"I consent with him," said Filmer of Hobbes, "about the Rights of _exercising_ Government, but I cannot agree to his means of acquiring it." That power must be absolute, Filmer, like Hobbes, has no manner of doubt; but his method of proof is to derive the title of Charles I from Adam.

Little difficulties like the origin of primogeniture, or whence, as Locke points out, the universal monarchy of Shem can be derived, the good Sir Robert does not satisfactorily determine.

Locke takes him up point by point, and there is little enough left, save a sense that history is the root of institutions, when he has done.

What troubles us is rather why Locke should have wasted the resources of his intelligence upon so feeble an opponent.

The book of Hobbes lay ready to his hand; yet he almost ostentatiously refused to grapple with it.