the spirit of laws-第35章

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！


ssor　of　which　went　and　shut　himself　up　in　the　very　same　palace。

8。　Of　public　Continency。　So　many　are　the　imperfections　that　attend　the　loss　of　virtue　in　women；　and　so　greatly　are　their　minds　depraved　when　this　principal　guard　is　removed；　that　in　a　popular　state　public　incontinency　may　be　considered　as　the　last　of　miseries；　and　as　a　certain　forerunner　of　a　change　in　the　constitution。

Hence　it　is　that　the　sage　legislators　of　republican　states　have　ever　required　of　women　a　particular　gravity　of　manners。　They　have　proscribed　not　only　vice；　but　the　very　appearance　of　it。　They　have　banished　even　all　commerce　of　gallantry　　a　commerce　that　produces　idleness；　that　renders　the　women　corrupters；　even　before　they　are　corrupted；　that　gives　a　value　to　trifles；　and　debases　things　of　importance：　a　commerce；　in　fine；　that　makes　people　act　entirely　by　the　maxims　of　ridicule；　in　which　the　women　are　so　perfectly　skilled。

9。　Of　the　Condition　or　State　of　Women　in　different　Governments。　In　monarchies　women　are　subject　to　very　little　restraint；　because　as　the　distinction　of　ranks　calls　them　to　court；　there　they　assume　a　spirit　of　liberty；　which　is　almost　the　only　one　tolerated　in　that　place。　Each　courtier　avails　himself　of　their　charms　and　passions；　in　order　to　advance　his　fortune：　and　as　their　weakness　admits　not　of　pride；　but　of　vanity；　luxury　constantly　attends　them。

In　despotic　governments　women　do　not　introduce；　but　are　themselves　an　object　of；　luxury。　They　must　be　in　a　state　of　the　most　rigorous　servitude。　Every　one　follows　the　spirit　of　the　government；　and　adopts　in　his　own　family　the　customs　he　sees　elsewhere　established。　As　the　laws　are　very　severe　and　executed　on　the　spot；　they　are　afraid　lest　the　liberty　of　women　should　expose　them　to　danger。　Their　quarrels；　indiscretions；　repugnancies；　jealousies；　piques；　and　that　art；　in　fine；　which　little　souls　have　of　interesting　great　ones；　would　be　attended　there　with　fatal　consequences。

Besides；　as　princes　in　those　countries　make　a　sport　of　human　nature；　they　allow　themselves　a　multitude　of　women；　and　a　thousand　considerations　oblige　them　to　keep　those　women　in　close　confinement。

In　republics　women　are　free　by　the　laws　and　restrained　by　manners；　luxury　is　banished　thence；　and　with　it　corruption　and　vice。

In　the　cities　of　Greece；　where　they　were　not　under　the　restraint　of　a　religion　which　declares　that　even　amongst　men　regularity　of　manners　is　a　part　of　virtue；　where　a　blind　passion　triumphed　with　a　boundless　insolence；　and　love　appeared　only　in　a　shape　which　we　dare　not　mention；　while　marriage　was　considered　as　nothing　more　than　simple　friendship；＇18＇　such　was　the　virtue；　simplicity；　and　chastity　of　women

in　those　cities；　that　in　this　respect　hardly　any　people　were　ever　known　to　have　had　a　better　and　wiser　polity。＇19＇

10。　Of　the　domestic　Tribunal　among　the　Romans。　The　Romans　had　no　particular　magistrates；　like　the　Greeks；　to　inspect　the　conduct　of　women。　The　censors　had　not　an　eye　over　them；　as　over　the　rest　of　the　republic。

The　institution　of　the　domestic　tribunal＇20＇　supplied　the　magistracy　established　among　the　Greeks。＇21＇

The　husband　summoned　the　wife's　relatives；　and　tried　her　in　their　presence。＇22＇　This　tribunal　preserved　the　manners　of　the　republic；　and　at　the　same　time　those　very　manners　maintained　this　tribunal。　For　it　decided　not　only　in　respect　to　the　violation　of　the　laws；　but　also　of　manners：　now；　in　order　to　judge　of　the　violation　of　the　latter；　manners　are　requisite。　The　penalties　inflicted　by　this　tribunal　ought　to　be；　and　actually　were；　arbitrary：　for　all　that　relates　to　manners；　and　to　the　rules　of　modesty；　can　hardly　be　comprised　under　one　code　of　laws。　It　is　easy　indeed　to　regulate　by　laws　what　we　owe　to　others；　but　it　is　very　difficult　of　comprise　all　we　owe　to　ourselves。

The　domestic　tribunal　inspected　the　general　conduct　of　women：　but　there　was　one　crime　which；　beside　the　animadversion　of　this　tribunal；　was　likewise　subject　to　a　public　accusation。　This　was　adultery；　whether　that　in　a　republic　so　great　a　depravation　of　manners　interested　the　government；　or　whether　the　wife's　immorality　might　render　the　husband　suspected；　or　whether；　in　fine；　they　were　afraid　lest　even　honest　people　might　choose　that　this　crime　should　rather　be　concealed　than　punished。

11。　In　what　Manner　the　Institutions　changed　at　Rome；　together　with　the　Government。　As　manners　were　supported　by　the　domestic　tribunal；　they　were　also　supported　by　the　public　accusation；　and　hence　it　is　that　these　two　things　fell　together　with　the　public　manners；　and　ended　with　the　republic。＇23＇

The　establishing　of　perpetual　questions；　that　is；　the　division　of　jurisdiction　among　the　pr？tors；　and　the　custom　gradually　introduced　of　the　pr？tors　determining　all　causes　themselves；＇24＇　weakened　the　use　of　the　domestic　tribunal。　This　appears　by　the　surprise　of　historians；　who　look　upon　the　decisions　which　Tiberius　caused　to　be　given　by　this　tribunal　as　singular　facts；　and　as　a　renewal　of　the　ancient　course　of　pleading。

The　establishment　of　monarchy　and　the　change　of　manners　put　likewise　an　end　to　public　accusations。　It　might　be　apprehended　lest　a　dishonest　man；　affronted　at　the　slight　shown　him　by　a　woman；　vexed　at　her　refusal；　and　irritated　even　by　her　virtue；　should　form　a　design　to　destroy　her。　The　Julian　law　ordained　that　a　woman　should　not　be　accused　of　adultery　till　after　her　husband　had　been　charged　with　favouring　her　irregularities；　which　limited　greatly；　and　annihilated；　as　it　were；　this　sort　of　accusation。＇25＇　Sextus　Quintus　seemed　to　have　been　desirous　of　reviving　the　public　accusations。＇26＇　But　there　needs　very　little　reflection　to　see　that　this　law　would　be　more　improper　in　such　a　monarchy　as　his　than　in　any　other。

12。　Of　the　Guardianship　of　Women　among　the　Romans。　The　Roman　laws　subjected　women　to　a　perpetual　guardianship；　except　they　were　under　cover　and　subject　to　the　authority　of　a　husband。＇27＇　This　guardianship　was　given　to　the　nearest　of　the　male　relatives；　and　by　a　vulgar　expression＇28＇　it　appears　they　were　very　much　confined。　This　was　proper　for　a　republic；　but　not　at　all　necessary　in　a　monarchy。＇29＇

That　the　women　among　the　ancient　Germans　were　likewise　under　a　perpetual　tutelage　appears　from　the　different　codes　of　the　Laws　of　the　Barbarians。＇30＇　This　custom　was　communicated　to　the　monarchies　founded　by　those　people；　but　was　not　of　long　duration。

13。　Of　the　Punishments　decreed　by　the　Emperors　against　the　Incontinence　of　Women。　The　Julian　law　ordained　a　punishment　against　adultery。　But　so　far　was　this　law；　any　more　than　those　afterwards　made　on　the　same　account；　from　being　a　mark　of　regularity　of　manners；　that　on　the　contrary　it　was　a　proof　of　their　depravity。

The　whole　political　system　in　respect　to　women　received　a　change　in　the　monarchical　state。　The　question　was　no　longer　to　oblige　them　to　a　regularity　of　manners；　but　to　punish　their　crimes。　That　new　laws　were　made　to　punish　their　crimes　was　owing　to　their　leaving　those　transgressions　unpunished　which　were　not　of　so　criminal　a　nature。

The　frightful　dissolution　of　manners　obliged　indeed　the　emperors　to　enact　laws　in　order　to　put　some　stop　to　lewdness；　but　it　was　not　their　intention　to　establish　a　general　reformation。　Of　this　the　positive　facts　related　by　historians　are　a　much　stronger　proof　than　all　these　laws　can　be　of　the　contrary。　We　may　see　in　Dio　the　conduct　of　Augustus　on　this　occasion；　and　in　what　manner　he　eluded；　both　in　his　pr？torian　and　censorian　office；　the　repeated　instances　that　were　made　him＇31＇　for　that　purpose。

It　is　true　that　we　find　in　historians　very　rigid　sentences；　passed　in　the　reigns　of　Augustus　and　Tiberius；　against　the　lewdness　of　some　Roman　ladies：　but　by　showing　us　the　spirit　of　those　reigns；　at　the　same　time　they　demonstrate　the　spirit　of　those　decisions。

The　principal　design　of　Augustus　and　Tiberius　was　to　punish　the　dissoluteness　of　their　relatives。　It　was　not　their　immorality　they　punished；　but　a　particular　crime　of　impiety　or　high　treason＇32＇　of　their　own　invention；　which　served　to　promote　a　respect　for　majesty；　and　answered　their　private　revenge。　Hence　it　is　that　the　Roman　historians　inveigh　so　bitterly　against　this　tyranny。

The　penalty　of　the　Julian　law　was　small。＇33＇　Th