The Press.
London, England, 1854-06-10 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

sion was not long wanting. Among the op-
ponents of the ultramoutanists no power was
so formidable as that of the press ; to destroy
it, they argued, had become a necessity; and
they went to work the shortest way. The
following was the measure forced by them on
the Cabinet, and actually introduced into the
Chamber of Deputies :
In the bill brought forward by Government it was pro-
posed that all writings of twenty pages and under should
be deposited with the censors five days before publication;
if published before the expiry of this period, the entire
edition was liable to be confiscated, and a fine of 3,000
francs (1201.) imposed on the publisher. A duty of one
franc for the first sheet, and ten sous for each sheet after,
was imposed on every publication below twenty pages.
Speeches in either Chamber, pastoral letters, and journals
appearing only once in two months, which by the exist-
ing law were obliged to find caution, were relieved from
these enactments. The proprietors of journals were to be
the parties against whom actions founded on delinquencies
against the state or individuals were to be directed, ►nd no
company for conducting a journal was to be legal if con-
sisting of more than five persons. Fines might be im-
posed from 2,000 to 20,000 francs ( 801. to 8001.)
A more unfortunate attempt could scarcely
have been made. The result was foreseen
even by the unwilling authors of the measure.
Yet these, though they had miscalculated
their strength, were actually not far from suc-
ceeding. The bill passed, in a mutilated
form ; but the triumph was equally insulting
and idle, for Ministers durst not enforce the
provisions of their own enactment. The most
remarkable circumstance attending the de-
bates on this subject was that while Chateau-
briand, Villemain, and Lacretelle protested
against the proposed repression, the names of
Cuvier and La Place were found ranged on the
side of Government. From the period of this
bold assault on popular liberty the fall of the
monarchy may be dated. Its results made
themselves early manifest. The Duke of
Rochefoucauld, a man more than respectable
by his talents, his social position, and historic
name, had voted against Government. All
his offices and honours, the reward of a long
life usefully spent, were taken from him in one
day. His death followed shortly : the Liberals
seized on the opportunity, and endeavoured to
grace his funeral by a public demonstration.
This was resisted—a riot ensued—the affair
was noised over all France—and in the hands
of skilful agitators served to revive disturb-
ances which time might have otherwise ap-
peased.
The next event of moment was even more
significant. Anxious to regain popularity,
which he highly valued, yet blind to the cause
of its decrease, Charles appointed the 12th of
April, '27, for a review of the National Guard.
As might have been foreseen, cries of "Vive
le Roil" were mingled with expressions of
disapprobation, which the Monarch's pre-
sence could not suppress. " I come here,"
he exclaimed in anger, "to receive homage,
" and not lessons ;" but his words pro-
duced no effect. The demonstration failed
to produce its intended result : the royal party
returned home dejected and discomfited. It
was the original purpose of Charles to take no
further notice of what had passed ; but evil
counsels again prevailed. A cabinet was sum-
moned in haste, it sat late and long, short
time was allowed for deliberation, and in the
morning appeared an ordinance disbanding
the Guard. It does not seem that in this step
the King exceeded his constitutional power, nor
was any resistance attempted, but the folly of
the act could not be defended; and, as if to
defy the very enemies whom they created,
Ministers did not even insist on disarming the
forCe which they ignominiously displaced.
Rarely in human affairs has there been wit-
nessed such a combination of audacity and
apathy—rarely have such dangers been con-
fronted with so little forethought or fear; and
this remark applies with equal force to every
succeeding step taken by the Bourbons until
their final overthrow in 1830. The censorship
was re-established by ordinance ; seventy-six
new peers were created—all, of course, in the
interest of the Church—a dissolution was
tried; preparations began on both sides for the
coming struggle. In November the elections
came on ; they were attended with disturb-
ances, especially in Paris ; blood ran freely ;
and it was noted that the troops of the line,
when summoned to act against the people,
showed signs of wavering. On summing up

543

the results the Liberals were found to have
gained ground, yet not so much so but that
the King had still a majority. But what the
Opposition could not effect was done by in-
ternal differences. The Ministry had been
founded on a compromise ; it contained many
members who had come reluctantly into the
violent measures of their colleagues ; these
were now displaced, and the memorable
Government of Prince Polignac succeeded to
power after a brief endeavour to compromise
matters by the appointment of a more consti-
tutional Premier. The Prince, who played so
memorable a part in the great drama of 1830, is
well, though perhaps too favourably, portrayed
in this volume. It is said that " he aimed at
" securing for France a constitution similar to
" that which for a century and a half had given
" prosperity and glory to Great Britain." All
the eloquence and talent of France was directed
against him, and through him against the
Court. Lafayette, in a kind of triumphal
progress through the south of France, stirred
up men's minds by that oratory in which he
excelled, and whose effect was enhanced by
the recollection of his services and sufferings.
Thiers and Guizot, not yet rivals, argued and
declaimed in their respective journals. Demo-
cratic societies were organised in all the great
towns, openly abetted by the leading statesmen
of opposition. Of independent members,
Berryer, when the Chambers met, alone sup-
ported the Ministry, which he nevertheless re-
fused to join when place was offered as the
reward of his exertions. The vast power of
French journalism never made itself more felt
than at this crisis. Metternich, in an epigram
which has become historical, said, " In Austria
" I would be minister ; in Paris I would be
" a journalist." The leading Liberal organs
commanded a sale, jointly, of nearly 40,000 ;
an equal number of their rivals circulated
scarcely more than 17,000 copies ; and the
disparity of talent equalled that of numbers.
Thus influenced, and strong in the sense of
popular support, the Opposition were not long
in bringing matters to a decisive issue. In
their first vote they gained a majority of 40-
221 against 181 ; and it was found that, in a
house of 402 members, the Polignac Ministry
could not count more than 160 certain sup-
porters. Still they persevered ; the Chamber
was prorogued ; and, the Algerine war having
apparently created a favourable diversion in
the public mind, a second dissolution was re-
solved on. Its result was, as might have been
expected, the defeat of many Ministerial can-
didates and an increase of the Liberal strength .
No option remained except to conquer or to
submit. The former alternative was chosen.
The charter, vaguely worded, contained an
article which seemed to invest the Monarch
with dictatorial power in extreme emergencies.
It was determined to put this article in force;
and (July 26th) the famous ordinances ap-
peared. By them the liberty of the ress was
suspended; the Chamber once mor issolved ;
the existing electoral body disfranc ised and
replaced by another on a different basis. They
amounted, in fact, to a revolution; and, since
submission could scarcely be anticipated, they
involved the necessity of an appeal to physical
force. But that physical force was itself want-
ing : the garrison of Paris had not been
strengthened ; the troops of the line could not
be relied on ; no steps were taken to prevent
the citizens from arming; even ammunition
had not been supplied in sufficient quantities.
The result need not here be told. Within
three weeks Charles was in England and Louis
Philippe on the throne. Admitting the ille-
gality of the King's acts—acknowledging their
folly, and not deeming the existence of equally
unconstitutional designs on the other side a
valid apology—we still think, with Sir Archi-
bald, that the overthrow of the monarchy
might have been arrested had due precautions
been taken to guard against the outbreak
which all knew was at hand. We have alluded
to the want of military preparation. Another
obvious omission was the leaving at liberty
the revolutionary chiefs. They were known—
they were unprotected. Force had been re-
solved on. It was too late to profess any
scruples about violating the constitution ; yet
for two days they were suffered to meet unmo-
lested, nor was any attempt made to arrest
, them until Paris had then in arms. It may

be a curious problem to the historical specu •
lator to say what might have happened in
France had the coup critat of 1830 been planned
and carried out with the secrecy and skill
which marked that of 1852. President Bona-
parte knew better than to allow his troops to
hold intercourse during three days with the
insurgents, and to listen to their promises of
promotion and reward to deserters.
We cannot follow the historian through his
able analysis—it may almost be called an
essay—on the causes of revolutions in France.
Those on which he mainly dwells are—the
unpopularity of a Royal Family restored by
foreign arms—the extreme division of pro-
perty, whereby the existence of an aristocracy
is rendered impossible—the want of religious
restraints in the large towns—the intense love
of excitement, and individual thirst of distinc-
tion, called forth by the Bonapartean con-
quests,—and not least, though hitherto less
noticed, the countless multitudes of illegiti-
mate children, without property, home, or
domestic ties, who were, and still are, found in
Paris and the urban districts. This class is
reckoned as forming one-third of the Parisian
population, and in Lyons the proportion is
not less. Add to all this, that under a Govern-
ment professedly constitutional the working
class were wholly unrepresented, while both
their interests and their feelings often placed
them in hostility to the bourgeoisie, who ex-
clusively composed the electoral body. It is
noteworthy that physical distress had little,
if anything, to do with the political convul-
sions we have described. Statistically tested,
the prosperity of France in 1820-30 seems to
have been great and increasing. Indeed, it
would appear that severe distress turns away
men's minds from politics : a certain degree of
leisure and wellbeing aro necessary before
the mass of mankind will interest themselves
in the fate of ministers and constitutions.
[To be continued.l

Poetry of the Anti-Jacobin. With Explanatory
Notes. By Charles Edmonds. Second
Edition. London : Willis.
Atrttouott there are not a few defects, as well
as mistakes, in this edition of the jeux d'esprit
of the Anti-Jacobin, the volume is worthy of a
place on the shelves of the collector. It has
several illustrative notes, and six reprints of
some of Gillray's most spirited caricatures.
It has also an index professing to give the
names of the authors of the several pieces, on
the accuracy of which in many places we arc
inclined to be sceptical. The little volume is
handsomely got up, and " second " edition
on the titlepage shows how keen is still the
appreciation of the satirical poems of Canning,
Frere, and Gifford.
Mr. Edmonds, however, must excuse us if
we say that he could scarcely be qualified for
editing such a production. There are very
few now living who could discharge the office
properly, because the parties who had most to
do with the authorship of those sarcastic pieces
were not in the habit of making revelations
on the subject. Several of the dicta scattered
through his numerous notes show that Mr
Edmonds has not the closeness in statement
essential to a critical discharge of editorial
functions. In his preface he adopts the re-
mark of Moore in the " Life of Sheridan" that
" the Anti-Jacobin and the .Rolliad may be
" considered on their respective sides as
" models of light political satire." The names
of the two works should not be mentioned in
the same sentence. The Rolliad was epheme-
ral in interest, and so grossly licentious in
many of its passages, that no man would per-
mit it in the hands of his wife or sister. Its
wit was mechanical and ponderous. The
heavy humour of Doctor Lawrence in his hex-
ameters and iambics was like a Dutch burgo-
master mimicking the elasticity of a French
dancer. Mr. Edmonds, in proceeding to the
origin of the Anti-Jacobin, says:—
The sagacious mind of Mr. Pitt had long seen that his
party in Parliament were, with very few exceptions, no
match for his numerous opponents, powerful both in
talent and social position ; among whom were Fox, Sheridan,
Erskine, Horne Tooke, Whitbread, Nicholls, Courtenay,
Fitzpatrick, the Dukes of Norfolk and Bedford, Lord
Stanhope, the Duchess of Devonshire, and others. He
was always anxious, therefore, to secure whatever available
talent presented itself, and immediately on their appear.