Foundations of American Environmental Thought and Action 13
themselves, in which we see them live in com-
monwealths, is the foresight of their own pres-
ervation, and of a more contented life thereby;
that is to say, of getting themselves out from that
miserable condition of war, which is necessar-
ily consequent, as hath been shown.. ., to the
natural passions of men, when there is no visible
power to keep them in awe, and tie them by fear
of punishment to the performance of their cov-
enants, and observation of those laws of nature
[discussed earlier].... For the laws of nature, as justice,
equity, modesty, mercy, and, in sum, doing to
others, as we would be done to, of themselves,
without the terror of some power, to cause
them to be observed, are contrary to our natu-
ral passions.
As for the plenty of matter, it is a thing lim-
ited by nature, to those commodities, which
from the two breasts of our common mother,
land and sea, God usually either freely giveth, or
for labour selleth to mankind.
For the matter of this nutriment, consist-
ing in animals, vegetals, and minerals, God
hath freely laid them before us, in or near to
the face of the earth; so as there needeth no
more but the labour, and industry of receiving
them. Insomuch as plenty dependeth, next to
God's favour, merely on the labour and indus-
try of men.
I find the words lex civilis, and jus civile,
that is to say law and right civile, promiscuously
The right of nature, which writers commonly
call jus naturale, is the liberty each man hath, to
use his own power, as he will himself, for the pres-
ervation of his own nature; that is to say of his
own life; and consequently, of doing any thing,
which in his own judgment, and reason, he shall
conceive to be the aptest means thereunto.
Whensoever a man transferreth his right
or renounceth it; it is either in consideration of
some right reciprocally transferred to himself; or
for some good he hopeth for thereby. Or it is a
voluntary act: and of the voluntary acts of every
man, the object is some good to himself. For it
is a voluntary act: and of the voluntary acts of
every man, the object is some good to himself.
[S]uch things as cannot be divided, [should]
be enjoyed in common, if it can be; and if the
equality of the thing permit, without stint; oth-
erwise proportionally to the number of them
that have right. For otherwise the distribution is
unequal, and contrary to equity.
... But some things there be, that can nei-
ther be divided nor enjoyed in common. Then,
the law of nature, which precribeth equity,
requireth, that the entire right; or else, mak-
ing the use alternate, the first possession, to be
determined by lot.
The final cause, end, or design of men, who
naturally love liberty, and dominion over oth-
ers, in the introduction of that restraint upon
DOCUMENT 11: Thomas Hobbes's Social Contract Theory (1651)
In his book Leviathan, the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes outlined his social contract theory, positing
that people must submit to governmental authority in order to have peace. The treatise, written in support
of absolute government and in defense of the acquisition of private property by the monarchy, also offered a
coherent statement about the human relationship to the natural world and about the use of the commons. Jean-
Jacques Rousseau, John Locke [see Document 14], and William Blackstone [see Document 18], whose writings
were seminal influences on the authors of the U.S. Constitution, took many of their ideas concerning the rights
of man, private property, and social contract from Leviathan.