梭罗论公民的不服从

. 论公民的不服从梭罗我由衷地同意这个警句“最好的政府是管得最少的政府。我希望看到这个警句迅速而且系统地得到实施。我相信，实施后，其最终结果将是“最好的政府是根本不进展治理的政府。当人们做好准备之后，这样的政府就是他们愿意承受的政府，政府充其量不过是一种权宜之计，而大局部政府，有时所有的政府却都是不得计的。对设置常备军的反对意见很多、很强烈，而且理应占主导地位，它们最终可能转变成反对常设政府。常备军队不过是常设政府的一支胳臂。政府本身也只不过是人民选择来行使他们意志的形式，在人民还来不与通过它来运作之前，它同样也很容易被滥用或误用，看看当前的墨西哥战争，它是少数几个人将常设政府当作工具的结果，因为，从一开场，人民本来就不同意采取这种作法。目前这个美国政府它不过是一种传统，尽管其历史还不久，但却竭力使自己原封不动地届届相传，可是每届却都丧失掉一些自身的老实和正直。它的活力和气力还顶不上一个活人，因为一个人就能随心所欲地摆布它。对于人民来说，政府是支木头枪。倘假设人们真要使用它互相厮杀，它就注定要开裂。不过，尽管如此，它却仍然是必不可少的，因为人们需要某种复杂机器之类的玩意儿，需要听它发出的噪音，藉此满足他们对于政府之理念的要求。于是，政府的存在说明了，为了人民的利益，可以如何成功地利用、欺骗人民，甚至可以使人民利用、欺骗自己。我们大家都必须成认，这真了不起。不过，这种政府从未主动地促进过任何事业，它只是欣然地超脱其外。它未扞卫国家的自由。它未解决西部问题。它未从事教育。迄今，所有的成就全都是由美国人民的传统性格完成的，而且，假设政府不曾从中作梗的话，本来还会取得更大的成就。因为政府是一种权宜之计，通过它人们可以欣然彼此不来往；而且，如上所述，最便利的政府也就是最不搭理被治理的人民的政府，商业贸易假设不是用印度橡胶制成的话，绝无可能跃过议员们没完没了地设置下的路障；倘假设完全以议员们行动的效果，而不是以他们行动的意图来评价的话，那么他们就理所当然地应当被视作如同在铁路上设路障捣蛋的人，并受到相应的惩罚。但是，现实地以一个公民的身份来说，我不像那些自称是无政府主义的人，我要求的不是立即取消政府，而是立即要有个好一些的政府。让每一个人都说明能赢得他尊敬的是什么样的政府，这样，也就为赢得这种政府迈出了一步。到头来，当权力掌握在人民手中的时候，多数派将有权统治，而且继续长期统治，其实际原因不是因为他们极可能是正义的，也不是因为这在少数派看来是最公正的，而是因为他们在物质上是最强大的。但是，一个由多数派作出所有决定的政府，是不可能建立在正义之上的，即使在人们对其所了解的意义上都办不到。在一个政府中，如果对公正与谬误真正作出决定的不是多数派而是良知，如果多数派仅仅针对那些可以运用便利法那么解决的问题做出决定，难道是不可能的吗？公民必须，哪怕是暂时地或最低限度地把自己的良知托付给议员吗？那么，为什么每个人还都有良知呢？我认为，我们首先必须做人，其后才是臣民。培养人们像尊重正义一样尊重法律是不可取的。我有权承当的唯一义务是不管何时都从事我认为是正义的事。那么一个人应当怎样对待当今的美国政府呢？我的答复是，与其交往有辱人格。我绝对不能成认作为奴隶制政府的一个政治机构是我的政府。人人都成认革命的权利，即当政府是暴政或政府过于无能令人无法忍受的时候，有权拒绝为其效忠，并抵抗它的权利。但是，几乎所有人都说，现在的情况并非如此。他们认为，1775年的情况才是如此。如果有人对我说，这个政府很糟糕，它对运抵口岸的某些外国货课税。我极有可能会无动于衷，因为没有这些外国货，我照样能过日子。所有的机器都免不了产生摩擦，但是这也许却具有抵消弊端的好处。不管怎么说，为此兴师动众是大错特错的。可是，如果摩擦控制了整个机器，并进展有组织的欺压与掠夺，那么，就让我们扔掉这部机器吧。换句话说，如果在一个被认为是自由的庇护所的国家里，人口的六分之一是奴隶，如果整个国家任由一个外国军队蹂躏、征服，并被置于军管之下，那么，我认为，老实的人都应立刻奋起对抗、革命。使这个责任变得更加迫切的是，这个被如此蹂躏的国家不是我国，恰恰相反，我们的军队却正是入侵的军队事实上，反对马萨诸塞州改革的人不是南方的万把政客，而是这儿的千千万万商人和农场主，他们更感兴趣的是他们的商业和农业，而不是他们属于人类这个事实。不管花费什么代价，他们都不打算公平对待奴隶和墨西哥。我要与之争论的敌人，不是远在天涯，而是那些就在我们周围的敌人。他们与远方的敌人合作，按照他们的旨意办事。要不是这些人的话，远方的敌人不会为害。我们习惯于说，群众还未做好准备。可是情况的改善是缓慢的，因为这些少数人实质上并不比多数人高明多少或好多少。在某处树立某种绝对的善，比起让许多人都像你这么好更重要。因为绝对的善将像酵母一样影响整体。在成千上万人具有反对奴隶制、反对战争的观点，但实际上却未做任何事情来完毕奴隶制和战争。他们自以为是华盛顿和富兰克林的子，却是两手插在裤兜里，坐在那儿，借口不知道该做些什么，而无所事事，他们甚至优先考虑自由贸易问题，而不是事关自由的问题。饭后，他们安然地同时间读时价表和来自墨西哥的消息，也许，读者读着便睡着了美国人已经蜕变成奇怪的家伙以爱交际的器官兴旺而着称，同时又显示出智力低下的沾沾自喜。在世界上，他最最关心的是确保救济院情况良好；他还未披上合法的外衣，便四下募捐以扶助孤寡，尽管这些孤寡眼下还不是孤寡。总之，他冒险光靠互助保险公司的资助过日子，而该公司已经容许为他体面地安葬不公正的法律仍然存在：我们必须心甘情愿地服从这些法律，还是努力去修正它们、服从它们直至我们取得成功，或是立刻粉碎它们呢？在当前这种政府统治下，人们普遍认为应等待，直到说服大多数人去改变它们。人们认为，如果他们抵抗的话，这样修正的结果将比原来的谬误更糟。不过，如果修正的结果真比原来的谬误更糟的话；那是政府的过错，是政府使其变得更糟的。为什么政府不善于预见改革并为其提供时机呢？为什么政府不珍惜少数派的智慧呢？为什么政府不见棺材不落泪呢？为什么政府不鼓励老百姓提高警觉，为政府指出错误而防止犯错误呢？为什么政府总是把基督钉在十字架上，把哥白尼和路德逐出教会，并指责华盛顿和富兰克林是叛乱分子呢？如果不公正是政府机器必然产生的磨擦的一局部，那么就让它去吧，让它去吧：也许它会磨合好的。不过，毫无疑义，机器终将被彻底磨损掉的。如果不公正的那局部有其单独的弹簧滑轮、绳索，或者曲柄，那么你可能会考虑修正的结果会不会比原来的谬误更糟；但是，如果不公正的那局部的本质要求你以其人之道还治其人时，那我说就别管这法规了。以你的生命作为反磨擦的机制来制止这部机器吧。我不得不做的是，无论如何都要确保我不为我所唾弃的谬误效劳。至于采纳州政府业已提出的修正谬误的方法，我听都没听过。那些方法太费时日，不等它们奏效，已经命赴黄泉了。我还有别的事要干。我到这世上来主要不是为了把这世界变成个过日子的好地方。而是到这世上来过日子，不管它是好日子还是坏日子。一个人办不了每一件事，但是可以做些事。正因为他不必样样事情都要做，所以他也不一定非做出什么错事来。州长和议员们用不着向我请愿，我也犯不着向他们请愿。如果他们不听从我的请愿，那么我该怎么办呢？如果事到如此，州政府也就自绝其路了：其宪法本身也就是谬误的了。这似乎显得粗暴、顽固和毫无调和之意。但是，最温和、最体贴的作法，只适用于能够欣赏它，并能够配得上它的人；一切能使情况好转的变迁都是如此，正如振撼整个人体的生与死一样。我毫无反顾地认为，但凡自称废奴主义者的人都必须立刻撤回对马萨诸塞州政府的人力和财力的支持，不必等到废奴主义者在政府中形成多数，不必等到他们让正义通过他们占了上风才动手。我认为，如果有上帝站在他们一边的话，就足够了，不必再等另一个了。况且，任何人只要比周围的人更正义一些，也就构成了一人的多数在一个监禁正义之士的政府统治之下，正义之士的真正栖身之地也就是监狱。当今马萨诸塞州为自由和发奋图强之士提供的唯一妥当的处所，是监狱。在狱中，他们为州政府的行径而烦恼，被禁钢在政治生活之外，因为他们的原那么已经给他们带来麻烦了。逃亡的奴隶，被假释的墨西哥囚犯和申诉白人犯下的罪孽的印第安人可以在监狱里找到他们，在那个与世隔绝，但却更自由、更尊严的地方找到他们。那是州政府安置不顺其道的叛逆者的地方，是蓄奴制州里一个自由人唯一能够骄傲地居住的地方。如果有人以为他们的影响会消失在监狱里，他们的呼声不再能传到政府的耳朵里，他们无法在囹圄四壁之与政府为敌，那么他们就弄错了。真理比谬误强大得多，一位对非正义有了一点亲身体验的人在与非正义斗争时会雄辩有力得多。投下你的一票，那不仅仅是一纸条，而是你的全部影响。当少数与多数保持一致时，少数是无足轻重的，它甚至算不上是少数；但是当少数以自身的重量凝聚在一起时，便不可抗拒。要么把所有正直的人都投入监狱，要么放弃战争与奴隶制，如果要在这二者之间做出选择的话，州政府会毫不犹豫地做出选择。如果今年有一千人不交税，那不是暴烈、血腥的举动，但是假设交税那么不然。那是使政府得以施展暴行，让无辜的人流血。事实上，这正是和平革命的定义，如果和平革命是可能的话。如果税务官或其它政府官员问我，正如有位官员问我的那样，“那么，我怎么办呢？我的答复是，“如果你真希望做什么的话，那你就辞职。如果臣民拒绝效忠，官员辞职，那么革命就成功了。即使假定这会导致流血的话，难道当良心受伤害的时候就不流血吗，从良心的创伤里流出的是人的气概和永生，将使他永世沉沦于死亡之中。此时此刻，我就看到这种流血我已经六年未交投票税了。我还一度为此进过监狱，关了一夜。当我站在牢房里，打量着结实的石壁，那石壁足有二、三尺厚，铁木结构的门有一尺厚，还有那滤光的铁栅欗。我不由地对当局的愚昧颇有感独。他们对待我，就好似我不过是可以禁锢起来的血肉之躯。我想，当局最终应当得出这么个结论：监禁是它处置我的最好方法，而且我还从未想到我还能对它有什么用处。我知道，如果说我与乡亲之间挡着堵石墙的话，那么他们假设想要获得我这种自由的话，他们还得爬过或打破一堵比这石墙更难对付的墙才行。我一刻也不觉得自己是被囚禁着。这墙看来是浪费了太多的石头和灰泥了。我觉得，似乎所有公民中，只有我付清了税款。他们显然不知道该怎样对付我，他们的举止就像些没教养的人。他们的威胁恭维，样样都显得荒唐可笑。他们以为我惦记的是挪到这堵墙的另一边。我不禁觉得好笑，我在沉思时，他们却煞有介事地锁起牢门，全然不知我的思绪就跟在他们身后出了牢房，丝毫不受任何阻碍，而他们自己才真正是危险的。他们既然奈何不了我，便打定主意惩罚我的身躯，就像群顽童，无法惩罚他们憎恨的人，就冲他的狗撤野。我看，州政府是个傻子，如同一位揣着银匙的孤女，怯生生的，连自己的朋友和敌人都分不出来。我已经对它失去了所有的敬意，我可怜它。州政府从未打算正视一个人的智慧或道德观念，而仅仅着眼于他的躯体和感官。它不是以优越的智慧或坦诚，而是以优越的体力来武装自己。我不是生来让人支使的。我要按照我自己的方式来生活。让我们来看看谁是最强者。什么力量能产生效果？他们只能强迫却无法使我顺从。因为我只听命于优越于我的法那么。他们要迫使我成为像他们那样的人。我还不曾听说过，有人被众人逼迫着这样生活或那样生活。那会是什么样的生活呢？当我遇到的政府对我说：“把你的钱给我，不然就要你的命！我为什么要忙着给它钱呢？那政府可能处境窘迫不堪，而且不知所措。我不能帮它的忙。它必须像我一样，自己想方法。不值得为这样的政府哭哭啼啼。我的职责不是让社会机器运转良好。我不是工程师的儿子。我认为，当橡果和栗子并排从树上掉下来时，它们不是毫无生气地彼此谦让，而是彼此遵循各自的法那么，发芽、生长，尽可能长得茂盛。也许直到有一天，其中的一棵超过另一棵，并且毁了它。如果植物不能按自己的本性生长，那么它就将死亡，人也一样我不想同任何人或国家争吵。我不想钻牛角尖或自我标榜比旁人强。我倒倾向于认为，我寻求的是遵守我国的法那么的理由。我是太容易遵守这些法那么了。我完全有理由疑心我有这毛病。每年，当税务官造访时，我总是忙着回忆国家与州政府的法令和主，回忆人民的态度，以便找到个遵命的理由。我相信州政府很快就能免除我的这类操劳，那么我简直就同其它国民一样爱国了。从较低层次的角度看，宪法尽管有缺点，但还是非常好的。法律和法庭是非常令人尊敬的，甚至这个州政府和这个美国政府在许多方面也是非常令人敬仰、非常难得可贵、令人感谢的，对此人们已经大加描述过了。但是，如果从稍高层次的角度看，它们就不过是我所描绘的那个样子。如果从更高或最高层次的角度看，那么有谁会说它们是什么玩意儿，或者会认为它们还配让人瞧上一眼，或者值得让人考虑考虑呢？不过，政府同我没多大关系，我尽可能不考虑它。我不常生活在政府之下，我甚至不常生活在这个世界上。如果一个人思想自由，梦想自由，想象自由，那么不自由的东西在他看来就绝不会长期存在。愚蠢的统治或改进者们不可能彻底阻碍他.政府的权威，即使是我愿意服从的权威因为我乐于服从那些比我渊博、比我能干的人，并且在许多事情上，我甚至乐于服从那些不是那么渊博，也不是那么能干的人这种权威也还是不纯粹的权威：从严格、正义的意义上讲，权威必须获得被治理者的认可或赞成才行。除非我同意，否那么它无权对我的身心和财产行使权力。从极权君主制到限权君主制，从限权君主制到制的进步是朝着真正尊重个人的方向的进步。，如同我们所知道的，就是政府进步的尽头了吗？不可能进一步成认和组织人的权利了吗？除非国家成认个人是更高的、独立的权力，而且国家的权力和权威是来自于个人的权力，并且在对待个人方面采取相应的措施；否那么就绝对不会有真正自由开明的国家。我乐于想象国家的最终形武，它将公正地对待所有的人，尊重个人就像尊重邻居一样。如果有人履行了邻居和同胞的职责，但却退避三舍，冷眼旁观，不为其所容纳的话，它就寝食不安。如果，一个国家能够结出这样的果实，并且听其尽快果熟蒂落的话，那么它就为建成更加完美、更加辉煌的国家铺平了道路。那是我想象到，却在任何地方都不曾看到的国家。语言不能够免除沉默中的痛苦。亨利戴维梭罗(18171862)是位杂文家、诗人、自然主义者、改革家和哲学家。他出生在马萨诸塞州的康科德，毕业于哈佛大学。在担任了数年小学校长之后，梭罗决定以作诗和论述自然作为他终生的事业。他是拉尔夫沃尔多埃默森的信徒，是先验主义运动的一位领袖。与浪漫主义和改革结合在一起的先验主义推崇感觉和直觉胜过理智，宣扬个人主义和在的心声完整和自然的声音。梭罗零打碎敲的以文谋生的努力几乎从未给他带来什么稿酬。他发表的作品销路不佳，便不时在家中的小铅笔厂里工作。1845年，时年二十八岁的他，下决心撇开金钱的羁绊，在征得埃默森的同意后，在埃默森拥有的离康科德二英里的沃顿塘上建了一座小屋。1846年7月，梭罗居住在沃顿塘时，当地的警官找他，叫他支付投票税，尽管他已经数年未行使这个权利了。梭罗拒绝支付税款。当夜，警官把他关在康科德的监狱里。第二天，一位未透露身份的人士可能是梭罗的姨母支付了税款，他便获释了。不过，他说明了他的观点：他不能向一个容许奴隶制并且对墨西哥发动帝国主义战争的政府交税。他准备了一份解释自己行动的演说稿，并于1849年发表了这篇演说稿。当时，这篇文章没有引起什么反响。但是到了十九世纪末，这篇文章却成了经典之作，在国际上出现了一批追随者。列夫托尔斯泰在1900年读到这篇文章，对它崇拜不已。圣雄甘地在南非当律师时，宣读这篇文章为触犯了种族歧视法规的印度人辩护。甘地深受梭罗的影响，成了一位终生非暴力对抗和消极抵抗非正义权势的典。通过甘地，梭罗的主变成了政治活动的工具。后来在二十世纪，年轻的小马丁路德金也深受甘地的影响，梭罗的主便在美国运动的思想根底中得到了新生。On the Duty of Civil DisobedienceI heartily accept the motto, “That government is best which governs least; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believeThat government is best which governs not at all; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government. The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it. Witness the present Mexican war, the work of comparatively a few individuals using the standing government as their tool; for in the outset, the people would not have consented to this measure.This American governmentwhat is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed upon, even impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government is an expedient, by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if they were not made of india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads.But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation on conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents on injustice. A common and natural result of an undue respect for the law is, that you may see a file of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder-monkeys, and all, marching in admirable order over hill and dale to the wars, against their wills, ay, against their common sense and consciences, which makes it very steep marching indeed, and produces a palpitation of the heart. They have no doubt that it is a damnable business in which they are concerned; they are all peaceably inclined. Now, what are they? Men at all? or small movable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power? Visit the Navy Yard, and behold a marine, such a man as an American government can make, or such as it can make a man with its black artsa mere shadow and reminiscence of humanity, a man laid out alive and standing, and already, as one may say, buried under arms with funeral accompaniment, though it may be,Not a drum was heard, not a funeral note,As his corpse to the rampart we hurried;Not a soldier discharged his farewell shot,Oer the grave where our hero was buried.The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, etc. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgement or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs. Yet such as these even are commonly esteemed good citizens. Othersas most legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers, and office-holdersserve the state chiefly with their heads; and, as they rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God. A very fewas heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the great sense, and menserve the state with their consciences also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and they are commonly treated as enemies by it. A wise man will only be useful as a man, and will not submit to be “clay, and “stop a hole to keep the wind away, but leave that office to his dust at least:I am too high born to be propertied,To be a second at control,Or useful serving-man and instrumentTo any sovereign state throughout the world.He who gives himself entirely to his fellow men appears to them useless and selfish; but he who gives himself partially to them is pronounced a benefactor and philanthropist.How does it become a man to behave toward the American government today? I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slaves government also.All men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable. But almost all say that such is not the case now. But such was the case, they think, in the Revolution of 75. If one were to tell me that this was a bad government because it taxed certain foreign commodities brought to its ports, it is most probable that I should not make an ado about it, for I can do without them. All machines have their friction; and possibly this does enough good to counter-balance the evil. At any rate, it is a great evil to make a stir about it. But when the friction comes to have its machine, and oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let us not have such a machine any longer. In other words, when a sixth of the population of a nation which has undertaken to be the refuge of liberty are slaves, and a whole country is unjustly overrun and conquered by a foreign army, and subjected to military law, I think that it is not too soon for honest men to rebel and revolutionize. What makes this duty the more urgent is that fact that the country so overrun is not our own, but ours is the invading army.Paley, a common authority with many on moral questions, in his chapter on the “Duty of Submission to Civil Government, resolves all civil obligation into expediency; and he proceeds to say that “so long as the interest of the whole society requires it, that is, so long as the established government cannot be resisted or changed without public inconvenience, it is the will of God. . .that the established government be obeyedand no longer. This principle being admitted, the justice of every particular case of resistance is reduced to a computation of the quantity of the danger and grievance on the one side, and of the probability and expense of redressing it on the other. Of this, he says, every man shall judge for himself. But Paley appears never to have contemplated those cases to which the rule of expediency does not apply, in which a people, as well and an individual, must do justice, cost what it may. If I have unjustly wrested a plank from a drowning man, I must restore it to him though I drown myself. This, according to Paley, would be inconvenient. But he that would save his life, in such a case, shall lose it. This people must cease to hold slaves, and to make war on Mexico, though it cost them their existence as a people.In their practice, nations agree with Paley; but does anyone think that Massachusetts does exactly what is right at the present crisis?A drab of stat, a cloth-o-silver slut,To have her train borne up, and her soul trail in the dirt.Practically speaking, the opponents to a reform in Massachusetts are not a hundred thousand politicians at the South, but a hundred thousand merchants and farmers here, who are more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity, and are not prepared to do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may. I quarrel not with far-off foes, but with those who, neat at home, co-operate with, and do the bidding of, those far away, and without whom the latter would be harmless. We are accustomed to say, that the mass of men are unprepared; but improvement is slow, because the few are not as materially wiser or better than the many. It is not so important that many should be good as you, as that there be some absolute goodness somewhere; for that will leaven the whole lump. There are thousands who are in opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them; who, esteeming themselves children of Washington and Franklin, sit down with their hands in their pockets, and say that they know not what to do, and do nothing; who even postpone the question of freedom to the question of free trade, and quietly read the prices-current along with the latest advices from Mexico, after dinner, and, it may be, fall asleep over them both. What is the price-current of an honest man and patriot today? They hesitate, and they regret, and sometimes they petition; but they do nothing in earnest and with effect. They will wait, well disposed, for other to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret. At most, they give up only a cheap vote, and a feeble countenance and Godspeed, to the right, as it goes by them. There are nine hundred and ninety-nine patrons of virtue to one virtuous man. But it is easier to deal with the real possessor of a thing than with the temporary guardian of it.All voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to it, a playing with right and wrong, with moral questions; and betting naturally accompanies it. The character of the voters is not staked. I cast my vote, perchance, as I think right; but I am not vitally concerned that that right should prevail. I am willing to leave it to the majority. Its obligation, therefore, never exceeds that of expediency. Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail. A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men. When the majority shall at length vote for the abolition of slavery, it will be because they are indifferent to slavery, or because there is but little slavery left to be abolished by their vote. They will then be the only slaves. Only his vote can hasten the abolition of slavery who asserts his own freedom by his vote.I hear of a convention to be held at Baltimore, or elsewhere, for the selection of a candidate for the Presidency, made up chiefly of editors, and men who are politicians by profession; but I think, what is it to any independent, intelligent, and respectable man what decision they may come to? Shall we not have the advantage of this wisdom and honesty, nevertheless? Can we not count upon some independent votes? Are