The Sun.
London, England, 1847-06-22 00:00:00

kq- Wining

LONDON, TUESDAY, JUNE 2.2, 1847.

A more injudicious, or, strictly speaking, a more
indecent proclamation could not by possibility have
been penned than the one addressed to the Portuguese,
on the ninth instant, by Queen MARIA DA GLORIA.
Had her Most Gracious and Most Faithful Majesty
been desircus to render a reconciliation with her
subjects odious beyond all description, she could not
more effectually have compassed her intentions than
by the publication of such a manifesto as the one
we have mentioned. In the very construction of
her sentences there is visible the partially-suppressed
malice of a domineering but conquered Sovereign.
Principles of liberality are there enunciated by
the lips of a woman whose career has, from the
moment of her accession to the throne of the
Braganzas, been subversive of every national
right and every constitutional prerogative. Those
sacred principles are glozed over with the lan-
guage of the most insidious hypocrisy, and the
patriotic insurgents, by whose loyalty to the Charter
she has been alone driven to the acceptance of a
liberal convention, are treated withal as culprits emi-
nently worthy of her royal displeasure, and are inso-
lently alluded to as the recipients of an unparalleled
generosity. We cannot indeed find expressions of
sufficient earnestness to indicate the disgust and in-
dignation with which we have perused this miserable
document. Its very introduction is a mockery, the
most gratuitous and the most reprehensible. Queen
MARIA reproach hPr people horaueo of the aaa auf
" effusion of Portuguese blood "—when the homicidal
spillers of that blood were the tools of her malapert
despotism ; because of the recent " destruction of pro-
perty "—when the pillagers and incendiaries were
none other than her own mercenary supporters ; and
because of the " dissolution of social ties "—when
she herself was the one who snapped the bonds of
affection asunder by abetting the cabal of the Cabrals
instead of promoting the happiaoss by securing the
liberties, of her loyal and taoffending people.
What, we ask, is the sequel to this ab-
horrent induction ? It is a sequel eminently
worthy of a QUEEN who throughout the whole
of her ill-omened reign has huckstered the privileges
of the nation for the emolument of an unprincipled
favourite. "Fatal illusions," says MARIA DA GLORIA,
have caused some persons to take up arms against ray
Royal authority, and against the constitution of the
State." Fatal illusions ! forsooth. Why, if any one
thing is notorious throughout the length and breadth
of Christendom, it is that the guilty proceedings of
the Court of Lisbon have goaded the population of
Portugal to a manifestation of their august wrath, it
is that the people of that land have been justified in
taking arms against the Supreme Government, it is
that the royal authority and the constitution of the
State have been leagued one against the other in con-
sequence of the policy adopted by the ruler of Por-
tugal. This has been proclaimed in Parliament ; it
has been acknowledged by that very Adminis-
tration through whose generous interference Queen
MARIA has been alone preserved from the possibility
of a speedy dethronement, and an ignominious expa-
triation. Mr. MACAULAY has proclaimed the late
revolution in Portugal to have been most justifiable
on the part of the insurgents, and most reprehensible
on the part of the Cabinet. And yet MARIA DA
GLORIA speaks thus contumeliously of the Junta,
as having assailed at once her Royal au-
thority and the constitution of the State !
Neither against the authority of their Sovereign nor
against the articles of their common constitution were
the soldiers of the Oporto Junta arrayed. The Por-
tuguese had armed themselves especially for the pro-
tection and vindication of the constitution, and for the
restriction of the royal authority within reasonable
and legal limits. Heartily do we confess that we
have not the inclination to analyse either the language
or the sentiments of this odious manifesto. After
the oriental fashion, the QUEEN has thrown a peace-
offering to her people, but the peace-offering is
nothing better than a poisoned cake. The gorge Of
the nation will rise at this ungracious recompense of
a loyalty which has survived all the throes of civil
contention, and all the incitements of popular success.
The peace-offering of MARIA DA GLORIA will be
spat forth derisively as it deserves, and a significant
assurance will thereby be conveyed to her councils
that the scorn of a virago is not compatible with the
dignity of a Princess, and that the diction of a des-
pot is no way suited to the mouth of a constitutional
Sovereign.

If ever there was a manifest necessity for the
reformation of a Cabinet that necessity is at
this moment conspicuous on the banks of
the Tagus. Let her Portuguese MAJESTY
take warning by the insane measures adopted in
1814 by the obese reviver of the ancienreginte—let her
bear in recollection the consequences of the abor•
tive projects born in the effete imagination of King
Louis XVlll—let her remember the calamitous
effects of the Ministerial treason and the legislative
crimes of King CHARLES X.—let her draw the
obvious analogies which are discernible in the revela-
tions of history, and trace out her course in ac-
cordance with the deductions derived therefrom.
Her destinies are now at her own disposal as
far as human destiny can he controlled by
human judgment. Whether her reign is to
be branded as infamous among the records
of the land she governs, whether her name is to be
handed down to the execration of posterity, or
whether, in obedience to the dictates of a purer pur-
pose, the assertor of the national liberties and the
object of national gratitude, is a consummation still
hidden in the womb of futurity. As yet not even
the glimmer of a hope has gilded the gloom of her
sovereignty. Still there is no reason to despair for
Portugal.

According to the practice that has heretofore pre-
vailed in the administration of public business, it is
in vain to hope for any improvement, however glaring
or obvious the defects of the system may be, until
actual inconvenience has been sustained by persons of
sufficient influence to give weight to their remon-
strances, and to enforce a patient consideration of
the grievances. The principle adopted with respect
to the prosecution of offenders has long given occasion
for many well-grounded complaints, has frequently
led to a failure of justice, to the escape of criminals,
and to a vast additional incon; enienee and expense to
those who, having already been sufferers by the acts
complained of, are further obliged, either to advance
the costs of the prosecution—an expense which they
can ill afford—or to abandon the duty they owe to the
public, and suffer the accused party to escape,
and to persevere in his vicious courses, until he
shall have injured some person of greater
wealth or energy. Private prosecutions are in
every respect objectionable. They appear to be
founded on feelings of individual resentment in place
of, being carried on for the vindication of the ma-
jesty of the law. They induce parties to suppose
that they can escape by means of a private arrange•
ment with the person who is prominently put for-
ward as the claimant for redress, and too frequently
inquiries are smothered, the aggrieved party accept-
ing compensation fur the injuries sustained, and an
indemnity against any loss that may possibly be oc-
casionedand vindictive by the forfeiture of his recognizances ;
while in others they enable parties to gratify mali-
ciousve feelings, and to persecute and
op-
press others under the cloak'
of law. A private per-
son has a right to institute proceedings to obtain re-
dress for any injuries that may be inflicted on him;
but the moment they assume a criminal character,
the private injury is merged in the public wrong.'
Public justice has been outraged, and the State which
aggrieved
take
takes upon itself to afford protection to the person
and property
of itsincitiezdeniasteblyecoinmteersptohsee,
and party, and should iru