French philosopher (1689–1755)
Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (18 January 1689 – 10 February 1755), also known as Charles de Montesquieu, was a French political thinker who lived during the Enlightenment and is famous for his articulation of the theory of separation of powers.
From: Wikiquote (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Alternative Names:
Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu
•
Charles-Louis de Secondat
•
Baron de Montesquieu
•
Charles Louis de Secondat de Montesquieu
•
De Montesquieu
•
Charles Louis de Montesquieu
From Wikidata (CC0)
But there is not a single person employed in any way at the court, in Paris, or in the provinces, who is not acquainted with some woman through whose hands pass all the favours and sometimes all the wrongs which he may wish done. These women are all in each other’s secrets, and form a sort of republic, the members of which are always busy aiding and serving each other; it is like a state within a state; and anyone at court, in Paris, or in the provinces who sees the activity of the ministers, the magistrates, and the prelates, if he does not know the women who govern them, is like a man who sees a machine at work, but who is ignorant of the springs that move it.
PREMIUM FEATURE
Advanced Search Filters
Filter search results by source, date, and more with our premium search tools.
In every government there are three sorts of power: the legislative; the executive in respect to things dependent on the law of nations; and the executive in regard to matters that depend on the civil law.
By virtue of the first, the prince or magistrate enacts temporary or perpetual laws, and amends or abrogates those that have been already enacted. By the second, he makes peace or war, sends or receives embassies, establishes the public security, and provides against invasions. By the third, he punishes criminals, or determines the disputes that arise between individuals. The latter we shall call the judiciary power, and the other, simply, the executive power of the state.
When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.
Again, there is no liberty if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control; for the judge would be then the legislator. Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression.
There would be an end of every thing, were the same man, or the same body, whether of the nobles or of the people, to exercise those three powers, that of enacting laws, that of executing the public resolutions, and of trying the causes of individuals.
The executive power ought to be in the hands of a monarch, because this branch of government, having need of dispatch, is better administered by one than by many: on the other hand, whatever depends on the legislative power, is oftentimes better regulated by many than by a single person.
But, if there were no monarch, and the executive power should be committed to a certain number of persons, selected from the legislative body, there would
CHAP. I.: Of the Spirit of a Legislator. I SAY it, and methinks I have undertaken this work with no other view than to prove it; the spirit of a legislator ought to be that of moderation; political, like moral evil, lying always between two extremes. Let us produce an example. The set forms of justice are necessary to liberty; but the number of them might be so great as to be contrary to the end of the very laws that established them; processes would have no end; property would be uncertain; the goods of one of the parties would be adjudged to the other without examining, or they would both be ruined by examining too much. The citizens would lose their liberty and security; the accusers would no longer have any means to convict, nor the accused to justify themselves.
Il est vrai qu'elles ne s'y livrent guère dans leur jeunesse que pour favoriser une passion plus chère; mais, à mesure qu'elles vieillissent, leur passion pour le jeu semble rajeunir, et cette passion remplit tout le vide des autres. Elles veulent ruiner leurs maris et, pour y parvenir, elles ont des moyens pour tous les âges, depuis la plus tendre jeunesse jusques à la vieillesse la plus décrépite : les habits et les équipages commencent le dérangement; la coquetterie l'augmente; le jeu l'achève.
On remarque que, dans les pays où l'on met dans les mains paternelles plus de récompenses et de punitions, les familles sont mieux réglées : les pères sont l'image du créateur de l'univers, qui, quoiqu'il puisse conduire les hommes par son amour, ne laisse pas de se les attacher encore par les motifs de l'espérance et de la crainte.