the spirit of laws-第106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！


ucceed　to　their　father's　possessions　as　a　consequence　of　the　law　of　nature；　which　it　is　not。

The　law　of　nature　ordains　that　fathers　shall　provide　for　their　children；　but　it　does　not　oblige　them　to　make　them　their　heirs。　The　division　of　property；　the　laws　of　this　division；　and　the　succession　after　the　death　of　the　person　who　has　had　this　division　can　be　regulated　only　by　the　community；　and　consequently　by　political　or　civil　laws。

True　it　is　that　a　political　or　civil　order　frequently　demands　that　children　should　succeed　to　their　father's　estate；　but　it　does　not　always　make　this　necessary。

There　may　be　some　reasons　given　why　the　laws　of　our　fiefs　appoint　that　the　eldest　of　the　males；　or　the　nearest　relatives　of　the　male　side；　should　have　all；　and　the　females　nothing；　and　why；　by　the　laws　of　the　Lombards；＇12＇　the　sisters；　the　natural　children；　the　other　relatives；　and；　in　their　default；　the　treasury　might　share　the　inheritance　with　the　daughters。

It　was　regulated　in　some　of　the　dynasties　of　China　that　the　brothers　of　the　emperor　should　succeed　to　the　throne；　and　that　the　children　should　not。　If　they　were　willing　that　the　prince　should　have　a　certain　degree　of　experience；　if　they　feared　his　being　too　young；　and　if　it　had　become　necessary　to　prevent　eunuchs　from　placing　children　successively　on　the　throne；　they　might　very　justly　establish　a　like　order　of　succession；　and　when　some　writers　have　treated　these　brothers　as　usurpers；　they　have　judged　only　by　ideas　received　from　the　laws　of　their　own　countries。＇13＇

According　to　the　custom　of　Numidia；＇14＇　Desalces；　brother　of　Gala；　succeeded　to　the　kingdom；　not　Massinissa；　his　son。　And　even　to　this　day；　among　the　Arabs　in　Barbary；　where　each　village　has　its　chief；　they　adhere　to　this　ancient　custom；　by　choosing　the　uncle；　or　some　other　relative　to　succeed。＇15＇

There　are　monarchies　merely　elective；　and　since　it　is　evident　that　the　order　of　succession　ought　to　be　derived　from　the　political　or　civil　laws；　it　is　for　these　to　decide　in　what　cases　it　is　agreeable　to　reason　that　the　succession　be　granted　to　children；　and　in　what　cases　it　ought　to　be　given　to　others。

In　countries　where　polygamy　is　established；　the　prince　has　many　children；　and　the　number　of　them　is　much　greater　in　some　of　these　countries　than　in　others。　There　are　states＇16＇　where　it　is　impossible　for　the　people　to　maintain　the　children　of　the　king；　they　might　therefore　make　it　a　law　that　the　crown　shall　devolve；　not　on　the　king's　children；　but　on　those　of　his　sister。

A　prodigious　number　of　children　would　expose　the　state　to　the　most　dreadful　civil　wars。　The　order　of　succession　which　gives　the　crown　to　the　children　of　the　sister；　the　number　of　whom　is　not　larger　than　those　of　a　prince　who　has　only　one　wife；　must　prevent　these　inconveniences。

There　are　people　among　whom　reasons　of　state；　or　some　maxims　of　religion；　have　made　it　necessary　that　the　crown　should　be　always　fixed　in　a　certain　family：　hence；　in　India；　proceeds　the　jealousy　of　their　tribes；＇17＇　and　the　fear　of　losing　the　descent；　they　have　there　conceived　that　never　to　want　princes　of　the　blood　royal；　they　ought　to　take　the　children　of　the　eldest　sister　of　the　king。

A　general　maxim：　it　is　an　obligation　of　the　law　of　nature　to　provide　for　our　children；　but　to　make　them　our　successors　is　an　obligation　of　the　civil　or　political　law。　Hence　are　derived　the　different　regulations　with　respect　to　bastards　in　the　different　countries　of　the　world；　these　are　according　to　the　civil　or　political　laws　of　each　country。

7。　That　we　ought　not　to　decide　by　the　Precepts　of　Religion　what　belongs　only　to　the　Law　of　Nature。　The　Abassines　have　a　most　severe　lent　of　fifty　days；　which　weakens　them　to　such　a　degree　that　for　a　long　time　they　are　incapable　of　business：　the　Turks　do　not　fail　to　attack　them　after　their　lent。＇18＇　Religion　ought；　in　favour　of　the　natural　right　of　self…defence；　to　set　bounds　to　these　customs。

The　Jews　were　obliged　to　keep　the　Sabbath；　but　it　was　an　instance　of　great　stupidity　in　this　nation　not　to　defend　themselves　when　their　enemies　chose　to　attack　them　on　this　day。＇19＇

Cambyses；　laying　siege　to　Pelusium；　set　in　the　first　rank　a　great　number　of　those　animals　which　the　Egyptians　regarded　as　sacred；　the　consequence　was　that　the　soldiers　of　the　garrison　durst　not　molest　them。　Who　does　not　see　that　self…defence　is　a　duty　superior　to　every　precept？

8。　That　we　ought　not　to　regulate　by　the　Principles　of　the　canon　Law　Things　which　should　be　regulated　by　those　of　the　civil　Law。　By　the　civil　law　of　the　Romans；＇20＇　he　who　took　a　thing　privately　from　a　sacred　place　was　punished　only　for　the　guilt　of　theft；　by　the　canon　law；　he　was　punished　for　the　crime　of　sacrilege。＇21＇　The　canon　law　takes　cognizance　of　the　place；　the　civil　laws　of　the　fact。　But　to　attend　only　to　the　place　is　neither　to　reflect　on　the　nature　and　definition　of　a　theft；　nor　on　the　nature　and　definition　of　sacrilege。

As　the　husband　may　demand　a　separation　by　reason　of　the　infidelity　of　his　wife；　the　wife　might　formerly　demand　it　on　account　of　the　infidelity　of　the　husband。＇22＇　This　custom；　contrary　to　a　regulation　made　in　the　Roman　laws；＇23＇　was　introduced　into　the　ecclesiastic　court；＇24＇　where　nothing　was　regarded　but　the　maxims　of　canon　law；　and　indeed；　if　we　consider　marriage　as　a　thing　merely　spiritual；　and　as　relating　only　to　the　things　of　another　life；　the　violation　is　in　both　cases　the　same；　but　the　political　and　civil　laws　of　almost　all　nations　have；　with　reason；　made　a　distinction　between　them。　They　have　required　from　the　women　a　degree　of　reserve　and　continency　which　they　have　not　exacted　from　the　men；　because　in　women；　a　violation　of　chastity　supposes　a　renunciation　of　all　virtue；　because　women；　by　violating　the　laws　of　marriage；　quit　the　state　of　their　natural　dependence；　because　nature　has　marked　the　infidelity　of　women　with　certain　signs；　and；　in　fine；　because　the　children　of　the　wife　born　in　adultery　necessarily　belong　and　are　an　expense　to　the　husband；　while　the　children　produced　by　the　adultery　of　the　husband　are　not　the　wife's；　nor　are　an　expense　to　the　wife。

9。　That　Things　which　ought　to　be　regulated　by　the　Principles　of　civil　Law　can　seldom　be　regulated　by　those　of　Religion。　The　laws　of　religion　have　a　greater　sublimity；　the　civil　laws　a　greater　extent。

The　laws　of　perfection　drawn　from　religion　have　more　in　view　the　goodness　of　the　person　that　observes　them　than　of　the　society　in　which　they　are　observed；　the　civil　laws；　on　the　contrary；　have　more　in　view　the　moral　goodness　of　men　in　general　than　that　of　individuals。

Thus；　venerable　as　those　ideas　are　which　immediately　spring　from　religion；　they　ought　not　always　to　serve　as　a　first　principle　to　the　civil　laws；　because　these　have　another；　the　general　welfare　of　society。

The　Romans　made　regulations　among　themselves　to　preserve　the　morals　of　their　women；　these　were　political　institutions。　Upon　the　establishment　of　monarchy；　they　made　civil　laws　on　this　head；　and　formed　them　on　the　principles　of　their　civil　government。　When　the　Christian　religion　became　predominant；　the　new　laws　that　were　then　made　had　less　relation　to　the　general　rectitude　of　morals　than　to　the　holiness　of　marriage；　they　had　less　regard　to　the　union　of　the　two　sexes　in　a　civil　than　in　a　spiritual　state。

At　first；　by　the　Roman　law；　a　husband；　who　brought　back　his　wife　into　his　house　after　she　had　been　found　guilty　of　adultery；　was　punished　as　an　accomplice　in　her　debauch。＇25＇　Justinian；　from　other　principles；　ordained　that　during　the　space　of　two　years　he　might　go　and　take　her　again　out　of　the　monastery。＇26＇

Formerly；　when　a　woman；　whose　husband　was　gone　to　war；　heard　no　longer　any　tidings　of　him；　she　might　easily　marry　again；　because　she　had　in　her　hands　the　power　of　making　a　divorce。　The　law　of　Constantine　obliged　the　woman　to　wait　four　years；　after　which　she　might　send　the　bill　of　divorce　to　the　general；　and；　if　her　husband　returned；　he　could　not　then　charge　her　with　adultery。＇27＇　But　Justinian　decreed　that；　let　the　time　be　never　so　long　after　the　departure　of　her　husband；　she　should　not　marry　unless；　by　the　deposition　and　oath　of　the　general；　she　could　prove　the　death　of　her　husband。＇28＇　Justinian　had　in　view　the　indissolubility　of　marriage；　but　we　may　safely　say　that　he　had　it　too　much　in　view。　He　demanded　a　positive　proof　when　a　negative　one　was　sufficient；　he　required　a　thing　extremely　difficult　to　give；　an　account　of　the　fate　of　a　man　at　a　great　distance；　and　exposed　to　so　many　accidents；　he　presumed　a　crime；　that　is；　a　desertion　of　the　husband；　when　it　was　so　natural　to　presume　his　death。　He　injured　the　commonwealth　by　obliging　women　to　live　out　of　marriage；　he　injured　individuals　by　exposing　them　to　a　thousand　dangers。

The　law　of　Justinian；　which　ranked　among　the　causes　of　divorce　the　consent　of　the　husband　and　wife　to　enter　into　a　monastery；　was　entirely　opposite　to　the　principles　of　the　civil　laws。＇29＇　It　is　natural　that　the　causes　of　divorce　should　have　their　origin　in　certain　impediments　which　could　not　be　foreseen　before　marriage；　but　this　desire　of　preserving　chastity　might　be　foreseen；　since　it　is　in　ourselves。　This　law　favours　inconstancy　in　a　state　which　is　by　its　very　nature　perpetual；　it　shook　the　fundamental　principle　of　divorce；　which　permits　the　dissolution　of　one　marriage　only　from　the　hope　of　another。　In　short；　if　we　view　it　in　a　religious　light；　it　is　no　more　than　giving　victims　to　God　without　a　sacrifice。

10。　In　what　Case　we　ought　to　follow　the　civil　Law　which　permits；　and　not　the　Law　of　Religion　which　forbids。　When　a　religion　which　prohibits　polygamy　is　introduced　into　a　country　where　it　is　permitted；　we　cannot　believe　（speaking　only　as　a　politician）　that　the　laws　of　the　country　ought　to　suffer　a　man　who　has　many　wives　to　embrace　this　religion；　unless　the　magistrate　or　the　husband　should　indemnify　them；　by　restoring　them　in　some　way　or　other　to　their　civil　state。　Without　this　their　condition　would　be　deplorable；　no　sooner　would　they　obey　the　laws　than　they　would　find　themselves　deprived　of　the　greatest　advantages　of　society。

11。　That　human　Courts　of　Justice　should　not　be　regulated　by　the　Maxims　of　those　Tribunals　which　relate　to　the　Other　Life。　The　tribunal　of　the　inquisition；　formed　by　the　Christian　mon