Now as the authority of a dictator is absolute, it cannot fail to be a
terror to all, especially if, as is here required, he were appointed at
a stated time, because in that case every ambitious man would pursue
this office with the utmost energy; and it is certain that in time of
peace virtue is thought less of than wealth, so that the more haughty a
man he is, the more easily he will get office. And this perhaps is why
the Romans used to make a dictator at no fixed time, but under pressure
of some accidental necessity. Though for all that, to quote Cicero's
words, "the tumour of a dictator was displeasing to the good." [2] And
to be sure, as this authority of a dictator is quite royal, it is
impossible for the dominion to change into a monarchy without great
peril to the republic, although it happen for ever so short a time.
Furthermore, if no fixed time were appointed for creating a dictator, no
notice would be paid to the interval between one dictator and another,
which is the very thing that we said was most to be observed; and the
whole thing would be exceedingly vague, and therefore easily neglected.
Unless, then, this authority of a dictator be eternal and fixed, and
therefore impossible to be conferred on one man without destroying the
form of dominion, the dictatorial authority itself, and consequently the
safety and preservation of the republic will be very uncertain.
2. But, on the other hand, we cannot doubt (Chap.


Pages:
115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138