difficulties were adjusted, and the second treaty of Paris was
concluded in November 1815, between France and the whole
Allied powers. By this treaty, and the relative conventions
which were signed the same day, conditions of a very onerous
kind were imposed upon the restored government. The French
frontier was restored to the state in which it stood in 1790,
by which means the whole of the territory, far from
inconsiderable, gained by the treaty of 1814, was resumed by
the Allies. In consequence of this, France lost the fortresses
of Landau, Sarre-Louis, Philipville, and Marienburg, with the
adjacent territory of each. Versoix, with a small district
round it, was ceded to the canton of Geneva; the fortress of
Huningen was to be demolished; but the little country of the
Venaisin, the first conquest of the Revolution, was preserved
to France. Seven hundred millions of francs (£28,000,000
sterling) were to be paid to the Allied powers for the
expenses of the war; in addition to which it was stipulated
that an army of 150,000 men, composed of 80,000 from each of
the great powers of England, Russia, Austria, and Prussia, and
the lesser powers of Germany, was to occupy, for a period not
less than three, or more than five years, the whole frontier
fortresses of France; ... and this large force was to be
maintained entirely at the expense of the French government.
In addition to this, the different powers obtained indemnities
for the spoliations inflicted on them by France during the
Revolution, which amounted to the enormous sum of 735,000,000
of francs more (£29,400,000 sterling). A hundred millions of
francs were also provided to the smaller powers as an
indemnity for the expenses of the war; so that the total sums
which France had to pay, besides maintaining the army of
occupation, amounted to no less than fifteen hundred and
thirty-five millions of francs, or £61,400,000 sterling. ...
Great Britain, in a worthy spirit, surrendered the whole sum
falling to her out of the indemnity for the war, amounting to
nearly £5,000,000 sterling, to the King of the Netherlands, to
restore the famous barrier against France which Joseph II. had
so insanely demolished."
Sir A. Alison,
History of Europe, 1789-1815,
chapter 95 (volume 20).
ALSO IN:
Prince de Talleyrand,
Memoirs,
part 9 (volume 8).
E. Hertslet,
The Map of Europe by Treaty,
Number 40 (volume 1).
{1368}
FRANCE: A. D. 1815 (September).
The Holy Alliance.
See HOLY ALLIANCE.
FRANCE: A. D. 1815-1830.
The restored monarchy.
Louis XVIII. and Charles X.
Career of the Reactionaries.
Conquest of Algiers.
Ordinances of July.
Revolution.
Abdication and exile of the king.
"France was defeated but not crushed. Indeed she had gained
Avignon and some districts of Alsace since 1792, and she had
gained social and political stability by having millions of
peasants as small proprietors in the soil; moreover, as
Napoleon always waged his wars at the expense of his conquered
foes, the French national debt was after all the wars only
one-sixth of the debt of Great Britain. So France soon rose to
a position of strength and prosperity hardly equalled in all
Europe, in spite of bad harvests, political unrest, and the
foreign occupation which ended in 1818. The royalists, after a
quarter of a century of repression, now revenged themselves
with truly French vehemence. In France a victorious party
generally crushes its opponents; and the elections, held
during the full swing of the royalist reaction, sent up to
Paris a Legislative Assembly 'more royalist than the king
himself.' Before it assembled, Louis XVIII., in spite of his
promise only to punish those who were declared by the Assembly
to be traitors, proscribed fifty-seven persons who had
deserted to Napoleon in the 'Hundred Days.' ... Of the
proscribed men thirty-eight were banished and a few were shot.
Among the latter the most illustrious was Marshal Ney, whose
past bravery did not shield him from the extreme penalty for
the betrayal of the military oath. ... This impolitic
execution rankled deep in the breasts of all Napoleon's old
soldiers, but for the present all opposition was swept away in
the furious tide of reaction. Brune, one of Napoleon's
marshals, was killed by the royalist populace of Avignon; and
the Protestants of the south, who were suspected of favouring
Napoleon's home policy, suffered terrible outrages at Nimes
and Uzès in this 'white terror.' The restored monarchy had far
stronger executive powers than the old system wielded before
1789, for it now drew into its hands the centralised powers
which, under the Directory and the Empire, had replaced the
old cumbrous provincial system; but even this gain of power
did not satisfy the hot-headed royalists of the Chamber. They
instituted judicial courts under a provost (prévôt), which
passed severe sentences without right of appeal. Dismissing
the comparatively Liberal ministers Talleyrand and Fouché,
Louis in September 1816 summoned a more royalist ministry
under the Duc de Richelieu, which was itself hurried on by the
reactionaries. Chateaubriand fanned the flames of royalist
passion by his writings, until the king even found it
necessary to dissolve this mischievous Chamber, and the new
deputies who assembled (February 1817) showed a more moderate
spirit. France was soon delivered from the foreign armies of
occupation, for the sovereigns of Russia, Austria, and
Prussia, meeting at Aix-la-Chapelle (September 1818), in order
to combat revolutionary attempts, decided that an early
evacuation of French territory would strengthen the Bourbon
rule in France; and they renewed the Quadruple Alliance, which
aimed at upholding existing treaties. The discontent in
Germany and Italy awakened a sympathetic echo in France, which
showed itself in the retirement of the Duc de Richelieu and
the accession of a more progressive minister, Decazes
(November 1819). This check to the royalist reaction was soon
swept away by an event of sinister import. The Duc de Berry,
second son of the Comte d'Artois, was assassinated (February
1820), as he was leaving the opera-house, by a fanatic who
aimed at cutting off the direct Bourbon line (February 1820).
His design utterly failed, for a posthumous son, the
celebrated Comte de Chambord, was born in September 1820; and
the only result was a new outburst of royalist fury. Liberty
of the press was suspended, and a new complicated electoral
system restricted the franchise to those who paid at least
1,000 francs a year in direct taxation: the, Chamber of
Deputies, a fifth part of which was renewed every year by an
electorate now representing only the wealthy, became every
year more reactionary, while the Left saw its numbers decline.
The Ultra-royalist ministry of Villèle soon in its turn
aroused secret conspiracies, for the death of Napoleon (May 5,
1821) was now awakening a feeling of regret for the
comparative liberty enjoyed in France during the Empire.
Military conspiracies were formed, only to be discovered and
crushed, and the veteran republican Lafayette was thought to
be concerned in a great attempt projected in the eastern
departments with its headquarters at Belfort; and the terrible
society of the Carbonari secretly spread its arms through the
south of France, where it found soil as favourable as in Italy
itself. ... A revolution in Spain held Ferdinand a prisoner in
his palace at Madrid. Louis determined to uphold the throne of
his Bourbon relative, and sent an army which quickly effected
its object (1823). 'The Pyrenees no longer exist,' exclaimed
Louis XVIII. In fact, everywhere in Europe absolutism seemed
to be triumphant, and the elections of December 1823 sent up a
further reinforcement to the royalist party; also the
approaching end of the sensible old king foreshadowed a period
of still more violent reaction under his hot-headed brother
Charles. Louis XVIII. died on September 16, 1824, At his death
the restoration seemed firmly established. ... France had
quickly recovered from twenty years of warfare, and was
thought to have the strongest government in Europe. Always the
chief of the reactionary nobles, Charles had said, 'It is only
Lafayette and I who have not changed since 1789.' Honest,
sincere, and affable as the new king was, yet his popularity
soon vanished when it was seen how entirely he was under the
control of his confessor; and the ceremonies of his coronation
at Rheims showed that he intended to revive the almost
forgotten past. In Guizot's words, 'Louis XVIII was a moderate
of the old system and a liberal-minded inheritor of the 18th
century: Charles X. was a true Émigré, and a submissive bigot'
Among the first bills which Charles proposed to the Chambers was
one to indemnify those who had lost their lands in the
Revolution. To give these lands back would have caused general
unsettlement among thousands of small cultivators; but the
former landowners received an indemnity of a milliard of
francs, which they exclaimed against for its insufficiency
just as loudly as the radicals did for its extravagance: by
this tardy act of justice the State endeavoured to repair some
of the unjust confiscations of the revolutionary era. ...
{1369}
The attempts made by the Jesuits to regain their legal status
in France, in spite of the prohibition dating from before the
fall of the old regime, aroused further hostility to the king,
who was well known to favour their cause. Nothing, however, so
strengthened the growing opposition in the Chambers and in the
country at large as a rigorous measure aimed at the
newspapers, pamphlets, and books which combated the clerical
reaction. These publications were to pay a stamp duty per
page, while crushing fines were devised to ruin the offending
critics. One of the leaders of the opposition, Casimir Périer,
exclaimed against this measure as ruinous to trade: 'Printing
would be suppressed in France and transferred to Belgium.' The
king persevered in his mad enterprise: he refused to receive a
petition from the most august literary society in Europe, the
Académie Française, and cashiered its promoters as if they
were clerks under his orders. Strange to say, the Chamber of
Deputies passed the measure, while that of the Peers rejected
it--an event greeted by illuminations all over Paris (April
1827). A few days afterwards, at a review of the National
Guards in Paris, the troops raised cries for the liberty of
the press and for the charter granted in 1815. The next day
they were disbanded by royal command, but were foolishly
allowed to retain their arms, which were soon to be used
against the government. Charles next created seventy-six new
peers to outvote his opponents in the Upper House. He also
dissolved the Chamber of Deputies, but found the new members
less pliable. Finally, Charles had to give way for the time,
and accept a more moderate ministry under Martignac in place
of the reactionary Villèle Cabinet. ... Charles was soon able
to dismiss this ministry, the last hope of conciliation, and
formed (August 1829) a ministry under Count Polignac, one of
whose colleagues was the General Bourmont who had deserted to
the allies the day before Waterloo. The king's speech at the
opening of the next session (March 1830) was curt and
threatening, and the Chamber was soon prorogued. Reform
banquets, a custom which the French borrowed from English
reformers, increased the agitation, which the Polignac
ministry vainly sought to divert by ambitious projects of
invasion and partition of some neighbouring States. The only
practical outcome of these projects was the conquest of the
pirate stronghold of Algiers. This powerful fortress had been
bombarded and reduced by Lord Exmouth with the British fleet
in 1816, and the captives, mostly Italians, were released from
that den of slave-dealers; but the Dey of Algiers had resumed
his old habits, complaints from the French were met by
defiance, and at last the French envoy quitted the harbor amid
a shower of bullets. A powerful expedition effected a landing
near the strongly-fortified harbour, and easily beat back the
native attack; and then from the land side soon battered down
the defences of the city.
See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1830.
Thus the city which had long been the terror of Mediterranean
sailors became the nucleus of the important French colony of
Algeria (July 4,1830). The design of Charles X. and of his
reactionary Polignac ministry to divert the French people from
domestic grievances to foreign conquest needed the genius and
strength of a Napoleon to ensure success. The mere fact of the
expedition being Under the command of the hated General
Bourmont had made it unpopular. ... So, although the victory
was triumphantly announced throughout France, yet the
elections sent up a majority hostile to the king.
Nevertheless, with his usual blind obstinacy, Charles on the
25th July 1830 issued the famous ordinances which brought
matters to a crisis. The first suspended the liberty of the
press, and placed books under a strict censorship; the second
dissolved the newly-elected Chamber of Deputies; the third
excluded licensed dealers (patentés) from the franchise; the
fourth summoned a new Chamber under the new conditions, every
one of which violated the charter granted by the late king.
The Parisians at once flew to arms, and raised barricades in
the many narrow streets which then favoured street-defence.
Marmont, hated by the people as being the first of Napoleon's
marshals who had treated with the allies, was to quell the
disturbances with some 20,000 troops of the line; but on the
second day's fighting (July 28) the insurgents, aided by the
disbanded National Guards, and veterans of the empire, beat
back the troops; and on the third day the royal troops, cut
off from food and supplies, and exhausted by the heat, gave
way before the tri-colour flag; the defection of two line
regiments left the Louvre unguarded; a panic spread among
other regiments, and soon the tri-colour floated above the
Tuileries. Charles thereupon set the undignified example, soon
to be followed by so many kings and, princes, of giving way
when it was too late. He offered to withdraw the hated
ordinances, but was forced to flee from St. Cloud. He then
tried the last expedient, also doomed to failure, of
abdicating in favour of his little grandson the Duc de
Bordeaux, since better known as the Comte de Chambord.
Retiring slowly with his family to Cherbourg, the baffled
monarch set out for a second and last exile, spent first at
Holyrood Palace, Edinburgh, and ended at Göritz in Bohemia.
More than 5,000 civilians and 700 soldiers were killed or
wounded in these terrible 'three days' of July 1830, which
ended all attempts to re-establish the tyranny of the old
régime. The victims were appropriately buried in the Place de
la Bastille. They freed not France alone, but dealt a fierce
blow at the system of Metternich."
J. H. Rose,
Century of Continental History,
chapter 23.
ALSO IN:
D. Turnbull,
The French Revolution of 1830.
A. de Lamartine,
The Restoration of Monarchy in France,
books 32-50 (volumes 3-4).
E. E. Crowe,
History of the Reigns of Louis XVIII.
and Charles X.
Prince de Talleyrand,
Memoirs,
part 10 (volumes 3-4).
G. L. Dickinson,
Revolution and Reaction in Modern France,
chapter 3.
FRANCE: A. D. 1822:
The Congress of Verona.
French intervention in Spain approved.
See VERONA: THE CONGRESS OF.
FRANCE: A. D. 1823-1827.
Interference in Spain to suppress the revolution and reinstate
King Ferdinand.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1814-1827.
FRANCE: A. D. 1827-1829.
Intervention on behalf of Greece.
Battle of Navarino.
See GREECE: A. D. 1821-1829.
{1370}
FRANCE: A. D. 1830-1840.
The monarchy renewed under Louis Philippe.
Its steady drift from the constitutional course.
"The Constitutional party set their hopes on Louis Philippe,
Duke of Orleans. This prince, born in 1773, was the son of
that notorious 'Egalité' who during the revolution had ended
his checkered career under the guillotine. His grandmother was
the noble Elizabeth Charlotte, a native of the Palatinate, who
had the misfortune to be the wife of the effeminate Duke of
Orleans, brother of Louis XIV. Louis Philippe was a Bourbon,
like King Charles; but the opposition of several members of
this Orleans branch of the royal house had caused it to be
regarded as a separate family. From his youth up he had
displayed a great deal of popular spirit and common-sense. ...
Seemingly created by his nature and career to be a citizen
king, he had long since, as early as 1814, determined to
accept the throne in case it were offered him." The offer came
in 1830 with the revolution of July. On the 31st of that month
he accepted the office of lieutenant-general of the kingdom,
conferred by the vote of a meeting of fifty delegates. "The
'Society of the Friends of the People' [an organization of the
pronounced republicans], not very well pleased with this result
of the 'great week' [as the week of the revolution was
called], laid before Lafayette, on the following day," their
programme, "and commissioned him to make the duke guarantee
the popular rights therein set forth by his signature. With
this document in his pocket, Lafayette made his ... visit to
Louis Philippe in the Palais Royal. In the course of
conversation he said to him, 'You know that I am a republican,
and consider the American constitution the most perfect.' 'I
am of the same opinion,' replied the duke; 'no one could have
been two years in America and not share that view. But do you
think that that constitution could be adopted in France in its
present condition--with the present state of popular opinion?'
'No,' said Lafayette; 'what France needs is a popular monarchy
surrounded by republican--thoroughly
republican--institutions.' 'There I quite agree with you,'
rejoined Louis Philippe. Enchanted with this political
harmony, the old general considered it unnecessary to present
the programme, and went security to the republicans for the
duke, the patriot, of 1789. ... On the 3d of August the
Chamber was opened by the Duke of Orleans, and the abdication
of the king and dauphin announced. ... The question whether
the constitution was to be changed, and how, gave rise to an
animated contest between radicals and liberals. The confidence
in Louis Philippe was so great, that they were content with a
few improvements. The throne was declared vacant, and Louis
Philippe proclaimed king of the French. ... August 8th, Louis
Philippe appeared in the Palais Bourbon, took the oath to the
constitution, and was thereupon proclaimed king. ... None of
the great monarchs had so difficult a task as Louis Philippe.
If he attached himself to the majority of his people and
showed himself in earnest with 'the republican institutions
which ought to surround the throne,' he had all the
continental powers against him; if he inclined toward the
absolute system of the latter, then not alone the extreme
parties, but also the men of the constitutional monarchy, ...
rose against him. ... His system, which he himself named a
happy medium (juste milieu), would have been a happy medium if
he had struck the middle and kept it; but he gradually swerved
so much toward the right that the middle was far to his left.
From the outset he had three parties against him--Legitimists,
Bonapartists, and Republicans." At intervals, there were
demonstrations and insurrections undertaken in the interest of
each of these. In July, 1835, the assassination of the king
was attempted, by the explosion of an infernal machine, which
killed and wounded sixty people. "The whole Republican party
was unjustly made responsible for this attempt, and new blows
were struck at the juries and the Press. Every Press offence
involving a libel of the king or the administration was to be
tried from this time on before the Court of Peers, and the
composition of that body rendered conviction certain. With
these September laws' the reaction was complete, the power of
the Republicans was broken. Their activity did not cease,
however. Their numerous societies continued to exist in
secret, and to the political affiliated themselves the social
societies, which ... demanded, among other impossibilities,
the abolition of private property. It was these baleful
excrescences which deprived republicanism of all credit, and
outbreaks like that of May 12th, 1839, where a few hundred
members of the 'Society of the Seasons,' with Barbès and
Blanqui at their head, disarmed military posts and proclaimed
the republic, found not the slightest response. The repeated
attempts which were made on the king's life were also
unsuccessful." The relations of Louis Philippe "to foreign
powers became better the more he approximated to their system,
putting restraints upon societies, the Press, and juries, and
energetically crushing popular revolts. Naturally he was by
this very means constantly further estranging the mass of the
people. ... What the Legitimists and Republicans had not
effected--a change of government--the Napoleonids now took in
hand." Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, son of ex-king Louis of
Holland and Hortense Beauharnais, made his appearance among
the soldiers of the garrison at Strasburg, October 30, 1836,
with the expectation that they would proclaim him emperor and
set the example of a rising in his favor. But the attempt was
a wretched failure; Louis Napoleon was arrested and
contemptuously sent out of the country, to America, without
punishment. In 1840 he repeated his undertaking, at Boulogne,
more abortively than in the first instance; was again made
prisoner, and was consigned, this time, to the castle of Ham,
from which he escaped six years later. "All the world laughed
at his folly; but without the scenes of Strasburg and
Boulogne, and the martyrdom of a six years' imprisonment, his
name certainly would not have produced such an effect in the
year 1848."
W. Miller,
Political History of Recent Times,
sections 7 and 14.
ALSO IN:
L. Blanc,
History of Ten Years, 1830-1840.
F. P. Guizot,
Memoirs to Illustrate the History of My Own Time,
volumes 3-4.
FRANCE: A. D. 1831-1832.
Intervention in the Netherlands.
Siege of Antwerp.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1830-1832.
FRANCE: A. D. 1833-1840.
The Turko-Egyptian question and its settlement.
See TURKS: A. D. 1831-1840.
FRANCE: A. D. 1833-1846.
The subjugation of Algeria.
War with Abd-el-Kader.
See BARBARY STATES: A. D.1830-1846.
{1371}
FRANCE: A. D. 1841-1848.
The limited electoral body and its corruption.
Agitation for reform.
The suppressed banquet at Paris and the
revolution which followed.
Abdication and flight of the king.
"The monarchy of Louis Philippe lasted for 18 years. But the
experiment was practicable only so long as the throne rested
on a small body of obedient electors. The qualification for
the franchise was so high that it was held only by 200,000
people. So small a constituency could, be 'managed' by the
skill of M. Guizot and M. Thiers [who were the chief rivals of
the time in political leadership]. It could be 'managed'
through gifts of places, bribes, the influence of local
magnates, and the pressure of public officials. There was
never perhaps so corrupt an electoral body. ... M. Guizot, who
was an austere puritan at home, and who has entered into a
competition with Saint Augustin as a writer of religious
meditations, raised many sneers to the lips of worldlings, not
only by lending his hand to the infamous intrigue of the
Spanish Marriages, but by allowing his subordinates to traffic
in places for the sake of getting votes. His own hands, of
course, were clean; no one spoke a whisper against his
personal purity. But he seemed to have much practical sympathy
with the advice which Pitt, in one of Landor's 'Imaginary
Conversations,' gives to his young disciple Canning. Pecuniary
corruption was the very breath of life to the constitutional
monarchy. The voters were bought as freely as if they had
stood in the market-place. The system admirably suited the
purpose of the little family party of princes and
parliamentary chiefs who ruled the country. But it was as
artificial and fleeting as the sand castles which a child
builds on the edge of the advancing tide."
J. Macdonell,
France since the First Empire,
pages 172-174.
"The population of France was then 34,000,000, and the
privilege of the political franchise was vested exclusively in
those who paid in direct taxes a sum not less than £8. This
class numbered little more than 200,000. ... The government
had 130,000 places at its disposal, and the use which was made
of these during the 18 years of Louis Philippe's reign was
productive of corruption more widespread and shameless than
France had known since the first revolution. In the scarcely
exaggerated language used by M. de Lamartine, the government
had 'succeeded in making of a nation of citizens a vile band
of beggars.' It was obvious to all who desired the
regeneration of France that reform must begin with the
representation of the people. To this end the liberals
directed much effort. They did not as yet propose universal
suffrage, and their leaders were divided between an extension
of the franchise to all who paid £2 of direct taxes and an
extension, which went no lower than £4. The demand for reform
was resisted by the government. ... Among the leaders of the
liberal party were men of high character and commanding
influence. Arago, Odillon Barrot, Louis Blanc, Thiers,
Lamartine, were formidable assailants for the strongest
government to encounter. Under their guidance the agitation
for reform assumed dimensions exceedingly embarrassing and
even alarming. For once France borrowed from England her
method of political agitation. Reform banquets, attended by
thousands of persons, were held in all the chief towns, and
the pressure of a peaceful public opinion was employed to
obtain the remedy of a great wrong. The police made feeble
attempts to prevent such gatherings, but were ordinarily
unsuccessful. But the king and M. Guizot, strong in the
support of the army and a purchased majority of the deputies,
and apparently little aware of the vehemence of the popular
desire, made no effort to satisfy or propitiate. Louis
Philippe had wisely set a high value on the maintenance of
cordial relations with England. ... The Queen of England
gratified him by a visit [1843], which he returned a few
months after. ... During these visits there was much
conversation regarding a Spanish matter which was then of some
interest. The Spanish government was looking around to find
suitable husbands for their young queen and her sister. The
hands of the princesses were offered to two sons of Louis
Philippe. But ... England looked with disfavour upon a close
alliance between the crowns of France and Spain. The king
would not offend England. He declined the hand of the Spanish
queen, but accepted that of her sister for his fourth son, the
Duc de Montpensier. Queen Victoria and her ministers approved
of that marriage on the condition voluntarily offered by King
Louis, that it should not take place till the Spanish queen
was married and had children. But in a few years the king
violated his pledge, and pressed upon Spain an arrangement
under which the two marriages were celebrated together [1846].
... To Louis Philippe himself the transaction was calamitous.
He had broken his kingly word, and he stood before Europe and
before his own people a dishonoured man. ... Circumstances
made it easy for the opposition to enhance the general
discontent. Many evidences of shameless corruption were at
this time brought to light. ... The crops failed in 1845 and
1846, and prices rose to a famine point. ... The demand for
parliamentary reform became constantly more urgent; but M.
Guizot heeded it not. The reformers took up again their work
of agitation. They announced a great procession and reform
banquet. The police, somewhat hesitatingly, interdicted the
demonstration, and its promoters resolved to submit; but the
people, insufficiently informed of these movements, gathered
for the procession in the early morning. All that day
[February 22, 1848] the streets were thronged, and the
excitement of the people increased from hour to hour; but few
soldiers were seen, and consequently no conflict occurred.
Next morning the strategic points of the city were garrisoned
by a strong force of soldiers and national guards, and the
people saw that the government feared them. Business was
suspended, and the constantly rising agitation foretold
irrepressible tumults. The men of the faubourgs appeared once
more. Towards evening a few barricades were thrown up, and a
few gunsmiths' shops were plundered. Worst of all, the
national guard appeared to sympathize with the people. ... To
appease the angry mob, no measure seemed so hopeful as the
sacrifice of the ministry. Guizot resigned. Thiers and Odillon
Barrot, chiefs of the liberal party, were received into the
cabinet. Marshal Bugeaud was appointed to command the troops.
But before the day closed a disaster had occurred which made
all concession vain. Before one of the public offices there
was stationed a battalion of infantry, around which there
surged an excited crowd. A shot came from the crowd, and was
promptly responded to by a volley which killed or wounded 50
persons.
{1372}
The bodies of the victims were placed on waggons and drawn
along the streets, that the fury of the people might be
excited to the highest pitch. During that sleepless night,
Marshal Bugeaud, skilfully directing the forces which he
commanded, had taken the barricades and effectively checked
the rioters. But in early morning the new ministers ordered
him to desist and withdraw his troops. They deemed it useless
to resist. Concession was, in their view, the only avenue to
tranquillity. The soldiers retired; the crowds pressed on to
the Tuileries." The king, terrified by their approach, was
persuaded to sign an abdication in favor of his grandson, the
Comte de Paris, and to fly in haste, with his family, from the
palace and from Paris. A week later the royal family "reached
the coast and embarked for England, ... their majesties
travelling under the lowly but well-chosen incognito of Mr.
and Mrs. Smith. ... Immediately on the departure of the king,
a provisional government was organized, with M. Lamartine at
its head."
R. Mackenzie,
The Nineteenth Century,
book 3, chapter 1.
ALSO IN:
F. P. Guizot,
France under Louis Philippe.
M. Caussidière,
Memoirs,
volume 1.
FRANCE: A. D. 1848 (February-May).
The three months of Provisional Government.
Its extraordinary measures.
Its absolutism.
Creation or the Ateliers Nationaux.
The consequences.
On the morning of February 24th--the morning of the king's
flight--M. de Lamartine, entering the Palais Bourbon, where
the Chamber of Deputies held its meetings, found in the
vestibule seven or eight persons waiting for him. "Who they
were we are not told--or what they were, except that they
belonged to the newspaper press. Even the names of the papers
with which they were connected are not expressly
stated--though the 'National' and 'Réforme' are indicated.
They demanded a secret conference. Lamartine took them into a
distant apartment." There they "proposed to him to substitute
for Louis-Philippe the Comte de Paris as king, and the Duchess
of Orleans as regent, and to place him [Lamartine] over them
minister." "Lamartine does not appear to have been surprised
at the proposal. He does not appear to have doubted the power
of seven or eight journalists to dethrone a king, create a
regent, and appoint a minister! And he was right. The
'National' and the 'Réforme,' whose representatives stood
before him, did more than all this, a couple of hours after.
... He objected to their scheme that such an arrangement would
not last, and declared himself in favour of a republic, based
on universal suffrage; ... they expressed their conviction,
and separated, agreed, apparently, on the course of action to
be pursued.' A few hours later, the Chamber was invaded by a
body of rioters, fresh from the sack of the Tuileries. The
Duchess of Orleans, who had presented herself at the Chamber
with her two children, fled before them. "M. Sauzet, the
President, disappeared. Lamartine [who was speaking] remained
in the tribune, and desired Dupont de l'Eure to take the
vacant chair." Thereupon a Provisional Government was
appointed, in some fashion not clearly detailed. It underwent
certain changes, by unexplained additions, within the
following day or two, but "in the 'Moniteur' of February 27
(the third day of the existence of the Provisional
Government), its members are arranged thus:--MM. Arago, Dupont
de l'Eure, Albert (ouvrier), F. Marrast, F. Flocon, Lamartine,
Marie, L. Blanc, Crémieux, Ledru Rollin, Garnier Pagès. ...
Within two days after its formation it was on the brink of
ruin under an attack from the Terrorists [or Red Republicans,
who assumed the red flag as their standard]. ... The contest
had left the members of the government in a state of mind
which M. de Lamartine thinks peculiarly favourable to wise
legislation. ... 'Every member of the Council sought [he
says], in the depths of his heart and of his intellect, for
some great reform, some great legislative, political, or moral
improvement. Some proposed the instantaneous abolition of
negro slavery. Others, the abolition of the restrictions
imposed by the laws of September upon the press. Some, the
proclamation of fraternity among nations, in order to abolish
war by abolishing conquest. Some, the abolition of the
qualification of electors. And all, the principles of mutual
charity among all classes of citizens. As quickly as these
great democratic truths, rather felt than discussed, were
converted into decrees, they were printed in a press set up at
the door of the council-room, thrown from the windows to the
crowd, and despatched by couriers through the departments.'
... The important decrees, which actually bear date February
25 or 26, and which may therefore be referred to this evening
of instinct, inspiration, and enthusiasm, are these:--The
18th, which sets at liberty all persons detained on political
grounds. The 19th, by which the government--
1, Engages to secure the existence of the operative
(ouvrier) by employment:
2, Engages to secure employment (garantir du travail) to
all citizens:
3, Admits that operatives ought to combine in order to
enjoy the fruits of their labour:
4, And promises to return to the operatives, whose property
it is, the million which will fall in from the civil list.
The 22nd, which dissolves the Municipal Guards. The 26th,
which declares that the actual government of France is
republican, and that the nation will immediately be called on
to ratify by its votes this resolution of the government and
of the people of Paris. The 29th, which declares that Royalty,
under any name whatever, ... is abolished. ... And the 30th,
which directs the immediate establishment of national
workshops (ateliers natlonaux). We confess that, we agree with
Lamartine in thinking that they bear the stamp of instinct
much more than that of reason. ... The declaration that the
actual government of France was republican ... was palpably
untrue. The actual government of France at that time was as
far removed from republicanism as it was possible for a
government to be. It was a many-headed Dictatorship--a
despotic oligarchy. Eleven men--some appointed in the offices
of a newspaper, and the others by a mob which had broken into
the Chamber of Deputies--ruled France, during three months,
with an absoluteness of which there is no other example in
history. ... They dissolved the Chamber of Deputies; they
forbade the peers to meet; they added 200,000 men to the
regular army, and raised a new metropolitan army of 20,000
more at double the ordinary pay; to meet this expense they
added 45 centimes to the direct taxes; they restricted the
Bank from cash payments; they made its paper a legal tender,
and then required it to lend them fifty millions; ... they
altered the hours of labour throughout France, and, subjected
to heavy fines any master who should allow his operatives to
remain at work for the accustomed period. ...
{1373}
The necessary consequence of the 19th decree, promising
employment to all applicants, was the creation of the ateliers
nationaux by the 30th. These workshops were immediately opened
in the outskirts Of Paris. A person who wished to take
advantage of the offers of the Government took from the person
with whom he lodged a certificate that he was an inhabitant of
the Department de la Seine. This certificate he carried to the
mairie of his arrondissement, and obtained an order of
admission to an atelier. If he was received and employed
there, he obtained an order on his mairie for forty sous. If
he was not received, after having applied at all of them, and
found them all full, he received an order for thirty sous.
Thirty sous is not high pay; but it was to be had for doing
nothing; and hopes of advancement were held out. Every body of
eleven persons formed an escouade; and their head, the
escouadier, elected by his companions, got half a franc a day
extra. Five escouades formed a brigade; and the brigadier,
also elected by his subordinates, received three francs a day.
Above these again were the lieutenants, the chefs de
compagnie, the chefs de service, and the chefs
d'arrondissement, appointed by the Government, and receiving
progressively higher salaries. Besides this, bread was
distributed to their families in proportion to the number of
children. The hours supposed to be employed in labour were
nine and a half. ... This semi-military organisation, regular
payment, and nominal work produced results which we cannot
suppose to have been unexpected by the Government. M. Emile
Thomas tells us that in one mairie, that containing the
Faubourg St.-Antoine, a mere supplemental bureau enrolled,
from March 12 to 20, more than 1,000 new applicants every day.
We have before us a list of those who had been enrolled on May
19, and it amounts to 87,942. A month later it amounted to
125,000--representing, at 4 to a family, 600,000 persons--more
than one half of the population of Paris. To suppose that such
an army as this could be regularly organised, fed, and paid,
for months in idleness, and then quietly disbanded, was a
folly of which the Provisional Government was not long guilty.
They soon saw that the monster which they had created could
not be subdued, if it could be subdued at all, by any means
short of civil war. ... 'A thunder-cloud (says M. de
Lamartine) was always before our eyes. It was formed by the
ateliers nationaux; This army of 120,000 work-people, the
great part of whom were idlers and agitators, was the deposit
of the misery, the laziness, the vagrancy, the vice, and the
sedition which the flood of the revolution had cast up and
left on its shores.' ... As they were managed, the ateliers
nationaux, it is now admitted, produced or aggravated the very
evils which they professed to cure or to palliate. They
produced or continued the stagnation of business which they
were to remedy; and, when they became absolutely intolerable,
the attempt to put an end to them occasioned the civil war
which they were to prevent."
N. W. Senior,
Journals kept in France and Italy, 1848-1852,
volume 1, pages 14-59.
ALSO IN:
Marquis of Normandy,
A Year of Revolution,
chapters 8-11 (volume l).
L. Blanc,
Historical Revelations, 1848.
A. de Lamartine,
History of the Revolution of 1848.
J. P. Simpson,
Pictures from Revolutionary Paris.
FRANCE: A. D. 1848 (April-December).
The Constituent National Assembly, and the Constitution of the
Second Republic.
Savage and terrible insurrection of the workmen of the
Ateliers Nationaux.
Vigorous dictatorship of Cavaignac.
Appearance of Louis Napoleon.
His election to the Presidency of the Republic.
The election by universal suffrage of a Constituent National
Assembly, twice deferred on account of fears of popular
turbulence, took place on the 23d of April, and resulted in
the return of a very Conservative majority, largely composed
of Napoleonists, Legitimists and Orleanists. The meeting of
the Assembly was opened on the 7th of May. "The moderates were
anxious to invest M. de Lamartine with a dictatorial
authority," which he declined. "Eventually an executive
commission of five was appointed. ... The commission consisted
of Arago, Garnier Pagès, Marie, Lamartine, and Ledru Rollin.
... This conciliatory executive commission was elected by the
Assembly on the 10th of May. On the 15th, the 'concilliated'
mob broke into the chamber, insulted the deputies, turned them
out, proclaimed a provisional government, and then marched to
the Hôtel de Ville, where they were installed with due
revolutionary solemnity;" but the National Guard rallied to
the support of the government, and the insurrection was
promptly suppressed. "Eleven vacancies in the Assembly had to
be filled in the department of the Seine, on account of double
returns. These elections produced fresh uneasiness in Paris.
Eighth on the list stood Louis Napoleon Bonaparte; and among
the names mentioned as candidates was that of Prince de
Joinville, the most popular of the Orleans princes. The
executive commission appears to have been more afraid of the
latter than of the former; and to prevent the disagreeable
circumstance of France returning him to the Assembly as one of
her representatives, they thought themselves justified in
declaring the whole Orleans family incapable of serving France
in any capacity. ... Louis Napoleon, on the first proclamation
of the Republic, had at once offered his services; but was by
the Provisional Government requested to withdraw, as his great
name might trouble the republic. ... Two Bonapartes had been
elected members for Corsica, and three sat in the Assembly;
but, as the next heir of the Emperor, Louis Napoleon caused
them much uneasiness. ... Already mobs had gone about the
Boulevard crying 'Vive l'Empereur.' The name of Bonaparte was
not unpopular with the bourgeoisie; it was a guarantee of
united and strong government to all. On his election, Louis
Napoleon wrote to the President of the Assembly: a phrase in
his letter gave considerable offence. Some days before,
Lamartine had proposed his exclusion from the Assembly and the
country; but, as it appeared he was in no way implicated in
the seditious cries, they voted his admission by a large
majority. The phrase which gave umbrage was: 'If the country
imposes duties upon me, I shall know how to fulfill them.' ...
However, by a subsequent letter, dated the 15th, he restored
confidence by saying he would resign rather than be a cause of
tumult. But the real difficulties of the government arose from
a different cause.
{1374}
The National Assembly bore with impatience the expense of the
Ateliers Nationaux: It was enough to submit to the factious
spirit of those bodies; but it was too much to pay them for
keeping on foot an organized insurrection, ever ready to break
out and deluge the capital in blood. The executive commission
had been desirous of finding means gradually to lessen the
numbers receiving wages; and on the 12th of May, it was
resolved to close the lists. The commission foresaw that if
the Ateliers were at once abolished, it would produce a
rebellion in Paris; and they hoped, first, by preventing any
more being inscribed, and then by setting them to task-work,
that they should gradually get the numbers reduced. ... But
the Assembly would not wait; they ordered all the workmen
between 18 and 25 years old, and unmarried, to be drafted into
the army, or to be discharged; and they were breaking them up
so rapidly, that if the workmen wanted to fight it was evident
that it must be done at once or not at all. ... General
Cavaignac, who had been sent for from Africa, was on his
arrival in Paris named Minister at War, and had command of the
troops. ... Preparations for the conflict commenced on Thursday
the 22nd of June; but it was noon of the following day ere the
first shot was fired. It is said, that had the executive
commission known what they were about, the heads of the
insurrection might have been all arrested in the meantime, for
they were walking about all day, and at one time met in the
Jardin des Plantes. The fighting on the 23d continued all day,
with much slaughter, and little practical result. ... The
extent of the insurgent lines swallowed up the troops, so
that, though great numbers were in Paris, there appeared to be
a deficiency of them, and loud complaints were made against
the inefficiency of the executive commission. During the night
the fighting ceased, and both parties were occupied in
strengthening their positions. The Assembly was sitting in
permanence; they were highly incensed against the executive
commission, and wished them to send in their resignations; but
the latter refused, saying it was cowardly to do so in the face
of insurrection. The Assembly then formally deposed the
commission, and appointed Cavaignac dictator; to which
arrangement the executive commission at once assented. The
General instantly ordered the National Guards to prevent
assemblages in the streets, and that no one should go out
without a pass: anyone going about, out of uniform, without
permission, was walked home. In this manner many persons
carrying ammunition to the insurgents were arrested. At noon,
he sent a flag of truce with a proclamation, offering an
amnesty to the rebels, at the suggestion of the ex-prefect
Caussidière; but it was unhesitatingly rejected. This latter
personage, though he was not among the barricades, was by many
thought to be the head of the insurrection. The troops of the
insurgents were managed with great military skill, showing
that persons of military knowledge must have had the command;
though no one knew who were their leaders. ... During the
early part of the day, the fighting was mainly on the southern
side of the river. The church of St. Gervais and the bridges
were carried with great slaughter, as well as the church of
St. Severin, and their great head-quarters the Pantheon; and
by four o'clock, the troops had conquered the whole of the
south bank of the Seine. On the other side, a hot engagement
was going on in the Faubourgs Poissonnière and St. Denis:
these were carried with great loss at a late hour, whence the
insurrection was forced back to its great stronghold, the Clos
St. Lazare; which defied every effort of General Lamoricière
to take it on Saturday. An unfinished hospital served as a
citadel, and several churches and public buildings as
out-posts; while the old city wall, which they had loop-holed,
enabled them to fire on the troops in comparative security;
but the buildings were breached with cannon, and the
insurgents by four o'clock on Sunday were dispersed. ... A
desperate struggle was going on at a late hour in the Faubourg
du Temple; and on the Monday morning the insurgents made a
stand behind the Canal St. Martin, where they sent to treat on
condition of retaining their arms. But Cavaignac would hear of
no terms. It was thought, at one time, that they had
surrendered; when some soldiers, going within the lines, were
surprised and murdered. Hostilities at once began again, and
the insurgents were finally subdued by one o'clock on Monday
the 26th. The victory was dearly bought: 8,000 were
ascertained to have been killed or wounded; and, as many
bodies were thrown into the Seine unrecognised, this is much
under the number. Nearly 14,000 prisoners were taken, and
3,000 of these died of gaol fever. ... The excellent
Archbishop of Paris, Denis Auguste Affre, fell a sacrifice to
his Christian benevolence. Horrified at the slaughter, he,
attended by two of his vicars carrying the olive-branch of
peace, passed between the combatants. The firing ceased at his
appearance; but, from the discharge of a single musket, it
began again: he, nevertheless, mounted the barricade and
descended into the midst of the insurgents, and was, in the
act of addressing them, when some patriot, fearing the effect
of his exhortations, shot him from a window. ... General
Cavaignac, immediately after the pacification of Paris, laid
down the temporary dictatorship with which he had been
invested by the Assembly; but their gratitude for the
salvation of society led them to appoint him President of the
Council, with the power to name his own Ministry. He at once
sent adrift all the red republican party, and chose a Ministry
from among the moderate class of republicans; to which he
afterwards added some members of the old opposition. ...
Prince Louis Napoleon was again thrust upon the Assembly, by
being elected for Corsica; but he wrote a letter on the 8th of
July, saying, that though he did not renounce the honour of
one day sitting as a representative of the people, he would
wait till the time when his return to France could not in any
way serve as a pretext to the enemies of the republic. ... On
Tuesday, the 26th of September, shortly after the president
had taken his seat, Louis Napoleon appeared quietly in the
chamber, and placed himself on one of the back benches. ...
The discussion of the constitution, which had been referred to
a committee, was the only subject of interest, except the
important question of how the president should be elected. It
was proposed by some that the assembly itself should elect a
president, a proposition which was eventually negatived by a
large majority.
{1375}
The real object was to exclude Louis Napoleon, whose great
name gave him every chance of success, if an appeal were made
to the universal suffrage of the nation, which the republicans
distrusted. Another amendment was moved to exclude all
pretenders to the throne; on which, allusion being made to
Louis Napoleon, he mounted the rostrum, and denied that he was
a pretender. ... The red republicans were desirous of having
no president, and that the constituent assembly itself should
name the ministers. It was not the only constitutional point
in dispute: for weeks and months, the debate on the
constitution dragged its weary length along; amendments were
discussed, and the work when turned out was, as might have
been expected, a botch after all. ... It was eventually
agreed, that to give validity to the election of a president
it should be necessary that he should have more than a half of
all the votes given; that is to say, more votes than all the
other candidates put together; if not, the assembly was to
choose between the highest candidate on the list and his
competitors, by which means they hoped to be able to get rid
of Bonaparte. ... The constitution was proclaimed on the 10th
of November. ... The legitimist and Orleanist parties refused
to start a candidate for fear of weakening Bonaparte, and thus
throwing the choice into the hands of the assembly, who would
choose General Cavaignac. Both these parties gave the former
at least a negative support; and as M. Thiers declared that
nine-tenths of the country were opposed to the General as too
revolutionary, it was clear that in the country itself
reaction was going on faster than in the assembly. ... Louis
Napoleon's chief support was from the inhabitants of the
country districts, the peasantry. ... On the 10th of December,
5,534,520 votes were recorded for Louis Napoleon. General
Cavaignac had 1,448,302. Then came Ledru Rollin; then Raspail.
Lamartine got 17,914; 23,219 were disallowed, as being given
for some of the banished royal family. The total number of
voters was 7,449,471."
E. S. Cayley,
The European Revolution of 1848,
volume 1, chapters 4-5.
ALSO IN:
J. F. Corkran,
History of the Constituent
National Assembly from May, 1848.
Marquis of Normanby,
A Year of Revolution,
chapters 13-15(volume 2).
H. C. Lockwood,
Constitutional History of France,
chapter 5, and appendix 8.
FRANCE: A. D. 1849.
Intervention at Rome, to crush the revolutionary republic and
restore the Pope.
French capture and occupation of the city.
See ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849.
FRANCE: A. D. 1849-1850.
Disagreement with England in Greece.
The Don Pacifico affair.
See GREECE: A. D.1846-1850.
FRANCE: A. D.1851.
The plot of the Coup d'État.
"In the beginning of the winter of 1851 France was still a
republic; but the Constitution of 1848 had struck no root.
There was a feeling that the country had been surprised and
coerced into the act of declaring itself a republic, and that
a monarchical system of government was the only one adapted
for France. The sense of instability which sprang from this
belief was connected with an agonising dread of insurrections.
... Moreover, to those who watched and feared, it seemed that
the shadow on the dial was moving on with a terrible
steadiness to the hour when a return to anarchy was, as it
were, pre-ordained by law; for the constitution requited that
a new president should be chosen in the spring of the
following year. ... In general, France thought it best that,
notwithstanding the Rule of the Constitution, which stood in
the way, the then President should be quietly re-elected; and
a large majority of the Assembly, faithfully representing this
opinion, had come to a vote which sought to give it effect;
but their desire was baffled by an unwise provision of the
Republican Charter which had laid it down that no
constitutional change should take place without the sanction
of three-fourths of the Assembly. By this clumsy bar the
action of the State system was hampered, and many whose minds
generally inclined them to respect legality were forced to
acknowledge that the Constitution wanted a wrench." The
President of the republic, Prince Louis Napoleon Bonaparte,