MONARCHY. That government which is ruled, really or theoretically, by one man, who is wholly set apart from all other mem bers of the state.
2. A wording to the etymology of the word mon archy is, that government in which one person rules supreme,—alone. In modern times the teruis autocracy, autocrat, have come into use to indicate that monarchy of which the ruler desires to he ex clusively considered the eource of all power and authority. The Ruesian emperor styles himself Autoorat of all the Russias. Autocrat is the same with despot; but the latter term has fallen eome what into disrepute. Monarchy is contradistin guished from republic. Although the etymology of the term monarchy is simple and clear, it is by no means easy to give a definition either of mon artily or of republic. The constitution of the United States guarantees a republican government to every state. What is a republic ? In this case the meaning of the term must he gathered from the republics which existed at the time of the forma tion of our government, sod which were habitually called repuhlies. Lieber, in a paper on the ques tion, " Shall Utah be admitted into the Union ?" (in Putnam's Magazine,) declared that the Mormons did not form a republic.
3. The fact that one man stands at the head of a government does not make it a monarchy. We have a president at the head. Nor is it neoessary that the one person have an unlimited amount of power, to make a government a monarchy. The power of the king of England is limited by law and theory, and reduced to a small amount in reality it yet England is called a monarchy. Nor does here ditariness furnish us with a distinction. The pope is elected by the cardinals, yet the States of the Church are a monarchy; and the stadtholder of several states of the Netherlande was hereditary, yet the states were republics. We cannot find any better definition of monarchy than this: a mon archy is that government which is ruled (really or theoretically) by one man, who is wholly set apart from all other members of the state (called his subjects); while we call republic that government in which not only there exists an organism by which the opinion of the people, or of a portion of the people (as in aristocracies), passes over into public will, that is, law, but in which also the eu preme power, or the executive power, returne, either periodically or at stated times (where the chief magistraoy is for life), to the people, or a portion of the people, to be given anew to another person; or else, that government in which the hereditary portion (if there be any) is not the chief and lead ing portion of the government, as was the case in the Netherlands.
4. Monarchy is the prevailing type of govern ment. Whether it will remain so with our eis-Cau casian race is a question not to be discussed in a law dictionary. The two types of modarchy as it exists in Europe are the limited or constitu tional monarohy, developed in England, and cen tralized monarchy—to whiola has been added the modern Frenob type which consists in the adop tion of Rouaseau's idea of sovereignty, and apply ing it to a transfor of all tbe sovereign power of the people to one Caesar, who thus becomes an un qualified and unmitigated autocrat or despot. It is a relapse into coarse absolutism.
Paley has endeavored to point out the advan tages and disadvantages of the different clas..ses of governnlent,—not successfully, we think. The great advantages of the monarchical element in n free government are : first, that there remains a stable and firm point in the unavoidable party struggle; and secondly, that, supreme power, and it may be said the whole government, being represented by or symbolized in one living person, authority, respect, and, with regard to public money. even public morality, stand a better chance to he pre served.
5. The great disadvantages of a monarchy are that the personal interests or inclinations of the monarch or his house (of the dynasty) are substi tuted for the public interest; that to the chance of birth is left what with rational beings certainly ought to be.the result of reason nnd wisdom ; and that loyalty to the ruler comes easily to be substi tuted for real patriotism, and frequently passes over into undignified and pernicious man-worship. Mon archy is, assuredly the best government for many nations, at the present period, and the only govern ment under which in this period they can obtain security and liberty : yet, unless we believe in a pre-existing divine right of the monarch, monarchy can never be any thing. hut a substitute—acceptable, wise, even desirable as the case may be—for some thing more dignified, whioh, unfortunately, the passions or derelictions of men prevent. The ad vantages and disadvantages of republics may be said to be the reverse of what has been stated re garding monarchy. A frequent mistake in modern times is this: that a state simply for the time without a king—a kingless called a republic. But a monarchy does not change into a republic simply by expelling the king or the dy nasty; as we have seen in France in 1848. Few governments are less acceptable than an elective monarchy ; for it has the disadvantages of the monarchy without its advantages, and the disad vantages of a. republic without its advantages. See GOVERNMENT j ABSOLUTISM.