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！
…natured and full of humanity。 This law or this custom has produced another； if a husband has lost his wife； he does not fail to marry her sister：＇42＇ which is extremely natural； for his new consort becomes the mother of her sister's children； and not a cruel stepmother。
15。 That we should not regulate by the Principles of political Law those Things which depend on the Principles of civil Law。 As men have given up their natural independence to live under political laws； they have given up the natural community of goods to live under civil laws。
By the first； they acquired liberty； by the second； property。 We should not decide by the laws of liberty； which； as we have already said； is only the government of the community； what ought to be decided by the laws concerning property。 It is a paralogism to say that the good of the individual should give way to that of the public； this can never take place； except when the government of the community； or； in other words； the liberty of the subject is concerned； this does not affect such cases as relate to private property； because the public good consists in every one's having his property； which was given him by the civil laws； invariably preserved。
Cicero maintains that the Agrarian laws were unjust； because the community was established with no other view than that every one might be able to preserve his property。
Let us； therefore； lay down a certain maxim； that whenever the public good happens to be the matter in question； it is not for the advantage of the public to deprive an individual of his property； or even to retrench the least part of it by a law； or a political regulation。 In this case we should follow the rigour of the civil law； which is the Palladium of property。
Thus when the public has occasion for the estate of an individual； it ought never to act by the rigour of political law； it is here that the civil law ought to triumph； which； with the eyes of a mother； regards every individual as the whole community。
If the political magistrate would erect a public edifice； or make a new road； he must indemnify those who are injured by it； the public is in this respect like an individual who treats with an individual。 It is fully enough that it can oblige a citizen to sell his inheritance； and that it can strip him of this great privilege which he holds from the civil law； the not being forced to alienate his possessions。
After the nations which subverted the Roman empire had abused their very conquests； the spirit of liberty called them back to that of equity。 They exercised the most barbarous laws with moderation： and if any one should doubt the truth of this； he need only read Beaumanoir's admirable work on jurisprudence； written in the twelfth century。
They mended the highways in his time as we do at present。 He says； that when a highway could not be repaired； they made a new one as near the old as possible； but indemnified the proprietors at the expense of those who reaped any advantage from the road。＇43＇ They determined at that time by the civil law； in our days； we determine by the law of politics。
16。 That we ought not to decide by the Rules of the civil Law when it is proper to decide by those of the political Law。 Most difficulties on this subject may be easily solved by not confounding the rules derived from property with those which spring from liberty。
Is the demesne of a state or government alienable； or is it not？ This question ought to be decided by the political law； and not by the civil。 It ought not to be decided by the civil law； because it is as necessary that there should be demesnes for the subsistence of a state； as that the state should have civil laws to regulate the disposal of property。
If then they alienate the demesne； the state will be forced to make a new fund for another。 But this expedient overturns the political government； because； by the nature of the thing； for every demesne that shall be established； the subject will always be obliged to pay more； and the sovereign to receive less； in a word； the demesne is necessary； and the alienation is not。
The order of succession is； in monarchies； founded on the welfare of the state； this makes it necessary that such an order should be fixed to avoid the misfortunes； which I have said must arise in a despotic kingdom； where all is uncertain； because all is arbitrary。
The order of succession is not fixed for the sake of the reigning family； but because it is the interest of the state that it should have a reigning family。 The law which regulates the succession of individuals is a civil law； whose view is the interest of individuals； that which regulates the succession to monarchy is a political law； which has in view the welfare and preservation of the kingdom。
It follows hence； that when the political law has established an order of succession in government； and this order is at an end； it is absurd to reclaim the succession in virtue of the civil law of any nation whatsoever。 One particular society does not make laws for another society。 The civil laws of the Romans are no more applicable than any other civil laws。 They themselves did not make use of them when they proceeded against kings； and the maxims by which they judged kings are so abominable that they ought never to be revived。
It follows also hence； that when the political law has obliged a family to renounce the succession； it is absurd to insist upon the restitutions drawn from the civil law。 Restitutions are in the law； and may be good against those who live in the law： but they are not proper for such as have been raised up for the law； and who live for the law。
It is ridiculous to pretend to decide the rights of kingdoms； of nations； and of the whole globe by the same maxims on which （to make use of an expression of Cicero）＇44＇ we should determine the right of a gutter between individuals。
17。 The same Subject continued。 Ostracism ought to be examined by the rules of politics； and not by those of the civil law； and so far is this custom from rendering a popular government odious； that it is； on the contrary； extremely well adapted to prove its lenity。 We should be sensible of this ourselves； if； while banishment is always considered among us as a penalty； we are able to separate the idea of ostracism from that of punishment。
Aristotle＇45＇ tells us； it is universally allowed； that this practice has something in it both humane and popular。 If in those times and places where this sentence was executed they found nothing in it that appeared odious； is it for us who see things at such a distance to think otherwise than the accuser； the judges and the accused themselves？
And if we consider that this judgment of the people loaded the person with glory on whom it was passed； that when at Athens it fell upon a man without merit；＇46＇ from that very moment they ceased to use it；＇47＇ we shall find that numbers of people have obtained a false idea of it； for it was an admirable law that could prevent the ill consequences which the glory of a citizen might produce by loading him with new glory。
18。 That it is necessary to inquire whether the Laws which seem contradictory are of the same Class。 At Rome the husband was permitted to lend his wife to another。 Plutarch tells us this in express terms。＇48＇ We know that Cato lent his wife to Hortensius；＇49＇ and Cato was not a man to violate the laws of his country。
On the other hand； a husband who suffered his wife to be debauched； who did not bring her to justice； or who took her again after her condemnation was punished。＇50＇ These laws seem to contradict each other； and yet are not contradictory。 The law which permitted a Roman to lend his wife was visibly a Laced？monian institution； established with a view of giving the republic children of a good species； if I may be allowed the term； the other had in view the preservation of morals。 The first was a law of politics； the second a civil law。
19。 That we should not decide those Things by the civil Law which ought to be decided by domestic Laws。 The law of the Visigoths enjoins that the slaves of the house shall be obliged to bind the man and woman they surprise in adultery； and to present them to the husband and to the judge：＇51＇ a terrible law； which puts into the hands of such mean persons； the care of public； domestic； and private vengeance！
This law can be nowhere proper but in the seraglios of the East； where the slave who has the charge of the enclosure is deemed an accomplice upon the discovery of the least infidelity。 He seizes the criminals； not so much with a view to bring them to justice； as to do justice to himself； and to obtain a scrutiny into the circumstances of the action； in order to remove the suspicion of his negligence。
But； in countries where women are not guarded； it is ridiculous to subject those who govern the family to the inquisition of their slaves。
This inquisition may； in certain cases； be at the most a particular domestic regulation； but never a civil law。
20。 That we ought not to decide by the Principles of the civil Laws those Things which belong to the Law of Nations。 Liberty consists principally in not being forced to do a thing； where the laws do not obl