against this end, he cannot act by authority from the people; so that he acts, in this case, without any authority either from God or man. He cannot, by any lawful authority, act against, but only for the good of society. This, in general, is the business of civil rulers. But there are a variety of ways and means by which they are to carry on this business, and accomplish the important end of their institution, which it is quite beyond my present design particularly to point out, though there may be occasion to suggest some of them in the progress of my discourse. Let us now consider, —

IV. The qualifications pointed out in the text as necessary for rulers.

1. They must be able men. God has made a great difference in men in respect of their natural powers, both of body and mind; to some he has given more, to others fewer talents. Nor is there perhaps a less difference in this respect arising from education. And though there are none but what may be good members of civil society, as well as faithful servants of God, yet every one has not abilities sufficient to make him a good civil ruler. "Woe unto thee, O land, when thy king is a child,” says Solomon, hereby intimating that the happiness of a people depends greatly upon the character of its rulers, and that if they resemble children in weakness, ignorance, credulity, fickleness, etc., the people will of course be very miserable. By able men may be intended men of good understanding and knowledge,- men of clear heads, who have improved their minds by exercise, acquired a habit of reasoning, and furnished themselves with a good degree of knowledge,- men who have a just conception of the nature and end of government in general, of the natural rights of mankind, of the nature and importance of civil and religious liberty, a knowledge of human nature, of the

springs of action, and the readiest way to engage and influence the heart, an acquaintance with the people to be governed, their genius, their prejudices, their interest with respect to other states, what difficulties they are under, what dangers they are liable to, and what they are able to bear and do. These things are ever to be taken into consideration by legislators when they make laws for the internal police of a people, and in their transactions with or respecting other states. It would be going too far to say that an honest man cannot be a good ruler unless he be of the first character for good sense, learning, and knowledge; but it will not be denied that the more he excels in these things, the more likely he will be to rule well. He will be better able to see what measures are suited to the temper and genius of the people, and most conducive to the end of his institution; how to raise necessary supplies for the expenses of government in ways most easy and agreeable to the people; how to extricate them out of difficulties in which they may be involved; how to negotiate with foreign powers; how to prevent or mitigate the calamities of war by compromising differences, or putting the people into a condition to defend themselves and repel injuries; in a word, how to render them happy and respectable in peace, or formidable in war. These things require a very considerable degree of penetration and knowledge.

As it is of great importance to the community that learning and knowledge be diffused among the people in general, it is proper that the government should take all proper measures for this purpose-making provision for the establishment and support of literary schools and colleges. But ignorant and illiterate men will not be likely to be the patrons of learning; unacquainted with its excellency and importance, and seeing no comeliness or

beauty in it, they will reject and despise it, as the Jews did the great Teacher of wisdom who came from God. It would not be strange if such men, entrusted with the government of a people, should wholly neglect to make any provision for the encouragement of literature. It is therefore proper that rulers should be men of understanding and learning, in order to their being disposed to give due encouragement and support to the teachers and professors of the liberal arts and sciences.1

It may be further observed, that weak and illiterate men at the head of a government will be likely to place in inferior and subordinate offices men of their own character, merely because they know no better.

But by "able men" may be intended men of courage, of firmness and resolution of mind, men that will not sink into despondency at the sight of difficulties, or desert their duty at the approach of danger, - men that will hazard their lives in defence of the public, either against internal sedition or external enemies; that will not fear the resentment of turbulent, factious men; that will be a terror to evil-doers, however powerful, and a protection to the innocent, however weak; men that will decide seasonably upon matters of importance, and firmly abide by their decision, not wavering with every wind that blows. There are some men that will halt between two opinions, and hesitate so long when any question of consequence is

1 Mr. Hildreth says that only the constitutions of Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Massachusetts, and the second constitution of New Hampshire, made any mention of the all-important subject of education; and in the two former states the clauses which required the Legislature to establish schools remained a dead letter. Jefferson attempted to introduce a system of common schools in Virginia, but did not succeed. Only New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Maryland, could boast anything like a system of public education, and many years elapsed before their example was imitated. - History of the United States, iii. 385–395. — ED.

before them, and are so easily shaken from their purpose when they have formed one, that they are on this account very unfit to be intrusted with public authority.1 Such double-minded men will be unstable in all their ways; their indecision in council will produce none but feeble and ineffectual exertions; and this doubting and wavering in the supreme authority must be prejudicial to the state, and at some critical times may be attended with fatal consequences. Wise men will not indeed determine rashly, but when the case requires it they will resolve speedily, and act with vigor and steadiness.1

By "able men" may be further intended men capable of enduring the burden and fatigue of government, - men that have not broken or debilitated their bodies or minds by the effeminating pleasures of luxury, intemperance, or dissipation. The supreme government of a people is always a burden of great weight, though more difficult at some times than others. It cannot be managed well without great diligence and application. Weak and effeminate persons are therefore by no means fit to manage it. But rulers should not only be able men, but,

2. "Such as fear God." The fear of God, in the language of Scripture, does not intend a slavish, superstitious dread, as of an almighty, arbitrary, and cruel Being, but that just reverence and awe of him which naturally arises from a belief and habitual consideration of his glorious perfections and providence, — of his being the moral governor of the world, a lover of holiness and a hater of vice, who sees every thought and design as well as every action of all his creatures, and will punish the impenitently vicious and reward the virtuous. It is therefore a fear of offend

1 Promptness and decision were peculiarly necessary at that time in the emergencies of the war.- - ED.

ing him productive of obedience to his laws, and ever accompanied with hope in his mercy, and that filial love. which is due to so amiable a character.

It is of great importance that civil rulers be possessed of this principle. It must be obvious to all that a practical regard to the rules of social virtue is necessary to the character of a good magistrate. Without this a man is unworthy of any trust or confidence. But no principle so effectually promotes and establishes this regard to virtue. as the fear of God. A man may, indeed, from a regard to the intrinsic amiableness and excellency of virtue, from a mere sense of honor, from a love of fame, from a natural benevolence of temper, or from a prudent regard to his own temporal happiness, follow virtue when he is under no strong temptation to the contrary. But suppose him in a situation where he apprehends that temporal infamy and misery will be the certain consequence of his practising virtue, and temporal honor and happiness the consequence of his forsaking it, without any regard to God, as his ruler and judge, and can we expect that he will adhere to his duty? Will he sacrifice everything dear in this life in the cause of virtue, when he has no expectation of any reward for it beyond the grave? Will he deny himself a present gratification, without any prospect of being repaid either here or hereafter? Will he expose himself to reproach, poverty, and death, for the sake of doing good to mankind, without any regard to God as the rewarder of virtue or punisher of vice? This is not to be expected. We all love, and we ought to love, ourselves; and all wish to be happy. Why, then, should a man give up present ease and happiness for suffering and death in the cause of virtue, if he has no expectation that God will reward virtue? This would be acting against the principle of