reforming abuses, which had become too powerful to be at once overthrown, but which might have been gradually removed; because, in the pursuit of abstract truths, they infringed existing rights; because they separated themselves from the feelings of the country, and by acts of inconsiderate legislation, offended the most confirmed prejudices of the people. The Constitution existed without popular prepossession, and fell without a struggle, because they took no effective measures to render the interests of any class of the community dependant on the success or failure of the revolution, while they converted into implacable enemies a powerful party, whom careful management would have warmly disposed in their favour; and lastly, they paralyzed the exertions of their most decided supporters, by adopting a policy inconsistent with their in

terests.

The nobles, as a body, were extremely wealthy; a large portion of the land of Spain was in their possession; whole districts belong

ed to a few noble individuals, and descended in strict perpetuity of entail. The favourite practice of creating mayorazgos or perpetual entails, become common not only among the nobility, but among all classes of landed proprietors, was a principal cause of the extreme depression under which the agricultural interest laboured these overgrown estates, seldom or never seen by their possessors, were committed to the charge of careless agents; little attention was devoted to the improvement of the soil, that in a few years under better management would have repaid them tenfold, but remittances hastily collected were sent to the capital to maintain an useless system of little real magnificence, but immense profusion. Among a large class of the nobility the greater portion of their incomes arose from the possession of feudal or seignorial rights, that varied according to different tenures. In some villages the people were obliged to compound with the Seigneur for the permission to erect a mill to grind their corn; a similar tax was

levied on the olive mill; and the local sale of merchandize was not unfrequently submitted to an imposition more or less heavy. The Crown, when it ennobled an individual, sometimes granted to him and his descendants the power of levying specific duties on a particular town or village, for the purpose of creating funds to maintain his rank. It may easily be conceived, that rights of this nature weighed heavily on the industry of the country; their existence was a grievance, their abolition without indemnity was an act of extreme injustice. The Cortes decreed, that such rights should be considered null and void, except in cases where the claimant was enabled to bring indisputable proof that they were of the highest antiquity, were granted without collusion, and given on good consideration: as it was scarcely possible to produce sufficient proofs, especially when submitted for judgment, not to the common tribunals, but to the Cortes, the seignorial rights were virtually abolished. In consequence of this act, the fortunes of the more opulent nobles suffered

considerably, while the less wealthy class of proprietors were reduced to absolute poverty. The law was also carried to an extreme length, and rights of a very different and less offensive character, such as exclusive fisheries, and other monopolies of that nature, were included in the sweeping proscription. The Marquis de Los Velez was said to have lost an annual income of 500,000 francs, by the loss of his rights of fishery at Motril. Rights of judicature possessed by the proprietors of the soil, such as the appointment of local judges, arbitrators, &c. were of course annulled at the same

time.

Soon afterwards the Cortes imposed upon the country a general land tax, that pressed most heavily on the nobles as the principal land-holders. This tax was raised by Government commissioners, who rated the estates at their nominal value, without making any deduction for the debts, family charges, &c. with which they were encumbered: this imposition was severely felt by the nobility, who were already impoverished by the loss of their

seignorial rights, and by the extraordinary contributions they were at times required to make. I have heard of a noble who was at this period in the annual receipt of £1200 sterling money: the family charges on his estate amounted annually to more than half that sum; yet with this diminished income he was assessed by the commission according to his rentroll, and scarcely possessing a clear £500, was compelled to pay the tax in the proportion of £1200 per annum.

These acts were followed by another that confirmed the discontent of the nobles. Many of the nobility held their estates in virtue of grants from the Crown, some of which dated from very remote periods. In those days when a powerful aristocracy controuled the King, some of the Barons had extended their jurisdiction and properties beyond the limits assigned to them by the royal grants. The weakness of the regal prerogative, the power of the feudal lords, the absence of an intermediate class sufficiently powerful to oppose a barrier to their encroachments, and the tur