Page:Inquiry into the Principles and Policy of the Government of the United States.djvu/135

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
AND OF THE ENGLISH POLICY.
125

"But the behaviour of the nobility was quite the contrary," says Machiavel, "for as they always disdained the thoughts of equality, even when they lived a private life, so now they were in the magistracy, they thought to domineer over the whole city, and every day produced fresh instances of their pride and arrogance; which exceedingly galled the people, when they saw they had deposed one tyrant to make room for a thousand.”

"All this," says Mr. Adams, "one may safely believe to be exactly true, but what then? Why, they ought to have separated the nobles from the commons, and made each independent of the other."[1]

These nobles were tried in private life and in the magistracy," in both they retained the vicious qualities of the vicious principle, nobility. True, says Mr. Adams, but they were not tried according to my theory. Many attempts in various modes, some approaching to his theory, were unsuccessfully made in Italy to gratify or purify the principle, nobility; all failed; it continued to exhibit vicious qualities. At this period, the nobles in England were separated from and independent of the house of commons, and that house of the nobles; yet the vicious qualities of nobility caused a multitude of disorders. Mr. Adams admits the insolence of nobility, and the disorders it produces; his remedy to cure insolence and ambition, is power and wealth.

The nobles of Poland, were rich and powerful; they ruined their country, rather than soften the condition of the people. Those of Russia receive districts with the inhabitants as donations from an emperour. But, says Mr. Adams, "hereditary kings and nobles are as much representatives of the people as these they elect." In Russia they represent them as part of their estates. Thus the feudal English barons represented the people, whilst possessed of their baronies; now, by selling them to the crown. We see in all instances, that nobility, with great wealth and power, is a tyrant; with little, a traitor; and that orders or interests,

  1. Adams's Def. v. 2, 46.