nterests."

As neither of the strangers made the smallest objection to the
proposal, we were all soon comfortably situated at the dinner-table. The
commodore, who, it would seem, was habitually well fed, merely paid
a little complimentary attention to the banquet; but Mr. Downright
attacked it tooth and nail, and I had no great reason to regret the
absence of Mr. Poke. In the meantime, the conversation did not flag.

"I think I understand the outline of your system, Judge People's
Friend," I resumed, "with the exception of the part that relates to the
patriots. Would it be asking too much to request a little explanation on
that particular point?"

"Not in the least, sir. Our social arrangement is founded on a hint from
nature; a base, as you will concede, that is broad enough to sustain
a universe. As a people, we are a hive that formerly swarmed from
Leaphigh; and finding ourselves free and independent, we set about
forthwith building the social system on not only a sure foundation,
but on sure principles. Observing that nature dealt in duplicates, we
pursued the hint, as the leading idea--"

"In duplicates, commodore!"

"Certainly, Sir John--a monikin has two eyes two ears, two nostrils, two
lungs, two arms, two hands, two legs, two feet, and so on to the end
of the chapter. On this hint, we ordered that there should be drawn,
morally, in every district of Leaplow, two distinct and separate lines,
that should run at right angles to each other. These were termed the
'political landmarks' of the country; and it was expected that every
citizen should range himself along one or the other. All this you will
understand, however, was a moral contrivance, not a physical one."

"Is the obligation of this moral contrivance imperative?"

"Not legally, it is true; but then, he who does not respect it is like
one who is out of fashion, and he is so generally esteemed a poor devil,
that the usage has a good deal more than the force of a law. At first,
it was intended to make it a part of the constitution; but one of our
most experienced statesmen so clearly demonstrated that, by so doing, we
should not only weaken the nature of the obligation, but most probably
raise a party against it, that the idea was abandoned. Indeed, if
anything, both the letter and the spirit of the fundamental law have
been made to lean a little against the practice; but having been
cleverly introduced, in the way of construction, it is now bone of