Imagini ale paginilor

would be imprudent to leave a great nation like France exposed without the power of defending her honour and her flag, if their defence became necessary. The Government has no arrière-pensée. In its eyes, peace is the great condition of civilization, and war a great calamity. The Government is at one with the Opposition and with the majority in its desire for peace, but to wish for peace is not to conclude in favour of disarmament.'

Marshal Niel said, “We have at present an army so strong that no Power in Europe could desire to wage war upon us, but we are weaker in artillery than the other Powers. The moral effect of artillery is superior to material effects. Therefore we must not compromise the moral effect by such a reduction as that proposed."

M. Jules Favre argued that France ought to take the initiative in a general disarmament.

The Marquis de Moustier replied. Referring to Crete, he said, “This question has passed through three phases-in the first we sought to prevent the Cretan insurrection, and any intervention by Greece; in the second, we endeavoured to prevent Turkey from concentrating her forces in the island, by showing her the crisis with which she would be threatened ; and, in the third, we paved the way in a friendly manner for the introduction of improved institutions into Crete.”

In reference to Germany, M. de Moustier stated that it was in the interest of peace that France had recourse to armaments, which had been, and would remain, an element of peace. If the Government had no despatches to lay on the table, it was because, in the interest of peace, it had abstained from every irritating controversy with Germany. The only despatch that had been written had been one in which the Government had explained the true nature of the interview at Salzburg. That interview concealed no warlike arrière-pensée. If the peaceful declarations of the Government, so frequently reiterated, had not succeeded in removing all uneasiness it was because they had been met by a perverse incredulity on the part of the Opposition.

M. Thiers asked whether it was true or not that during the last seventeen years the Government had been obliged to raise, over and above the proceeds of the taxes, a sum of 4,322,000,000f.

In the sitting of the Corps Législatif on the 10th of July, M. Ollivier called attention to the approaching meeting of an Ecumenical Council. He expressed his opinion that the State ought to throw no obstacles in the way of the publication in France of the Papal Bull convoking the Council or of the departure of the French bishops for Rome, but he thought it advisable for the Government to abstain from taking any part in the Council. In conclusion, he argued that the Government should prepare a law for the separation of Church and State. M. Baroche, Minister of Public Worship, in reply, stated that the Government observed a


double rule of conduct-namely, the Concordat and the principles of '89. It had not yet decided any thing with regard to the question whether France should be represented at the Ecumenical Council or not, and whether the decisions of the Council should be totally or partially admitted in France. With reference to the separation of Church and State, M. Baroche said it was necessary to leave time to solve this delicate question.

The Session of the Chambers was brought to a close on the 28th of July.

A vacancy occurred in the representation of the second division of the Jura, and a M. Grévy became the Opposition candidate. We mention the circumstance for the purpose of quoting a remarkable and prophetic speech made by him when he was a member of the Constituent Assembly in October, 1848, and asked the following questions, to which the course of events has given a significant answer:- “ Are you sure that in this series of personages who to succeed each other on the throne of the Presidency every four years, there never will be any but pure Republicans promptly descending from it at the expiration of their term of office ? Are you sure that there never will be among them an ambitious man who may be tempted to prolong his power? And if that ambitious man happened to be one who has succeeded in making himself popular-if he be a victorious general invested with all the prestige of military glory, which the French people never can resist—if he be a scion of one of the families who have reigned in France, and has never formally renounced what he calls his rights-if commerce should be stagnant—if the people be in a state of sufferingand if in one of those moments of crisis when, through misery and deception, they give themselves up to those who hide under promises designs against liberty—will you affirm it as a certainty that this ambitious man shall not succeed in overthrowing the Republic ?”

A curious incident happened in August, which shows how little feeling of attachment to the Napoleon dynasty really exists in France. At the distribution of prizes to the pupils of the University in the hall of Sorbonne, M. Duruy, the Minister of Public Instruction, presided, and he had by his side the young Prince Imperial. A son of General Cavaignac had gained one of the prizes, and he was called up by the Minister to receive it. He however hesitated, and then rose, but on a sign made to him by his mother resumed the seat which he had just quitted. There was a burst of applause for the reason was perfectly under

The son of General Cavaignac did not choose to receive a prize at the hands of the son of the Emperor. It was a very ungracious act, but the way in which it was applauded by the students showed how little loyalty to the occupant of the throne exists in the hearts of the youth of France. A new map of France was published by the Government in the




[ocr errors]

course of the autumn, the object of which was to show how much better her position relatively to the balance of power had become under the rule of Napoleon III. It was accompanied by a preface which said,—“ Under the Second Empire France has regained her natural frontiers, the Alps. Italy has become a free country. Holland has burst the chains which bound her to the German Confederation in virtue of her possession of Limburg and Luxemburg. The German Confederation has been dissolved; the Federal fortresses have ceased to exist; Mayence is now occupied by Prussia alone. Landau and Germersheim belong to Bavaria, and are garrisoned by her; Rastadt is occupied by Baden troops, and Ulm by Bavaria and Wurtemberg together. Prussia is materially increased, but in reality the European balance of power is not destroyed to the detriment of France. Before the recent events Prussia and Austria united were the rulers of Germany, and they could oppose us with 80,000,000 of men, bound together by treaties and a formidable military organization. To-day the States surrounding France are independent; Belgium and Switzerland are neuter; Prussia, with the North German Confederation, counts 30,000,000; the South German States, having a military alliance with Prussia, count 8,000,000, Austria 35,000,000, and Italy 22,000,000. France, with her unity and her 40,000,000 of inhabitants, including Algeria, has nothing to fear from any one.

A member of the Chamber of Deputies named Baudin was killed at a barricade, fighting on the side of the insurgents on the 3rd of December, 1851, the day after the coup d'état. buried in the cemetery of Montmartre, and the man and his grave had been forgotten until the latter happened to be discovered in November this year. It was determined by some strenuous opponents of the existing Government to erect a monument to his memory, and subscription-lists were opened which were soon filled by a great number of names. Instead of treating the matter with indifference, the Ministry unwisely gave it a political importance by prosecuting the journals in which the lists appeared. The charge was that they were guilty of “ manæuvres with the object of disturbing the public peace, and exciting hatred and contempt against the Government of the Emperor;" and several of the editors were found guilty and sentenced to penalties. It would have been much better to follow the advice given by the journal La France, which observed, “If the Republicans desire to raise a statue to the memory of Baudin, if they do so pacifically, honourably, without troubling public order, without outraging the Constitution and the laws, without provoking the people to revolt, we sincerely believe it is impolitic to prevent them.”

M. Berryer was among the number of subscribers, and he wrote the following letter to the editor of one of the newspapers :-

“Paris, Nov. 11. “Sir,—On the 2nd of December I proposed and obtained from

the National Assembly, held in the Mairée, of the 10th arrondissement, a decree deposing and outlawing the President of the Republic, and I convoked the citizens to resist the violation of the laws of which the President was guilty. That decree was made as public as possible in Paris. My colleague, M. Baudin, energetically obeyed the orders of the Assembly. He was the victim of that obedience; and I feel myself bound to take part in the subscription opened for the erection of an expiatory monument on his tomb. Be pleased to accept my offering, and receive the expression, &c.

BERRYER.” Soon afterwards this illustrious man-one of the greatest advocates who have ever adorned the bar of France-was seized by a sudden illness, and died at a good old age.

In December some changes took place in the French Ministry. M. Pinard retired from the office of Minister of the Interior, and was succeeded by M. Forçade de la Roquette, who was replaced by M. Gresner in the office of Public Works. The Marquis de Moustier left the Foreign Office, and was succeeded by M. de Lavalette.



SPAIN-Dissatisfaction of the people-Death of Marshal Narvaez-New Cabinet under

Gonzalez Bravo-Arrest and banishment of Spanish generals—Duke and Duchess de Montpensier ordered to leave Spain-Outbreak of the Revolution at Cadiz-Return of the banished generals-Proclaination of General Prim - Resignation of the Ministry -Defeat of the royal troops — Flight of the Queen from Spain-Manifestoes of the Provisional Goverument - Entry of Marshal Serrano into Madrid - Formation of a Provisional Ministry-Decrees -- Recognition of the Provisional Government by Foreign Powers - New Electoral law-Manifesto of Electoral Committee-Dis.

turbance at Cadiz. ITALY-Changes in the Cabinet-Speech of General Menabrea-Circular of the

Minister of the Interior on the condition of the Country.


This year witnessed a revolution in Spain which overthrew the Bourbon dynasty and left the form of government to the choice of the people. Insurrectionary movements may be said to have been the chronic state of that country for many years past, but they have until the present year been all abortive; and so long as the army remained faithful to the throne there seemed to be no chance of their succeeding; but now the whole nation, including the military and the fleet, has risen and swept away one of the worst Governments in Europe. The conduct of the Queen had alienated all feelings of loyalty, and the forms of the Constitution had been abused and made the machinery of arbitrary and oppressive rule. The people were weary of a system which repressed all freedom of thought and rights of conscience, which placed the education of the young in the hands of Jesuits, and under which they had lost all respect for their Ministers and all attachment to the Crown. Nothing, however, occurred until April to give warning of the coming storm. In that month insurrectionary movements broke out in Catalonia, and the province was placed in a state of siege. On the 23rd of April Marshal Narvaez, the President of the Council, died, and this led to a resignation of the Ministry. A new Cabinet was formed under Gonzalez Bravo, with SS. Roncali, Belda, Marfori, Orobio, Catalina, and Villaroya as his colleagues, and some other changes in the composition of the Ministry took place in June.

In July several Spanish generals were arrested and, without any form of trial, sent into exile. Marshal Serrano (Duke de la Torre), General Dominiquez, General Serrano (a relative of the Marshal), and General Dulce were put on board ship at Cadiz and sent off to the Canary Islands. Other generals were sent to the Balearic Islands, and some were confined in Spain. At the same time an intimation was conveyed to the Duke and Duchess de Montpensier to leave Spain, and as they refused to comply on the ground that an Infanta of Spain could receive orders only direct from the Sovereign, the Queen signed a decree exiling them from the country. They were sent on board a Spanish ship of war, the “ Villa de Madrid,” and conveyed to Lisbon.

The CaptainGeneral of Andalusia was ordered to accompany them to the ship, and it is said that the captain of the vessel, when he received them whispered to the Duke, “Say but the word, and the Captain-General shall remain as a prisoner on board, and we will sail to the Canaries to fetch the banished generals, and bring them back to Spain." But the Duke refused.

In September the revolution broke out. General Prim left England on the 11th of that month and reached Cadiz on the 17th. In the meantime a vessel had been sent by the revolutionary leaders to the Canary Islands to bring back the banished Generals, and they arrrived at Cadiz on the 19th. The day before the Spanish fleet at that port, under the command of Admiral Topete, and the garrison in the city declared for the revolution.

A proclamation was issued signed by General Prim, in which he said :

“People of Cadiz !
“Viva Liberty ! Viva the sovereignty of the nation !

“Yesterday you were groaning under the yoke of a despotic Government. To-day the flag of liberty waves over your walls.

“The squadron of the fleet led by Admiral Topete, in the first instance, and subsequently the garrison and the populace, have

« ÎnapoiContinuă »