University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
  
expand section 
  
expand section 
  

expand section1. 
expand section2. 
expand section3. 
expand section4. 
expand section5. 
expand section6. 
expand section7. 
expand section8. 
expand section9. 
expand section10. 
expand section11. 
expand section12. 
expand section13. 
expand section14. 
expand section15. 
expand section16. 
expand section17. 
expand section18. 
expand section19. 
expand section20. 
expand section21. 
collapse section22. 
 22.1. 
expand section22.2. 
 22.3. 
 22.4. 
expand section22.5. 
expand section22.6. 
expand section22.7. 
 22.8. 
 22.9. 
expand section22.10. 
expand section22.11. 
expand section22.12. 
expand section22.13. 
 22.14. 
 22.15. 
 22.16. 
 22.17. 
expand section22.18. 
expand section22.19. 
 22.20. 
expand section22.21. 
expand section22.22. 
expand section23. 
expand section24. 
expand section25. 
expand section26. 
expand section27. 
expand section28. 
expand section29. 
expand section30. 
expand section31. 

It is contrary to reason and nature that women should reign in families, as was customary among the Egyptians; but not that they should govern an empire. In the former case the state of their natural weakness does not permit them to have the pre-eminence; in the latter their very weakness generally gives them more lenity and moderation, qualifications fitter for a good administration than roughness and severity.

In the Indies they are very easy under a female government; and it is settled that if the male issue be not of a mother of the same blood, the females born of a mother of the blood-royal must succeed. [40] And then they have a certain number of persons who assist them to bear the weight of the government. According to Mr. Smith, [41] they are very easy in Africa under female administration. If to this we add the example of England and Russia, we shall find that they succeed alike both in moderate and despotic governments.