Page:Criticism on the Declaration of independence, as a literary document (IA criticismondecla00seld).pdf/10

 less one, is certainly a legitimate subject of inquiry. But that matter can only be settled by a close inspection of the document itself. I understand to be sure, that great men will not always bear close inspection; but who ever claims to be a great writer, or for whomsoever that reputation is claimed, their works must abide that test, or their claims must fall.

These brief preliminaries being all I deem clearly necessary upon commencing the subject, I invite the examination of my readers to the first paragraph. Supposing it to be familiar, to every one, or if not, that it is in every one's law book where reference can be had to it any moment, I will not quote it entire. My observations upon this passage will be brief, because the purpose of it for the most part, seems to be for an opening of the subject, and for an harmless soother of asperities expected to follow.

"When in the course of human events" it appears expedient "for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with an other," I admit it would not be improper for that people to declare the causes which made that expediency apparent to them. But I entirely deny the propriety of a similar declaration when in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands that have connected them with an other. That necessity knows no law, is a thoroughly established maxim—that it knows no apologies—can neither make them or receive them, is as evident as the maxim of which it is but another version. More strenuously should I deny the propriety of a declaration of causes, when a necessity (necessity is obligatory if it is any thing) obliges them "to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them."

A mere philological criticism was no part of my design; perhaps then I ought to apologise for noticing the queer position of the preposition "to," in the lines last quoted. To assume a station, which the laws of nature entitled them to occupy; would have been natural, and perhaps easy but "to assume a station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them," it