CHAP. XXX.
The same Subject continued.
Book XII.
Chap. 30.NOTHING but the very excess and fury of despotic power ordained that the father's disgrace should drag after it that of his wife and children. They are wretched enough already without being criminals: besides, the prince ought to leave suppliants or mediators between himself and the accused, to asswage his wrath, or to inform his justice.
It is an excellent custom of the Maldivians[1], that when a lord is disgraced, he goes every day to pay his court to the king till he is taken again into favour: his presence disarms the prince's wrath.
In some despotic governments[2] they have a notion that it is trespassing against the respect due to their prince, to speak to him in favour of a person in disgrace. These princes seem to use all their endeavours to deprive themselves of the virtue of clemency.
Arcadius and Honorius, in a law[3] which we have already descanted upon[4], positively declare that they will shew no favor to those who shall presume to petition them in behalf of the guilty[5]. This was a very bad law indeed, since it is bad even under a despotic government.
The custom or Persia, which permits every man that pleases, to leave the kingdom, is excellent;
- ↑ See Francis Pirard.
- ↑ As at present in Persia, according to Sir John Chardin; this custom is very ancient. They put Cavades, says Procopius, in the castle of oblivion; there is a law which forbids any one to speak of those who are shut up, or even to mention their name.
- ↑ The fifth law in the cod. ad leg. Jul. Maj.
- ↑ In the 8th chapter of this book.
- ↑ Frederic copied this law in the constitutions of Naples, book 1.
