In short, when we have reduced to precept, all the well known reflections, on the apparent, but delusive advantages of rank and fortune, we cannot prevent uncultivated minds from being continually struck with the extreme inequality of the different contracts which the rich make with the poor; it might be said, in those moments, that one portion of mankind was formed only for the convenience of another; the poor man sacrifices his time and his strength to multiply round the rich gratifications of every kind; and he, when he gives in exchange the most scanty subsistence, does not deprive himself of any thing; since the extent of his physical wants is bounded by the laws of nature: equality then is only re-established by the lassitude and apathy which the enjoyment even of pleasure produces. But these disgusts compose the back ground in the picture of life; the people perceive them not; and as they have only been acquainted with want, they cannot form any idea of the langour attendant on satiety. Will any one imprudently say, that if the distinctions of property are an obstacle to the establishment of a political system of morality, we ought, therefore, to labour to destroy them? But if in past ages, when the different degrees of talents and knowledge were not so unequal, men were not able to preserve a community of possessions, can you imagine, that these primitive relations could be re-established at a time when the superiority of rank and power is enforced by the immoveable strength of disciplined armies? Besides, when even in the composition of an ideal world, we should have introduced the most exact division of the various possessions esteemed by men, it would still be necessary, to preserve a system of real equality, that every one should execute faithfully the duties imposed on him by universal morality; since this is incumbent on every individual, for the sacrifice that all the members of society have made; which society ought to recompense every citizen in particular, for the restriction to which he submits himself. It is essential to observe still further, that it is not only personal interest, when clearly understood, which ought to be annexed to the idea of public order; it is the same interest when led astray by the passions, then a mere guide is no longer sufficient; a yoke must be imposed; a check always acting, which must be used absolutely. Nothing can be more chimerical than to pretend to restrain a man, hurried on by an impetuous imagination, by endeavouring to recal to his remembrance some principles and instructions, which, in the terms of an academic thesis[1], ought to be the _result of analysis, of methodizing, of the art of dividing, of developing, and circumscribing ideas_.