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！
was divided into very small states； and there was reason to apprehend lest in a republic torn by intestine divisions the soberest part should keep retired； in consequence of which things might be carried to extremity。
In the seditions raised in those petty states the bulk of the citizens either made or engaged in the quarrel。 In our large monarchies parties are formed by a few； and the people choose to live quietly； In the latter case it is natural to call back the seditious to the bulk of the citizens； and not these to the seditious； in the other it is necessary to oblige the small number of prudent people to enter among the seditious； it is thus the fermentation of one liquor may be stopped by a single drop of another。
4。 Of the Laws contrary to the Views of the Legislator。 There are laws so little understood by the legislator as to be contrary to the very end he proposed。 Those who made this regulation among the French； that when one of the two competitors died the benefice should devolve to the survivor； had in view； without doubt； the extinction of quarrels； but the very reverse falls out； we see the clergy at variance every day； and like English mastiffs worrying one another to death。
5。 The same Subject continued。 The law I am going to speak of is to be found in this oath preserved by ？schines：＇4＇ 〃I swear that I will never destroy a town of the Amphictyones； and that I will not divert the course of its running waters； if any nation shall presume to do such a thing； I will declare war against them and will destroy their towns。〃 The last article of this law； which seems to confirm the first； is really contrary to it。 Amphictyon is willing that the Greek towns should never be destroyed； and yet his law paves the way for their destruction。 In order to establish a proper law of nations among the Greeks； they ought to have been accustomed early to think it a barbarous thing to destroy a Greek town； consequently they ought not even to ruin the destroyers。 Amphictyon's law was just； but it was not prudent； this appears even from the abuse made of it。 Did not Philip assume the power of demolishing towns； under the pretence of their having infringed the laws of the Greeks？ Amphictyon might have inflicted other punishments； he might have ordained； for example； that a certain number of the magistrates of the destroying town； or of the chiefs of the infringing army； should be punished with death； that the destroying nation should cease for a while to enjoy the privileges of the Greeks； that they should pay a fine till the town was rebuilt。 The law ought； above all things； to aim at the reparation of damages。
6。 The Laws which appear the same have not always the same Effect。 C？sar made a law to prohibit people from keeping above sixty sesterces in their houses。＇5＇ This law was considered at Rome as extremely proper for reconciling the debtors to their creditors； because； by obliging the rich to lend to the poor； they enabled the latter to pay their debts。 A law of the same nature made in France at the time of the System proved extremely fatal； because it was enacted under a most frightful situation。 After depriving people of all possible means of laying out their money； they stripped them even of the last resource of keeping it at home； which was the same as taking it from them by open violence。 C？sar's law was intended to make the money circulate； the French minister's design was to draw all the money into one hand。 The former gave either lands or mortgages on private people for the money； the latter proposed in lieu of money nothing but effects which were of no value； and could have none by their very nature； because the law compelled people to accept of them。
7。 The same Subject continued。 Necessity of composing Laws in a proper Manner。 The law of ostracism was established at Athens； at Argos；＇6＇ and at Syracuse。 At Syracuse it was productive of a thousand mischiefs； because it was imprudently enacted。 The principal citizens banished one another by holding the leaf of a fig…tree in their hands； so that those who had any kind of merit withdrew from public affairs。＇7＇ At Athens； where the legislator was sensible of the proper extent and limits of his law； ostracism proved an admirable regulation。 They never condemned more than one person at a time； and such a number of suffrages were requisite for passing this sentence that it was extremely difficult for them to banish aperson whose absence was not necessary to the state。＇8＇
The power of banishing was exercised only every fifth year： and indeed； as the ostracism was designed against none but great personages who threatened the state with danger； it ought not to have been the transaction of every day。
8。 That Laws which appear the same were not always made through the same Motive。 In France they have received most of the Roman laws on substitutions； but through quite a different motive from the Romans。 Among the latter the inheritance was accompanied with certain sacrifices＇9＇ which were to be performed by the inheritor and were regulated by the pontifical law； hence it was that they reckoned it a dishonour to die without heirs； that they made slaves their heirs； and that they devised substitutions。 Of this we have a very strong proof in the vulgar substitution； which was the first invented； and took place only when the heir appointed did not accept of the inheritance。 Its view was not to perpetuate the estate in a family of the same name； but to find somebody that would accept of it。
9。 That the Greek and Roman Laws punished Suicide； but not through the same Motive。 A man； says Plato； who has killed one nearly related to him； that is； himself； not by an order of the magistrate； not to avoid ignominy； but through pusillanimity shall be punished。＇10＇ The Roman law punished this action when it was not committed through pusillanimity； through weariness of life； through impatience in pain； but from a criminal despair。 The Roman law acquitted where the Greek condemned； and condemned where the other acquitted。
Plato's law was formed upon the Laced？monian institutions； where the orders of the magistrate were absolute； where shame was the greatest of miseries； and pusillanimity the greatest of crimes。 The Romans had no longer those refined ideas； theirs was only a fiscal law。
During the time of the republic； there was no law at Rome against suicides； this action is always considered by their historians in a favourable light； and we never meet with any punishment inflicted upon those who committed it。
Under the first emperors； the great families of Rome were continually destroyed by criminal prosecutions。 The custom was then introduced of preventing judgment by a voluntary death。 In this they found a great advantage： they had an honourable interment； and their wills were executed； because there was no law against suicides。＇11＇ But when the emperors became as avaricious as cruel； they deprived those who destroyed themselves of the means of preserving their estates by rendering it criminal for a person to make away with himself through a criminal remorse。
What I have been saying of the motive of the emperors is so true； that they consented that the estates of su