« PředchozíPokračovat »
Wootton Basset, 1896 379 321 379
Forty Boroughs in Schedule B having less than 4000, and more than 2000 of population, by the census of 1831.
3831 606 1114 763
3397 217 662 679
3900 748 1399 780
3715 574 815 743
3092 234 126 618
3061 546 528 612
3462 602 887 692
2835 591 606 567
3442 356 1088 688
2545 386 1073 509
2191 125 627 438
2107 354 302 421
2313 340 411 462 2072 302 210 414
2137 275 151 427
2325 417 560 465
2008 148 272 401
Boroughs not included in Schedules A or B, together with such as were formerly included in the latter, but have now a population exceeding 4000.
21331 4076 37732 4266 Leominster, 4300
2731 904 Liverpool, 165175 27792 59086 33036 121344 17534 198101 24263 406 1042 London,
Impeachment of the Ex-Ministers.-Riots of October.-Change of Ministers.-Trial of the Ex-Ministers.-State of Paris.-The Students.-La Fayette.-Riots of February.-New Ministry.Finances.-Prorogation of the Chambers.-The Heroes of July. -King's Tour-Dissolution of the Chambers.-Election.New Chambers.-Celebration of the Three Days.-Resignation of Ministers.-Belgian Expedition.-State of Parties.
It is not our purpose, the pres- in other countries; but M. de ent year, to enter so minutely Peyronnet, Guernon de Ranville, into the affairs of France as we and Chantelauze were apprehenddid in giving an account of the ed by the local authorities at year 1830, including the great Tours, and M. de Polignac in the events of the revolution of the same way at Granville in NorThree Days. A brief notice of mandy. Of course, the governthe popular riots and ministerial ment had no remedy but to subdifferences, and of the few im- mit to the disagreeable necesportant acts of the government, sity of bringing to punishment the which together constituted the responsible authors of the crimiincidents of the general period, will nal occurrences of July. suffice on the present occasion.
The autumn of 1830 was chiefly occupied with the trial of the late ministers, and the various public movements to which the questions of their fate gave rise. After the successful issue of the Three Days, the new government of Louis Philippe took no measures for apprehending the ministers, being willing in fact that they should make their escape out of France. M. d'Haussez, Capelle, and de Montbel continued to avoid arrest, and took refuge
Indeed, on the 13th of August, M. Salverte, one of the members of the Chamber of Deputies for Paris, moved for and obtained the appointment of a committee to draw up an act of impeachment against the ex-ministers for high treason. On the 29th, the examinations were had of the four 'ex-ministers under arrest. the 23d of September, M. de Berenger delivered a report in behalf of the Committee, impeaching of high treason MM. de Polignac, de Peyronnet, Chantelauze, Guer
non de Ranville, Capelle, and de Montbel, the subscribers of the ordinances of July,
'For having abused their power, in order to falsify the elections and to deprive the citizens of the free exercise of their civil rights; 'In having arbitrarily and violently changed the institutions of the kingdom, and being guilty of a conspiracy against the national safety of the state;
'In having excited civil war, and armed one class of citizens against another, and carried devastation and massacre through the capital, as well as through several of the communes.'
popular voice claimed the capital punishment of the ex-ministers, as high criminals, guilty of an atrocious offence, and meriting a proportionate visitation of public justice. On the other hand, the King and his advisers, and indeed the prominent statesmen generally, were anxious to shun the repetition of those scenes of judicial bloodshed, which had dishonored the first revolution, and yet were afraid to oppose directly the wishes of the people. The leading politicians hit upon a plan for attaining their object of a very singular nature. A project of law was introduced into the Chambers, for the abolition of capital punishments; and an address to the King was voted, praying him to make use of his initiative, in order to force forward the passage of the law. Louis Philippe gladly responded to this call, and thus the nation saw the executive and legislative authorities conspiring together, as it were, to prevent the punishment of death from being inflicted on the ex-ministers in any event, thus forestalling the sentence of the Peers.
The report consisted, as is usual in French criminal proceedings, of an argumentative history of the offences of the accused. In the present case, it comprised a long history of the liberticide schemes of the Bourbons ever since the restoration, from the laws of censorship in the time of Louis XVIII, down to the violent attempts on the constitution in the reign of Charles X. The report was accepted on the 28th of September, and on the 29th, M. de Berenger, Persil, and Madiez de Montjau were chosen commission- However well intended all this ers, to prosecute the impeach- may have been, the effect of it ment before the Peers in behalf was decidedly bad. The people of the Chamber of the Deputies. After various preliminary proceedings, the Chamber of Peers appointed the trial to take place before them on the 15th of De
were calling for vengeance on their late oppressors; the popular agitators knew this; and they took care to represent the proposed law as a plot to defraud the people of their rightful victims. Meantime, the progress of the In consequence of all this, mobs proceedings had produced a very of the most dangerous description serious effect on the tranquillity assembled before the Palais Royof the country and the composi- al on the 17th and 18th days of tion of the government. The October; and the national guard,
together with troops of the line, were put in requisition to maintain the very existence of the government. The King was obliged to temporise with the factious of his subjects. M. Odillon Barrot, the Prefect of the Seine, was directed or permitted to assure the people that justice would be done, notwithstanding the 'unseasonable' agitation of the question concerning capital punish
This address of Odillon Barrot produced a breach in the ministry; for the Chamber of Deputies took up the matter with great heat, as an attack on them; M. Guizot, the Minister of the Interior, was not less offended. On the other hand, M. Dupont de l'Eure, the Keeper of the Seals, supported the Prefect, as did General La Fayette. Hereupon M. Guizot, and his friend the Duc de Broglie, resigned their offices. A contest ensued between the juste milieu party-who maintained that the true policy of France was to obtain quiet and consolidate her present institutions -and the mouvement party, who were for carrying forward the principles of the revolution into fuller development. For this time, the latter party prevailed, and the ministry was re-organized on the 2d of November, with M. Lafitte as President of the Council and Minister of Finance, Marshal Maison, of Foreign Affairs, Marshal Gerard of War, M. Montalivet of the Interior, M. Dupont de l'Eure of Justice, and M. Merilhou of Public Instruction.
the 15th of December, the day assigned for that purpose. anticipation of the most extreme popular excitement on this occasion, the Luxemburg was converted into a fortress, the most imposing array of military defence being employed to protect the court and the prisoners from the violence of the mobs of Paris. The public authorities had been justly alarmed by the disturbances of October, and had ample cause to expect a renewal of them at the present time. But all the intelligent actors in government affairs felt the necessity of guarding against any act of lawless violence being committed on the persons of the prisoners; because it would not fail to be considered by all Europe as conclusive proof that the new monarchy was destitute of vigor, and France subject to an irresponsible mob, as in the days of the sans culottes and Septembrisers.
In fact, con
spirators and agitators of all kinds were at work in Paris, eager to rouse the elements of anarchy into a storm, and ready to take advantage of the hour of confusion.
This important trial lasted only a week from the 15th to the 21st of December, inclusive. M. de Martignac, the head of the cabinet which Polignac displaced, did himself great credit by undertaking and ably conducting the defence of M. de Polignac; and each of the other ex-ministers had his counsel. The facts, on which the accusation was founded, were of course abundantThe trial of M. de Polignac ly proved, although considerable and his associates commenced on difference appeared in the de