The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-04-15
THE REPU BLIC

less than three hundred lives were lost.
For two weeks there was not even the
shadow of government in Paris. During
that time the arms, arsenals, and ammu-
milton of the city were entirely in the
hands of the people; life and property
were at their disposal; yet scarce soli-
tary act of pillage or even violence was
perpetrated. Men, women, and children
went forth amid the armed populace with
out fear or annoyance. For three months
there was no other government through
out France than that which rested upon
the assent of what is called the me6-yet
that sufficed for the emergency. There
is not, in the history Of mankind, an ex-
ample of SO high degree of civilization
1t is curious illustration of the dis
coloring force Of prejudice, that Mr..
| WALSH declares the masses of Paris in
l84S-and especially the female portion
las more degraded and debased than
even during the bloody '9reign of terror"
The philosophic MACAULAY takes very
| different view. He considers the atroci-
ties of 1789-1792 as the result of the
social degradation, caused by ages Of des-
potism under corrupt monarchy; and he
points to the revolution of 1880, as dis
playing the humanizing effects of the par
tial liberty which had been enjoyed during
the preceding fifty years. MAcAULAY, the
English historian, imputes the debase-
ment of society 10 monarchy; our Ameri-
can in Paris, it would seem, regards mon
archy as the fountain of virtue and peace,
and the vices of the people as springing
from their innate and instructive corrup-
ton!
Thus much is due, we think, in fair
and candid review, to the French charac-
ter; and from this we are bound to make
hopeful auguries as to their future course.
Nor are we much disturbed by what is
deemed the alarming progress of Social
ism. The great mixture of opinions and
shades of opinions embraced under that
term has one fundamental point of agree
ment, and that is, the reputation of mon
archy, and the assumption of the business
of government by the people. There are,
no doubt, among the various grades of
Socialists many crude, impracticable and
absurd theories. But these will not prevail.
Among an intelligent people ultraism can
not govern ; moderate views will form
the only point on which majority can
agree. They must thus agree, or be
crushed. Necessity will compel them at
last to the adoption of republicanism.
That these principle are already at work,
is evident from the course of the late
elections.
Such is brief outline of our views on
the side of republicanism in France. This
may be embarrassed, defeated, and even
set aside for time; but that republican
ism is 10 be the final issue of the agita-
tons in that country we deem to be as
certain as that the rivers will continue to
flow to the ocean.
What other system, indeed, is open
to Francel We shall be told that mon
archy is the favorite government of the
French people, and that we may expect
their speedy return to it. We are assured
that Louis Napoleon is already meditating
an attempt to restore the Empire. The
character of this individual is somewhat
enigmatical, and it is not easy to say
what degree of wisdom or folly will mark
his future course. But one thing is GER
tain: monarchy can never be permanent
ly or benefcially established in France.
Monarchy is an institution which cannot
stand alone. Certain strong pillars are
essential to its support. A dynasty in
volving royalty and loyalty; a rich and
time-honored peerage; a church allied to
the State; an ignorant and stultifed peo-
pie, are all required to ensure perma-
hence and tranquility TO throne. Yet
these elements do not exist, to any avail
able extent, in France. The claims Of
particular family TO royal blood, by virtue
Of which its offspring are princes and prin-
cesses, and by virtue Of which, also, il may
claim the allegiance Of mankind, is the
scoff Of large part Of the people there.
The days Of royalty are over in that
country; they were numbered at the exc
cution Of LOUIS XVI. LOUIS PHrLrppE's
dynasty fell, without blow, like tree
destitute Of roots, and stuck only in the
sod. He was a man Of talent, but he was
not the lineal heir to the throne. He had
peerage, but they were mushrooms, and
the shutting of door in the Luxembourg
snufed them out like the foot-lights Of
theatre at the turn Of screw. How diff
ferent was it with the old dynasty in
1892, even though the imbecile LOUIS
XVI. was on the throne II stood like