hostile to the reigning dynasty, which had been presented during the whole course of the revolution, might come to be considered as political Helots. Baron Pasquier, replying to Benjamin Constant, urged, that the step which the King, moved by his natural sentiments of clemency, and by high political considerations, had once taken, was one which could be taken by him alone. The benefit could not be turned against the benefactor. M. Corbieres opposed M. Manuel upon the principle itself. The constitutional question, which the opposite side were attempting to stifle, was, whether a regicide could sit in the French Chamber of Deputies. If he was admissible there, he was admissible also into all high functions of state; he would return into our armies, drawing in his train the revolution, and all our cala mities. It was said that all opinions ought to be represented; but the question here was, not about opinions, but crimes; crime now, for the first time, sought to be represented. Scarcely had M. Corbieres finished his speech, when M. Ravez proposed the vote. A tumultuary assent was given by the great bulk of the assembly, which rose up and pronounced the sentence of non-admission; after which the sitting was terminated amid cries of Vive le Roi. This sudden and irregular close was unsatisfactory, not on ly to numerous members who had wish. ed to speak, but to the zealous of both parties, who, agreeing in the propriety of exclusion, wished each to have it pronounced according to his own peculiar principles. The Chamber being constituted, the first conflict of parties was occasioned by the proposition of the minister of finance, that government should be allowed provisionally to draw the first six-twelfths of the taxes on landed and personal property. The committee, VOL. XIII. PART I. however, to which the proposition was referred, recommended that the vote should be limited to four-twelfths. This measure was supported by M. de la Bourdonnage, in a speech remarkable by the views it gave of the political state of France. According to him, anarchy was "advancing with rapid steps, ready to devour us. Displacing power, it undermines every day our rising institutions, places without the Chambers the influence which ought to be exercised by them; opposes to their deliberations the expression of a factitious, often factious, and always insolent opinion." France was affected with a political gangrene, which threatened to swallow up the whole social body. These evils he attributed in a great degree to the fluctuating and indecisive measures of ministry, and could, therefore, by no means agree to repose in them that confidence, and place that power in their hands, which would be done by the present vote. M. Decazes, in reply, maintained, that the ministers had not attached them selves to any party, but that their system was supported by a majority, both in the Chamber and the nation. He wholly denied the allegations which their enemies were circulating, that they meant to carry their point by any violent and unconstitutional means. Ministers finally carried the vote by a majority of 137 to 39. The Chambers now approached that high debateable ground, the theatre of those conflicts by which the session was to be so terribly agitated. We have already noticed the alarms excited through France by the understood purpose of altering that part of the charter which relates to the law of elections. Any symptoms of royalist encroachment excited through France the dread of more than the mere loss of political rights. It raised throughout the whole body of landed proprie tors a fear which had been always connected with the Bourbon dynasty, the fear of the resumption of emigrant property, sold or confiscated at the commencement of the revolution. Numerous petitions against the projected innovation were, therefore, poured in even from the most remote villages. By the 8th January the commission had received 139, containing about 19,000 signatures. The committee thereupon made a report to the Chambers, unfavourable to the reception of these petitions. None of them, it was observed, had been signed by any of the local authorities; on the contrary, several public functionaries described them as obtained by individuals going through the villages, announcing the return of tithes and the feudal system. Many of these petitions had been evidently signed without being read, and many contained expressions offensive to the Chamber. As they did not solicit the reparation of any act of injustice, they could only be considered as unconstitutional attempts to fetter the proceedings of the representative government. The reading of this report caused an extraordinary tumult. M. Dupont, having first obtained liberty to speak, censured it with the utmost vehemence. He could not but admire the heroic courage of the committee, in thus proposing to repel, by a single vote, the wish of nineteen thousand citizens, who demanded, in the name of public peace, the maintenance of the constitutional compact, which the deputies were bound to defend by their honour and their oath. Last year petitions had been sent in by hundreds in favour of the law of elections; they had been kindly welcomed, and no danger had been apprehended; but now that the policy, that is, the interest of the ministry, made them wish to change this law, these petitions, so innocent last year, were found to be infected with vices of every kind. The versatility was not in public opinion, which had always declared itself in favour of the charter and the law of elections; it would be elsewhere, if the Chamber should adopt the advice of the committee. As to the agitation felt in the departments, the orator ascribed it solely to the projected change, and to the fears thence entertained as to the stability of the political contract which united the prince to the nation. M. Pasquier, in reply, insisted that the petitions, as they were presented, had a direct tendency to exercise an illegal influence on the legislative authority. Nothing could be more groundless than the alarm which had been spread for the maintenance of the charter, and of the sales of national property. The words "touch the charter," were used in an occult, mysterious sense, calculated to blind the weak and ill-informed. The petitions had been all formed on one model; they had been hawked about from village to village, from shop to shop, preceded by the report of the re-establishment of tithes and of feudal rights. However much he might applaud the zeal of those who communicated to the Chambers useful information, he could never allow that all the citizens, of every profession and every age, some scarcely beyond infancy, students, soldiers, should be able, by a petition, to oblige the Chambers to deliberate on any subject which might have attracted their attention. The number of those who sought this presumptuous initiative could not be compared to that of the citizens who waited in a just and respectful confidence for the result of the legislative discussions. Messrs Castel Bajac and Barthe la Bastide supported the rejection still more warm. ly, representing that the petitioners were not one to every commune; that France wished an election-law which should not introduce into the Chamber 1 a living representation of the crimes of the revolution. They described the petitions as unconstitutional, factious, tending to supplant the initiative of the King by the initiative of the multitude. De Corcelles, General Foy,, and Benjamin Constant, argued, that the petitions should be at least deposited in the Office of Inquiry; but, after two days of stormy debate, their entire rejection was carried by a majority of 117 against 112. In the Chamber of Peers, M. de Seze laid down still more rigorous limitations on the right of petition. It could be admitted, he thought, only in matters connected with private interest, and the redress of individual grievances, but could not be allowed in the case of a legislative proceeding. The petitioners had no information qualifying them to discuss points so important; and, indeed, every species of collective petition might be branded as a form of sedition. Although the measure was opposed by Counts Daru, Lanjuinais, and Segur, as tending to overthrow entirely the right of petition, it was carried by the great majority of 109 to 48. This check did not slacken the zeal of the petitioning bodies, who continued to pour in addresses, till they amounted to five hundred and more, covered with from fifty to sixty thousand signatures. On the 9th March, M. Dupont made an attempt to obtain their reception, but his motion was negatived without any discussion. The next measure proposed was one tending to fix the right of those who had formerly made purchases of the national domains. It was acceptable to all parties, the liberals only wishing to introduce alterations in some particular clauses. This law was generally understood to be only a douceur, intended to smooth the way to the main object of the session-the introduction of the law of election. Yet this critical and eagerly expected measure was delayed from day to day, and serious differences of opinion were understood to prevail among ministers on the subject. The classification of the electoral body, the influence to be allowed to property, the integral renewal of the Chambers, and the diminution of the frequency of election, were all questions on the details of which varying opinions were held. Amid the debates and delays arising out of this state of things, an event of the most terrible and unexpected description arrested all men's attention, and shook to its basis the whole political system of the French monarchy. The Duke de Berri was the youngest of the two sons of the Count d'Artois (now Monsieur); but as he had lately married a Sicilian princess, the hope of issue which was wanting in the Angouleme family, made him be regarded as the only channel by which the race of Bourbon could be perpetuated. This circumstance proved fatal to him. On the evening of the 13th February, after having been present at the opera along with his duchess, a weapon resembling a rude poniard was struck into his breast. At the first moment the shock appeared to himself and his attendants to have arisen from an indiscreet push of one of the bystanders; but soon discovering how the case stood, he called out, "I am assassinated." On drawing out the weapon, the duchess was covered with the blood which burst from the wound. He was carried into a neighbouring saloon; and the first medical men in Paris being hastily called, soon recognized that the wound was of the most dangerous nature. Accordingly, every assistance proving vain, he expired the following morning at half past six. The assassin, immediately on committing this horrible deed, took to flight; but being closely pursued by several of the Prince's attendants, and his route happening to be blocked by a carriage, he was speedily taken. He was found to be a person of the name of Louvel, holding a menial employment in the King's stables. On being interrogated, he declared that he had no accomplices, nor any who knew of the deed; that he had meditated it in his own breast for four years. He had acted solely from public motives. Considering the Bourbons as the most cruel enemies of France, he sought to exterminate them, and had begun with the youngest, and the one who appear ed most likely to continue the race. If he had escaped on this occasion, he meant to have successively assassinated the other Princes, and the King himself. Being afterwards brought to the Louvre, and the dead body of his victim exhibited to him, he did not testify the slightest emotion. Several were arrested in consequence of suspicions inspired either by their known political sentiments, or by expressions of exultation reported to have been used on hearing of the event; but no proof could be established against them; nor was there found in Louvel's apartment, or among his effects, any thing which could implicate in the slightest degree any other individual. Three months spent in preparing for his trial were equally unproductive of any discovery. On being placed before the House of Peers he displayed a calm and gloomy physiognomy, and repeated the confessions formerly made. He disavowed, in the strongest manner, all sense of injury, or hostile feeling of a personal nature, towards the Duke, or any of the Bourbons; he had assailed them only as the enemies of his country. He protested as solemnly as ever, the total absence of all accomplices; and added, that he was not in the habit of reading either journals or pamphlets. His advocate, M. Bonnet, endeavoured to make some kind of defence, by representing him as affected by that species of madness which consists in the mind dwelling continually upon a single idea. He urged also the wish for his pardon which had been expressed by the dying Prince. Louvel, when called for his own defence, made a speech which was considered a repetition of the crime, and which was, therefore, never allowed to be publish. ed. He openly justified the action of which he had been guilty, and, on the same principle, the death of Louis XVI; he compared himself to Brutus, and to the most illustrious of those who had died in the cause of liberty. Being condemned to death, he was executed on the 7th of June. An immense crowd attended; but, though Paris was then much disturbed from other causes, no attempt at tumult took place, and the event passed in the most profound silence. An event of so deep and appalling a character could not fail to redouble the violence of those political contentions, with which France was already so strongly agitated. The immediate effect of the feelings excited, was decidedly in favour of the royalist party. No proof had indeed appeared of this crime being the result of any combination, or even of its having been prompt. ed by any writings or discourses of the opponents of government. But, amid the emotions inspired by such a catas trophe, nice distinctions or inquiries were not likely to be made; every thing was swallowed up in the general impression. Besides, though such a combination of crime and madness could only originate in a peculiar and fanatical atrocity of individual character, yet this might, in consequence of a violent fermentation in the public mind, have been raised to such an extreme and preternatural pitch. Feelings, which might otherwise have fermented in gloomy silence, might thus have been roused to desperate action. Under these views, ministers considered themselves justified in bringing for ward restraints upon the liberty, both of action and writing, such as are supposed to be rendered necessary in tur bulent and dangerous times. A violent effervescense appeared at the meeting of the Chamber of Depu. ties on the 14th. The first proceed. ing was marked by an almost frantic burst of personal animosity. Clausel de Coussergues, mounting the tribune, denounced Decazes, minister of the interior, as an accomplice of the assassination of the Duke of Berri. Loud cries of order! order! resounded through the assembly, and the orator being immediately silenced, the Presi dent read the letter by which the President of the Council announced the event which had taken place. A warm debate followed, and the sentiments of the royalist party were strongly expressed by M. de la Bourdonnaye. He could not but perceive in this deplora. ble crime, the action of an imagination exalted by that political fanaticism which was daily sapping the foundations of the throne. The object was, to raise on their ruin those new powers which a delirious philanthropy had sought in the sovereignty of the people, the numerical power of the multitude, and in that law of the strongest, against which the social contract was drawn up. At the view of an issue so dismal, it must be the first object of a political body to crush in its germ a fanaticism which leads to such fatal results; to chain anew that revolntionary spirit which can only be restrained by an arm of iron; to silence those daring writers, who, emboldened by impunity, excite to the most odious He proposed, therefore, that the address should communicate the decided wish of the Chamber to suppress those pernicious doctrines, which, sapping at once all thrones and all au thorities, threatened anew the civilized world with general destruction. General Foy, in expressing the opinion of the liberal part of the Assembly, argued that the address should be entirely devoted to the expression of the grief which absorbed every heart. Of all Frenchmen, none regretted the Prince so much as the friends of liberty, because they knew that its enemies would avail themselves of this dreadful event to deprive the nation of all those rights which had been granted to it by the wisdom of the sovereign.-A secret committee being appointed, an address was drawn up, and carried unanimously, where the Assembly, besides the expression of their grief, added the assurance that they were ready to concur. with equal energy and devotion, according to the order of their constitutional duties, in the measures which the wisdom of his Majesty might judge necessary in such grave circumstances. A similar address was voted in the Chamber of Peers. On the following day, the wild charge against Decazes came again under consideration, and a vote of censure was moved, declaring it rash and calumnious. The charge, however, was still maintained by its author; and though it met with no belief in the Assembly, yet a very strong animosity against the minister manifested itself both on the right and left sides. This was not di minished, when Decazes appeared in person, to propose the new law of elections, as well as two others imposing restraints upon individual liberty. The unpopularity of the minister appeared now so evident, that it was con sidered impossible, at so tempestuous an era, to carry on the grand objects which the executive had in view, without a change of management. He re signed on the 18th February, under the pretence of ill health. The King, to express his satisfaction with his ser |
