, 1866-03-30

NAPOtultutC, duu LHe privilege OF Sp6eCu'
The former distinctly avow an intention
to reserve for the King the sole power of
interpreting the Constitution, to re-esta-
bllsh the ~''ancient traditions of the Mon
archy," and to strengthen the power
"and authority Of the Crown'-the pre-
sent holder of which has openly asserted
his Divine right-as q bulwark against
the progress of new ideas in politics and
religion. Now, what surprises an English
man Is, that in the middle Of the nine
teentl century, and in a nation which
justly boasts of its educational advance
ment, such an issue can be raised at all.
There IS not a Conservative Peer in our
own Upper House, which Americans love
to describe as the stronghold of reaction
airy preJudlces, who would venture to
e]nounce. or would even he capable of
entertaining, the sentiments expressed
by Herr Wagner. The supremacy Of
public opinion is so firmly established in
this country, that no one dreams of ques-
tlonlng 1t, and no politician Of Count Bis
marks school could retain power for a
single day. YET all assembly Of p~niIoso-
piers and soldiers toIerates-for it does
lI5uAlC IiOiII III uI ISIOCI1JiC 4 IG-
mler which would rouse our sedate mid
die classes into revolutionary Indignation.
1t Is not that they do not appreciate the
l~ndlgnltleS heaped on them, or fail to see
the issues involved in their struggle with
the Crown. On the contrary, the speech
OF DR.. Gneist deals with the whole sub
Ject IN an eminentIy practical spirit, and
shows a thorough comprehension of The
position. He declared 1t was vain to APP
peal to the King, for "not only the Con
''stitutlon, but each and every law rela-
citing to matters political, had ceased to
exist IN Prussia" The King and his
Ministers had arrogated to themselves o
right OF Interpretation equivalent to a dis
Ta"sing qoWer, and had even rome so far
as TO corrupt the Law CoulJs. THE
Prusslans had been a loyal people because
they regarded their Princes as the guar
dams Of law, but now the Monarchy had
placed itself IN antagonism TO the national
conscience. Count Bismark, he observ-
ed, had drawn his inspiration from Paris
aud st. Petersburg, and meditated a copy
OF French imperialism utterly repugnant
to the political convictions of Germany.
This is plain-speaking-far palmer than
the measured and ambiguous utterances
of Hampden Vane, or Pym-and vet the
speaker himself hardly anticipates any
practical response to ii from the people,
still less a rebellion like our own. He is
content to appeal TO the future, and to
profess his faith in the ultimate victory
OF his cause, when the moral sense Of
Germany shall have triumphed over COM
mercial seIfShness. In fact, he virtually
allows what his adversary afterwards ex-
presSly asserted, that Prussian electors,
as Il body, are very well satisfied with a
strong Government, which developcs
their trade, protects their pecuniary in
]terests, and, we may add, DULLES their
weaker neighbours.
This is precisely the kind o findiference
to political right and wrong which En-
glishmen cannot understand, and which.
in part, j%ustiies our proverbial partiality
for our own institutions. An amusing
article on this subject has recently ap-
peared in one of our monthly contempo-
rarles. The author, identifying himself
with the imaginary Continental critic,
rates his countrymen soundly for their
insular self-complaceRcy, and for a Ger.
tain o%btuseness and impenetrability to