The National Register.
London, England, 1815-07-16 00:00:00

THE NATIONAL REGISTER.

spoke as follows :—" When in your memorable sitting
of yesterday, you solemnly proclaimed your political grin-
ciples, it was not merely your intention to give the na-
tion a new pledge of fidelity--you wished to make known
at the same time your sentiments to the Allied Sove-
reigns, and the high confidence which you entertain in
their justice and magnanimity. Thet will hear your
language with a noble interest, for it is worthy of them
and of the nation whom you represent. They have more
than once announced their wish to respect the indepen-
dence of the French people. It would be insulting them
to fear that they wish to impose on us a Government by
force of arms, or to favour a party who might attempt to
prevent the wishes of the nation, and to substitute the ac-
clamations of a. few individuals to the free expression of
the gener4l wish. It appears to me neee'ssary, therefore,
in order that your declaration should produce all the
effects which you have a right to expect from it, that
it be carried to the Allied Monarchs by a Deputation
chosen from yourselves. The French people will see in
this solemn proceeding a new proof of your patriotic so,
licitude. The High Powers will also find the most strik,
ing testimony of your unbounded confidence in their de?
claration."

The proposition was unanimously supported and adopt:
ed, and ordered to be printed ; after which, the House
proceeded to consider the project of a new Constitution
when M. Manuel, in name of the Committee, submitted
the following report
Men (said he) are not a sufficient guarantee for States, a durable
security can alone be found in Institutions. For twenty-five years
France has been the victim of factions and despotism; lestitn.
lions alone she must set* an asylum agaiust the disorders and the
abuses to which she has been a prey. To rally themselves tinder
a Constitution, has, for a people, the double advantage of attaching
them to a fixed point, and giving a strength to them of which their
enemies may be in awe. History informS us that by the mere
force of their institutions, nations in antiquity were enabled to
give laws at the very moment when they weie vantetislit d. The
twenty-five years which we have passed are twenty-tive ages of ex-
perience. nut the labonrs of your Committee were foil of diffi-
culty, from the number of opposite principles, and of different in.
terests to conciliate. We have nut aimed at au imaginary perfee-
tjon: Utopia has given rise to too many errors. We are destined
to give laws not to an untreated world, but to France, snch as it
is, in its vast social reports. The mode of Government must offer
by guarantees and mutual concessions a just equilibiiiim bt t weep
the popular power and that of the Monarch, nothing could be eata-
blished were we not to consult the public opinion and ;he general
spirit which is diffused, Those who give laws to a people, that
they may be durable, ought to follow to a certain point the
movement and the inclination of that opinion. This has been
proved by experience. A sage combination in public transactions,
and a reciprocal guarantee between the people and the Monarch,
are the safeguards of liberty and stability ; for it one power pre-
ponderates, it caa only be obtained by a revolution. Fortunately
we have profited by our experience; our enthusiasm is calmed,
and social reason is unfortunately seated at present on number-
less ruins; this reason demands mutual sacrifices; on this ba-is the
present system rests. The for:n of Government could not be
doubtful. A Republic might seduce elevated souls; but it does
not suit a great people in the present state cf nor SOCit tics. A
Constitutional Monarchy was alone fit for France, and wr pi pose it
to you. The division of the legislative pow Cr into two Chambers,
has united every opinion : lint shall three he an upper Chamber ? A
Chamber of Peers? Shall the Veers be for lite? Shall they be here-
ditary? Some conciliatory watts have been prliosed rnir
wisdom wi:l decide respecting. them. However. the Committee
isof opinion that a hereditary peerage, both ter the nits res Cie
people and the Monarch, is the institution which prea ii;* the
greatest number of obstacles in the way of the abuse power.
The suppression of the ancient anti modern Noblesse iea appear-
ed necessary. and such was your opinion in yosir sitooa ur ye-ter-
day. The. Monarchy, however, requires tins sort of institution,
and the diffienlty is perhaps resolved in the institution of the vet:r-
age, 4 31.2C'..-IVb of irsilcge cunci:ivvd in such a niauasr the