the spirit of laws-第17节

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！



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　as　an　injury。

All　inequality　in　democracies　ought　to　be　derived　from　the　nature　of　the　government；　and　even　from　the　principle　of　equality。　For　example；　it　may　be　apprehended　that　people　who　are　obliged　to　live　by　their　labour　would　be　too　much　impoverished　by　a　public　employment；　or　neglect　the　duties　attending　it；　that　artisans　would　grow　insolent；　and　that　too　great　a　number　of　freemen　would　overpower　the　ancient　citizens。　In　this　case　the　equality＇12＇　in　a　democracy　may　be　suppressed　for　the　good　of　the　state。　But　this　is　only　an　apparent　equality；　for　a　man　ruined　by　a　public　employment　would　be　in　a　worse　condition　than　his　fellow…citizens；　and　this　same　man；　being　obliged　to　neglect　his　duty；　would　reduce　the　rest　to　a　worse　condition　than　himself；　and　so　on。

6。　In　what　Manner　the　Laws　ought　to　maintain　Frugality　in　a　Democracy。　It　is　not　sufficient　in　a　well…regulated　democracy　that　the　divisions　of　land　be　equal；　they　ought　also　to　be　small；　as　was　customary　among　the　Romans。　〃God　forbid；〃　said　Curius　to　his　soldiers；＇13＇　〃that　a　citizen　should　look　upon　that　as　a　small　piece　of　land　which　is　sufficient　to　maintain　him。〃

As　equality　of　fortunes　supports　frugality；　so　the　latter　maintains　the　former。　These　things；　though　in　themselves　different；　are　of　such　a　nature　as　to　be　unable　to　subsist　separately；　they　reciprocally　act　upon　each　other；　if　one　withdraws　itself　from　a　democracy；　the　other　surely　follows　it。

True　is　it　that　when　a　democracy　is　founded　on　commerce；　private　people　may　acquire　vast　riches　without　a　corruption　of　morals。

This　is　because　the　spirit　of　commerce　is　naturally　attended　with　that　of　frugality；　economy；　moderation；　labour；　prudence；　tranquillity；　order；　and　rule。　So　long　as　this　spirit　subsists；　the　riches　it　produces　have　no　bad　effect。　The　mischief　is；　when　excessive　wealth　destroys　the　spirit　of　commerce；　then　it　is　that　the　inconveniences　of　inequality　begin　to　be　felt。

In　order　to　support　this　spirit；　commerce　should　be　carried　on　by　the　principal　citizens；　this　should　be　their　sole　aim　and　study；　this　the　chief　object　of　the　laws：　and　these　very　laws；　by　dividing　the　estates　of　individuals　in　proportion　to　the　increase　of　commerce；　should　set　every　poor　citizen　so　far　at　his　ease　as　to　be　able　to　work　like　the　rest；　and　every　wealthy　citizen　in　such　a　mediocrity　as　to　be　obliged　to　take　some　pains　either　in　preserving　or　acquiring　a　fortune。

It　is　an　excellent　law　in　a　trading　republic　to　make　an　equal　division　of　the　paternal　estate　among　the　children。　The　consequence　of　this　is　that　how　great　soever　a　fortune　the　father　has　made；　his　children；　being　not　so　rich　as　he；　are　induced　to　avoid　luxury；　and　to　work　as　he　has　done。　I　speak　here　only　of　trading　republics；　as　to　those　that　have　no　commerce；　the　legislator　must　pursue　quite　different　measures。＇14＇

In　Greece　there　were　two　sorts　of　republics：　the　one　military；　like　Sparta；　the　other　commercial；　as　Athens。　In　the　former；　the　citizens　were　obliged　to　be　idle；　in　the　latter；　endeavours　were　used　to　inspire　them　with　the　love　of　industry　and　labour。　Solon　made　idleness