But I think there is no probability that a law so unreasonable in itself, (unreasonable even after making all allowance for the difference in the value of money,) and so contrary to immemorial custom, could and did obtain any general or speedy acquiescence among a people who cared little for the authority of kings.
He argues that an unreasonable law would not gain acceptance among a populace that disregarded royal authority.
Share
More from Lysander Spooner
The answer is, that they are as reliable for that purpose as are the majority; they are as much presumed to have associated, and are as likely to have associated, for that object, as are the majority; and they have as much interest in such…
It was simply, that they would neither convict the innocent, nor acquit the guilty.
Therefore all their laws, as they call them,--that is, all the laws of their own making,--have no color of authority or obligation.
Proud from victory, and with their swords in their hands, would they surrender their liberties to a private man?