HEAD VI.
_Rights of citizens._
ART. 59. Frenchmen are equal in the eye of the law, both in contributing to the taxes and public expenses, and in regard to admission to employments civil or military.
ART. 60. No one can be taken out of the hands of the judges a.s.signed him by the law, on any pretence.
ART. 61. No one can be prosecuted, arrested, detained in custody, or banished, except in cases provided for by the law, and according to the forms prescribed.
ART. 62. Freedom in religious worship is guarantied to all.
ART. 63. All property possessed or acquired agreeably to the laws, and all debts of the state, are inviolable.
ART. 64. Every citizen has a right to print and publish his opinions, he signing them, without any previous censorship; saving that he is legally responsible, after publication, to be tried by a jury, even though the application of a correctional punishment only should be requisite.
ART. 65. The right of pet.i.tion is secured to all the citizens. Every pet.i.tion is that of an individual (_est individuelle_). These pet.i.tions may be addressed, either to the government, or to the two chambers; nevertheless, even the latter must be superscribed "to his Majesty the Emperor." They must be presented to the chambers under the guarantee of a member, who recommends the pet.i.tion. They are read publicly; and, if the chamber take them into consideration, they are carried to the Emperor by the president.
ART. 66. No place, no part of the territory, can be declared in a state of siege, except in case of invasion by a foreign power, or of civil disturbance.
In the former case, the declaration is made by an act of the government.
In the second case, it can be made only by the law. However, if the case occur, when the chambers are not a.s.sembled, the act of government, declaring the state of siege, must be converted into a proposal for a law in the first fifteen days after the meeting of the chambers.
ART. 67. The French people declare farther, that, in the delegation it has made, and now makes, of its powers, it has not intended, and does not intend, to confer the right of proposing the re-establishment of the Bourbons, or of any prince belonging to that family, on the throne, even in case of the extinction of the imperial dynasty; or the right of re-establishing either the ancient feudal n.o.bility, or feudal and seigniorial rights, or t.i.thes, or any privileged and predominant form of worship; or the power of making any infringement of the irrevocability of the sale of national domains: it formally prohibits the government, the chambers, and the citizens, from every proposal in respect to these.
Done at Paris, the 22d of April, 1815.
(_Signed_) NAPOLEON.
By the Emperor, _The minister secretary of state,_ (_Signed_) The Duke of Ba.s.sANO.
This additional act did not answer the general expectation.
The public had hoped, to receive from Napoleon a new const.i.tution, freed from the faults and abuses of the preceding const.i.tutions; and it was surprised, grieved, dissatisfied, when it saw, by the very preamble of the additional act, that it was nothing but a _modification_ of the former const.i.tutions, decrees of the senate, and other acts, by which the empire was governed.
What confidence, people cried, can such a production inspire? What guarantee can it afford the nation? Do we not know, that it was by means of these decrees of the senate, that Napoleon sported with our most sacred laws? and, since they are now maintained and confirmed, may he not employ them, as he formerly did, to interpret after his own fashion his additional act, alter its nature, and render it illusory?
It had been to be wished, undoubtedly, that the additional act had not revived the name, and borrowed the a.s.sistance, of all the senatorial acts, become on so many accounts objects of the public contempt and derision: but this was impossible[7]. They were the basis of our inst.i.tutions; and they could not have been proscribed in a body, without arresting the progress of government, and subverting the established order of things from top to bottom.
[Footnote 7: Notwithstanding the charter, and the laws daily pa.s.sed, it is found necessary, to recur every day to rules established by the ancient legislation of the senate.]
Besides, the fear of Napoleon"s putting them in vigour was founded only on vague suppositions. The oppressive arrangements of the decrees of the senate were annulled, both in fact and in law, by the principles, which the additional act sanctioned: and Napoleon had rendered it impossible for him to augment his authority, or to abuse it, by the immense power, with which he had invested the chambers, the responsibility he had thrown on his agents and ministers, and the inviolable guarantees he had conferred on freedom of opinion and personal liberty. The slightest attempt would have betrayed his secret intentions; and a thousand voices would have been raised, to say to him: "We, who are as good as you, have made you our King, on condition, that you keep our laws: if not, not[8]."
[Footnote 8: The well-known words, in which the cortes of Arragon address the kings of Spain at their coronation.]
The re-establishment of the chamber of peers, imported from England by the Bourbons, excited no less vividly the public discontent.
It was clear, in fact, that the privileges, and peculiar jurisdiction, which the peers exclusively enjoyed, const.i.tuted a manifest violation of the laws of equality; and that the hereditary state of the peerage was a formal infraction of the right of all Frenchmen, to be equally admissible to the offices of the state.
Accordingly the friends of liberty and equality with reason reproached Napoleon for having falsified his promises; and given them, instead of a const.i.tution bottomed on the principles of equality and liberty, which he had solemnly professed, a shapeless act, more favourable than the charter, or any of the preceding const.i.tutions, to the n.o.bility and their inst.i.tutions.
But Napoleon, when he promised the French a const.i.tution, that might be termed _republican_, had rather followed the political suggestions of the moment, than consulted the welfare of France. Restored to himself, ought he to have adhered strictly to the letter of his promises, or interpreted them merely as an engagement, to give France a liberal const.i.tution, as perfect as possible?
The answer cannot be doubtful.
Now the testimony of the most learned civilians, the experience of England for 125 years, had demonstrated to him, that the government best adapted to the habits, manners, and social relations of a great nation; that which affords the greatest pledge of happiness and stability; in fine, that which best reconciles political liberty with the degree of power necessary to the chief of a state; is a representative monarchical government. It was Napoleon"s duty, therefore, as a legislator, and a paternal sovereign, to give this mode of government the preference.
This point granted, and it is incontestable, Napoleon was under the necessity of establishing an hereditary and privileged chamber of peers; for a representative monarchy cannot subsist, without an upper chamber, or chamber of peers; as a chamber of peers cannot subsist without privileges, and without being hereditary.
None therefore but the insincere; or men, who, though good patriots, unconsciously subst.i.tute their pa.s.sions or prejudices in the place of the public welfare; can reproach Napoleon for having introduced this inst.i.tution into our political organization.
The re-establishment of an intermediate chamber, perhaps, would not have wounded them so deeply, if care had been taken, to give it a name less sullied by feudal recollections: but the revolution had exhausted the nomenclature of public magistracies. Besides, the Emperor thought, that this was the only t.i.tle answerable to its high destination.
Perhaps, too, as Louis XVIII. had had his peers, he was not displeased, to have his also.
A third accusation bore hard on Napoleon. He promised us, it was urged, as a natural consequence of the fundamental truth, _the throne is made for the nation, and not the nation for the throne_, that our deputies, a.s.sembled at the _Champ de Mai_, should give to France, jointly with him, a const.i.tution conformable to the interests and wishes of the nation; and by an odious breach of faith, he grants us an additional act, after the manner of Louis XVIII; and this he forces us to adopt in the lump, without allowing us to reject those parts, that may wound our dearest and most sacred rights.
Napoleon had proclaimed, it is true, on the 1st of March, that this const.i.tution should be the work of the nation: but since this period circ.u.mstances had altered. It was of importance to the preservation of peace at home, and to the relations between Napoleon and foreign powers, that the state should be speedily established and that Europe should find in its new laws those safeguards against the ambition and despotism of the Emperor, _and perhaps too against the re-establishment of a republic_, that it might deem desirable.
Literally to comply with the words of Napoleon, it would have been necessary, for the electoral colleges to give their deputies written instructions, as in 1789. The a.s.sembling of these colleges, the drawing up of their instructions after discussion, the choosing of delegates, their journeying to Paris, the distribution of the labour, the preparation, examination, and discussion of the bases of the const.i.tution, the disputative conferences with the delegates of the Emperor, &c. &c., would have consumed an incalculable portion of time, and left France in a state of anarchy, that would have deprived it of the means or possibility of making peace or war with foreigners.
Thus, then, far from blaming the Emperor for deviating at the moment from this part of his promises, he on the contrary deserves credit for having voluntarily resigned the dictatorship, with which circ.u.mstances had invested him, and placed public liberty under the protection of the laws. Had he not been _sincere_; had he not been _honestly_ disposed, to restore to the people their rights, and confine his own within proper limits, he would not have been in haste, to publish the additional act: he would have been for gaining time, in hopes that victory or peace, by consolidating the sceptre in his hands, would have enabled him to dictate laws, instead of subjecting himself to them.
In fine, the additional act was reproached with having re-established the confiscations abolished by the charter.
The majority of the counsellors of state and ministers, and M. de Ba.s.sano more particularly, strongly opposed this renewed provision of our revolutionary laws. But the Emperor considered the confiscation of estates as the most efficacious means of bridling the royalists; and he persisted obstinately in not giving it up; reserving the power of relinquishing it, when circ.u.mstances would permit.
Upon the whole, the additional act was not without blemishes; but these blemishes, easy to be removed, no way affected the beauty or goodness of its basis.
It acknowledged the principle of the sovereignty of the people.
It secured to the three powers of the state the strength and independence necessary, to render their actions free and efficacious.
The independence of the representatives was guarantied by their number, and the mode of their election.
The independence of the peers, by their being hereditary.
The independence of the sovereign by the imperial _veto_, and the happy establishment of the other two powers, which serve him mutually as a safeguard.
The liberties of the people, solidly established, were liberally endowed with all the concessions granted by the charter, and all those subsequently claimed.
The trial of all libels (_delits de la presse_) by a jury, protected and secured freedom of opinion. It defended patriotic writers from the anger of the prince, and the complaisance of his agents. It even a.s.sured them of impunity, whenever their writings are in harmony with the secret opinions and wishes of the nation.
Personal liberty was guarantied, not only by the old laws, and the irremoveableness of the judges, but also by two new provisions; one, the responsibility of ministers; the other, the approaching abolition of the impunity, with which public functionaries of all cla.s.ses had been invested by the const.i.tution of the year 8, and afterward by the regal government.
It was still farther guarantied by the insurmountable barrier opposed to the abuse of the right of banishment, by reducing the jurisdiction of military courts within their natural limits, and by restricting the power of declaring any portion of the country in a state of siege; a power hitherto arbitrary, and by help of which the sovereign suspended at will the authority of the const.i.tution, and placed the citizens, in fact, out of the pale of the law.