The Sun.
London, England, 1834-09-11 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, SEPTEM:BER 11, 1834.

that to make improvements gradually is the characteristic of
wisdom and equity. But to follow Senor Trueba, England,
a country which I also love, and whose institutions I admire,
is precisely the country in which liberty has been acquired by
degrees, and not suddenly, and in which declarations of
rights were not made until long after many had been con-
solidated. It was only after the expulsion of the Stuarts
that the constitutional edifice was crowned with the
cupola of the declaration of rights, which is here proposed
as a commencement. In nations which are essentially mo-
narchic, if that principle be destroyed, liberty is destroyed
with it. Licentiousness then comes, and with it every fury
and disorder. The people then call for a dictatorship, that
they may be rescued from the chaos of tyranny. Of this
the histories of Cromwell and Bonaparte are examples. It
was far from being a prudent step in the French to begin
with a declaration of rights, thereby very inopportunely
imitating what a few years before had occurs in the
United States, without paying attention to the Merence of
countries and circumstances. Laws should be accommo-
dated to the habits, interests, and customs of nations. I
may here quote the words of a celebrated man who was
distinguished by many great qualities amongst his defects.
When the Constituent Assembly made a declaration of the
kind proposed, Mirabeau observed—" This will not last
longer than an almanack—that is to say, a year." The
Secretary of State then proceeded to criticise the articles
of the petition in succession. With regard to the liberty
of the press, he observed that he was not insensible of its
benefits. It might be recollected that he had formerly
proposed its establishment, and wished to accompany
it as a safeguard with the trial by jury. But having af-
terwards seen the consequences which followed the
liberty of the press elsewhere, he was convinced that
the nation was not yet prepared for the enjoymentof that
institution, and that it would be necessary to postpone its
establishment to a more suitable time. The country was
at present precisely in that sort of situation in which the
English suspend their law of Habeas Corpus, and the
Romans used to resort to that of Caveant Consules. If
the Estate adopt this article, what must the Government do
in the circumstances in which the country is placed ? How
is conspiracy to be guarded against ? In such a situation
legal forms cannot be strictly observed. In a word, the
proposition is the same as to say " Your hands are tied,
now labour ; your feet are bound, now run." He con-
cluded by remarking that he could easily go more at large
into the reasons which induced him to oppose the approval
of these petitions as they were now drawn up, but he
would reserve what he had further to say until the details
came to be discussed, if the Estate should allow them to
reach that stage. _

After some explanations by Senores Trueba and Lopez, it
was decided that the question had been sufficiently discussed,
and that the voting should be nominally. The result of
the division on the question that there is ground for voting
on the petition was 73 for, 36 against.
The question was then put on the petition as a whole,
when the votes, given nominally for approving it, were 71,
against it 38.
The President intimated that the discussion now sus-
pended would be resumed next day at 10 o'clock.
SEPT. 2.

The Chamber of Procuradores was opened at an early
hour this morning. The public, reserved, and diplomatic
Tribunes were all crowded.
Brigadier Palarea, whose name was compromised in the
supposed conspiracy of the 24th July, took the oaths and
his seat.

The debate on the petition then commenced by Sig. Ca-
ballero reading the first article, namely—" That individual
liberty is protected and guaranteed, and consequently that
no Spaniard can be compelled to do that which the law
does not order."

Sig. Toreno then rose and addressed the Chamber at
considerable length, and refuted several of the arguments
drawn from the " History of England," which he considered
were not fairly stated by Messrs. Trueba and Lopez, and
ended by proposing, as an amendment, that the following
words be substituted in lieu of the first article—" That the
law in future shall protect individual liberty."
Sigs. Gonzales, Caballero, Lopez, and Priest Dias Gon-
sales, supported the original article.
Sigs. Santa Fe, La Torra; and Martinez de la Rosa, sup-
ported the amendment.
After which the House proceeded to a nominal votation,
when there appeared of the 104 Members present—
For the original article 52
For the amendment

This equality of votes occasioned great embarrassment
to the Chamber, the reglamento not having provided that
the vote of the President should decide ; and Martinez de
la Rosa proposed that the question should be re-voted to-
morrow ; but Messrs. Lopez and Las Navas opposed that,
as some of the Procuradores might be induced, by reasons
out of doors, to change their opinions in the interim.
Signor La Santa suggested that the question should be
again discussed, as it was possible several of the Deputies
might change their minds, on hearing fresh arguments, and
he said such was the custom in the Cortes of 1812. This
brought up Moscoso, who denied that the practice of 1812
was as the Hon. Deputy represented it, and a second
voting then never took place unless it was the opinion of
the House that the subject was not sufficiently discussed.
La Santa, however, produced the book of the old Cortes,
and his thus correcting Moscoso on such authority seemed
to give great pleasure to the Chamber. A stormy conver-
sation then took place, which was broken by the Senhor
Gonzales calling to the table the fourteen Members who
had signed the petition, and requesting them to sign an
amendment which he then meant to propose. This was in-
stantly complied with, and after the fourteen Deputies had
attached their names to it,

Signor Gonzales moved that the following words be sub-
stituted in lieu of the amendment of M. Toreno, and of the
first article—namely, " That the law protects and guarantees
individual liberty?' _ _

Signor Beldawsaid that no new discussion must take place
on this new proposition.
Signor Lopez contended that this was an amendment of
an article already sufficiently discussed, and that the vote
should be taken without any further delay.
Signor Trueba contended that the question was reduced
simply to this, whether the House would or would not take
into consideration an amendment moved by the Commission
itself which drew up the petition.
The House then proceeded to vote, and out of 100 Mem-
bers present, four being gone away, there appeared—
For the amendment of the Commission 95
For the amendment of T0ren0.......
Majority against Ministers —93
Moscoso and two other Deputies refused to vote.
The Sitting was then closed, and the discussion of the
remaining articles postponed till Thursday.
After all this inconsistency of votes, how can I venture
to give an opinion formed on my Parliamentary experience
in England ? Can Ministers remain in the face of such a
majority ? A devil at my elbow whispers that Toreno is at
the bottom of the whole, and that it is nothing but a plot to
turn out his colleagues, and put himself at the head of his
creatures, and form a new Administration.