philosophy of the French Revolution, and which, through that great upheaval, profoundly influenced the growth of popular government in all countries.

The Common-Consent Theory.-In contrast with the force and divine-right theories, there has been a new development of the contract theory toward an ideal of government based on common consent. The ideal of common consent was formulated in the Declaration of Independence, where it was affirmed that

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

The sentiment of the Declaration as exemplified in the government of the United States was forcefully expressed in the terse phrase of Abraham Lincoln as a "government of the people, by the people, and for the people." President Wilson has more recently presented the case for the common-consent theory in notable state papers. Among these is his address to Congress, April 2, 1917, respecting the relations of the United States with Germany. In recommending the necessity of the declaration of war, President Wilson said:

Our object, now as then, is to vindicate the principles of peace and justice in the life of the world as against selfish and autocratic power and to set up amongst the really free and self-governed peoples of the world such a concert of purpose and of action as will henceforth insure the observance of those principles-a steadfast concert for peace can never be maintained except by a partnership of democratic nations. Only the free peoples can hold their purpose and their honor steady to a common end and prefer the interests of mankind to any narrow interest of their own.

...

In this and in subsequent addresses President Wilson formulated the ideal of common consent as the foundation of political authority in opposition to the ideals of the past, force and divine right, which have been the basis for autocratic government.

The Evolutionary Theory.-The foregoing theories as to the incentive which led to man's association with his fellowbeings for civic purposes have been found to be at best only partially correct. Though there is an element of truth in each, they are now felt to be but a part of the modern theory of the evolution of political institutions. It is granted that the instinctive theory explains how at the very beginning of this evolutionary process the inherent qualities or characteristics of man caused him to associate with others, and that he is by his very nature a political animal. All along the line of this development it is obvious that he has, on the grounds of necessity, established his authority by force and then has sought justification for his action. Then, too, it was advantageous for those who succeeded in gaining an ascendency over others to employ and rely on the idea of a direct personal connection with a divinity to reinforce their power and authority. And while it is generally conceded that the social - contract theory cannot account for the origin of the state, it has without question served man's purpose in bringing about changes in the existing order of political institutions and in justifying the formation and exercise of political authority.

Upon examining, then, the evolutionary theory, which includes the other theories within its scope, it is found that modern complex political institutions represent a growth extending through many centuries. Just as the biologist maintains that plants and animals, as found today, had rudimentary beginnings in the past, that presentday species of both are the result of actions and reactions resulting from environmental influences, so the student of politics finds that political institutions represent the outcome of man's struggle to adjust himself to his environment

and to use the same in meeting the new conditions which are ever arising. This development from the primordial efforts in civic association to our present complex political institutions has been previously discussed. The earliest forms of concerted action were there traced in the family, the clan or gens, and the tribe. It was found that tribes united with tribes to form city-kingdoms, and city-states, and still later more complex and comprehensive systems of organization arose in the military nations of the Orient and of Europe. It has been shown, too, that with the growth of individual freedom in local provinces a strong centralized power dominating large areas becomes less and less possible. With the rise of the mediæval state and the modern nations, the complexity of modern political institutions has increased. This has resulted largely from the political consciousness which has been gradually awakened in man, not only in a few leaders, but in the great masses of mankind. The intricacies of modern government, then, have not arisen suddenly, nor have they been artificially imposed upon mankind by the ingenuity of a few of their number. Rather they are the results of the broadening intellectual outlook and the awakening of an increasing political consciousness within man in his attempt to adjust himself to a changing environment. The process, begun ages ago when man was a primitive animal, has continued to the present day, when he is found adjusting himself anew to the conditions of modern civilization.

The Economic Theory.-A phase of the evolutionary theory which requires brief consideration is the economic interpretation of the state. Attracting attention during the middle of the nineteenth century and gaining favor the latter part of that century, the economic interpretation of man's political development continues to claim an increasing number of adherents. Stated very briefly, it may be said that the main feature of the economic theory of the state is that political organization had as its chief incentive the necessity of man's economic struggle for existence,

In the evolution from his primitive conditions to his present status in society, the satisfaction of his increasing wants has occasioned the development of the control of one person over the life and working power of another; or, in the usual phraseology, it has resulted in the economic exploitation of man by man. The consequent exploitation of one class by another and the struggles which necessarily ensued were, according to this view, the important factors in the formation of the political machinery which is now called the state with its laws, courts, and numerous agencies by which the ruling classes and later the owners of large industries have sought greater power and protection. Beginning with the first subjugation and ownership of slaves by primitive peoples and ending with the great industrial systems of modern times, the advocates of the economic theory of the state interpret the various political developments as but steps in the history of the economic struggle between classes. The national state, with all its organization and administrative machinery, according to this view, has been evolved as a means by which the more powerful class exploits the results of the labor of the less powerful. Though it has gained many adherents, the economic interpretation of the state which regards the chief motive of political organization as self-preservation and the dominance of selfish interests, backed at first by brute strength and military power and later by political institutions based on laws and courts, has at the same time been adversely criticized.

Critics of this theory have attacked it on the ground that progress in political development would have been impossible had class struggle and class hatred been the dominant elements in man's evolution from primitive conditions. Then, too, it is maintained that in emphasizing the economic motive in progress there has been a tendency to read into the past forces and conditions which did not exist and which have developed in more recent years through changes resulting from the industrial revolution

which rendered it possible for a few individuals to control the work and results of the labor of many. Furthermore, instead of a deliberate attempt to form and control political institutions for the subjugation of one class by another, the interpretation and application of laws have at times seemed to work to the advantage of one class and the disadvantage of another. But when such interpretation of the laws is carried to an extreme, the result has usually been a change in political institutions which has alleviated the wrongs of the oppressed class. Though the economic theory of the state has thus served a useful purpose in calling attention to the influence of some of the fundamental factors in political progress, it is apparent that this theory, like some of the others briefly discussed, serves as only a partial explanation of the grounds for political obligation and control.1

DEFINITIONS

For the purpose of clearness and accuracy, brief definitions of a few of the terms in general use in political science are necessary. Subsequent chapters will amplify and render these more definite. The terms to be defined are society, nation, state, government, sovereignty, and law.

Society. Society is the word commonly used to designate a group of persons who are bound together in relations more or less permanent and who share a common life. It is used frequently to comprise the social groups through which the common life of a people is carried on. In calling attention to life in society, sociology has given us a view of the individual as a socius—that is, a unit whose ideas and opinions are formed in large part by the groups in which he lives, moves, and has his being. It may be going too far to hold, as did Gabriel Tarde, that virtually all of the life of the individual is the result of imitating the acts and thoughts of his fellows, but sociology and psychology

Find some illustrations in modern society of the economic motive back of political control.