the origin of the distinction of ranks-第20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！


　The　first　effectual　regulations　in　favour　of　children　were　those　which　bestowed　upon　them　a　privilege　of　acquiring　property　independent　of　their　father。　During　the　free　government　of　Rome；　as　war　was　the　chief　employment　in　which　a　Roman　citizen　thought　proper　to　engage；　and　by　which　he　had　any　opportunity　of　gaining　a　fortune；　it　appeared　highly　reasonable；　that　when　he　hazarded　his　person　in　the　service　of　his　country；　he　should　be　allowed　to　reap　the　fruit　of　his　labour；　and　be　entitled　to　the　full　enjoyment　of　whatever　he　had　acquired。　With　this　view；　it　was　enacted　by　Julius　and　by　Augustus　Caesar；　that　whatever　was　gained　by　a　son；　in　the　military　profession；　should　be　considered　as　his　own　estate；　and　that　he　should　be　at　liberty　to　dispose　of　it　at　pleasure。（14*）　　　　　Some　time　after；　when　the　practice　of　the　law　had　also　become　a　lucrative　profession；　it　was　further　established；　that　whatever　a　son　acquired　in　the　exercise　of　this　employment；　should　in　like　manner　become　his　own　property；　and　should　in　no　respect　belong　to　the　father。（15*）　　　　　In　a　later　age；　when　no　employment　was　considered　as　too　mean　for　the　subjects　of　the　Roman　empire；　the　son　became　proprietor　of　what　he　could　procure　by　the　practice　of　the　mechanical　arts；　and　of　whatever　he　obtained　by　donations；　or　by　succession　to　his　mother　or　material　relations；　though　the　usufruct　of　those　acquisitions　was；　in　ordinary　cases；　bestowed　upon　the　father。（16*）　　　　　It　is　uncertain　at　what　time　the　Romans　first　began　to　limit　the　father　in　the　power　of　selling　his　children　for　slaves。　It　appears；　that　before　the　reign　of　the　emperor　Dioclesian　this　privilege　was　entirely　abolished；　except　in　a　singular　case；　in　which　it　remained　to　the　latest　periods　of　the　empire。　To　remove　the　temptation　of　abandoning　newborn　children；　a　permission　was　given　to　sell　them；　but　with　provision　that　they　might；　at　any　time　after；　be　redeemed　from　the　purchaser　；　by　restoring　the　price　which　he　had　paid。　　　　　Exclusive　of　infants；　the　power　over　the　life　of　children　was　first　subjected　to　any　limitation　in　the　reign　of　Trajan；　and　of　Hadrian　his　successor　；　who　interposed；　in　some　particular　cases；　to　punish　the　wanton　exercise　of　paternal　authority　。　In　the　time　of　the　emperor　Severus；　the　father　was　not　allowed　to　put　his　children　to　death　in　private；　but　when　they　committed　a　crime　of　an　atrocious　nature；　was　directed　to　accuse　them　before　a　magistrate；　to　whom　he　was　impowered；　in　that　case；　to　prescribe　the　particular　punishment　which　he　chose　to　have　inflicted。　At　length　this　part　of　his　jurisdiction　was　finally　abolished　by　the　emperor　Constantine；　who　ordained　that　if　a　father　took　away　the　life　of　his　child　he　should　be　deemed　guilty　of　parricide。　　　　　These　were　the　principal　steps　by　which　the　Romans　endeavoured　to　correct　this　remarkable　part　of　their　ancient　law。　It　was　natural　to　begin　with　the　reformation　of　those　particulars　in　which　the　greatest　abuses　were　committed；　and　thence　to　proceed　to　others；　which；　however　absurd　in　appearance；　were　less　severely　felt；　and　less　productive　of　disorder　and　oppression。　It　seldom　happened　that　a　father；　though　permitted　by　law　；　was　so　hardened　to　the　feelings　of　humanity　and　natural　affection；　as　to　be　capable　of　imbruing　his　hands　in　the　blood　of　a　child　whom　he　had　brought　up　in　his　family　；　and　accordingly　no　more　than　three　or　four　instances　of　that　nature　are　mentioned　in　the　whole　Roman　history。　He　might　oftener　be　tempted　to　neglect　his　children　immediately　after　their　birth；　or　be　reconciled　to　the　measure　of　reaping　a　certain　profit　at　the　expense　of　their　freedom。　But　the　part　of　his　prerogative　which　he　would　probably　exert　in　the　most　arbitrary　manner　；　was　that　which　related　to　the　maintenance　of　his　family；　and　the　management　of　that　property　which　had　been　procured　by　their　industry　and　labour。　Thus　we　find　that；　beside　the　early　and　ineffectual　attempts　to　prevent　the　neglect　of　infants；　the　interpositions　of　the　Roman　legislature　were　directed　first　to　secure　the　property；　afterwards　the　liberty；　and　last　of　all　the　life　and　personal　safety　of　the　children。（17*）　　　　　Upon　comparing　the　manners　of　different　countries；　with　regard　to　the　subject　of　our　present　inquiry；　it　will　be　found　that　where　ever　polygamy　is　established；　the　authority　enjoyed　by　the　head　of　every　family　is　usually　carried　to　a　greater　height；　and　is　more　apt　to　remain　in　its　full　force；　notwithstanding　the　improvements　which；　in　other　respects；　the　people　may　have　attained。　By　the　institution　of　polygamy；　the　children　belonging　to　a　person　of　opulent　fortune；　are　commonly　rendered　so　numerous　as　greatly　to　diminish　the　influence　of　paternal　affection：　not　to　mention　that　the　confinement　of　his　wives；　and　the　jealousy；　hatred；　and　dissension；　which　prevail　among　them；　are　productive　of　such　intrigues　to　supplant　or　destroy　one　another；　and　to　promote　the　interest　of　their　respective　children；　that　the　husband；　in　order　to　repress　these　disorders；　finds　it　necessary　to　preserve　a　strict　discipline　in　his　family；　and　to　hold　all　its　members　in　extreme　subjection。　This　will　suggest　a　reason　for　what　is　observed　by　Aristotle；　that　among　the　Persians；　in　his　time；　the　power　of　a　father　over　his　children　was　no　less　absolute　as　that　of　a　master　over　his　slaves。　　　　　In　the　empire　of　China；　the　same　circumstance；　together　with　that　aversion　which　the　people　discover　to　every　sort　of　innovation；　has　also　enabled　the　father　to　maintain　a　great　part　of　his　original　jurisdiction。（18*）　The　father　is　said　to　have　there　the　privilege　of　selling　his　children　whenever　he　thinks　proper；　but　if　he　intends　to　put　them　to　death；　it　is　necessary　that　he　should　bring　them　before　a　magistrate；　and　publicly　accuse　them。　At　the　same　time；　whatever　be　the　crime　of　which　they　are　accused；　they　are　held　to　be　guilty；　without　any　other　proof　but　the　bare　assertion　of　the　father。（19*）　　　　　　The　custom　of　exposing　infants　was　not　restrained　in　China　till　very　lately。　Father　Noel；　in　a　relation　presented　to　the　general　of　the　Jesuits　in　1703；　takes　notice；　that　at　Pekin　a　number　of　children　were　usually　dropped　or　exposed　every　morning　in　the　streets。　　　　　　As　Pekin　is　excessively　populous　＇continues　that　pious　and　Catholic　father＇　and　those　who　have　more　children　than　they　can　maintain　do　not　scruple　to　drop　them　in　places　of　public　resort；　where　they　either　die　miserably；　or　are　devoured　by　beasts；　one　of　our　first　cares　is　to　send；　every　morning；　catechists　into　the　different　parts　of　that　great　city；　in　order　to　baptize　such　of　those　children　as　are　not　dead。　About　twenty　or　thirty　thousand　children　are　exposed　yearly；　and　of　these　our　catechists　baptize　about　three　thousand；　and　had　we　twenty　or　thirty　catechists；　few　of　the　children　in　question　would　die　unbaptized。（20*）　　　　　In　those　European　nations　which　have　made　the　greatest　improvements　in　commerce　and　manufactures；　great　liberty　is　usually　enjoyed　by　the　members　of　every　family；　and　the　children　are　no　farther　subjected　to　the　father　than　seems　necessary　for　their　own　advantage。　When　they　come　to　be　of　age；　they　have　the　full　enjoyment　and　disposal　of　any　separate　property　which　they　happen　to　acquire；　and　even　during　their　father's　life；　they　are　in　some　cases　entitled　to　a　fixed　provision　out　of　the　family　estate。　　　　　It　can　hardly　be　doubted　that　these　regulations；　which　tend　to　moderate　the　excessive　and　arbitrary　power　assumed　by　the　head　of　a　family；　are　supported　by　every　consideration　of　justice　and　utility。　The　opinion　of　Sir　Robert　Filmer；　who　founds　the　doctrine　of　passive　obedience　to　a　monarch；　upon　the　unlimited　submission　which　children　owe　to　their　father；　seems；　at　this　day　；　unworthy　of　the　serious　refutation　which　it　has　met　with；　and　could　only　have　gained　reputation　when　men　were　just　beginning　to　reflect　upon　the　first　principles　of　government。　To　say　that　a　king　ought　to　enjoy　absolute　power　because　a　father　has　enjoyed　it；　is　to　defend　one　system　of　oppression　by　the　example　of　another。　　　　　The　interest　of　those　who　are　governed　is　the　chief　circumstance　which　ought　to　regulate　the　powers　committed　to　a　father；　as　well　as　those　committed　to　a　civil　magistrate　；　and　whenever　the　prerogative　of　either　is　further　extended　than　is　requisite　for　this　great　end；　it　immediately　degenerates　into　usurpation；　and　is　to　be　regarded　as　a　violation　of　the　natural　rights　of　mankind。　　　　　The　tendency；　however；　of　a　commercial　age　is　rather　towards　the　opposite　extreme；　and　may　occasion　some　apprehension　that　the　members　of　a　family　will　be　raised　to　greater　independence　than　is　consistent　with　good　order；　and　with　a　proper　domestic　subordination。　As；　in　every　country；　the　laws　enforced　by　the　magistrate　are　in　a　great　measure　confined　to　the　rules　of　justice；　it　is　evident　that　further　precautions　are　necessary　to　guard　the　morals　of　the　inhabitants；　and　that；　for　this　purpose；　the　authority　of　parents　ought　to　be　such　as　may　enable　them　to　direct　the　education　of　their　children；　to　restrain　the　irregularities　of　youth；　and　to　instil　those　principles　which　will　render　them　useful　members　of　society。　NOTES：　1。　Lathmon。　2。　Leviticus；　chap。　xix；　ver。　32。　3。　Job；　chap。　xxxii。　4。　Histoire　generale　des　voyages。　5。　Notwiths