The English works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Volume 02 (of 11) — Thomas Hobbes — John Shaqi
The English works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Volume 02 (of 11)
Thomas Hobbes · en
14. Again the _civil law_, according to its two-fold manner of
publishing, is of two sorts, _written_ and _unwritten_. By
_written_, I understand that which wants a voice, or some other sign
of the will of the legislator, that it may become a law. For all
kind of laws are of the same age with mankind, both in nature and
time; and therefore of more antiquity than the invention of letters,
and the art of writing. Wherefore not a _writing_, but a _voice_ is
necessary for a _written law_; this alone is requisite to the
_being_, that to the _remembrance_ of a law. For we read, that
before letters were found out for the help of memory, that _laws_,
contracted into metre, were wont to be sung. The _unwritten_, is
that which wants no other publishing than the voice of nature or
natural reason; such are the _laws of nature_. For the natural law,
although it be distinguished from the civil, forasmuch as it
commands the will; yet so far forth as it relates to our actions, it
is civil. For example, this same, _thou shalt not covet_, which only
appertains to the mind, is a natural law only; but this, _thou shalt
not invade_, is both natural and civil. For seeing it is impossible
to prescribe such universal rules, whereby all future contentions,
which perhaps are infinite, may be determined; it is to be
understood that in all cases not mentioned by the _written laws_,
the _law of natural equity_ is to be followed, which commands us to
distribute equally to equals; and this by the virtue of the _civil
law_, which also punisheth those who knowingly and willingly do
actually transgress the _laws of nature_.
[Sidenote: That the natural laws are not written laws, neither are
the sentences of lawyers or customs laws of themselves,
but by the consent of the supreme power.]
15. These things being understood, it appears, first, that the _laws
of nature_, although they were described in the books of some
philosophers, are not for that reason to be termed _written laws_:
and that the writings of the interpreters of the laws, were no laws,
for want of the supreme authority; nor yet those _orations of the
wise_, that is to say, _judges_, but so far forth as by the consent
of the supreme power they part into custom; and that then they are
to be received among the _written laws_, not for the custom’s sake,
(which by its own force doth not constitute a law), but for the will
of the supreme commander; which appears in this, that he hath
suffered his _sentence_, whether equal or unequal, to pass into
custom.
[Sidenote: What the word _sin_, taken in its largest sense,
signifies.]