The Sun.
London, England, 1831-12-22 00:00:00

MADRID, DEC. 8.

To-day the Government has published a Gazette Ex-
traordinary, in which we find the following official
despatches:---
" FIRST DESPATCH.

"Frincipal Subdelegation of Police at Algesiras.
" In the night of the 30th November quitted Gibralter
(in consequence of the persecutions which the revolu-
tionaries meet with there) two vessels containing fifty of
these men, without knowing where they were steering
for ; but last night a despatch informed us that the vessels
of the coast-guard having pursued these two barks, suc-
ceeded in driving them on shore, when these perverse men
landed at a place called Ferangirola, where they hoisted
the tri-coloured flag, with cries of Five la Liberte !' In
my capacity of Commander of the forces at Algesiras, I
immediately despatched the necessary troops, and took
every other measure for the capture and extermination of
these revolutionists, which I trust will soon take place, on
account of the excellent spirit of the inhabitants of these
countries, and the enthusiasm of his Majesty's troops.
" JEAN ANTOINE MENEL.
" Algesiras, Dec. 4, 1831."
" SECOND DESPATCH.

" EXCELLENZA,—This very moment, four minutes past
eight in the morning, have surrendered at discretion the
rebel Don Joseph Marie de Torrijos, and the whole band
of revolutionaries of whom he was at the head ; who had
disembarked on the coast to the westward of this province,
as I had the honour to inform your Excellency on the 3d
instant. Anxious not to lose a single moment in inform-
ing his Majesty of so important an event, I have despatched
in great haste an extraordinary courier. By the next
courier I shall have the honour to make known to his Ma-
jesty the details of this expedition.

" VINCENT GONZALES MORRENNO."

The above despatches reached Government this morning
at day-break, and their contents caused great rejoicing
among the Apostolical party. In the course of the day
two couriers have been despatched into Andalusia. If we
may credit report, these couriers conveyed the order to the
Genera►, who captured these unfortunate liberals, to shoot
them forthwith, in conformity with the decrees still in
force against rebels taken in arms.

THE PRINCESS CZARTORISKI.—This Prin-
cess, who has arrived in Paris, was by birth Princess
SArIEHA. Sbe has with her three children and a nu-
merous suite. She is accompanied by M. 13Lornrcxx, a
distinguished Lithuanian, as tutor of her eldest child, a
boy about nine years of age, and Dr. DxNom, a young
French physician, whe was in extensive practice in Poland
before the breaking out of the revolutionary war. The
Princess seems wholly devoted to her children. She ap-
pears much afflicted, and speaks of the recent political
events in which her husband was engaged with deep regret
and sorrow. She is not now uneasy about the Prince her
husband, who has for some weeks past been engaged in
visiting the German Universities, in order to settle his son's
education. Some days since he was at Heidelberg, and it
is thought that be will proceed thence to Paris or London.
THE PATENT THEATRES.---The managers
of Covent-garden and Drury-lane Theatres have had a
meeting ; the effect of Lerd TENTERDEN'S decision
(in re Chapman) was considered, and the result has been
a determination, on the part of the patent proprietors, to
suppress ALL dramatic performances existing under the
supposed license of 10 Geo. 11. Notices have been
served upon the managers and proprietors of the Coburg,
Sadler's Wells, the Pavillion, the Garrick, the City,
Astley's, Panarmonion, the Surrey, and Queen's Theatres.
It appears that the Adelphi and Olympic, having a
Chamberlain's license are exempt from the penalties to
which the theatres we have named are liable. The Act of
Geo. 11. in its literal acceptation, only authorises
" dancing and singing," and thus Laid TENDIRDEN
has rendered it. A meeting of the proprietors of minor
theatres, and the actors thereat, takes place on Saturday
next, and there is little doubt but the present attempt will
bring the question of dramatic rights to afinal settlement.

Gentlemen,—The question which you have sent
to be discussed by your Commission is that off' the
Representative Government itself; for this Govern.
ment is in the balance of the powers which com•
pose it, and the constitution of one of them cannot
be put in question without that of the two others
also, and with society itself. Without looking abroad
for examples, the lesson that the history of our re-
volution has taught us, is a proof that there is no
real guarantee for inward order, or independence,
but under the shield of a representative Government ;
and that there is no real representative Government
but the Government of the three powers—of three
powers, each having under different but analogous
forms an effective and independent authority, not of
their duties and of the interests of the country, but
of the caprice or of the will of one of them, or of
two others together.
Two Chambers and one executive authority, as
was the directory of the empire, do not constitute the
Government of the three powers. If the two
Chambers have one common origin—the popular
election, direct or indirect—they are only the delega-
tion of a power ; and the third body that they have
created by another delegation is only an indirect re-
presentation of the power by which they themselves
were instituted. This is popular government.
If the Chambers, on the contrary, are not, as un-
der the empire, only an emanation of executive au-
thority, and are what is called a legislative tribunal
or senatorial body, they have nothing popular but
the name, and exist only by will of the power which
has really constituted them: this alone will compose
the Government, and with reason. Thus have we
seen it pretending to be alone representing a country
which in fact does not expect on its party liberty
and independence, which it will be thought proper
to leave it.
In order that the Government of the three
powers may be real, each of these three powers
must have an existence which would be peculiar to
it, a distinct origin which would be sufficient for it-
self. They must be different in their principles,
equal for their independence, all relying on the same
soil, and tending to the same tnd. They may have
another life, other roots, and the same storms may
not reach them all. This is the state of all consti-
tutional power, to exist by itself, not to accept any
support without returning it ; only to receive in or-
der to give; to be equal for itself. To have invio-
lable rights, which it is its duty to defend against
any aggression, from whatever part it comes—not
obeying any impulse but the full conviction of the
interest of the country.
If the existence of one of the three powers de-
pends on the will of the three others, there would be
only two powers, and very soon there would be
but one. For between two authorities en presence,
without a counter-balance, without a mediator,
the struggle would be without any other result
than the destruction of that which would have at its
command, and would call to its aid, less of interest,
and less of feeling.
The first want of a representative Government
is, then, to lay the foundation of independent
powers; to coalesce their modes of action, without
which it would cease to be free; and to be connected
without rendering them slaves of each other. These
conditions of independence and strength, of moral
authority and of durability, must, to establish them-
selves, be acknowledged by laws as well as manners.
Manners only, in fact, create institutions, because
they alone give continuance, without which there is
no real creation. They alone constitute the body
politic. They create nations, because it is only
manners which give them their political character,
without which the re-union of men are only the ag-
glomeration of individuals, which do not compose
society.
Manners reclaimed in 1789 an administration of
constitutional liberty which alone could have assured
the balance of powers, enlightened enough to know
their wants and their interests, but too little to ap-
preciate the institutions which could guarantee them;
they were not strong enough to defend them against
the violence of new ideas and the rooting out of in-
ordinate passions, which did not know where to
stop, and would only stop in the abyss of despair.
The powerful man, who took them from us, did not
know how to stop these very passions in himself.
In freeing himself from all counterbalance, he de-
prived himself of a guarantee—he would not have
any resistance, and he had no support. The two
bodies he created only survived him to pronounce his
fall.

If his triumphs dazzled a nation covetous of glory,
his fall, in throwing light upon the fragility of a
system which had for its foundation the scorn of men
deprived of their rights, and the substitution of ma-
terial interests for their moral and intellectual inte-
rests, struck, as by an electrical spark, every en-
lightened mind, every generous soul, and very soon
the entire mass desired legal liberty and political
guarantees. This movement of mind was instan-
taneous and invincible; it imposed a representative
Government from that day, not only on the restora-
tion, but we might say on the whole of Europe. It
was imposed before the Charter, before even the
declaration of St. Ouen, which was only the ac-
knowledgment of a fact which was accomplished in
reality. Under this impression, a counter-revolution
was impossible. The counter revolutionists felt it;
for from that time their heavy and violent war be-
gan less against the Charter and the concessions of
the throne, than against the ideas which they had
rendered necessary—against even the generation
which had provoked them,—against the population
which had adopted them with ardour. It did not
see in the guarantees that the throne had given
itself, more than the country, any thing but the
barriers and the chains which it had forced to free
her. Its efforts only overturned a throne which
had the blindness to believe in its terrors and its
power, and to confide to it their destinies.
These guarantees shaken for a moment, gave new
strength to the aggression, even which, by its weak-
ness, will attest so loudly the national wish; would
it riot be more for its redoubtable adversaries, if it
were not destined to encounter in the same ranks
many of their most ardent defenders ? If it had
only to fear a zeal badly enlightened, they would not
be compromised in seeking to extinguish it. With-
out doubt the danger which has threatened them,
the triumph even which they have obtained, has beet,
a warning which could not be lost. It has made the
necessity felt of giving to them, by the extension of
electoral rights, a foundation larger and more solid
by the initiative of the Chambers, and, the suppres-
sion of the 14th article, more of action at once, anu
more security. But this triumph, which has bee,
much more that of institutions than of men, ha,
Proved also that these institutions had in themselves
a power of resistance and of life, which showed at
once their wisdom and their strength, and corn-',
manded our confidence and our respect. France,
which roused itself entirely to defend them, and
wished that they were calculated to become stronge,
and more durable, did not wish for a Reform whict
destroyed instead of strengthening them. Thi-
satisfied the greatest part, by the different modifi-
cations added to the Charter of 1814, as also to that
of 1830, and the King has confided to the Cham-
bers the revision of the 23d article,—that is to SA:
the examination and amelioration of disposition:

What it wislies,and what you are asking for,is the
consolidation of the Constitutional Government.
We have already told you that this Government
could be stable only in proportion as the three
powers which compose it, preserve in their character
the necessary strength and independence. The
Royal power derives strength from its perpetuity,
from the sanction of the law, the action of the Ad-
ministration, and the command of the army. The
popular power has for it, the opinion which it
creates and renews, the voting of taxes, theim-
peachment of Ministers, and that constant inter-
ference with the acts of a Ministry, more powerful
even than accusation. In presence of all these means
of action, what will be the means of resistance
possessed by the Chamber of Peers, frequently re-
quired to contend against the other two powers,
whether it places itself as mediator between them,
or whether it contends with them both; called upon
:ilso by its position, and its nature, to resist public
opinion, by opposing itself to its passions and its
prejudices ? Its perpetuity was its force, by that its
independence was insured. Opinion does not sepa-
ate power from duration; the idea of ability and
experience is justly connected in all minds with that
which is hereditary. The lose of the herediti would
deprive the Peerage of this conservative instinct,
this spirit of conduct, which is perpetuated in such
bodies, is transmitted from age to age, as a family
tradition, and renders their experience, their prin-
ciples, and their politics, as hereditary as the titles
of the Members which compose them. It was per-
petuity which constituted the wisdom and the
strength of the Roman Senate, as well as the great-
ness of Rome herself ; which raised our Parlia-
ments to the rank of political bodies, and in-
sured their independence by giving to them that
admirable character and manner, which procured
them the respect of nations. Property is the basis
and foundation of societies. Without transmission
there is no property ; therefore the heredite is itself
the basis of society as well as of families. It is
said the heredite is a privilege i No doubt ; but a
constitutive privilege of societies,—a privilege like
that of property,—like all the conventions which
have substituted right for force. It is the privilege
of the son over the stranger,—of the will which
survives over the matter which is extinct. It is the
first—the true condition—the corner-stone of social
order. But, say, they, if the hereditaryship of pro-
perty is a privilege, it is the privilege of all, whilst
the heredite of the Peerage on the contrary is a
personal prerogative ; on this account it is offensive
to the masses desirous of equality, enemies of the
aristocratical distinctions. We shall now proceed to
establish the principles and the facts. Privileges are
favours granted, not for the common advantage, but
the advantage of individuals. Reason, the prin-
ciples of our Government, and public manners,
equally reject them. In every well organized society,
rights are the only means of accomplishing duties,
and that is true even of the rights of the Prince.
Rights conceded for the advantage of all are not
privileges, but institutions. The Peerage is no more
a privilege for the Peers, than the deputation for the
Deputies, or that even the crown for the King.
Utility is the supreme rule, it is the common right,
it is the law of the law. If the heredite be useful,
it is no longer a privilege. Besides, why call by
this name a right to which all the social superiorities
may pretend—a right open to all classes of society.
At Rome, so long as the patricians were the only
candidates for the Consulships, this office was in
reality a privilege; but this privilege was annulled
the moment when every Roman might aspire to this
honour ; and no one can pretend to discover any-
thing so hostile to equality, in a power open to every
ambition and every capacity.
France is affected, it must be acknowledged, by
a kind of passion for equality. We shall not exa-
mine whether this propensity be not rather a senti-
ment than a real want; or whether this sentiment
even be as deeply rooted as it pretends to be ; and
if it have not its origin rather in prejudice than in
interest—in adopted traditions rather than in indivi-
dual and well.considered opinions; but this senti-
ment, or this want, however active, however pas-
sionate, even we may suppose it, is neither unjust
nor anti-social. Far from rejecting legal hierarchies,
it does not reject even those of association, since
nothing which perpetuates or recalls them is offen-
sive to it. And what can it discover offensive or
horrible in the constitutional hierarchy of a Parlia-
mentary power, which the Charter has eatabl shed
The representation of the superior classes of society
—the Chamber of Peers—doubtless represents also
the country, which cannot be separated from the
distinctions, the servicee,and the recollections which
constitute its honour and its glory. We might de-
:pair of a nation sufficiently ungrateful to forget the
services rendered to the country—sufficiently hostile
'o its own greatness, as not to honour those who
have done honour to it ; this would be to wither at
its source the most useful of emulations,—to de-
prive of all continued and future recompence so
many Generals who have a right to think that as
the services which they have rendered their country
will survive them, the public gratitude ought not to
be less durable. Justice is always useful, and gra-
titude is also justice; bat for the people, it is even
more politic than just. It is possible to conceive
chat rewards may not survive services, in a state
without country, without family, where there is only
one will—supreme law, to which nothing survives,
and nothing ought to survive; but it cannot be, and
happily it is not so, and with a people so justly
proud of its distinctions and its glories, who forget
so readily the recollection of the evils they have suf-
tered, and who preserve so religiously the memory
if the good they hare received. Thank God, there
no proscription in France, neither for services nor
for great virtues; and public gratitude there has
always been hereditary. Death never discharge,:
debts of honour, neither with the people who render
it, nor with the individuals who are the objects of