Politics   

an arbitration, although the arbitrators are many, they confer with
one another about the decision, and therefore they can distinguish;
but in courts of law this is impossible, and, indeed, most legislators
take pains to prevent the judges from holding any communication with
one another. Again, will there not be confusion if the judge thinks
that damages should be given, but not so much as the suitor demands?
He asks, say, for twenty minae, and the judge allows him ten minae (or
in general the suitor asks for more and the judge allows less), while
another judge allows five, another four minae. In this way they will
go on splitting up the damages, and some will grant the whole and
others nothing: how is the final reckoning to be taken? Again, no one
contends that he who votes for a simple acquittal or condemnation
perjures himself, if the indictment has been laid in an unqualified
form; and this is just, for the judge who acquits does not decide that
the defendant owes nothing, but that he does not owe the twenty minae.
He only is guilty of perjury who thinks that the defendant ought not
to pay twenty minae, and yet condemns him.
To honor those who discover anything which is useful to the state is a
proposal which has a specious sound, but cannot safely be enacted by
law, for it may encourage informers, and perhaps even lead to
political commotions. This question involves another. It has been
doubted whether it is or is not expedient to make any changes in the
laws of a country, even if another law be better. Now, if an changes
are inexpedient, we can hardly assent to the proposal of Hippodamus;
for, under pretense of doing a public service, a man may introduce
measures which are really destructive to the laws or to the
constitution. But, since we have touched upon this subject, perhaps we
had better go a little into detail, for, as I was saying, there is a
difference of opinion, and it may sometimes seem desirable to make
changes. Such changes in the other arts and sciences have certainly
been beneficial; medicine, for example, and gymnastic, and every other
art and craft have departed from traditional usage. And, if politics
be an art, change must be necessary in this as in any other art. That
improvement has occurred is shown by the fact that old customs are
exceedingly simple and barbarous. For the ancient Hellenes went about
armed and bought their brides of each other. The remains of ancient
laws which have come down to us are quite absurd; for example, at
Cumae there is a law about murder, to the effect that if the accuser
produce a certain number of witnesses from among his own kinsmen, the
accused shall be held guilty. Again, men in general desire the good,
and not merely what their fathers had. But the primeval inhabitants,
whether they were born of the earth or were the survivors of some
destruction, may be supposed to have been no better than ordinary or
even foolish people among ourselves (such is certainly the tradition
concerning the earth-born men); and it would be ridiculous to rest
contented with their notions. Even when laws have been written down,
they ought not always to remain unaltered. As in other sciences, so in
politics, it is impossible that all things should be precisely set
down in writing; for enactments must be universal, but actions are
concerned with particulars. Hence we infer that sometimes and in
certain cases laws may be changed; but when we look at the matter from
another point of view, great caution would seem to be required. For
the habit of lightly changing the laws is an evil, and, when the
advantage is small, some errors both of lawgivers and rulers had
better be left; the citizen will not gain so much by making the change
as he will lose by the habit of disobedience. The analogy of the arts
is false; a change in a law is a very different thing from a change in
an art. For the law has no power to command obedience except that of
habit, which can only be given by time, so that a readiness to change
from old to new laws enfeebles the power of the law. Even if we admit
that the laws are to be changed, are they all to be changed, and in
every state? And are they to be changed by anybody who likes, or only
by certain persons? These are very important questions; and therefore
we had better reserve the discussion of them to a more suitable