1824.] 
which its legislation encompasses, a 
legislation generated and formed by the 
experience of the most able statesmen 
of former ages. With respect to pro- 
jects of interior improvement, none, he 
says, canbe more judicious in their 
arrangement, more grand in their ex- 
tent, or which bid more fair to involve 
consequences beneficial to the country. 
In the midst. of the several political 
storms that have threatened to deluge 
Europe, Great Britain has firmly re- 
tained both her seat or situation, and 
her honour. He describes the reliance 
of her people on themselves, not merely 
as the unavoidable result of an insular 
position, but as emanating from com- 
prehensive minds, conscious of great 
powers, and fairly estimating those 
powers, in comparison with the most 
exalted of their competitors. 
' In his view of the Russian empire, 
M. de Pradt considers the mingled 
masses which compose it, as a curious 
and extraordinary phenomenon, of 
which no other example exists in his- 
tory. In its physical, civil and moral 
state, he forms a picture illustrative of 
civilization, and its gradual develop- 
ments, from a rude and brutal condition 
to the summit of sensible refinement. 
Here we see him tracing nations of 
hunters and fishers, who wrap them- 
selves in the skins of beasts, with which 
they contend for their existence, and 
having scarcely any notion of property ; 
the pastoral nations, deriving their food 
and clothing from their flocks and herds, 
but without the knowledge of writing, 
and use of money. He beholds others, 
in the labours of agriculture, in an in- 
complete state; and so pursues the pro- 
gress of culture, till houses arise, instead 
of the earth-holes of the Samoyedes and 
huts of felt, till viliages are changed 
into towns, and houses into palaces. 
Here are most of the modifications of 
which a state, on the general scale of 
human nature, is susceptible ; not only 
in the gradations of living, but in the 
civil constitutions, are several ranks or 
classes. In the eastern isles, the social 
connexion seems unknown ; but among 
other hordes are instances of family go- 
vernment, of democracy, of a repub- 
lican monarchy, of personal and _here- 
ditary nobility, and, at least, unlimit- 
ed monarchy. And as to religion, 
there are numberless turnings from Po- 
lytheism to a total unacquaintance with 
any idea ‘of a deity. Christians of 
every sect, Jews, Mahometans, votaries 
of the Lama, &c., are numerous. With 
Russia and Britain compared. 
131 
respect to physical condition, manners, 
custoins, &c., the difference is as great. 
And what is it that maintains, in such 
a confluence of governments, one con- 
solidated state ? What keeps,this pro- 
digious combination in. unconditional 
submission to the will of one ruler ? 
M. de Pradt attributes it to a double 
supremacy of religion and politics; to 
the severity of an automatic discipline, 
carefully kept up every where, whatever 
particular changes, of yarious_ kinds, 
modern times may have made. This re- 
gimen, supported by a vast military 
force, is equally bindirig on the people 
and grandees, on the soldier and the 
citizen. He might haye added in his 
key to the solution of this singular cir- 
cumstance, the religious toleration which 
marks the spirit of the, monarchy, so 
that the uniformity and unity of admi- 
nistration appear more complete than in 
any other state. 
The Russian army may be averaged at 
600,000, of whom 500,000, at least, are 
effective soldiers. This army supplies 
the place of strong fortifications, which 
may be dispensed with. It-may be as- 
serted, that the Russian poles never 
give way, if the commandets shew proper 
courage. The common men make their 
small pay and provision suffice, and on 
holidays, treat themselves with strong 
liquors. The Cossacks, though called 
irregular, are so well disciplined, that 
they may be used ashussars; Frederick 
the Great pronounced the men, “ excel- 
lent soldiers,” and the Empress Catha- 
rine might well denominate the people, 
“* obedient, brave, habitually hardy, en- 
terprizing, and powerful.” 
The general condition of the subjects 
is not so unfavourable as is generally 
thought. Even the boors have the 
means of becoming rich; and if they 
are content with dress and accommoda- 
tions, which to strangers seem wretched, 
it is from choice, and not from want of 
ability to procure better things. 
The general remark of this author on 
the subject is, that the influence of 
Russia and Britain is so great and 
striking in all the concerns of other 
states, in the various parts of Europe, 
that these two ruling powers (domina- 
teurs obligés) form an order of protec- 
torate, and that the others, taken alto- 
gether, will be found to be protégées. 
But is not this extravagantly express- 
ed, even admitting that, under limita- 
tions, it may contain some truth? The 
author appears entirely to have over- 
looked the comparative importance 
$2 which 
