The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1865-05-12
NJ. Thiers ON the Pope and Italian
Unity.

Unity.
We give elsewhere the speech Of NJ Theirs
on the Italian question, as delivered in the
French Legislature on The 4th ult nj. Theirs
supports the temporal powsR.pf the Pope and
opposes the unity of Italy. He would have the
government sustain the Pope for fear of a "col-
lision with the Church." which he is convinced
twill ever be peril and danger for any regu-
lar government" and because any change in
the Pope's position will be ''regarded by Catho-
lies as violation of the liberty of conscience"
His other argument in favor of the Pope flows
from that against Italian unity. He believes
that the separation of Church from State-the
condition, for instance, that we have in this
country-is "uterly chimerical !" that there
and that France, with such choice forced upon
her, must inevitably choose the Pope; for to
choose the other is to have Italian unity. And
why not have Italian unity? Because it would
be dangerous to France. France contributed
to the independence of Holland, and Holland
subsequently fought against her. She con-
tributed to the independence of America, and
"you all know how America acted scen after
the treaty OF 1883" Therefore, if France
should contribute to Italian unity and indie
pendence, she will be merely bringing into ex-
istence another enemy, and she has enough
already. She will assist in "the forma-
ton Of nation of TWEEN. y-six millions
of men at the gates of France" These men
may differ with The French rulers-they may
not be able to reconcile their differences
there may be war! Down with Italian unity.
But there is worse than this. Italian unity
may lead to German unity. The formation Of
this nation of twcnty-six millions may "give
rise to another nation of forty millions beyond
tue Rhine" and where would France be then?
From all antiquity prudent States have kept
down their smaller neighbours" and France,
therefore, will not be a prudent State if she
does not follow this same venerable plan.
Such is the opinion of M. Theirs.
In these arguments we have the height and
breadth Of NJ. Theirs. He depicts himself re-
lentlessly as the least philosophical, the mar
rowcst and meanest minded historian of the
age. He shows himself as man quite unable
to take comprehensive or enlightened view of
national polity, and while he charges against
the House of Savoy that it is "always
guided by the interests Of the moment"
he would establish for France po
Icy that should always be guided
by the fears Of the future. He is strictly
and literally what we call in this country
small-po!ato politicians man without states
manlike views and unable to consider the
questions that arise in any but the most con-
temptible light. He does not march with the
progress of the age; he is not even tinctured
with the spirit of tho present time. For thou
sand years Italy has been divided, and in that
time she has sounded all the depths and shoals
of national degradation; and now, when there
is new spirit abroad in the world, and when
the large enlightenment Of the human mind
teaches that the good Of all consists in the i'm
provement Of each one, this historian Of one of
frances brightest periods would hurl down
again the Italy that attempts to arise from her
thousand years of misery to a fellowship with
the nations. Austria kept Italy divided to
keep her down and retain dominion over her.
1t was a policy worthy the spirit of the Aus
trian despotism. And now member Of the
French Legislature proposes that France shall
carry out the same policy for even meaner
reason. Consistently with this he proposes
Austria as a natural ally tor France, and refers
to the similarity between The governments of
the two nations. II would be charitable TO N.
Theirs to suppose that these propositions did
not flow from q narrow view of the Italian
question, but were intended rs savage satires
on the present condition Of France and the
government Of the Emperor. He would imply,
perhaps that the latter has brought France to
the condition of Austria, and that her vitality
is 40 far gone that she must needs fear regene-
rated Italy. This, we say, would be chari-
table view to take; but it is too evident that
the propositions of M. Theirs are intended
seriously.
M. Theirs is not even original in the means
proposed to keep Italy divided. He would
use the same instrument that has proved so
efficient in Austrian hands--thnt u.s. the Pope
He is 30 purblind he cannot even see that
Papal Rome bus fulfilled its mission in Europe
and must pass away. But this is true, though
he cannot see it. And as republican Rome full
filed its time and passed away, as imperial
Rome accomplished what there was for it to do
in the world and went out Of existence. so must
Papal Rome, now that its mission-which was
its vitality-is gone. As the Goths and vandals
finished imperial Rome, no another race Of
Goths and Vandals-those assailcd by the
encyclical-- finish Papal Rome. Republic
can Rome succumbed to internal dissenson,
imperial Rome to external foes, and Papal
Rome must 60 down before that fully de-
veloped spirit of the age that is heard in the
call for Italian unity. Nor will the limping
craftsmanship Of M. Theirs suffice to save it.