other places； from whence sprang all that number of petty
commonwealths in the beginning of ages； and which always multiplied as
long as there was room enough； till the stronger or more fortunate
swallowed the weaker； and those great ones； again breaking to
pieces； dissolved into lesser dominions； all which are so many
testimonies against paternal sovereignty； and plainly prove that it
was not the natural right of the father descending to his heirs that
made governments in the beginning； since it was impossible； upon
that ground； there should have been so many little kingdoms but only
one universal monarchy if men had not been at liberty to separate
themselves from their families and their government； be it what it
will that was set up in it； and go and make distinct commonwealths and
other governments as they thought fit。
116。 This has been the practice of the world from its first
beginning to this day； nor is it now any more hindrance to the freedom
of mankind； that they are born under constituted and ancient
polities that have established laws and set forms of government；
than if they were born in the woods amongst the unconfined inhabitants
that run loose in them。 For those who would persuade us that by
being born under any government we are naturally subjects to it； and
have no more any title or pretence to the freedom of the state of
Nature； have no other reason （bating that of paternal power； which
we have already answered） to produce for it； but only because our
fathers or progenitors passed away their natural liberty； and
thereby bound up themselves and their posterity to a perpetual
subjection to the government which they themselves submitted to。 It is
true that whatever engagements or promises any one made for himself；
he is under the obligation of them； but cannot by any compact
whatsoever bind his children or posterity。 For his son； when a man；
being altogether as free as the father； any act of the father can no
more give away the liberty of the son than it can of anybody else。
He may； indeed； annex such conditions to the land he enjoyed； as a
subject of any commonwealth； as may oblige his son to be of that
community； if he will enjoy those possessions which were his father's；
because that estate being his father's property； he may dispose or
settle it as he pleases。
117。 And this has generally given the occasion to the mistake in
this matter； because commonwealths not permitting any part of their
dominions to be dismembered； nor to be enjoyed by any but those of
their community； the son cannot ordinarily enjoy the possessions of
his father but under the same terms his father did； by becoming a
member of the society； whereby he puts himself presently under the
government he finds there established； as much as any other subject of
that commonweal。 And thus the consent of free men； born under
government； which only makes them members of it； being given
separately in their turns； as each comes to be of age； and not in a
multitude together； people take no notice of it； and thinking it not
done at all； or not necessary； conclude they are naturally subjects as
they are men。
118。 But it is plain governments themselves understand it otherwise；
they claim no power over the son because of that they had over the
father； nor look on children as being their subjects； by their fathers
being so。 If a subject of England have a child by an Englishwoman in
France； whose subject is he？ Not the King of England's； for he must
have leave to be admitted to the privileges of it。 Nor the King of
France's； for how then has his father a liberty to bring him away； and
breed him as he pleases； and whoever was judged as a traitor or
deserter； if he left； or warred against a country； for being barely
born in it of parents that were aliens there？ It is plain； then； by
the practice of governments themselves； as well as by the law of right
reason； that a child is born a subject of no country nor government。
He is under his father's tuition and authority till he come to age
of discretion； and then he is a free man； at liberty what government
he will put himself under； what body politic he will unite himself to。
For if an Englishman's son born in France be at liberty； and may do
so； it is evident there is no tie upon him by his father being a
subject of that kingdom； nor is he bound up by any compact of his
ancestors； and why then hath not his son； by the same reason； the same
liberty； though he be born anywhere else？ Since the power that a
father hath naturally over his children is the same wherever they be
born； and the ties of natural obligations are not bounded by the
positive limits of kingdoms and commonwealths。
119。 Every man being； as has been showed； naturally free； and
nothing being able to put him into subjection to any earthly power；
but only his own consent； it is to be considered what shall be
understood to be a sufficient declaration of a man's consent to make
him subject to the laws of any government。 There is a common
distinction of an express and a tacit consent； which will concern
our present case。 Nobody doubts but an express consent of any man；
entering into any society； makes him a perfect member of that society；
a subject of that government。 The difficulty is； what ought to be
looked upon as a tacit consent； and how far it binds… i。e。； how far
any one shall be looked on to have consented； and thereby submitted to
any government； where he has made no expressions of it at all。 And
to this I say； that every man that hath any possession or enjoyment of
any part of the dominions of any government doth hereby give his tacit
consent； and is as far forth obliged to obedience to the laws of
that government； during such enjoyment； as any one under it； whether
this his possession be of land to him and his heirs for ever； or a
lodging only for a week； or whether it be barely travelling freely
on the highway； and； in effect； it reaches as far as the very being of
any one within the territories of that government。
120。 To understand this the better； it is fit to consider that every
man when he at first incorporates himself into any commonwealth； he；
by his uniting himself thereunto； annexes also； and submits to the
community those possessions which he has； or shall acquire； that do
not already belong to any other government。 For it would be a direct
contradiction for any one to enter into society with others for the
securing and regulating of property； and yet to suppose his land；
whose property is to be regulated by the laws of the society； should
be exempt from the jurisdiction of that government to which he
himself； and the property of the land； is a subject。 By the same
act； therefore； whereby any one unites his person； which was before
free； to any commonwealth； by the same he unites his possessions；
which were before free； to it also； and they become； both of them；
person and possession； subject to the government and dominion of
that commonwealth as long as it hath a being。 Whoever therefore；
from thenceforth； by inheritance； purchases permission； or otherwise
enjoys any part of the land so annexed to； and under the government of
that commonweal； must take it with the condition it is under… that is；
of submitting to the government of the commonwealth； under whose
jurisdiction it is； as far forth as any subject of it。
121。 But since the government has a direct jurisdiction only over
the land and reaches the possessor of it （before he has actually
incorporated himself in the society） only as he dwells upon and enjoys
that； the obligation any one is under by virtue of such enjoyment to
submit to the government begins and ends with the enjoyment； so that
whenever the owner； who has given nothing but such a tacit consent
to the government will； by donation； sale or otherwise； quit the
said possession； he is at liberty to go and incorporate himself into
any other commonwealth； or agree with others to begin a new one in
vacuis locis； in any part of the world they can find free and
unpossessed； whereas he that has once； by actual agreement and any
express declaration； given his consent to be of any commonweal； is
perpetually and indispensably obliged to be； and remain unalterably
a subject to it； and can never be again in the liberty of the state of
Nature； unless by any calamity the government he was under comes to be
dissolved。
122。 But submitting to the laws of any country； living quietly and
enjoying privileges and protection under them； makes not a man a
member of that society； it is only a local protection and homage due
to and from all those who； not being in a state of war； come within
the territories belonging to any government； to all parts whereof
the force of its law extends。 But this no more makes a man a member of
that society； a perpetual subject of that commonwealth； than it
would make a man a subject to another in whose family he found it
convenient to abide for some time； though； whilst he continued in
it； he were obliged to comply with the laws and submit to the
government he found there。 And thus we see that foreigners； by
living all their lives under another government； and enjoying the
privileges and protection of it； though they are bound； even in
conscience； to submit to its administration as far forth as any
denizen； yet do not thereby come to be subjects or members of that
commonwealth。 Nothing can make any man so but his actually entering
into it by positive engagement and express promise and compact。 This
is that which； I think； concerning the beginning of political
societies； and that consent which makes any one a member of any
commonwealth。
Chapter IX
Of the Ends of Political Society and Government
123。 IF man in the state of Nature be so free as has been said； if
he be absolute lord of his own person and possessions； equal to the
greatest and subject to nobody； why will he part with his freedom；
this empire； and subject himself to the dominion and control of any
othe