Although all sta­tes have in gene­ral a sin­gle objec­tive, which is to main­tain them­sel­ves, each state never­the­less has one that is pecu­liar to itself. The objec­tive of Rome was expan­sion ; that of Lacedæmon, war ; that of the Judaic laws was reli­gion ; Marseille’s was trade ; public tran­qui­lity that of the laws of China1 ; navi­ga­tion that of the Rhodians’ laws ; natu­ral free­dom that of the govern­ment of sava­ges ; in gene­ral, the delights of the prince that of des­po­tic sta­tes ; his glory and the glory of the state that of monar­chies ; the inde­pen­dence of each indi­vi­dual is the objec­tive of the laws of Poland, and what results is the oppres­sion of all.2

There is also one nation in the world which has poli­ti­cal free­dom as the direct objec­tive of its cons­ti­tu­tion. We are going to exa­mine the prin­ci­ples on which she bases it. If they are sound, free­dom will appear as in a mir­ror.

It is not so dif­fi­cult to dis­co­ver poli­ti­cal free­dom in the cons­ti­tu­tion. If we can see it where it is, if we have found it, why look for it ?

The natural objective of a state that has no external enemies, or thinks it has stopped them with barriers.

A drawback of the liberum veto.