphazard contrivances. The use of history is recognised as extremely important in determining a future line of conduct; and statesmen are in the habit of endeavouring to find from their study of the past what is the logical sequence of events. Just as mathematicians endeavour to determine the law of a series of figures, and having found the law, can write down the next, and the next, ad infinitum; so scientific politicians may be able soon to establish the various laws of a series of events, and calculate their course of actions. That there is considerable progress in this direction is manifest by the value which they place upon statistics, and their continued use of this important information.

There are a few great evils in our present system which are strongly opposed to any scientific methods in politics; and in the interests of the country as well as those of [111] science they ought to be removed. One great evil is the want of political and scientific knowledge on the part of the electors, who are in the habit of choosing their representatives on personal grounds, or party considerations, rather than on sound principles of political science. All this is opposed to any idea of law. Owing to the ignorance of the electors they fall an easy prey to adventurers and unprincipled politicians, who make all kinds of specious promises, tempt them with all manner of baits, and make self-interest instead of the welfare of the State the principle of voting. Selfishness is the ruin of social life and intercourse, the destroyer of all happiness, peace, and mutual trust in family life or in society. It is the root of most of the faults, vices, and crimes in the individual; and who can tell the endless disasters which will befall the State, where selfishness is the chief motive-power of the electors and the elected? A selfish statesman, one who goes into Parliament to gain his own ends and forward his own personal interests, is a disgrace to society—

I have said that the ignorance of the electorate makes them an easy prey to such men; and until they have learnt to detect the false from the true, until they become acquainted with the elements of political science, and have been taught that their own selfish interests are not the highest aims of social government, it is vain to hope for a reasonable method of regulating the affairs of the nation, based upon logical laws and scientific principles.

And how is this work of educating the electors to be accomplished? Not, I maintain, by furious speeches and rhetorical displays; not by bribery, baits and banter; but by patient, never-ceasing labour, by lectures on history and science, by individual instruction, is the great work to be accomplished upon which the security and stability of the country depend.

Then we may hope that the ‘Reign of [113] Law’ in polemical science may be ushered in with the joyful acclamations of an enlightened and united people, and its benign influence extend from the throne of the monarch and the council-chamber of his ministers to the hearth of the cottager. Politicians will rule by law; policies be calculated by laws; people vote by law; and then methinks I see in my mind (to use the words of the blind old poet) a noble and puissant nation rousing herself like a strong man after sleep, and shaking her invincible locks; methinks I see her as an eagle, renewing her mighty youth, and kindling her undazzled eyes at the full mid-day beam; purging and unsealing her long-abused sight at the fountain itself of heavenly radiance; while the whole noise of timorous and flocking birds flutter about amazed at what she means. Such is the glorious vision of the ‘Reign of Law.’ Let it be the business of every Englishman and Englishwoman to arrange the framework of our social and political system, that law may have an uninterrupted sway; then shall we be a united, prosperous, and [114] contented people, and the reign of lawless agitators, bribery-mongers, and counterfeit statesmen will have passed away into the oblivion and obscurity of a more suitable but less favoured region.