Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

former, he may be said to have surrendered France to the Autocrat It was not the loss of her colonial possessions that reduced France to the station of a secondary power, but this timid and disastrous policy on the part of the French ministry. Had they taken their stand on that occasion, and declared that no foreign government whatever should interpose in the affairs of Spain, what a point of support would not the liberty of Europe now have possessed against the designs of universal domination which Russia scarcely affects to conceal !

The opposition of England to the invasion of Spain commenced, and her subsequent recognition of the Spanish American States completed, her separation from the Holy Alliance. She was destined thenceforth to move, as Mr. Canning more than once expressed it, in an orbit of her own; and whatever vacillation may be perceptible in the councils of our present ministers, it cannot be doubted that her true policy is to be found in that orbit, and no other. We do not therefore understand the point of our author's assertion, that the recognition of South America was to England 'almost equivalent in its consequences to a geographical removal from one quarter of the globe to the other. Distrusted by the continental powers, as a false friend, and deserter of the common cause; banished from their markets, excluded from their councils, and an alien from their principles, Great Britain seems to have lost her hold on the other world in which she is situated, and to have become an American rather than a European state.' We have no objection to the cultivation of the warmest feelings on both sides between America and England; on the contrary, we are confident that the true interests of both countries require that amity the most cordial and unreserved should subsist for ever between them. But England wants no geographical removal, nor any thing equivalent to it, we trust, in order to be enabled to preserve her independence, and to pursue her own policy. If she be but thoroughly English, that is to say, true to her own glory, and to the spirit that first raised her from being a petty island to be the mistress of the seas, the geographical position which she now holds is the very one that is best suited to her wishes. But if she much longer continue to permit her influence to be trampled under foot by Russia, and to be scorned even by the contemptible usurper of Portugal, the sooner she is sunk in the sea, the better for her memory.

[ocr errors]

The death of the late Emperor Alexander, is another fact that has occurred within the last five years, upon which the author makes some just reflections. It is evident that that monarch was a great favourite with him. He calls the Autocrat the Titus of the age, and the delight of the human race.' 'He felt a real sympathy in the fortunes and concerns of other men, and was fond of mingling with them on equal terms. I have seen him repeatedly in the streets of St. Petersburgh, walking unattended, by the hour

together, and conversing familiarly with persons of all classes, whom he happened to meet.' Had the author deferred closing this chapter until he had learned that the troops which Alexander had so long detained behind the Pruth, were now actually investing Shumla, and on their march to Constantinople, he would probably have devoted a considerable portion of it to the policy of the new Emperor. He concludes with the following grandiloquent

observations :—

'During this interval, the boundless regions of Spanish America have completed their emancipation from the government of the parent country; and our own United States have taken the stand which they are henceforth and for ever to occupy, in the political system of Christendom. What volumes of detail are comprehended in these lines! How insignificant do the events of former times appear by the side of those which this new epoch must bring to light! How confined the sphere on which the most distinguished actors in those events performed their parts, compared with the present political theatre, which has no limits but those of the globe! Is it too much to anticipate that the minds which are to figure upon this more extended field of action, before this enlarged circle of observers, will be moved by purer and nobler views, and rise to loftier heights of patriotism and virtue, than those which preceded them? May we not hope at least that the new world will continue to produce Washingtons instead of Cromwells and Buonapartes; and Adamses, Franklins, and Jeffersons, instead of Machiavels and Mirabeaus? Certainly the present appearances tend to encourage very strongly these ideas, and to cheer the hearts of the lovers of our race with delightful visions of the future.'pp. 58, 59.

The remainder of the volume is engaged in commentaries upon these two events-the emancipation of Spanish America, and the stand which the United States have taken, and are for ever to occupy, in the political system of Christendom.' The latter topic is treated first in point of order, as it seems to be a matter of course that the United States are to take the lead in every thing. In noticing this over-ambitious, not to say inordinate arrogance of our author, we wish to be clearly understood as having no desire whatever to undervalue the political institutions, the domestic prosperity, and the legitimate foreign influence of that great Republic. To talk, however, of the stand which it has taken in the political system of Christendom, simply because its President lately said, that it would not view with indifference any attempt that might be made to restore the Spanish States of America to the mother country, seems at least evidence of a desire to infer the largest possible consequence from a very narrow, and not to say it disparagingly, a very equivocal premise. The phrase, 'not to view with indifference,' might, if circumstances required it, be construed to mean absolutely nothing. For ourselves, we doubt extremely whether the people of the United States would ever undertake a war, the sole object of which would be to defend the freedom of South America. A war even for their own preservation, when it

affects their commerce, is not very agreeable to them, as their his, tory shows; and to suppose that they would contract a new debt, and shed the blood of their children, for the sake of securing independence to Mexico or Columbia, is far more than any man who knows the people of New York or Massachusetts, would ever expect from them. It is all very well for the President to use fine words, which may admit of any meaning which future circumstances might render necessary; but it is a little too much for an American writer to place his own construction upon them, and then to erect them into a great and permanent principle of action, upon which his country has taken a stand in the political system of Christendom!' The thing looks ridiculous, and is, in fact, mere bombast. If by Christendom, Europe be chiefly meant, we assert, without fear of contradiction, that America has taken no stand here, and that when her councils are not confined to her own hemisphere, they are treated with no degree of respect.

[ocr errors]

In the author's commentaries upon the general and local constitutions of the United States, he adopts uniformly the fantastic and absurd language of M. Chateaubriand, that the representative republic of America is "the most splendid discovery of modern times." Could the author, or the author whom he quotes, have been ignorant that a commonwealth once existed in England, which was in a great measure representative, although its forms were abused? Could they have been ignorant that since the revolution, at least the democratic branch of the British constitution has been treated by our best lawyers as a representative republic, and as the first one of the kind that ever endured for any considerable period? The states of Holland also, what were they but a rather less perfect picture of what the United States of America now are, in their mode of government; and yet are we told that a representative republic is "the most splendid discovery of modern times!" Our author, not contented with this, gives a long and elaborate history of the discovery of the representative principle, as if it had never been known or reduced to practice, save in the new hemisphere! There is a want of candour, and of fairness towards England, in this part of his work, which we much regret to perceive in the pages of so able a writer, whọ cannot be supposed ignorant of the history of the country which gave all the models of her free institutions, and what is better, the spirit that produced and defended them, to his own.

With the exceptions just noticed, the explanation which our author has given of the federal, and the States' constitutions, is clear, copious, and satisfactory. They are rather more complicated in their relations, and at the same time more distinct from each other in their practical application, than most foreigners, even Englishmen, are apt to imagine. To those who wish to understand them, we recommend the essays in the "Federalist," and the third and fourth chapters in the book before us. They will

see in the former the plans traced out by Madison and Hamilton; they will see in the latter the manner in which their theories are carried into operation, as well as very able biographical sketches of those two justly celebrated persons. In these chapters there are also some remarks on the internal economy of the United States, in which we find great encouragement given to the establishment of manufactures. So anxiously does the author feel on this point, that he even recommends a minister of trade to be added to the cabinet, for the purpose of superintending and promoting this branch of industry.

The fifth chapter is taken up with the political condition of the new states of Spanish America. The author looks upon the emancipation of those states as completing in one of its principal parts, the developement of a new universal system,' and as forming one of the leading circumstances, in the most interesting crisis in the fortunes of Christendom, that has occurred since the first establishment of the European commonwealth upon the ruins of the Roman empire.' The causes both immediate and remote of that revolution, are treated in a masterly manner. In the author's observations on the political institutions of the new states, we are not altogether disposed to acquiesce. They are founded on the plausible principle that the material virtue of a good constitution is its conformity to the condition of the people who are to be governed by it.' Speaking generally, this rule may no doubt be received as a good one; but it admits of exceptions. As for instance, in the case of the Spanish Americans, what condition could be said to appertain to them, to which a constitution of any kind could be considered as strictly conformable? They were not rich enough to support a despotic government, still less a mixed government, which would be much more expensive. In selecting a republican form of government, they sought to enjoy the practical advantages of that liberty, for which they had so long and so heroically struggled; and if they were at first untutored in the theory and practice of legislation, and in the exercise of the franchises which are necessary for the support of a general system of freedom, is it therefore to be contended that they ought to remain slaves for ever? A few years will give them all the experience of which they can stand in need under their circumstances; and although the constitutions on which they fixed cannot be said to have been in conformity with the condition of the men of the revolution, they will be perfectly in consonance with that of their children. Liberty is always worth an experiment, and if it only be permitted to have fair play, it cannot fail in due time to knit itself into the hearts of those who are within the sphere of its influence. The author does not tell us what form of government he would have given to the Spanish states, if they had consulted him on the subject. He thinks, indeed, that they all possessed in common one element-that of religion-of which they have made too little

use as a means of union and strength for their political systems. It might, he says, have been rendered with great propriety and utility the principal basis of their institutions. In other words, perhaps he would have them governed as the Indians of Paraguay formerly were by the Jesuits, or by patriarchs, who would be at once the law-givers and executive officers of the new theocrasies. In strict reasoning, perhaps, a government of this sort would have been more conformable to the condition of the Spanish Americans than any other, for in point of religion their condition was universally the same. But although we set as high a value as any person can set on the utility of religion, yet we apprehend that no greater injury can be done to it, than by converting it into a political instrument. When mixed When mixed up with the government of a nation, its sacred name is often assumed as a mark for hypocrisy and vice of every description. A political system, solely founded on religion, would not be practicable, and certainly not at all conformable to the present usages of the world. We may add, that if governments supported entirely by religion, had been established in South America, there is not one of the new states that would not at this moment have been again under the dominion of the Peninsula.

The author's notions on this subject are eminently absurd and paradoxical. Religion,' he says, wherever it can be employed in this way, seems in fact to be the proper corner stone of every political fabric; the theory of the natural separation of the church and state, which grew up at the time of the reformation, and has since gained so much currency that the Catholics themselves have found it necessary to admit it, has, in fact, no foundation whatever in truth.' It is not true that the theory of the natural separation of the church and state, grew up at the time of the reformation. It was established by HIM who said that His kingdom was not of this world, and the innovation commenced with Constantine, who for the first time allied the Christian church with the state.

Far from the theory of separation growing up at the time of the reformation, it was then violated more vigorously than ever, in England, in Saxony, in Prussia, in Holland, in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, in Scotland, and in Ireland, in each of which kingdoms the doctrine of the natural union of the church and state was enforced by law, and often by persecutions of the most flagitious character. If there be any one thing more enviable than another in the system of the United States, it is its total want of an established religion. This is a matter which it has wisely left to every individual to take care of for himself, and we hope that sooner or later the same practice will prevail all over Christendom. No church can be the true one which requires to be bolstered up by human laws. f

In treating of the European colonies in America, (to which the author devotes his sixth chapter), he takes it for granted, as

« AnteriorContinuar »