Obrázky stránek

Although the Ministers had thus gained the victory, yet it was by so small a majority that they considered it equivalent to a defeat, and M. Perier accordingly resigned, with several of his associates. But on receiving intelligence of the invasion of Belgium by Holland, he was induced, in view of the urgent necessities of the government, to resume his office, and await the demonstrations of the Chamber on the subject of the customary address of the King. The result was that the direction of the government remained in the hands of Perier.

And here, for the present, we close our account of the affairs of France. We have abstained from any circumstantial analysis of the debates in the Chambers upon domestic or foreign affairs, because it would require more space, to enter into them satisfactorily, than would be consistent with due attention to the important events in other parts of Europe. It will be sufficient to remark briefly on the great distinction of parties, and on some of the subjects, which gave occasion to the development of their differences. In the discussions of the press and in the votes and speeches of the deputies, it was easy to discriminate four parties, all clearly defined. The friends of the reigning dynasty, of the present order of things, and of peace with foreign nations even at some hazard to the national honor, constituted, it would seem, the majority of the deputies, and therefore gave the tone to the acts of the government. The Carlists were powerful from their united

ness, their talents, and their standing in the community, although less numerous than the Orleanists, if we may so call the zealous adherents of Louis Philippe and the juste milieu system. The republicans, including those friends of monarchy who were for limiting the royal authority still more than at present, by giving additional vigor to the liberal elements of the constitution, were in high repute with the people, and were next in visible influence to the administration party. Finally came the Bonapartists, who were far from being a small or powerless party. In the elections, and perhaps we may say in ordinary proceedings of a public nature, the two latter parties often acted together, against the two former. But in times of confusion, whenever there was the least prospect of endangering or embarrassing the authority of Louis Philippe, the Bonapartist and Carlist parties appear to have lent their aid and exerted their influence, wherever they thought they could accomplish the most mischief; and thus it is, in political matters, that extremes act together in the promotion of the most opposite and irreconcilable purposes.

Independently of the affairs of Belgium, there were two great topics of foreign policy, which gave frequent occasion for disquisition in the Chambers, and excited the deepest interest_among all the intelligent classes in France. These were the affairs of Poland and of Italy.

In regard to Italy, it is undeniable that the patriots in Lombardy and the Roman State not

only were invited to take up arms against their rulers by the example of France, but received some encouragement in their undertaking from responsible sources in that country. When, therefore, Austria marched her troops into the disturbed cities and districts, in violation of the principle of non-intervention, and thus suppressed, or enabled the local authorities to suppress, popular movements, which, otherwise, would have ended in revolutionising Italy, the revolutionary party in France demanded of their government that the proceedings of Austria ought to be taken as a ground of war, and in fact as a declaration of war against the revolution of the Three Days. But the French ministers adhered unchangeably to their pacific policy, and contented themselves with remonstrances against the conduct of Austria, and with insisting that her troops should evacuate the Papal territory. and other parts of Italy, which they had invaded. Austria, of course, made the fairest promises in the world, and withdrew her troops, after the short period which was necessary to effect the object of apprehending the leading patriots, and re-establishing the legitimate rulers in their ill-used authority.

In regard to Poland, the question of inter-national law presented was a very different one from that of Italy, and the conduct of the French ministers was dictated by somewhat different principles. Austria interfered, in Italy, between the subjects and the rulers of countries over which she had no right of control. They were

independent states, however small they might be, and however dangerous their example to the Italian subjects of Austria. Of course, the conduct of the Emperor was clearly an act of intervention. Nicholas, on the other hand, marched his armies into Poland, in order to reclaim his subjects to their allegiance; and if France had engaged in war in behalf of the Poles, here would have been the intervention,—an intervention, necessarily implying the invasion of Prussia and the Germanic Empire, and, of course, involving France in war with Prussia and Austria, as well as Russia. Admitting, therefore, that the Russians had contemplated the invasion of Belgium, and perhaps of France, in a war against liberal principles,—and that the Polish insurrection was all that saved the French from this contest,-yet for France to have commenced hostilities in behalf of Poland, would have been to kindle the flames of war throughout Europe, and might have been disastrous to France herself, in the same proportion that it was beneficial to the Poles.

While, therefore, it is impossible to applaud the conduct of Louis Philippe's cabinet as to Italy, it seems equally impossible to condemn very pointedly their conduct in the case of Poland, in so far as regards their abstinence from war in her behalf. If, as the. Poles allege, they were indirectly sacrificed by means of the negociations and secret proceedings between France and England on the one side, and Russia on the other, then indeed

have the French ministers much to answer for to the world and to posterity. At the same time it should be avowed, that their procedure in regard to Belgium was prompt, decided, and honorable. And we should bear in mind, also, in considering the foreign policy of Louis Philippe,

his rigor in punishing the outrages of Don Miguel, and his liberality in discharging the claim of the United States, as illustrating, in contrasted force, the sense of honor, and the sense of justice, which should ever direct the councils of a magnanimous prince.




FOR THE YEARS 1830-31.

« PředchozíPokračovat »