temple, were again cheered with the presence of Liberty. She was occupied in superintending the affairs of the island; which were administered by three delegates, who sat beneath; and whose countenances were contrasted, with singular variety.* These three having debated every measure, the decree when agreed on, was executed by the first; who was distinguished from the others by a crown. But I could not observe, that, with the Goddess who presided, any one of these deputies was a greater favourite than the rest. I cannot say how much farther my slumbering observations might have proceeded, if I had not been startled by what seemed a cry of "the dome is on fire !" when, raising my head, I found that my hair, as I nodded, had caught fire at a candle; and my servant (though a Frenchman,) was extinguishing the flames. G. TO THE PATRIOT.‡ Humani generis mores tibi nosse volenti, JUVENAL, SAT. 13. Would you the manners of your species know? To any neighbouring mansion let us go: The baby scenes of passion, acted there, Of Earth's vast drama just abridgements are. ANON. March 2d, 1793. SIR, To the pleasure which I have derived from the perusal of your essays, you must attribute the trouble of my present letter. * Monarchy, Aristocracy, and Democracy. This paper was written, not very long after the dome of the Irish Parliament House had taken (or was set on) fire. This is one of the Essays, promised in page 45. I would lay before you the result of some observations, to which the purport of those essays led. The mass of Society, I apprehend to be formed by the insensible growth of families to tribes; and gradual accumulation of these latter into nations. From whence it would follow, that public government is a multiple of private sway; and thus the topics, on which I write, will become altogether pertinent. For as small states have been held the fittest for the instruction of politicians, may not the petty arrangements of domestic regulation, and miniature control which presides in private companies, also furnish principles of wider application? I have, therefore, assumed the task of suggesting those analogies, and enabling you to publish my discoveries. I shall first bring before you, my friend Mr. Tamely, in his capacity of Paterfamilias; and sketch the constitution of his household. During the commencement of a reign which lasted somewhat longer than that of Edward the Fifth, his efforts were directed to the population of his empire; and these have finally been crowned with tolerable success. But, strange as it will appear, his authority diminished, in proportion as he became the father of his people. The family constitution was insensibly deranged; and the government, lodged seemingly in the hands of two, might be thought, by a hasty observer, to be consular. But, at best, it was the Consulate of Cæsar and of Bibulus; and, as the Romans recorded the usurpation which occurred in their time, by dating from the consulate of Julius and Cæsar, so the household authority, which I am describing, might be termed the reign of Henrietta and of Loverule; this being Mrs. Tamely's maiden name. * Suetonius, Jul. Cæs. c. 20. Affairs being thus circumstanced, you will anticipate the conclusion. He has long since named Her Effeminacy Dictatress; a step which I will confess myself to have advised; and for which the tumults of the marriage State very loudly called. The event has in some sort justified my counsels; for matters now proceed with sufficient smoothness; insomuch that, unless the Lady should herself abdicate, I apprehend the dignity will be perpetual.* So long as the power was apparently divided, the family quiet was continually disturbed, by the lady's jealousy of her yokemate's claims, and stratagems to exalt her own ascendancy;—and the subject groaned beneath that suspicious harshness, which arises from the, fearfulness of Precarious Authority. But now that her supremacy is fixed and recognised, she can exercise all the clemency of secure and satisfied ambition. Yet, as if the more effectually to verify my system, she sometimes regrets her former indirect control; and, waving the exertion of her acknowledged privilege, disclaims “ having any will but that of Mr. Tamely; or wish beyond the freedom that every woman ought to have:" a claim of dominion, by the way, which is thoroughly à la Française.—Power, she knows, is bounded, by being constituted and recognised; and she broods upon a sentiment which fell from me ;—that "the authority of Magistrates is better than that of Demagogues ; "and the majesty of a King than the terrors of a Lord Protec“tor; or lurking despotism of a National Convention."† 66 Do not hastily accuse me, then, of abetting tyranny-though * As it became, in the case of Julius Cæsar. + I suspect that those are mistaken, who suppose the Convention to be the seat of that power, which now rules France with such despotic rigour. The supreme power I take to be lodged, for the present, with the Mob; (I ask pardon, I mean the People.) Or, if a portion of it be vested in any members of the Convention, it is only because these same persons happen to be mobleaders. Their power does not flow from their constitutional situation of legislators. See the last mandate, issued to them, by the Federates, to forbear prosecuting the assassins of the Second of September. I should have contributed to Mrs. Tamely's greatness; but, now that the facts which form my premises are stated, hearken patiently to my conclusions.-That, as of Power, it is the substance which is formidable, not the name, and as Despotism is usually aggravated by being latent, (the unacknowledged Tyrant being instigated to cruelty by his jealousies, while he is exempted from the check of shame by his concealment;) the title should therefore follow the reality of Power. Its rigour should be softened, by exposure to public notice. In a word, it is desirable that Despotism should project a shadow, which may warn the Inadvertent, when they come within its reach. Let us now, Sir, enlarge the field of observation ; and, extending our inquiries beyond a single family, contemplate the more spacious circles of society: examine that federative system, which forms a neighbourhood; and investigate those governments, which may be termed convivial. Or, appropriating a more technical dialect to my art, let us say, that, having considered the thoral system, we shall now proceed to study the mensal constitutions. At dinner lately, with my old acquaintance, Mildworth, my new theory floating in my brain, and converting into proofs all the objects that lay round me, I assumed the following princi. ples for a foundation. That the government, which regulates convivial meetings, is not tinctured with any properties of feodality; but may be fairly classed amongst the democratic forms. The guests enjoy equal rights and privileges in conversation while, in the capacity of Stadtholder to these united families, the Entertainer upholds their federative connexion; and clothes and keeps on foot a standing army, for the public service.* As for those Inquisitors, who went round * The servants or footmen attending at table. the table, and detected and betrayed the secrets of the company, I thought them as consistent with a republican form, as the Committee of Research, established amongst the French; and with respect to the despotic character of such establishments, your seventh number had already taught me, that Democracy and Despotism are in no sort incompatible. In this theory, perhaps, I was not much mistaken. Perhaps those parlour usurpations, which I am about to state, are the natural produce of a too popular constitution; and that the arbitrary conduct of Sir Blatero Rumbledon, a Mensagogue who sat beside me, was no more than an epitome of that which Demagogues exert, in their wider sphere of action. Let this be as it may, I soon perceived that he was the ruler of the table: that his word was the law; and that no man's property in conversation was secure, from the effects of his extortion, and extravagance. Modest Knowledge faultered in his presence: Contradiction fell before him; and Truth was overwhelmed in the tempest of his assertions. A monopolist of uproar, his avarice grasped at syllables; while stunning with interruption, and burglariously entering the precincts of your discourse, he wrung your story from your mouth, to the last sentence; and disembogued it on his hearers, with the most vociferous profusion. Nay, however small your means in conversation, though you were but provided with a dozen sentences, for chequering the dull solemnity of your silence, and scantily supplying the wants of the afternoon, he had no compassion,-no discrimination ;-but with fiscal barbarity, levied your little all. "Nil habuit Codrus: quis enim negat? at tamen illud * The Decanters. Aperit præcordia Liber.-Hor. Vino tortus.-Ibid. +Juvenal, Sat. 3. |