Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Literary
October 17, 1789
Gazette Of The United States
New York, New York County, New York
What is this article about?
An essay excerpt critiques the notion that common people are less luxurious than kings or nobles, arguing that human desires for bread, sports, and ease inevitably escalate, demanding as much or more than granted to elites. It urges philosophers and legislators to base institutions on factual human nature, not flattering compliments.
Clipping
OCR Quality
98%
Excellent
Full Text
The RIGHT CONSTITUTION of a COMMONWEALTH.
WEALTH EXAMINED,
(IN CONTINUATION.)
Our author is no where so weak as in this reason, or under this head. He attempts to prove his point by reason and examples, but is equally unfortunate in both. First, by reason. The "people," says he, "must be less luxurious than kings, or great ones, because they are bounded within a more lowly pitch of desire and imagination: Give them but panem et circenses, bread, sport and ease, and they are abundantly satisfied." It is to be feared that this is too good a character for any people living, or that have lived. The disposition to luxury is the same, tho the habit is not, both in plebeians, patricians and kings. When we say their desires are bounded, we admit the desires to exist. Imagination is as quick in one as in the other. It is demanding a great deal to demand "bread, and sports, and ease." No one can tell how far these terms may extend. If by bread is meant a subsistence, a maintenance in food and clothing, it will mount up very high; if by sports be meant cock-fighting, horse racing, theatrical representations, and all the species of cards, dice, and gambling, no mortal philosopher can fathom the depth of this article; and if with "bread" and "sport" they are to have "ease" too, and by ease be meant idleness, an exemption from care and labor, all three together will amount to as much as ever was demanded for nobles or kings, and more than ought ever to be granted to either. But let us grant all this for a moment; we should be disappointed; the promised "abundant satisfaction," would not be found. The bread must soon be of the finest wheat; poultry and gibbier must be added to beef and mutton; the entertainments would not be elegant enough after a time; more expense must be added: In short, contentment is not in human nature; there is no passion, appetite, or affection for contentment. To amuse and flatter the people with compliments of qualities that never existed in them, is not the duty or the right of a philosopher or legislator; he must form a true idea and judgment of mankind, and adapt his institutions to facts, not compliments.
WEALTH EXAMINED,
(IN CONTINUATION.)
Our author is no where so weak as in this reason, or under this head. He attempts to prove his point by reason and examples, but is equally unfortunate in both. First, by reason. The "people," says he, "must be less luxurious than kings, or great ones, because they are bounded within a more lowly pitch of desire and imagination: Give them but panem et circenses, bread, sport and ease, and they are abundantly satisfied." It is to be feared that this is too good a character for any people living, or that have lived. The disposition to luxury is the same, tho the habit is not, both in plebeians, patricians and kings. When we say their desires are bounded, we admit the desires to exist. Imagination is as quick in one as in the other. It is demanding a great deal to demand "bread, and sports, and ease." No one can tell how far these terms may extend. If by bread is meant a subsistence, a maintenance in food and clothing, it will mount up very high; if by sports be meant cock-fighting, horse racing, theatrical representations, and all the species of cards, dice, and gambling, no mortal philosopher can fathom the depth of this article; and if with "bread" and "sport" they are to have "ease" too, and by ease be meant idleness, an exemption from care and labor, all three together will amount to as much as ever was demanded for nobles or kings, and more than ought ever to be granted to either. But let us grant all this for a moment; we should be disappointed; the promised "abundant satisfaction," would not be found. The bread must soon be of the finest wheat; poultry and gibbier must be added to beef and mutton; the entertainments would not be elegant enough after a time; more expense must be added: In short, contentment is not in human nature; there is no passion, appetite, or affection for contentment. To amuse and flatter the people with compliments of qualities that never existed in them, is not the duty or the right of a philosopher or legislator; he must form a true idea and judgment of mankind, and adapt his institutions to facts, not compliments.
What sub-type of article is it?
Essay
What themes does it cover?
Political
Moral Virtue
What keywords are associated?
Commonwealth
Luxury
Human Nature
Desires
Political Institutions
Philosopher
Legislator
Literary Details
Title
The Right Constitution Of A Commonwealth. Wealth Examined, (In Continuation.)
Subject
Critique Of Author's Argument On Luxury In People Versus Kings
Form / Style
Argumentative Prose Essay
Key Lines
The "People," Says He, "Must Be Less Luxurious Than Kings, Or Great Ones, Because They Are Bounded Within A More Lowly Pitch Of Desire And Imagination: Give Them But Panem Et Circenses, Bread, Sport And Ease, And They Are Abundantly Satisfied."
In Short, Contentment Is Not In Human Nature; There Is No Passion, Appetite, Or Affection For Contentment.
To Amuse And Flatter The People With Compliments Of Qualities That Never Existed In Them, Is Not The Duty Or The Right Of A Philosopher Or Legislator; He Must Form A True Idea And Judgment Of Mankind, And Adapt His Institutions To Facts, Not Compliments.