« PreviousContinue »
derfors : and, even on the hypothesis that both parties continue the fame, a disagreemeof may spring up among the people': a part may be persuaded that the original contract has been broken, while another part is satisfied that it is ttill preserved. On this supposirion, shall the discontented portion be deprived of their liberties, merely because the relt of the people do not agree with them in sentiment; or, fall a part of the contracting body have a power of annulling the compact which was entered into by the whole ?" P. . • After proving that there tenets are nca Serely “ absurd in theory” but “ false in fact,” he also hows wow pernicious they are in their confequences.' " While they lie dormant as the ories, they inflate the mind with pride, and flaster the passions which require, controul; they excite disaffection to eflablished government, loosen the sies of allegiance, and degrade the vira tues of loyalıy and submission; and when attempted to be re. duced to practice,” they " break down the barriers of restraint," and.“-involve the world in bloodthed, confufion, and anarchy." : The writer, having thus nown that liberty is not to be con fidered as "the chiet object of government," proceeds to point Out the principle to which it ought to be subordinate, and the extent to which it thould be incorporated into every political syfiem:'
. This principle he states to be “the public good, or the general happiness of the community ;' and, from many just obe fervations which follow, on the nature and condition of mang he deduces these confequenoes ;, that“ restraint is the firft and most essential quality of government, and that “ the freedom which condnces to happiness, regards restraint as her parent and friend,” provided that " restraint be directed to its proper object, the public good."--"Freedom” therefore, he concludes,
"" is one of the qualities of government, admitted as a mode of ac. complishing its ultimate object, -the general happiness of the community; but it must ever be fubordinate to the first principle of all government, exterior rettraint ; it must be founded po i law as its only folid bafis, and muft ba consistent with virtue, as the sole means by which it can be truly relished, and usefully employed." P. 51.
Having given so full an account of the second Effay as, we trut, may impress our readers with a just idea of the book in general, we shall be more brief as to the iwo remaining branches of this work; although they will be found equally, worthy of attention. The object of the third is to prove, that both Species of democratic goveroment (nainely, the direct, when the wholena. tion are supposed to enact laws, and the indirect, when shey are represented by delegates)" are founded on a false principle; that Both are impracticable with a close adherence to that principle on which they profefs to be founded; and that, if either could
concluents as to boment is de would be progresico
164 Sotheby's Translation of the Georgics. be carried into execution, it would be productive of the very evils wbich government is designed to prevent." The author's arguments as to both these forms of democracy are, we think, conclusive; but we especially recommend his remarks on the representative system ; finice, to the best of our judgment, they completely overthrow the doctrine, which Paine and others have maintained, that representation is a cure for all the evils of a populár government. The principle enforced in this part of the work is, " that almoft all the evils atributed both to simple and representative democracy, apply to it only as an origioa! and independent power; whereas all its advantages, like thote of liberiy, are to be ascribed to its subordinate itation in the fyftem of government." This doctrine is admirably illustrated and applied, so as to demonstrate the excellence of the British Constitution.
In the fourth and last Eslay, the opposite senets maintains ed by Whigs and Tories, at different periods of our history, are clearly and fairly stated, and the degree of danger refulting from the extreme of either opinion pointed out. Among other errors, that which allerts “ the sovereignty of the people," js exposed by reasonings, which it would, in our apprehension, be difficult for the ablest champion of that doctrine to answer. Little disagreement, he thinks, can remain on this subject,
* between ihose virtuous characters who are equally attached to the component parts of our government." An animated exhortation to support the king, religion, and constitution of the kingdom, concludes. · From the view we have taken of these Essays, we trust they will appear to merit not only the attention of those readers who feek to gratify, taste by the perufal of ingenious and elegant compositions, but the diligent study of all who with to acquire the foundest principles of government in general, or io maintain unimpaired in their minds a veneration for our happy establishment; that establishment, which has long been our pride, and has, on so many occasions, proved our safeguard against the opposite evils of absolute power, and still inore fatal anarchy. I .
ART. XII. Sotheby's Translation of the Georgics.
(Concluded from vol. xv, p. 670.) IN proceeding with a comparative criticism on Mr. Sotheby,
and the translators who have gone before him, the next passage which we shall select, as the subject of comparison,
Thall be the conclusion of the First Book of the Georgics. As. the passage is short, we shall give the translations of it fully.
Thou tather Romulus and mother earth,
As when four furious coursers whirl away
Thou Veita, and thou founder of our name,
This passage, for the sake of greater distinctness of compa. rison, may be divided into four parts : the invocation to ine Gods of Rome ; the praise of Augustus, which that invocation introduces ; the picture of the Itale of anarchy, which his government was to remedy ; and the comparisop, by which the unbridled rage of that wretched state is represented to the fancy. The invocation is not only inelegantly, but unfaithfully translated by Dryden. The words which we have marked with italics in his first couplet, are wholly unjustified by the original. The “ Di patrii indigetes," undoubtedly meant only the native Gods of Rome, the local and national deities who more peculiarly presided over the fortunes of the city. No Roman could have had an idea that they were “bome-born," still less that they were “ of mortal birth.” Dryden, in the haste of his translation, seems to have been led into this confufion by the mention of Romulus. But Romulus and Velta are invoked, in addition to these national deities (whoever they were) and Romulus was himself conGdered, not as “ of mortal birth,” but as the son of Mars. In the second and third verses, the language addrefled to Veíta is extremely unhappy. The imagination is diverted from the Goddess Velta, to the earth itself. In other parts of poetry, it may sometimes be allowed to substitute the name of the deities who are supposed to preside over certain objects, for the class of objects over which they preside, as Mars for war, Bacchus for wine, &c. and the reverse. But this never can be tolerated in invocation, because prayer must suppose the personal existence of those beings who are addressed. The expreilions which we have marked in the fifth couplet are so inelegant, not to say vulgar, that they must displease and disgust even the mere English reader, whose taste does not receive the additional dira pleasure, which arises from a contralt of the meanness of these lines with the majesty of the original. But all the lines which follow are truly Drydenic. They are nervous and musical, spirited and lofty. They have that air of immediately flowing from the inspiration of genius, which distinguishes their great author, and which no other English poet in rhyme has been able to copy. The reader in this passage, as in many others of Dryden, rises from the perusal with mingled feelings of admiration and regret ; he admires the powers which can produce such excellence, and he deplores the halte which could suffer so many errors to escape. For the memory and talents of Dr. Warton, we have great respect ; but we can scarcely prevail on ourselves to doubt, that our readers must think his Translation the worst of those which we have laid before them, The first and third couplets of his version, are made up of as