Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-06-04

reckiessness ana rDpactty OF n prOleta-
Tres the lowerpopulaoe) the monopoly
Of lands and Offices, The eviction Of the
yeomanry, the spoils Of authority, the
unprineipled contentious OF the Forum,
the riot and anarchy Of the city, the
plumber Of the Provinces, the lust Of com
mund, the iawlessness Of military rule;
and shows in these distsmpers and their
consequences, the influences which pro-
posed and invited the rule Of q despot
His accurate delineatiOn Of Roman So
eiety in its various leprosies, OF Roman
rule in all its enormities, enables us 10
recognize the contemporaneous cOndi-
tons which were breeding the spirits OF
tyranny, ike maggots in a putreseeHt
carcass"
Remarking upon the fact that, until
recently, there has been "no complete
representation or Interpretation Of the
movements Of that tremendousa and over
whelming eonvulsion'' which changed
the Roman Republic into an Empire, the
Reviewer asks " Did destiny, with that
marvellous provision, which often un-
derlies the current Of Roman affairs
a figure Of speech and use Of the word
Hprevision" as underlying aeurrent, as 3
/ pinnacle might underlie the currents OF
the sea, to which we ~strenuously object,
-"reserve the treatment OF this pOrten-
tious historical lesson for a season whea
the prospect Of a like agony might gre
unexpected insight into the transactions
Of these i~nperfecHy recorded conUtasiORs,
aud might nlsminate the motives and
actions Of the past by presenting a Ike
c~onfiagratiou Of the liberties Of man
kind %
The Reviewer hasn0t read and re-read
what be wrote, 70 see if the words were
aptly chosen to express his meaning, or
had deceived him by the sonorous and
/ stately march Of the sentences they COM
pose. It is idle to speak Of illuminating
| the nlotfUes OF the men of the days Of
/ CESAR. Even underOur modern system
which allows no domestic privacy Of the
the soul any more than Of the home or
/ affections or business affairs OF public
men, we cannot fathom their motives ;
and the judgments of that wretched tri-
bunaL public opinion, we know, are al
most always erroneous. Who knows
with certainty the motives Of any Of the
miscresnts who are preeipitating the fall
and ruin of the Republic?
Neither was the Roman Revolution
/ any more a confagration Of the liberties
| OF mankind. Mankind had never had
any liberties, since the earlier days Of
the rsce. Civilization had been the
growth of despotisms everywhere. The
known world was the slave Of Imperial
Rome, and her people fitted themselves
to be slaves, by becoming fond Of Tyranny
exercised by themselves, or in their
name. Only the Romans were free.
But it is undoubtedly q true and wise
thought, that tie experiences OF the
scenes that in France preceded the Em-
pire, and the subsequent oscillations,
through the different phases of govern
ment, until the restoration Of the EN-
pire under the same dynasty, IS if
! France too had its CEsABs; and the
actual inception, not the aeFe arospSct
Of the ike e~onvulsi0ns Of the transition
period in the United States, have given
the philosophical thinkers Of the present
sge the means, and perhaps an intuitive
mower, Of comprehending the causes that
established the throne Of the Roman
CEsARs.
Yet the three cases are ~siuguiariy n
Ike and that of Rome much more re-
sembIes the slow and steady march Of
revolution in England. For Rome was
an old Nation, long used to the customs
and manners Of liberty, its freemen the
masters Of vast numbers Of slaves OF
races possessing equal intellectual RigOar
and capacity with themselves II people
proud Of their ancestral glories and old
iIlustrious names, with intense pride Of
race, aa u~nequaIed sentiment Of Ma
tional unity, and Q naughty conviction
of superiority that caused Them % re-
gard all other races as b~arbarians and
their institutions had all the sOlidity and
stability thar sge and long habit and the
popular prejudices could give. France,
a monarchy for centuries, rad been for
only a few years, not a republic, but an
lily organized and ~ductuating anarchy,
under successive paper Constitutions,
that committed al the powers OF the
State to the hands OF popular tyrants in
no sense elected, but only suffered by
the people. The transition there was
only from the insanity Of individual
license and anarchy, 70 a Military Des-
potism made necessary by its own ex-
cesses, and which was grateful to the
people because all under it were equal.
" The career Of the American Repub-
lie says the ReUjcDer Of de TOeQUeuiHe,
"has, thus far, consisted Of two steps.
It first became, in practice, a pure de-
mocraey, and then an Oligarchy Of
Demagogues, the worst Of all possible
forms Of misgoverument.n There was
not aman, he truly says, in the Conven-
ton Of 1857, who did not assume the
tyranny Of the majority IS a first prin-
ciple,-as the thing absolutely essential
to be guarded against. ALEXANDER
HAMILTON, perhaps its ablest member,
expressed the whole in a single phrase /:
" Give all power to the many, and they
will Cypress the few Give all power to
the few, and they will Cypress the
many.u To this, JOHN ADAMS and
JAMES MADISON alike agreed. zone
great object Of Government" said
MADISON, the Father Of the Constitu-
tion,' 4" is a safeguard against the oppres-
sions Of the majority" In submitting
the Virginia plan for a Constitution, at
the very opening Of the Convention,
Governor RANDOLPH said that the ''ob-
jet was to provide a cure for the evils
under which the United States laboured,
that in tracing these evils to their origin,
every man had found it ia the turbulence
and follies Of democracy 8" and the
great object Of the trainers Of the Consti-
tuition was, according to MADISON, to set
such bounds and limits to the power Of
the majority, s. to prevent or control the
efforts Of its well known, inherent and
incuFable disposition to tyrannizs over
and Cypress the minority.
The founders Of the Republic did not.
the reviewer well says, Intend a pure
Democracy, in which the viii Of the
majority is the rule Of government ''but
a republic in which tina viii Is limited
and hedged around with various checks
and balances designed to make the Con-
stitution, in practice, as well as in the
DRY, the rule Of the government. But,
as viewed by its destroyers, it was s
pure Democracy, and such it became in
its practical operation" The Constitu-
ton and law ceased, after q few years, 10
be supreme, " and the people. or the ma
jority acting in the name Of the people,
became supreme or sovereign"
"Hence," in the strong yet true words
Of the reviewer, " arose an oHgarchy oil
demagogues, who appear utterly iDcapa-
bia Of seeing tha diffaranca hat,-..- "a L