The National Register.
London, England, 1814-04-17 00:00:00

POLITICAL DISQUISITION.

NEW FRENCH CONSTITUTION.

S°l

~/

SUNDAY, APRIL 17, 1814.

PRICE Jul.

vent the encroachments of the two Powers upon each other.
It has produced that effect in England, because the House of
Lords, by its origin and the nature of its personal preroga-
tives, acts as a counterpoise, and would maintain the equili-
brium, if either the numai chi al or democratical part should
threaten to destroy it. Political freedom rests on the pal
titioe of the Ler.,islative power; but it must be shmed
out being disunited, in. order to avoid the two dangerous
shoals of despotism atiedemocracy. What has most contri-
buted to stNigthen the British Constitution and to render
it immoveah?e, is the House of Peels, the link that connects
the aristccracy with the king and the people.

The authors of the French constitutions' charter seem.to
have entirely mistaken the object for which tie)! branch, so
essential to the Legislative power in a limited monarchy,
has been instituted. Their Senate, by its origin and its he-
terogeneous composition, and by the nature of the different
prerogatives of its members, although they wear the same
title, is more likely to create dissentiont in its own bosom,
than to form a link between the two other branches of the
Legislative power. This vice, in its primitive formation, is
a principle of dissolution more or less distant.
The organization of the judicial power in the new French
charter is contrary to the Monarchial system. It ought to
form part of the Executive, which, however, ought never to
xert it, but ought to retain the exclusive tight of notnine,
tint,* the judges. By only allowing the King a choice be-
, tween three candidates presented to, him to till judicial
1 functions, the authors of the new charter have mi,taken the
right source of the judicial power, which is a de1e,..3,31,...:t
from the civil administration of the Executive.
It also appears almost incredible, that is the constitu-
tional charter of a Monarchical state, there should not only
be no established religion, but that it should be deciared,
that the ministers of every kind of worship should have the
same pay, and receive equal protection. . General toleration
may safely exist only in countries in which an established
religion forms part f,f the constitution, as in England. I;
results from the principle adopted by the French legislators,
that the clergy ate not endowed, and eanniit become pro.
i prietors. This is a new germ of division in this constitu-
I tion, the authors of which do not seem to Lave sufficiently
considered the influence of religious opinions, and toe
1 necessity of avoiding the civil broils which they may oc-
casion. Ilad they inquired into the motives that rtrJsed Eng-
-I.i lishl Bishops to be admitted into the ll,u:se , f Peer', 3'l
; those which closed the [louse of Commons to sectarian mi-
tnisters, they would have perceived the prop. ic7 (,f tl•Ilt law,
! and would have enacted one of the same kind Ti
fancied they would diminish the King's influence
'dirdiniz Bishops from the Senate, but have, on the
~,•:,,,-

'hey bays
e by ex.
...1
contra. y,
" •
•