XLIV. 1841. 54. tions against entered so largely into the composition of every Paris CHAP. jury was taken into consideration. So it turned out accordingly on the present occasion. The Gazette de France was prosecuted by the Advocate-General on the Prosecu part of the Government, and the defence was conducted, the editors who pubwith his wonted ability, by M. Berryer. After a long trial, lished the and an hour's deliberation by the jury, a verdict of “Not papers. Guilty" was returned, to the utmost satisfaction of a crowded court, and the unbounded joy and excitement of the public generally. The sensation produced was the greater, that the Advocate-General had most imprudently, in describing to the jury the purport of the letters alleged to be forgeries, characterised them in these terms: Polonais sous le Prince Adam, et voudrait-on oublier ce qu'on nous doit, à nous, comme unique et puissant moteur des mesures qui ont paralysé ces résolutions, neutralisé le système, et réalisé les paroles prophétiques de Sébastiani?" 3d Letter." C'était du temps qu'il fallait gagner, et au lieu d'irriter les esprits, il fallait endormir le civisme en activité pour le préparer au salutaire moment où une ordonnance nous eût fait justice de tout récalcitrant. Du reste, rien ne me fera renoncer à un projet si sagement conçu, à l'exécution duquel, dans l'état des choses où se trouve la France, s'attache en quelque sorte non seulement la durée de la monarchie constitutionnelle, mais la perpétuité de ma dynastie, ce qui sonne mieux et vant mieux pour la France. Qu'on se persuade bien que moi seul je pouvais affronter, diriger, et vaincre l'hydre révolutionnaire. Qu'on nous sache donc un peu de gré. On ne tient aucun compte de nos efforts constants; on ne sait pas à quel peuple nous avons affaire, et que depuis quarante ans on peut regarder Paris comme étant la France. Qu'on s'assure donc que je ne renonce pas à mon projet, ni à celui de maîtriser la presse, notre plus dangereux ennemi. On a gagné une grande partie des écrivains; les autres suivront et le calme succédera aux excitations malignes et journalières de ces plumes guerroyantes. Qu'on pense à ce que Juillet eût pu attirer sur l'Europe en 1830; que l'on voie ce que notre siècle et notre forte volonté ont fait de cette effrayante ébullition populaire; que l'on juge par là de ce que nous ferons; et surtout qu'aucune des Puissances n'oublie que nous seul nous pouvons faire, pour sauver la France et l'Europe, ce que nous avons fait. "Il y a d'épouvantables conséquences redouter dans les crises politiques lorsqu'une volonté sage et prévoyante se trouve en inévitable contact avec l'obstination d'un zèle qui peut, dans ce cas, se réputer hardiment de mauvais vouloir. Si au lieu d'en finir brutalement avec les artilleurs civiques, l'on eût suivi mon seul avis, qu'on eût flatté, cajolé ces hommes ; qu'on leur eût fait entrevoir que si l'on pensait à construire des forts, c'était pour leur en confier la garde; si on leur eût persuadé qu'en cas d'invasion, Paris ne pourrait devoir son salut qu'à de pareils défenseurs; si, enfin, au lieu d'une décision brusque, on eût pris ces citoyens par la vanité, Arago et les siens n'eussent pas été admis à prouver que les forts, bien loin d'être destinés à repousser une invasion étrangère,deviendraient, dans ce cas, une ressource victorieuse pour maintenir dans le devoir et la soumission la très-turbulente population de Paris, et de ses aimables faubourgs."-REGNault, ii. 84, 87; Ann. Hist. xxiv. 388. CHAP. 1841. "Were the letters genuine, it would result from them that the King, who had been elected in 1830, to answer the wishes of the nation, has betrayed them on every point; that he has consented to the crushing of Poland in order to advance the interests of Russia; that he was disposed to abandon Algeria in order to promote those of England; that with him the preservation of his dynasty was the sole object, and not the maintenance of the constitutional government; in fine, that the project of fortifying Paris was, in the hands of the King, a project only for oppressing the citizens; that it was directed, not against the stranger, but against his own subjects. Such is the true import of the passages libelled upon as criminal. How could a man be called a king who could engage in such projects? Should he not rather be styled one of those tyrants who move only under the mask of dissimulation, and who establish their empire, not on the sincerity ii. 94, 95. of their language, but on the violation of their engagements?" 1 1 Regnault, 55. in regard to ship of the letters. It may readily be believed that letters containing such Ambiguity sentiments, and openly ascribed to the reigning sovereign, the author- made an immense sensation, and that every one believed or disbelieved them, according as it suited his private interest or political prepossessions. The accusation of forgery connected with those letters, which was at first preferred against two persons of the names of Lubis and Montour, failed; but as the originals were not produced, and alleged fac-similes only were in the publisher's hands, no direct evidence tending to establish the genuine nature of the documents was got. The celebrated lady known in more than one character, "La Contemporaine," was said to have furnished these fac-similes. Thus the matter was left to rest very much on the internal evidence which the letters afforded, and the probabilities of the case; and, viewed in this light, as usual in such instances, there was much to say on both sides. On the one hand, the ideas contained in the letters were not only the same, but the expressions used were almost CHAP. identical, word for word, with those ascribed to Louis XLIV. 1841. Philippe by M. Sarrans, in his work published in 1834, 1 L. Sarrans, et la Contre de 1830, on the fall of Charles X., which had never been contra- L. Philippe' dicted, or formed the subject of prosecution.1 They were Révolution also such as corresponded very nearly with expressions. 8. which were known to be often used by Louis Philippe to those with whom he was on intimate terms, and which conveyed his fixed ideas. On the other hand, it was very improbable that so prudent and astute a monarch would have hazarded the committing of such sentiments to writing, especially to a foreign ambassador. In this state of uncertainty, every one was at liberty to adopt his own conjectures, and draw his own conclusions; but the great majority of men firmly believed, and still believe, in their authenticity; and the allusions to the subject in the British Parliament render it more than probable that some letter of a similar import, detailing a conversation of Louis Philippe with Lord Stuart de Rothesay, really exists in the Foreign Office. Be this as it may, the pub- Morning lication of these alleged letters answered all the purposes 30, 1841; for which it was intended, in adding to the unpopularity i. 8, 9. of the French monarch.1 1 Regnault, ii. 97, 99; Post, April Sarranas, Reform, and The all-important subject of Parliamentary reform 56. was only glanced at by a side-wind in the Chamber in Debate on this session, and on moving for a grant of secret funds, its refusal. the usual trial of strength of all administrations, M. Duchâtel, in making the motion, said: "Culpable associations are at work in the shade, and menace not only the existence of Government, but of society. Pains are taken to spread doctrines among the working classes subversive of all order; organisation is attempting mysteriously to attack the social system in its essential base the right of property. Security and repose are awanting to the Government; there is no fixed tomorrow for any one in the whole of France; the present is continually tottering, the future is an enigma. XLIV. 1841. CHAP. Complaints are made of the dregs of society striving to subvert its foundations: that audacity is the work of the Chambers; it is the consequence of the instability of the ministerial majority. Whence comes this instability?— whence is it that, when the great principles are decided, every one is impassioned for small distinctions as formerly they were for fundamental points?"—" Immobility," exclaimed M. de Courcelles in reply,-" is that your remedy for existing evils? You tell us that the Government cannot acquire external force, or internal consideration, by reason of its instability; that no one can prophesy of to-morrow in France-that the present is tottering, and the future presents an enigma. In such circumstances, you tell us, there is nothing to be done but to execute the laws with rigour, and to oppose a firm resistance to all efforts at constitutional change. You are all agreed on the necessity of this resistance, and yet you yourselves tell us it is against a disunited and vacillating country you are obliged to combine."-" The majority in the Chamber," said M. Guizot in reply, "is composed of a body firmly united to maintain external peace and internal tranquillity; it finds itself in presence of a great danger; and is it surprising that, when its objects can only be attained by a firm adherence to its fundamental principles, it should resist all attempts to shake the constitution or introduce disunion into its ranks? This is not the time to hazard the existence of society by stirring unnecessarily fundamental questions."-" Talk not of this not being the proper time," rejoined M. Odillon Barrot ; "it is always a proper time to reconsider legal government and constitutional rights. Could any opportunity be so really desirable as that of honouring your adminis1 Moniteur, tration by a return to the scrupulous and respectful 1842; Ann. observance of the constitution? But your policy is to 76, 112; put off one by pleading that the times are inopportune ii. 77, 93. for change, to get quit of another by sacrificing your Feb. 19-22, Hist. xxiv. Regnault, principles. That is not the conduct of a frank or cour XLIV. 1841. 57. perty de ageous Government." The motion was agreed to without CHAP. the Opposition amendment by a majority of 235 to 137. The question of literary property underwent a very long discussion in this session; and M. de Lamartine, the Law on lireporter of the commission to which it was referred, in terary proan elaborate and eloquent report, proposed to limit the feated. exclusive right of publication to fifty years. This long period met with a very fierce resistance, in which several literary men took the lead; and M. Villemain, in hopes of conciliating the Chamber, proposed to restrict it to thirty years after the death of the author, being an extension of ten years from the term of twenty, which had been adopted in the preceding years by the Chamber of Peers. This compromise was at first adopted by the Chamber; but, after a long discussion of eight days, they Ann. Hist. reversed this decision, and rejected the law altogether, 195; Releaving the right of literary property to rest on its present 116, 121. foundation.1* * "The produce of intellectual and manual labour may differ," said M. de Lamartine, in the Report of the Commission; "but the title to its exclusive enjoyment is the same. The time has now arrived when this title should be recognised by law. By a generosity worthy of its nature, Thought, which creates everything, forgets itself; it asks only of men to be permitted to serve and enchant them; it demands only from Glory the fortune of a name destined to immortality, leaving in poverty or destitution the family of the philosopher or poet, whose works form the intellectual riches of a nation. But the press has made of these intellectual riches a material wealth, which is capable of being seized, consecrated, and regulated by law. That press, which renders Thought palpable as the character which engraves it, and commercial as the copy which forms the subject of sale, must sooner or later form the subject of a legislation which is to recognise its legality, and distribute equitably its fruits. The feeling of justice which prompts this on the part of the legislator takes nothing from the dignity of the writer, or the intellectual character of his labours. It noway lowers the book in its inestimable and inappreciable character of a service spontaneously and gratuitously rendered to the human race. It leaves its recompense to time and the memory of men. It does not touch Thought, which can never fall under the provisions of an infirm pecuniary law; it only relates to the book which has become the object of an impression -become an article of commerce. The idea comes from God, and returns to God, after leaving a trace of light on the forehead of him to whom it has been communicated, and on the name which his son bears; the book becomes the object of commercial circulation, and becomes a property capable of producing revenue, and forming capital. One man expends a portion of his strength-a few easy years of his life with the assistance of capital transmitted to him by his fathers, in fertilising his fields, or in exercising a lucraVOL. VII. 2 a xxiv. 175, gnault, ii. |