The Royal Family of France (Henry)/Thiers
X.
THIERS.
It belongs to French Statesmen to reduce to practice the political theory we have here put forth. The first among them was the late M. Thiers, the "Liberator of the Territory," whose name ever will be associated with the payment of the largest distraint ever known, not forgetting the fact that the indemnity was fully paid many weeks before the time which had been fixed, through financial efforts which had appeared quite impracticable, but richly merited the admiration of all Europe. M. Thiers was an enlightened mind, whose logic was full of persuasion and whose good sense was most practical.
Called by his unexampled services to be the Protector of France as Cromwell by his crimes rose to be the Protector of England, Thiers held the fate of the country in his hands: they were safe there. Of all the Statesmen who have governed Europe during this century,—Ave may say,—M. Thiers was the only one who had taken accurate note of the past, the only one who had learned the lessons inculcated by Providence and who had deserved by making an open confession of his political mistakes that the spirit of God and France should speak by his mouth. In his defence of the Holy See in the French Senate he said: "There is a thing more worthy of respect than glory, genius, virtue; it is justice." In truth, nothing could be more illogical or ridiculous than to impute wild illiberality to M. Thiers or to brand his memory with principles which he thoroughly abhorred. Toleration, moderation, and liberty were the political doctrines of M. Thiers; and most of his ideas and policy we find reproduced in the spirit of his personal friend, M. Jules Simon. The programme of M. Thiers consisted then of the Holy See, justice and national liberty. Who owns not the conviction that such a programme should bring good fortune to the Statesman who supports it? and could our conviction have been deceived had it not been for the unmanly greed of partisans?
Arbiter of the fate of France, Thiers was the safest ally to Europe, if Europe, like him, had looked back and studied the past. Europe was inclined to pursue a perilous policy, and she is playing her last cards to-day. It is but too evident that the Statesmen of our day are living from day to day and dare not recall the past to their mind. Thiers was capable of warning Europe as to the fate awaiting adventures and adventurers. What befell the English policy of Palmerston, the Austrian manoeuvres of Metternich, the French tactics of Talleyrand? In no distant future we shall ask what has become of the Italy of Cavour, and where is now the Spain of Prim? M. de Bismarck possesses greater genius than Metternich, Palmerston, Cavour; but his mighty plans are ventures, ventures similar, if you like to Charles V.'s and Napoleon's; but ventures that have already partly ended at Canossa, and sooner or later will end, if not in a Monastery of St. Just or another St. Helena, at least with a broken heart. Thiers was the only Conservative in Europe; and since his death Bismarck has taken from him some useful lessons in Conservatism. The pride of the victorious Prussian Minister may have winced; but he was not totally blinded by a success that is almost miraculous; and lately he realized that before the tribunal of God and of History he will appear very insignificant by the side of the late Pontiff, who, having discerned his covetousness, indicated the method of counteracting it, and foretold Europe the misfortunes awaiting both hemispheres and addressed the German Chancellor of to-day in the language of civilization and justice.
Prince von Bismarck himself and our generation may witness the fulfilment of these Prussian plans, of that German Unification which, according to the forecast of common sense, is to reach from the North Sea to the Adriatic; what next?
A great Philosopher, an illustrious writer, was gifted with prophecy when he wrote, eleven years ago:—
"The next generation will witness the division of the Continent of Europe into three or four great sections, distinguished by some name or other, perhaps by that of Empire which seems to tickle the ears of languid nations: Germany, with its vast unity, will be one: Russia, with its gigantic extent, another; England, with its multitudinous isles and kingdoms, a third; and when this laboured transformation shall be effected, God only knows what effect it may have on the peace and prosperity of nations! Conjecture here reaches to perspectives some of which may make us tremble; this state of Europe, the outcome of Democratic instincts, whilst bringing into immediate contact such colossal empires, provides no arbitration that may seem to restrain them. It is easy to see that such an approximation must give rise to inevitable collisions, and then how deadly will be the struggles, how fearful the shock, how calamitous the catastrophe! It will be beyond anything that has occurred since the disruption of the Eastern Empires, since the fall of the Roman Empire beneath the invasion of the barbarian hordes" (Laurentie). When we think of the progressing division of the world into four parts; one extending from Archangel to Varna, with or without Constantinople; the second from Kiel to Trieste, with or without Holland; the third from Silesia to the Illyrian Frontier, with or without Greece; the fourth from the Straits of Behring to Panama, inclusive or not of Peru and Brazil, doubtless we are filled with alarm. This idea, conceived by a Statesman intoxicated with conquest and usurpation, agrees with the schemes of a Mazzini, with the Republicanism of a Monroe. Did not the Socialists band together to extol Sadowa? Whilst but the other day President Grant congratulated the Emperor of Germany in significant words. Mazzini did and Grant does know well that individual Monarchies well one day clash together, and then from their fragments will be built up one gigantic State, the Universal Republic of Socialism. Ministers' and Crown Servants' sordid desire of gain, the burden of taxation and the high price of food are the source of much internal distress, disquiet, and suffering in all countries at this moment. Revolutions must take place sooner or later, as citizens will not bear much longer the awful taxations they have to pay off at the sweat of their brow. Let this be a warning to any venturesome Minister or Military Dictator whose life is dearer to him than the ephemeral wear of the regal garb. The hearts contented and homes happy of his subjects should be the first care of a Sovereign whose philanthropic policy will more readily win his people than any other measures, "making each the other^s treasure,—once divided, losing all."
Such is the state of contemporary Europe; its concert is utterly disorganized, and if the most powerful States are threatened, in what plight can Frenchmen expect to find France, she who has been disinherited of her centuries-old possessions, she who has thrown overboard Kings, allies and frontiers?
If I pass on to consider the internal state of France, I feel still more the need of the powerful yet moderate prudence of the late M. Thiers. Parties divided against themselves, faction in power, a horde of men who will persist in either keeping aloof from the rest of the population or in assuming the selfish guardianship of their interests, but preach- disaffection as well as unreason, think, speak and act as foreign foes; the finances of the country pilfered or squandered at the very time when millions have to be paid away for necessaries; the army raw in its new discipline, faulty in organization, through local dissensions and through having become the tool of the party in power; anarchy armed to the teeth; the working-classes discontented and turbulent, lowered and weakened in their character, in spite of the universal extension of the Franchise, which in England is being desperately fought for as the sole means of giving the labouring man more self-respect, more elevation of mind!!! a Press run wild in insult, recrimination and provocation against both Heaven, and earth: such is the situation.
At the time of M. Thiers' election as their representative, twenty-six Counties had expressed a deeply-felt want as well as an ardent desire. M. Thiers alone could repair internal disasters, and prepare for France later on a return to her former position among European Monarchies. He had felt the responsibility laid upon him, and without hesitation or evasion he had grasped firmly the powers given him, and declared publicly that he would not yield them up, that he was the representative of France, and that he countenanced no faction. When the crisis had passed away; when France was reorganized by order,, economy, a just administration, and true liberty; when agriculture, commerce, manufactures, would be once more in a flourishing condition; when the army had learned loyalty and discipline; when the Provincial and Municipal Councils had been purged, and National Diplomacy restored France to the confidence of Europe; then, and only then, would M. Thiers have crowned his edifice. "All my life," the illustrious old man said, "I have reflected on the most desirable form of government for my country, and if I had had the power which no mortal ever has had, I would have given to it that which during forty years of my life I have striven unsuccessfully to obtain for it, the Constitutional Monarchy of England. I wish you to understand me thoroughly; I will not flatter any faction; I wish to speak the truth as I see it, as it has shown itself to me. Well then, gentlemen, I find men are free, nobly, grandly free at Washington, and that they accomplish great things; but I find men are equally free in London, and, if I may be allowed to say so, even freer, perhaps, than at Washington. At London the Government dwells apart equally from the passions of the mighty and of the people. Never in any country or in any age has a Government resided in an atmosphere where judgment was so all-powerful, where judgment was so untroubled. But, gentlemen, in my opinion, an opinion I have always maintained, Princes who hold the reins of government must accept the conditions of this form of government; if they assume the government, they must also assume its responsibilities, which in an age so restless as our own soon become a burden to the Throne. I do not wish to bring any accusation against Princes whom I have ever esteemed, some of whom have been beloved by me; but in my opinion they have not understood the conditions of this government. Forty years ago I said it, I say it now, and during the ten years of the Empire, and I will not cease to repeat it; it is a proverb now become famous, the maxim of my youth, and to which I have held faithfully all my life; Princes must admit that in its essence a Monarchy is a Republic, it has been defined as a country governed by itself, a Republic with an hereditary President. But, gentlemen, this truth has not been understood, and forty years ago, when still quite young, I wrote these words: If France will not cross the Channel with us, she will be forced to cross the Atlantic" (Thiers, June 8th, 1871).
Many Legitimists and Orleanists distrusted Thiers because their foresight is short and their intellect narrow. Perhaps they felt reluctant in forgiving his allowing £20,000 to the Jew Deutz who discovered to M. Thiers the place of refuge of the Duchess de Berry, when this noble-hearted Royal Princess attempted, in 1832, a popular rising for the restoration of Henry V., her son, failed, and was imprisoned in the citadel of Blaye. They would not understand that the declaration of the Head of the Executive power meant: —
That to prepare the path of Royalty it is necessary to clear away some at least of the rubbish that blocks up the way, and cart away to Charenton half the maniacs masquerading as Politicians;
That any dynasty mounting the Throne before France has been reconstituted both in administration and in military matters, will not keep it for twelve months;
That Royalty ought not to be burdened with an overwhelming responsibility not belonging to it; that the calumnies and slanders of the Revolution must be silenced, and Europe and History made to witness that the Royalty unanimously welcomed back by France is a stranger to Frenchmen's defeats and to Frenchmen's humiliations.
This masterly policy of M. Thiers could have been realized to the letter if French Monarchists and Conservative Republicans like MM. Jules Simon, Waddington, with hundreds of others, one and all, had given their support to this illustrious Statesman; if they had provoked no reaction, no act of revenge; if France had had on her side those two powerful allies, God and Time; it Frenchmen had not been precipitate; if, above all, they had been thoroughly convinced that an immediate restoration was an impossibility. To this end M. Thiers would have brought about a public reconciliation of all the Princes of the Royal Family of France; if necessary, he would have exacted it in the name of the country; and the union of Legitimists and Orleanists thus accomplished, he would have sent the people to the ballot to elect a Constituent Assembly. Most Frenchmen were at that moment aware of the obligation they would lay on their Parliamentary Representatives. Meanwhile, Frenchmen should have shown every consideration to M. Thiers to strengthen him in fulfilling his arduous mission. They should have been patient the tempest was still and is still raging, and its towering waves fill minds with- fear, and cause confusion all around. But these storms have left unscathed the Royal tree, which, deeply rooted in the French soil, has survived and once again should overshadow that country with its leafy branches under whose shelter its weary children will find rest. God has stamped this long race of the Kings of France with His own seal. Let anarchy and intrigue work their will Yes; we can understand that certain men think twice before throwing aside the tool of Democracy; but the friends of liberty, we would even say true Republicans, dread the mob, that vile mob, the ruin of all Governments. … This wretched mob has betrayed to every tyrant the liberty of every Government. It was the mob who betrayed the liberty of Rome, for bread and games, into the power of Cæsar. This same mob, satiated with bread and games, later on slaughters its Emperors; now elevating Nero to the throne, and soon murdering him because he was too rigid; it wished to debauch Otho; it elected the ignoble Vitellius; and, when it had lost even its valour for fightings it handed Rome over to the Barbarians. This is the same mob which betrayed the liberty of Florence into the hands of the Medici; which in Holland—prudent Holland—murdered the Witts, those true friends of freedom. It was this vile mob which arraigned and murdered Bailly, and applauded the execution, or rather the abominable assassinate of the Girondists; which next applauded the execution, too well deserved, of Robespierre; which would applaud ours which accepted the despotism of the great man who understood it and mastered it; which later on rejoiced over his fall, and which in 1815, and but ten years ago threw a rope round his statue to drag it down into the mud. Such throughout History up to this moment are the achievements, is the career of this mob. But there is a Divine spirit guiding deserving nations, who do not wish to be Christian without Christ; and a Hand more mighty than the sword of her enemies is extended to guard the national Monarchy.