than　one　husband　at　a　time？　or　in　those　parts　of　America　where；　when
  the　husband　and　wife　part；　which　happens　frequently；　the　children
  are　all　left　to　the　mother；　follow　her；　and　are　wholly　under　her
  care　and　provision？　And　if　the　father　die　whilst　the　children　are
  young；　do　they　not　naturally　everywhere　owe　the　same　obedience　to
  their　mother；　during　their　minority；　as　to　their　father；　were　he
  alive？　And　will　any　one　say　that　the　mother　hath　a　legislative　power
  over　her　children　that　she　can　make　standing　rules　which　shall　be　of
  perpetual　obligation；　by　which　they　ought　to　regulate　all　the　concerns
  of　their　property；　and　bound　their　liberty　all　the　course　of　their
  lives；　and　enforce　the　observation　of　them　with　capital　punishments？
  For　this　is　the　proper　power　of　the　magistrate；　of　which　the　father
  hath　not　so　much　as　the　shadow。　His　command　over　his　children　is　but
  temporary；　and　reaches　not　their　life　or　property。　It　is　but　a　help　to
  the　weakness　and　imperfection　of　their　nonage；　a　discipline
  necessary　to　their　education。　And　though　a　father　may　dispose　of　his
  own　possessions　as　he　pleases　when　his　children　are　out　of　danger　of
  perishing　for　want；　yet　his　power　extends　not　to　the　lives　or　goods
  which　either　their　own　industry；　or　another's　bounty；　has　made　theirs；
  nor　to　their　liberty　neither　when　they　are　once　arrived　to　the
  enfranchisement　of　the　years　of　discretion。　The　father's　empire　then
  ceases；　and　he　can　from　thenceforward　no　more　dispose　of　the　liberty
  of　his　son　than　that　of　any　other　man。　And　it　must　be　far　from　an
  absolute　or　perpetual　jurisdiction　from　which　a　man　may　withdraw
  himself；　having　licence　from　Divine　authority　to　〃leave　father　and
  mother　and　cleave　to　his　wife。〃
  66。　But　though　there　be　a　time　when　a　child　comes　to　be　as　free　from
  subjection　to　the　will　and　command　of　his　father　as　he　himself　is　free
  from　subjection　to　the　will　of　anybody　else；　and　they　are　both　under
  no　other　restraint　but　that　which　is　common　to　them　both；　whether　it
  be　the　law　of　Nature　or　municipal　law　of　their　country；　yet　this
  freedom　exempts　not　a　son　from　that　honour　which　he　ought；　by　the
  law　of　God　and　Nature；　to　pay　his　parents；　God　having　made　the　parents
  instruments　in　His　great　design　of　continuing　the　race　of　mankind
  and　the　occasions　of　life　to　their　children。　As　He　hath　laid　on　them
  an　obligation　to　nourish；　preserve；　and　bring　up　their　offspring；　so
  He　has　laid　on　the　children　a　perpetual　obligation　of　honouring
  their　parents；　which；　containing　in　it　an　inward　esteem　and
  reverence　to　be　shown　by　all　outward　expressions；　ties　up　the　child
  from　anything　that　may　ever　injure　or　affront；　disturb　or　endanger　the
  happiness　or　life　of　those　from　whom　he　received　his；　and　engages
  him　in　all　actions　of　defence；　relief；　assistance；　and　comfort　of
  those　by　whose　means　he　entered　into　being　and　has　been　made　capable
  of　any　enjoyments　of　life。　From　this　obligation　no　state；　no
  freedom；　can　absolve　children。　But　this　is　very　far　from　giving
  parents　a　power　of　command　over　their　children；　or　an　authority　to
  make　laws　and　dispose　as　they　please　of　their　lives　or　liberties。　It
  is　one　thing　to　owe　honour；　respect；　gratitude；　and　assistance；
  another　to　require　an　absolute　obedience　and　submission。　The　honour
  due　to　parents　a　monarch　on　his　throne　owes　his　mother；　and　yet　this
  lessens　not　his　authority　nor　subjects　him　to　her　government。
  67。　The　subjection　of　a　minor　places　in　the　father　a　temporary
  government　which　terminates　with　the　minority　of　the　child；　and　the
  honour　due　from　a　child　places　in　the　parents　a　perpetual　right　to
  respect；　reverence；　support；　and　compliance；　to　more　or　less；　as　the
  father's　care；　cost；　and　kindness　in　his　education　has　been　more　or
  less；　and　this　ends　not　with　minority；　but　holds　in　all　parts　and
  conditions　of　a　man's　life。　The　want　of　distinguishing　these　two
  powers　which　the　father　hath；　in　the　right　of　tuition；　during
  minority；　and　the　right　of　honour　all　his　life；　may　perhaps　have
  caused　a　great　part　of　the　mistakes　about　this　matter。　For；　to　speak
  properly　of　them；　the　first　of　these　is　rather　the　privilege　of
  children　and　duty　of　parents　than　any　prerogative　of　paternal　power。
  The　nourishment　and　education　of　their　children　is　a　charge　so
  incumbent　on　parents　for　their　children's　good；　that　nothing　can
  absolve　them　from　taking　care　of　it。　And　though　the　power　of
  commanding　and　chastising　them　go　along　with　it；　yet　God　hath　woven
  into　the　principles　of　human　nature　such　a　tenderness　for　their
  offspring；　that　there　is　little　fear　that　parents　should　use　their
  power　with　too　much　rigour；　the　excess　is　seldom　on　the　severe　side；
  the　strong　bias　of　nature　drawing　the　other　way。　And　therefore　God
  Almighty；　when　He　would　express　His　gentle　dealing　with　the
  Israelites；　He　tells　them　that　though　He　chastened　them；　〃He　chastened
  them　as　a　man　chastens　his　son〃　（Deut。　8。　5）…　i。e。；　with　tenderness
  and　affection；　and　kept　them　under　no　severer　discipline　than　what　was
  absolutely　best　for　them；　and　had　been　less　kindness；　to　have
  slackened。　This　is　that　power　to　which　children　are　commanded
  obedience；　that　the　pains　and　care　of　their　parents　may　not　be
  increased　or　ill…rewarded。
  68。　On　the　other　side；　honour　and　support　all　that　which　gratitude
  requires　to　return；　for　the　benefits　received　by　and　from　them　is
  the　indispensable　duty　of　the　child　and　the　proper　privilege　of　the
  parents。　This　is　intended　for　the　parents'　advantage；　as　the　other
  is　for　the　child's；　though　education；　the　parents'　duty；　seems　to　have
  most　power；　because　the　ignorance　and　infirmities　of　childhood　stand
  in　need　of　restraint　and　correction；　which　is　a　visible　exercise　of
  rule　and　a　kind　of　dominion。　And　that　duty　which　is　comprehended　in
  the　word　〃honour〃　requires　less　obedience；　though　the　obligation　be
  stronger　on　grown　than　younger　children。　For　who　can　think　the
  command；　〃Children；　obey　your　parents；〃　requires　in　a　man　that　has
  children　of　his　own　the　same　submission　to　his　father　as　it　does　in
  his　yet　young　children　to　him；　and　that　by　this　precept　he　were
  bound　to　obey　all　his　father's　commands；　if；　out　of　a　conceit　of
  authority；　he　should　have　the　indiscretion　to　treat　him　still　as　a
  boy？
  69。　The　first　part；　then；　of　paternal　power；　or　rather　duty；　which
  is　education；　belongs　so　to　the　father　that　it　terminates　at　a　certain
  season。　When　the　business　of　education　is　over　it　ceases　of　itself；
  and　is　also　alienable　before。　For　a　man　may　put　the　tuition　of　his　son
  in　other　hands；　and　he　that　has　made　his　son　an　apprentice　to
  another　has　discharged　him；　during　that　time；　of　a　great　part　of　his
  obedience；　both　to　himself　and　to　his　mother。　But　all　the　duty　of
  honour；　the　other　part；　remains　nevertheless　entire　to　them；　nothing
  can　cancel　that。　It　is　so　inseparable　from　them　both；　that　the
  father's　authority　cannot　dispossess　the　mother　of　this　right；　nor　can
  any　man　discharge　his　son　from　honouring　her　that　bore　him。　But　both
  these　are　very　far　from　a　power　to　make　laws；　and　enforcing　them
  with　penalties　that　may　reach　estate；　liberty；　limbs；　and　life。　The
  power　of　commanding　ends　with　nonage；　and　though　after　that　honour　and
  respect；　support　and　defence；　and　whatsoever　gratitude　can　oblige　a
  man　to；　for　the　highest　benefits　he　is　naturally　capable　of　be
  always　due　from　a　son　to　his　parents；　yet　all　this　puts　no　sceptre
  into　the　father's　hand；　no　sovereign　power　of　commanding。　He　has　no
  dominion　over　his　son's　property　or　actions；　nor　any　right　that　his
  will　should　prescribe　to　his　son's　in　all　things；　however；　it　may
  become　his　son　in　many　things；　not　very　inconvenient　to　him　and　his
  family；　to　pay　a　deference　to　it。
  70。　A　man　may　owe　honour　and　respect　to　an　ancient　or　wise　man；
  defence　to　his　child　or　friend；　relief　and　support　to　the
  distressed；　and　gratitude　to　a　benefactor；　to　such　a　degree　that　all
  he　has；　all　he　can　do；　cannot　sufficiently　pay　it。　But　all　these
  give　no　authority；　no　right　of　making　laws　to　any　one　over　him　from
  whom　they　are　owing。　And　it　is　plain　all　this　is　due；　not　to　the
  bare　title　of　father；　not　only　because　as　has　been　said；　it　is　owing
  to　the　mother　too；　but　because　these　obligations　to　parents；　and　the
  degrees　of　what　is　required　of　children；　may　be　varied　by　the
  different　care　and　kindness　trouble　and　expense；　is　often　employed
  upon　one　child　more　than　another。
  71。　This　shows　the　reason　how　it　comes　to　pass　that　parents　in
  societies；　where　they　themselves　are　subjects；　retain　a　power　over
  their　children　and　have　as　much　right　to　their　subjection　as　those　who
  are　in　the　state　of　Nature；　which　could　not　possibly　be　if　all
  political　power　were　only　paternal；　and　that；　in　truth；　they　were
  one　and　the　same　thing；　for　then；　all　paternal　power　being　in　the
  prince；　the　subject　could　naturally　have　none　of　it。　But　these　two
  powers；　political　and　paternal；　are　so　perfectly　distinct　and
  separate；　and　built　upon　so　different　foundations；　and　given　to　so
  different　ends；　that　every　subject　that　is　a　father　has　as　much　a
  paternal　power　over　his