To say, as the advocates of our government do, that a man must give up _some_ of his natural rights, to a government, in order to have the rest of them protected--the government being all the while the sole and irresponsible judge as to what rights he does give up, and what he retains, and what are to be protected--is to say that he gives up all the rights that the government chooses, _at any time_, to assume that he has given up; and that he retains none, and is to be protected in none, except such as the government shall, _at all times_, see fit to protect, and to permit him to retain. This is to suppose that he has retained no rights at all, that he can, _at any time_, claim as his own, _as against the government_. It is to say that he has really given up every right, and reserved none. For a still further reason, it is absurd to say that a man must give up _some_ of his rights to a government, in order that government may protect him in the rest. That reason is, that every right he gives up diminishes his own power of self-protection, and makes it so much more difficult for the government to protect him. And yet our government says a man must give up _all_ his rights, in order that it may protect him. It might just as well be said that a man must consent to be bound hand and foot, in order to enable a government, or his friends, to protect him against an enemy. Leave him in full possession of his limbs, and of all his powers, and he will do more for his own protection than he otherwise could, and will have less need of protection from a government, or any other source. Finally, if a man, who is _compos mentis_, wants any outside protection for his rights, he is perfectly competent to make his own bargain for such as he desires; and other persons have no occasion to thrust their protection upon him, against his will; or to insist, as they now do, that he shall give up all, or any, of his rights to them, in consideration of such protection, and only such protection, as they may afterwards _choose_ to give him. It is especially noticeable that those persons, who are so impatient to protect other men in their rights that they cannot wait until they are requested to do so, have a somewhat inveterate habit of killing all who do not voluntarily accept their protection; or do not consent to give up to them all their rights in exchange for it.