advantage of fortune in their hands? Consult common experience, and observe the effects of such an order of things upon the privileged, and upon the despoiled: in the former, the first thing it does is, to destroy industry and the virtues which spring from it; in the latter, it entirely effaces the stamp of independence, and debases the mind, in some instances so far as to make it exult in its own degradation. The best type of a state that cherishes an aristocracy in its bosom, is a large family in which one child usurps the whole favour of the parents: on a different scale the same effects exactly take place in each; the favourite, protected against labour and the irksome and dangerous vicissitudes of life, is indulged with splendid toys, and furnished with all the means of satisfying his capricious appetites. The other children, having no road to enjoyment, except through the gracious smiles of the domestic darling, and being actuated no less than he by the thirst of pleasure, immediately have recourse to cringing and hypocrisy, pretend extraordinary anxiety for his gratification, and eagerly provide him with delights, in the hope that they may, by this means, be allowed to share them with him. Let any parent who is in doubt about this bestow a course of exclusive favours on one of his children only, and observe the distinction it will create for that one, and the meanness and adulation it will cause in the others. The sturdy brother, who would previously have struck him for the least provocation, now grows humble and submissive, obeys his beck and call, and fears to look amiss lest it should deprive him of his share of the pleasures which the caprice of the favourite may withhold from him altogether. On the other hand, the possessor of the parents' distinctions seems to grow taller with conceit, tosses up his head, walks about in a stately pace, runs now here, now there, seeming to be quite delighted to put his retinue into the most humiliating position, to gratify his pride and love of power. It is true that any sudden suspension of the exclusive smiles of the parent restores the little urchins to their original equality, and, perhaps, procures the favourite a severe beating or two, in revenge for the degradation he inflicted during his good fortune; but this superiority continuing, or often repeated, would essentially corrupt the favourite, and debase his brethren.

The gross and palpable favouritism which should prompt a father to feed his eldest son on white bread, and the younger on brown, or lead him to convert the latter into the personal attendants of the former, would be abominated and decried by all mankind. Yet this would be by no means a more unjust proceeding than is now authorized and practised under the law of primogeniture; which, in reality, confers the hereditary wealth of the family on one son, and employs the rest in the church, the army, or the navy, as satellites to defend and preserve him in the possession of it.

But although it may perhaps be allowed that the right of the first

born is not founded in nature or in justice, but it may still be urged that it is a useful fiction, or, at least, one which has appeared such to the great majority of mankind. Nobody can deny that when once the world begins to patronize any particular piece of folly, it generally continues its patronage in secula seculorum, and, being judge of its own conduct, calls this proceeding, wisdom. But in regard to primogeniture, the opinions of the majority have been nearly always heretical. Among the Jews the eldest son inherited only a double portion; at Athens all the sons obtained equal portions, while the daughters were left dependent on their brothers; the Roman laws originally made no distinction between the sexes, sons and daughters inheriting an equal share. In Mohammedan countries, the paternal estate descends in even portions to all the sons; as it also does in Hindoostan. The laws of Japan differ from all others in respect to succession, no child inheriting in that country except those of the wife bestowed by the emperor. Among the benefits conferred on France by the Revolution, the abolition of the law of primogeniture was not the least, as it removed the greatest stain of barbarism from her code, and restored that equality among brothers, which the abolition of feudality had established among the citizens in general.

As the Constituent Assembly contained, when this question was agitated, a number of lawyers attached to the old maxims of jurisprudence, Mirabeau introduced into the speech he prepared for the occasion, the title of which we have quoted at the commencement of this article (but which he never lived to pronounce), sharp invectives against the imperfections of ancient law: full of the daring spirit of the times, his eloquence always seemed to burst from him, like the strains of the Delphian priestess, in involuntary inspiration; but in speaking against the law of primogeniture, death, then fast approaching him, appeared like a whirlwind to drift away all the chaff of declamation from his periods, leaving nothing remaining but the pure grains of truth.

This speech, which will bear to be compared with some of the best orations of Cicero, was read to the Assembly by M. Talleyrand, then bishop of Autun. Before commencing it, he informed his hearers that he went the day before to the house of Mirabeau, then on his death-bed; crowds of admirers or friends thronged the rooms; sadness was on all their countenances. The orator only was calm and cheerful. During the interview, Mirabeau, who regretted that he should not be present at the debate on the law of primogeniture, delivered into his hands the speech he had prepared for the occasion. It was his last labour, and his best; the reading of it was frequently interrupted by the enthusiastic applause of the hearers, and the splendid and forcible reasoning it contained had undoubtedly much influence on the decision to which the Assembly shortly afterwards came.

To give any thing like an analysis of this speech would carry us into too great length, for it embraces a large field, and is remarkable for the closeness of its style. As on other occasions, we must confine ourselves to a few remarks and extracts; but we shall endeavour, in the latter, to select such as are likely to do most honour to the memory of Mirabeau, and draw the attention of the reader to a speech which cannot be too assiduously studied. In quoting such a writer, we shall religiously abstain from all attempts at transla-' tion; eloquence, as well as poetry, appearing in a foreign language much more awkward and clumsy than a Turk or a Hindoo would look in the costume of Paris or London. Much must, of course, be passed over in silence. Indeed, as a great part of the speech turns on free gifts and testaments, a branch of the subject which we avoid touching upon at present, this might very well be done, without breaking the connection of his arguments against the right of primogeniture; but we can cite but a small number even of these.

The Arabs, we know, are accustomed to speak of the times before Mohammed, as their "days of ignorance;" and the French of 1791 judged in a like manner of the period preceding the Revolution:

Dans les siècles de tenebres (says Mirabeau), ces lois (romaines) ont été notre seule lumiere; mais dans un siècle de lumières, les ancien flambeaux pâlissen; ils ne servent qu'à embarrasser la vue, ou même à retarder nos pas dans la route de la vérité.

Of all the laws of antiquity relating to succession, those of Rome, which appeared to Mirabeau so exceptionable, approached most nearly the equality of nature: all the children inherited equal portions, without distinction of sex or age; but as the law ordained that property should not pass by marriage from one family to an other, the children of a daughter could not succeed to her property, which returned at her death to the family from which she sprung. Experience afterwards taught the Romans that the allowing women to inherit introduced pernicious luxury and disorder into the state; and a law proposed by Quintus Voconius, the tribune, and thence called the Voconian Law, made it illegal to constitute a woman heir, whether married or unmarried. This law was advocated with great vehemence by Cato the Censor, at the age of seventy-five. It is important not to mistake the spirit of the Voconian law it was really intended to repress luxury, and not wantonly to deprive women of their rights; for, while they were excluded by it from the succession to large estates, they might inherit possessions not included in the first census. To encourage marriage, Augustus partly removed the prohibitions of this law, making it legal for women to succeed in virtue of their husbands' will, and, in case they had three children, they might inherit the estate of a stranger who should name them as his heir. By the time of Adrian, the Voconian Law was nearly a dead letter; and Justinian abrogated it altogether.

The orator then advises to abandon entirely all deference for former laws, and in regulating the possessions and determining the rights of a great people, to look solely to reason and nature.

Or, Messieurs (he continues), que nous dit cette nature, dans la matière que nous discutons? Si elle a établi l'égalité d'homme à homme, à plus forte raison de frère à frère; et cette égalité entre les enfans d'une même famille ne doit elle pas être mieux reconnue encore, et plus respectée par ceux qui leur ont donné la naissance?

Society acknowledges fully the right of children to succeed to their fathers, but it has hitherto neglected in most cases to decree that all shall succeed to equal portions. But,

Cette loi sociale, qui fait succéder les enfans aux pères dans la propriété des biens domestiques, doit se montrer dans toute sa pureté, quand le chef de famille meurt ab intestat. Alors les enfans qui succédent partagent selon les lois de la nature, à moins que la société ne joue ici le rôle de marâtre, en rompant à leur égard la loi inviolable de l'egalite. Mais il ne suffit pas d'avoir fait disparaître de notre co e ce reste impur des lois feodales, qui, dans les enfans d'un m^me père, créaient quelquefois, en dépit de lui, un riche et de pauvres, un protecteur hautain et d'obscurs subordonnés; leis corruptrices, qui semaient des haines, là où la nature avoit crée la fraternité, et qui devenoient complices de mille désordres, si pourtant il n'est plus vr i de dire qu' elles les faisaient naître. Il ne suffit pas d'avoir détruit jusqu'au dernier vestige de ces lois funestes; il faut prevenir par de sages statuts les passions aveugles, qui n'auraient pas des effets moins pernicieux que ces lois mêmes; il faut empêcher l'alteration qu'elles apportent insensiblement dans l'ordre civil.

The entire disregard of justice oftentimes manifested by testators, is but too well known. Services of the most infamous kind, as well as the smaller delinquencies of cringing and flattery, too frequently purchase the succession to property, to the injury of the natural heirs. Even where the secret obligations of guilt exist not, old men are subject to be capricious in their preferences, and sometimes bequeath immense wealth to individuals on the strength of impressions made upon them instantaneously by a fortunate physiognomy, or by engaging manners. It is clear that such testaments ought not to be respected by the laws, which being the nearest approach to pure reason should by no means be made subservient to the most irrational vagaries of individuals.

Combien de ces actes, signifies aux vivans par les morts, où la folie semble disputer à la passion; où le testateur fait de telles dispositions de sa fortune, qu'il n'eût osé de son vivant en faire confiance à personne; des dispositions telles, en un mot, qu'il a en besoin pour se les permettre de se détacher entierement de sa memorie, et de penser que le tombeau serait son abri contre le ridicule et les reproches !

The right of primogeniture, as it now exists in Europe, arose out of feudal manners, with which it was perfectly congruous. Nevertheless it did not come into vogue simultaneously with the possession of fiefs, for under the first two races of French kings both sons and daughters succeeded equally even to feudal possessions, as may be clearly inferred from a law of Edward the Confessor: "Si quis intestatus obierit, liberi ejus succedunt in capita." It was after the Capet family ascended the throne of France that the great feudal proprietors, having united together to cast off the

yoke of royal authority, established the right of primogeniture, that all the power of the father might remain united in the hands of one man, the better to resist the encroachments of regal power. The eldest son being the most early adapted to undergo the fatigues of war, and to feel the spur of ambition, was therefore chosen to be the representative of the father; and the whole domain of the family devolved to him, with an injunction to provide for his younger brothers so far as to enable them to live respectably. This we find recorded as a law enacted by Geoffry, Count of Britanny, in 1185: "Majores natu integrum dominium obtineant, et junioribus, pro posse suo provideunt de necessariis, ut honeste viverent." When the right of primogeniture was once established among the nobles, who are generally allowed to coin ideas and fashions for those below them, it was not to be expected that the commoners would long remain behind them in the career of absurdity and injustice. Accordingly, the eldest son of a clown very quickly acquired the right to rob his brothers and sisters as completely as the son of a lord, and believed that, by the exercise of this piece of unnatural plunder, he was approaching the condition of his betters. As to daughters, they were accounted for next to nothing by the feudal institutions, which, on their account, ran riot in every possible absurdity, ordaining one thing in this province, another in that; now securing them a small portion, now granting them nothing. So that during the glorious times of chivalry, when a princely beauty had perhaps a hundred knights ready to break a lance in her honour, she might not possess sufficient property to furnish the palfrey that carried her to the tournament, or to provide herself with a veil to shade her cheek from the sun. All she could demand was no more than a simple chapeau de rose, having which she was portioned for life. "Tis true there were nunneries, and to these the toasts and beauties of chivalrous periods betook themselves, so soon as time had begun to make havoc with their features; for the honest knights of those days were no less given to look to the main chance than the knights of our times; and if they broke each other's skulls to prove the virtue and loveliness of their mistresses, they likewise took good care to leave those lovely creatures very little besides their beauty that they could call their own. Such having been the wisdom of our ancestors, and the gallantry of chivalric days, it must be owned that we have degenerated sadly now, when, at all events, a lady receives a portion suited to her rank, and is not left quite dependent on the caprice of her brother.

Those glorious dawnings of the revolution which dispersed the darkness that had so long obscured the laws of France, must, undoubtedly, have been viewed by a man like Mirabeau with the most enthusiastic delight. The barbarous curtain of chivalry was withdrawn from the national character, men stood up in a proud equality,

*Discours de M. Chabot de l'Allier.