Page images
PDF
EPUB

that is suitable to France. That neutrality is neither indifference nor impuissance. Such abstinence would be unworthy of a great nation. The only neutrality that can be fitting for France is that which, taking its principle in the sentiments of right, justice, and respect for the independence of States, leaves to each people to regulate as it pleases, and according to its own ideas-(Interrup tion on the Left; cries of and Rome, and Rome!')-its internal affairs and policy, on the condition, however, of respecting the rights and legitimate interests of other nations.

[ocr errors]

"Permit me, Gentlemen, to enter here into some developments which will enable you better to understand the policy which we follow relative to Germany.

"In the midst of their divisions the German Governments agree generally in admitting that new circumstances render modifications of more or less importance necessary in the Federal Constitution of Germany, such as it has been established by treaties.

"The changes which may be introduced therein are of two kinds. The one may relate to questions which had been regulated by the principal Powers, and which affect the general situation of Europe; the proportion of force between the members of the great political body, and the existence peculiar to some of these. Evidently, if the Germanic Governments think that it is their duty or the interest of Germany to enter on such questions, they will comprehend the necessity, before deciding on them definitively, of concerting with such Powers unconnected with Germany, as according to existing VOL. XCII.

treaties are entitled to be consulted in these great interests.

"Other changes may relate to points which, though exceedingly. important undoubtedly to the internal organization of Germany, are, however, only secondary so far as the rest of Europe is concerned. In that case I have no need to say that France, like the other Powers placed in the same condition, would not have either any right nor any real interest to interfere in such changes-(Long interruption on the Left) and that a sense of propriety even imposes on her a law not to express publicly an opinion on questions which do not concern her.

"After having thus clearly defined the nature of the neutrality which the Government is determined to guard in its foreign policy, I think it superfluous to give any further explanation to the Assembly on the affairs of Germany.

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][ocr errors]

M. Emmanuel Arago moved the adjournment of the debate. The state of affairs had, he said, completely changed since the project of law had been deposited. It was evident, from the result of the conferences of Olmütz, that the two serious causes of the differences which had arisen between the two great Powers were to a certain degree removed. France could not proclaim her neutrality in presence of two Governments who had signed a treaty of peace. The discussion would be useless; nay, dangerous. The sentiments delivered in the Assembly might have an echo in Germany. There was no longer either urgency or peril. The two armies had ceased to be in presence, and there was no danger of immediate hostilities. It was consequently advisable to postpone the discussion until it was known whether the deliberating Assemblies would accept the terms agreed to by the Sovereigns.

The question of adjournment was then put from the chair, and rejected by a considerable majority.

M. Mathieu de la Drôme having been called to the tribune, said that, in consequence of the shameful treaty signed by the King of Prussia, no discussion was possible. If peace was insured, why call out

40,000 men and demand 8,460,000 francs, unless it was for domestic purposes? Had not the Govern ment at its disposal, to repress any subversive attempt, an army of 400,000 men, a numerous and vigilant police and gendarmerie, whose loyalty was celebrated in the Message of the President of the Republic? Peace and war required the same military force and sacrifices. What he considered most dangerous for his country was the perfect accord that prevailed between the Northern Powers of Europe. After the declaration made by General Lahitte, he should only add a few words to express his sympathy for Electoral Hesse. That country enjoyed during the last two years a Constitution which was not remarkable for Republicanism, but it breathed principles of liberality which would ultimately bear their fruits. He could not help rendering homage to the magistrates of the Duchy, whose noble conduct had elicited from the Prince of Hesse an additional proof of the contempt of Kings for their oaths.

General Fabvier, who followed, condemned the resolution proposed by the Committee as impeding the action of the Government, but would gladly grant the credit.

M. Emmanuel Arago, the next speaker, began by asking the Committee if, after the statement made by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, it persevered in the resolution it had submitted to the approbation of the Assembly? The reorganization of Germany, he said, involved a very serious question. France had been a party to the treaties which had constructed Germany as she now stood, and it behoved her

to be a party to the new Congress charged with the contemplated organization of the confederacy. Under these circumstances a declaration of neutrality would be a proof of impotence, and the total abandonment of French interests. M. Remusat, reporter of the Committee, declared, in its name, that it persisted in all its resolutions. The probabilities were favourable to peace. Peace was now more probable than war. But until the main question which divided the two great German Powers was peaceably solved, France should be prepared for every contingency. The signs of war were every day vanishing, he admitted; but the Committee was of opinion that the Assembly, after hearing the loyal declaration of the perfect accord that existed between the executive and legislative powers made by General Lahitte, should give a formal and complete adhesion to the policy so admirably defined in the Message of the President of the Republic. War, he repeated, was less probable, but it was always possible. During the negotiations about to be opened might not demagogues be tempted to transfer the discussion from places where it would be calm, into the streets? Was it certain that the Prussian and Austrian armies were to be dissolved? Under those circumstances the Committee deemed it advisable to maintain an armed neutrality, and persist in its resolutions.

After some further discussion a ballot took place, when there appeared―

For the resolution of the
Committee

Against it

483

[ocr errors]

211

[blocks in formation]

The resolution was accordingly adopted.

The President then read the first article, appropriating an extraordinary credit of 8,460,000 francs for the immediate levy of 40,000 recruits, which was agreed to without a division. The two other articles were similarly adopted, and the entire Bill was voted by 466 to 213.

On the 10th of December, M. de Montalembert ascended the tribune, and read to the Assembly the report of the Committee appointed to examine a proposition of M. Olivier, relative to the observance of Sundays and holydays. The question, he said, interested the dignity and moral liberty of the French people. By adopting it the Assembly would honour itself and render to France and society a signal service. In every country that right was required, and the repose of Sundays considered a blessing as well as a duty. That law had received the sanction of the experience of sixty ages, and nevertheless no country had so shamefully violated it as France. The Sabbath was still observed in the rural districts, but desecrated in the towns. It was time that the law should at last restore the simplest obligation of nature and religion so long trodden under foot. The Committee openly called on the Assembly to reestablish the public homage due to the majesty of God and to the conscience of every Christian. It was the most insane illusion to suppose that respect can be enforced for the rights of society and property when the laws of morality and religion are disregarded. Nations no more than kings can violate with impunity the eternal decrees of the Al

mighty. In accord with the experience of mankind the Committee proclaims the impotence of a material remedy, and sees no other except religion, which men have so long strenuously laboured to extirpate from the hearts of their fellow-creatures. Our ancestors knew and believed that prayer and faith were the very fundamental bases of society. There is no society without religion, no religion without a worship, no worship without the Sabbath. The repose of the seventh day is the sign and symbol of alliance between God and man. Its nonobservance was a public profession of atheism, a public defiance thrown to the Creator. Modern philosophers have substituted the dignity of matter for the old religion of Clovis and Jean d'Arc. England and the United States are perhaps indebted for their prosperity to their close observance of the first law of God. Christians of every persuasion observe the Sabbath, and the Jews still more strictly. The project prepared by the Committee offered guarantees to all, with the exception, perhaps, of those who professed no religion. ("They constitute the majority," cried a Member on the Left.) They were numerous, he knew, but the Committee thought that the liberty of believing could be reconciled with that of not believing. The non-observance of the Sabbath was an attempt against equality the only true equalityequality in the eyes of God. It affected particularly the dignity of the poor and the labourer. He (M. Montalembert) and his friends had

been often charged with indifference for the education of the people. Now, in his opinion, the greatest obstacle to that education was the sacrilegious labour on Sunday. To deprive the people of repose on that day was to deprive them of their rights and duties, and to suppress the day of the Lord was to suppress education. He cited again Great Britain and the United States in support of his opinion, and ascribed to their respect for that day the prosperity, tranquillity, and grandeur they enjoyed. In London, where the population amounted to two millions and a half, order was maintained by three battalions of infantry and a few squadrons of cavalry, while in Paris the presence of an entire army was required. M. de Montalembert next described the demoralising effects of the nonobservance of the Sabbath. He attributed to it the extraordinary increase of cabarets, which, according to returns submitted to the Committee appointed to institute an inquiry into the best mode of levying the duty on liquors, amounted to 332,000 in France. It was full time to remedy the evil, and it behoved the Assembly to oppose to the right to labour, invented by the Socialists, the right to repose, and minister both to the material and moral improvement of the labouring classes.

M. Montalembert then read the different articles of the project, but the question was not disposed of this year, nor did anything else occur before its close of sufficient importance to require notice in our pages.

CHAPTER X.

SPAIN.- Accouchement of the Queen-Marriage of the Comte de Montemolin-Renewal of Diplomatic Relations between Great Britain and Spain-Dissolution of the Spanish Cortes-Circular of the Minister of the Interior-Result of the Elections-Opening of the New Cortes— Queen's Speech.

PORTUGAL.-Opening of the Portuguese Cortes-Royal Speech. GREECE.-Claims of the British Government upon Greece-Narrative of Facts relating to these Claims-Exaggerated Demands of M. Pacifico-His Claims not a subject for State interference according to the Law of Nations-Dispute respecting the Islands of Cervi and Sapienza-Interviews and Correspondence between Mr. Wyse and M. Londos-Seizure of Greek Vessels by Admiral Sir William Parker— Acceptance by Lord Palmerston of the good offices of France-Baron Gros sent to Athens as Mediator-Result of his investigation of the Claims of M. Pacifico-Abortive attempts at Agreement between Mr. Wyse and Baron Gros-Convention agreed to in London between Lord Palmerston and M. Drouyn de Lhuys-Delay by Lord Palmerston in communicating this Convention to Mr. Wyse - Unfortunate consequences of this delay-Mr. Wyse resumes Coercive Measures, and the Greek Government yields-Letter from Mr. Wyse containing a List of the Demands of the British Government-Termination of the Dispute-Strong Remonstrance addressed by Russia to the British Go

vernment.

SPAIN

PAIN. On the 12th of July this year the Queen of Spain was delivered of a son, but the Prince died within a few minutes after his birth. In the same month the Comte de Montemolin, son of Don Carlos, was married to the Princess Caroline, sister of the King of Naples.

The diplomatic relations between this country and Spain, which had been in so untoward a manner broken off, in consequence of the well-grounded offence taken by the Spanish Government at the interference of Sir Henry L. Bulwer, according

to the instructions of Lord Palmerston, in finding fault with the administration of the internal affairs of that kingdom*, were happily this year renewed, and on the 4th of August Lord Howden was introduced to the Queen of Spain as Envoy Extraordinary and Ambassador Plenipotentiary of the Queen of Great Britain to the Court of Madrid. On presenting his credentials, Lord Howden said

"At any time, and under any circumstances, I should have con

See Vol. XC.

« PreviousContinue »