首页 >出版文学> The Spirit of Laws>第1章
  ByCharlesdeSecondat,BarondeMontesquieuTranslatedbyThomasNugent,revisedbyJ。V。PrichardTheTranslatortotheReaderbyThomasNugent1752
  Thefollowingworkmaywiththestrictestjusticebesaidtohavedonehonourtohumannatureaswellastothegreatabilitiesoftheauthor。
  Thewisestandmostlearnedman,andthosemostdistinguishedbybirthandtheelevationoftheirstations,have,ineverycountryinEurope,considereditasamostexcellentperformance。Andmaywebepermittedtoadd,thatasovereignprince[1]asjustlycelebratedforhisprobityandgoodsense,asforhispoliticalandmilitaryskill,hasdeclaredthatfromM。deMontesquieuhehaslearnttheartofgovernment。Buthadtheillustriousauthorreceivednosuchdistinguishedhonour,thenumerouseditionsofthisworkinFrench,andtheirsuddenspreadingthroughallEurope,areasufficienttestimonyofthehighesteemwithwhichithasbeenreceivedbythepublic。
  Butnotwithstandingthedeservedapplausewhichhasbeensoliberallybestowedontheauthor,therehavebeensomewhohavenotonlyendeavouredtoblasthislaurels,buthavetreatedhimwithallthatscurrilitywhichbigotryandsuperstitionareapt,oneveryoccasion,tothrowoutagainsttruth,reasonandgoodsense。TheseM。deMontesquieuhashimselfanswered,inaseparatetreatiseintitled,ADefenseoftheSpiritofLaws,fromwhencewehavethoughtpropertoextract,forthesakeofsuchashavenotseenthattreatise,theprincipalofthoseobjections,andthesubstanceofwhathasbeengiveninreply:Onlyfirstobserving,thatthisdefenseisdividedintothreeparts,inthefirstofwhichheanswersthegeneralreproachesthathavebeenthrownoutagainsthim;inthesecondherepliestoparticularreproaches;andinthethird,hegivessomereflectionsonthemannerinwhichhisworkhasbeencriticized。
  TheauthorfirstcomplainsofhisbeingchargedbothwithespousingthedoctrinesofSpinoza,andwithbeingaDeist,twoopinionsdirectlycontradictorytoeachother。Totheformeroftheseheanswers,byplacinginoneviewtheseveralpassagesintheSpiritofLawsdirectlylevelledagainstthedoctrinesofSpinoza;andthenherepliestotheobjectionsthathavebeenmadetothosepassages,uponwhichthisinjuriouschargeisfounded。
  Thecriticassertsthatourauthorstumblesathisfirstsettingout,andisoffendedathissaying,thatLawsintheirmostextensivesignification,arethenecessaryrelationsderivedfromthenatureofthings。Tothishereplies,thatthecritichadhearditsaidthatSpinozahadmaintainedthattheworldwasgovernedbyablindandnecessaryprinciple;andfromhenceonseeingthewordnecessary,heconcludesthatthismustbeSpinozism;tho’whatismostsurprising,thisarticleisdirectlylevelledatthedangerousprinciplesmaintainedbySpinoza:ThathehadHobbes’ssysteminhiseye,asystem,which,asitmakesallthevirtuesandvicesdependontheestablishmentofhumanlaws,andasitwouldprovethatmenwereborninastateofwar,andthatthefirstlawofnatureisawarofallagainstall,overturns,likeSpinoza,allreligion,andallmorality。Hencehelaiddownthisposition,thattherewerelawsofjusticeandequitybeforetheestablishmentofpositivelaws:hencealsohehasprovedthatallbeingshadlaws;thatevenbeforetheircreationtheyhadpossiblelaws;andthatGodhimselfhadlaws,thatis,thelawswhichhehimselfhadmade。
  Hehasshewn[2]thatnothingcanbemorefalsethantheassertionthatmenwereborninastateofwar;andhehasmadeitappearthatwarsdidnotcommencetillaftertheestablishmentofsociety。Hisprinciplesarehereextremelyclear;fromwhenceitfollows,thatashehasattackedHobbes’serrors,hehasconsequentlythoseofSpinoza;andhehasbeensolittleunderstood,thattheyhavetakenfortheopinionsofSpinoza,thoseveryobjectionswhichweremadeagainstSpinozism。
  Again,theauthorhassaidthatthecreationwhichappearstobeanarbitraryact,supposeslawsasinvariableasthefatalityoftheAtheists。FromthesewordsthecriticconcludesthattheauthoradmitsthefatalityoftheAtheists。
  Tothisheanswers,thathehadjustbeforedestroyedthisfatality,byrepresentingitasthegreatestabsurditytosupposethatablindfatalitywascapableofproducingintelligentbeings。Besides,inthepassageherecensured,hecanonlybemadetosaywhathereallydoessay:hedoesnotspeakofcauses,nordoeshecomparecauses;buthespeaksofeffectsandcompareseffects。Thewholearticle,whatgoesbeforeandwhatfollows,makeitevident,thatthereisnothinghereintendedbutthelawsofmotion,which,accordingtotheauthor,hadbeenestablishedbyGod:theselawsareinvariable;thisheasasserted,andallnaturalphilosophyhasassertedthesamething;theyareinvariablebecauseGodhasbeenpleasedtomakethemso,andbecausehehaspleasedtopreservetheworld。Whentheauthorthereforesaysthatthecreationwhichappearstobeanarbitraryact,supposeslawsasinvariableasthefatalityoftheAtheists,hecannotbeunderstoodtosaythatthecreationwasanecessaryactlikethefatalityoftheAtheists。
  HavingvindicatedhimselffromthechargeofSpinozism,heproceedstotheotheraccusation,andfromamultitudeofpassagescollectedtogetherprovesthathehasnotonlyacknowledgedthetruthofrevealedreligion;butthatheisinlovewithChristianity,andendeavourstomakeitappearamiableintheeyesofothers。Hethenenquiresintowhathisadversarieshavesaidtoprovethecontrary,observingthattheproofsoughttobearsomeproportiontotheaccusation;thatthisaccusationisnotofafrivolousnature,andthattheproofsthereforeoughtnottobefrivolous。
  Thefirstobjectionis,thathehaspraisedtheStoics,whoadmittedablindfatality,andthatthisisthefoundationofnaturalreligion。Tothishereplies,"Iwillforamomentsupposethatthisfalsemannerofreasoninghassomeweight:hastheauthorpraisedthephilosophyandmetaphysicsoftheStoics?Hehaspraisedtheirmorals,andhassaidthatthepeoplereapedgreatbenefitfromthem:hehassaidthis,andhehassaidnomore:Iammistaken,hehassaidmore,hehasatthebeginningofhisbookattackedthisfatality,hedoesnotthenpraiseit,whenhepraisestheStoics。"
  Thesecondobjectionis,thathehaspraisedBayle,incallinghimagreatman。Tothisheanswers,"ItistruethattheauthorhascalledBayleagreatman,buthehascensuredhisopinions:ifhehascensuredthem,hehasnotespousedthem:andsincehehascensuredhisopinions,hedoesnotcallhimagreatmanbecauseofhisopinions。EverybodyknowsthatBaylehadagreatgeniuswhichheabused;butthisgeniuswhichheabused,hehad:theauthorhasattackedhissophisms,andpitieshimonaccountofhiserrors。Idon’tlovethemenwhosubvertthelawsoftheircountry;butIshouldfindgreatdifficultyinbelievingthatCaesarandCromwellhadlittleminds:Iamnotinlovewithconquerors,butitwouldbeverydifficulttopersuademetobelievethatAlexanderandJenghiz—Khanweremenofonlyacommongenius。Besides,Ihaveremarked,thatthedeclamationsofangrymenmakebutlittleimpressiononanyexceptthosewhoareangry:thegreatestpartofthereadersaremenofmoderation,andseldomtakeupabookbutwhentheyareincoolblood;forrationalandsensiblemenlovereason。HadtheauthorloadedBaylewithathousandinjuriousreproaches,itwouldnothavefollowedfromthence,thatBaylehadreasonedwellorill;allthathisreaderswouldhavebeenabletoconcludefromitwouldhavebeen,thattheauthorknewhowtobeabusive。"
  Thethirdobjectionis,thathehasnotinhisfirstchapterspokenoforiginalsin。Towhichhereplies:"Iaskeverysensiblemanifthischapterisatreatiseofdivinity?iftheauthorhadspokenoforiginalsin,theymighthaveimputedittohimasacrimethathehadnotspokenofredemption。"
  Thenextobjectiontakesnotice,that"TheauthorhassaidthatinEnglandself—murderistheeffectofadistemper,andthatitcannotbepunishedwithoutpunishingtheeffectsofmadness;theconsequencethecriticdrawsfromthenceis,thatafollowerofnaturalreligioncanneverforgetthatEnglandisthecradleofhissect,andthatherubsaspongeoverallthecrimeshefoundthere。"Hereplies,"TheauthordoesnotknowthatEnglandisthecradleofnaturalreligion;butheknowsthatEnglandwasnothiscradle。HeisnotofthesamereligioussentimentsasanEnglishman,anymorethananEnglishmanwhospeaksofthephysicaleffectshefoundinFrance,isnotofthesamereligionastheFrench。Heisnotafollowerofnaturalreligion;buthewishesthathiscriticwasafollowerofnaturallogic。"
  Thesearetheprincipleobjectionslevelledagainstourauthor,onthishead,fromwhichourreaderswillsufficientlyseeonwhattrifling,whatpuerileargumentsthischargeofDeismisfounded。Heconcludeshoweverthisarticle,withadefenseofthereligionofnature,andsuchadefenseaseveryrationalChristianmustundoubtedlyapprove。
  "BeforeIconcludethisfirstpart,Iamtemptedtomakeoneobjectionagainsthimwhohasmadesomany;buthehassostunnedmyearswiththewordsfollowerofnaturalreligion,thatIscarcelydarepronouncethem。
  Ishallendeavourhowevertotakecourage。Donotthecritic’stwopiecesstandingreaterneedofanexplication,thanthatwhichI
  defend?Doeshedowell,whilespeakingofnaturalreligionandrevelation,tofallperpetuallyupononesideofthesubject,andtolosealltracesoftheother?Doeshedowellnevertodistinguishthosewhoacknowledgeonlythereligionofnature,fromthosewhoacknowledgebothnaturalandrevealedreligion?Doeshedowelltoturnfranticwhenevertheauthorconsidersmaninthestateofnaturalreligion,andwheneverheexplainsanythingontheprinciplesofnaturalreligion?
  DoeshedowelltoconfoundnaturalreligionwithAtheism?HaveInotheardthatwehaveallnaturalreligion?HaveInotheardthatChristianityistheperfectionofnaturalreligion?HaveInotheardthatnaturalreligionisemployedtoprovethetruthofrevelationagainsttheDeists?andthatthesamenaturalreligionisemployedtoprovetheexistenceofaGodagainsttheAtheists?HehassaidthattheStoicswerethefollowersofnaturalreligion;andIsay,thattheywereAtheists,sincetheybelievedthatablindfatalitygovernedtheuniverse;anditisbythereligionofnaturethatweoughttoattackthatoftheStoics。HesaysthattheschemeofnaturalreligionisconnectedwiththatofSpinoza;andIsay,thattheyarecontradictorytoeachother,anditisbynaturalreligionthatweoughttodestroySpinoza’sscheme。Isay,thattoconfoundnaturalreligionwithAtheism,istoconfoundtheproofwiththethingtobeproved,andtheobjectionsagainsterrorwitherroritself,andthatthisistotakeawaythemostpowerfularmswehaveagainstthiserror。"
  Theauthornowproceedstothesecondpartofhisdefence,inwhichhehasthefollowingremarks。"Whathasthecriticdonetogiveanamplescopetohisdeclamations,andtoopenthewidestdoortoinvectives?hehasconsideredtheauthor,asifhehadintendedtofollowtheexampleofM。Abbadye,andhadbeenwritingatreatiseontheChristianreligion:hehasattackedhim,asifhistwobooksonreligionweretwotreatisesondivinity;hehascavilledagainsthim,asifwhilehehadbeentalkingofanyreligionwhatsoeverwhichwasnotChristian,heshouldhaveexamineditaccordingtotheprinciples,anddoctrinesofChristianity;hehasjudgedhimasifinhistwobooksrelatingtoreligionheoughttohavepreachedtoMahometansandIdolatorsthedoctrinesofChristianity。Wheneverhehasspokenofreligioningeneral,wheneverhehasmadeuseofthewordreligion,thecriticsays,’thatistheChristianreligion’;wheneverhehascomparedthereligiousritesofdifferentnationsandhassaidthattheyaremoreconformabletothepoliticalgovernmentofthesecountries,thansomeotherrites,thecriticagainsays,’youapprovethemthenandabandontheChristianfaith’:whenhehasspokenofapeoplewhohaveneverembracedChristianity,orwhohavelivedbeforeChrist,againsaysthecritic,’youdon’tthenacknowledgethemoralsofChristianity’;whenhehascanvassedanycustomwhatsoever,whichhehasfoundinapoliticalwriter,thecriticaskshim,’IsthisadoctrineofChristianity?’Hemightaswelladd,’Yousayyouareacivilian,andIwillmakeyouadivineinspiteofyourself:youhavegivenuselsewheresomeveryexcellentthingsontheChristianreligion,butthiswasonlytoconcealyourrealsentiments,forIknowyourheart,andpenetrateintoyourthoughts。ItistrueIdonotunderstandyourbook,noritismaterialthatIshoulddiscoverthegoodorbaddesignwithwhichithasbeenwritten;butIknowthebottomofallyourthoughts:Idon’tknowawordofwhatyouhavesaid,butIunderstandperfectlywell,whatyouhavenotsaid。’"
  Buttoproceed。Theauthorhasmaintainedthepolygamyisnecessarilyandinitsownnaturebad;hehaswroteachapterexpresslyagainstit,andafterwardshasexaminedinaphilosophicalmanner,inwhatcountries,inwhatclimates,orinwhatcircumstancesitisleastpernicious;hehascomparedclimateswithclimates,andcountrieswithcountries,andhasfound,thattherearecountries,whereitseffectsarelessperniciousthaninothers;because,accordingtotheaccountsthathavebeengivenofthem,thenumberofmenandwomennotbeingeverywhereequal,itisevident,thatifthereareplaceswheretherearemorewomenthanmen,polygamy,badasitisinitself,istherelessperniciousthaninothers。Butasthetitleofthischapter[3]containsthesewords,Thatthelawofpolygamyisanaffairofcalculation,theyhaveseizedthistitleasanexcellentsubjectfordeclamation。Havingrepeatedthechapteritself,againstwhichnoobjectionismade,heproceedstojustifythetitleandadds:"Polygamyisanaffairofcalculationwhenwewouldknow,ifitismoreorlessperniciousincertainclimates,incertaincountries,incertaincircumstancesthaninothers;itisnotanaffairofcalculationwhenwewoulddecidewhetheritbegoodorbadinitself。Itisnotanaffairofcalculationwhenwereasononitsnature;itmaybeanaffairofcalculationwhenwecombineitseffects;inshort,itisneveranaffairofcalculationwhenweenquireintotheendofmarriage,anditisevenlessso,whenweenquireintomarriageasalawestablishedandconfirmedbyJesusChrist。"
  Again,theauthorhavingsaid,that[4]polygamyismoreconformabletonatureinsomecountriesthaninothers,thecritichasseizedthewordsmoreconformabletonature,tomakehissay,thatheapprovespolygamy。
  Towhichheanswers,"IfIsay,thatIshouldlikebettertohaveafeverthanthescurvy,doesthissignifythatIshouldliketohaveafever?oronlythatthescurvyismoredisagreeabletomethanafever?"
  Havingfinishedhisreplytowhathadbeenobjectedtoonthesubjectofpolygamy,hevindicatesthatexcellentpartofhisworkwhichtreatsoftheclimates;whenspeakingoftheinfluencethesehaveuponreligion,hesays,"Iamverysensiblethatreligionisinitsownnatureindependentofallphysicalcauseswhatsoever,thatthereligionwhichisgoodinonecountryisgoodinanother,andthatitcannotbeperniciousinonecountrywithoutbeingsoinall;butyet,Isay,thatasitispracticedbymen,andhasarelationtothosewhodonotpracticeit,anyreligionwhatsoeverwillfindagreaterfacilityinbeingpracticed,eitherinthewholeorinpart,incertaincircumstancesthaninothers,andthatwhoeversaysthecontrarymustrenounceallpretensionstosenseandunderstanding。"
  Butthecritichasbeengreatlyoffendedbyourauthor’ssaying,[5]
  thatwhenastateisatlibertytoreceiveortorejectanewreligion,itoughttoberejected;whenitisreceived,itoughttobetolerated。
  Fromhenceheobjects,thattheauthorhasadvisedidolatrousprinces,nottoadmittheChristianreligionintotheirdominions。Tothisheanswersfirstbyreferringtoapassageinwhichhesays,[6]thatthebestcivilandpoliticallawsare,nexttoChristianity,thegreatestblessingsthatmencangiveorreceive;andadds,"IfthenChristianityisthefirstandgreatestblessing,andthepoliticalandcivillawsthesecond,therearenopoliticalorcivillawsinanystatethatcanoroughttohindertheentranceoftheChristianreligion。"
  Hissecondansweris,"Thatthereligionofheavenisnotestablishedbythesamemethodsasthereligionsoftheearth;readthehistoryofthechurch,andyouwillseethewondersperformedbytheChristianreligion:wasshetoenteracountry,sheknewhowtoopenitsgates;
  everyinstrumentwasabletoeffectit;atonetimeGodmakesuseofafewfisherman,atanotherhesetsanemperoronthethrone,andmakeshimbowdownhisheadundertheyolkofthegospel。DoesChristianityhideherselfinsubterraneancaverns?stayamoment,andyouseeanadvocatespeakingfromtheimperialthroneonherbehalf。Shetraverses,whenevershepleases,seas,rivers,andmountains;noobstaclesherebelowcanstopherprogress:implantaversioninthemind,shewillconquerthisaversion:establishcustoms,formhabits,publishedicts,enactlaws,shewilltriumphovertheclimate,overthelawswhichresultfromit,andoverthelegislatorswhohavemadethem。Godactingaccordingtodecreeswhichareunknowntous,extendsorcontractsthelimitsofhisreligion。"
  ______
  1。ThepresentKindofSardinia。
  2。Booki。Chap。1。
  3。Bookxvi。Chap。4。
  4。Bookxvi。Chap。4。
  5。Bookxxv。Ch。10。
  6。Ibid。Ch。1。
  TheSpiritofLawsbyCharlesdeMontesquieuCONTENTS
  PrefaceAdvertisementBookI。OfLawsinGeneral1。OftheRelationofLawstoDifferentBeings2。OftheLawsofNature3。OfPositiveLawsBookII。OfLawsDirectlyDerivedfromtheNatureofGovernment1。OftheNatureoftheThreeDifferentGovernments2。OftheRepublicanGovernment,andtheLawsinRelationtoDemocracy3。OftheLawsinRelationtotheNatureofAristocracy4。OftheRelationofLawstotheNatureofMonarchicalGovernment5。OftheLawsinRelationtotheNatureofaDespoticGovernmentBookIII。OfthePrinciplesoftheThreeKindsofGovernment1。DifferenceBetweentheNatureandPrincipleofGovernment2。OfthePrincipleofDifferentGovernments3。OfthePrincipleofDemocracy4。OfthePrincipleofAristocracy5。ThatVirtueIsNotthePrincipleofaMonarchicalGovernment6。InWhatMannerVirtueIsSuppliedinaMonarchicalGovernment7。OfthePrincipleofMonarchy8。ThatHonourIsNotthePrincipleofDespoticGovernment9。OfthePrincipleofDespoticGovernment10。DifferenceofObedienceinModerateandDespoticGovernments11。ReflectionsonthePrecedingChaptersBookIV。ThattheLawsofEducationOughttoBeinRelationtothePrinciplesofGovernment1。OftheLawsofEducation2。OfEducationinMonarchies3。OfEducationinaDespoticGovernment4。DifferencebetweentheEffectsofAncientandModernEducation5。OfEducationinaRepublicanGovernment6。OfsomeInstitutionsamongtheGreeks7。InWhatCasesTheseSingularInstitutionsMayBeofService8。ExplanationofaParadoxoftheAncientsinRespecttoMannersBookV。ThattheLawsGivenbytheLegislatorOughttoBeinRelationtothePrincipleofGovernment1。IdeaofThisBook2。WhatIsMeantbyVirtueinaPoliticalState3。WhatIsMeantbyaLoveoftheRepublicinaDemocracy4。InWhatMannertheLoveofEqualityandFrugalityIsInspired5。InWhatMannertheLawsEstablishEqualityinaDemocracy6。InWhatMannertheLawsOughttoMaintainFrugalityinaDemocracy7。OtherMethodsofFavouringthePrincipleofDemocracy8。InWhatMannertheLawsShouldRelatetothePrincipleofGovernmentinanAristocracy9。InWhatMannertheLawsAreinRelationtoTheirPrincipleinMonarchies10。OftheExpeditionPeculiartotheExecutivePowerinMonarchies11。OftheExcellenceofaMonarchicalGovernment12。TheSameSubjectContinued13。AnIdeaofDespoticPower14。InWhatMannertheLawsAreinRelationtothePrinciplesofDespoticGovernment15。TheSameSubjectContinued16。OftheCommunicationofPower17。OfPresents18。OfRewardsConferredbytheSovereign19。NewConsequencesofthePrinciplesoftheThreeGovernmentsBookVI。ConsequencesofthePrinciplesofDifferentGovernmentswithRespecttotheSimplicityofCivilandCriminalLaws,theFormofJudgments,andtheInflictingofPunishments1。OftheSimplicityofCivilLawsinDifferentGovernments2。OftheSimplicityofCriminalLawsinDifferentGovernments3。InWhatGovernmentsandinWhatCasestheJudgesOughttoDetermineAccordingtotheExpressLetteroftheLaw4。OftheMannerofPassingJudgment5。InWhatGovernmentstheSovereignMayBeJudge6。ThatinMonarchiesMinistersOughtNottoSitasJudges7。OfaSingleMagistrate8。OfAccusationinDifferentGovernments9。OftheSeverityofPunishmentsinDifferentGovernments10。OftheAncientFrenchLaws11。ThatWhenPeopleAreVirtuous,FewPunishmentsAreNecessary12。OfthePowerofPunishments13。InsufficiencyoftheLawsofJapan14。OftheSpiritoftheRomanSenate15。OftheRomanLawsinRespecttoPunishments16。OftheJustProportionbetweenPunishmentsandCrimes17。OftheRack18。OfPecuniaryandCorporalPunishments19。OftheLawofRetaliation20。OfthePunishmentofFathersfortheCrimesofTheirChildren21。OftheClemencyofthePrinceBookVII。ConsequencesoftheDifferentPrinciplesoftheThreeGovernmentswithRespecttoSumptuaryLaws,Luxury,andtheConditionofWomen1。OfLuxury2。OfSumptuaryLawsinaDemocracy3。OfSumptuaryLawsinanAristocracy4。OfSumptuaryLawsinaMonarchy5。InWhatCasesSumptuaryLawsAreUsefulinaMonarchy6。OftheLuxuryofChina7。FatalConsequencesofLuxuryinChina8。OfPublicContinency9。OftheConditionorStateofWomeninDifferentGovernments10。OftheDomesticTribunalamongtheRomans11。InWhatMannertheInstitutionsChangedatRome,TogetherwiththeGovernment12。OftheGuardianshipofWomenamongtheRomans13。OfthePunishmentsDecreedbytheEmperorsagainsttheIncontinenceofWomen14。SumptuaryLawsamongtheRomans15。OfDowriesandNuptialAdvantagesinDifferentConstitutions16。AnExcellentCustomoftheSamnites17。OfFemaleAdministrationBookVIII。OftheCorruptionofthePrinciplesoftheThreeGovernments1。GeneralIdeaofThisBook2。OftheCorruptionofthePrinciplesofDemocracy3。OftheSpiritofExtremeEquality4。ParticularCauseoftheCorruptionofthePeople5。OftheCorruptionofthePrincipleofAristocracy6。OftheCorruptionofthePrincipleofMonarchy7。TheSameSubjectContinued8。DangeroftheCorruptionofthePrincipleofMonarchicalGovernment9。HowReadytheNobilityAretoDefendtheThrone10。OftheCorruptionofthePrincipleofDespoticGovernment11。NaturalEffectsoftheGoodnessandCorruptionofthePrinciplesofGovernment12。TheSameSubjectContinued13。TheEffectofanOathamongVirtuousPeople14。HowtheSmallestChangeoftheConstitutionIsAttendedwiththeRuinofitsPrinciples15。SureMethodsofPreservingtheThreePrinciples16。DistinctivePropertiesofaRepublic17。DistinctivePropertiesofaMonarchy18。ParticularCaseoftheSpanishMonarchy19。DistinctivePropertiesofaDespoticGovernment20。ConsequenceofthePrecedingChapters21。OftheEmpireofChinaBookIX。OfLawsintheRelationTheyBeartoaDefensiveForce1。InWhatMannerRepublicsProvideforTheirSafety2。ThataConfederateGovernmentOughttoBeComposedofStatesoftheSameNature,EspeciallyoftheRepublicanKind3。OtherRequisitesinaConfederateRepublic4。InWhatMannerDespoticGovernmentsProvidefortheirSecurity5。InWhatManneraMonarchicalGovernmentProvidesforItsSecurity6。OftheDefensiveForceofStatesinGeneral7。AReflection8。AParticularCaseinWhichtheDefensiveForceofaStateIsInferiortotheOffensive9。OftheRelativeForceofStates10。OftheWeaknessofNeighbouringStatesBookX。OfLawsintheRelationTheyBeartoOffensiveForce1。OfOffensiveForce2。OfWar3。OftheRightofConquest4。SomeAdvantagesofaConqueredPeople5。Gelon,KingofSyracuse6。OfConquestMadebyaRepublic7。TheSameSubjectContinued8。TheSameSubjectContinued9。OfConquestsMadebyaMonarchy10。OfOneMonarchyThatSubduesAnother11。OftheMannersofaConqueredPeople12。OfaLawofCyrus13。CharlesXII