The Fall of the Confederacy. 535 
States. Free government is a compact in England as in 
America,and the right to dissolve the union or compact is 
as valid in England as in America. Suppose the House of 
Commons refused to pass the Mutiny Bill, to vote the mili- 
tary and naval forces, and to grant the required supplies. 
Suppose a new Parliament called, and that the new House of 
Commons followed the example of its predecessor. Suppose 
it refused to grant supplies until the Sovereign had abo- 
lished ecclesiastical titles, or abolished the House of Lords. 
The conduct of the House of Commons would be in ac- 
cordance with the letter and the forms of the Constitution. 
The letter of the Constitution does not in any way limit 
the money power of the House of Commons. Yet such 
conduct would be revolutionary. What could the Sove- 
reign do? Oppose it? We could not blame the Sovereign 
for doing so, yet the constitution does not confer any 
power upon the Sovereign to oppose such an arbitrary pro- 
ceeding on the part of the Commons. Every step in 
defence of the rights of the Sovereign, would necessitate a 
breach of the constitution. But this position is not peculiar 
to England. It is in the very nature of a free government, 
that revolution is not forbidden by the letter of the consti- 
tution. In all governments, both free and despotic, power 
is derived from the consent of the people, only, in the one 
case, this power is admitted in theory, and in the other case, 
the theory is, that the government governs by right divine. 
Therefore the right of revolution is implied in all constitu- 
tions; and it follows, that, in a free country, whether a revolu- 
tion be justifiable or not, it cannot seldom be opposed with-= 
out the infraction of the letter of the constitution. It was 
then a palpable error to assert, that to break up the Union, 
and to set up a rival government, was not a revolution. 
The right of revolution is a constitutional right, to the 
exercise of which the English race owes its liberty, prosperity, 
and glory. There were, perhaps, many reasons why the 
Confederate Administration put forward such an untenable 
theory. It was done, perhaps, with the hope of conciliating ” 
parties, both North and South, and above all, with the hope 
of at once obtaining the recognition of Europe. It did not 
occur to the Confederate Administration, that no one would 
think of acting upon such a pretext. But, strange to say, 
the Confederate Government did act upon the extraordinary 
theory that a revolution was not a revolution, but a strictly 
anti-revolutionary as well asa constitutional proceeding. 
The consequences were disastrous to the Confederacy. 
