LECTURES ON THE CIVIL GOVERNMENT OF THE HEBREWS. By E. C. WINES,
Author of 'Two Years in the Navy,' Works on Education, etc.
Delivered at the New-York Society Library Rooms.
WHEN we first saw the advertisement of Mr. WINES in the public
journals, it struck us that the theme he had chosen for his lectures
was a _dry_ one, and that it would scarcely be found to interest the
general public; but we were greatly in error. It was not only an
unhackneyed subject, of intrinsic interest, but it was one that had
never before been treated in the manner in which it was presented
by Mr. WINES. We are no longer surprised that the lectures should
have drawn together overflowing audiences in Philadelphia, nor that
they were received with the most marked approbation in our own
metropolis. Although the chief authority whence the materials of the
discussion are drawn is the Bible, a book in every body's hands,
yet the facts in the record are brought by Mr. WINES into such new
and sometimes almost startling relations, that while they impart
important instruction on a subject venerable by its hoary antiquity,
they have yet all the charms of _novelty_ to recommend them. Even
acute and diligent students of the Scriptures, after listening
to his discourses, must confess that they have not exhausted its
riches, especially so far as they treat of the great principles of
social organization and constitutional government. Indeed, one of
their best fruits will be to send the hearer with a keener spirit of
inquiry, and with increased patience and industry of investigation,
to the 'Lively Oracles.' The lectures are conceived in a liberal
and philosophical spirit, and evince an ardent attachment to, and a
firm faith in, our republican institutions. They are written with
thorough scholarship and learning, and in a style always lucid and
vigorous, often glowing and elegant. In a word, Mr. WINES takes hold
of his subject like a man who is conscious of his strength, and he
almost invariably carries the sympathies and convictions of his
audience along with him, even when advancing opinions quite out of
their ordinary habitudes of thought. He has shown how thoroughly a
subject, which has been commonly regarded as belonging exclusively
to _scholars_, can be brought within the grasp of the popular mind.
Whatever currency his elaborate and most interesting disquisitions
on the laws and government of the Hebrews may have, will be so much
subtracted from the strength of infidelity, and added to the cause
of sacred learning and religion.
The lecturer commenced with a reference to the magnificent
sepulchral remains of an unknown city on the banks of the Ganges,
in Central India, as an emblem of the uncertainty which accompanies
most of our researches into the events of remote antiquity. The
writings of the best of the Greek historians were represented as
filled with contradictions, and with mutual charges of error and
falsehood; and several striking instances of historical doubt were
adduced; as, whether the famous Trojan war ever actually occurred
or not; whether Semiramis lived two thousand or seven hundred years
before CHRIST; and whether the Great Cyrus fell in battle near the
snowy Caucasus, or died in peace in his palace at Persepolis. The
noble historic record of Moses was contrasted with the confused
and incredible fictions which disfigure all other ancient annals;
and a just eulogium was passed upon its clearness and consistency.
Mr. WINES'S brief but clear analysis of the political and social
institutions of the various ancient Asiatic dynasties, as also
of Egypt, Sparta, Athens, and Rome, fully established his main
position in reference to them, that they knew nothing about the
true principles of civil liberty; but were, at all times, governed
either by arbitrary _men_ or arbitrary _laws_. A sober, rational,
well-poised, and well-guarded national freedom was nowhere to be met
with in the ancient world, except in Palestine, under the occupancy
of the Hebrews; and all antiquity did not afford a single example
of a state, where the PEOPLE exercised any just influence in public
affairs, till we come to the Jewish republic. The far-famed Spartan
Institutes were discussed with merited severity. Their barbarous
and even brutal characteristics were drawn in strong relief, but
without a single darker shade than truth required. It was admitted
that the Spartans were the bravest, the most warlike, the best
skilled in the art military, the most politic, the firmest in
their maxims, and the most constant in their designs, of all the
people of Greece; but in making them so, Lycurgus had stripped
them of almost every quality of men, and caused them to put on the
fierceness of savage beasts. The war-laws of ancient times were
sketched in vivid but truthful colors. One cannot but regard with
horror the spirit of barbarity and cruelty that reigned in almost
every ancient nation. Death or slavery was the inevitable portion
of the vanquished. Cities reduced to ashes; sovereigns massacred
in cold blood, and cast out a prey to dogs and vultures; children
crushed to death at the breast; queens dragged unworthily in chains,
and outrage and humiliation added to the rigors of captivity; these
were but the common consequences of victory. And to crown all, the
horrible practice of poisoning the arrows to be used in battle
was almost universal. The general military regulations of Moses
were examined and contrasted with those of the other nations; and,
though undeniably severe when compared with the war-laws of our
day yet most essential modifications, tending to the progress of
refinement and humanity, were introduced into his military code. The
severities exercised toward the Canaanites formed no part of the
general war-system, having been employed by special warrant and for
a specific purpose--the punishment and prevention of idolatry and
unnatural lusts.
The institution of slavery was next discussed at considerable
length; and an interesting and instructive contrast was drawn
between the condition of bond-service as it existed among the
Hebrews and in the other nations. The relation of slavery is so
ancient that its origin is lost amid the shadows and uncertainties
of early legendary traditions. It is, however, a most curious fact,
that probably more than one half of the human family have at all
times been in bondage to the other, and have been looked upon as
the rightful properly of their masters. Gibbon estimates the slave
population of the Roman Empire at sixty millions, fully a moiety of
the whole; and the proportion of the slaves to the free citizens
in Greece almost exceeds belief, being, according to the accurate
Mitford, more than four to one. In reference to Eastern nations,
we are without these exact statistics; but we have every reason
to believe that the slave population was immense. In all these
nations the slaves were reduced to the lowest possible depression;
and were, in every sense, at the absolute disposal of capricious,
greedy, imperious, and merciless owners. They might be tortured,
maimed, or put to death, without let or hindrance from the civil
power. Mr. WINES gave a variety of deeply interesting details in
illustration of these positions. Moses did not abolish slavery; he
could not do it, without a miracle wrought upon men's minds. He
was too wise to make the attempt, when failure would have been the
certain consequence. But he so modified and softened the relation;
he so fenced it about with checks, and restrictions, and guaranties;
that it was disarmed of most of the evils flowing from it in other
countries. Servitude, under the institutes of Moses, at least so
far as Hebrew servants were concerned, resembled the system of
_apprenticeship_ in vogue in this country, where a child is bound
out for a certain number of years for a stipulated compensation,
to be paid to the parent at the end of that period. In no nation,
either ancient or modern, has slavery existed under so mild a form,
and guarding the rights and persons of the slaves with such jealous
care, as among the ancient Hebrews. These topics, and some to which
we have not had space to allude, were discussed in the opening
lecture. In his second, the learned Professor drew a portrait of
the illustrious Hebrew sage and law-giver, developed the general
policy of his laws, and traced the obligations of other nations,
in their legislation and philosophy, to his institutes. Moses was
described as possessing, in an eminent degree, all those endowments,
natural and acquired, which form the character of a consummate chief
magistrate of a nation; an intellect of the highest order; a perfect
mastery over all the civil wisdom of the age; a judgment cautious,
penetrating, and far-reaching in its combinations; great promptness
and energy in action; patriotism that neither ingratitude nor
rebellion could extinguish, or even cool; a persuasive eloquence; a
hearty love of truth; an incorruptible virtue; and a freedom from
selfish ambition, and a greatness of soul, in which none of the
most admired heroes of ancient or modern times has ever surpassed
him. These positions were proved and illustrated at large; and the
lecturer concluded his sketch with a beautiful parallel between the
military and civic character of MOSES and WASHINGTON; both were men
whom their compatriots placed in the highest position, and both
managed their authority so as to produce the 'greatest good of the
greatest number.'
In entering upon his account of the political system of Moses, Mr.
WINES insisted, with great earnestness, that all the essential
principles of civil liberty and constitutional government were as
thoroughly embodied in his constitution, as they are in ours; and
in fact, that that great charter of human freedom, the DECLARATION
OF AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE, which, like the writing on the wall of
Belshazzar's palace, has troubled the thoughts of many a tyrant,
and caused his knees to smite one against the other, was but an
echo from the deep thunders of Mount Sinai. His great maxims of
policy were remarkably sound and judicious. The entire and absolute
political equality of the whole body of citizens; the discouragement
of a spirit of war and military conquest; the appointment of
agriculture as the chief employment of the nation; the universal
education of the people, especially in the knowledge of the history,
constitution, and laws of their own country; a firm union of hearts
and sentiments; and the indispensable necessity of a well-contrived
and well-guarded system of checks and balances between the several
departments of the government; these were the organic principles
on which he founded his civil polity. The lecturer laid down the
proposition broadly and without qualification, that there never
was a nation, ancient or modern, in which the people stood upon
so perfect a level in regard to political rights and influence as
the Jews under the Constitution of Moses. Property in the soil is
the natural foundation of power, and consequently of authority.
Hence, the natural foundation of every government is laid in the
distribution of its territory. If the prince own the lands, as was
the case anciently in Egypt, and is now in many Eastern governments,
such prince will be absolute; for the people, holding of him, and
at his pleasure, will be in the condition of slaves rather than of
free men. If the land be shared among a few men, the rest holding
as vassals under them, as in the feudal system, the real power and
authority of government will be in the hands of an aristocracy, or
nobility, whatever power may be lodged in one or more persons, for
the sake of greater unity in counsel and action. But if the lands be
equally divided among all the members of a society, the true power
of such government will reside in all the members of the society,
and the society itself will constitute a real democracy, whatever
form of union may be adopted for the better direction of the whole
as a political body. Now this last is an exact description of the
provision of the Hebrew constitution in reference to property in the
soil. Moses legislated for a people without land, and who had their
territories to gain at the point of the sword. He was not therefore
trammelled by any prescriptive rights, or long-established laws of
inheritance. He was free to adopt any principle he might deem most
expedient. The principle actually chosen by him was that of the
equal division of all the conquered territories among the whole
six hundred thousand citizens; and to render this equality solid
and permanent, the tenure was made inalienable, and the estates
thus originally settled in each family, were to descend, by an
indefeasible entail, in perpetual succession, to all the heirs-male
of the original proprietors. Such was the oldest of Agrarian laws.
The wisdom of this provision was most refined and admirable. It made
extreme poverty and overgrown riches alike impossible, and thus
annihilated one of the greatest sources and engines of ambition. It
gave every member of the body politic an interest in the soil, and
consequently in the maintenance of public order and the supremacy
of law over mob violence. It elevated labor to its just dignity,
by making the virtues of industry and frugality necessary elements
in every man's character. It cut off the sources of luxury, that
corruptor and bane of states, by denying the means of it, and took
away the strongest incitement to it in the example of others. It
served to keep up that original equality of the citizens, which was
fundamental to the legislation of Moses, and altogether conformable
to its strong democratic spirit and tendency. It rendered it
impossible for any Israelite to be born to absolute poverty, for it
gave to each his hereditary modicum of land; a garden, an orchard,
or an olive-grove. In preventing poverty, it cut off the most
prolific source of emigration, and thus preserved unimpaired the
strength and vigor of the state. It tended strongly to perfect the
science of agriculture. And, finally, it served to bind every Hebrew
to his native soil by almost indissoluble ties, and gave to the
sentiment of patriotism an almost passionate fervor and intensity.
The entire political equality of the citizens was proved by various
other arguments, and illustrated with great copiousness of detail.
The system of checks and balances between the several powers of
government, provided by the constitution of Moses, evinced the
deepest political wisdom, and a most patriotic regard to the public
liberties. History is full of proofs that restless and ambitious
spirits are the growth of all times and nations. Now there are two
principal methods of preventing the evils of ambition; either to
take away the common occasions of ambitious views, or to make the
execution of them difficult and hazardous. The Hebrew constitution
made both these provisions in a manner equal, if not superior,
to any known constitution of government in the world. Never did
legislator labor with such eagle-eyed jealousy as Moses, to preserve
the people from the dangers of ill-balanced power, or guard the
public liberty with so many and so admirably-contrived defences
against the projects of factions and restless ambition. We regret
that we cannot follow the learned lecturer through his earnest and
unanswerable argument in support of these positions. All who heard
it will yield a full assent to the remark with which he concluded
it, that the provisions of the Hebrew government to prevent faction
and ambition incomparably surpass all the constitutions of the
famed Spartan law-giver for the same purpose, so celebrated in
ancient story; nor would they have missed their praise, had they
been published by a Lycurgus, a Solon, a Numa, or indeed by any
body but Moses. The great principles of the Jewish law early became
known to the contemporaneous nations, and were powerfully felt
in modifying their political institutions, their philosophical
opinions, and their moral practices. This influence was traced in
the clearest manner by Professor WINES, in respect both to ancient
and modern nations. He drew his proofs from the chronicles of
the kings of Media and Persia; from the history of the Egyptian
Ptolemies; from the writings of Hermippas, Theophrastus, Clearchus,
Longinus, and even Aristotle, as well as those of Josephus and
Philo; from the public records of France and Great Britain; and
from the whole structure of our own government, and the history of
our jurisprudence. He maintained with great force, that it is to
the laws of Moses, and not the politics of Greece and Rome, that
we moderns are indebted for the great and precious principles of
civil freedom. He referred to the fact as not a little remarkable,
that when the presidents and professors of our colleges are most
of them ministers of religion, a contrary impression is permitted
to remain upon the minds of the young men, who are there receiving
their education to be American citizens. He administered a rebuke
to those gentlemen, because they do not give the writings of Moses
a more prominent place in their systems of instruction, and because
they do not more distinctly inform their pupils that the true
elements of republican liberty are to be sought in his institutions;
but permit the Greek and Roman authors to monopolize their
admiration and their gratitude. The very nations whose achievements
in arts and arms these writers so eloquently commemorate, were not
a little indebted to the genius of the Hebrew legislator for those
principles and qualities in their institutions which awaken our
youthful enthusiasm.
In his third lecture, Mr. WINES showed that to suppress and supplant
idolatry was the grand design, and constituted, as it were, the very
soul, of the Mosaic Institutes. He entered into an elaborate and
erudite examination of the qualities and tendencies of polytheism,
and of the nature, design, and limit of the theocracy. He showed
that the theocratic feature of the government was not an arrangement
of the commonwealth, fundamentally different from the monarchical,
aristocratical, democratical, and mixed forms of government; but
that, viewed as to its main design, it was nothing more than a name,
or contrivance, employed the more effectually to exclude idolatry.
God took the name of king, as a title that conferred honor on the
Israelites, and the great object of it was to supplant idolatry,
without an infringement of that essential and precious principle
of civil liberty, that mere opinions are not to be cramped and
restrained by the pains and penalties of the civil law. Having
cleared the ground by these preliminary disquisitions, the lecturer
entered upon the analysis of the constitution itself. This part of
the discussion was exceedingly novel, philosophical, and luminous.
Learned doctors in divinity acknowledged themselves instructed
and charmed by his masterly dissection of the _jus publicum_ of
the Hebrews; the texture and frame-work of their government; the
fundamental, organic law of their state. He proved, conclusively,
that the government Moses instituted was a constitutional democracy,
and that there were, properly speaking, neither nobles nor peasants
under it, but a brotherhood of hardy and industrious yeomen, all
politically equal, and having each an important stake in the
maintenance of public tranquillity and order. The analogies between
the Hebrew government and ours, in their substance, forms, and
modes of administration, were shown to be, many of them, most close
and surprising. The radical features of that ancient and venerable
social compact were stated thus: Each of the twelve tribes formed
a separate, and in some respects, independent state, with a local
legislature and supreme court of judicature, having absolute power
within the limit of its reserved rights. Nevertheless, so long as
the Constitution of Moses was preserved unimpaired, there was both a
real and a vigorous general government and national administration.
The nation might, with strict propriety, have been denominated,
'The United States' of Israel. The government consisted of four
departments; the chief magistrate, the senate, the oracle, and
the congregation of Israel. This last was the popular branch, and
consisted of deputies truly representing the nation, and faithfully
embodying and carrying out the decrees of the popular will. The form
of a legal enactment might have run thus: 'Be it enacted by the
Congregation of Israel, the Senate advising, the Judge presiding,
and the Oracle assenting.' There was a supreme national court at
Jerusalem, to which difficult causes were adjourned from the local
tribunals. And, finally, the organization of the tribe of Levi was
such as to impart a vital action to the whole system, at the same
time that it served as a sort of counterpoise to the democracy,
and prevented its excesses. All these positions, and many others
not here enumerated, were sustained with an array of convincing
arguments, drawn from the sacred writings themselves.
The great Hebrew statesman foresaw that the time would come,
when his countrymen, infected and dazzled by the example of the
surrounding nations, would lose their relish for republican
simplicity, and demand the splendors of a throne and a court. But it
was neither his advice nor his wish that they should have a king.
He used every means to prevent it. He reasoned; he dissuaded; he
expostulated; he threatened; he uttered many solemn and fearful
warnings against the dangers and horrors of despotism. If he could
not wholly resist the headlong proclivity of his nation to the
regal form of government, he at least postponed the issue which he
dreaded; he fenced about the royal power with a thousand unwelcome
restrictions; and, by his glowing and withering denunciations
against every form and species of despotism, he showed how
thoroughly his own spirit was impregnated with popular principles;
how deep was his hatred of tyranny and usurpation; and how ardent
and irrepressible his sympathy for the rights, the liberties, and
the happiness of the people. Whoever, then, holds to the divine
legation of Moses, and therefore necessarily believes that a
constitutional and representative democracy is a form of government
stamped with the seal of the divine approval, while the monarchy
was but granted in anger to the mad clamors of the people, will
hence derive a new and forcible argument to cherish and defend the
precious charter of our own liberties, since its type and model came
originally from the depths of the divine wisdom and goodness. We
are glad to learn that these very able lectures of Professor WINES
are to be re-modelled, extended to eight, and repeated the ensuing
season. A syllabus of them lies before us, which we shall have
pleasure in presenting, when the time for their delivery shall have
arrived.
THE SPANISH STUDENT. A Play in three Acts. By HENRY WADSWORTH
LONGFELLOW. In one volume, pp. 174. Cambridge: JOHN OWEN.
New-York: WILEY AND PUTNAM.
WITH what regularly-progressive steps HENRY W. LONGFELLOW has
trod the path of fame! We can scarcely call to mind an American
writer who has exhibited the industry of patient acquisition,
the increasing refinement of taste, the expansion of fancy, and
the enhanced delicacy of execution, which have distinguished the
literary career of the author of the volume before us. Nor in
depth of thought, and power of expression, have Mr. LONGFELLOW'S
writings fallen behind those of any of his contemporaries; while
in that winning sympathy with humanity, which finds a response in
every bosom, it would be difficult to name his superior. It is not
however for this Magazine--which has been the source through which
the best and most voluminous portions of Mr. LONGFELLOW'S poetical
writings have been given to the public--to praise that which our
readers know is its own best commendation. Nor can we, from the
scores of pencilled and dog's-eared pages of the beautiful volume
under notice, select a tithe of the passages which we indicated as
we read, rather with the _hope_ than the _expectation_ of being
able to find space for them in our crowded pages. For the beautiful
story, we shall, in justice to the publishers and the author, refer
our readers to the volume which contains it and its accessories,
unmutilated; yet in the mean time we cannot resist an extract or
two, as a sample of the execution of the verse. It is enough to
'make lovers of us all,' to read the annexed dialogue between the
enamoured PRECIOSA and VICTORIAN:
PREC. Dost thou remember when first we met?
VIC. It was at Cordova,
In the Cathedral garden. Thou wast sitting
Under the orange-trees, beside a fountain.
PREC. 'Twas Easter-Sunday. The full-blossomed trees
Filled all the air with fragrance and with joy.
The priests were singing, and the organ sounded,
And then anon the great Cathedral bell.
It was the elevation of the Host.
We both of us fell down upon our knees,
Under the orange boughs, and prayed together.
I never had been happy, till that moment.