« VorigeDoorgaan »
THE STATE OF PARTIES SINCE
Two parties during the Three Days - A third party
Natural consequences of their union — In order to understand the policy of the present Government, we must perpetually refer to the policy which presided over its creation - In creating the Government, the French should have considered that its course was prescribed for at least ten years — What the present King's Government was likely to do, what it was not likely to do — Its policy — The persons who can best maintain it on that policy — The Doctrinaires Ministry of Lafitte, of M. Périer, of Duc de Broglie - Of Soult, of Gérard — M. Thiers - His character - He the best person to maintain the present Government What are the difficulties in maintaining it? - Its necessary unpopularity - The dangers of that unpopularity - Its safety in its gaining time.
HAVING carried the political events of France down from the first to the second revolution, I would now take a brief view of the condition of the new monarchy, and of the state of the parties which have existed under it; reserving to myself the opportunity of returning to the subject, when, having made more familiar to
the reader the manners, the character, the influences, the institutions, and the men of this country, I may take a broader, a bolder, and a more satisfactory view of its future destiny.
It is evident from what I have already said, that the revolution, from the first of the three days, contained two parties — those who felt strongly, and those who reasoned calmly. The one party joined it with the desire to overthrow a tyrannical government; the other party, with the hope to prevent present confusion. The one party, while the conflict was still uncertain, was for declaring the ordonnances illegal, and heading the people; while the other party would have renounced a resistance by force, and treated with Charles X. So, after the pact of Rambouillet, some men were, as I have said, for beginning the new race with a new title; some, for connecting the monarch whom the people had chosen with the long line that had reigned by the divine grace of God.
The natural bent of the two parties I have described, would have led them to diverge even wider than they did. The enthusiasts for liberty would have taken the republic—the advocates of order would willingly have declared for Henry V. But there was a third party the personal party of the Duc d'Orléans, which appealed to the sympathies of the republicans -to the ideas of the legitimists. To the first it said- I fought with you in the days of July, and I propose to you the soldier of Jemmapes. To the second it said - The Duc d'Orléans is a Bourbon, and remember the revolution of 1688. In this manner the revolution, which had been commenced and continued without a plan, was constituted and confirmed with one. Its natural consequences were
- vast concessions to popular opinion in the moment of passion. The triumph of the party in favour of order and tranquillity, when tranquillity and order were restored. And, lastly — since in order to overthrow the former government, the personal friends of the Duc d'Orléans had been obliged to side rather with those who were for destroying than with those who were conserving - they would, when the principles of the present reign became conservative, be obliged to separate, either from their party or their patron.
In order to have a proper idea of the present king's policy, it is necessary to be perpetually referring to the policy by which his election was dictated. Very few of the French understand their own revolution. They cry out against the 'juste milieu.' Their revolution, as I have said, was the juste milieu.' Louis· Philippe was the 'juste milieu. If they had expected, through peaceable representations, the respect, the attention, the confidence of the despotic governments of Europe, they should not have taken Louis-Philippe : if they had expected war with those governments, a reign of glory and action, they should not have taken Louis-Philippe. If they had expected from the crown the continued perpetual concession of popular rights, they should not have taken LouisPhilippe; for they should not have taken a man with the passions and the ambition of a man. If they had expected tranquillity in the South of France,-submission in La Vendée on the one hand -or an abhorrence to hereditary rights, and a detestation of the royal name of France, on the other, - they should not have taken Louis-Philippe. Directly they chose their sovereign, they ought to have considered that they had traced, for ten years at least, the direction of their revolution. They had chosen the Duc d'Orléans to satisfy those who were against the family of Charles X. They had chosen a Bourbon, in order to reconcile the friends of legitimate succession; they had chosen a monarchy, in order to pacify those who were afraid of a republic; they had made that monarchy the commencement of a new era,
in order to satisfy the republicans; and, more than all — they had chosen peace in the selection they had made, and evinced a dislike, if not a fear, of war;—and yet there is not one of the parties to whom Louis-Philippe was a compromise, that has not alternately claimed the triumph of its own opinions.
Was Louis-Philippe's government the one likely to allow the family at Holyrood to enter France ? Was Louis-Philippe's government the one to pull down from the public edifices the fleurs-de-lis? Was Louis-Philippe's (government the one likely to march hand in hand with the Americo-republican Lafayette? And was Louis-Philippe's government the one best calculated to remonstrate effectually with the Emperor of Russia, or to march, with the tricolour flying, in favour of the Poles ? Was LouisPhilippe's government the one which would naturally command the ear of Prince Metternich or Louis-Philippe's the name that would terrify the Austrian veterans of Austerlitz and Marengo! No; Louis-Philippe's government was a government of peace-of peace to be obtained by an unpretending posture abroad, by a sober, quiet position at home. It was the government of the “juste milieu,' as Louis-Philippe himself was the 'juste milieu' between a variety