按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
leaves fields untouched； where the eye is refreshed by the prospect of fine meadows。
10。 Difference of Obedience in Moderate and Despotic Governments。 In despotic states； the nature of government requires the most passive obedience； and when once the prince's will is made known； it ought infallibly to produce its effect。
Here they have no limitations or restrictions； no mediums； terms； equivalents； or remonstrances； no change to propose： man is a creature that blindly submits to the absolute will of the sovereign。
In a country like this they are no more allowed to represent their apprehensions of a future danger than to impute their miscarriage to the capriciousness of fortune。 Man's portion here； like that of beasts； is instinct； compliance； and punishment。
Little does it then avail to plead the sentiments of nature； filial respect； conjugal or parental tenderness； the laws of honour； or want of health； the order is given； and； that is sufficient。
In Persia； when the king has condemned a person； it is no longer lawful to mention his name； or to intercede in his favour。 Even if the prince were intoxicated； or non compos； the decree must be executed；＇19＇ otherwise he would contradict himself； and the law admits of no contradiction。 This has been the way of thinking in that country in all ages； as the order which Ahasuerus gave； to exterminate the Jews； could not be revoked； they were allowed the liberty of defending themselves。
One thing； however； may be sometimes opposed to the prince's will；＇20＇ namely； religion。 They will abandon； nay they will slay a parent； if the prince so commands； but he cannot oblige them to drink wine。 The laws of religion are of a superior nature； because they bind the sovereign as well as the subject。 But with respect to the law of nature； it is otherwise； the prince is no longer supposed to be a man。
In monarchical and moderate states； the power is limited by its very spring； I mean by honour； which； like a monarch； reigns over the prince and his people。 They will not allege to their sovereign the laws of religion； a courtier would be apprehensive of rendering himself ridiculous。 But the laws of honour will be appealed to on all occasions。 Hence arise the restrictions necessary to obedience； honour is naturally subject to whims； by which the subject's submission will be ever directed。
Though the manner of obeying be different in these two kinds of government； the power is the same。 On which side soever the monarch turns； he inclines the scale； and is obeyed。 The whole difference is that in a monarchy the prince receives instruction； at the same time that his ministers have greater abilities； and are more versed in public affairs； than the ministers of a despotic government。
11。 Reflections on the preceding Chapters。 Such are the principles of the three sorts of government： which does not imply that in a particular republic they actually are； but that they ought to be； virtuous； nor does it prove that in a particular monarchy they are actuated by honour； or in a particular despotic government by fear； but that they ought to be directed by these principles； otherwise the government is imperfect。
______
1。 This is a very important distinction； whence I shall draw many consequences； for it is the key of an infinite number of laws。
2。 Cromwell。
3。 Plutarch； Pericles； Plato； in Critias。
4。 She had at that time twenty…one thousand citizens； ten thousand strangers； and four hundred thousand slaves。 See Athen？us； vi。
5。 She had then twenty thousand citizens。 See Demosthenes in Aristog。
6。 They had passed a law； which rendered it a capital crime for any one to propose applying the money designed for the theatres to military
7。 This lasted three years。
8。 Public crimes may be punished； because it is here a common concern； but private crimes will go unpunished； because it is the common interest not to punish them。
9。 I speak here of political virtue； which is also moral virtue as it is directed to the public good； very little of private moral virtue； and not at all of that virtue which relates to revealed truths。 This will appear better in v。 2。
10。 This is to be understood in the sense of the preceding note。
11。 We must not； says he； employ people of mean extraction； they are too rigid and morose。 Testament Polit。； 4。
12。 This word good man is understood here in a political sense only。
13。 See Footnote 1。
14。 See Perry； p。 447。
15。 As it often happens in a military aristocracy。
16。 Ricaut on the Ottoman Empire。 I； ii。
17。 See the history of this revolution by Father du Cerceau。
18。 Suetonius； Life of Domitian； viii。 His was a military constitution； which is one of the species of despotic government。
19。 See Sir John Chardin。
20。 Ibid。
Book IV。 That the Laws of Education Ought to Be in Relation to the Principles of Government
1。 Of the Laws of Education。 The laws of education are the first impressions we receive； and as they prepare us for civil life； every private family ought to be governed by the plan of that great household which comprehends them all。
If the people in general have a principle； their constituent parts； that is； the several families； will have one also。 The laws of education will be therefore different in each species of government： in monarchies they will have honour for their object； in republics； virtue； in despotic governments； fear。
2。 Of Education in Monarchies。 In monarchies the principal branch of education is not taught in colleges or academies。 It commences； in some measure； at our setting out in the world； for this is the school of what we call honour； that universal preceptor which ought everywhere to be our guide。
Here it is that we constantly hear three rules or maxims； viz。； that we should have a certain nobleness in our virtues； a kind of frankness in our morals； and a particular politeness in our behaviour。
The virtues we are here taught are less what we owe to others than to ourselves； they are not so much what draws us towards society； as what distinguishes us from our fellow…citizens。 Here the actions of men are judged； not as virtuous； but as shining； not as just； but as great； not as reasonable； but as extraordinary。 When honour here meets with anything noble in our actions； it is either a judge that approves them； or sophist by whom they are excused。
It allows of gallantry when united with the idea of sensible affection； or with that of conquest； this is the reason why we never meet with so strict a purity of morals in monarchies as in republican governments。
It allows of cunning and craft； when joined with the notion of greatness of soul or importance of affairs； as； for instance； in politics； with finesses of which it is far from being offended。
It does not forbid adulation； save when separated from the idea of a large fortune； and connected only with the sense of our mean condition。
With regard to morals； I have observed that the education of monarchies ought to admit of a certain frankness and open carriage。 Truth； therefore； in conversation is here a necessary point。 But is it for the sake of truth？ By no means。 Truth is requisite only becaus