It seems to us that the reproach of Utopian opinions may more justly be thrown upon his opponents.  The latter do not escape the evil from which they fly.  They proceed upon the belief that man is unfit for self-government; but since every government is one of men, if he cannot control himself, how shall he rule over others?  Whatever may be said about the superiority of men of genius, it is certain that there never has existed an intellect capable of providing for all the minute and varying necessities of each individual among many millions.  The history of legislation shows that the best-disciplined minds find it difficult to devise a single statute affecting a single interest which will be precise in its terms and equal in its operation.  These railers at the majority of their kind seem to expect in the minority a greater than human perfection.  Mr. Jefferson proceeded upon a mere moderate estimate of the abilities, and a more just appreciation of the weakness of men.  It is because we are easily led astray and blinded by passion, that he thought us unfit to govern others, and that we should limit our efforts to self-government.  His confidence in man was no greater than that which is the foundation of Christianity.  The whole Christian scheme is one of the broadest democracy.  The most important truths are there submitted to the general judgment and conscience of mankind, with no other recommendation than their value and the force of the evidence by which they are attested.  Can it be said that we are not fit to decide upon a tax, yet are fit to decide our fate for all the mysterious future?  If Jefferson was an enthusiast, every clergyman who calls his bearers to repentance must be mad.  He did have confidence in his fellows,—­he did believe that we are not helpless slaves of sin, that the evils which afflict us are not inevitable,—­and that we have power to lead lives of justice and virtue.  Who will accuse him because of this confidence?

The charge of French principles originated in a political contest.  It was true in the narrow application which it had at first, but false in that which was afterwards given to it.  There is a marked distinction between him and the politicians of France.  Rousseau, perhaps the ablest, certainly the most popular, of those who preceded the Revolution, is an example.  The Contrat Social constantly carries the idea, that the government is the seat of all power and the source of all national action.  No suggestion is made, that there are individual functions with which the state cannot interfere to advantage.  The same opinions prevailed among the Encyclopedists and Economists, they were announced by the Gironde and the Mountain, and practically carried out by Robespierre and Barras.  The Girondists made cautious approaches towards federalism, but one looks in vain through the speeches of Vergniaud for an intimation of individualism.  The modern doctrinaires have retained the same