-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The motions are put to vote in the Audience.
The Repeal of the Protection of Public Movements Act fails with 102 yes votes, 219 no votes, and 79 abstentions
The Repeal of the Worker's Safety Act fails with 120 yes votes, 124 no votes, and 156 abstentions
Both motions were presented in and passed the State Council. The Royalist Party came out to support the Count of Ponteverda in his call to revoke the Protection of Public Movements Act, but a fraction of them went with First Minister Francisco D'Ambrosio in going against the motion. Los Amarillos's motion to Repeal the Worker's Safety Act was met with Royalists and the People's Party going against the motion.
--------------------------
Player Actions Needed: Going to wait till Mars gets on to do a run-through since he has no need to overlook passed bills. I shall take into consideration ML8991's call for a grand ball, and I am also reforming the mechanics surrounding the legislature to include the State Council.
@Marschalk1 still needs to also appoint the remaining 25% of all regional audiences.
The Repeal of the Protection of Public Movements Act fails with 102 yes votes, 219 no votes, and 79 abstentions
The Repeal of the Worker's Safety Act fails with 120 yes votes, 124 no votes, and 156 abstentions
Both motions were presented in and passed the State Council. The Royalist Party came out to support the Count of Ponteverda in his call to revoke the Protection of Public Movements Act, but a fraction of them went with First Minister Francisco D'Ambrosio in going against the motion. Los Amarillos's motion to Repeal the Worker's Safety Act was met with Royalists and the People's Party going against the motion.
--------------------------
Player Actions Needed: Going to wait till Mars gets on to do a run-through since he has no need to overlook passed bills. I shall take into consideration ML8991's call for a grand ball, and I am also reforming the mechanics surrounding the legislature to include the State Council.
@Marschalk1 still needs to also appoint the remaining 25% of all regional audiences.
((Marquis of Pontevedra, Nax))
The Marquis of Pontevedra opts to detail explicitly the votes for and against repealing the Worker’s Safety Act, broadly painting the Royalist League as a protector of worker’s rights and, contrary to past accusations, a party of extreme moderation and sensibility (he also conveniently leaves out the People’s Party, this time under the guise of them being under investigation regarding their legality); however, noting the concerns of the elites, amongst newspapers read principally by them, and through the use of the Society of St James the Greater, he also reveals to them the voting divide regarding the other repeal proposal.
Pontevedra also begins railing against the Audience in the various other newspapers, proclaiming its indifference to the plight of the workers was contrary to the goals of not only the Royalist League, but also to the Spain itself, and above all else the Crown, and that it was in dire need of radical restructuring, or perhaps even abolition itself, to ensure the workers were not to become victims of abuse from the other parties – where possible, he would utilise elements of the Interior Secretariat to spread that word amongst the illiterate portions of the population.
-
(Private: Alexiuskomenoi IV)
Senor Verdejo,
The recent motion set forth within the Audience has convinced me that my efforts thus far to ensure such laws concerning the wellbeing of our industrial workers are effective and implemented throughout the Kingdom have been lacking. Therefore, I would ask to appoint you as Head of the Department of Worker Safety, to ensure that the laws therefore passed are thoroughly followed.
~ Pontevedra
The Marquis of Pontevedra opts to detail explicitly the votes for and against repealing the Worker’s Safety Act, broadly painting the Royalist League as a protector of worker’s rights and, contrary to past accusations, a party of extreme moderation and sensibility (he also conveniently leaves out the People’s Party, this time under the guise of them being under investigation regarding their legality); however, noting the concerns of the elites, amongst newspapers read principally by them, and through the use of the Society of St James the Greater, he also reveals to them the voting divide regarding the other repeal proposal.
Pontevedra also begins railing against the Audience in the various other newspapers, proclaiming its indifference to the plight of the workers was contrary to the goals of not only the Royalist League, but also to the Spain itself, and above all else the Crown, and that it was in dire need of radical restructuring, or perhaps even abolition itself, to ensure the workers were not to become victims of abuse from the other parties – where possible, he would utilise elements of the Interior Secretariat to spread that word amongst the illiterate portions of the population.
-
(Private: Alexiuskomenoi IV)
Senor Verdejo,
The recent motion set forth within the Audience has convinced me that my efforts thus far to ensure such laws concerning the wellbeing of our industrial workers are effective and implemented throughout the Kingdom have been lacking. Therefore, I would ask to appoint you as Head of the Department of Worker Safety, to ensure that the laws therefore passed are thoroughly followed.
~ Pontevedra
Lolo looks on in mild astonishment as Pontevedra breaks down and willingly paints himself as a control-obsessed hero of socialism in the nations papers.
The People's Party is happy to announce the Democratic Coalition of the Amarillos, the Movement for Liberty and the People's Party which will cooperate in the Royal Audiencia to further the democratic cause and protect the Rule of Law from abuses and oligarchization of power. Recognizing that the Democratic Coalition represents a large majority of Spaniards and the Royal Audiencia, lawmakers from the three parties will announce legislative initiatives protecting the Rule of Law later this week.
Don de Valle,
Leader of the People's Party
Don de Valle,
Leader of the People's Party
Last edited:
Lolo spends copious amounts of time over the ensuing weeks speaking to various Nobles, landowners and few industrialists reassuring them that the monarchy has not abandoned them. Even a number of supporters of the Liga. Many express a deal of discontent at Pontevedra provoking class divides as a political tool, and concern at his inability to accept dissenting voices, which apparently now applies to them too.
Naturally, Lolo makes full use of this to build stronger support for the Amarillos.
Naturally, Lolo makes full use of this to build stronger support for the Amarillos.
Last edited:
This recent proposal is, simply put, yet another vast overreach of the Audience, and in particular of the People's Party - known already for its rather liberal interpretations of the law - into matters solely at the discretion of the King. If there is any more proof needed that the the People's Party is a fount of revolution and treason, then my good sirs, the party has presented it on a silver platter before you.
The Audience has absolutely no say on the appointments of the members of Government, nor does the Audience have the power to enforce these demands upon His Majesty. To assume such powers would be, as I stated before, nothing more than overreach and treason.
That this was brought forth by a party whose very legality is now in question, and is now supported by the head of another party discussing said legality, I must express my alarm at the potential for bias amongst His Majesty's Committee, and I must further express my deep concern that this body has now placed itself wholly against the Crown and its powers, and indeed against the agreement of 1873.
This is outright expression of treason and disloyalty to the Crown, an affront to and a stealing of the Monarch's god-given powers, and such an overreach that I cannot bear see this brought forth. I will not acknowledge, I will oppose it in the State Council, and should this disloyal cabal manage to pass it there, I will oppose it before the King.
~ Pontevedra
-
((Private))
Alarmed by the sudden overreach of the Audience's authority, Pontevedra quickly pens a few letters, the contents of which and to whom they are meant to be read by known only to him.
-
((Private: Mars))
Your Catholic Majesty,
The members of the Audience have, at last, expressed outright defiance of Your sovereign powers; the parties therein have, by and large (excepting but a few), formed a coalition intent on seizing away your authority to appoint members of your own government at your discretion - that you would be bound by their rulings to no longer appoint those who You deem fit for office, regardless of what other posts they may or may not hold, is in my eyes unacceptable. Furthermore, the actions of Your government should not, cannot, and must not be made privy to the members of that advisory body; not only must Your government act without scrutiny from this pervasively disloyal body, it must be held in any way accountable or subject to the rulings of anyone other than Your Person.
I daresay these men are committing treason against Your Majesty, and I cannot stomach such men of low calibre and rank disloyalty.
I must further express my doubts regarding the Committee formed by Your Majesty to discern the legal status of the People's Party; it has, in my estimation, been utterly compromised by this political union between de Valle and Lord Etxeto. I can no longer place my faith within that body to act forthrightly and fairly in any matter pertaining to me, particularly with the proposed bill now in the Audience - that vile piece of treason - is directed at my person.
Ever faithful,
Pontevedra
The Audience has absolutely no say on the appointments of the members of Government, nor does the Audience have the power to enforce these demands upon His Majesty. To assume such powers would be, as I stated before, nothing more than overreach and treason.
That this was brought forth by a party whose very legality is now in question, and is now supported by the head of another party discussing said legality, I must express my alarm at the potential for bias amongst His Majesty's Committee, and I must further express my deep concern that this body has now placed itself wholly against the Crown and its powers, and indeed against the agreement of 1873.
This is outright expression of treason and disloyalty to the Crown, an affront to and a stealing of the Monarch's god-given powers, and such an overreach that I cannot bear see this brought forth. I will not acknowledge, I will oppose it in the State Council, and should this disloyal cabal manage to pass it there, I will oppose it before the King.
~ Pontevedra
-
((Private))
Alarmed by the sudden overreach of the Audience's authority, Pontevedra quickly pens a few letters, the contents of which and to whom they are meant to be read by known only to him.
-
((Private: Mars))
Your Catholic Majesty,
The members of the Audience have, at last, expressed outright defiance of Your sovereign powers; the parties therein have, by and large (excepting but a few), formed a coalition intent on seizing away your authority to appoint members of your own government at your discretion - that you would be bound by their rulings to no longer appoint those who You deem fit for office, regardless of what other posts they may or may not hold, is in my eyes unacceptable. Furthermore, the actions of Your government should not, cannot, and must not be made privy to the members of that advisory body; not only must Your government act without scrutiny from this pervasively disloyal body, it must be held in any way accountable or subject to the rulings of anyone other than Your Person.
I daresay these men are committing treason against Your Majesty, and I cannot stomach such men of low calibre and rank disloyalty.
I must further express my doubts regarding the Committee formed by Your Majesty to discern the legal status of the People's Party; it has, in my estimation, been utterly compromised by this political union between de Valle and Lord Etxeto. I can no longer place my faith within that body to act forthrightly and fairly in any matter pertaining to me, particularly with the proposed bill now in the Audience - that vile piece of treason - is directed at my person.
Ever faithful,
Pontevedra
The Marques de Pontevedra may rant as much as he desires, if he had read the act carefully he would have seen that it was carefully thoughtover and highly important advise to Our Most Catholic Majesty and that only through our most authentic advise can we fully serve His Most Catholic Majesty. If we were to willfully ignore the people demanding democracy and the Rule of Law across Spain in the name of a false and outdated order and thereby putting the security of the Monarchy on the line, as the Marques de Pontvedera seems to do now, would we then not be the traitors he claims we are?
The good Senor ought to read his own bill, which expressly forbids the King from appointment whomever he chooses to the ministries he so desires. This is, at its core, an overreach of the Audience's authority.
I see no people making any such demands upon the King as you are now making; the people are, as ever, faithful to the Crown save for but a few, sad traitors. Some of which are amongst us in this room today - he glances over at the People's Party and various members of the Audience who have declared their support for this bill - I seem to notice. However, I shall not permit the use of "democracy" by your faction; I shall use the far more accurate term - treason.
I would trust you to serve His Majesty as faithfully as Tallyrand served any of his lords; your treasonous actions are all well known. Need I remind you of your calls to overthrow His Majesty in 1873? I find your claims of my treason to be quite laughable, in that light. Granted, I had always considered you a joke, albeit a poorly constructed one.
~ Pontevedra
I see no people making any such demands upon the King as you are now making; the people are, as ever, faithful to the Crown save for but a few, sad traitors. Some of which are amongst us in this room today - he glances over at the People's Party and various members of the Audience who have declared their support for this bill - I seem to notice. However, I shall not permit the use of "democracy" by your faction; I shall use the far more accurate term - treason.
I would trust you to serve His Majesty as faithfully as Tallyrand served any of his lords; your treasonous actions are all well known. Need I remind you of your calls to overthrow His Majesty in 1873? I find your claims of my treason to be quite laughable, in that light. Granted, I had always considered you a joke, albeit a poorly constructed one.
~ Pontevedra
The Duke mutters about how Pontevedra is the most sensitive man in Spain after listening to his rant.
The Marques lacks knowledge of law, or so it would seem, since the Royal Audiencia is officially an advisory council to the Monarch and because laws passed by the Royal Audiencia are merely advisory proposals until the Monarch signs them, which renderd his statement regarding overreaching of powers empty.
The Monarch would prudently restrain himself and strengthen the independence of the courts by signing this bill into law.
I shall not deal with the personal insults the Marqued had thrown at the elected representatives of the Spanish People, for these insults are not worth my time and ought not be uttered by a Minister of the Crown.
The Monarch would prudently restrain himself and strengthen the independence of the courts by signing this bill into law.
I shall not deal with the personal insults the Marqued had thrown at the elected representatives of the Spanish People, for these insults are not worth my time and ought not be uttered by a Minister of the Crown.
May I suggest renaming this article from 'bill' to 'motion' as it most clearly is not the former. Perhaps this might go some way to mollify the good Marquis' apoplexy.
And any measures that violate the King's sacred powers are, so as to not mince words, treason. It does not matter who proposes the measure, or from what body, or from where - if they propose a restriction of the King's power, it is treason. I would suggest that, before you mock my own ignorance of the law, as it were, you had best make sure not to expose your own.
As for your other measures, they need no addressing; the simple fact of the matter that the good Senor refuses to accept that his proposal is illegal is enough.
Be it a bill or a motion, it is still treason; I care not for the dressing of it. All that matters is the substance.
~ Pontevedra
As for your other measures, they need no addressing; the simple fact of the matter that the good Senor refuses to accept that his proposal is illegal is enough.
Be it a bill or a motion, it is still treason; I care not for the dressing of it. All that matters is the substance.
~ Pontevedra
An anecdote comes to mind:
Caesar non supra grammaticos
The King may recieve his power from God, but he is not omnipotent.
Caesar non supra grammaticos
The King may recieve his power from God, but he is not omnipotent.
I myself am reminded of a law, if you will permit me to exerpt and paraphrase:
From the Act to Recognize and Legitimate Political Parties, declared by the King in 1873:
Any parties that espouse an ethos contrary to the Spanish Monarchy and the Catholic nature of the Kingdom or advocates disobedience to the Crown, the Government and the public authorities of the Kingdom, deprivation of these bodies of their legitimate authority and insults to their dignity shall be denied legal existence.
By my reckoning, this bill is in violation of one of these, and very likely several. I suppose that the Committee's role to determine the People's Party legality has now been made redundant, and indeed a member of that body may well have found his own party in a strikingly similar situation.
~ Pontevedra
From the Act to Recognize and Legitimate Political Parties, declared by the King in 1873:
Any parties that espouse an ethos contrary to the Spanish Monarchy and the Catholic nature of the Kingdom or advocates disobedience to the Crown, the Government and the public authorities of the Kingdom, deprivation of these bodies of their legitimate authority and insults to their dignity shall be denied legal existence.
By my reckoning, this bill is in violation of one of these, and very likely several. I suppose that the Committee's role to determine the People's Party legality has now been made redundant, and indeed a member of that body may well have found his own party in a strikingly similar situation.
~ Pontevedra
"What does he want with me? Don't answer, but do hand me the letter."
As he read the letter he became more intrigued and finally wrote a note to the secretary.
The army is on standby not long away from the city. If you need assistance restoring control of the unrest of parliament, my army core is ready to restrain and protect.
~ Zumalacárregui
~ Zumalacárregui
After the courier had been sent away once more, Zumalacárregui mounted his horse.
The Marques has not addressed the fact that this act is in no way an infringement on the power of the Monarch, which dissolves his entire argument.
I have repeatedly stated how this motion, or bill, or farce, is a direct usurpation of the King's power - it restricts his power to appoint his minister's at his own discretion, amongst other concerns. It matters not a wit that this body is advisory; this is a proposal to steal away monarchical power, and must be treated as such.
~ Pontevedra
~ Pontevedra
I was not aware that advice constituted an impingement upon the Kings power. If so then the greatest traitor to the crown must be the Marquis himself.
Any motion that is a defiance of the monarch's authority is treason. That you can claim I am a traitor, when I have stalwartly followed the Crown in all matters, acting within the powers delegated to me whilst the good Senor who proposed this bill was fomenting and supporting revolution, is - again - laughable. However, a repeated jest is rarely as funny as the first.
I feel it is an exercise in futility to reason with some amongst us in this august body, however, I shall continue my best to present the unreasonableness of this motion, stress its illegality, and combat its proponents for as long as necessary.
~ Pontevedra
I feel it is an exercise in futility to reason with some amongst us in this august body, however, I shall continue my best to present the unreasonableness of this motion, stress its illegality, and combat its proponents for as long as necessary.
~ Pontevedra