constantly making the most fearful attacks on public morals, instead of being their parent and protector. In all the free states that have gone before us, freedom, instead of giving birth to, destroyed, public morals, and by this it destroyed itself. If we glance at the history of our constitution, we find, that for ages it was frequently either inoperative, or at work only for public injury. Now the King was virtually a despot, then he was the tool and slave of a faction. Now, contending rivals desolated the country with civil war, for the crown, as though no constitution had ever existed; then, a band of nobles trampled upon the throne with one foot, and upon the peasantry with the other, as though their will was the only constitution. Now, the House of Commons was in a state of suspended animation, then it was the cringing lacquey of the crown, and then it seized upon the sovereignty, butchered the sovereign, demolished the constitution, and rivetted upon the nation the fetters of military despotism. The most revolting atrocities that stain our annals were perpetrated by the instrumentality of the Houses of Parliament, the Peers in their judicial capacity, and Juries-by the institutions which we reverence, and justly too, as the most precious of our national possessions. It was only when that immense class, which exists between the lower orders and the nobility, attained maturity, that the Constitution was put into proper operation in all its parts, and was made the dispenser of liberty and blessings. If it be possible to prove anything whatever, this must prove that popular institutions will not of themselves create freedom,-that freedom rather militates against, than originates and sustains, that from which it draws its vitality, and that it is dependent upon the higher mental endowments, and the highest virtues, for birth and longevity.

Our American Colonies went to war with the mother country from no doctrinal fanaticism; "Liberal opinions" were then unknown, or, at least, had not been condensed into a system to wage war with genuine liberty, and curse mankind. At the commencement, they fought for what they believed to be a right, without thinking of independence, and when at last they determined on having a government of

their own, they wished to have one that would be the most suitable for their character and circumstances. They were Englishmen in character and habit; they had been trained to the use and enjoyment of liberty, and they knew nothing else; they were without materials for forming a monarchy, and therefore there was only a republic for them. Those who formed the scheme of government were practical men, anxious to benefit their country, and the structure which they raised contained nothing of moment that was new to the people in practice, while it contained almost everything to which they had been accustomed. The people, moreover, were unanimous in favour of this form of government, and when they had obtained it, they believed that they possessed the best in the world. It does not fall within the scope of this Article to speak of its defects, to examine its operation, and to inquire what it will be when factions shall become so unprincipled and violent in America, as they have so long been in this country.

What has been said will clearly indicate the path which ought to have been followed in South America, but the directly opposite one was followed. The authors of the South American revolution were Liberals, and they commenced it almost wholly, not from pressing national needs, or just quarrel with the parent state, but to practise their political doctrines. This would have been most perilous, even if their creed had been true, rational, and practical; if it had been high Toryism. It was of necessity to distract those with disputes on abstract principles of government who were destitute of political knowledge-it was to make political fanaticism the grand spring of action, and to attempt to obtain freedom by the agency of that which can establish no other government than a tyranny. But the creed of these persons consisted of "liberal opinions"-the old farrago respecting the equality of man, and not the good of man, the possession of liberty, and the destruction of all that can nurture liberty. Of course, those principles only were inculcated that were the most false and dangerous, and those institutions only were thought of, that were the most unfit, and the most likely to be perishable.

The condition of South America was exactly the reverse of that of North America, in the contest of the latter for its independence. The most marked inequalities existed in the circumstances of its inhabitants. One class was rich, luxuriant, fond of splendour and magnificence, and, in the highest degree, aristocratic from birth and the degradation of those amongst whom it moved. The remainder of the population, comprehending a very large proportion of the whole, existed in the lowest stages of poverty, servitude, vice, and ignorance of mental and bodily degradation. The former displayed the inertness of the Spaniard, doubled by the enervating influence of a tropical climate; the latter possessed the sprightly, unreflective, unstable, foppish, sensual, selfish, insincere, dishonest, wild, and passionate temperament of the Indian, Negro, and Creole. It was not possible to amalgamate both into one adhesive body. They had been accustomed only to the rule of an absolute monarch, they knew nothing whatever of practical liberty, and, in addition to this, the higher class, the wealth and intelligence of the country, were of royalist principles, and opposed to the revolution. Common sense loudly proclaimed that monarchy was alone calculated for such a population, and that while this population was disabled by mental defects, habit, and condition, for rendering republican institutions operative for public good, it was endowed with almost everything that could convert republican liberty into a plague. The erection of a rational monarchy with a member of the royal family of Spain at its head, would, in all probability, have converted the higher class of the people into supporters of the revolution, while it would, no doubt, have been as palatable to the lower class as a republic. Unanimity, so essential for the stability of new governments, would thus have been secured. The power of the Crown might have been limited to the utmost extent. The King must have accepted it on the terms of the givers, and he would have possessed no party, and no means of any kind, to enable him to violate the compact. Such a government would have stood on the natural foundation of governments; it could scarcely have failed of being permanent, and of realizing the best hopes of its subjects. The Liberals, however, must always

follow the saine conduct in all countries, and they must, above all things, appropriate the sovereign power to themselves. A population like this was formed into a variety of petty republics, each, of course, having at its head, a party of the leaders of the revolution.

South America therefore presents the following monstrous incongruities. A population consisting of three or four distinct, hostile, and unmixable races of men, of which, one is composed of decided aristocrats, who regard the others, not merely as inferiors in station, but as beings ranking only just above the brute, and of which a very large portion are slaves, or nothing better, is governed by republic. A population ignorant in all things, and profoundly ignorant of the principles and practice of liberty, having no literature and no public opinion, composed chiefly of the rich and of the extreme poor, and licentious in the highest degree, is governed by republican institutions. The degraded slave, the outcast Indian, and the despised Creole, have governments which continually ring in their ears the doctrine of equality, the rights of man, &c. &c. Ultra Liberals are formed into governments which profess to be liberty personified, and still render one part of the people the tyrants of the other;-which affect to secure a community of political rights, and still give to a great part of their subjects no political rights whatever. Governments are established which are hated by one part of their subjects, as being founded on false principles, which are despised by another part, as conceding nothing that they ought to concede, and which are scarcely cordially reverenced by any, except those who draw emoluments from them.

Some of the fruits have already appeared, and others will speedily follow. These republics are already agi tated by factions of the worst description-factions struggling only for the reins of power. Even before the contest with the mother country is ended, we see in some of them, one set of men after another, seizing upon the government by main force, as though no constitu tion existed. If human nature remain unchanged, and chance interrupt not the operation of natural causes, this will continue until it end in the destruction of South American republi

canism. Factions must exist as long as the republics exist, and there is nothing in the people, or the government, to control them. The natural and acquired qualities, the form and condition of society, and the national institutions, which in this country keep factions within due bounds, are in a great measure unknown in South America; and, on the contrary, the people are in a state peculiarly calculated for enabling factions to become lawless and to work their ruin. But what the republics have chiefly to dread is, the effect which the doctrines on which they stand must have, when they are rendered familiar to the lower orders. This must take place; the principles of Liberalism must become the creed of the slaves, the Indians, and the subordinate portion of the Creoles, and the passions of these must be continually worked upon by faction. The consequences, all may anticipate.

It is time now to speak of the questions which agitate Europe respecting these States.

That Spain should be exceedingly anxious to regain the sovereignty of them, is perfectly rational; and that, if she can reconquer them without assistance, she has a right to do so, iş admitted by every one. But that she has a right to hire, or to receive without hire, such assistance from other powers, even though it be only meant to recover for her what she has lost, is strenuously denied. It would be idle to enter into the labyrinth, into which, the discussion of the principle of this denial would lead. England and America have protested against such assistance being furnished, and the idea of furnishing it seems to be entirely abandoned; there is therefore an end of the matter. America could do this safely, for she has neither colonies nor allies, and she seldom puzzles herself with maxims of honesty and consistency in the prosecution of her policy. With us it was a different matter. We have both colonies and allies; we have something to lose in other parts of the world, as well as something to gain in South America. We have by our "clear principle" effectually bound ourselves from ever using a ship, or a soldier of an ally, let us be losing what we may in the East Indies and else where. It would, however, no doubt, be against our pecuniary interests of the moment, for South America to

be again controlled by the mother country.

The opinion which has been so widely inculcated, that the leading powers of the continent wish to reunite South America to Spain in order to stay the contagion of revolutionary principles, is unworthy of belief. These powers had, at least, a very strong interest in putting down the Crown-veiled republic that was reared in Spain. Danger commanded, if public law forbade, them. However despotic as governments they may be, they must still be as solicitous for their own existence, as though they were free ones; and it was loudly proclaimed by all the Liberals in the world, as well as belie ved by themselves, that the existence of the new Spanish government was incompatible with their own. Not merely the principles on which this government was raised, but all the inflamed personal feelings of the ruling party were fiercely opposed, not to the policy, but to the existence of the other European governments; they regarded the subversion of these governments, as a matter alike probable and desirable. They proclaimed the governments of England and France to be tyrannies, as well as those of Austria and Prussia; and no nation and monarch were more abused by their public prints, than England and her King. It was impossible for a government like this, ruling a nation of the second class, and forming a member of the great family of European governments, while almost every state was agitated by powerful factions professing its principles and labouring to accomplish its wishes, to exist, without endangering the existence of other governments. It could not harmonize with them, or avoid provoking their dislike, except by apostacy; it was compelled by self-preservation, as well as principle, to foment their internal disturbances; its professions of noninterference were neutralized by the doctrines which it publicly inculcated, and its personal connection with the revolutionists of every state; and its physical weakness, as an enemy, was counterpoised by the strength of the revolutionary factions that almost everywhere existed. But with regard to the States of South America matters are wholly different. Their feebleness, distance from, and want of connection and influence in Europe,

place them, even with regard to doctrines, far below its fears. If the allied sovereigns wish republicanism to receive its death-blow, let them leave the republics of these states to yield their natural fruits, and to destroy themselves.

It has been said, that the allied sovereigns merely wish for the establishment of some rational, practical, independent government in South America, for the benefit of itself alone. There would be but little to condemn in such a wish, even though it savoured of the impossible. The warmest friend of South America would wish to see it converted into one, or two, constitutional monarchies, framed upon the model of the British one, as far as the genius, habits, and circumstances of the population would permit, and having, for functionaries, practical, experienced men of British constitutional principles. He would wish this, not merely as a friend to its future prosperity, happiness, and greatness; but in order that it might be saved from impotency, strife, misrule, anarchy, bloodshed, and ruin. If mankind would act from right motives alone, this might be easily accomplished, for its expediency would be admitted by all parties. But were the allied sovereigns to propose that the people should themselves trace the boundaries of these monarchies, that they should have all the royal houses of Europe, and, in truth, all mankind to choose their sovereigns from, that they should draw up their own constitutions under no other restriction, than that they should contain nothing manifestly hostile to social order, and that the sovereigns should guarantee the permanence of these monarchies, and the preservation of internal tranquillity-such a scheme, however salutary it might be for the country, however palatable it might be to the people at large, could still only be carried into effect by force, and of course in direct opposition to public law. Not only the Liberals of Europe and the government of the United States, but the powers that be in South America would resist it with all their might, and this would be a sufficient reason for not undertaking it.

It may be proper here to remark, when so much praise has been lavished by our Whigs upon the protest of the President of the United States

against the interference of the Allied Powers with the affairs of South Ame rica, that this protest may safely be referred to the lowest of interested motives. It is the manifest interest of the United States, that South America should be divided and governed as it is. If the latter formed but one state, it might easily possess itself of a formidable fleet, a numerous army, and powerful allies, and might become a sturdy equal and a galling curb, as well as a valuable neighbour. But the feeble, jarring republics must be content to remain without fleets, armies, and allies;-they must be content to act the slave when North America pleases to act the bully, and to look on in submissive trembling, when she pleases to aggrandise herself, either to their danger, or at their expense. She will be in the western world, with regard to power, the France, as it was in the days of Buonaparte on land, and the England on the ocean. In exactly the same proportion in which it is the interest of the United States for South America to remain what it is, it is the interest of England that it should not so remain-that it should be consolidated into one, or two, powerful states. Next to South America itself, no country in the world has so great an intérest in promoting such consolidation as Great Britain. This violent clashing of interests ought at any rate to make us exceedingly cautious in seconding the views of North America.

With regard to the future influence of the States of South America on our general interests, they will, no doubt, furnish an extremely beneficial market for our trade. With this we must be satisfied. They will add vigour to the rivalry which exists between us and the United States, revive our fainting jealousies and animosities, and make us almost natural enemies. They will frequently embroil us in disputes, and not seldom in war, with that power; for the preservation of their rights from its invasion, and of their territory from its grasp, will, in a great degree, devolve upon us. While they will thus render the duty of guarding our interests more difficult, make the task of maintaining the balance of power more extensive and laborious, and multiply the chances of war and its evil consequences, they will be comparatively worthless as allies and auxilia

ries. We must have no alliance with them-we must draw none of the benefits from them that spring from alliance, and still we must act for them towards the United States, as though we were cemented by alliance into one; and we must fight for them, when fighting is the order of the day, as principals, and almost single-handed. We must, moreover, not expect the negative advantage of quarrelling for, and of being assisted by, the whole when we do quarrel for them; but it must be for one at a time, with, not seldom, some of the others opposing us in the business. This must, of course, add to the chances in favour of the frequency of strife, and increase the odds against us when we are engaged in it. Looking at British interests alone, it is painful in the extreme to think of what South America might have been rendered, and to see what it has been made. As one State, it would have yielded as many present benefits to our trade as it yields in its divided condition. With one rational, stable, efficient government, probability would have been entirely in favour of an increase of this trade; but with the existing hundred cockney, shadowy governments, probability is wholly in favour of its interruption and decrease from internal contentions and changes. As one State, South America would have formed a natural and most valuable ally to Great Britain: it would have enabled us to preserve important national possessions, which we can scarcely preserve without an ally, and for the preservation of which, we must now seek one in vain. Both would have had territory bordering on that of the United States-both would have had a clear interest in guaranteeing the inviolability of each other's territory, and in restraining that power from further aggrandizing itself, and their combined means would have been amply sufficient for the purpose. As it is, in our next contest with the United States for our possessions that lie near them, we must fight alone, and national vanity itself can scarcely hope for a favourable issue.

The main object of these remarks is, to draw the attention of our statesmen to the real merits of the great question respecting South America. It is in general regarded as a mere affair between liberty and slavery, beVOL. XV.

tween trade and no trade: the Whigs and Radicals huzza, because that portion of the world is throwing off a monarchical government; the better portion of us wave our hats, because it is swelling the list of free States, and the tide of our commerce and manufactures; and all seem to think that, provided it become independent, and allow us to trade with it, there is nothing more to be anxious about, either for its own sake, or ours. We seem to believe, that the best institutions will naturally be formed; that things will naturally take the best channel for the future; and that it is impossible for error to be committed now, and calamity to be reaped hereafter. Is this delusion, so glaring and disgraceful, to last for ever? and are we, while we are boasting of being wise above all who have gone before us, still to pursue conduct that would be scarcely worthy of children?

To what is all this owing? What has placed the extensive regions of South America in the worst possible situation that the acquisition of their independence could have placed them in, with regard to themselves and to Europe? What causes this consummation to yield the least possible benefit to Great Britain, both with respect to the present and the future? And what causes our own blindness to truths so apparent? The new principles of social union and government -Liberal opinions and Liberals. A new race of usurpers and tyrants, consisting of discarded and would-be statesmen, and needy and ambitious soldiers, has sprung into being, and it is to that we are indebted for this mass of present loss and fearful anticipation. Things cannot be done now as formerly. The individual usurper cannot now find accomplices to place the crown on his head, therefore the prize is shared; an army cannot now be raised among dependants and connections to fight avowedly for the sovereignty, therefore one is provided by disorganization, and Liberty is the rallying cry for the establishment of an oligarchical tyranny. But motives and objects are substantially unchanged. If we dispassionately compare the creed and practice of these usurpers, with those of absolute monarchs, the latter are demonstrably the best, not merely with regard to national weal and happiness, but even with respect

T