and American governments had great efficacy in arresting in its inception the projected movement in Europe. We have thought it worth while, thus to dwell upon the expression of the writer before us, to show that France and Spain were not the only courts, to which the preservation and the erection of monarchical institutions in America had presented themselves, as great objects of policy; and also that these objects were avowedly pursued, in order to afford a counterbalance to the influence of the United States of America. These facts ought to be borne in mind by the American statesman, who would come to an enlightened conclusion as to the zeal and vigilance, with which we ought to cherish that sympathy between ourselves and our sister republics, for which so solid a foundation exists in

nature.

The writer proceeds to observe, that the question has often, with propriety, been asked, why the liberals, those malecontents, do not at once renounce our continent, to which, by their interests and their character, they have become alien?' After observing that discontent with home has always been the great principle of colonization, and that a great majority of the emigrants to North America, in every period, have gone out from that principle, he sums up with the observation, However different the character of the various classes of emigrants, they all agree in the common character of dissatisfaction with the relations existing in the mother country, be that dissatisfaction religious, political, or personal.'

6

6

Why do not these malecontents renounce our continent?' OUR Continent?-But we will let that pass; because we might not express the feelings which the phrase excites, without falling into a tone too harsh for this place. We will give some reasons, however, why the malecontents do not renounce our continent.' It is not a very easy process to renounce a continent. An ocean is to be crossed; a foreign land explored; and a new settlement made. These are all expensive, and beyond the means of vast numbers, who would gladly renounce 'our continent.' Let the writer of this preface read the work of Mr Gall, or that of the Baron Von Fürstenwärther, and there behold a picture of the distress incident to renouncing a continent, enough to move the heart of a minister, or his secretary. We venture to quote from a former number of this journal a single passage.

'At Dusseldorf our author received information, with regard to the unfortunate emigrants, who, three years before, had left Germany for Holland, without any mode of supporting themselves in the Dutch ports, and finding no means of procuring a passage for America, were obliged, under circumstances of the extremest misery, to return. He says

"Many, unwilling to admit the necessity of returning, remained still in the neighborhood of the Dutch cities till the approach of winter. At last, violently undeceived, they set out on their return. Half starved, covered with rags filled with vermin, and from the total prostration and wasting of strength scarce able to creep on, they arrived in the neighborhood of Dusseldorf. And yet it was out of the question to afford the most miserable any repose, for it was necessary to hurry them forward, to make room for those that followed. Those, who could not march, were sent on in wagons. Almost every family had lost one of its members. An unhappy father of seven children, of whom the oldest was scarce twelve years, had become insane at the loss of his wife. 'I want nothing,' was his constant cry, in his delirium, 'I want nothing, but a little bread for my poor children. One loaf, yes, one loaf, I have only earned one; but the poor worms cannot get their fill of that, and leave some for me to eat and be strong enough to work tomorrow for another.-See! look there! Three big, big dogs! See how they eat! O how they eat their fill! O God! God! let my poor children only eat their fill once! Shall we go to America? Oh yes, to America; there, there is plenty of land-all belongs to God-there I shall have a great, great field-and there we 'll raise the corn and potatoes, and eat as much as we want!'"''*

But this is not the worst. Recollecting always the source, from which the remarks under consideration proceed, there is a malice as well as an unreasonableness in them, which deserves severe reprehension. Why do not the malecontents leave Europe? Because the governments throw all possible obstacles in the way of their departure. Do they not pursue them with a claim of inalienable allegiance? Even in England, was it not till two years ago penal, for any man of that class, from which alone most of the emigrants would naturally proceed, the mechanics, to leave his country? In the German states, an enormous tax, we believe twenty per centum, is levied upon every transfer of real estate, made by an individual, who sells his pro

*North American Review, No. XL. Vol. XVII. pp. 110, 111.

perty with an intention to emigrate. And yet the official agent of one of these governments very cooly asks why, if the malecontents do not like the country, they do not leave it. With how much justice might the question be retorted. War was carried on in Europe for one generation, for the purpose of seating a single family on the throne of France. With how much reason might the French people say to this family, You are but one family out of nine millions of families of Frenchmen. You are dissatisfied with our actions, you are unwilling to live with us on a footing of equality. You are unwilling to submit to the man whom we prefer as our ruler. Why do you not leave us in peace, and go and live elsewhere? In this expostulation there would be a world of good sense. And for ourselves, we know not what the hearts of the men are made of, who could consent that their own country and every other country in Europe should be wasted with a thirty years' war, in order that one of themselves should be placed on a throne, for which sickness, want of and old energy, unfitted him. But how the men, age who have been leaders in the great counsels of restoring one family, at an immense cost of happiness and life to all the rest, can seriously call upon the great body of liberal politicians, as a simple matter of duty, to emigrate, we cannot comprehend.

The only other topic in this preface of importance is one, that regards the composition of society, in America. The writer infers from the mode in which America was peopled, and from the nature of our institutions, that we are all, as he calls it, of the third estate. What the writer means is true enough; that we have no clergy, endowed by the government, and no hereditary nobility, constituting a first and second estate. But why this makes the aggregate of our society the third estate, may not be so clear. If there be neither a first nor a second, we perceive not how there can be a third. There is then but one estate; that is, every citizen enjoys an equality of political right, and all the consideration, which his character and standing give him.

We should not have been at the pains to rectify our writer's statement on this subject, did we not apprehend that the practical application of the truth, that we have no division of orders in society, has not yet fully been felt and made, even in this country. During the period which elapsed between the overthrow of the British government in the United States and the establishment of the various systems of government, in the various states of the Union, there was a pretty strong current, in favor of the

proposition, that there is, in the nature of human society a foundation for the threefold divisions of the one, the few, and the many. If this be taken merely as the enunciation of the proposition, that the various functions of government ought not to be collected into the same hands, it is a safe doctrine. But it is known to have had, in the minds of many, a far more extensive application; and to have led to the adoption of some provisions in most of our forms of government, which may hereafter appear not their most useful parts. On this great topic, we will not now enlarge. We will only state two authorities, deserving the consideration of the reader. Mr Burke argues against the principle, which forms the basis of the senatorial representation of Massachusetts, with great vigor, and, as we think, great success; although some of the arguments, which he presents against that principle, in the French republican constitutions, do not, we own, apply to us. Mr Jefferson has expressed the opinion, that the unlimited negative of the Senate is a defect in the constitution of the United States. We have, however, given more space to this German writer than anything in the nature of his performance requires; and we leave the effectual refutation of it to time and the steady progress of liberty and truth.

R.C. Anderson.

ART. V.-Cuerpo de Leyes de la Republica de Colombia. Tom. I. Comprende la Constitucion y Leyes sancionadas por el primo Congreso Jeneral, en las Sesiones que celebró desde el 6 de Mayo hasta el 14 de Octubre de 1821. 4to. pp. 267. Bogotá.

THE Constitution of Colombia resembles, in many of its great features, the constitution of the United States. Some of its most valuable provisions are copied almost literally from it. The executive power is confided to an officer bearing the name of President, elected for a limited time; a vice president is chosen to discharge the executive functions, on the death or resignation of the first officer. The legislative power is vested in two branches, each possessing, on all subjects purely legislative, a negative on the proceedings of the other; and both are elected for limited periods. The judicial authority is confided to a se

parate body of magistracy appointed during good behavior by the Executive, with the advice and consent of the Senate. In these respects, which give the popular representative name and character to the two governments, they are alike, as they are also in many of the minor provisions, designed to give effect to these fundamental articles.

But there is one respect, in which the forms of government established by the two republics is so essentially different, that they cannot be considered as entirely bearing a common character, or a common name. The government of the United States is a confederacy of States, each reserving to itself unlimited powers of legislation on most local subjects, and on all subjects, of which the control has not been clearly surrendered, and maintaining distinct local legislatures for the exercise of these powers; they also have their Executive and Judiciary in full exercise of the ordinary functions of those departments. The federal government has the powers, which are granted by enumeration; these are generally such as apply to foreign relations, and general commerce. The government of Colombia is central, or consolidated. All the powers of legislation are confided to a single central legislature. There is nothing corresponding to the states, or local governments of the northern confederacy. The republic is divided into departments, and has also smaller subdivisions for the purpose of more convenient internal administration, but every officer is indebted for his authority, and owes responsibility, to the great central power, residing in the national metropolis. While the Congress of the one possesses all legislative power not expressly excepted, that of the other has none, which is not granted in a manner equally clear and formal. While the subjects, on which the one can operate, are as numerous and diversified as the wants of civilized society, those of the other are limited and specified. In the constitution of the United States, enumeration grants power; while, in that of Colombia, enumeration fixes the boundaries of a grant otherwise unlimited.

The patriots, who were assembled to frame a government for the Colombian Republic, met at a moment of anxious trial. The enemy was within the country; the patriot troops were unsubdued, but they were undisciplined and unpaid; the treasury was empty, and credit there was none. It may readily be believed, that no men ever assembled under circumstances less favorable to mature deliberation, and where there seemed to be less prospect of a judicious and happy result. From within, they had no