The Press.
London, England, 1856-08-23 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

language. The only difference left between them was in
their rights.
1 much doubt whether this was the case in the same
degree anywhere else, even in England, where the different
classes, though firmly united by common interests, still
differed in their habits and feelings; for political liberty,
which possesses the admirable power of placing the citizens
of a state in needful intercourse and mutual dependence,
does not on that account always make them alike ; it is
the government of one man which, in the end, has the
inevitable effect of rendering all men alike, and all mu•
tually indifferent to their common fate.

This, like the concluding sentence of the last
extract, giving an unexpectd turn to what had
gone before, contains a sting, which will doubt-
less make itself felt in the quarter at which it
is aimed.
Another not less fatal result is indicated in
the following passages :

The baseness of mankind is, moreover, not to be esti.
mated by the degree of their subserviency to a sovereign
power: that standard would be an incorrect one. How-
ever submissive the French may have been before the
revolution to the will of the King, one sort of obedience
was altogether unknown to them ; they knew not what it
was to how before an illegitimate and contested power—a
power but little honoured, frequently despised, but which
is willingly endured because it may be serviceable or be-
cause it may hart. To this degrading form of servitude
they were ever strangers. The King inspired them with
feelings which none of the most absolute princes who have
since appeared in the world have been able to call forth,
and which are become incomprehensible to the present
generation, so entirely has the revolution extirpated them
from the hearts of the nation. They loved him with the
affection due to a father; they revered him with the re-
spect due to God. in submitting to the most arbitrary of
his commands they yielded less to compulsion than to
loyalty, and thus they frequently preserved great freedom
of mind even in the most complete dependence. To them
the greatest evil of obedience was compulsion ; to us it is
the least: the worst is in that servile sentiment which
leads men to obey. We have no right to despise our
forefathers. Would to God that we could recover,
with their prejudices and their faults, something of their
greatness!

In the eighteenth century a clique of literary
men had assumed the 'guidance of public
opinion, and introduced that'ataste for theories,
" for general ideas and big words," which is
still characteristic of the French. This, too,
was the product of the revolution, though often
erroneously supposed to be the indigenous
growth of French genuis. On this subject
M. de Tocqueville has some striking com-
ments :

Even the political language of the time caught some-
th'ng of the tone in which the authors spoke : it was full
of genus' expressions, abstract terms, pompous words,
and literary turns. This style, aided by the political pas-
sions which it expressed, penetrated through all classes,
and descended with singular facility even to the lowest.
Considerably before the revolution, the edicts of Louis
XVI. frequently spoke of the law of nature and the rights
of man ; and I have found instances of peasants who, in
their memorials, called their neighbours "fellow-citizens,"
their Intendant "a respectable magistrate," their parish
priest " the minister of the altar," and God " the Supreme
Being," and who wanted nothing but spelling to become
very indifferent authors.

It is singular that the French have preserved the habits
which they had derived front literature, whilst they have
almost entirely lost their ancient love of literature itself.
I have been frequently astonished in the course of my own
public life to see that men who had never read the works
of the eighteenth century, or of any other, and who had a
great contempt for authors, nevertheless so faithfully
retain some of the principal defects which were displayed
before thew birth by the literary spirit of that day.

The reason of this is, that previous to 1789
men had never seen radical or socialist theories
put in practice, and did not therefore believe
it possible. As the telescope is said to have
been discovered by the experiments of a child
playing with some bits of broken glass, so the
revolution gradually grew into life from the
harmless reveries with which the French phi-
losophers delighted to amuse themselves :

The nobles even shared as a pleasant pastime in these
discussions, and quietly enjoyed their immunities and pri-
vileges ; whilst they serenely discussed the absurdity of all
established customs.

Hence, it is to be feared, the difficulty of
tranquillising France. The theoretical spirit
still remains, whetted by the example of re-
peated efforts to realise its dreams, which were
wanting to the eighteenth century. It is hard
to say which is most dangerous, to give it rein,
or to compress it. The former produces a
normal state of turbulence, the latter always
involves the risk of a sudden and terrible
explosion.
From the general progress and results of
this great political convulsion, now so ably
brought under our notice, one other conclu-
sion, but slightly glanped at by M. de Tocclue-

809

vine, is forced on our attention. It is, that with
the progress of civilisation and luxury the
dread of oppression has diminished, and the
fondness for public affairs has declined. How
few of our youthful aristocracy, or sons of
wealthy families, take the same interest in
political life that was displayed by their grand-
fathers. And that circumstance it is which
renders other classes in society less tolerant
of their superiority. The aristocracy at this
moment inspires less fear and more jealousy
than in former times ; and the consequence is
that the revolutionary spirit in this country, as
far as it exists at all, manifests itself in a
craving for social equality, rather than for
political freedom. We believe this spirit is
not wide spread ; but where it has taken root,
it is with a class thoroughly well able to give
effect to their opinions, and likely to be far
from disagreeable to those who are favorable to
the continental system of government. This
sentiment has long been dominant in France,
and there M. de Tocqueville sees its operation
with perfect distinctness, though he has not
noticed its existence in Europe generally.
This is the most pernicious legacy of the revo-
lution. It is destructive of free government,
subversive of natural order, and calculated to
enervate all the more noble and masculine
elements of a nation's character.

We take our leave of M. de Tooqueville with
a twofold feeling of satisfaction—first, that a
writer of such acknowledged genius should
have given to the world so purely conservative
a work ; and, next, that Imperial France should
have contributed another witness to the utility
of the traditions and policy of Constitutional
England.