Louis Philippe, with the Infanta Donna Louisa, the sister of the Queen of Spain, which took place on the 10th of October, will be more appropriately discussed in our narrative of affairs in that country. It is sufficient here to state that this marriage, and the mode in which it was brought about, gave great umbrage to the British Government, and drew from it a strong protest.

In consequence of this event, and the unsatisfactory nature of the communications which passed between Lord Palmerston and M. Guizot, through the medium of the Ambassadors of the two countries, the good understanding between England and France was materially impaired, and up to the

We shall have occasion to enter at some length upon this subject in our narrative of events in Spain during the year, for nothing occurred there so important in its political aspect and so fraught with consequences as these Royal marriages.

On the 28th of December, in the Senate, the Marquis de Vallgornera, Secretary to the Committee for drawing up the Address in answer to the Speech from the Throne, read the document which had been prepared. It was almost an echo of the Royal Speech. The dispute with the See of Rome was alluded to in the following terms :

"The Senate has also heard with respect from the august lips of your Majesty that negotiations continue pending with the Holy See, and it is intimately convinced of what great interest it is to the Church to witness a speedy and happy termination to that subject; and it trusts that the nation will owe that benefit to the solicitude and prudence of your Majesty and your Majesty's Government."

One of the members of the Committee, the Duke de Frias, had refused to sign this Address; and dissenting from his colleagues, he drew up one for himself, which he read to the Senate.

In the Congress also the Committee appointed for drawing up its Address were not unanimous, and Senor Seijas Lozano prepared a separate document, which he proposed to the Chamber. The Address signed by the majority was as usual a mere echo of the Speech from the Throne. The chief difficulties which the Government had to grapple with this Session were the Queen's marriage, and the dispute with

the Papal See. The latter subject was thus handled in the Address, proposed by Senor Seijas Lozano.

"The Congress has seen with much regret that the good understanding which ought to exist between this country and the Holy See has not been as yet established. The explicit promises made by your Majesty's Government in the late Session revived the hopes of an immediate reconciliation with the common father of all the faithful; and in such a manner, that the nation believed so happy an event was probable, if not already verified.

"May Heaven grant to the Government of your Majesty better fortune in the continuation, as well as termination of these negotiations!

a

"The Congress entertains hope that, in following them up, our duties as Catholics will be conciliated with the prerogatives of the Crown; and it hopes that the Government will not forget that those rights which have been created under the protection of the laws will be respected.'

A debate took place early in January, in the Chamber of Deputies, on the Address which was brought forward by Senor Seijas Lozano, as an amendment, instead of that drawn up by the Committee. He began by denying, in strong terms, the justice of the accusations of personal ambition which had been applied by the supporters of the Government to the members of the Opposition; and explained the circumstances under which he had declined to support the Address of the majority of the Commission; and the motives which induced him to propose a separate one. He then entered into the whole question at issue,

and reviewed the policy of the Government, of which he disapproved. He alluded to the almost isolated state of the Spanish nation with regard to the great foreign Powers England and France being the only ones with which an intercourse was kept up. He demonstrated the necessity that existed for renewing those relations before any decision was come to respecting the marriage of the Queen. This necessity existed equally for those Powers as for Spain. He entered largely into the question of the difference with Rome in the following terms "If we may judge from what we have read in the domestic and foreign press, and from public report, we may conclude that the Government believed in the successful issue of the negotiations with Rome, in case they were supported by French influence. That is to say, gentlemen, that the French Government should serve as mediator between us, and should afford us its protection. In my opinion it was the very worst course that could be followed. My firm, fixed, and earnest belief is, that, on the contrary, it is to England that we should have recourse to obtain for us the assistance of Austria in the arrangement of such a question with Rome. This may appear the longer course, no doubt, but I am convinced it is the safest. I may be asked why I entertain such an opinion. The reasons are manifold, and are not unknown to the Government. It is well known, Gentlemen, that the friendly relations which exist between the powers do not always possess the same value; nor yet are they of the same identical character, nor equally cordial. I have no data

to go on to enable me to tell the nature of those which exist between France and the Court of Rome; but I have only to look at history to know that the Court of Rome has never regarded with indifference the liberties of the Gallican Church. On the contrary, I see the necessary influence possessed by Austria-an influence which cannot cease to exist; and my conclusion is, that if we had succeeded in securing the mediation of Austria, we might have obtained all that Portugal has obtained. With how little trouble Portugal has been enabled to renew her relations with the common father of the faithful!

"For my part, I admit that I had much suspicion, mingled with fear, when it was determined to select France as our mediator with Rome; and these fears I have not yet got rid of. yet got rid of. The question is, are the offers of service made by France to the Spanish Government sufficiently frank? Are they sincere? I fear they are not. interests are not identified with ours. I may be mistaken, but my firm belief is, that it is the interest of France that we shall remain as isolated as possible, until the great events she desires be effected.'

Her

Senor Seijas afterwards entered at length into the questions of taxation and finance, and concluded by calling on the Government to apply instant relief to the burdens which were pressing on the people.

M. Munez Maldonado opposed the adoption of the amendment, which was afterwards strongly supported by M. Fernandez de la Hoz, who particularly condemned the moderation evinced by the Government in its negotiations with Rome, and its violation of the constitution in suppressing the trial of

offences of the press by the jury. General Narvaez replied, that if the negotiations pending with Rome had not yet been attended with the desired result, it was not the fault of the Government, which had proved itself throughout the faithful defender of the interests of the nation and the privileges of the Crown. "It has been asserted," he said, "that the Queen was not recognised by the Pope, but I declare that the relations between the two Sovereigns are most friendly, and that the Spanish Envoy in Rome is highly respected, and treated as the Minister Plenipotentiary of the Queen of Spain. Her Majesty has even in her possession letters from His Holiness, who calls her his most beloved daughter.' The settlement of the dotation of the clergy alone prevents her formal recognition by the Holy See." General Narvaez added that, with regard to the marriage question, the Queen had not yet expressed any desire on the subject, and that when Her Majesty should think proper to make a choice, the Ministers would hasten to inform the Cortes of her resolution. Messrs. Gonzales Moro, Pacheco, and Martinez de la Rosa afterwards respectively took part in the discussion, and the amendment of M. Seijas Lozano was ultimately rejected by a majority of 117 to 33. Ministerial majority, 84.

The discussion on the address, as agreed upon by the majority of the committee, commenced on the 7th of January, and was opened by Senor Calderon Collantes (Saturnino), who addressed the House in opposition to its reception. He highly censured the conduct of the Government. He declared that the liberty of the press being an VOL. LXXXVIII.

essential element in every constitutional country, the Government was much to blame for having usurped the legislative powers on that most vital point; at the present moment particularly, when the country was without national representation, and the powers of the municipalities and provincial deputations completely destroyed. The liberty of the press cannot exist without trial by jury; and that guarantee having been destroyed, there was no security for the free expression of thought. He touched on the marriage question, and said that since the days of Ramiro III., the Cortes had been always consulted on the marriage of the Sovereigns of Spain.

The Minister of the Interior (Senor Pidal), and the Minister of State (Senor Martinez de la Rosa), defended the Government against the attacks which had been made upon it, and were followed by Senor Galiano, who spoke as a member of the committee, and gave some explanations as to their conduct in drawing up the address. Alluding to the Moderado party being called the "French party, he said it was no wonder that the Moderados had attached them. selves to France, when so much hatred had been excited against them in England, and when revolutions and pronouncements were made amid cries against France. In allusion to the marriage question, he said that, as soon as a choice was decided on, it would be introduced to the notice of the Chamber, and then the articles of the contract would be examined. After some further remarks, he entreated all parties to combine. for the common welfare of the country, and to endeavour to obtain permanent felicity and true liberty. [T]