to the body politic an absolute power over all its
members; and it is this same power which, when directed
by the general will, bears, as I have said, the name
of sovereignty."[207] Above all, the little chapter
on a dictatorship is the very foundation of the position
of the Robespierrists in the few months immediately
preceding their fall. “It is evidently
the first intention of the people that the state should
not perish,” and so on, with much criticism of
the system of occasional dictatorships, as they were
resorted to in old Rome.[208] Yet this does not in
itself go much beyond the old monarchic doctrine of
Prerogative, as a corrective for the slowness and want
of immediate applicability of mere legal processes
in cases of state emergency; and it is worth noticing
again and again that in spite of the shriekings of
reaction, the few atrocities of the Terror are an almost
invisible speck compared with the atrocities of Christian
churchmen and lawful kings, perpetrated in accordance
with their notion of what constituted public safety.
So far as Rousseau’s intention goes, we find
in his writings one of the strongest denunciations
of the doctrine of public safety that is to be found
in any of the writings of the century. “Is
the safety of a citizen,” he cries, “less
the common cause than the safety of the state?
They may tell us that it is well that one should perish
on behalf of all. I will admire such a sentence
in the mouth of a virtuous patriot, who voluntarily
and for duty’s sake devotes himself to death
for the salvation of his country. But if we are
to understand that it is allowed to the government
to sacrifice an innocent person for the safety of
the multitude, I hold this maxim for one of the most
execrable that tyranny has ever invented, and the most
dangerous that can be admitted."[209] It may be said
that the Terrorists did not sacrifice innocent life,
but the plea is frivolous on the lips of men who proscribed
whole classes. You cannot justly draw a capital
indictment against a class. Rousseau, however,
cannot fairly be said to have had a share in the responsibility
for the more criminal part of the policy of 1793,
any more than the founder of Christianity is responsible
for the atrocities that have been committed by the
more ardent worshippers of his name, and justified
by stray texts caught up from the gospels. Helvetius
had said, “All becomes legitimate and even virtuous
on behalf of the public safety.” Rousseau
wrote in the margin, “The public safety is nothing
unless individuals enjoy security."[210] The author
of a theory is not answerable for the applications
which may be read into it by the passions of men and
the exigencies of a violent crisis. Such applications
show this much and no more, that the theory was constructed
with an imperfect consideration of the qualities of
human nature, with too narrow a view of the conditions
of society, and therefore with an inadequate appreciation
of the consequences which the theory might be drawn
to support.