« ElőzőTovább »
an aristocratic party. The wars which Richelieu waged against them were directed against a political, not a religious party. It was only in extreme cases, like those of Holland and Scotland, that the popular feeling was enlisted against the menarch ; and even in these cases, the leaders belonged to the aristocratic party. Philip secured the co-operation of the people in protecting the throne against the nobles, and saved the Netherlands. In addition to motives of policy, he was also governed by those of religion. Watson says, “it is impossible to suppose that he was insincere in his zeal for religion. But as his religion was of the most corrupt kind, it served to increase the natural depravity of his disposition.” In an impassioned appeal to the Spanish people, Balmus calls upon them to cherish the memory of Philip's glory.
“We have nothing left,” says he, “but great recollections; let us at least avoid despising them. These recollections are, in a nation, like the titles of ancient nobility in a fallen family; they raise the mind; they fortify the soul in adversity; and, nourishing hope in the bottom of the heart, they seem to prepare what is to come. On the policy of King Philip depended not only the tranquility, but perhaps even the existence of the Spanish monarchy. He is now accused of having been a tyrant; if he had pursued another course, he would have been taxed with incapacity and weakness.”
Ranke, who has no prejudices of either religion or politics, to induce him to defend the character of Philip, says of him :
“Obedience and the Catholic faith at home—the Catholic faith and subjection in all other countries—this was what he had at heart; this was the aim of all his labours. He was devoted with monkish attachment to the outward observances of the Catholic worship. How diligently, with what care and expense, did he gather the sacred relics from all countries that had become Protestant, that such precious relics might not be lost to Catholicism and Christendom This was surely not from indwelling religion ; yet a sort of indwelling religion, capable of swaying the moral character, had grown up in him, out of the conviction that he was born to uphold the external service of the church ; that he was the pillar of the church; that such was his commission from God. By this means he brought it to pass, that the majority of Spaniards, full of the like feelings, did, as an Italian says, not merely love, not merely reverence, but absolutely adore him, and deem his commands so sacred, that they could not be violated without offence to God.”
It is principally for the sake of this last observation that we have ventured on the hazardous ground of the history of Philip the Second, in illustration of our subject. But the more paradoxical it may appear, the more forcibly does it teach us the importance of seeing all sides of a question, before we venture to draw a conclusion. In Northern Europe, Philip is regarded as the type of a tyrant. The illustrious Niebuhr has not scrupled to name him with Sylla and Antiochus, in illustration of a curious fact that great tyrants frequently fall victims to loathsome diseases. And yet this tyrant, this monster of inhumanity, acquires so great an ascendancy over the Spanish mind, that he is not merely loved, not merely reverenced, but absolutely adored.
Arbitrary princes have not unfrequently enjoyed the enthusiastic devotion of their subjects. Admiration for her character bound the English to the despotic Elizabeth. The French were content to bear any amount of oppression from the hands of Napoleon. But when this disposition is exhibited, the monarch has enjoyed the advantage of success. This was not the case with Philip the Second. His reign was disastrous. His empire was dismembered, and Spain ceased to enjoy the monopoly of the valuable trade to the East Indies. If, under all these untoward circumstances, Philip could retain, not the affection but even the adoration of his Spanish subjects, there must have been something in his character which has been overlooked by historians. Successful genius commands admiration, but it is something more amiable which inspires love.
The secret of the Spaniard's attachment to Philip consisted in the fact, that he sympathized with the Spanish sentiment. His father had been too much of a Fleming, had been known to them rather as a foreign ruler than as a native prince. This is a sentiment which is apt to operate in favour of a young person; in Philip, it sustained him for nearly half a century. No people have exhibited more nationality than the Spaniards. It defeated miserably the schemes of Napoleon, and yet, with a strange perversity, the very conduct which we extol in our ancestors of the South, during the war of the revolution. The indomitable spirit of the individuals which caused every man to arm and fight on his own account, even when the
presence of a superior military force seemed to extinguish all hope—this spirit which in Spain led to the guerilla warfare, is cited as an argument to prove the fallen state of the kingdom, and the degeneracy of her citizens. It is doubtful whether such a spirit could be exhibited in a country teeming with an industrial population. Excepting in La Vendee, it was unknown in France. It was unknown in Germany. Spain and Russia alone gave examples of it. In those countries alone the spirit of individuals contributed to defeat an enemy whom no regular force could resist. It is a common law of humanity, that they who are actually in the excitement of rapid progress, look with feelings of contempt upon those who are comparatively stationary. And it cannot be denied that there is something exhilarating and intoxicating in the gigantic strides which have been made by the intellect in the progressing countries of the earth. An Englishman or a Frenchman surveys the empire of mind as his own. He feels himself a participator in the triumph of the genius of his country. His mind is powerfully excited by the wonderful progress of industrial art, and however humble his position, he fancies himself a sharer of the boundless wealth which that industry is accumulating. But it may be wise to glance occasionally at other countries, apparently less favoured by genius, and inquire whether the cause of huInanity may not even in them assume a more cheerful aspect. The basis of the structure on which is raised the magic wealth of England, is shrouded by the rags of millions of English paupers—and the greatest boon demanded by those who have not yet sunk to that degree of misery, is employment. Inventive genius furnishes the means of doubling the rich man's treasure, but it drives thousands out of employment. The principles of civil and political liberty are perfectly developed, but to the mass, the greatest liberty is still the right to labour. With each succeeding year, the work of accumulation goes on. Wealth rewards enterprise, and luxury in every conceivable form of delicacy and refinement, gives a zest to its enjoyment. But how stand they whose daily toil produce these magic results 1 What portion of this wonderful prosperity comes to cheer the brave spirits whose untiring industry has earned it ! All the boon they claim is the right to labor. The gloomy portals of the alms-house still open portentously before them, and its melancholy comforts are still the only resources to which they can look, when stricken with years or exhausted with toil. We confess we take pleasure in turning from a picture in which such strong contrasts appear, to one on which the eye may rest without being dazzled ; where natural poverty may be endured by the consoling substitution for general ease ; where a few hours of labour may fully supply the wants of the day; where Christian charity dispenses with the necessity of legalized pauperism. These are questions of even more importance than those which are agitated by the political economist. The cause of humanity may have to adjust a settlement with that of national wealth, and it is questionable whether those countries which have made greater progress in the latter may not find themselves deeply in arrears to the former. And when the day of general reckoning shall come, they will, perhaps, be found least deficient, which have not sacrificed every thing to the cause of progress, but have occasionally allowed themselves time to breathe, to rest, and to enjoy their happiness. F. A. P. Charleston, S. C.
ART. III.-CARTwRIGHT ON NEGROEs.
1. Report on the Diseases and Physical Peculiarities of the Negro race. By SAMUEL A. CARTwRIGHT, M.D., Chairman of the Committee appointed by the Medical Association of Louisiana to report on the above subject. New-Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal, for May, 1851.
2. The Diseases and Physical Peculiarities of the Negro Race. By SAMUEL A. CARTwRIGHT, M.D. New-Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal, for July, 1851, and Fenner's Southern Medical Reports, Vol. II., p. 421.
3. The Diseases and Physical Peculiarities of the Negro Race. By SAMUEL A. CARTwRIGHT, M.D. New-Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal, for November, 1851.
The diversities which mark the various races of man, as manifested alike in their physical and intellectual nature, have long attracted the attention of philosophers, and been the subject upon which many of the ablest pens have been employed, in elucidating and enforcing the opposing views which have divided them. On the one hand, it is contended that these diversities are innate and contemporaneous with his creation ; on the other, it is as strenuously urged that all men are the descendants of one pair, and that the differences observed between the races are but the result of the various circumstances in which they have been placed. We are somewhat in doubt under which of these banners we shall range the author before us, for we find him at different times battling under both, though in the true spirit of knight-errantry he is generally found combating on the side of weakness. He is a firm believer in the descent of all men from one pair, yet he somewhat inconsistently regards the differences observed between the Negro and Caucasian as specific, physiological distinctions, rendering even the medical practice employed with the one altogether inapplicable to the other. If, however, his mind oscillates between the opposite attractions of this vexed question, it is well fixed upon others of much interest and importance, his very singular views on which we propose now to pass in review, for the en
NEW SERIES, VOL. VI.-No. 11. 4