« AnteriorContinuar »
Will it be said that Senators, from the for the office? And especially, in referpeculiarity of their being appointed by the ence to the jurisdiction, the authority, the States as such, and not by popular suffrage, power, which the incumbent is to be put are beyond the scope of this reasoning ? in charge of, does it come by the office, or and that they must be regarded as repre- | by the man ? Is it appurtenant or in senting their respective States or State gross ?–a power, in other words, which governments, more strictly and closely the man finds in his station, when he gets than they do the country at large ? Let us there, or which he carries thither in his
pocket with his credentials of election ? Have the State Legislators any original Let the subject be honestly dealt with. authority for appointing national Senators ? | An electoral appointment has no creative That will not be said. They get their pow- energy, save only as regards the connecer then from the Constitution. And who tion of the appointed individual with the made the Constitution ? We, the peo- post to which it advances him. His serple,” is its own emphatic response. Touch- vices it undoubtedly destines to a new eming the matter in hand, therefore, the Con- ployment. And that is all it does. The stitution is a general letter of attorney, by line of employment, the office, is a thing which "we, the people,” give to each of of earlier date, and which cannot be the State Legislatures, in trust, an elective touched. Its settled pre-existence is infranchise for filling two places in the Na- deed assumed by the very act of providing tional Senate. It is a franchise indeed, an incumbent for it. and like every other franchise, has a trust If, then, we can analyze this fixture of annexed to it. For whose benefit, do you the Constitution called office, and see what ask? That of the donors, the nation at its ingredients are, we may, to some exlarge. And thus the State Legislators are tent, determine what public men possess the fiduciary agents of the Union for ap- which their constituents have not given pointing Union Senators.
them, and over which there can of course These Senators again are agents. But be no right of dictation left behind in the whose agents? That is the point. Are legislature, or district, where elections have they the agents of the agency-legislatures been made. that appoint them, or of the real principals The task is easy. Office, wherever it in the whole business, the people of the exists, and whatever be the ends it is to Union ? How can trustees of a franchise, answer, is essentially a compound of duty more than of anything else, claim the fruit and power : the duly of fulfilling its funcof it to themselves ?
tionary intent, (for it is always functionary.) In one respect, a public officer may be and the power requisite for that purpose. looked upon as a result of the joint action This power and duty, therefore, have, in of his immediate constituents and the every possible case, their origin and meas. country at large; the office (without which ure from the constituents of the office, and the man were nothing) having its existence not of the officer who fills it for the by the Constitutional enactment of the time being; which is just equivalent to nation, while the man (without whom the saying (where the office is national) that office would exist in vain) is furnished by they are the property of the nation, and the local electors. But because the more not in any sense or degree the gift of local extensively popular part of the work is electors, or amenable to their control. The antecedent to the other in order of time, very nature of things teaches us this. being the effect of a transaction long since And well that it does. We wants past, and seemingly forgotton by many ; ments for minds of various mould there is danger lest the noisier and more which are under various infly bustling performance of the hour, however the too prevalent doctrine of small the theatre it is done upon, however to prevail, we might live to few the actors, may have an undue rela- dent and Senate overrulin tive magnitude ascribed to it. Men should the judges, as being the ask themselves a question or two in the stituents. Why no matter. What is it to provide an office, in have the State comparison with providing an incumbent mels upon
might live to see boards of Presidential held their own liberty sufficiently dear, Electors assemble long after their true but they were true parents, and held the function has been exercised and spent, to | liberty of their children in equal esteem. instruct the political Executive how to bear | What did they do? Alike careful of the himself in his high walk of State. If suf- future and the present—of the remainder frage were essentially a delegation of pow- in fee, as of the life-estate—they made siger, these absurdities would be no longer nal provision for both the one and the such. If the authors of men's official other of their objects, by placing each in preferment were the makers of their offi- | charge of a distinct portion of the sovercers too, government would not be gov- eign power; giving the law-making and ernment; the only sovereignty of the land law-executing management of things to a would be in the local electorships, and the set of persons who were to be singled out affairs of the nation would be carried on for the purpose, with a scrupulous regard by and for them as such, and in the way to character and fitness—while the conserof mere diplomacy.
vative oversight of this agency-corps of Why will men lose sight as they do of government, with a view to saving the rethat great act of universal sovereignty, the public harmless in their hands at all events, Constitution ? And why will they shut was given to an immense mass of popular their eyes to the very genius and policy of electors ; too many to be capable of beit on the precise topic in hand ?
traying their trust, and yet not numerous The best frame of government for any enough to include the dregs of society, given country, is that which provides best, ) who might be unworthy of it. Such is first, for the rights and interests of the our political division of labor. The dipeople, and secondly, for its own health rectly governing sovereignty belongs to ful continuance. Both these objects are official rulers for the time being—an indevital.
pendent, ultimate, administrative power in But each of them, it is plain, has exi- | their hands. But because such power is gencies of its own, to be specially looked corrupting and dangerous, these rulers, after by the founders of States. To com- sovereign though they be, in their place, are bine the two successfully, is perhaps the held in check by regulations making it nenoblest, because the most extensively ben- cessary for them to apply from time to eficial achievement, that human wisdom time for new commissions at the bar of pubcan aim at. In most governments no ef- lic opinion, or to descened into private life. fort has been made in that direction. I So that the electoral sovereignty, to which know of none but ours in which the thing the enormous power of public opinion aphas been seriously attempted.
pertains, is influentially paramount, as in Mark then the most interesting peculiar- truth it should be ; though for any purity of our system, and, God be praised, the pose of direct action, it is co-ordinate with most hopeful.
that of governing agents; a power in the Our Constitutional fathers were not government as well as theirs, and no more more considerate for themselves than for free to trespass upon them, than ther an those who should come after them. They to invade its own domain.
RECENT ENGLISH HISTORIANS OF ANCIENT GREECE.*
(CONTINUED FROM PAGE 190.)
AFTER the return of the Heraclida-esting of the two, as he has the greater which Thirlwall Euemerizes into a Doric dexterity in rendering a dry subject atinvasion and conquest, requiring “ many tractive, and illustrates his details by noting years, probably many generations,” for the differences as well as the resemblances its consummation, and Grote disposes of of climate, natural productions, cultivation, among the mythes of the legendary age &c., in Ancient and Modern Greece. we pass at once to the definite region of And now before treating of the PeloponHistorical Greece. Not that even here nesian Dorians, we have one more troublewe are entirely freed from uncertainty, but some subject to adjust or get over in some the races and institutions at which we ar- way. Every student of Greek and Rorive are real and tangible, though in some man history has been more than once cases—that of Lycurgus is a well-known brought to a stand by the Pelasgi, an exinstance—a cloud may still hang about tinct people who seem to have been used their founders. We can always be pretty as a convenient solution for all the problems sure what laws, customs, and form of gov- | in the archæology of the nations around ernment existed in each place at a particular the Mediterranean, much as electricity was time, though something fabulous may still once employed in physical philosophy to cling to the individual personages of the account for all unknown phenomena. The period. It is here, accordingly, that Mr. anxious inquirer, after laboring to shape Grote takes occasion to bring in his sketch some definite and consistent conclusion of Grecian geography. Something of the out of the various conflicting statements kind is generally considered a necessary of ancient writers, and the still more conintroduction to a history: we confess to flicting inferences drawn from every one of having some doubts of its indispensability. these statements by modern scholars, genArnold's most valuable and interesting erally has to end by confessing himself work on Rome contains no geographical hopelessly puzzled. Whoever has worked account of Italy; and yet, singularly through Niebuhr, and Thirlwall, and Malenough, Arnold himself has elsewhere in-den, I and Michelet—whoever has tried to sisted on the importance and necessity of form a coherent opinion of his own on the the ordinary course ;t nay, more, he illus- principal questions in dispute : whether trates its value by immediate reference to the Pelasgians spoke Greek, or something Italy, the natural features of which he very different from Greek; whether Heproceeds to describe in his most felicitous | rodotus ought to have written Croton where manner. A good map is certainly always he wrote Creston, or Dionysius ought to a requisite, and with this probably most have quoted Creston where he quoted Croreaders would be satisfied. We half suspect ton; whether the Tyrsenian Pelasgians that few persons, except conscientious re- came from Greece to Italy or vice versa, or viewers like ourselves, peruse these geo- whether they ever were in Italy at all ; graphical introductions. Both our authors whether the real name of the people whom are full and accurate in this part of their we know through the Romans as Etruswork; Grote, the more spirited and inter- cans was Rasena, or whether these Rasena
* A History
of Greece, by the Right Rev. Connop THIRLWALL. London: Longman & Co. 1835, 1884 A History of Greece, by Geo. GROTE, Esq. London: John Murray. 1846-7. + Lectures on Modern History, pp. 123, 124, 125, 128, 129.
Prof. Malden, of the London University, who began a History of Rome for the “ Library of Useful knowledge” in 1830: The early numbers were remarkably promising, but under the fatality which seems to attend histories of Rome, it stopped short after the fifth.
only exist in a wrong reading*_whoever the islands of the Archipelago, in Asia has blundered through all this, is struck Minor, in Italy-nothing about the Pelasgic with agreeable surprise, not unmingled with names, such as Larissa,* that occur in something like triumphant satisfaction, to various parts of Greece-nothing about find that Mr. Grote “shoots ” these troub- the Tyrseni, and their connection with lesome Pelasgi as unceremoniously as if Greece on the one hand and Etruria on they were so much rubbish. This is his the other--nothing about those imperishasummary method of dispatching them - ble and extraordinary relics, the Cyclopean
structures, except indeed Mr. Grote's off" If any man is inclined to call the unknown hand disposal of them by adopting the ante-Hellenic period of Greece by the name of Pelasgic, it is open for him to do so ; but this is a conjecture of a German Professor, that name carrying with it no assured predicates,
“the character of the Greek limestone no way enlarging our insight into real history, determined the polygonal style of archinor enabling us to explain—what would be the tecture.”+ Now we have always conreal historical problem-how or from whom sidered the whole Pelasgic question more the Hellens acquired that stock of dispositions, valuable in reference to Latin, than in referaptitudes, arts, &c., with which they began ence to Greek history, (though the genetheir career. Whoever has examined the many ral opinion, we are aware, tends the other conflicting systems respecting the Pelasgifrom the literal belief of Clavier, Larcher and way:) and we are well disposed to adopt Raoul Rochette, (which appears to me at least Mr. Grote's two main propositions—that the most consistent way of proceeding,) to the the Pelasgic language was not by any interpretative and half incredulous processes means Greek, and that it is impossible to applied by abler men, such as Niebuhr, or 0. predict with anything like accuracy what Müller, or Dr. Thirlwall, will not be displeased element, if any, of the Hellenic civilization with my resolution to decline so insoluble a problem. No attested facts are now present to
and character was due to the Pelasgi ; 15-none were present to Herodotus and Thu- and it is for these very reasons—because cydides even in their age-on which to build we agree with him so far—that we regret trustworthy affirmations respecting the ante- his having handled the subject with such Hellenic Pelasgians; and where such is the brevity, and not given us some of the case, we may without impropriety apply the re- prevalent views upon it, even though he mark of Herodotus respecting one of the the ended by rejecting them all. Considered ories which he had heard for explaining the inundation of the Nile by a supposed connec
as mere mythes, the traditions about the tion with the ocean—that the man who carries Pelasgi are sufficiently interesting to deup his story into the invisible world, passes out serve repetition at any rate. The old of the range of criticism.'” Vol. ii., pp. 346, 7. story, for instance, which represented them
as a people specially persecuted by the Certainly this is the pleasantest and wrath of the gods, has something very most convenient way of getting rid of impressive and poetical in it. Michelet, these Pelasgi ; but after all, is it doing who never lets a legend lose any of its full justice to them and to ourselves? It romance in passing through his hands, strikes us that a student who began with has worked it up in a series of striking and depended upon Mr. Grote, would be tableaux. likely to underrate the importance of the The classical passage respecting the question, at least as much as some enthu- Pelasgic tongue, and the few places where siastic speculators have overrated it, and it was yet spoken in the time of Herodotus, to form a most inadequate idea of its bear- is the fifty-seventh chapter of Clio :ings. He would find nothing about the extent of ground covered by Pelasgic * That Larissa is “the city of the Lar," or traces and traditions—in Greece Proper, prince, and that the Tyrseni derived their
name of in Macedonia, around the Hellespont, in their architectural propensities, seem to us as
natural and well-founded case of ethnical etymology
as any on record. Mr. Grote is unusually liberal to the Rasena. + It is but fair to say, however, that Mr. Bunbury, He alludes to their existence without the least doubt an accurate and accomplished scholar, whose or suspicion, at the close of the very chapter in opinions are formed on his own observation of the which he has been making a clear sweep of the country, has come to the same conclusion respectPelasgi, the Græci, and the ante-Hellenic people ing the Cyclopean remains in Italy. Classical generally
Museum, vol ii., p. 147.
“What language the Pelasgians spoke I am | Pelasgian language.* This passage affords a not able positively to affirm. But if one must measure by which we may estimate the force give an opinion, arguing from* the Pelasgians of the word barbarian in the former. Nothing still extant at present, those who inhabit the more can be safely inferred from it, than that town of Creston beyond the Tyrseni, (who the Pelasgian language which Herodotus heard were once neighbors to the people now called on the Hellespont and elsewhere, sounded to Dorians, and then dwelt in the territory now him a strange jargon, as did the dialect of called Thessaliotis,) and those who founded Ephesus to a Milesian, and as the Bolognese Placia and Scylace on the Hellespont, (who does to a Florentine."—(Thirlwall, vol. i., were fellow-inhabitants with the Athenians, p. 53.) and all the other towns which were Pelasgic, and changed their name-if one must give an Mr. Grote, after some judicious remarks opinion arguing from these, the Pelasgi spoke upon the improbability of one language a barbarian language. If then all the Pelas- being totally displaced by another, as Hegians were like these, the Athenians who were Pelasgi must have changed their language
rodotus supposed to be the case with the along with their transformation into an Hellenic Pelasgian in Attica, accepts with confipeople ; for we know that the Crestonians do dence the Greek historian's statement of not speak the same tongue with any of those what he heard with his own ears— -the barwho live around them, neither do the Placians, baric language spoken by the Pelasgi exbut they speak the same with each other. It is tant in his day—and observes on Thirlclear, then, that they have preserved the same characteristic form of speech (gawoons xa
wall's softening away of this statement : paxsupa) which they brought with them on
“ To suppose that a man who, like Hero
dotus, had heard almost every variety of emigrating into these places.”
Greek in the course of his long travels, This seems tolerably plain ; yet in the as well as Egyptian, Phænician, Assyrian, face of it O. Muller lays down as a funda- Lydian, and other languages, did not know mental hypothesis that “the Pelasgi were how to distinguish bad Hellenic from nonGreeks, and spoke the Grecian language.”+ Hellenic, is, in my judgment, inadmissible ; We shall not enter into an examination of at any rate, the supposition is not to be his reasons for so doing, preferring to quote adopted without more cogent evidence Dr. Thirlwall's opinion, both because it than any which is here found.” And he falls more immediately within our present continues the argument in a note, with his purpose to compare him with Mr. Grote, usual accuracy of discrimination :-and because this comparison furnishes an amusing instance of the directly opposite tive mode of speech) are common to both these
“The words yeaons xapaxtrip (distincinferences which two learned men will draw from the very same passage :
passages, [of Herodotus,] but their meaning in the one and the other is to be measured by ref
erence to the subject-matter of which the au" This language Herodotus describes as barbarous, and it is on this fact he grounds his accompany them-especially the word Bápla
thor is speaking, as well as to the words which general conclusion as to the ancient Pelasgian pos in the first passage. Nor can I think, with tongue. But he has not entered into any Dr. Thirlwall
, that the meaning of Báp Bapos details that might have served to ascertain the
is to be determined by reference to the other manner or degree in which it differed from the Greek. Still the expressions he uses would
two words: the reverse is in my judgment corhave appeared to imply that it was essentially rect. Bápßapos is a term definite and uneforeign, had he not spoken quite as strongly in quivocal, but yawaons xapaxtrip varies acanother passage, where it is impossible to cording to the comparison which you happen ascribe a similar meaning to his words. In at the moment to be making, and its meaning enumerating the dialects that prevailed among is here determined by its conjunction with Sapthe Ionian Greeks, he observes that the Ionian | Bapos. When Herodotus was speaking of cities in Lydia agree not at all in their tongue with those of Caria; and he applies the very same term to these dialects, which he had be
* The passage referred to here by Dr. Thirlwa". fore used in speaking of the remains of the Greek cities, that "they do not all use the same
is in Clio, 142, where Herodotus says of the Ionic tongue, but four different varieties." Miletes,
Myus and Priene have one, Ephesns, Colophon. * Mr. Grote quotes τεκμαιρομένοις for τεκμαι
Lebedus, Teos, Clazomena and Phocoma another,
the Chians and Erythræans a third, and the Sami póusvov, probably a misprint.
ans a fourth. “ These are their four characteristic † Muller's Dorians, i. 1-5.
forms of speech."