gular expeditions by which a monarch was ever yet driven from his dominions. The drum beat in the streets: the still excited populace collected:-"Charles X. is coming to Paris!"-" Charles X. will not go away from Rambouillet;" all the women in accents of terror-all the little boys in accents of fury screeched out the name of "Charles X.,"

"to Rambouillet !-to Rambouillet !-after Charles X. to Rambouillet!" was the cry-as on a no less memorable occasion it had once been-" to Versailles !"—And to Rambouillet, in carolines and hackney-coaches, in carts, in cabriolets, running, riding, driving, without plan as without preparation, rushed the population of Paris. The Commissioners preceded this incongruous cohort, and to-day they succeeded in obtaining an interview with the king.

Charles X., even as a young man, wanted personal courage. He had been accused of this weakness in the court of Louis XVI. Years had not invigorated his spirit. His nerves were shaken, and his mind unstrung by the quick succession of adventures and calamities that had so rapidly followed one another during the last few days. He received the deputation in a state of great agitation.

"Qu'est ce qu'ils veulent? me tuer!" was his address to Marshal Maison.

He then asked advice of the Duc de Raguse. What can you say to a man who at the head of a gallant army asks what he should do?

There were that day at Rambouillet twelve thousand infantry, three thousand five hundred cavalry, and forty pieces of cannon. The Royal Guards were on foot, at the head of their horses, one hand on their pistols, one foot ready to put into their stirrups! A prince of courage, wisdom, and resolution might still have extricated himself from the difficulties surrounding Charles X.; but in these difficulties such a prince would never have been involved. Alarmed by an exaggeration of the numbers of the approaching multitude; fatigued with the toil of thinking and planning

which he had already undergone; and incapable of a new mental effort to meet the new crisis; flattering himself that the Duc de Bordeaux would still, as the best political combination, be named to the throne; conscious that blood spilled even in victory might endanger the peaceful establishment of this prince, in whose favour he had himself already abdicated; swayed in some degree, doubtless, by these considerations, but urged more especially by his fears and his irresolutions, Charles threw away the sword where others might have thrown away the scabbard, and resigned himself quietly to the destiny which doomed his exile. The soldiers of the hackney-coaches returned to Paris, and the late King of France set out for Maintenon, where, reserving a military escort, he bade adieu to the rest of his army.

His journey was now made slowly, and under the delusion that all France would yet rise in his favour. Betrayed, and left by many of his courtiers, his hopes remained by him to the last; and perhaps still remain, alone faithful in sorrow and in exile.

REVIEW OF THE REVOLUTION OF 1830.

IV.

The two parties among the Royalists and the Liberals--The wishes and ideas of each-Young Napoleon and a republic, or Henry V. and the monarchy the two best combinations-Reasons why not adopted-Having formed the existing government, it is wise to maintain it-Astonishment to the hostility shown by those who put the present king on the throne to the natural consequences of his accession-What Louis Philippe's system must be-Louis Philippe named Philippe I. and not Philippe V.-Triumph over the more moderate party-Constitutional changes caused by the revolution.

To any one who has followed the events of this revolution, there will seem to have been on the side of the people, as on the side of the king, two factions.

The Royalists were divided into the friends of the ordonnances and the ministry, and the friends of the monarchy without the ordonnances.

The liberal deputies also were divided. There were those who, without any personal affection for the reigning family, wished for the old form of government, popularly administered (M. Guizot and M. Sébastiani). There were those (M. Lafitte, Laborde, Mauguin*) who wished for a new dynasty and new institutions. M. C. Périer seems to have been between the two parties, and General Lafayette to have gone beyond them both. To M. Guizot, and those who thought like M. Guizot, Henry V. ought to have been more acceptable than the Duc d'Orléans-by M. Lafitte the Duc d'Orléans, even if not personally recommended, would have been preferred to Henry V.-To M. C. Périer the claims of the one, whom circumstances most favoured, were likely to appear the best-To M. de Lafayette the American republic was the dream of a long life.

In the nation, if it could have been polled, the liberal nobility would probably have been for Henry V.; the bourgeoisie for the Duc d'Orléans; the old army for young Napoleon; the masses for a republic. If the Duc d'Orléans was selected, it was because, while his accession promised the least to any particular party, it promised something to all, and was least likely to offend any one party. "The multitudes would have been passionately opposed," say many, "to the legitimate line of the family they had been fighting against." The army would have despised, and the bourgeoisie dreaded the red cap, which had presided over the confiscations and proscriptions of the Comité de Salut Publique. M. Guizot and his friends accepted the Duc d'Orléans as a Bourbon; M. Lafitte and M. Mauguin as a member of the opposition during the time of the Bourbons; General Lafayette as the soldier of Jemmapes, as the aid-de-camp of Dumourier. Besides,

It is these two parties that have formed the government and the opposition of Louis Philippe's reign.

Louis Philippe was the first person proposed, when everybody was uncertain. "Take the Duke of Orléans for your king," said M. Lafitte. "Liberty will be satisfied with the sacrifice of legitimacy! Order will thank you for saving it from Robespierre! England, in your revolution, will recognise her own!"

All declared against Charles X. None spoke of young Napoleon; none of Henry V.; and yet, if circumstances had favoured, a government might perhaps have been formed under the sanction of either of these names, more popular and more strong than the one which was adopted. The Legitimate Monarchy and Henry V.; the Republic and young Napoleon; these (I venture the opinion as an historical speculation) would have been the two great and most reasonable alternatives.

For the legitimate monarchy there was the past; for a republic the future. The claims of the one were in the tombs of St. Denys; it was sanctioned by time, and it promised repose. A desire for new things could alone justify the pretensions of the other; and its existence could only have been an existence of action and glory, invasion, defence, conquest. As for a republic, with Lafayette it would have been the vision of an hour-for the title of a republic would have been a declaration of war; and if war were to ensue, what name but that of "Napoleon" had a military prestige?

Nor had young Bonaparte without a republic any chance of success. The soldier of France would have rallied round his cause- -the citizen of France would have shrunk from it. A name possessed by one, a boy in the Austrian capital, was not alone a sufficient basis for a government. If France were desirous of throwing herself at once into a new position, of braving Europe, and defying the propagande in hand, the legions of the Holy Alliance-the young Napoleon, first consul of a military republic, would, I say, have aroused and united all the energies demanded for this daring career. If, on the other hand, the revolution

was a combat for what had been obtained by the Charta, and not for a new system that was to succeed the Restoration ;--if the internal policy of France was to be conservation, the external policy peace; if monarchy was to be preserved and royalty respected, it was better to keep a crown that nine centuries had hallowed, and to preserve to majesty its history and its decorations. Tranquillity and the past with Henry V.--agitation and the future with young Napoleon-these, I repeat, were the two great and complete ideas between which the people, if they could then have reasoned with the cool philosophy with which we reason now, would have chosen after the combat of July. But in times of trouble and intrigue, it is not one great idea that strikes us with force; we bend beneath a thousand little circumstances and considerations. Besides, though I have conjecturally united the young Bonaparte with a republic, as the best combination, we must not forget that at the time of the revolution, those who thought of Napoleon thought of the empire; those who thought of a republic thought of Lafayette. The people, moreover, still saw in Henry V. the shadow of the old "régime." A long array of peers and pensions, of guards and tabourets, stood between him and them. They had been fighting to the cry of "à bas les Bourbons," and the blood was yet dripping from their clothes which had been shed by the soldiers of legitimacy.

But might not a liberal regency have been named? Was not Louis Philippe himself a Bourbon? And is it not just possible that the same people who bound up the wounds of the Swiss would have felt pity for the innocence of a child? Charles X. at the head of his guards, the Duchesse de Berri with the Duc de Bordeaux in her arms, might at two different moments have changed the destinies of France. But the blood of the grand constable was frozen in the veins of his descendant; the heroine of La Vendée was guarded in her chamber; the religion of legitimacy passed away when he who wore the crown of Henry IV. had neither