7153 
MONTESQUIE U. 
ters,” which'gave a fatirical reprefentation of the manners 
and fentiments of the country, under the affumed cha¬ 
racter of a foreigner. Thefe letters ferve as a vehicle of 
free fentiments concerning politics and religion, which 
the author was one of the firft to render popular in 
France. They gave him a degree of literary reputation 
which induced him to become a candidate for a place in 
the French academy ; and he was admitted in the year 
1728. He now refolved to devote his time and talents 
to theinftruCtion of his fellow-creatures as a writer; and, 
having quitted his civil employments, he entirely devoted 
liimfelf to his genius, and was no longer a magistrate, but 
a man of letters. Having thus fet himfelf af liberty, he 
travelled through Germany, Italy, Swifferland, Holland, 
and England, in which laft country he refided three years, 
and contracted intimacies with the greateft men then 
alive ; for Locke and Newton were dead. The refult of 
his obfervations was., “ that Germany was fit to travel in, 
Italy to fojourn in, England to think in, and France to 
live in.” On his return he retired for two years to his 
eftate at La Brede, near Bourdeaux, where he finifhed his 
work On the Caul’es’ of the Grandeur and Declenfion of 
the Romans; which appeared in 1734. This excellent 
performance is celebrated for the energy of its ftyle, the 
force of its defcriptions, and the depth of the author’s 
remarks. His love of liberty is the animating fpirit of 
the,whole. In 174.8 he publifhed, in two volumes quarto, 
his “ Spirit of Laws.” On this he had fpent very many 
years of his life ; its principles are founded on the radical 
diverfities of mankind, owing to climate and other caufes; 
and it difcuffes at large the nature of different forms of 
government, from which laws emanate, and to which 
they ought to be adapted. Voltaire, in fpeaking of this 
work, which is far from faultlefs, fays, “if it does not 
always inftruCt the reader, it never fails to make him. 
think.” And M. de l,a Harpe, in comparing Montefquieu 
and Rouffeau, fays that the fyftem of the latter was a work 
of mere imagination ; but the EJ’prit (les Loix was pro¬ 
duced by long labour and meditation ; and it feerirs as if 
one fhould, like a novel, be read for amufement, and the 
other for information and improvement. Montefquieu’s 
lively and ingenious expreflions, in which is difplayed the. 
imagination of Montaigne, have particularly contributed to 
fhe great reputation of the Spirit of Laws. The fame things 
laid even by a more learned manwould not have been read. 
Few works are to be met with in which there are more 
profound ideas, more bold thoughts, or more matter for 
inftruCtion. It has a claim to be ranked among the ori¬ 
ginal productions which adorned the age of Louis XIV. 
and which has no model in antiquity. 
Mr. Dugald Stewart, in his Firft Differtation prefixed 
to the Ency. Brit. Supplement, has the following remarks 
tipon the intent of this great work, and the manner in 
which it is executed. “ The main objeCt of the Spirit of 
Laws is to fhow, not, as has been frequently fuppofed, 
what laws ought to be, but how the diverfities in the 
phyfical and moral circumftances of the human race have 
contributed to produce diverfities in their political efta- 
blifhments, and in their municipal regulations. On this 
point, indeed, an appeal may be made to the author himfelf: 
6 1 write not,’ fays he, ‘ to cenfure anything eftablilhed in 
any country whatfoever; .every nation will here find the 
recjbns on which its maxims are founded.” This plan, 
however, which, when underftood with proper limitations, 
is highly philofophical, and which raifes jurifprudence, 
from tire uninterefting and ulelefs ftate in which we find 
it in Grotius and Puftendorff, to be one of the moft agree¬ 
able and important branches of ufeful knowledge (al¬ 
though the execution of it occupies by far the greater 
part of this work), is profecuted by Montefquieu in fo 
very defultory a manner, that I am inclined to think he 
rather fell into it infenfiblv, in confequence of the occa¬ 
sional impulfe of accidental curiofity, than from any re¬ 
gular defign he had formed to himfelf when he began to 
rolled materials for that celebrated performance. He 
feems, indeed, to confefs this in the following paffage of 
his preface : £ Often have I begun, and as often laid afide, 
this undertaking. I have followed my obfervations with¬ 
out any fixed plan, and without thinking either of rules 
or exceptions. I have found the truth only to lofe it 
again.’ But, whatever opinion we may form on this 
point, Montefquieu enjoys an unqueftionable claim to 
the grand idea of connecting Jurifprudence with Hiftory 
and Philofophy, in fuch a manner as to render them all 
fubfervient to their mutual illuftration. Some occafional 
difquifitions of the fame kind may, it is true, be traced in 
earlier writers, particularly in the works of Bodinus; but 
they are of a nature too trifling to detract from the glory 
of MoKtefquieu. When we compare the jurifprudential 
refearches of the latter with the fyftems previoufiy in 
pofTeflion of the fchools, the ftep which he made appears 
to have been fo vaft as alrnoft to juftify thefomewhat too 
oftentatious motto prefixed to them by the author; Pro¬ 
tein Jhie Matre crcatam. Infteacl of confining himfelf, 
after the example of his predeceffors, to an interpretation 
of one part of the Roman code by another, he ftudied 
the Spirit of thefe laws in the political views of their 
authors, and in the peculiar circumftances of that extra¬ 
ordinary race. He combined the fcience of law with the 
hiftory of political fociety, employing the latter to account 
for the varying aims of the legiflator; and the former, in 
its turn, to explain the nature of the government, and 
the manners of the people. Nor did he limit his inqui¬ 
ries.to the Roman law, and to Roman hiftory; but, con¬ 
vinced that the general principles of human nature are 
everywhere the fame, he fearched for new lights among 
the fubjeCts of every government, and the inhabitants of 
every climate; and, while he thus opened inexhauftible 
and unthought-of refources to the lludent of jurifpru¬ 
dence, he indireCtly marked out to the legiflator the ex¬ 
tent and the limits of his power, and recalled the atten¬ 
tion of the philofopher from abftraCt and ufelefs theories, 
to the only authentic monuments of the hiftory of man¬ 
kind. 
For feveral parts of his work the author drew upon 
himfelf certain cenfures; and among his critics was M. 
Dupin, a farmer-general, who -wrote an anfwer to it; 
but, after a few copies of the critique had been diftributed, 
Montefquieu made his complaint to madame Pampadour, 
who fent for the writer, and told him fhe took the Spirit 
of Laws, and its author, under her protection : in con¬ 
fequence of this, Dupin was obliged to fubmit, and the 
whole edition of his anfwer was configned to the flames. 
This was not to the credit of Montefquieu, who fhould 
have learnt f a different leffon from the country in which 
lie had been excited to thought and reflection. 
He died of a pulmonary complaint in February 1755, 
in the fixty-fixth year of his age. His laft hours were 
difturbecl by the Jefuits, who were anxious to get from 
him fomething like a retractation of his fentiments con¬ 
cerning religion. His private character is reprefented as 
having been highly amiable and eftimable. Though ha¬ 
bitually frugal, he was capable of great generofity; and an 
inftance of his beneficence in giving his purfe to a young 
boatman at Marfeilies, and fecretly configning a fum of 
money to abanker to redeem the youth’s father from flavery 
in Africa, lias.been the fubjeCtofa pathetic drama. After 
his death, was publifhed a collection of his works in three 
volumes quarto, in which were fome pieces that had not 
before appeared. Of thefe the principal was Le Temple 
de Guide , a kind of profe poem, in which a warm and vo¬ 
luptuous picture is given of the progrefs of love in a 
mind hitherto new to that paffion. It tvas at firft read 
with great avidity, but foon met with cenfurers who re¬ 
garded it as a frivolous effufton of gallantry, unworthy of 
the ferious reputation of the author. A “Fragment on 
Tafte” was another of the additional pieces. In 1764. were 
publifhed “Familiar Letters of Montefquieu,” fome of 
which were marked with the genius of the author. His 
romance of “ Arface,” alfo a pofthumous publication, 
though 
