A traveller's rambling reminiscences of the Spanish war; with a refutation of the charges of cruelty brought against general Evans and the British legion; and a defence of British policy

of Don Carlos, on which is written Despotism and the Inquistion*, and in favour of the claim and banner of the Queen, on which must be written the Guarantees of Constitutional Liberty, Freedom of Discussion, and the Freedom of the Press.

The most natural way of commencing a plain and easily-comprehended analysis of the Spanish War, is, by at once stating, in the shortest form possible, on whose side the balance of evidence appears to preponderate, as far as the mere question of the respective legitimacy of each party is concerned. The argument has been reduced to the fewest

"It is notorious that when, a short time since, and at a moment of his greatest necessity, Don Carlos was offered the assistance of Austria (which would have been followed by that of other powers), but upon the condition of his promising not to re-establish the Inquisition, he refused assistance coupled with such conditions."-Spanish Policy, p. 120.

words, by the Westminster Review, and I will, for that reason, extract the passage:

"Carlos's pretended right rests upon the "Salic law, which had never the force of "law in Spain. The Salic law was not the "ancient rule of succession; it was first in"troduced by the Bourbon, Philip V., the

great grandfather of Don Carlos. Females

"could always succeed in Castille, Leon, "and Portugal. It was by a marriage with "the heiress of Navarre that a king of France "obtained a claim to that kingdom; and

although females were excluded in Arra

gon, yet it was through a princess that its "inheritance passed to the Counts of Cata"lonia. It was by the right of female succes"sion, that the House of Austria reigned in

Spain it was by the same right, that the "Bourbons themselves occupied the throne. "It formed a part of the Partidas, or sys"tem of constitutional law, which Philip

swore to observe on his succession to the "throne.

"The Salic law could only be established "in two ways: by the old forms of the

"constitution, or by the despotic will of the sovereign. If the advocates of Don Carlos "take their stand on the former ground, the

answer is, that the forms as well as the "substance of the Constitution were violated "when Philip V. established his law of agnation; and that, conscious of its in"validity, he did not register it in the form "usual with similar acts: while again, if we pass over the Cortes of 1789 as secret and irregular, we have the Cortes of Cadiz in 1812, representing the nation, and acting "in the name of the King, which abolished "the decree of Philip, restored the ancient law de Partidas, and re-established the right of female succession to the crown. Finally, the decree of Ferdinand, constituting his daughter his successor, was just as regularly sanctioned by a Cortes as Philip's law of agnation. If, on the other hand, the sovereign's will be regarded as despotic in Spain, the question is at an end; for Carlos must confess that Ferdi"nand had a right to rule the succession as "he liked; and this view seems to have

"been taken by the King's confessor and "his minister Calomarde, when, during his dangerous illness at La Granja, in 1832, they seduced him to sign a new will,

settling the crown on Don Carlos. Ferdi"nand's recovery disconcerted their plan; "but their effort plainly shews, that the par"tisans of Don Carlos, at that time, felt that

the Salic law was a very weak support to their favourite's claims. If Carlos appeals "to the constitution, the question is decided against him; the will of the sovereign is against him; and what is of far more importance than either, a majority of the "nation is against him."

The author of a "Summer in Spain" takes much the same view of the question:

"I confess," he says, "I cannot see, that Don Carlos has any right, either human or divine, to the throne of Spain. The Salic "law, so far from being the ancient rule of "succession, was introduced little more than

a century ago, by a foreigner, Philip V., "the great grandfather of the pretender. As a proof that it never prevailed in Spain

"before that period, it is only necessary to " mention that Philip himself succeeded to "the throne in right of his mother. The "Salic law was introduced in an arbitrary

manner by that prince and his council, "without the convocation of the Cortes; its "sole object being to exclude the Houses "of Austria and Savoy, and to secure the Spanish throne to the House of Bourbon. "This innovation, which can scarcely be "termed legal, was repealed by the late King "and Cortes of the kingdom; and surely no "one can deny their right to do so. Don "Carlos, however, admits the right of his

great grandfather, Philip V., to make a "law, which he denies the right of his "brother Ferdinand to repeal. Such is the

"reasoning of princes!"

Thus, as far as the decision of the lawyer or historian is concerned, nothing can be clearer than the balance of legitimacy being in favour of the Queen: but I do not mean to found any argument on the balance of legitimacy, or the bravery of the Basques, or the nature of their privileges; but will allow

« Eelmine Jätka »

Books

A traveller's rambling reminiscences of the Spanish war; with a refutation ...