When a

registers were kept with the most sacred regard. man died, his property was divided among his sons; not all given to the eldest, though respect for the patriarchal feelings of the day compelled him to give the eldest son, the presumptive head of the family, two parts, where each of the others had one. This arrangement secured to every man an interest in the soil, by assigning him either a field, a vineyard, an olive-yard, or a garden. Thus local attachment, the feeling on which patriotism so much depends, was formed among the Jews. It was a great undertaking thus to change the whole social system, to make those who had been wandering shepherds, going wherever they pleased, content with institutions that restricted them, each to a narrow enclosure; but he knew it could be done, and it was done. These wanderers became afterwards renowned for the deep devotion of their attachment to their own land; witness their lament under the weeping willows of Babylon. Their feeling is expressed in all its strength and beauty by one of their prophets, speaking of their exile: "Weep not for the dead. Oh no, weep not for him; but weep sore for him that goeth away; for he shall never return; he shall never again behold his native country.

In order still further to secure this equality in the condition of the people, Moses provided, that, every fiftieth year, all the lands which had been sold should revert to the original owner or his heirs. This was in fact rendering lands inalienable; since the lands reverted on the year of Jubilee, it was evident that all which the owner could really part with was the produce of the soil for a term of years, longer or shorter according to the time when the next Jubilee was to come. The effect of this arrangement was to render it impossible for any man to be miserably poor; he or his heirs always retained their claim to the land of their fathers. They could raise money upon it if they were in want; but they could neither part with nor lose their right, since the registry, kept by the scribes, would always show to whom the land belonged. It rendered it impossible, also, for any man to become a great proprietor, and thus to gain the influence which a feudal lord possesses over his tenants at will. In that day, when the great were so apt to be usurpers, and the small to be slavish in their feeling, the power of great proprietors of land would have endangered the

public liberties, in a thousand times greater proportion than would be possible now.

He

The objection which would suggest itself to this arrangement is, that the land would soon be so much subdivided as to render the hereditary estate too small to support its proprietor. But this statesman, when he determined that every rood of ground should support its man, was not embarrassed by any popular system of political economy. Moses evidently believed, that, with a favorable social system, the soil would support all who came upon it:-not by its own products perhaps; nor was this necessary, since commerce with foreigners was not prohibited within the bounds of Palestine. evidently calculated also, that the means of subsistence would grow with the population, since enterprise, art, and industry would be developed so as to increase the resources of the country full as fast as they were wanted. So it always will be in every well-governed state,-every state that gives man a fair field, secures him the profits of his labor, and then leaves the race to the swift and the battle to the strong. The little province of Palestine supported its millions, and it seldom became necessary to apply the remedy of famine to keep down. their numbers.

Such were some of the maxims upon which his institutions were founded. We will now look at the frame-work of his government; and it will be enough to show its free character, to point out its general resemblance to our own.

In the first place, it was a union of separate tribes, differing in many respects of position, habits, manners, and feelings; each with its own government to conduct its internal concerns, the municipal arrangements of every tribe being left entirely in its own hands. He did not attempt to bind together these separate states by a confederacy; such a government, even if it would have held them together, would not have been vigorous and decided enough in its action. He therefore drew up a Constitution, which applied not to each tribe as a body, but to the individuals in the tribe. He made it bear on every individual in every tribe; thus giving each one a personal interest in the national concerns, making him as much a member of the nation as he was of his own tribe. There was a strong feeling of ambition, and sometimes of rivalship, in each separate tribe. Judah, the ancient dominion, found the superiority which it assumed, more than once warmly contested;

but, while each Hebrew was strongly concerned to maintain the honor of his tribe, the Constitution of the general government gave him an almost equal interest in the honor of his country.

Situated as the Hebrews were, with marauding tribes upon their borders, it was not possible in all cases to wait for all to unite in a declaration of war, Wherever invasion came, it must be resisted; and thus it happened that sometimes one or two tribes would carry on a war, in which the nation had no concern. But this concession to the separate tribes did not extend so far as to allow them to conduct their own foreign relations. All were bound to unite against the common enemy; and so strong was the national feeling, that, instead of complaining that they were summoned to fight the battles of the nation, the tribes rather felt aggrieved and insulted when they were not called upon to aid the common cause. Indeed this was a neglect by which their harmony was more than once endangered, since, in the hurry of military preparations, the forms of public intercourse were sometimes disregarded.

This political organization was not without its disturbing forces. The tribes occasionally magnified their reserved rights, and betrayed a strong disposition to nullify the laws of the land. But it was understood, that in such cases the tribe did it at its peril, and the history of an act of nullification on the part of Benjamin showed, that there needed no force-bill there to sustain the authority of the national law. That tribe was prophetically described as a ravening wolf, -a figure very descriptive of its warlike and savage fierceness. A Levite, in travelling peaceably through, had one member of his family abused in such a manner as to cause her death. He made his appeal for retribution to all the other tribes. They assembled at once in convention at Mizpeh, heard the appeal to their justice, and sent a summons to the tribe of Benjamin to deliver up the delinquents according to the law. That tribe refused, and determined rather to dissolve the union, than to submit to the dictation of the majority. The rest of the tribes declared them in a state of rebellion, and proceeded against them accordingly. So stubborn and unbending was the spirit of the nullifying tribe, that the national army was twice defeated; but, in the third battle, Benjamin was routed with the loss of twenty-five thousand men. And there was no danger of the offence being repeated; for the offending city

was levelled with the ground, the country was made a wilderness, and six hundred men, posted on the inaccessible rock of Rimmon, were all that remained of the contumacious tribe.

With respect to the various departments of the national government, they were arranged in such a manner as to secure the liberty and prosperity of the people, their republican character depending upon their spirit, rather than on any given forms. There was no need of legislative action; since a code had been prepared, suited to all public and private relations then existing, and all which would be likely ever to arise. The social and domestic part of this law is, as has been suggested, extremely well suited to infant agricultural colonies, like those of our fathers, so far as they could apply. There were cases in which directions were given respecting divorce, vengeance for blood, and some other things, which would not answer for modern times; but it will be observed, that these practices are not enjoined by his law. They were practices then existing and common, which he introduced into his law only to limit and discourage them, with a view to their final abolition. So there were local regulations with respect to clothing and provisions, so clearly limited to their climate and people, that no other would think of adopting that portion of the law. Neither would the sanguinary penalties of his law answer for modern and more gentle times; death was his common punishment, because in all Israel there was but one prison, and that was-the grave.

But while there was no need of a Congress for the purpose of making laws, conventions were often required and often assembled for other public purposes; and these were attended by the notables, or renowned men of the congregation,more properly those who were used to attend. It does not appear that delegates were elected by the people; but there were those who by prescription represented the people, and to whom, without any formal act, they looked in all matters of public concern. They were more like an assembly of 'notables,' than like the members of our public bodies; but the people evidently considered them as representing their interests, and their acts in turn were binding upon the people.

The judicial department was organized in such a manner as to insure the administration of justice without delay. The Hebrew statesman considered this trust so important, that he

intended to retain it in his own hands. But he soon found, that no human strength was equal to the labor; he therefore appointed others, and, at last, there were judges in almost every city. Not, however, those who bear that name in the Old Testament. Most of the Judges, as they are unappropriately called, were persons of no civil authority; some were mere partisan officers; there was but one, Samuel, who in any respect resembled a President of our Union.

With respect to the Executive department, it was the object of the founder of Israel to do, if possible, without one. Knowing how difficult it was to control power once intrusted to the hands of an individual, he wished to have executive. purposes answered without setting apart a single person for that tempting distinction, trusting that, on emergencies, men would appear, who could discharge the duty required by the occasion, without any other commission than their own qualifications, acknowledged by the public voice. Such were the persons recorded in the book of Judges,-persons wholly without authority, starting up whenever and wherever they were needed, doing whatever was necessary, and then sinking back into the great body of the people, whence they sprang. But he foresaw that this arrangement would not always be satisfactory to the Hebrews; indeed, that it might not always be adequate to public purposes; and that his people, too unenlightened to relish republican simplicity, would be misled by the example of surrounding nations, and would at last demand a king. He therefore made provision for this exigency in case it should arise, and, after solemn warnings of the danger of despotism, proceeded to enact, that, if they insisted upon having a king, he should be a king only in name, and nothing more than a popular magistrate in power. No king was ever to ascend the throne against the will of the people. When Saul, by acclamation, was called to this high station, Samuel prepared a writing, and deposited it in the sanctuary, where reference might afterwards be made to it, in case of royal usurpation. And when Saul was set aside, in consequence of mental derangement, David did not ascend the throne till he was called to it by the popular voice. For some time, he was acknowledged only as king of Judah, nor did he think of extending his authority over the other tribes, till their consent had been formally given; and even after the revolt of Absalom was suppressed, a new election on the part of the nation was