While I was in Madrid, a grandee, a favourite at court, whose name I regret I cannot recollect, being deeply in debt, and harassed by his creditors, and unwilling, although extremely wealthy, to limit the number of his enjoyments, went to the king and laid the case before his royal master; who, sympathizing in the pecuniary distress of the noble, exercised the prerogative of a king who is above law, by immediately presenting him with a royal order, by which he was secured in the undisturbed possession of his revenues for ten years,--his creditors being interdicted during that time from making any demand upon their debtor. The grandee called his creditors together; and when they supposed they were about to be paid, he produced the royal order, against which there was no appeal. No act of oppression could be more base than this; it was a total suspension of law, exercised without reason; a royal license to commit robbery; and of the worst kind, the robbery of the poor by the rich. It is more than probable, however, that before the lapse of ten years, the signature of Ferdinand VII. will have ceased to inspire fear, or exact obedience. The following circumstance I know to be true. The Duke of Liria (Berwick) having got into difficulties, put himself under, or was put under _secrésto_ (sequestration), and was allowed 10,000_l._ per annum from his revenues. It so happened that the duke had an attack of gout, and that he was obliged in consequence to absent himself a few weeks from court. One evening, while he was sitting at home, a letter was delivered to him, sealed with the royal seal; and, upon opening the letter, he found it to be an order of the king, that he should pay 2500_l._ of his income yearly to his grandmother in Paris. Thus, without process, without cause, without any previous intimation made to the Duke of Berwick, without any opportunity being given to him of objecting to this inroad upon his property, he was deprived, by a dash of the king’s pen, of 2500_l._ per annum. This was accomplished by the intrigue of the duke’s grandmother. The sequel to the story, by which it will be seen that the duke regained his money, does not in any respect alter the act of tyranny that deprived him of it; but only exemplifies the indecision of the king’s character. The duchess, who happened to be a spirited woman, and who knew the character of the king, immediately ordered her coach, drove to the palace, asked an audience, saw the king, and returned in less than an hour with the revocation of the order in her hand.