To be sure, the Convention voted it : but will that
make it binding upon our belief?

Suppose they had voted that there was no God :
would that have demonstrated such a proposition ?
G 4



128 HISTOKICAL ESSAY, SECT. II,

In reference to the opinion quoted from Locke, I
have asked what is meant by a trust?

Surely it is not meant to be that technical instru-
ment in law which appoints, by a known formulary,
one person to hold a benefit for the use of another ?

But, even if Locke meant it so, could he who
appointed the trust resume it himself, let it be ever
so much abused ?

The reason is, because no man can be a judge in
his own case. The law, therefore, in cases of abuse,
appoints other parties to take cognisance of, and
decide the question. But the word had not this
literal technical meaning, even with Locke.
It is evidently a metaphysical supposition, the
better to illustrate a particular doctrine in morals, as
well as in politics.
Under this, as a legal deed of trust cTiacts certain
duties to be performed, in failure of which, the
power may be resumed under a decree by competent
and known authority; so, for the better exposition
of the reciprocal duties of governors and governed,
or of men generally, a case is supposed which never
actually happened, and a trust is impliedly granted
by one party to another, as if bpth were in a state
of civil society, when, in point of fact to have been
so, the trust supposed must have already been exe-
cuted.
