352 THE THREE FORMS OF GOVERNMENT. 



lie has appointed for the observance of the citizens, himself has em- 

 braced ; and who never imposes laws on the people which he himself 

 does not obey, but, on the contrary, exhibits his life like a law for 

 the inspection of his fellow-citizens. If this single individual were 

 able to perform every thing, there could be no occasion for any more; 

 and if the multitude always perceived what is best to be done, and 

 unanimously agreed on it, no one would desire an aristocracy. The 

 difficulty of a wise determination on political subjects, has transferred 

 the administration from a king to a larger number of persons ; the 

 errors and indiscretion of the people have also transferred it from 

 the multitude to a select body of individuals. Thus the aristocracy 

 have obtained a middle station equally removed from the weakness 

 of a single person, and the headstrong impetuosity of a multitude/ 

 than which nothing can be better regulated ; and when the common- 

 wealth is under their protection, the greatest happiness must neces- 

 sarily be enjoyed by the people, unoppressed with any thing demand- 

 ing care and thought ; their repose secured to them by others who 

 must preserve it, and who must never commit any action which may 

 lead the people to think that the aristocracy neglect their interests." 



Lalius then presses Scipio to give them his own opinion on the 

 three forms of government, and likewise to tell them which of the 

 three he considers most calculated to secure the prosperity and sta- 

 bility of a state. He states, in reply, that a mixed form of government 

 is, in his opinion, far better than mere monarchy, mere aristocracy, 

 or mere democracy ; but yet, if he were compelled to give his pre- 

 ference to one, it would certainly be to monarchy. In this, Cicero 

 only imitated the Grecian poets and philosophers, most of whom, 

 though born in Athens, the most democratical of all the cities of 

 Greece, still strenuously advocated the government of a single person. 

 Daily witnesses as they were to the bloody scenes of a factious oli- 

 garchy, and the wild fury of a headstrong democracy, what wonder 

 that, disgusted with such horrors, they should fly to the opposite 

 extreme, and stand forth the champions of monarchy ? It is however 

 a remarkable fact, that their influence was never diminished by such 

 opinions, and that, on the contrary, they were admired by their co- 

 temporaries and succeeding generations, as ornaments of their country, 

 and instructors of mankind. What poet of Greece was so enthusi- 

 astically loved as Homer? The children learnt to lisp his verses; the 

 youth cherished them as the grand depository of all that was glorious 

 and sublime; the aged reverted to them as the joy of their juventi- 

 tude, the delight of their manhood, and the consolation of their old 

 age ; they were chaunted by rhapsodists at private feasts and public 

 festivals; in them was depicted the beautiful mythology of the Greeks, 

 the basis of the popular religion, from them the poets derived sub- 

 jects for their odes, their tragedies, and their epics, and yet Homer 

 was the bold uncompromising advocate of monarchy, and the severest 

 censurer of democracy ; for he declares, in the strongest terms, " no 

 good comes from the government of the many let one be ruler and 

 one be king."* 



* Iliad, Book ii. 1. 204. 



