Review of M. Decazes.

his urbanity, merited it by the sagacity of his views, shook it by excessive compliances, some of them deplorable, first to the court party, then to the opposition, and lost it finally by a catastrophe of which he was innocent, and of which the ma-' lignity of the times wished to make him an accomplice while he was only its victim. His fidelity to his master and his benefactor was complete, his conduct was variable, and his system, which was only the system of the King, was that of a statesman. It consisted in energetically interposing royalty, the moderator of the new ideas, between the royalists eager for reaction, and the liberals impatient for liberty. There was none other practicable to make the country acceptable to royalty, and royalty to the country. It was the policy of the King matured by reflection in solitude. To carry it into execution the King required a new man, young and without other prospect than his personal favour; that, being independent of the royalist and revolutionary parties, he should have no signification but in himself, and no future prospect but in the charter. The King had found this man in M. Decazes, and had attached himself to him with an obstinacy which partook at least as much of policy as of friendship. M. Decazes was not only the favourite of a king, but the favourite of a system, and in falling he dragged down the system with him. When the royalists attained power they were compelled to restore this fallen system and to practice it after him. de Villèle was the Decazes of the royalist majority, as M Decazes had been the Villèle of the King. For this reason his name will appear in history above the names of the common race of favourites, who only represent the caprice of kings; M. Decazes is the representative of a just idea, the reconcilement of a revolution and a royalty. He was the statesman of concord, of impartiality and of the charter; and if he was not strong enough to separate parties ferociously bent on destroying each other, he had the glory of falling between them with the only truth which could perpetuate the throne of his master.

M.

His greatest error was not in his fall, but in reappearing upon the scene after he had honourably quitted it. His proper asylum was retirement, his dignity inaction, his greatness the

Impolicy of the re-appearance of M. Decazes after his retirement.

future. When a man has approached so closely to the heart of a king, and personified with him one of those epochs which constitute eras in the annals of a nation, he should disappear with the events in which he has embodied his name. name of M. Decazes should disappear with Louis XVIII. The History recognises such names in obscurity, but never again in the crowd. Fallen from the summit of power, the states man rises no more until time has embalmed his memory. solation is the majesty of disgrace

BOOK THIRTY-EIGHTH.

Opening of the debates on the law of election-M. Royer Collard, his previous life and character-Speeches of M. M. Lainé, Camille Jordan, and Foy-Passing of the bill-Trial and execution of Louvel-Increasing hatred to the Bourbons: Secret Societies, Bonapartists, Counter-Revolutionists-M. Madier-Montjau denounces to the Chambers, the royalist conspiracies of the South-Birth of the Duke de Bordeaux-Revival of the spirit of independence in Europe: error of those who have ascribed the honour of it to Napoleon-Its real causes ideas of nationality instilled by the European kings, to resist the Napoleonic absorption-Revolution in Spain-Retrospective glance: Decay of that monarchy: Palace intrigues: Theocratical terrorism-The Prince of the Peace-Charles IV., his abdication and captivity-Heroism of Spain, the Cortes, the constitution of 1812 Return of Ferdinand VII.: reaction::-O'Donnell-Revolutionary explosion: Riégo, Mina-Italy-State of this country in 1820: erroneous opinions concerning it-Carbonarism -- Movement at Naples Guglielmo Pepe-Equivocal conduct of the courtIntervention of the Northern courts: congress of Troppau, of Laybach: conclusion of the revolution at Naples-Movement in Piedmont-Carbonarism in France-Napoleon at St. Helena: his captivity-The "memorial": unskilful justification of his memory— Hudson Lowe-Illness of Napoleon : his death: review of his reign

I

THE serious and prolonged emotion produced by the death of the Duke de Berry, the expectation of his posthumous issue, the fall of the favourite, the satisfaction given to the royal family, and the character, at once monarchical and moderate of the ministry, seemed to soothe for a moment the irritation of the royalist party, and the alarms of the liberals. But this calm was only the funeral truce. The laws for the censorship of the press, for the suppression of individual liberty, and the electoral law, prepared by M. Decazes, and laid before the

Opening of the debates on the law of election.

Chambers, with some modifications, by the new ministry, caused an explosion of rage which was envenomed by the blood of the prince, and which could no longer be restrained in the hearts of the people. M. Pasquier frankly avowed to the Chamber that in these laws the government really demanded a dictatorship. "It is a dictatorship given to a party thirsting for vengeance," responded Manuel. Benjamin Constant emboldened by the election which had absolved his double defection of 1814 and 1815, attacked the characters of ministers with a bitterness of invective as though it had no retaliation to dread; M. de Lafayette spoke in the tone of a master experienced in revolutions, predicting in their apparent slumber their approaching triumph; General Foy, as a loyal citizen, who participates in the grief of kings, but who refuses to offer up hecatombs of freedom at their mourning. Irritated by the insulting apostrophes of the deputies of the right, he designated as a handful of wretches the men who had hailed the triumph of the foreigners over their country. At these words an emigrant, a relative of Charlotte Corday, the deliverer of her country by a crime resembling that of Judith, arose and hurled at the general, one of those insulting reprisals which the Romans despised and the French wash out with blood. The two adversaries exchanged shots on the following day without any fatal results; after which the general ascended the tribune, and satisfied the honour of the emigrant, who on his part rendered homage to the courage of the patriots. The right applauded this mutual reparation; the left astonished at the condescension of the general, murmured and seemed to reject all justice and all peace. The implacable animosity of the one side, excited party excesses on the other. The revolution and the counter-revolution personified, looked each other in the face during the long debates on all the questions involved in the proposed laws. M. Benoist exclaimed that the counter-revolution was accomplished, and that the charter was nothing but its reign. A deputy of the South, a conscientious echo of the clergy, to whom all controversy tolerated in matters of faith, was an impiety of thought, declared that liberty was the greatest plague that could be inflicted upon nations. Manuel denounced to the country, the

Agitation of the capital.

new alliance between the government and the men of 1815, deposed by the 5th of September, and these men he called the factious. The capital, excited every evening by the noise of these combats of the day in the Chambers, took fire at these flashes of the orators. Mobs were formed in the public places, the students, the disbanded officers, the conspirators of secret societies, as yet masked under an appearance of respect for the charter, those who were discontented without cause and seditious without party, the men who float with every breeze on the surface of great populations, began to boil and bubble at stated hours, at the silent signal of the assemblages. The police watched them, harassed them, and only increased their numbers by attempting to disperse them. Paris presented every night the aspect and the presage of revolutions. In the midst of this fermentation the ministry brought forward the electoral law, which was to disarm the nation, and decree with the double vote a political privilege to the aristocratical classes in the departments.

II

On the 6th of May the discussion, preceded by so many storms, opened amongst 120 speakers, ranged on both sides of public opinion, to attack, or to defend the cause which the government threw in as a fire-brand of desperate struggle between the revolution and the crown. General Foy demon strated in every page of our annals for several ages past, the increasing equality of rights amongst the national classes, and that the new order of things could be fixed and unshaken solely upon the basis of this civic equality. This is the doctrine of the rights of man, the theoretic code of the revolution, elucidated by sound reason and a moderate conscience. "To support the throne upon an aristocracy in such a country," concluded the orator, "is to support it upon an abyss!" M. de Labourdonnaie, the boldest and most eloquent of the leaders of the right, and the most popular in the saloons of the aristocracy, loudly advocated privilege as a necessity of the monarchy. · It can no longer be saved but by those most interested in it, and the

6.