besides a relation of facts, just and acute remarks on a subject of such general interest. The second part ought to relate the events. Without this division, the narrative will be confused, because the reader cannot understand the events whose origin he is unacquainted with, and without this kuowledge, they will seem both contradictory and improbable.

"The first part is that of which I am about to treat. Truth being the only guide which an historian ought to follow, I have rigidly adhered to this maxim. I have published no other documents than those which were circulated in Spain, by order of Napoleon himself, and which I received in my official capacity, as attorney-general of the principality of Asturias. I have spoken of the private meetings at Bayonne, in the very language in which I received an account of them from those who were present, whose names I forbear to mention, lest I should endanger their safety. I have never ventured to make conjectures which are not supported by facts or probability, and I fam satisfied that I have not failed in any important condition-not been partial in concealing the defects of any one-nor in attributing to them faults of which they were not guilty.

"I expect to obtain from my readers that indulgence which every man deserves who is impelled by an honourable motive; and it ought to be considered, that having suffered innumerable calamities for having served the cause of my country, my mind cannot always preserve that serenity which may be thought requisite for a work of great meditation, and that I have composed it somewhat hastily, on account of the circumstances under which I have written,"

On such a subject as the Spanish revolution, it was natural in the writer to refer to that great event which may be considered as the parent of the various revolutions which have since followed, however they may have differed in their principles or the means by which they have been accomplished. Respecting the French revolution our author makes the following just observations...

"The French, at the commencement of their revolution, had no other object

:

than to reform the multitude of abuses which had grown up in their government; and no object could be more legitimate; but the Kings of Europe, seeing that it was contrary to their personal interest, and inconsistent with their dignity, that France should attempt to place limits to the power of their monarchs, lest the same thing should happen to themselves, could not look on with indifference, nor remain tranquil spectators of such events. Without any other motive than this, and thinking that it might afford them an opportunity of aggrandizing themselves, by diminishing the power of a nation which all others had looked upon with jealousy, they easily agreed to form an alliance the most unjust that ever existed. The result was such as might have been expected by any sensible person who consulted his reason, and did not suffer himself to be led astray by the spirit of party. The French fought for their freedom, and to defend those rights which inspire the generality of men with valour and enthusiasm; their enemies sacrificed themselves to support the interest of Kings which they little understood and since they attempted to confound the rights of freedom with the name of licentiousness, which they gave to the conduct of the French, it was not to be wondered that they were soon defeated on all sides. It must be confessed, that neither Louis XVI. would have been beheaded, nor would the French have succeeded against all Europe united, if the enemies of France had not committed those errors which the injustice of their cause naturally produced. The ministers and counsellors of that feeble and ill-advised monarch, not bearing that his power should decline from that height to which it had been raised, under the pretence of reinstating the king in all his rights, and that he might not give his consent to the reforms which the nation demanded, persuaded him to fly the kingdom, without considering the danger of exposing the nation to complete anarchy. The very means they took to reinstate him produced his ruin. The unhappy monarch would not have ventured on a measure so precipitate, if he had 'not been excited to it by the court of Vienna; but every thing contributed to produce an effect conf trary to that which was expected, and we need not wonder at the result which happened from the conduct of the ill

advised monarch. The enemics of France thinking their coalition the most powerful that had ever been formed, believed that nothing could resist it and they did not find out, till it was too late, that the advantages were all on the side of their opponents: being thus undeceived, their terror was equal to their former confidence.

"One error generally produces another. The pride and contempt with which, at the commencement of the revolution, they treated the power and resources of France, and the despair with which they afterwards regarded the contest, most probably contributed to that uninterrupted series of victories which compelled them to receive the law from those to whom they had at-. tempted to give it. Contempt of their enemies, and an imprudent confidence in their own superiority, has been, and ever· will be, the cause of ruin to the most powerful empires. A civil war, in which the republicans and the royalists fell upon each other-a want of money, which had occasioned a bankruptcy of the government, and was a secondary cause of the revolution-the general emigration of certain classes, who were averse to reform-the great effusion of blood among the different republican parties, gave the enemies of France the hopes of certain triumph, and a blind confidence, which prevented them from seeing that all their unjust and imprudent projects were perpetually liable to be frustrated. Had they acted with wisdom and justice, they would have attempted to prevent the misfortunes of the nation, and permitted the reform, which was indispensible, and in which men of all countries were deeply interested; but, as they thought only of the interest of kings, and never of the good of the people, they acted, eventually, as it happens in all these cases, against their own interest. Had they been acquainted with true and sound policy, they would have known that nations owe as much to each other as indivividuals, and that that which is just, alone is useful: but even considering their own happiness alone, which is always bad policy, if they had consulted their reason, they would have been contented to see the French engaged in a war among themselves, which cost them nothing, and would make them in the end more powerful, by remaining quiet spectators. But, as the passions never

suffer men to act with calmness, the rivals of France, desirous to diminish, as soon as possible, the influence and power of that nation, hastened to declare war, without perceiving that it could only serve to unite the French, and make them forget or suspend their internal dissentions, which were their chief misfortune.

"The true lover of his country forgets the insults of his fellow citizens when he is called upon to drive away her enemies. They did not perceive that the interests of the French would be concentrated from that moment, and that their own would be divided. It is impossible that even two individuals can long hold together to support an unjust cause, much less two nations; and, therefore, in proportion to the greater number of the allies, the sooner they were likely to quarrel. The wicked can never remain long united.

"Our passions and our reason have long conspired to persuade us that money is one of the sinews of war. Virtue alone is the true nerve of states, and in that alone consists all their force. France, now so victorious, would have been subdued, if, against so many enemies and in a state of bankruptcy, she had had to sustain a war for any other object than that which she had. Her enemies

understood not this truth: they believed the event would be the same as with other governments, when they had no money to pay for men or provisions. But they were ignorant that a war, declared by a whole country, supposes a general and ardent spirit of patriotism; and, in that case, men will fight without money; for when animated by a love of their country, nations possess inexhaustible resources, which are never calculated by the policy of cabinets.

"The emigration did no harm to, but rather served the cause of France: for, as the emigrants belonged, in general, to classes who would not have been em ployed in war, in the arts, or in agricul ture, they deprived the country of neither soldiers nor resources; and, by their departure, the French found themselves in possession of a considerable portion of riches, with which they could supply the expences of the war. sides, the emigrants left them also the means of augmenting their population in future: for population being always in proportion to the means of subsistence and comfort, the great estates of

Be

the nobles and clergy being equally divided, increased the number of proprietors in France by more than a million, and in a few years will increase it still further."

To the mistaken principles of those who opposed the French revolution, in its origin, and the rigour with which the French expelled those who attacked their independence, "the only motive which can make men invincible," are ascribed those. events which have filled the world

with astonishment. It is very justly added-" To acquire liberty, a mo"ment of fervour is sufficient, but "to preserve it men must be virtu"ous and of rigid morals." To il lustrate this position, and to account for the submission of the French to the tyranny of Bonaparte, our au thor remarks as follows.

"All nations who have lost their liberty, have lost it by slow degrees, from the effects of corruption, and not in a moment, as France has; and this can only be accounted for by the corrupt state of the French people before the revolution. A moral revolution can never be sudden, because men cannot change in a day their habits of thinking and feeling, without which an enslaved people can never be free. Nothing can more strongly prove this truth than the indifference with which the French nation submitted, without the least resistance, to a man who openly attacked and annihilated, in a moment, their national representation, that is, their total independence. How is it possible, if the French had possessed either morals or spirit, that they could have submitted to so unjust and violent a proceeding. As nations lose their liberty, they lose the martial spirit inherent in freemen. France lost her newly-acquired freedom so suddenly, that she had not time to lose that warlike enthusiasm acquired during her revolution; a spirit which destroyed every thing that opposed it, and gave the French sufficient energy to defend themselves; but they had not time to strengthen their virtue, nor to secure their liberty. Horrified at the blood which the revolution bad cost them; they were hardly able to estimate the merit of what they had performed, harrassed for ten years with a

most bloody war-terrified by the loss of their most zealous republicans-and irritated at the injustice, weakness, and perverseness of the directory, they saw, with tranquillity, the sanctuary of their laws and the sovereignty of the people (which had by no means been sufficiently defended by their constitution) attacked and annihilated by Bonaparte at one single stroke.”

The character and the history of Bonaparte is then given in a manner naturally to be expected from a Spaniard, whose love of liberty and independence excite in him the utmost indignation agrinst the man whom he considers as the deprejudice and partiality are appastroyer of both. Although some rent in this part of the work, it abounds with useful observations which are applicable to all countries, where the will of the tyrant is law. On the subject of the liberty of the press, we have the following just observations.

"To censure the measures of government was considered as the highest state crime; and to prevent the possibility of it in future, he [Bonaparte] put an end to the liberty of the press; which sacred right, though considerably limited, had produced so many great men in France from the time of Louis XIV. He did that which every despotic government does to prevent their iniquitous schemes being discovered: he fixed the seal of despotism on the people, by forbiding the exercise of a right, without which no idea of liberty can exist among men. He reserved to himself the sole right of forming the public opinion, as if he alone possessed the right of being hap py, since the people, who are not allowed to declare their grievances, can expect no remedy. He removed the only barrier that existed to arbitrary power. He insulated and rendered himself impenetrable by that cloud of mystery, in which those, who govern by their own caprice, always enwrap themselves, lest the truth should bring their crimes to light. He deprived the French of that most sacred privilege of man, viz. that of communicating their ideas, discovering truth, reclaiming their rights, denouncing injustice, instructing themselves on the state of their nation and

their own private interests. Thus he took upon himself to direct the public opinion, to determine all things according to his own will, and to find guilty all those who dared to oppose him, or censure the abuses of his authority.'

Amongst other causes assigned for the success of the French, is the conscription, a law so powerful "that its author was said to have organised victory." The internal state of France, and the nature of the governments with which she had to contend are thus described.

cr

Although her commerce and manufactures have suffered much since the commencement of the revolution, it is certain that she now possesses more specie than at any former period. The immense plunder of the continent has given her a great quantity of gold and silver, a small part of which only has been exported in the contraband trade with England. The people are therefore able to support the heavy taxes which Napoleon has imposed on them, and to maintain even greater armies than they do at present. The bankruptcy of the republic has placed the emperor in a state of complete solvency, while the expences of the war have al most ruined his enemies. This has given him an immense advantage over them all, except England, which he atteinpted to place in a similar situation by his continental system, carried on with so much rigour as to produce, in a great measure, the effect desired. Without adopting a similar system for arming their people, the nations on the continent could not hope to oppose with success the system of Napoleon, and he has therefore overturned their feeble governments, by means the most admirably adapted to the purpose:--by ferocity, cunning, activity, violence, and immorality. Master of so formidable an empire as France is, under her present system, impelled by his insatiable ambition, and led on from victory to victory, which victories are to be attributed more to the system adopted by the republic, to the gross ignorance and cruel despotism of his enemies, than to his own true force and military science, he formed the project of conquering and enslaving all Europe. No measures; however unjust or indecorous, has he ●mitted to complete his intentions; he

VOL. IX.

makes war against individuals as well as against whole nations, and spares no one who opposes his designs. It must be confessed, that he has excelled all former conquerors in activity, and a knowledge of the means for obtaining his purpose."

After having traced the conduct of the French emperor towards the emperor of Austria, and the German States, the author proceeds to detail the history of the revolution in his own country, the state of which, and the nature of its" regular government," may be learned from the following extract.

"In the twenty years, during which Charles IV. a most insignificant prince,' had reigned, governed by a woman the most corrupt, and by his own passions, not one single act of virtue for justice ever distinguished his government; not a single measure that was not dictated by the most gross ignorance, or the most arbitrary authority. A minister the most stupid, the most avaricious, the most despotic, and who enjoyed, in a greater degree, the distinguished regard of his Sovereign thau any other minister whom we read of in history, Don Manuet Godoy, Generalissimo, Admiral, and Prince of Peace, under whose administration his creatures had found out the unhappy secret of eluding the laws with impunity, sunk the nation, during this unfortunate reign, into an abyss of incalculable evils. A reign so deplorable on all accounts, from the first day of it to the last, had excited the hatred of all ranks of Spaniards, whether good or bad. There was not one single person who did not in his heart abominate so detestable a King, and did not desire the punishment of so iniquitous a minister, whose whole life was stained with every crime that man could commit.

"The nation, notwithstanding its immense resources, was brought to the brink of ruin. It had lost, during this abominable reign, almost its whole navy, which, on the succession of Charles, was the largest and best equipped that it had ever possessed. The army was so diminished, that all its fortresses were dismantled. The treasury of the nation was entirely exhausted, and the public credit completely annihilated. The national debt was greatly increased, if not wholly created in this short pe

K