XXX.

1833.

at the head of the real, though concealed, leaders of the CHAP. conspiracy, which sat in permanence, though shrouded in mystery, and cautiously avoiding committing themselves, watching an opportunity to overthrow the Government. Ostensibly, the war in the Chambers was directed against the Ministers alone; really, against the King. The speech from the throne, at the meeting of the deputies on the 23d December 1833, was moderate Dec. 23. and conciliatory, both in so far as regarded external and internal affairs; but the language of Opposition was in the highest degree recriminatory, and breathed the bitterness of a party which in a great public movement had found the whole fruits of victory wrested from them by a third power, which had appeared in the field at the close of the fight. "Gentlemen," said M. Garnier Pagès, " I declare-for I have a right to express what I feel that society is not established on a basis that can be durable. Justice, humanity, no longer exist: Government is nothing but a deception: the whole of society is out of the pale of the law. Woe to the nation which is placed without the only foundation of pure morality-that is, universal equality—and which is crushed under the yoke, Séance, of an exceptional legislature."1 On this occasion M. 3 Jan. 1834; Thiers with candour admitted the erroneous view of the Jan. 4, 1834. Revolution of 1789 presented in his History; "a work,"

Robespierre, St Just, and Marat, which will be rendered accessible to the very humblest of the people, by the moderate price of a sous a number, at which it is sold. We earnestly recommend the works of these immortal patriots to our readers. They will find everything that philosophy could discern, or learning reveal, or humanity desire, or learning enforce, in their incomparable productions."-Tribune, Aug. 20, 1833.

"The tyranny of the rich over the poor is the real plague which infests society-the eternal source of oppression, in comparison of which all others are as dust in the balance. What have we gained by the Revolution? The substitution of the Chaussée d'Antin for the Faubourg St Germain: an aristocracy of bankers for one of nobles. What have the people gained by the change? Are they better fed, or clothed, or lodged, than before? What is it to them that their oppressors are no longer dukes or counts? Tyranny can come from the bureau as well as the palace. There will be no real regeneration to France till a more equal distribution of property strikes at the root of all the calamities of mankind."-Tribune, Aug. 21, 1833.

Moniteur,

XXX.

CHAP. he added, "begun at the age of twenty-three, with the effervescence of youth, and which does not contain what should have been said on the subject."

1834.

33.

ence be

tween

the allied

the subject

disarming.

At this period the ruling desire, both on the part of Correspond- the French Government and the European powers, was to effect a reduction of the immense military armaments France and which for two years had been kept on foot on both sides, powers on and which produced a strain on all their finances which of a general they were little able to bear. M. de Broglie, on the part of the Cabinet of Louis Philippe, made repeated representations on this subject to the ambassadors of the allied powers; but M. de Metternich replied, "We desire nothing more ardently than a general disarmament; like France, we have need of it; but the first step must come from yourselves. Re-establish order in your own country: you have a propagandism which devours us; secret societies fully organised; a press which respects nothing. At the tribune, even, declamations are incessantly launched against our policy and our acts. Begin with repressing that, and the disarmament will follow as a matter of course." To this M. de Broglie replied, "Give us time, and with prudence you will obtain all that Europe desires. It is impossible to control an independent Chamber, ridiculously enamoured of revolutionary ideas, after the manner of a government master of itself, and in possession of all its powers." These remonstrances, however, produced a great effect on the French Government. Sensible of their justice, and that no general disarmament could be expected in Europe till the spirit of propagandism was checked in their own country, two important measures of repression were prepared in the Cabinet, which were ere long submitted to the Chamber, and con345, 347. stituted the great cheval de bataille between the parties for the remainder of the session.1

1 Cap. vii.

The project consisted of two laws, one against public criers of seditious and immoral publications in the streets of the capital-an evil which had risen to such a height,

XXX.

1834.

34.

against pub

ing a stamp

pamphlets.

as to have scandalised even the most violent supporters CHAP. of revolutionary ideas; the other imposing a restraint upon pamphlets and short publications. By the first, no crier was to be allowed to hawk or distribute pamphlets Laws in the streets without a license from the police; by the lic criers, second, a stamp duty was imposed on pamphlets under and impostwenty pages. Both these measures were a mere recur- duty on rence, like the proclamation of the state of siege by Marshal Soult after the revolt in the Cloister of St Méri, to the laws of the Restoration; a homage unintentionally offered by the Citizen King to the wisdom of his royal predecessors, and another proof among the many which history affords, that conservative measures do not belong Cap. vii. in a peculiar manner to any one dynasty or form of Ann. Hist. government, but are forced upon all, after a certain period 101. of existence, by the necessities of their situation.1

1

L. Blanc,

iv. 212, 213;

353, 354;

xvii. 99,

35.

associa

Feb. 25.

The evils which these laws were intended to abate were so flagrant and well known, that they excited very Law against little resistance in the legislature, although they were not tions. carried into execution without some violent and disgraceful contests between the police and those numerous classes in Paris which made their livelihood by hawking obscenity, scandal, and sedition through the streets of the capital.* But it was far otherwise with the law proposed against associations, the second measure of repression, which encountered the most vehement and impassioned resistance, both in the Chamber and over the country. In truth, it well-nigh brought on a third revolution. To understand this subject, it must be premised that by article 291 of the penal code of Napoleon, every association consisting of more than twenty persons was prohibited, if not autho

* « Les crieurs lancés sur les places et dans les rues par les ennemis du pouvoir ne furent souvent que les colporteurs du scandale, que les hérauts d'armes de l'émeute. Dans les libelles qu'ils distribuaient, la mauvaise foi des attaques le disputa plus d'une fois à la grossièreté du langage, et à je ne sais quelle flagornerie démagogique. Flatter le peuple est une lâcheté, le tromper est un crime. Que le Gouvernement fût intervenu pour mettre fin à un tel désordre il le devait."-LOUIS BLANC, Histoire de Dix Ans de Louis Philippe, iv. 211, 212.

XXX.

1834.

CHAP. rised by the Government. M. Guizot and the Doctrinaires had violently opposed this law during the Restoration, and to elude its operation the secret societies were divided into sections, each of which consisted only of nineteen persons. The new law brought forward by the Government extended the prohibition to associations consisting of more than twenty persons, whether divided into sections or not; it extended to associations not having periodical meetings, which the former did not; it extended the penalties to all the members, while the former applied only to the office-bearers; and it devolved the cognisance of Ann. Hist. offences against the law, if they amounted to high treason, to the Chamber of Peers-if to sedition only, to the courts trying by jury; but if the offence amounted only to an infraction of police regulations, to the police courts.1

xvii. 102,

103; L. Blanc, iv. 214, 215.

36.

bates on it in the

How moderate soever it might be in its provisions, Violent de- this law excited the most violent opposition on the part of all shades of the Liberal party, and led to the most violent recriminations in the Chamber of Deputies. "It is absurd," said M. Barthé, the orator of Government, "to act on the principle laissez faire, laissez passer, for that which you despise soon becomes strong: contempt is very proper for individuals for certain classes of injuries, but Government has other duties; it owes to society that of protection." "You must," answered M. Garnier Pagès, accustom the people to read and hear everything." "Would you, then," replied M. Chapuis Montlaville, 'bring back the guillotine and the massacres en masse?” "The cause of our disorders," rejoined an oppositionist, "is to be found in the disastrous system which the Ministers have hitherto pursued. Why were such dangerous and indecent publications so long allowed to be cried through the streets?" "The right of association," said M. Ludre, "has its foundation in Christianity not less than in the rights of man. What is the Government's object in suppressing them? It is because it can submit. to no popular control; it would proscribe the rights of

XXX. 1834.

man, because they constitute a democratic power; dis- CHAP. turbances spring not from associations, but from discontent." "The proposed law," replied M. Barthé, "in no way infringes on the charter; clubs are never once mentioned in it. Here is the history of political clubs: they sow disorder; they reap carnage. M. de Ludre offers us battle; the Government must accept it; there is no other part to take, after so many bravadoes." "You would proscribe political associations,” replied M. Garnier Pagès, "but in doing so you proscribe the whole past life of your own statesmen. It is from these societies that the Moniteur, King has chosen his councillors. The society of The 29, 1834; Rights of Man' does not conspire; it is the Government 358, 359. that conspires for it."1*

When these violent recriminations had in some degree given place to real argument, it was powerfully pleaded by M. Odillon Barrot and M. Garnier Pagès: "What! shall we make that outrage to civilisation, to human reason,

* M. Dupont de l'Eure at this juncture resigned his seat in the Chamber of Deputies, and his letter to his constituents on the occasion is valuable as a manifesto, from an able leader, of the sentiments at that period entertained by the Republican party. "Depuis longtemps j'ai pris la résolution de quitter la Chambre des Députés, en voyant le Gouvernement et les Chambres oubliant leur commune origine, s'éloigner de la Révolution de Juillet, en méconnaître les principes, en répudier les auteurs et les soutiens naturels, revenir au contraire avec une inconcevable prédilection aux traditions et aux hommes de la Restauration; et faire pour l'administration du pays ce que ne ferait aucun père de famille pour l'administration de sa fortune particulière. Cependant cette fausse direction donnée à nos affaires était tellement contre nature qu'il était permis d'espérer encore qu'elle ne pourrait se soutenir longtemps, et que le Gouvernement ramené par la force des choses et par son propre intérêt se replacerait sur la large base de notre Révolution, c'est à dire, sur la base de la souveraineté du peuple en renonçant à la légitimité elle même. Mais, en conscience est-ce-là ce que nous avons obtenu ? Ce que nous avons vu s'établir c'est l'état de siége pour la capitale, la juridiction militaire pour de simples citoyens et députés, la police la plus inquisitoriale et la plus oppressive, substituant parfois son action à celle de la justice et créant même au besoin des prisons d'état telles que celle du château de Blaye, pour des personnages privilégiés. Joignons à tout cela un budget d'un milliard, renforcé d'éternels crédits supplémentaires, une armée de quatre cent mille hommes, qui nous ne donne ni la guerre, ni la paix; une diplomatie trop largement dotée, qui nous donne, Dieu sait, quelle attitude à l'etranger, et demandons nous, la main sur la conscience, si c'est bien là ce que nous avait promis la Révolution de Juillet? DUPONT DE L'EURE. 2 Fevrier, 1834."-Moniteur. CAPEFIGUE, Dix Ans de Louis Philippe, vii. 354, 355.

VOL. V.

U

Feb. 20, 27,

Cap. vii.