"to be mannerly at the public table, and give the beſt from himſelf to decency and the common intereſt. But that ſuch orders may be eſtabliſhed, as may, nay muſt, give the upper hand in all caſes to common right and intereſt, notwithſtanding the nearneſs that ſticks to every man in private, and this in a way of equal certainty and facility, is known even to girls; being no other than thoſe which are of common practice with them in diverſe cafes. For example: Two of them have a cake, yet undivided, which was given between them. That each of them, therefore, might have that which is due, "Divide," ſays one, "and I will chooſe; or let me divide, and you ſhall chooſe." If this be but once agreed upon, it is enough; for the one dividing unequally, loſes, in regard that the other takes the better half; wherefore ſhe divides equally, and ſo both have right. And thus, what great philoſophers are diſputing upon in vain, is brought to light by two harmleſs girls; even the whole myſtery of a commonwealth, which lies only in dividing and chooſing."
Now, if all authority is to be collected into one central aſſembly, it will have the whole power of diviſion and choice; and we may eaſily conjecture what diviſion and choice it will be. It will ſoon have poſſeſſion of all the cakes, loaves, and fiſhes.
Harrington proceeds: "Nor has God, if his works in nature be underſtood, left ſo much to mankind to diſpute upon, as who ſhall divide and who chooſe, but diſtributed them for ever into two orders; whereof the one has the natural right of dividing, and the other of choofſing. For example: A commonwealth is but a civil ſociety of men: let us take any number of men,
