12.23. 23. Of Spies in Monarchies.
Should I be asked whether there is any
necessity for spies in monarchies, my answer would be that the usual
practice of good princes is not to employ them. When a man obeys the
laws, he has discharged his duty to his prince. He ought at least to
have his own house for an asylum, and the rest of his conduct should be
exempt from inquiry. The trade of a spy might perhaps be tolerable, were
it practised by honest men; but the necessary infamy of the person is
sufficient to make us judge of the infamy of the thing. A prince ought
to act towards his subjects with candour, frankness, and confidence.
He that has so much disquiet, suspicion, and fear is an actor
embarrassed in playing his part. When he finds that the laws are
generally observed and respected, he may judge himself safe. The
behaviour of the public answers for that of every individual. Let him
not be afraid: he cannot imagine how natural it is for his people to
love him. And how should they do otherwise than love him, since he is
the source of almost all bounties and favours; punishments being
generally charged to the account of the laws? He never shows himself to
his people but with a serene countenance; they have even a share of his
glory, and they are protected by his power. A proof of his being beloved
is that his subjects have confidence in him: what the minister refuses,
they imagine the prince would have granted. Even under public calamities
they do not accuse his person; they are apt to complain of his being
misinformed, or beset by corrupt men. "Did the prince but know," say the
people; these words are a kind of invocation, and a proof of the
confidence they have in his person.
