the occasion. But in the midst of their jollity, | much reverence paid him as the other? My the prince was determined to gain the applause predecessor was, and my successor will be, of Philoxenus, whose approbation he preferred served with the same ceremony and parade as to that of a thousand flatterers. He desired myself. If my subjects do not injure me, it is It is him, therefore, to divest himself of envy, (for no proof of their good-will towards me. Philoxenus was a poet as well as a critic) and not in their power, if they were inclined to do declare his real sentiments. Philoxenus could it. No one follows me from any friendship not dissemble; and therefore, without making which subsists between us: there can be no any answer to Dionysius, turned to the guards, friendship contracted, where there is so little who always attended, and with a humorous connection or correspondence. All that they air, desired them to carry him back to the stone- say or do is pretence and show: I see nothing around me but disguise and dissimulation.”— quarries. Lib. i. c. 42. Dionysius (though probably piqued) said, the wit of the poet had atoned for his freedom.Plut. Moral. N. B. It was Dionysius the younger, who, after enduring the miseries of royalty, was condemned to be a schoolmaster. No. VI. Montaigne, who has pillaged every ancient classic author, quotes and enlarges upon some of Hiero's sentiments; but gives them the vulgar turn, to prove that kings and beggars, if stripped of their external appendages, are upon a level, which few people now a-day will dispute. The following, however, are put in a striking light. "The honour we receive from those that fear us does not deserve the name; that respect is paid to my royalty, not to me. Do I not see, that the wicked and the good king, he that is hated, and he that is beloved, has the one as No. VII. I shall conclude these extracts with a short one from Lord Bolingbroke's "Letter on Patriotism." Speaking of superior spirits, whether invested with royalty, or placed in other elevated situations, "They either ap "like ministers of divine venpear," says he, geance, and their course through the world is marked by desolation and oppression, by poverty and servitude; or, they are the guardian angels of the country they inhabit; busy to avert even the most distant evil, and to maintain or to procure peace, plenty, and the greatest of human blessings, LIBERTY." P. S. I have availed myself of Peter Coste's French translation, but have never adopted an expression without having first examined the original with the most scrupulous attention. THE SCIENCE OF GOOD HUSBANDRY; OR THE ECONOMICS OF XENOPHON. TRANSLATED BY R. BRADLEY, F. R. S. PROFESSOR OF BOTANY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE. THE SCIENCE OF GOOD HUSBANDRY; OR THE ECONOMICS OF XENOPHON. I. I remember once to bave heard the learned ¡ steward, if in the discharging of his stewardship Socrates reasoning with Critobulus, concerning the management of a house, in the following manner: Soc. "Tell me, Critobulus, whether the ordering of a house is a science, such as that of physic, or the brasiers, and of the masons?" Crit. " My opinion is, that the good management of a house is as great a science as either masonry, or physic, or any other; from whence we may infer there is a distinct business or duty belonging to an economist or housekeeper, as well as to any science whatever: a farmer or a master of a family ought to be a good judge of every particular which relates to the good ordering of his farm or house." he could improve his master's house. But what do we mean by the word house, or the economy of it? Is it only the good distribution of the things that are in the house? or is it the good management and improvement of every thing belonging to a house, and the master of it." Crit." It is my opinion, that a man's estate, whether it lie in or about the house, or remote from it, yet every branch of that estate may be said to belong to the house; nay every thing that a man has, except his enemies, which some men have in great numbers, but these are not to be reckoned among his goods or substance. It would be ridiculous if we were to say that the man who had been the occasion of making us more enemies than we had before, should be rewarded with favour or money; but a man's enemies, or any thing which he possesses to his hurt or prejudice, must not I suppose, be reckoned among his goods: therefore I conclude, that those things only which contribute to the welfare of a man may be reckoned among his riches, or be properly called his goods." Soc. "But may we not find a trusty steward well skilled in this science, who may take the management of the household upon him, and save the master the trouble? for a master mason employs a deputy under him, who will do his work as well as himself; and for the same reason we may expect that a steward well skilled in the management of a house, may be as serviceable to his master as the mason's deputy." Soc. "I am of the same mind, that whatever Crit. "I am of the same opinon, good So- is injurious to a man must not be esteemed a crates." Soc. "Then the man who is well skilled in this science, though he has no property of his own, may gain a comfortable living by directing another man's house. For the man would be worthy of the master's favour, and a good part of his goods; for if a man buy a horse, and for want of skill to manage him, he falls from him and hurts himself, can that horse be reckoned amongst his goods? No, certainly; because those things should be called goods that are beneficial to the master. Neither can those lands be called goods, which by a man's unskilful management put him to more expense than he receives profit by them; nor may those lands be called goods, which do not bring a good farmer such a profit as may give him a good living: so likewise if a man has a flock of sheep, and they come to damage by his unskilful management, he cannot reckon them among his goods." Crit. "So these may only be called goods which are profitable, and those which are burtful be deemed the contrary." them advantageous to him by any means: for how many instances have we, good Critobulus, of ordinary men, as well as of noblemen and kings, who have increased and amplified their fortunes by law, and warring with their enemies." Soc. "You distinguish right, that nothing Soc." Undoubtedly they are so; therefore ought to be esteemed goods to any man which it behoves a master of a house to use his enehe does not receive advantage by; and thates with that discretion that he may make those things which bring him disprofit must be esteemed the contrary. A flute, when it is in the hands of a person who can play well upon it, is an advantage, and may be reckoned among his goods; but the same instrument in the possession of one who does not know the use of it, is no better to him than a stone, unless he sells it, and then the price of it may be accounted among his goods; but if he keeps it, when he has no knowledge of its use, it can not be ranked among them." Crit. I agree with you in this point, that those things only which are profitable may be called goods: the flute, while we keep it unemployed, is no part of our goods, for we have no advantage from it; but if we sell it, it is then profitable to us." Soc. "You say right, if a man has wit enough to sell it well: but when it is sold, and the man has not wisdom enough to use the value of it to his advantage, yet whatever price he gets for it cannot be esteemed to be good." Crit. " By this you seem to intimate that money itself is not good, if it is in the hands of one who does not know how to use it." Soc. "Yes, certainly; for we have already agreed that nothing may be esteemed good but what we can get profit by. If a man bestow the money he gets upon harlots, and by continual conversing with them he impairs his health, and abandons the care of his estate, then his money is no profit to him; but, on the contrary, is an errant poison, which will shortly bring him to destruction: therefore, friend Critobulus, money is good only to those who know how to use it; but to those who know not rightly the value of it, it were better for them to cast it away, to avoid the damage it would do them." Crit." You reason well, good Socrates, of these matters. But what think you of those who have good learning, and many other good properties, whereby they have every opportu nity of improving their estates, and yet never put their minds to it? We have many instances of men with these qualifications, who never regard the advancement of their fortunes; shall we then reckon their learning, or their other properties, among their goods, seeing they make no advantage of them, or ought we to esteem them the contrary ?" Soc. "I imagine you mean bondmen, or such other vile persons." Crit. "No, good Socrates; but the persons I speak of are young gentlemen, who are expert in affairs of war, as well as peace; and yet they abandon their knowledge for trifles; and such as them I esteem in a worse condition than bondmen; for I suppose they do not employ themselves in the sciences they have been bred to, because they have not masters to direct them or set them to work." Soc. "How can that be, friend Critobulus, that they are without directors? they have many masters, which, when they would study their felicity and their advantage, lead them away from their virtuous inclinations." Crit. "These masters then are invisible !" Soc. "Not so invisible, good Critobulus, but that we may easily discover them to be the most mischievous of any that reign upon earth. What think you of sloth, idleness, negligence, |