Litchfield enquirer., 1878-01-10
Destruction.

There is the English Constitution --barnacled with inconsistencies, and honey -combed with injustices yet maintained in spite of all it's inconsistency and injustice because our race hates to destroy anything not absolutely unen- durable. The Frenchman, on the other hand, is set down by all true Anglo-Saxons as born 4ccaeeiast. history of France for the past century shows it violently progressive and vi- olently retrograde by turns. It has changed continually without much apparent improve ment. Hence you find the Frenchman classi- fled under the head ssDestrnctiye, Fin the mind ot nearly every intelligent Anglo-Saxon, wheth- CT in Old or in New England. You find it laid down also asan axiom throughout Old and New England that no great institution; political so- cial, or religious; should be pulled down till it in it's place
 We dissent entirely from such doctrine. There is duty of Destruction as we'll as a du- ty of Construction. To give the Frenchman his due, we need only to go back two centu- ries In the Seventeenth century France would have ranked as the most conservative, Eng land as the most destructive of European na- tions. The Long Parliament, like the French Convention was destructive and not construc- tive. Much that it pulled down staid abolish ed; but what did it build up that lasted? The soldiers of Oliver Cromwell put down the Long Parliament in England century and a half before Napoleon Boaaparte abolished the republic in France; andseach military despot- ism was followed by g Restoration. Only, in France, there have been two Restorations; one of the old dynasty, and one of the new, which latter, it must be remembered, was never re- jected by the French people themselves till 1870. In England, in short, the kingly author 1 ity of the Tudors and Stuarts had grown unen- durable and, in 164O the work of it's destruc- ton began. It was noble and necessary work, but cost great deal of blood and suf- ! fering, and no less than three revolutions-two against the Stuarts and one against the Inde- ! pend ents-to accomplish it. The tyranny and misgovernment against which France revolted 1 in 1789, was vastly more oppressive than that dSdlIot WulIA ICNOItCu III 1OfO HC subsequent struggle was greatly aggravated by the interference of monarchical Europe. Hence the subsequent period of cohvulsions has been longer and more disturbed than that of En- gland. The most disgracefuf years of recent French history have been the nineteen years of Bonapartist Restoration, from '51 to '7O Have they been more disreputable and worse disgraced by political and social disorganizatior than the 28 years of Stuart Restoration-from 1860 to 1888!
 We have strong belief that the work o1 destruction is mainly over in France. The average Frenchman of today is a conservative in the true sense of the term. There are be tween five and six million freeholders in tha country-mainly peasant farmers-between whom the land is nearly all divided. Ther. is not such powerful element interested 1T order as against disorder, such solid founda tion for real republican institutions, to be found in any other European country. How is it in Great Britain: Says Mir. Froude:
 The House of Lords own more than a thirt of the whole area of Great Britain. Tw, thirds of 1t really belongs to great peers anC commoners, whose estates are continually de vouring the small estates adjoining them. Th remaining third, in and about the great towns is Subdvided, and the subdivision is continu ally increasing but the land there also stil falling mainly into the hands of the rich
 Short Studies, 3d Series, page 2S7.]
 While, therefore, the peasantry of Franc are generally free-holders, the peasantry o Great Britain are substantially landless Az afforded England by her numerous colonie has prevented the country from falling into
 condition greatly resembling that from whlc France was rescued by the Revolution of l7os France, on the other hand, would be to,dRR 5 1R one of the most coasGsccEyft coasGcE fto communism on tn lmatoi iercity populations and the tendency t despotism on the part of her immense stand ing army. Dangerous as these tendencies hav proved ill the past-the one leading to despot lsm ot tine Lower Empire, the other to tn anarchy of the Parisian Commune of '71- universal suffrage gives the control of Franc, to the peasant proprietors, if they are wis enough to uphold the Republic Is it to, thi class that We look with confidence as the ba sis upon which republican institutions are t, become permanent in France. It is just ther to revile the Great Revolution because. bavine no such support, it proved failure? Is it no fact that while the policy of Destruction ha, become necessary and unavoidable in 17S9 Il, policy of fra Reconstruction had vet become possible?
 Just so, in our own land, there came a tim when no policy was possible in our nationa dealings with slavery, but the policy of De struction. We tried all sorts of compromise to no purpose, fearing to destroy because no body could see how to build up after destruc tlon. Finally we were obliged to destroy O be destroyed, and we did our work thoroughly Then we tried to reconstruct. Here we me the precise difficulty that blocked the way o the Long Parliament, and of the old French Re public. The materials for thorough recon struction were wanting. We built on what VI considered the firm foundation of universal sui frage, r1ld our buildings have one afteranothe fallen flat. We found out, as the French Repub licans of the last century discovered that uni versal suffrage among people without eithe property or intelligence does not furnish tirn basis for reconstruction, Hence we are nov having our Restoration. The Bourbons ant Stuarts of the South are again in power; bu they can no more restore what we pulled dowu than Charles or James could restore what the Long Parliament overthrow, or than Loui. XVIII, or Louis Philippe, or Louis Napoleon could restore what Mirsbeau had destroyed No work of just and righteous destruction i! ever entirely lost; but, the greater need there is of destruction, the less is any immediate re construction possible. Great suffering, violen, vicissitudes of party, and the lapse of time, are necessary to complete such work yet we need never lose heart because results turn tenn. porariy against Progress. The prospects oi the party of progress in the United States ir 1 1878, are infinitely better than were the nros