Ita nati estis, ut bona malaque vestra ad Rempublicam pertineant.

TACITUS.


“We have long been accustomed to laugh at the pride and poverty of petty German Princes,” says one of the most sensible and right minded travellers that ever published the result of his observations in Germany;1 “but nothing,” he proceeds, “can give a higher idea of the respectability which so small a people may assume, and the quantity of happiness which one of these insignificant monarchs may diffuse around him, than the example of the little state of Weimar, with a Prince like the present2 Grand Duke at its head. The mere pride of sovereignty frequently most prominent where there is only the title to justify it, is unknown to him; he is the most affable man in his dominions, not simply with the condescension which any prince can learn to practise as a useful quality, but from goodness of heart.” The whole population of his state little if at all exceeds that of Leicestershire; his capital is smaller than a third or fourth rate county town; so in fact it scarcely deserves the name of a town; and the inhabitants, vain as they are of its well earned reputation as the German Athens, take a pride in having it considered merely a large village: his revenue is less than that of many a British Peer, great Commoner, or commercial Millionist. Yet “while the treasures of more weighty potentates were insufficient to meet the necessities of their political relations, his confined revenues could give independence and careless leisure to the men who were gaining for Germany its intellectual reputation.” It is not too much to say that for that intellectual reputation, high as it is, and lasting as it will be, Germany is little less beholden to the Duke of Weimar's well-bestowed patronage, than to the genius of Wieland, and Schiller and Goëthe. “In these little principalities, the same goodness of disposition can work with more proportional effect than if it swayed the sceptre of an empire; it comes more easily and directly into contact with those towards whom it should be directed: the artificial world of courtly rank and wealth has neither sufficient glare nor body to shut out from the prince the more chequered world that lies below.”

1 RUSSELL.

2 A. D. 1822.

Alas no Prince either petty or great has followed the Duke of Saxe Weimar's example! “He dwells,” says Mr. Downes, “like an estated gentleman, surrounded by his tenantry.” Alas no British Peer, great Commoner, or commercial Millionist has given to any portion of his ampler revenues a like beneficent direction.

A good old Bishop3 quoting the text “not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called,” cautions us against distorting the Scripture as if it pronounced nothing but confusion to the rulers of the earth, “let not the honourable person,” said he, “hang down his head, as if power and wisdom, and noble blood, and dignity were causes of rejection before God: no beloved! Isaiah foretold that Kings should be nursing fathers, and Queens should be nursing mothers of the Church, but it is often seen that the benignity of nature and the liberality of fortune are made impediments to a better life; and therefore Nobles and Princes are more frequently threatened with judgment. I adjoin moreover that the Scriptures speak more flatly against illustrious Magistrates, than the common sort; for if God had left it to men, whose tongues are prostituted to flattery, they had scarce been told that their abominable sins would bring damnation.”

3 BISHOP HACKET.

When our philosopher considered the manner in which large incomes are expended, (one way he had opportunities enough of observing at Doncaster) he thought that in these times high birth brought with it dangers and evils which in many or most instances, more than counterbalanced its advantages.