The Sun.
London, England, 1824-07-14 00:00:00

FOR THE SUN.

MILITARY GOVERNMENTS.

Ma. EDITOR--I tis a singular, and at the same
time a lamentable fact, that the Sovereigns of the
Continent of Europe are at this day invested
with more arbitrary power than at any previous
period. That this state of things may last for
a time, no rational man can deny ; but IL is equal-
ly certain, that it cannot possibly endure for
ever, and that the very excess of arbitrary power
must bring about its own final destruction. The

formation of the Holy Alliance was most un-
doubtedly the best plan they could adopt to ac-
complish the design they had in view, of keeping
their subjects in complete subjection, and of
effectually impeding the progress of liberal opi-
nions. Alarmed at the effects which the revo-

lution of France produced, and at the shock it
had given to the old established system of abso-
lute power, they perceived that to secure their
own political existence they must now lay aside
those petty jealousies which had hitherto been
the frequent cause of war between them, and
cordially unite against the freedom of their re-
spective subjects. The times were highly fa-
vourable to the system it was their wish to esta-
blish. To crush the overwhelming power of Na-
poleon, and to resume the rank they once held
in Europe, numerous armies were raised, and
these engines of royal power, now kept up upon
an extensive scale, prove no less serviceable in
keeping down the spirit of their countrymen,
than they had been instrumental in procuring
their emancipation from foreign yoke. Trained
to the most implicit submission to the will
of their superiors, and having all their hopes
and fears centered in the Government by
which they are paid, the soldiery, though►
connected by ties of blood with the mass of the
people, yet form a body totally distinct, and may
be made the engine of tyranny and of oppression.
There can be, indeed, no doubt that it was the
introduction of standing armies that laid the
foundation of absolute power, and changed the
political system of most of the kingdoms of

Europe.
If we refer to the pages of history, we there
find that in their origin, and even long after their
eitabllibment in the countries they have since
occupied, the barbarous nations, which reared
the present kingdoms upon the ruins of the Ro-
man Empire, considered their Kings only as
chiefs whom they obeyed in war, but cared little
for in times of peace. Among many of those tribes,
that royal dignity was elective, and even when
continued in the same family, this arose from the
consent of the nation, and not from any acknow-
ledged right of succession. Nor was this all. In
all cases when the general good of the community
was concerned, it was not the King, but an as-
sembly of the ,people, which decided every ques-
tion of public importance. In. short, the Sove-
reign was, in fact, only the Chief Magistrate of
the State, but always more or less dependent
upon the people over whom he presided, and
subject to the National Assembly, whether it was
called Wittenagemote, States General, Cortes,
Diet, tic.
In process of time, the independence of the
nobles led to the establishment of the feudal
system, during the existence of which the Royal
authority became a mere phantom, and all but
the nubility were slaves of the• very worst of
tyrants. Then did ignorance, superstition, cruelty,
and barbarism spread their baneful influence
over the whole of Europe, to the misery of the
greater portion of its wretched inhabitants. It
was under the reign of Charles the Bald that the
feudal system began to prevail,, and both in
France and in Germany it proved a fertile
source of.internal discord and civil wars between
the Sovereign sad his most powerful vassals.
William the Contiueroi introduced it into Eng-
land 4 but here its duration was comparatively
short, and the liberties of the subject being
secured , at an early period, paved the way to
the present existing Constitutional Government.
With most of- the continental states, the case was
widely ,different. It was natural that the Sove-
reign should feel desirous of repressing the in-
subordination of his great vassals, and for this
purpose he sought to strengthen his own poWer,
either by giving freedom to his own dependents,
or by granting privileges and immunities to towns
and corporations. This system was attended
eventually with complete success. In proportion
as the power of the vassals diminished, and it
decreased in proportion as the Sovereign stood
less in need of their assistance, that of the crown
increased, until, in process of time, and by various
means, the Monarch became invested with un-
limited power, Then, but not till then, did he
tyrannize equally over all classes of his subjects,
whom he now considered as his own immediate
dependents. And then, only, were the doctrine
of the divine rights of Kings, and legitimate au-
thority, and the system of arbitrary government,
establishes:ll3u the continent of Europe.
It is somewhat difficult to discover upon what
this divine right of Kings is founded. The Di-
vinity visibly interfered with the temporal con-
cerns of only one nation, and to that people
Kings was granted more as a pimishment than as
a blessing. The only right which the Kings of
Europe originally possessed to the Crown they
wore, and , the only legitimate claim they had,
and the authority they exercised, were those
granted to them by the nations over whir It they
presided. That their subjects; then admitted no
such divine rights to the Throne, nor considered
any authority as legitimate, excepting that which
they themselves delegated, is proved abundantly
by the frequent changes of dynasties, and to the
exercise of such a right on the part of the nation
are most of the present reigning families indebt-
ed for the crowns which now incircle their brows.
By accepting the Crown which were offered to
them, when numbers of the previously reigning
family still existed, did they not acknowledge
that the nation tied the right of disposing of the
Throne, and consequently that they were about
to reign in consequence of the free choice of their
fellow subjects, and not of any right specially
granted to them by the Deity ?
The Sovereigns having once enjoyed the sweets
of uncontrouled authority, were not likely, of
their own accord, to lay it aside. Freedom of