New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-11-24

R,rolstion aetnelle de rEspaghe that the
Cortes unressonsbly chung TO antiquatee formslas,
borrowed from the ancen. Fueros snd belong
ing to fendal times, when the royal authority vas
checked by the exorbitan. privileges Of the
grsndees.
The truth is that the Constitution Of l5l2 is
reproSu ction Of the ancient Fuero,, but read IN
the light of the French Revolution. and adapted
TO the wants of modern society. The right OF In
surrecton, for instance, in generally regarded as
ore of the boldest innovations of the Jacobin
Constitution of 1893, but you meet this same
right in the ancient Fueros of Sobrarve, where
IL il called the Pririlegio de la Union" You
fpd it also in the ancient Constitution OF Castlle
According 10 the Fueros of Sobrarve, the King
cannot make peace nor declare war, nor cobclu1e
treaties. without the previous consent OF the
Cortes. The Permanent Committee, consisting
Of seven members of the Cortes, who are to
watch over the strict observance OF the Constltu-
ton during the propagation Of the Legislative
bodv was of old established in Arragon, and vas
introduced into CASTLE at the time when the prr-
cjpal Cortes Of the Monarchy were united Ia one
single body. To the period of the French in
vasjon a similar institution still existed in the
kingdom OF Navarro. Touching the formation of
a State Council from list of 100 persons presented
to the King by the COrtes and paid by them-this
singular creation of the Constitution of 1872 was
suggested by the remembrance of the fatal In
huence exercised by the Csmsrillas at al
epochs of the Spanish Monarchy The State
Council was intended to supersede the Camarilla.
Besides there existed analogous institutions in the
pat. At the time of Ferdinand w. for instance,
the King was always surrounded by twelve con-
moners, Designated by the cities of Castillo, to
serve as bis privy councillors; aud, in l4l9, the
Delegates of the cities complained that their
CON missoDers were no longer admitted into the
Kings council. The exclusion of the highest
functionsres and the members Of the Kings
household from the Cortes, as well as the pro-
hbition to the Deputies to accept bonors or Of
fees on the part of the King, seems, at frs.
view, to be borrowed from the Constitution OF
1871, and naturally to flow from the modern d.
vision of powers, sanctioned by the Constitution
of 1912. But, in fact we meet not only in the
ancient Constitution of Castillo with precedents,
but we know that the people, at different tines
rose and asssssinated the Deputies who had &C.
cepted bonors or Offices from the Crown. As to
the right of the Cortes to appoint regencles in
case of minority, it had continually been exer-
cised by the ancient COrtes Of Castillo during the
long minorities of the fourteenth century
1t is true that the Cadiz Cortes deprived the
king of the power he had always exercised OF
/ IL. - fha
but as the Cortes hal fallen ina disuse by the
very manner in which the kings improved their
privileges, there was nothing more evident than
the necessity of cancelng it The alleged facts may
suffice to show that the anxious Limitation of the
royal pOwer-the mOst striking feature of the
constitution of l612-Otherwise fully explained
/ by the recent and revolving Souvenirs of Godoy's
contemplate despotism, derived its origin from
the ancient Fueros of Spain. The CadIz Cortes
but transferred the control from the privileged
estates to the national representation. How
much the Spanish kings stood in ave Of the an
cient Fueros may be seen from the fact that when
new collection of the Spanish laws had become
necessary, in 1895, royal ordinance ordered the
removal from it Of all the remains of feudalism
contained in the last collection of laws, aud be-
longing to time when the weakness OF the
monarchy forced the kings to enter with their
vassals into compromises derogatory 10 the SOW
ereign power.
If the election of the Deputies by general suf-
frsge was an innovation, it must not be forgotten
that the Cortes Of 1912 were themselves elected
by general suffrage that all the juntss had been
elected by it; that limitation of it would there
FORE have been an infraction of right already con.
quered by the people; and lastly, that property
qualification, at a time when almost all the real
property of Spain was locked up in mortmsin,
would have excluded the grester part of the pop
uaton.
The meeting Of the Representatives in one
single house was by no means copied from the
French Constitution of 1871, as the morese
English Tories will have it. Our readers know
already that since Charles (the Emperor Charles
W the aristOcIacy and the clergy had lost their
seats in the COrtes of Castillo But even at the
times when the Cortes were divided into bra.as,
(arms branches representing the different &C.
tates, they assembled in one single hail. sep ars.ed
only by their seats, and voting in common. From
the Provinces in which alone the Cortes still pos
sessed real power at the epoch of the French in
yasiOn, Navarro continued the old custom of con-
vOkiDg the Cortes by estates; but in the Vas
copgadas the altogether democratic assemblies
admitted not even the clergy. Besides, if the
clergy and aristocracy had saved their obnoxious
privileges, they had long since ceased to
form independent political bodies, the existence
of which constituted the basis of the composition
Of the ancient Cortes.