characters, only too fictitious in their graver dress, but simply to set
forth the familiar operations of Venetian policy. For the justification
of his likeness, after allowing for the defects of execution, he refers
to the well-known work of M. Daru.

A history of the progress of political liberty, written purely in the
interests of humanity, is still a desideratum in literature. In nations
which have made a false commencement, it would be found that the
citizen, or rather the subject, has extorted immunity after immunity, as
his growing intelligence and importance have both instructed and
required him to defend those particular rights which were necessary to
his well-being. A certain accumulation of these immunities constitutes,
with a solitary and recent exception in Switzerland, the essence of
European liberty, even at this hour. It is scarcely necessary to tell
the reader, that this freedom, be it more or less, depends on a
principle entirely different from our own. Here the immunities do not
proceed from, but they are granted to, the government, being, in other
words, concessions of natural rights made by the people to the state,
for the benefits of social protection. So long as this vital difference
exists between ourselves and other nations, it will be vain to think of
finding analogies in their institutions. It is true that, in an age like
this, public opinion is itself a charter, and that the most despotic
government which exists within the pale of Christendom, must, in some
degree, respect its influence. The mildest and justest governments in
Europe are, at this moment, theoretically despotisms. The characters of
both prince and people enter largely into the consideration of so
extraordinary results; and it should never be forgotten that, though the
character of the latter be sufficiently secure, that of the former is
liable to change. But, admitting every benefit which possibly can flow
from a just administration, with wise and humane princes, a government