The Royal Family of France (Henry)/Conclusion
XII.
CONCLUSION.
Now as to a practical conclusion to what we have said. Some incurable and radical blindness must have come over the French to prevent their seeing that in this their Third Republic, as in the first two, everything is steadily deteriorating from bad to worse. France in a state of Republicanism seems never to be able to' avoid those crises when everything threatens to fall to pieces in the fury of social war, as Greek civilization fell in the convulsions of Athenian demagogy, and Roman civilization in the corruption of the Later Empire.
While Victor Hugo's drama, "Le Roi s'amuse" (a gross and scandalous libel on the character of Francis I. and, in his person, on the principle of Monarchy), is for the moment turning Frenchmen's interest from home and foreign politics to the theatre— that institution so dear to every Frenchman— the question of the Budget and the lamentable deficit it reveals has called out able and alarming articles from the pen of MM. Leroy-Beaulieu and Leon Say. The force of public opinion sides with the Opposition at present on the subject so strongly, that the numerous caricatures representing the Ministers all feeling their pockets for the "missing hundred millions," and accusing each other of having made away with them, are allowed to stand in the shop windows, where they draw crowds of spectators, without the police wanting to interfere.
Whatever the causes of the deficit in the Budget for 1881 may be, the fact remains that it exists, and that it has to be dealt with. The Report for the past year shows that France imported one thousand one hundred millions of francs more than she exported. The commercial situation is consequently on a par with the financial one. The commercial decadence is attributable by many to the Treaty of 1860; and the Republic is made for not altering that treaty and organizing a new system of Custom House duties. It might be more to the purpose to seek the reason of the present financial disarray, and depression in the senseless waste of public funds which is being displayed by Republicans in every department of the public service, and which, according to authentic calculations, has led to the expenses of the country being increased to the following proportions: four times more than under Napoleon I.; three times more than under the Restoration; twice more than under King Louis Philippe, and exactly double what they were under Napoleon III.
The men who have been in power under M. Grévy's reign are, with a few exceptions, needy adventurers who have taken the carpet-bag with empty pockets and left it with their pockets full; who have become millionaires with a rapidity which is not to be explained by any commercial or financial transactions, and which justly excites the maddening indignation of the ratepayers, and the jealousy of unsuccessful competitors for the portefeuille, which proves a Fortunatus' purse to those who hold it even for the short life of a Republican Ministry.
It is time that in France, as in Ireland, as in every European country, a vigorous reaction should assert itself against the Jacobins, whether national or international, who would rule the world by terror, against the spirit of disorder which overwhelms modern society, against the general moral enfeeblement of characters who have lost their power of resistance. It is not enough to have Heads of the State living in palaces where officials meet, whom we entitle Ministers because they each bring with them a carpet-bag, officials who individually may all be honourable citizens, but who do not form what we ordinarily mean by a Government. What we mean by a Government, is a responsible Cabinet, of which the members hold identical opinions on all the important questions of the day, on all the details of general policy, domestic or foreign; and who, feeling themselves backed by compact and homogeneous majorities, the official expression of public opinion, can repress with a strong hand civil tumult, can control and disarm faction, and can ensure the maintenance of order, without violating the guarantees of freedom, without having recourse to exceptional legislation.
Do the French of this Third Republic possess this unity, this firm and homogeneous will? or is it not proved by present facts that the French Republic in 1882 is simply another Tower of Babel? This we all can see and judge for ourselves. Let us pass on.
As a contrast, French History shows us how, in 1831, in the Lyons insurrection, the revolutionary party were disarmed by the Ministry of Périer. But the fact is, that in 1831 the King of France and his Ministers were a real Government, which governed, supported by the majority of the Chamber of Deputies, and the majority of the House of Peers; and that these were real and serious majorities, which knew the objects of their desires and of their efforts. These Deputies and these Peers were pre-eminently Frenchmen; in short, at that date, from the Throne to the cottage, France was herself and ruled herself At that date the adherents of the Monarchy were sets of unpaid unshaken, unseduced, unterrified men; to-day the followers of Democracy are servile majorities, ready to silence the minorities who denounce corruption, and dare enter a last and fearless protest. Reasoning that fails for the moment will tell, we trust, in the long run, because no living power has yet finally survived an honest cause undeservedly defeated. L'heure est à Dieu! "Events are in the saddle, and they ride mankind." Unexpected developments are sure to arise, and the probability is that well-known tenants of another man's property will be forced to rush away forgotten in utter obscurity. How only the last thirty-five years of French History " some pregnant truths convey " about plotters and betrayers! Plainly so weighty and comprehensive a History as that of France and of her Royal Family should shield a large minority from oppression, and it is a factor which will certainly influence largely the current of politics in the coming years. "Pais que dais; advienne que pourra!"
End.