A HISTORY OF AMERICAN

POLITICAL THEORIES

CHAPTER I

THE POLITICAL THEORY OF THE COLONISTS

In

A STUDY of American political theories may appropriately begin with an examination of the ideas of the colonists who laid the foundations upon which the national structure now rests. view of the fact that the Puritan ideals, political and moral, have been so potent a force in the development of American national characteristics, attention will first be directed to the Puritan · political tenets.

Puritanism was primarily a religious and not a political movement.1 Its central doctrine was that the spiritual element in worship is of far greater importance than the ceremonial element. The

1 A complete discussion of the Puritan theory is given by H. L. Osgood in the Political Science Quarterly, Vol. VI, "The Political Ideas of the Puritans." See also The Rise of Democracy in Old and New England, by Charles Borgeaud; G. E. Ellis's Puritan Age in Massachusetts; and the standard histories of this period: in particular, Doyle's Puritan Colonies and J. G. Palfrey's History of New England.

Puritans condemned a ritualistic service as not only unnecessary and superfluous, but positively injurious and sinful; and they demanded a style of worship from which the ceremonial features were as nearly as possible eliminated. The Anglican Church they bitterly denounced for its failure to carry through the desired reforms, and its retention of so many of the features of the Roman worship. Theologically, Puritanism was closely allied to Calvinism, and it resembled Calvin's system on the political side also. In common with the other adherents of the Reformation, the Puritans denied the binding force of Church tradition, precedent, and law, asserting that the Scriptures are the only authoritative guide of human conduct. a study of Puritan politics it is essential, therefore, to remember that the spirit and purpose of the Puritans' movement was only incidentally political. Their aim was to found a spiritual, not a political, organization—a church rather than a state. They were interested above all things in the true worship of God, which meant to them, of course, the Puritan style of worship.

In

It is important to observe at the outset the basis upon which the Puritans rested their commonwealth. Having rejected the authority of the Church and ecclesiastical law and precedent, they relied solely upon the Scriptures as a guide for all conduct, public as well as private, and considered the Bible as the only proper foundation upon which

either a state or a church could rest. They a tempted to deduce from the Old and New Testa ments their whole system of public law, finding in these writings, expressly or by implication, authority for the government as organized and administered. As their theology and their form of church government rested upon a scriptural basis, so must their political theory and their state have the same foundation. This idea was well stated by John Eliot in his work on The Christian Commonwealth; or, The Civil Policy of the Rising Kingdom of Jesus Christ, when he said that "there is undoubtedly a form of Civil Government, instituted by God himself in the holy Scriptures, whereby any Nation may enjoy all the ends and effects of Government in the best manner, were they but perswaded to make trial of it. We should derogate from the sufficiency and perfection of the Scriptures, if we should deny it." In the establishment of New Haven Colony, one of the questions submitted to those participating was, "Whether the Scriptures doe holde forth a perfect rule for the direction and government of all men in all duties which they are to perform to God and men, as well in the government of families and in the Commonwealth, as in the matters of Church?"2; and to this all assented. This idea runs through the Puritan thought of that time. They devoutly believed that somewhere in

1 Mass. Historical Society Collections, Third Series, Vol. 9, p. 134. 2 New Haven Records, I, 12 (1639).

the Scriptures there must be a rule of public as well as of private conduct, and they further believed that they had discovered and were applying this rule in the development of their political institutions. The particular part of the Bible upon which they relied for this purpose was the Old Testament, with its frequent references to the political experiences of the Children of Israel. This was a rich mine of precedent, to which the Puritans frequently resorted when in need of such support to justify their conduct.1

It is not to be assumed, however, that the Puritans really constructed their entire political system from an interpretation of the Scriptures.2 They brought with them to the New World the English common law, English political precedent and tradition of centuries' growth. This was beyond question the real basis of their system, and the additions to this from interpretation of the Scriptures were less important than the Puritans themselves thought. It would be near the truth to say that they did not begin with the Scriptures and build up a complete system, but that they attempted to justify a system already in existence

1 For example, Cotton said that no instance could be given "of any capital Law of Moses, but is of moral (that is of general and perpetual) equity, in all Nations, in all Ages. Capitalia Mosis politica sunt aeterna." The Bloudy Tenent, Chap. LIII.

2 O. S. Straus, in the Origin of the Republican Form of Government in the United States of America, maintains this proposition.