The Prince (Byerley)/Introduction
INTRODUCTION.
When the star of Buonaparte arose, it was mistaken for a meteor that blazes for a moment, and is seen no more; from its continuance, however, the world condescended to dignify it by the appellation of a comet, rapidly approaching its perihelion; yet here again they were mistaken: and after several mutations of opinion, they seem agreed to apply the epithet of Jupiter and his satellites to Buonaparte and his vassal kings. Of the beauty, aptitude, or force of the comparison, we will not offer an opinion. It is a matter of small moment whether we denominate him in the language of our Journals, "a Corsican adventurer," "an upstart," "a soldier of fortune," or, in the language of adulation with which his subjects ever salute him when he appears, "Vive l'Empereur!” "Vive notre Empereur Napoleon le Grand!" Though, if we might hazard our sentiments on the occasion, we should say, that much evil has occurred to Great Britain from the constant endeavour to depreciate his genius, and underrate his talents, thereby deceiving ourselves to our own wrong. Yet, who shall dare to call the enemy of his country great? one whom the general voice has reprobated by every ignominious term which the genius of the language afforded; and held up to public scorn, contempt, and hate, till the prodigies he performed compelled us, in spite of ourselves, to acknowledge him "a wonderful man."
Incalculable are the miseries which have resulted from this system: every scheme we have adopted to arrest the progress of his victorious arms, has failed, and our numerous "diversions" in favour of our allies have, in reality, proved a diversion to Buonaparte!—they failed, because we did not think it worth while to study the character of the enemy, as a statesman and a prince. His origin was humble, and therefore our sapient ministers deemed the subject beneath their consideration. And what has been the result? Why, that we have squandered ONE HUNDRED MILLIONS OF MONEY, AND SACRIFICED ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND OF THE BEST TROOPS IN THE WORLD, AND LEFT BUONAPARTE ARBITER OF THE DESTINIES OF CONTINENTAL EUROPE. These are painful reflections, which produce heart-rending sensations—they are, I confess it, unwelcome truths, but had they been known and well appreciated be fore, we should have been spared the painful part of the relation, and avoided the reiterated disgraces attending our arms; for every one must feel convinced, that, in order successfully to cope with an enemy, it is as necessary to ascertain the character of his mind as the number of his forces, to penetrate his cabinet, discover him in his study, and read those mental conceptions which will ere long be thrown into practice with a view to our own discomfiture. Having done this, having discovered his tactics, and the weapons with which he fights, as well as the object for which he fights, it turns the chance of success in our favor, and prevents the sacrifice of money and men on unprofitable objects. A question will naturally arise: Does Buonaparte, act thus?. I answer, Yes[1]. He is more conversant with the nature, character, and talent, of every cabinet in Europe, than we, as a nation, appear to be with our own. It is on this principle that half his victories are assured: before he marches a man into the field; adventitious circumstances may accelerate, or retard his operations; but as he invariably adapts the means to the end, that end is certain.
There are many who consider Buonaparte as a scourge from heaven to punish the wickedness of mankind, but they destroy their own argument in interposing obstacles to his success, and accusing him with numberless crimes, for were his mission divine, and he the instrument of Providence, to fight against him would be to fight against God.
I merely notice this en passant, as many well-meaning persons adopt the idea without considering the natural consequences resulting from it if true. The name of Buonaparte inspires terror, and this idea is only wanting to render him invincible; for what impression must it make on the spirits of an army, to believe, that besides the equality of force, they are also opposing the arm of Omnipotence. It was this idea which so often rendered the Israelites vic- torious over their enemies; and this, which made Alexander invincible; from which we may infer, that we cannot render. Buonaparte a more acceptable service, than by disseminating the idea that he is an instrument in the hand of Providence.
To those, indeed, who are unaccustomed to reasoning by induction, and who hate“ the labour of a serious thought," many of the actions of Buonaparte may appear superhuman. But those who have marked every step of his progress see nothing wonderful, nothing miraculous in all he has done, nothing but the natural consequences of certain premises; and however singular and extravagant this assertion may appear, I am well persuaded that it may be proved with the certainty of mathematical demonstration; of which truth the reader will probably be persuaded from the perusal of the following pages, in which I shall attempt to shew that . Buonaparte has invariably pursued the dọc-trines of Machiavelli, as laid down in “The Prince."
With Machiavelli in one hand, and his sword in the other, the one performing the dictates of the other, he has crushed empires, and subjected the continent of Europe to his sway; so striking a coincidence may be shewn in every part between Buonaparte and his model, even to the deprivation of the Pope's temporal power, that to translate Machiavelli is to write the life of Buonaparte, and the secret history of the court of St. Cloud.
Before we proceed to this illustration of the principles of Buonaparte's conduct, it may not be improper to pause for a moment on the character of his model.
"The name of Machiavelli, as the French translator of his works observes, appears to be consecrated by every modern idiom to recal and even to express the highest degree of political criminality and atrocity. The greater part of those who pronounce it, like every other expression of a language, before they knew what it signified, or whence it was derived, might at first suppose that it was that of a tyrant, who so far surpassed all other known tyrants in perfidy and cruelty, that his name was given to the species of crime for which he was so celebrated. But how much more culpable must he appear, when we learn that he was an individual, who, without interest and without a motive, has only acquired this dreadful renown for having given lessons to despots against the people on the art of rivetting their chains."
This is the popular idea of Machiavel in the breast of the greater portion of mankind, who, "true telegraphs of opinion, repeat without comprehending, and transmit a decision without knowing the meaning, or penetrating the secret."
Machiavelli, indeed, has had the misfortune to be universally calumniated by all. parties and men of all persuasions, and his name has been consecrated to infamy, as. well by those who have read him, as by. those who have not; and at the head of those stands Frederick the Second of Prussia[2]! It would, however, be easy to prove, that the principles which Frederick condemns in his anti-Machiavel were adopted by him in his political and military career, and acquired him the surname of Great—a signal proof of his genius and ingratitude.
"There have been, however, some whose esteem is preferable to that of a whole people, and whose judgment would preponderate in the balance against that of an age, who have dared to raise their voice in favour of a man consigned to eternal infamy. Our own Verulam says, we are indebted to Machiavelli; for in feigning to give lessons to princes he has instructed the people.
This sentiment has been repeated and: enlarged upon by Rousseau of Geneva, which in France effected a complete revolution in favor of Machiavelli; whose works were now sought after, read, and deservedly admired. England, however, still maintains her old opinion of Machiavelli, and distinguishes by his name those deeds which display superior cunning, atrocity, and want of faith. Though Bacon and Rousseau declare Machiavelli worthy of all praise, her enlightened politicians still hold him accursed.
That they do not venerate him is their own fault, for had they consulted him as their oracle, they would have saved millions of treasure, and as many warriors as we can boast in our standing army.
Let it not, however, be thought that I propose to vindicate Machiavelli. No. I will only unfold his principles to the reader, and leave him to form his own conclusions: and if, after this specimen, he should be tempted to read the whole of his works with proper attention, and without prejudice, he will probably deduce the conclusion that I have arrived at, after repeated reperusals; and which I cannot describe better than in the language of his French translator. "Besides a superiority of talent, which no one will deny him, his writings prove to me, that no one more ardently loved the liberty and prosperity of his country; that to its welfare he consecrated his midnight: studies, all his thoughts, his affection, his fortune, and repose. That even the very work wherein he has developed those maxims for which he is so much reviled, (the Prince), "is perhaps a most splendid proof of patriotism, and as enlightened as ardent; that, to appreciate the greater part of his counsels, we must refer to the time, place, and circumstances, under which he wrote; and, above all, the hypothesis in which he places himself in writing. Then, not only my scruples vanished, but I deemed it a service to my country to translate all his works; being convinced, that to pre-sent him entire to the public, was the only mode of displaying him in his true light, and the surest way not only of re-establishing the author's reputation, which is of secondary moment, but to remove from his maxims the unfavourable impression they are calculated to produce when detached[3].'
The reader being now, I will hope, disposed to question the truth of the popular opinion, to the prejudice of Machiavelli, will naturally enquire how it first arose, and what conspired to render it universal; being repeated by millions, who never perused a page of his writings.
The circumstance is curious, and at the present moment important, as it unfolds part of the policy of Buonaparte, and places his obligations to Machiavelli in a striking point of view; in order to which, we will take a brief survey of the state of Italy at the time he wrote, with a short sketch of his life, which will elucidate many passages of his " Prince," and account for the dissemination of those principles which, abstractedly considered, are revolting to the human mind.
Niccolo Machiavelli was born at Florence in the year 1466, and displayed that precocity of talent which procured him, at an early age, the high and confidential post of Secretary to the Council of Ten, or, in other words, the republic of Florence. His genius, his learning, and vast intelligence, were so conspicuous and pre-emi- nent, that he was alternately appointed their ambassador to the courts of Germany, France, Rome, to the Swiss, and several of the states of Italy; and on every occasion, where superior talents and deep penetration were necessary, Machiavelli was chosen to execute it.
Being their general ambassador, it some- times occurred that his mission conferred no honour upon him. It was on one of those occasions, in which he was sent to a Chapter of Monks at Carpi, that his friend Guichardini wrote to him thus:
"My dear Machiavelli, when I think on your new title of ambassador to a community of monks, and when I think on the dukes, princes, and kings, with whom you have negociated, it brings to. my mind Lysander, who, after so many victories and trophies, was ordered to distribute provisions to those very soldiers whom he had so gloriously commanded.”
But Machiavelli soon passed the zenith of his fortune: when the family of Medicis gained. the ascendancy at Florence, he lost his situation, and was no longer employed. He was even accused of being concerned in a conspiracy against that family, and was actually put to the torture[4], which he bore with admirable firmness.
The power of the Medici being too firmly seated to be shaken by any gust of fortune, they endeavoured to conciliate and gain the affections of this celebrated man. Clement the VIIth engaged him to write the history of Florence, and had it dedicated to himself; and to Lorenzo de Medicis, he dedicated his "Prince." Yet, notwithstanding this illustrious patronage, Machiavelli died poor, leaving behind him two sons.
Machiavelli was a citizen of a republic, whose constitution was so vicious, that it was by turns the victim of licentious democracy, and an oppressive anistrocracy. By turns torn by the faction of the nobles, and by that of the populace, Florence: presented a scene of perpetual convulsions: The calmest intervals she enjoyed were a mere suspension of hostilities between the exhausted parties, which were resumed by those who first recovered breath.
Machiavelli, deeply affected with the evils which desolated his unfortunate country; as a man of genius, far from attributing them to the passions; or errors of those who governed-an error too common amongst mankind, rose superior to particular considerations and the private interests of the age in which he lived, soon perceived that so many disorders were: the natural consequences of the radical vices of the constitution. The power and the glory of ancient Rome fixed his attention. The Romans had several points of relation with the Florentines, as the identity of country, climate, vicinity, ancient relations, and a similar form of government, which presented to him such different results, that he determined on studying the causes of these differences.
The conclusions he arrived at are given in his discourse on the first Decade of Livy, and the principles which he there laid down were afterwards collected by him, disposed in a systematic order, and augmented by others which his studies and political experience struck out; and these combined, formed "The Prince," a work which stands alone, being superior to all others in solidity of reasoning and depth of genius.
It was in considering every thing on the basis of general policy, that he discovered the evils arising from THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPES. He thus expresses himself on the subject, in the 12th chapter of the first book of his Reflections on the first Decade of Livy; and, as it will place the character of Machiavelli in a new light, the reader will not be displeased to see a translation of the whole chapter.
"That it is important to have a great consideration for religion—The ruin of Italy, through the intrigues of the Court of Rome, in consequence of having neglected this maxim.
"Those princes and republics who wish to maintain themselves free from all corruption, ought, above all things, to preserve religion in its purity, and respect the sanctity of its ceremonies; for there is not so sure a sign of the ruin of a state as the contempt of divine worship. This is easy to. comprehend, when we ascertain the base on which the religion of a country is founded.
"In fact, every form of religion has a principal point on which the whole system turns and is supported. The religion of the Gentiles was founded on the responses of the oracles, and on the sect of augurs and aruspices. On these all their other ceremonies, sacrifices, rites, &c. entirely depended. They readily believed that the God, who could predict good and evil, had also the power of acting in favour of his worshippers; hence temples, sacrifices, supplications, and numerous ceremonies, in honour of their gods; for the oracle of Delos, the temple of Jupiter Ammon, and other oracles equally celebrated, filled the world with astonishment and devotion. But when the oracles were found to utter their responses under the dictation of princes, and their falsity was discovered by the people, men became incredulous, and from that moment capable of subverting all established order.
"Hence it is evidently the duty of princes, and the heads of republics, to support the religion of the country on its basis; for nothing is so easy as to maintain a.state composed of religious persons—religion is a bond of union, which unites them to each other and their prince; therefore, every thing that tends to favour religion ought to be paid attention to, even though we are aware of its falsity, and the greater our wisdom and our knowledge of the human heart, the more we feel the importance of such a mode of proceeding.
“The attention of wise men to adopt these maxims, even in the most inconsistent formsof religion, gave birth to the faith in miracles. They seemed to credit them whatever was their source, and their opinion was an authority with the multitude.
"There were many of these miracles at Rome, and one of the most remarkable was the following : The Roman soldiery, after sacking the city of Veia, entered the temple of Juno ; they approached the sta tue of the goddess, and one of them said, “Will you come to Rome?” Some thought they saw the goddess give a sign of approbation, others fancied they heard her answer "Yes.” And why it was because these men were very religious; for, as Livy tells us, they entered the temple without tumult, full of devotion and religious zeal, and therefore they were easily induced to believe they heard an answer, which they so much desired and thought would be given to their question. But this opinion, this be lief, was received, favoured, and accredited by Camillus and the other Roman chiefs.
"We may add, that if, in the commencement of the Christian dispensation, the religion had been maintained on the principles of its founder, the states and republics of Christendom would be more united and more happy than they are; and we can give no stronger proof of its decline and approaching fall than, that the nearer the proximity of a people to Rome, the head of the Christian church, the more irreligious they are: and, whoever will examine the principles on which it is founded, and how it's uses and applications are changed and altered from their primitive forms, must foresee that the period of its fall, or a violent concussion that will shake it to its centre, is not far distant[5].
"But as many persons conceive that the prosperity of Italy depends on the existence of the Church of Rome, I may be permitted to advance against this opinion a few reasons, two of which appear to me unanswerable.
"In the first place, I maintain that the evil example of this court has destroyed every sentiment of piety and religion in Italy; for, if where religion is, we suppose every virtue; where it is wanting, we have a right to suppose the existence of every vice. Hence, the first service that the church and the priest-hood have conferred on us Italians, has been to deprive us of religion, and fill us with every vice. But the church has done more, which will prove the ruin of Italy, for she has kept it, and continues to keep it, perpetually full of divisions.
"A country cannot be truly united and prosper, unless it is under the entire dominion of one government; whether it be monarchical or republican, as France or Spain. That the government of the whole of Italy is not thus organized, either as a republic or a monarchy, is wholly owing to the Church of Rome.
"She has, indeed, acquired in it an empire and a temporal power, but she has never been powerful enough to gain possession of the rest of Italy, and acquire the sovereignty of the whole. Her political weakness has, on the contrary, been such, that apprehending the loss of her temporal territories, she has had recourse to foreign powers to defend her states against the neighbour whom she dreaded. This has often happened. She invited Charlemagne to drive out the Lombards, who were already kings of all Italy; and, in our time, she weakened the power of the Venetians by the aid of France, and afterwards expelled the French by the aid of the Swiss.
"The Church, therefore, having never been powerful enough to subjugate all Italy, and having prevented any other from occupying it, has been the cause of this country's never being united under one chief, but continued divided amongst a great number of petty princes. Such is the cause of the weakness and disunion which has rendered it the prey, not only of foreign powers, but of whoever chose to attack it.
"Now all this is owing to the Court of Rome; and, as an experimental proof, I would suppose the Papal See removed to the centre of Switzerland, amongst the people who, of all the nations of Europe, have best preserved their primitive religion and manners; and we should soon find the politics and intrigues of this court give birth to more. disorders, and introduce more vices, than in any other time, any other cause, would have been able to produce.”
We here perceive, that three hundred years after this denunciation of the mischiefs arising from the temporal power of the Popes, Buonaparte not only performs what Machiavelli prompted Lorenzo de Medicis to undertake, but he even assigns the very reasous alledged by Machiavelli; this is only one situation in which we behold the preceptor and pupil acting in concert; but, in the course of this Introduction, wherein we shall review "The Prince," chapter by chapter, the fact we have already assumed will be more abundantly apparent.
The sentiments which Machiavelli inculcates in the above chapter, he, like a true patriot, whose love of his country was paramount to every other consideration, enunciated in a more ample manner in his History of Florence, composed at the instance of Pope Clement the VIth. Yet, with the exception of the torture which he suffered on suspicion of conspiring against Julius de Medicis (in 1513,) and of which the family of the Medicis themselves believed him innocent—we do not find that either his conduct, or those writings which have been so much decried, ever subjected him to censure during his life-time, which is no inconsiderable proof· of the high estimation in which his writings were held; for Machiavelli was no common writer, and had he disseminated any schism in religion or policy, it would have been denounced, and the author punished, by one of those illustrious characters whom it so nearly concerned, Lorenzo de Medicis, Pope Clement the VIIth, or Leo the Tenth.
It was Clement the VIIIth who first raised the senseless outcry against Machiavelli, for he was told that Machiavelli had been an enemy to the temporal power of the Popes. Fired with that holy zeal and resentment for which the Church of Rome has been so conspicuous, he proscribed his works, and ordered them to be carefully perused, to discover whether there were not passages in them which could be laid hold of as contrary to the principles of religion.
The task was not difficult: they easily found more than they wanted, and on the strength of their discoveries they did not hesitate to pronounce Machiavelli the most execrable of men; and when we consider the power of a Pope at that period, over the "intellectual faculties of mankind, at at once, vice-God, kingly priest, sacred legislator, and prophet; dispensing life and death, binding nations in bonds, which he alone had the right and power of unbind ing at his pleasure. A triple crown on his head, the keys of heaven and a god in his hand; with princes and emperors at his feet," and the faith of all the civilised world suspended on his decree - When we consider this, I repeat it, cản we be astonished that Machiavelli should be universally condemned, and those who dared to defend him subjected to the severest censure.
As we have rent the veil of Romish superstition, it would be well if we were also to question the justice of her anathemas against our author, whose memory, instead of being accursed, ought to be cherished in the best affections of every lover of his country; for who can look on the history of Italy at that period, and not recoil with horror.
"Can we condemn an author for recommending artifice towards a people, whose vicious institutions had so completely changed the character, that war was the period when the least blood was shed! It was in the time of peace, that conspiracy, poison, assassination, and murder, raged with the greatest fury. There is not a single page of their history, which is not polluted with the recital of these crimes in the numerous sovereignties of Italy. It was in the seeming demonstrations of friendship, in the rejoicings of a festival, it was at the entrance of the nuptial bed that a husband was massacred by concealed assassins hired by his wife. It was in the temple, during the performance of the holiest offices. of religion, that priests and cardinals themselves used the assassin's dagger, and gave the signal for carnage, and, as Machiavelli justly observes, war was only really made in time of peace.
"It was necessary, therefore, in attacking such enemies, to employ the same arms that they managed so successfully—being perfidy and cunning, for force alone would have been entirely misplaced."
The general reader, who has hitherto been induced to consider Machiavelli as a dangerous author, will not, I am persuaded; be displeased with this outline of, and index to, his real character; while the critic will, I hope, forgive any irregularity of method which my warmth in favour of my author may have led me into, and I will now proceed to the more immediate object of this Introduction, a review of "The Prince."
Of all the works of Machiavelli, "The Prince" appears to be that which he valued the most, and on which he bestowed the greatest care and attention, as he himself acknowledges in the dedication to the illustrious Lorenzo de Medicis. He had previously written a work in some measure similar, under the title of Reflections on the First Decade of Livy. In this work, he traces man, from his condition, as an isolated being, to a member of society; he considers the pact of union between the members, and traces out the primitive sources of power and happiness; he weighed the different forms of government which had flourished in the world, and analysed their constituent principles. He compared the effects which different revolutions had produced, according to the circumstances under which they had taken place; and he studied the conduct of the Romans in their civil and military capacities, &c. &c. From all which, he deduced a series of maxims, which ought continually to be kept in remembrance by the statesman and the warrior, by princes and the people.
He afterwards published his History of Florence, in which he again scattered those political flowers which have stamped him the greatest political writer of any age: but it was in the Prince, where all these maxims were concentrated, and where the superior genius of Machiavelli displayed itself in meridian splendour. There it was where he developed those ideas which were capable of hurling imbecility from the throne. For this reason, The Prince is esteemed the most dangerous of all our author's works; in some respects it is really so.—But why is it dangerous? Is it on account of the maxims it contains? Assuredly not. The Prince is only pregnant with dangers to that monarch who has not deigned to study it, or whose imbecility prevents him from appreciating its value. It is an epitome of the wisdom of all the warriors and legislators of antiquity; it is the book of fate, in which a wise prince will read the future in the mirror of the past[6]. Hence what a powerful weapon must it not be, in; the hands of those who know how to wield it; for it is not only a new system of tactics, but a profound exposition of the human heart. But as its language, and its doctrines are beyond the comprehension of dulness, bigotry, and imbecility, the sovereigns of Europe banished it from their courts, and it fell into the hands of Buonaparte, and he has used it, as might be expected, to their destruction.
Their fate may be lamented, but it cannot be commiserated. One ray of intellect might have saved them, but even that was wanting, and they fell. What, however, greatly surprises us is, that we should seem astonished at the rapidity and uniformity of the successes of Buonaparte. The contest has been between genius and dulness, between learning and ignorance,
between wisdom and imbecility, between energy and sloth: hence it must have been wonderful indeed had the result been different.
I am well aware, that many will censure me, for what they conceive, holding up to admiration the enemy of my country: this censure, however, can only arise from our different views of patriotism; mine aspires beyond the ephemeral considerations of party and popular opinion, and looks to the permanent well-being of my country, which, with bitterness of soul, I see convulsed by the struggles of party, and groaning under the burthen of domestic woes at the awful moment when her inveterate. enemy, rich in the science of antiquity, great in himself, and still greater in the host of intellect with which he is surrounded, contemplates her ruin; who, then, can behold these powers conjoined and directed to one common object, the ruin of his country, without shuddering for her fate, and imploring heaven to breathe wisdom and unanimity into her distracted councils[7]. On this view of the subject we must premise, that it is our bounden duty not only to watch the operations of our enemy, but by anticipating his designs, endeavour to defeat them. Let us also bear in mind, that
Con forza e con ingano
Si vive mezzo l'anno
Con forza e con arte
Si vive l'altra parte.
"One half the year he lives by force and art,
By art and force he lives the other part."
I therefore beg leave to deprecate all future censure, when, in the consideration of the tenets of Machiavelli, I am compelled to give Buonaparte credit for susperior talents. My object being to enable us more effectually to resist him, and blow the spark of British emulation into a flame, which shall transcend in brilliancy and grandeur that which our enemy displays.
The commencement of "the Prince," like that of most works of genius and science, is extremely simple and unadorned. He divides all states into the two classes of republics and principalities; in which he seems to have had Tacitus in his eye, who considered them as two opposites[8]. He next distinguishes the various kinds of principalities, how they have been acquired, and how they are governed; which he evidently intends to serve as data whereon to build the general structure of his arguments.
One would have imagined, that so short a chapter containing nothing but simple self-evident truths, would have escaped the animadversion and censure of the royal commentator; but such was not its fate. Frederic, with a degree of vanity only to be excused from his youth, inconsiderately determined, to refute—no, that was impossible—but to cavil at every chapter of the whole work; and he here finds fault with Machiavelli, for not informing us how states were formed, and how men came to be princes; an enquiry superfluous in "The Prince," and which our our author had treated in his Reflections on Livy, which I shall here translate, to oblige those of the royal commentator's opinion.
"Chance gave birth to every species of government amongst men. The first inhabitants were few in number, and lived during a period, dispersed, and like the beasts of the forest; but the human race increasing, they felt the necessity of uniting for their mutual defence; for which purpose, they chose the strongest and most courageous among them, and placing him at their head, promised to obey him. At the period when the pact of society was first formed, mankind began to distinguish what was good and right, from what was bad and wrong. When a man injured his benefactor, two sentiments instantly filled every bosom-hatred for the ingrate, and love for the benevolent man. They blamed the former, and honoured the more those who, on the contrary, evinced gratitude, as each of them felt that he was liable to a similar injury. To prevent the recurrence of such evils, they determined to make laws, and decree proportionate punishments. Such was the origin of justice.
No sooner was justice known, than she influenced them in the choice of a chief. They had not now recourse either to the strongest or the bravest, but they sought him who was the most just and wise.
As the sovereignty became hereditary, and not elective, the children degenerated from their parents; and, instead of endeavouring to emulate their virtues, they only. shewed they were princes, by distinguishing themselves by luxury, indolence, and the refinement of all pleasures. This conduct soon drew upon them the hatred of the people. The object of their hate he experienced fear, and fear dictated both pre-cautions and resentment, and on these bases tyranny arose.
Such were the commencements and the causes of the disorders, plots, and conspiracies, against sovereigns. They were never conceived by weak and timid minds, but by those who surpassed the rest in courage, riches, and greatness of soul, and consequently more sensibly felt the excesses and outrages, imposed upon them."
Reflections on Livy, Chap. 2.
Those who wish to see the subject farther pursued, and the different species of governments compared with each other, together with the different degrees of merit in the founders, will be amply gratified with our author's mode of treating the subject in the above work.
Our author, in the second chapter, treats of hereditary principalities, in which he lays down maxims for their government and their preservation.
He here shews, that an hereditary prince may easily maintain himself on the throne of his ancestors, if he acts with common prudence, and adapts his conduct to the occasion. And even should he be driven from his throne, by an infinitely superior force, he may regain it on the first reverse of his adversary's fortune, of which he cites several instances. Hence, how lamentable it is that we are doomed to add to the list Prussia, Spain, Austria, &c. for the kings of Prussia, Spain, and Austria, are merely nominal. Buonaparte reigns as much at Berlin, Madrid, and Vienna, as in Paris itself. But it may be said, that Spain is not yet conquered. One would imagine that her fate must easily be foreseen, when, with the aid of 50,000 of the flower of the British army, a population of nine millions could not repel 100,000 at most, of the enemy. This is too heart-rending a scene for me to dwell upon. Let those gallant heroes who survive the sword of the enemy and the dagger of the friend, in hunger, and many other privations, paint the scene of Spanish lethargy and ingratitude, for
"They best can paint it who have felt it most."
Our author's conclusion of this chapter brings all the horrors of the French Revolution before our eyes, and leads us to pray that a good understanding may perpetually subsist between the people and the throne; and that ministers may endeavour to palliate, rather than exasperate; for when a change once begins, no one knows where it will end. Unanimous, we are invincible; and can never be conquered, unless we conquer ourselves; for Buonaparte is only invincible because his enemies are at variance with themselves.
From hereditary principalities, our author proceeds to mixt principalities, by which he understands one incorporated with or annexed to another. And here we recognize the preceptor of Buonaparte—here we find the principles he has pursued in all his successes, and here is developed the mystery of his becoming the mediator of Switzerland, protector, and afterwards king of Italy, and protector of the Confederation of the Rhine; thus, in the latter case, as Machiavelli observes, becoming the defender of the weaker princes against the more powerful. The formation of this composite power is of great avail to Buonaparte; there is a considerable jealousy between them, and they will never unite among themselves to throw off their yoke; as many of them must, in consequence of such a measure, become private persons; they are, therefore, obedient to the call of their common sovereign, and as our author says, they cost nothing, and their troops easily unite with their protector's, and become an army which will enable him to overwhelm the most powerful. This we have seen in the late war with Austria. The Archduke Charles penetrated into one of those vassal states (Bavaria); Buonaparte arrived before his own troops, and took the command of those of his vassals: "You yourselves shall drive the invaders back,” he said, "Bavaria shall be the signal for the charge." Animated by such a leader, they gave battle to the Austrians, and were victorious; and from the loss of this battle, the fate of the campaign may be dated, especially when followed up with that promptitude and celerity which our author here recommends, and Buonaparte invariably practises.
Our author next proceeds to enquire, why the kingdom of Darius remained to the successors of Alexander after his death; from which we may derive this lesson, that the throne of France will never return to the line of the Bourbons, which is virtually extinct, and a new order of things has arisen, which, in this respect, makes France resemble Turkey. The race of her kings being extinct, and all her nobility expatriated and destroyed. The causes which led to this total revolution in France have been often discussed, nor are we disposed to question the decision of those. who have considered them. Machiavelli, however, having pointed them out in so forcible a manner, we may be pardoned for resuming the subject.
"A prince with less eminent qualities than his predecessors may enjoy all the fruits of his labours, his institutions, and the energies of his genius; but if his reign is of long duration, or his successor does not resume the genius and energies of the first, the ruin of the state is inevitable[9].” Reflections on Livy, b. 1. ch. 19.
"A prince ought to see the events and occurrences which may be adverse to him; on what men he can rely in the moment of danger, and conduct himself towards them in the manner they would wish to be treated when the danger arises. Every government, and above all, a prince who acts otherwise, grossly deceives himself, especially if he dares to flatter himself that when the danger is at hand he can conciliate the parties by favours, which, instead of preserving him, accelerates his ruin," ch. 32. It is more wise to temporize with, than openly attack an evil which has acquired a degree of consistency. In temporizing it either consumes itself, or the shock is more remote. The magistrates who resolve to destroy it, or oppose its violence, ought to be careful not to strengthen it in their endeavour to repress it, and not essay by blowing upon the flame, to extinguish a fire which will burn with greater fury. They ought to examine the magnitude of the evil, and if they are persuaded they can cure it, to attack it without any consideration, otherwise let them not even touch or try to probe its depth.” ch.33.
If these counsels had been attended to in, France, a million of lives might have been saved, and Europe spared twenty years of war and desolation; but as what is past cannot be remedied, it behoves those who have not yet fallen to admit the possibility of similar ccurrences[10], and fortify themselves against an evil which may assail them.
The means recommended by our author in the 5th chapter of the Prince, for the government and conservation of dependant states and provinces, has been literally adhered to by Buonaparte in his conduct to all his petty princes and vassal kings, and consulting the genius and manners of each state he has settled his sovereignty on a firm and stable basis, leaving them the semblance at least of what they cherished most, whether it was in the forms of religion or government, agreeably to the precept of our author. Whoever wishes to change the constitution of a free state, in such a manner as that the change will be accepted with the consent and approbation of the people, should necessarily retain some vestiges of the ancient forms[11], so that the people can scarcely perceive the change, although the new constitution is essentially different from the old one; for mankind in general are as satisfied with appearance as reality; nay, often they are more struck, or more highly pleased with appearances than the reality itself."—Reflect. on Livy, ch. 25.
This is Buonaparte's system of external policy; but when we contemplate the internal policy of the empire, as effected by him, we shall find that he has greatly improved on his model; but, in order to display this in a stronger light, we will give a portrait of the French people, as drawn by our author, in which the general character of the nation is admirably sketched.
The Character of the French.
They are so occupied with the present good or evil, that they do not take the future into account; and they equally forget the insults and the favours they have received.
Their prudence is only speculative, the fortuitous success of random conjecture. They are very indifferent as to what is said or written respecting them; they are less cruel than selfish, and their liberality is merely parade.
If a nobleman or a gentleman disobeys the king in any thing that interests a third person, he is quit on receiving an injunction to obey in future; but if it is in a point wherein royalty alone is wounded, he is punished by a banishment from court for three or four months. This principle lost them the city of Pisa twice; once when D'Entraignes commanded the fort, and also when the French encamped there.
Nothing is done at the court of France without money, activity, and good fortune.
A Frenchman, of whom you ask a service, considers first whether he can turn it to his own advantage.
The first engagements with them are the surest.
If it is out of their power to oblige you, they will load you with promises; and if it is to serve you, they do it with ill-will.
More than modest in adversity, but insolent in prosperity.
They recount their defeats as if they were victories.
A successful general is frequently with the king, therefore the grand point at court is, less to court the favour of the king than the conqueror. This doctrine was well appreciated by Duke Valentino, who thus got the command of the army sent to Florence.
They have a very exaggerated idea of their own honour, and a very contemptuous one of that of other nations. It is well known how sensibly hurt they were at the refusal to surrender to them Monte-Pulciano, which their government had demanded of Pisa.
They are light and changeable, and keep their words like a conqueror; they neither love the language nor the great reputation of the Romans."
With these data, and an experience of many years during a period when the character of the people was necessarily developed in all its shades, Buonaparte steered his course towards the empire, unsuspected and unobserved. In no one instance did he affect to introduce any considerable change in the system of government, but by degrees he effected every thing he wished. He had already attracted the admiration of France by his brilliant exploits and constant contempt of danger in her service; and flattered her characteristic vanity by appearing to espouse the popular opinion, and resounding her greatness and her triumphs perpetually in her ears: thus swimming with the tide of events, he directed them at his pleasure till his expedition to Egypt. While he was there, the management of affairs necessarily devolved on other persons, whose interest and whose views were widely remote from those of Buonaparte. What was the consequence? France, every where victorious, and enjoying the sweets of peace in the capital, when he sailed for Egypt, was on the eve of destruction on his return. "In what state," said he, "did I leave France: and in what state do I find it? I left you peace, I find war; I left you conquests, but the enemy has now passed your frontiers; I left your arsenals full, they do not now contain a single stand of arms. Your cannon has been sold; robbery has been raised into a system, and the resources of the state are exhausted; vexatious measures, the reproach of justice and good sense, have been had recourse to; the soldier has been sacrificed without defence!—Where are the heroes, where are the hundred thousand of my comrades whom I left covered with laurels? What is be- come of them? They are dead !”—
This affecting picture of the state of France was universally felt; Buonaparte was entreated to exert his powers to retrieve the nation from impending ruin. He did so, and having convinced them of the horrors and dangers of a popular government, with one accord he was chosen consul; but, to avoid the appearance of sovereignty, which would have been too quick a transition[12] from avowed republicanism, he had two coadjutors chosen with him, who possessed the shadow of power, which was principally vested in him. It was thus by gentle and almost imperceptible degrees that he arrived at sovereign power, ever contriving that the people should be induced to press upon him those honours to which he aspired[13].
Our author, in the next place, treats of new states which a prince acquires by his valour and his own arms;" wherein he cites examples from the greatest personages of antiquity, whom he points out as models for future conquerors. From the slightest survey of the contents of this chapter, the reader will perceive that Buonaparte has its lessons continually in his eye. The book of antiquity is ever before him, and he professes to emulate the glory of the greatest heroes of the ancient world; and as he owes his elevation more to splendid talents than to fortune, his throne is seated on a stable foundation. As to fortune, indeed, Buonaparte professes to chain her to his car his fortune was the opportunity of displaying his talents, which the French Revolution afforded; he owes the rest to his own genius, and his mental superiority over all the sovereigns of continental Europe. "Without opportunity, his talents and his courage would have been useless,
and without his personal qualities; opportunity would have presented itself in vain."—(Machiavelli's Prince, ch. 6.) ·
The most difficult part of the functions of a new prince is, as our author observes, the introduction of new laws; but from the wisdom displayed by Buonaparte in their organization, and the immense military force which was entirely devoted to him, he experienced no obstacles in their formation, and the Code Napoleon passed with less opposition than the most insignificant taxes proposed by the minister in the English house of commons. Buonaparte undoubtedly displayed considerable address on this occasion, but justice demands the avowal that the glory was not exclusively his own. Not to mention others, the Abbé Sieyes, whose political talents are too well known to need any panegyric from my pen; and Charles Maurice Talleyrand Perigord, the Ex-Bishop of Autun, who may be justly denominated the Machiavelli of our age, divide the palm with their sovereign[14].
Thus we see, agreeably to the position of our author, that every difficulty Buonaparte experienced was in his progress to the throne, which he preserves without any molestation whatever. Once, indeed, the assassin's dagger was raised against his life, but that is no proof of a want of the general affection of the people towards him, as our own beloved sovereign would be liable to a similar censure, for more than one attempt have been made against his royal person. The truth is, and I do not scruple to declare it of my own knowledge, in the face of all the world, and as a positive contradiction of the senseless clamour of our journalists to the contrary, BUONAPARTE IS BELOVED AND ADORED BY THE FRENCH NATION. Nor will it be wondered at, when we consider on what basis their love and adoration is founded.
The vanity of the French is proverbial, and what can serve to inflate it more than to really make them the arbiters of Europe? The glory of conquest possesses too many charms not to dazzle the eyes and seduce the affections of any people less emulous of military fame than the French. .Even the phlegmatic Briton glows with honest pride at the successes of his country's arms; and worships, as a demi-god, the hero who gains a brilliant victory. What bosom was not warmed, was not flushed with joy, delight, and extacy, at the glorious successes of our arms under the immortal Nelson, and what eye shed not a tear for his irreparable loss?[15]
If then, we, as a commercial nation, feel so elated with military success, how much more exalted must the sentiments of a professedly military nation be towards the hero who has extended the French empire and the terror of the French name to both the extremities of Europe, and laid the whole continent at the feet of France.
The present, indeed, is the most splendid period of their history, for France is not only mistress of the destinies of Europe, she also takes the lead of every other nation, England not excepted, in the sciences and the arts, of which Buonaparte is the avowed and liberal protector. Mark the result of all his victories: their object has not only been the extension of the empire, and the aggrandizement of France, they also tended to render Paris the grand emporium of the arts. Wherever he went, he made his victories subservient to this purpose. Witness his campaigns in Italy, Holland, Prussia, and Germany: whatever they possessed the most rare, but chiefly in what tended to the advancement of the sciences and the arts, was decreed to be part of the price of the peace he accorded them[16].
Even the campaign in Egypt was glorious, if considered in a literary point of view[17]; and the mere list of the names of the literary characters who accompanied the expedition, makes us lament that political circumstances prevented them from pursuing their researches for the advancement of natural knowledge, and the consequently common benefit of mankind. This system of Buonaparte, viz. the encouragement of the arts, and patronage of
learned men, is one of the firmest pillars of his throne, and not only endears him to France, but entitles him to the praise of all mankind.
But, say they who are determined to grasp at every idea which can militate against Buonaparte, he has depopulated France, and exhausted her treasures, to gratify his insatiable ambition.
In reply, I would observe, that during no three years of his government has he depopulated France in proportion to the losses of Great Britain in the year 1809, compared on the scale of the relative population of the two countries; nor has one-fifth of the money drawn out of the British treasury been expended by him in the same space of time; for, as he is uniformly victorious, he always makes the vanquished defray the expences of the war.
It is not France, it is the States which are dependant on France, that may complain with justice; for, in order to spare France, he throws the burthen upon them; they are indeed to be pitied.
That his ambition is insatiate, no one will attempt to deny; his scheme is universal empire, and every step he takes is directed to the completion of his object. But in this he is not singular: there is not a monarch on earth, who, with the same probability of success, would not aspire to attain it. That such views and the means adopted to attain such objects are sinful in the eyes of God, must be evident to every Christian. But all wars are equally sinful, if we reason upon the principle that God is no respecter of persons, and that all men are equal in his all-seeing eye; therefore it is evident, that, reasoning on the principles of Christianity, all are equally to be condemned.
I have been thus diffuse, in order to undeceive my countrymen with respect to Buonaparte, and the actual situation of France, in order that they may advocate the return of peace when the war has no other object than the restoration of the Bourbons to the crown of France—IT IS AN EVENT WHICH CANNOT HAPPEN, even were Buonaparte to die without an heir, or appointing a successor. The scale of political consideration in France is completely turned, the race of her kings and nobles is virtually extinct; and many, who were heretofore trodden under foot, now possess rank and influence; whilst the highest offices in the state are open to merit and emulation in the lowest classes of society. Superior merit now marks every gradation from the peasant to the throne. Can it then be supposed that all these will voluntarily return to the state of slavery? Præstat prevenire quam preveniri. Assuredly they will not. Will they voluntarily become servants, who have been masters? Common sense will determine the question. As to the few of the ancient nobility now remaining in France, they are, according to Machiavelli's maxim (chap. 3) too weak to be feared; or enjoy that degree of credit under the present system, that they would be worse than ideots to attempt a revolution in favour of the Bourbon race, which it is evident, if the Royalists, as they are called, could muster any force, would be more sanguinary even than that which deluged France with blood for so many years, and deprived her of A MILLION OF INHABITANTS.
Machiavelli considers, in the 7th chapter, the two means of arriving at sovereignty, by fortune and talents, and quotes as examples, Francis Sforza[18] and Cæsar Borgia. The latter owed his sovereignty to the fortune of his father Pope Alexander VI, and lost it when his father was no more, notwithstanding his employing every means of success.—Machiavelli here declares the difficulty of laying the foundations of a permanent government after arriving at the throne; and we find Cæsar Borgia failed in the attempt, which proves Buonaparte's superiority over that bold, active, and enterprising man, whom our author points out for a model to new princes, though stained with every crime. The reader will therefore bear in mind what we have already said on the dreadful state of Italy at that period, (vide page 27); so that, if he had succeeded, it would have been a service to suffering humanity to cut off all the heads of the hydra, and by establishing one great power in Italy free it from the perpetual intestine commotions which had so long desolated it.
Finding Romagnia convulsed by factions, infested by robbers, and full of all disorders, he adopted a system of terror to reduce it to obedience, and establish tranquillity. When this was attained, he did, as all other princes do by the tools of their iniquity, sacrifice him to popular vengeance. This conduct is undoubtedly politically good, though it is morally wrong; for, as I have already observed, policy and religion cannot go hand in hand. In every thing, excepting atrocity, Buonaparte resembles Cæsar Borgia, whose only political error was his suffering a Pope to be elected who must necessarily be adverse to him, inasmuch as he had formerly been his enemy. And how the great resent indig- nities every person is aware:
For though we deem the short-lived fury past,
'Tis sure the mighty will revenge at last.Pope.
As no inconsiderable proof of our author's detestation of barbarity, even in the progress to the throne, we might refer to chap. 8 of The Prince, and lib. 1. chap. 10, of his Reflections on Livy. He views every circumstance in the light of general policy: he recommends one head to be taken off to save a thousand, and the sacrifice of a few to regenerate and make nations happy[19]: and he advises, above all, that a monarch, (whether a usurper or not), should so conduct himself, that on the reverses of fortune he may have nothing to dread, which, in other words, is to secure the love and affections of his people; for the throne of a monarch ought to be in the hearts of his subjects, which is easily to be obtained, as Machiavelli observes in chap. 9, as the people demand nothing, save that they shall not be oppressed. And as the affection of the people is a prince's only resource in adversity, (chap. 9,) our author very wisely concludes that their favour is to be preferred to that of the nobility, whom he can displace and dispose of at his pleasure.
The tactics of Europe have undergone such a material change since the days of our author, that his advice respecting the fortification of a prince's capital is of much less importance than heretofore, for a British besieging force would destroy any town in Europe in the course of one or two months, and not leave a single chimney standing. We shall, therefore, pass over the tenth chapter, and proceed to the eleventh, on ecclesiastical principalities; which, being governed by supernatural means, and whose permanency depends on their degree of superstition, no certain rules, as Machiavelli observes, can be laid down respecting them.
We have already shewn the consequence of the succession of two weak princes; we have here the reverse of the portrait in Alexander VI and Julius II; to which we might add, amongst other instances, Romulus and Numa; and Philip of Macedon and Alexander the Great; which latter instance proves, that the succession of two great men of talent and courage is sufficient to conquer the world. What would be the state of affairs if another Napoleon was to succeed the present one?
With regard to ecclesiastical principalities however, I would briefly observe, that the prince may become arbitrary with less danger than in any other state; for the pact of religion, when strengthened by superstition, will hold when every other social tie is dissolved.
The next subject of our author's discourse is the different species of troops, as national, foreign, or mixed. He observes very wisely, that the principal foundations of a state, whether old or new, are good laws and good troops. With respect to both these, I believe the English will cede to none; but, alas! our troops cannot reap a harvest of glory, because they not only want correspondent officers, but occasions properly selected by the minister in which to display their valour!
As to Buonaparte's laws, it would be inconsiderate to attempt their definition here; I will only say, that if superior wisdom, and a constellation of talent, can frame good laws, his may be expected to be such. As to his troops, they are only inferior to the British. How they are officered, all the world can tell.
The description our author gives of mixed troops in the 12th chapter will be found a correct picture of the British army and their allies the Spaniards, who acted with all the cowardice of mercenary troops.
As the nature and quality of those mercenary troops which our author mentions are not generally known, I will describe them.
"In Italy, the greater portion of the wars were carried on by hired generals and troops, whose chiefs, named conductors or condottieri, hired themselves to such and such powers until the war ended. These chiefs of bands, who lent themselves, as well as their men, to figure in the cruel sports of war, being interested to run as little risk as possible, arrived at such refinement as to make a complete amusement of it. Cowardly by calculation, though they might not have been so naturally, the agreement, tacit or expressed, which passed between avarice and poltroonery, was so strictly observed, that a combat has been known to last several hours without a single man being killed, unless he had fallen from his horse, &c."—Guiraudet.
Such being the nature of these troops, they, as might be expected, conspired to the ruin of Italy. For a more copious detail, we must refer the reader to ch. 12 and 13 of The Prince, where he will see the value of national troops clearly pointed out.
Having discussed the nature of the different kinds of troops, our author proceeds to the duties of the Prince himself, which he affirms to be principally an unceasing attention to the art of war, to hunt for his diversion, and emulate the great characters of antiquity. The whole of these three precepts Buonaparte literally performs: war is his delight, and the instant he returns from a campaign he goes a hunting; and as to his emulating the heroes of ancient days, the fact is too well known to be called in question.
From the duties of princes, Machiavelli turns to the objects of praise and blame; and if his pupil does not unite in himself all the virtues he enumerates, he at least possesses one which his master deems of great importance, viz. prudence, which cannot be better evinced perhaps than by the uniform success of every measure, and the non-resistance of his subjects to their performance.
In no one instance has Buonaparte adhered more closely to the rules of his prototype than in his instructions respecting liberality and parsimony. Every gift he bestows, every honour he confers, though they may appear to result from his magnificence or liberality, are actually dictated by no other motives than prudence or policy, and their object is to attach the party, and receive a fourfold remuneration in one shape or another. It is true, he frequently sacrifices to the national vanity, but he is amply repaid for these concessions. He is a strict economist, as our author recommends, and his example we would also recommend to some other potentates; but this economy, as Machiavelli directs, is only in his own resources. He is prodigal of the riches of his enemy; and is beloved by the army, because he suffers them to enrich themselves whenever they find treasure to do it.
Chap. 17. Of cruelty and clemency, and whether it is better to be loved than feared. Machiavelli, as if he had not already sufficiently justified the conduct of Cæsar Borgia, takes this opportunity of approving his apparent cruelty, inasmuch as it added Romagnia to his states, and established in it peace and tranquillity, of which it had been long deprived; and he adds, that his conduct evinced more clemency than that of the people of Florence, who, to avoid being thought cruel, suffered Pistoia to be destroyed. From whence he concludes, that a prince is not to regard the reproach of cruelty, when the object is to keep his subjects in their duty, as it will prove in the end more humane to make a few necessary examples, than by too much indulgence to encourage disorders, robbery, and murder, which frequently draw after them the ruin of the state. A happy medium, however, should be endeavoured to be attained, between love and fear; but if the union of the two should be impossible, he recommends the latter, on account of the natural ingratitude of mankind[20]. It is, however, to be recollected, that when fear degenerates into hatred, it proves fatal to the prince.
That Buonaparte unites, in some measure, in himself, the two qualities of being beloved and feared, is very evident: he is unceasing in his endeavours to conciliate the affections of the French people, to attain which, he considers the sacrifice of a whole state a mere trifle. He has raised France from a secondary power to be the first power in Europe, unless we dispute that title on the grounds of the old adage, Imperator Maris Terræ Dominus and that
"Le trident de Neptune est le sceptre du monde."
Be this as it may, Buonaparte does every thing in his power to gain the affections of the French; knowing, as he does, that his personal courage, his prompt decisions, and his rigid system of military discipline, must naturally inspire fear; but that the sensation pauses there, and does not extend to hate, is amply proved from the non-existence of conspiracies against him, which must infallibly have taken him off had he been hated rather than feared.
If moralists are already angry with our author, I fear the chapter, whether princes ought to be faithful to their engagements, will not restore him to their favour; for he expressly declares, that a prudent prince cannot and ought not to keep his word, except when he can do it without injury to himself, and when the circumstances under which he contracted the engagement still subsist.
I refer the reader to the chapter itself for the reasons of this advice, which he deduces from the wickedness of mankind; and says, that the prince succeeds best who covers himself with the fox's skin. This is a system which has been adopted in all ages; and Buonaparte is a great adept in it, only he generally contrives a tolerable pretext for his want of faith towards an ally[21], which more "vigorous" politicians in their haste overlook, or one of the greatest instances of bad faith and perfidy towards an ally ever displayed would not have disgraced our annals. Now "they manage these things much better in France," for Buonaparte never ceases to preach good faith, and that in so plausible a manner, as even to persuade his victims they ought to suffer, and he makes the maxim of Livy entirely his own. Inter arma silent leges. Parum tuta est sine viribus majestas; and having learnt of Machiavelli, that if he succeeds, his measures will always appear honourable, and be praised by all; as the vulgar are dazzled by appearances, and judge only by the event, he never troubles himself about the opinion of moralists, or the anger of his enemies.
If the reader will attentively compare the whole of this chapter with the conduct of Buonaparte, he will find a strict parallel between them:
Our author completes his character of the Prince by this maxim, that he ought carefully to avoid every thing which can make him despised or hated. Fugere in effectu contemptum et odium. For, as he observes, in in a letter to Leo the Xth, "if he does not avoid contempt at least, it is all over with his power, whether it be his subjects or allies, who entertain the sentiment, if the former, farewel good order and subordination; if the latter, he will be continually vexed and harassed, (like an officer in a regiment, who will not fight in support of his honour,) till at last he loses the crown, which becomes the prey of the first who chuses to attack him, and he falls without exciting a single sentiment of regret either in friend or foe. One infallible cause of contempt is, as our author observes, the neglect to take up arms on the attack of an ally, and remaining neutral between two powers at war; as he will be, in fact, despised by both, and is sure to become the prey of the conqueror, as Flaminius observed to the Achaians, whom Antiochus persuaded to remain neuter: Nihil majis alienum rebus vestris est, sine gratiâ sine dignitate præmium victoris eritis. As both powers suspect his friendship[22], and both despise and hate him. He ought, on the contrary, to declare himself for one of the parties, saying with our Henry the VIIIth, Cui adhæreo præest; but superior talents alone can determine what part to take, all are equally persuaded that Prudentia est recta ratio agibilium, but weak princes are generally irresolute, or if they are animated by a momentary vigour, their measures generally conspire to produce their ruin.
After citing a variety of examples in illustration of his position, our author describes the conduct of Severus; and he concludes, If we examine the conduct of this emperor with attention, we shall find that it is difficult to unite, in so eminent a degree, the strength of the lion and the cunning of the fox; he knew how to make himself feared and respected by his troops, as well as the people; but we shall not be astonished to find a new prince maintain himself in so difficult a station, if we consider that it was in commanding esteem and admiration that he disarmed the hatred which his rapine naturally excited."
These qualities, which Machiavelli so highly admires, form, as we have already shewn, the constituent principles of the mind of Buonaparte. The courage of the lion, and the cunning of the fox, are more completely united in him than perhaps any other personage in the annals of history—with these natural talents, with Machiavelli in his hand, and Sieyes and Talleyrand by his side, can we wonder at the rapidity of his movements, or the uniformity and magnitude of his successes!
We have already considered the degree of estimation in which Buonaparte is held by the people of France; and we have also dared to shew the basis of their esteem; to which we may add, the semblance of religion with which he veils his ambition: which, as Machiavelli observes, always produces a powerful effect. "He ought, above all things, to study to utter nothing that does not breathe goodness, justice, good faith, and piety, but the latter quality is the most important for him to appear to possess, &c." Of Buonaparte's conduct in this respect we have a thousand examples: "the dearest object of his heart is universal peace and happiness," &c. &c.; and, whenever he goes to war, it is "to avenge the miseries of humanity, and punish the breach of the law of nations, &c.;" and he never forgets to proclaim, that "he owes his success to the justice of his cause, and that he only visits the vengeance of Heaven on broken faith, &c." But the reader may ask, Is he sincere? Quite as sincere in his religion as any other monarch. He knows the value of appearances, and that the world know, though a bad man may appear good, yet a good man cannot appear bad.[23] On this principle it is that he regularly attends divine service; and when on his last expedition to Austria, his first demand was for a priest, that he might hear mass, and implore a blessing on their arms. This had a powerful effect on those around him: it inspired them with awe and veneration, for it made them imagine that Buonaparte knew the efficacy of prayer. And so he does, though he is neither vain enough nor impious enough to suppose that it insures him the blessing of heaven; but he is well assured, that it will create a higher opinion of him where veneration is conducive to his glory. His religion, therefore, is one of the springs. of his grand political machine; and though some say he would not scruple to change. his religion as often as his linen, provided he could obtain any political advantage by it, yet I do not see how he can be taxed with hypocrisy any more than ourselves. It is true, he makes his hypocrisy subservient to great purposes, while we, on the contrary, make a parade of it without any ostensible purpose, unless it is, indeed, to stamp us with perfidy and inconsistency in the eyes of the world.
The senseless cry of "No Popery” has resounded through the kingdom, and rivetted the chains of unhappy Ireland; yet the ministry have expended millions to establish the church of Antichrist (as we at home call popery) in Spain; and the Marquis of Wellesley, the ambassador from the "No Popery administration," gave, at a meeting of the grand junta, as a toast, "His Holiness the Pope!!" They profess a deadly hatred of despotism and tyranny, and worship freedom as a deity; yet they have strove to re-establish the reign of terror, despotism, and tyranny ;-they boast of our being an enlightened people, yet they wish to revive the ages of darkness, ignorance, and superstition. They account the liberty of the press an invaluable privilege, yet they wish to restore a government which interdicted printing. They say, they account the trial by jury the palladium of liberty, yet they would revive all the horrors of the Inquisition And what is all this for?—What is the reason of this inconsistency? Is it to replace a faithful ally on the throne? No. Charles the IVth, the legitimate sovereign, was our enemy. Was it to rescue a nation from slavery? No. The Spanish nation groaned under the bitterest system of oppression, plundered by monks, and trodden under foot by the nobles. What, then, was our motive? It was to prevent Buonaparte from acquiring a greater preponderance of power. This, I allow, was a sufficient motive for our interposition, had a rational hope of success offered itself; but that such was never the case, we might have been long ago convinced; and yet, after the sacrifice of three gallant armies, we are mad enough to send forces to the peninsula. We wonder, and so must every one who is not aware of the cause, that nine millions, though assisted by fifty thousand British troops, cannot expel eighty or one hundred thousand Frenchmen. Shall I declare the truth ?-The Spaniards, freed from their former galling yoke, shudder at the idea of its return. Their condition may be ameliorated, but cannot be rendered worse. Under the old government, they were mere beasts of burthen; they now breathe, their eyes are opened, and they feel they are men. The race of Buonaparte they may despise, but the Bourbons they detest: hence it is, the flame of patriotism, as we call it, is so languid, and burns so dim; hence it is that the flower of the British army suffered every privation in a galling march through the heart of Spain, unsupported by any part of the Spanish army, who even suffered our rear to be uncovered, and exposed us to the superior forces of the enemy when half of our troops were embarked; from which resulted the "glorious victory," attended with all the consequences of a defeat, at Corunna. To this principle also we owe our disasters after the battle of Talavera; when we were obliged to leave our hospital behind, and commit to the mercy of the French those whom the cold-blooded Spaniards would have seen expire rather than have relieved them with a glass of water[24]. One might imagine we had sufficiently seen the folly of the attempt to restore the Bourbon line in Spain, but stultorum incurata malus pudor ulcera celat.
But be it as it may, the Spaniards having once tasted of freedom, though they reject Joseph Buonaparte, and drive the French out of Spain, will NEVER return to the yoke of Ferdinand the VIIth.
I hope I shall be forgiven for this digression, I was insensibly! drawn into it from a love of justice and humanity, with the conviction, that in boldly declaring a truth not generally known, I was doing an actual service to my country.
I will now resume the parallel of Buonaparte and Machiavelli, or rather, the striking coincidence between the precepts of the former and the conduct of the latter.
Machiavelli strongly recommends the appearance of piety; and Buonaparte, it must be confessed, most rigidly adheres to the precept. Machiavelli recommends it on the score of policy; and Buonaparte, we see, makes it eminently subservient to that end. His panegyrists tell us, he is religious. If outward forms were unerring indexes of the inward man, few would be more so, but none can be so blind as to imagine, that his religion, whatever form it may assume, is any thing more than superior policy, to cover and mask his wide-wasting scheme of universal empire.
Machiavelli tells us, that nothing secures a people's affection more than great and extraordinary actions, of which the life of Buonaparte forms a regular series: he throws an air of grandeur over every thing he does, and is proud of an occasion of surpassing all that had preceded him. These were the motives which induced him to be crowned by the Pope himself; and while the Pope was at Paris, to surprize him and all the world with a curiosity unique in its form and execution. In the former, he combined sound policy and brilliant effect; in the latter, he surpassed every thing of the kind on record. He knew, that many would consider him an usurper of the throne of the Bourbons. To defeat this argument, he caused the crown to be placed on his head by the very fountainhead of the church, by "Christ's vicar on earth, and the successor of St. Peter." The effect hereby produced was very imposing in itself, and was, at the same. time, a stroke of deep-laid policy, as it established him on the throne of France with the sanction of their high-priest.
But we have said, Buonaparte :delights to surprize. When the Pope was at Paris, he was invited to visit, amongst other theatres of art and museums of curiosities, the imperial printing-office. As his Holiness was shewn over the different apartments, he was presented from each of the presses with a sheet pulled off in his presence. The number of sheets were one hundred and fifty, and they proved to be copies of the Lord's Prayer in so many different languages and dialects, printed in their respective characters[25].
We have already mentioned Buonaparte's encouragement of the arts and sciences, which, from his love of them in his youth, is perhaps principle in him but he does not pause here, he enters into all the ramifications of domestic policy; he visits, (as Machiavelli directs in ch. 21,) the labourer in the vineyard, the husbandman at the plough, and the mechanic in his shop, the philosopher in his study, and the preceptor surrounded by his pupils, and rewards with his own hand those who excel; and this, as our author cautions, without compromising the dignity to which he is elevated,
Men of learning, of whatever nation, are always greeted with a hearty welcome to France, for he has never chosen to make the wars of policy and ambition, the scourge of literature; on the contrary, he encourages it as a prince ought to do, and thereby sows the seed of his own immortality: for who is blind enough not to foresee that, in fostering genius as he does, he must infallibly make his name immortal: and, when ages shall have rolled away, and the memory of every prince of continental Europe shall be buried in oblivion, his name will stand recorded on the page of history, less as a conqueror, than as the nurse of genius and protector of the arts and sciences. For, when our prejudices have destroyed themselves, and the crimes of Buonaparte are lost in the splendour of his achievements, history, with an impartial hand, will trace the character of our enemy thus:—" When genius wandered over the world, forlorn, wretched, and despised; and ignorance, bigotry, and intrigue occupied her seat at the courts of the princes of Europe, and left her to starve on the casual eleemosynary bounty of kindred souls in the lower walks of life, 'an upstart' took her by the hand, bound up her bleeding wounds, and cheered her fainting spirits. Nor did she prove ungrateful for the favour; she directed his paths to glory, and enabled him to scatter her enemies like dust before the whirlwind, and made him arbiter of the destinies of those who had despised her."
These positions may be denied, but I am persuaded they cannot be controverted; for the history of all ages proclaims it an unerring truth, that Fame has no niches in her temple, save those filled by genius to eternize the memory of those who greatly excelled.
As to the present race of continental princes, it will be said of them, that they preferred ignorance to learning, and dullness to genius; and consequently,
"They had no poet, and they died;”
while Buonaparte may sing with Horace, Exegi monumentum, &c.
Machiavelli next treats (ch. 22) of what he considers the index of a monarch's widom, the choice of ministers, and how good ministers may be known.
This is a delicate subject for an Englishman to treat of in March 1810; let me draw the veil over the infirmities naturally attendant on old age; let me not touch the hallowed precincts of my venerable monarch's sanctorum, but rather blast with infamy the wretch who, in the House of Commons, asserted that, "His Majesty is laden with age and infirmities," and who has for three years taken advantage of that age and those infirmities by every dishonourable and unconstitutional means to whisper falsehood in the royal ear; enrich himself and the miscreants around him, and spill the nation's blood and treasure to gratify his mad ambition, non te hoc pudet, Miserable! Cannot the finger of scorn, the scowl of contempt, and the burst of general indignation appal thee? Art thou deaf to every cry, insensible to thy country's suffersuffering-groan, and blind to all but self-interest? For, wert thou in the pay of our grand enemy, thou couldst not have given stronger proofs of being devoted to thy country's ruin.
I beg the reader's pardon for my warmth; but, if I have, in any degree, succeeded in producing a single spark of compunction in the political cormorant of the day, my country must be benefited by it, and that is my highest ambition. I shall conclude observations on the subject af ministers with a quotation from Pliny, which the reader will compare with what Fame says of our enemy's cabinet, and draw his own inferences on the occasion. Ut enim de pictore, sculptore, fictore, ni artifer judicare, ita nisi sapiens non potest perspicere sapientem. —Epist. Lib. I.
I would only observe, that while we find Buonaparte has creatures in every cabinet, it has never been found that any of the princes had creatures in the cabinet of Buonaparte.
I shall treat this subject more at length in my translation of Machiavelli's Reflections on Livy.
Our author next considers the subject of flattery to princes. It is to us a matter of trifling importance at the présent moment, and therefore I have thrown my observations into the form of a note on the chapter itself, to which I must refer the reader.
The 24th chapter is, however, of a different complexion; in it the reader will find the reason of the present state of Spain, which may perhaps (if any thing can) enlighten our ministers, as to the madness of their measures. Machiavelli's observations on the influence of fortune is not entirely consonant with those he has made in his Reflections on Livy, but it is a subject on which few have reasoned, either justly or rationally, because they assumed erroneous data, and therefore their conclusions were necessarily false, mali principii maus finis. As the consideration of the subject is foreign to the purpose, of this Introduction, the reader will find an attempt at a new and more rational theory in the appendix (G).
My labour now draws to a conclusion; I assumed, in the cominencement, that Buonaparte invariably trod in the footsteps of Machiavelli, and, I think, I may venture to assume, that I have completely established the fact. Another object was to wipe off those foul stains which have so long been unjustly attached to the character of my author; my limits: did not permit me to enter largely into the subject, but I am persuaded the unprejudiced will at least venture to doubt the propriety of the common opinion, which I pledge myself completely to refute in my life of Machiavelli, now preparing for the press, which will form a sequel to the Lorenzo de Medicis, and Leo the 10th of Mr. Roscoe, and thus complete the history of that period.
Our author concludes with an address to the patron he selected to deliver Italy from foreign powers, a signal proof of the amor patrie which this unjustly calumniated man perpetually felt. May I follow his example herein? Having traced, step by step, the career of Buonaparte, the striking analogy between his conduct and the precepts of our author; and having thus unfolded his latent springs of action, explored his system, and ascertained the laws by which it is governed, I cannot but think that I have rendered some service to my country; but as unus vir non omnia videt, let those whose leisure and abilities are propitious to such a design, take the subject where I leave it, and complete what I have begun, when we may not despair of seeing our beloved country not only mistress of the seas, but again assuming her elevated rank in the scale of nations; an event which, if incompatible with the declining years of our beloved sovereign, will, I am persuaded, mark the auspicious accession of His Royal Highness the heir apparent, whose superior talents, to prove their superior transcendancy, only demand a field for action.
Footnotes
[edit]- ↑ The genius of Buonaparte, like a powerful lever, moves and shakes all Europe, and changes the political system of its governments. His treaties of alliance have a double object. 1st. To preserve his conquests, extend the national commerce, and augment the federal the federal power; 2d. To make the strength of other governments subservient to that of France. The legislator, the warrior, and the statesman; ought to establish his combinations and his plans on the relation which his government ought to have with other powers; he ought to know, examine, and consider their political systems and their commercial relations, in order to turn them to the advantage and prosperity of the state which he governs; he ought to penetrate their secret views, and foresee their designs. Buonaparte enters into the mysteries of external policy, his genius examines, weighs, and calculates it; he foresees the events and sways them at his pleasure, and opposes the firmness of his principles to the diplomatic oscillations and the shadowy versatility of the govern- ments of Europe. He knows what treaties and alliances to conclude, &c. &c.—Tableau Historique et Politique de Buonaparte, par De Chas. Pa. 243.
- ↑ He was then only Prince Royal.
- ↑ Discours sur Machiavel, par Guiraudet.
- ↑ Vide Dedication to the Prince.
- ↑ It is worthy of remark, that Luther's Reformation took place a very few years after this prediction, viz. in 1518.
- ↑ Machiavelli severely reprehends this neglect of the examples of antiquity; he expresses himself thus: "If our respect for antiquity is considered, or to confine self to a single example, the value which we often set on even the fragments of antique statues, which we are proud to possess, to ornament our houses, and offer as models to artists to imitate in their works. If, on the other hand, we perceive the wonderful examples which the history of ancient kingdoms and republics present to us, the prodigies of wisdom and virtue displayed by citizens, generals, legislators, and kings, who sacrificed themselves for their country; if we find them, I say, more admired than imitated, or even so completely neglected as that there remains no trace of this ancient virtue, we cannot fail of being at once greatly surprised and deeply affected. Yet, in the differences arising between citizens, or the diseases to which they are liable, we find the same men refer to former decisions and remedies prescribed by the ancients. The civil laws are, in fact, only the sentences of ancient lawgivers, reduced into principles, and methodically arranged. Nay, what is me- dicine but the experience of ancient physicians, serving as a guide to those of modern times. But strange as it may seem in order to found a republic, maintain states, govern a kingdom, organize an army, conduct a war, dispense justice, or enlarge an empire, we do not find the citizen, general, republic, or prince, have recourse to the examples of antiquity. This negligence is less owing to the weakness arising from the vices of education than to the evils produced by that slothful pride so predominant in most of the Christian states, and the want of a profound knowledge of history, of which the true sense and spirit has escaped us.Thus the greater portion of those who read history never think of studying it, contenting themselves with the pleasure which the contemplation of such a variety of events affords. The idea never occurs to them of striving to imitate the splendid actions of antiquity: the imitation appearing to them not only difficult, but even impossible; as if the elements, the heavens, the sun, and man himself, had changed their order, motion, and power, and were different from what they formerly were.It is, as much as in me lies, to undeceive man in this respect, that I have undertaken this commentary on Livy and compare those ancient and modern events which appear to facilitate the intelligence; by which my readers will perceive the advantages that we ought to propose to ourselves in the study and knowledge of history, &c."—Introduction to Reflections on Livy. He again enforces this doctrine in ch. 11 of the same work:"Let no one despair of being able to do what so many others have done, for all men are born, live, and, die in the same manner, and consequently resemble each other."
- ↑ Concordia res parvæ crescunt, discordia maxime dilabuntur.
- ↑ Res dissociabiles, principatum et libertatem,
- ↑ Let no one imagine, that in speaking of France, I intend England, for we have been blessed with a succession of wise princes. I do not hope that the heir apparent will display all the virtues of his sire, but I can venture to predict that England's ruin will be more remote on his accession to the throne.
- ↑ Appearances may change, but the world constantly exhibits the same scenes, and no event occurs which has not taken place in past ages; but as the names and the forms perpetually change, the wise alone are able to recognize them.—Guichardini's Lett. to Mach. Whoever compares the present with the past, will find that all cities and all nations have been and are animated by the same desires and the same passions. Hence it is easy, by a careful and deliberate examination of the past, to discover what will happen in a state, when we may apply either the means employed by the ancients or invent such as are more adapted to the purpose. But this examination is neglected by the greater portion of readers, or rather it is above their comprehension; or if some one amongst them is capable of deriving such consequences, they are always unknown to those who govern; whence it is that we continually see the same evils produce the same revolutions.-Reflections on Livy, ch. 39. lib. 1.The astronomer knows the course of the stars, and announces their different motions; and the philosopher, who meditates in silence and tranquillity, and who knows the actual manners of a people, is rarely deceived when he predicts its destiny.—Du Chas.:
- ↑ "He (Buonaparte). concluded a treaty with the Arabs, ordered the most severe discipline, and recommended the respect of persons and property. He did not express himself with contempt of the superstitious ignorance of the Imans and the Mollahs of Egypt, and he spoke of Mahomet with the admiration due to the memory of a great man; he spoke of him with that political veneration which tended to conciliate the esteem of his sectaries."—De Chas.
"People of Cairo, I am satisfied with your conduct; you have done well in not taking part against me. I am come to destroy the race of the Mamalukes, to protect commerce, and the natives of the country. Let all those who are afraid, cease to be so; let those who have fled return to their homes; let prayer take place to-day as usual, and which I wish should always continue. Fear nothing, for your houses, your property, your wives, and above all, your religion, which I love."—Buonaparte's Proclamation on entering Cairo. - ↑ —These reforms are never brought about without danger, because the multitude will never agree to the establishment of a new law, tending to change the constitution of the state, without being forcibly struck with the necessity of this change. Now this necessity cannot be felt without being accompanied by danger.—Reflections on Livy, lib. 1. ch. 2.
- ↑ "One of the greatest faults of Appius was the changing his manner and character too suddenly. His finesse in deceiving the people by assuming popular manners, was no doubt well judged; nothing was more adroit than his conduct to renew the decemvirs; or his audacity in publicly nominating himself against the will of the nobles; or, his attention in choosing colleagues devoted to him. But nothing was more misplaced or improper than changing his character on a sudden, and shewing himself the enemy of the people whose friend he had appeared, and becoming proud and difficult of access, instead of being affable and easy of access as heretofore; and that so rapidly, that the least attentive could perceive his falsehood without being able to make any excuse for him. Whoever, from being good, wishes to become bad in principle, ought to proceed towards it by the gentlest shades and gradations. He must manage the change so skilfully, and with such regard to circumstances, that the old friends whom he must of necessity lose, may be advantageously replaced by new ones, so that his authority is never weakened; for if it is strip- ped of support, and the system discovered, he is inevitably lost past recovery."—Reflections on Livy, lib. 1. ch. 41.
- ↑ Talleyrand is worthy of his entire confidence: he possesses a profound knowledge in science and politics; he knows the systems and the springs of action of foreign courts; he follows them, weighs them, and knows how to direct them at his pleasure. He knows those true principles which constitute the essence of political strength. He is well skilled in the human heart, because he has studied it in turbulent times, in the conflicts of opposing interests, in the concussions of parties, and in the course of a revolution fertile in crimes. His genius never reposes, his mind is always in action—all his labours are consecrated to the good of the state, and the glory of the government."—Du Chas.Such is the portrait of Talleyrand, which even his enemies will allow to be correct. As to his moral virtues, I will pass them over, as I know an English reader will not admit their existence.
- ↑ Success was only wanting to render the battle of Talavera one of the most glorious in our history. The conduct of Lord Wellington had, for its precedent, the uniform practice of Buonaparte, and the basis of every victory atchieved by Lord Nelson, rapidity of movement, an apparent contempt of danger, and a resolution to attack the enemy if the shadow of the possibility of success appeared in the contest; for British valour always surpasses itself on great emergencies. Lord W. completely succeeded, but his allies, on whom he had a right to count, basely deserted their duty, and one of the most gallant generals of our nation, as if the fault was his, became "the slander of little tongues."
- ↑ Pius the VIth signed an armistice, whereby he renounced several cities, agreed to pay twenty millions of livres, and give one hundred objects of art, to be chosen from the museums of Rome, and five hundred manuscripts from the library of the Vatican.
- ↑ "While Buonaparte was at Cairo, the learned tra- velled by his order into the interior of Egypt, and made most important discoveries for geography, history, and physics. Nouet and Mechain determined the latitude of Alexandria, Cairo, Salehia, Damietta, and Suez; Lefevre and Malus surveyed the canal of Moèz; Peyre and Girard made a plan of Alexandria; Lanorey discovered Dabou and Menegda; Geoffroi examined the animals of the lake Menzaleh, and the fishes of the Nile; De Lisle made a catalogue of the plants found in Upper Egypt. Arnolet, and Champy the younger, were nominated to examine the minerals of the Red Sea. Girard was charged with the execution of a labour on all the canals of Upper Egypt. Denon travelled in Fayoum and Upper Egypt to design the monuments. Conté superintended the mechanic arts: he constructed windmills, and many other machines unknown in Egypt. Savary made a collection of the insects of the Desert of Syria. Beauchamp and Nouet arranged an almanac containing five calendars, viz. that of the French Republic, and those of the Roman, Greek, Coptic, and Mussulman churches," &c. &c.
- ↑ It was customary amongst the hired or mercenary troops to give their leaders a nom de guerre; whence the romantic names of Sforza, Forte in Braccio, Fracassa, &c.—like the puritanic Praise God Bare-bones, &c.
- ↑ Vide The Prince, chap. 18.
- ↑ Proclivius est injuriæ, quam beneficio vicem exsolvere, quia gratia oneri, ultio in questio habetur tacituo.
- ↑ Vide Reflections on Livy, lib. 1, ch. 9.
- ↑ He that is not with us is against us.
- ↑ The Prince, chap. 18.
- ↑ At the battle of Talavera, an officer of the 87th, who had received three wounds, and was fainting with the loss of blood, asked a man, who was carrying some water, to give him a little. The fellow refused; on which the British officer, indignant at such conduct, drew his sword, and insisted on it; when the fellow spilled the water on the ground, and ran away. To this authentic fact we may add another. During the march of the British army from Portugal, they were frequently distressed for water, and they were only supplied from the brooks in their way, many of which they were obliged to pass, without satiating their thirst, the Spaniards having thrown mud into them to prevent their drinking.
- ↑ The curious may see a copy of this unique work at the library of Messrs. Dulau and Co. Soho-square.