Capital.
This idea furnishes an answer to the objection that the operations of
the Chamber are nullified.
The King had the power of making it what it is, in consequence of
existing circumstances.
The Chamber of Deputies does not alone make the laws. The Chamber of
Peers, and the King, who in France is the chief branch of the
legislative body, have co-operated in that enactment.
If this objection could hold good in the present case, it would equally
hold good in all the rest. In fact, either after the dissolution, or
under any other circumstances, the King will return to the Charter, in
regard to age and number. On this hypothesis, it might be said that the
operations of the existing Chamber are nullified. Article 14 of the
Charter could always be explained by the extraordinary circumstances,
and its complete re-establishment by the most sacred motives. To return
to the Charter without dissolution is not then to nullify the operations
of the Chamber more than to return to the Charter after dissolution.
Will it be said that the King is not more certain of a majority after
the proposed reduction than at present? I reply that the probability is
greatly increased.
An assembly less numerous will be more easily managed; reason will be
more readily attended to. The Royal authority which is exercised in the
reduction will be increased and secured.
Again, in the event of a dissolution, would the King be more certain of
a majority? How many chances are against this! On one side the ultras,
whose objection to transfer a portion of the Royal authority to what
they call the aristocracy, occupy nearly all the posts which influence
the operations of the electoral assemblies. On the other, they will be
vehemently opposed by the partisans of a popular liberty not less
hostile to the Kingly power. The struggles which will take place at the
electoral assemblies, will be repeated in the Chamber, and what
description of majority will emanate from such a contest?
If the plan of reduction appears inadmissible;--if on the other hand, it
should be decided that the hostile spirit of the Chamber compels the
dissolution after convocation;--I should not hesitate to prefer
immediate dissolution to the danger which seems so likely to arise from
dissolution after assembly.
But if immediate dissolution were to lead to the forming of a new
Chamber animated by the same spirit and views, it would then become
necessary to find remedies,
|