the spirit of laws-第15部分

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！






Book　V。　That　the　Laws　Given　by　the　Legislator　Ought　to　Be　in　Relation　to　the　Principle　of　Government

1。　Idea　of　this　Book。　That　the　laws　of　education　should　relate　to　the　principle　of　each　government　has　been　shown　in　the　preceding　book。　Now　the　same　may　be　said　of　those　which　the　legislator　gives　to　the　whole　society。　The　relation　of　laws　to　this　principle　strengthens　the　several　springs　of　government；　and　this　principle　derives　thence；　in　its　turn；　a　new　degree　of　vigour。　And　thus　it　is　in　mechanics；　that　action　is　always　followed　by　reaction。

Our　design　is；　to　examine　this　relation　in　each　government；　beginning　with　the　republican　state；　the　principle　of　which　is　virtue。

2。　What　is　meant　by　Virtue　in　a　political　State。　Virtue　in　a　republic　is　a　most　simple　thing：　it　is　a　love　of　the　republic；　it　is　a　sensation；　and　not　a　consequence　of　acquired　knowledge：　a　sensation　that　may　be　felt　by　the　meanest　as　well　as　by　the　highest　person　in　the　state。　When　the　common　people　adopt　good　maxims；　they　adhere　to　them　more　steadily　than　those　whom　we　call　gentlemen。　It　is　very　rarely　that　corruption　commences　with　the　former：　nay；　they　frequently　derive　from　their　imperfect　light　a　stronger　attachment　to　the　established　laws　and　customs。

The　love　of　our　country　is　conducive　to　a　purity　of　morals；　and　the　latter　is　again　conducive　to　the　former。　The　less　we　are　able　to　satisfy　our　private　passions；　the　more　we　abandon　ourselves　to　those　of　a　general　nature。　How　comes　it　that　monks　are　so　fond　of　their　order？　It　is　owing　to　the　very　cause　that　renders　the　order　insupportable。　Their　rule　debars　them　from　all　those　things　by　which　the　ordinary　passions　are　fed；　there　remains　therefore　only　this　passion　for　the　very　rule　that　torments　them。　The　more　austere　it　is；　that　is；　the　more　it　curbs　their　inclinations；　the　more　force　it　givfes　to　the　only　passion　left　them。

3。　What　is　meant　by　a　Love　of　the　Republic　in　a　Democracy。　A　love　of　the　republic　in　a　democracy　is　a　love　of　the　democracy；　as　the　latter　is　that　of　equality。

A　love　of　the　democracy　is　likewise　that　of　frugality。　Since　every　individual　ought　here　to　enjoy　the　same　happiness　and　the　same　advantages；　they　should　consequently　taste　the　same　pleasures　and　form　the　same　hopes；　which　cannot　be　expected　but　from　a　general　frugality。

The　love　of　equality　in　a　democracy　limits　ambition　to　the　sole　desire；　to　the　sole　happiness；　of　doing　greater　services　to　our　country　than　the　rest　of　our　fellow…citizens。　They　cannot　all　render　her　equal　services；　but　they　all　ought　to　serve　her　with　equal　alacrity。　At　our　coming　into　the　world；　we　contract　an　immense　debt　to　our　country；　which　we　can　never　discharge。

Hence　distinctions　here　arise　from　the　principle　of　equality；　even　when　it　seems　to　be　removed　by　signal　services　or　superior　abilities。

The　love　of　frugality　limits　the　desire　of　having　to　the　study　of　procuring　necessaries　to　our　family；　and　superfluities　to　our　country。　Riches　give　a　power　which　a　citizen　cannot　use　for　himself；　for　then　he　would　be　no　longer　equal。　They　likewise　procure　pleasures　which　he　ought　not　to　enjoy；　because　these　would　be　also　repugnant　to　the　equality。

Thus　well…regulated　democracies；　by　establishing　domestic　frugality；　made　way　at　the　same　time　for　public　expenses；　as　was　the　case　at　Rome　and　Athens；　when　magnificence　and　profusion　arose　from　the　very　fund　of　frugality。　And　as　religion　commands　us　to　have　pure　and　unspotted　hands　when　we　make　our　offerings　to　the　gods；　the　laws　required　a　frugality　of　life　to　enable　them　to　be　liberal　to　our　country。

The　good　sense　and　happiness　of　individuals　depend　greatly　upon　the　mediocrity　of　their　abilities　and　fortunes。　Therefore；　as　a　republic；　where　the　laws　have　placed　many　in　a　middling　station；　is　composed　of　wise　men；　it　will　be　wisely　governed；　as　it　is　composed　of　happy　men；　it　will　be　extremely　happy。

4。　In　what　Manner　the　Love　of　Equality　and　Frugality　is　inspired。　The　love　of　equality　and　of　a　frugal　economy　is　greatly　excited　by　equality　and　frugality　themselves；　in　societies　where　both　these　virtues　are　established　by　law。

In　monarchies　and　despotic　governments；　nobody　aims　at　equality；　this　does　not　so　much　as　enter　their　thoughts；　they　all　aspire　to　superiority。　People　of　the　very　lowest　condition　desire　to　emerge　from　their　obscurity；　only　to　lord　it　over　their　fellow…subjects。

It　is　the　same　with　respect　to　frugality。　To　love　it；　we　must　practise　and　enjoy　it。　It　is　not　those　who　are　enervated　by　pleasure　that　are　fond　of　a　frugal　life；　were　this　natural　and　common；　Alcibiades　would　never　have　been　the　admiration　of　the　universe。　Neither　is　it　those　who　envy　or　admire　the　luxury　of　the　great；　people　that　have　present　to　their　view　none　but　rich　men；　or　men　miserable　like　themselves；　detest　their　wretched　condition；　without　loving　or　knowing　the　real　term　or　point　of　misery。

A　true　maxim　it　is；　therefore；　that　in　order　to　love　equality　and　frugality　in　a　republic；　these　virtues　must　have　been　previously　established　by　law。

5。　In　what　Manner　the　Laws　establish　Equality　in　a　Democracy。　Some　ancient　legislators；　as　Lycurgus　and　Romulus；　made　an　equal　division　of　lands。　A　settlement　of　this　kind　can　never　take　place　except　upon　the　foundation　of　a　new　republic；　or　when　the　old　one　is　so　corrupt；　and　the　minds　of　the　people　are　so　disposed；　that　the　poor　think　themselves　obliged　to　demand；　and　the　rich　obliged　to　consent　to　a　remedy　of　this　nature。

If　the　legislator；　in　making　a　division　of　this　kind；　does　not　enact　laws　at　the　same　time　to　support　it；　he　forms　only　a　temporary　constitution；　inequality　will　break　in　where　the　laws　have　not　precluded　it；　and　the　republic　will　be　utterly　undone。

Hence　for　the　preservation　of　this　equality　it　is　absolutely　necessary　there　should　be　some　regulation　in　respect　to　women's　dowries；　donations；　successions；　testamentary　settlements；　and　all　other　forms　of　contracting。　For　were　we　once　allowed　to　dispose　of　our　property　to　whom　and　how　we　pleased；　the　will　of　each　individual　would　disturb　the　order　of　the　fundamental　law。

Solon；　by　permitting　the　Athenians；　upon　failure　of　issue＇1＇　to　leave　their　estates　to　whom　they　pleased；　acted　contrary　to　the　ancient　laws；　by　which　the　estates　were　ordered　to　continue　in　the　family　of　the　testator；＇2＇　and　even　contrary　to　his　own　laws；　for　by　abolishing　debts　he　had　aimed　at　equality。

The　law　which　prohibited　people　having　two　inheritances＇3＇　was　extremely　well　adapted　for　a　democracy。　It　derived　its　origin　from　the　equal　distribution　of　lands　and　portions　made　to　each　citizen。　The　law　would　not　permit　a　single　man　to　possess　more　than　a　single　portion。

From　the　same　source　arose　those　laws　by　which　the　next　relative　was　ordered　to　marry　the　heiress。　This　law　was　given　to　the　Jews　after　the　like　distribution。　Plato；＇4＇　who　grounds　his　laws　on　this　division；　made　the　same　regulation　which　had　been　received　as　a　law　by　the　Athenians。

At　Athens　there　was　a　law　whose　spirit；　in　my　opinion；　has　not　been　hitherto　rightly　understood。　It　was　lawful　to　marry　a　sister　only　by　the　father's　side；　but　it　was　not　permitted　to　espouse　a　sister　by　the　same　venter。＇5＇　This　custom　was　originally　owing　to　republics；　whose　spirit　would　not　permit　that　two　portions　of　land；　and　consequently　two　inheritances；　should　devolve　on　the　same　person。　A　man　who　married　his　sister　only　by　the　father's　side　could　inherit　but　one　estate；　namely；　that　of　his　father；　but　by　espousing　his　sister　by　the　same　venter；　it　might　happen　that　this　sister's　father；　having　no　male　issue；　might　leave　her　his　estate；　and　consequently　the　brother　who　married　her　might　be　possessed　of　two。

Little　will　it　avail　to　object　to　what　Philo　says；＇6＇　that　although　the　Athenians　were　allowed　to　marry　a　sister　by　the　father's　side；　and　not　by　the　mother's；　yet　the　contrary　practice　prevailed　among　the　Laced？monians；　who　were　permitted　to　espouse　a　sister　by　the　mother's　side；　and　not　by　the　father's。　For　I　find　in　Strabo＇7＇　that　at　Sparta；　whenever　a　woman　was　married　to　her　brother　she　had　half　his　portion　for　her　dowry。　Plain　is　it　that　this　second　law　was　made　in　order　to　prevent　the　bad　consequences　of　the　former。　That　the　estate　belonging　to　the　sister's　family　might　not　devolve　on　the　brother's；　they　gave　half　the　brother's　estate　to　the　sister　for　her　dowry。

Seneca＇8＇　speaking　of　Silanus；　who　had　married　his　sister；　says　that　the　permission　was　limited　at　Athens；　but　general　at　Alexandria。　In　a　monarchical　government　there　was　very　little　concern　about　any　such　thing　as　a　division　of　estates。

Excellent　was　that　law　which；　in　order　to　maintain　this　division　of　lands　in　a　democracy；　ordained　that　a　father　who　had　several　children　should　pitch　upon　one　of　them　to　inherit　his　portion；＇9＇　and　leave　the　others　to　be　adopted；　to　the　end　that　the　numbers　of　citizens　might　always　be　kept　upon　an　equality　with　that　of　the　divisions。

Phaleas　of　Chalcedon＇10＇　contrived　a　very　extraordinary　method　of　rendering　all　fortunes　equal；　in　a　republic　where　there　was　the　greatest　inequality。　This　was　that　the　rich　should　give　fortunes　with　their　daughters　to　the　poor；　but　receive　none　themselves；　and　that　the　poor　should　receive　money　for　their　daughters；　instead　of　giving　them　fortunes。　But　I　do　not　remember　that　a　regulation　of　this　kind　ever　took　place　in　any　republic。　It　lays　the　citizens　under　such　hard　and　oppressive　conditions　as　would　make　them　detest　the　very　equality　which　they　designed　to　establish。　It　is　proper　sometimes　that　the　laws　should　not　seem　to　tend　so　directly　to　the　end　they　propose。

Though　real　equality　be　the　very　soul　of　a　democracy；　it　is　so　difficult　to　establish　that　an　extreme　exactness　in　this　respect　would　not　be　always　convenient。　Sufficient　is　it　to　establish　a　census＇11＇　which　shall　reduce　or　fix　the　differences　to　a　certain　point：　it　is　afterwards　the　business　of　particular　laws　to　level；　as　it　were；　the　inequalities；　by　the　duties　laid　upon　the　rich；　and　by　the　ease　afforded　to　the　poor。　It　is　moderate　riches　alone　that　can　give　or　suffer　this　sort　of　compensation；　for　as　to　men　of　overgrown　estates；　everything　which　does　not　contribute　to　advance　their　power　and　honour　is　considered　by　them　a