367 





THE FRENCH AND THE KING OF THE FRENCH. 



LETTER FROM PARIS. 



Paris, September 15. 



THE events of the 5th and 6th of June did immense harm to the 

 republican party. The entire blame of the insurrection was laid upon 

 them ; and they were accused of being able to support their political 

 opinions only by bloodshed and conspiracy. All the middle and com- 

 mercial classes, together with the national guard, that had looked with 

 feelings of alienation towards the government of the juste milieu, previous 

 to the epoch in question, were led to rally to it by the events in ques- 

 tion. Such a lavishing of blood to no purpose, angered every rational 

 mind against the promoters of the movement ; and Paris, instead of being 

 indignant at the martial law proclaimed, and the councils of war, was 

 rather inclined to applaud these anti-constitutional acts as measures of 

 just severity. 



With the lapse of time, however, divers circumstances have come to 

 light, which have materially altered the public judgment. But ere en- 

 tering upon these, it is necessary to premise, that republicanism in 

 France is divided into two distinct sects and parties. These are the old 

 republicans of 1791, admirers not only of democracy, but democracy in 

 action, ruling by popular terror, lopping off aristocratic heads, and 

 astounding the world by their cruelty and valour. Besides these, there 

 are the theoretic republicans, who propose the American constitution as 

 their model, who wish to have two chambers, the -first based upon the 

 the possession of considerable property, and who, in consequence, are 

 ready to admit the aristocracy of wealth, at least, amongst the elements 

 of the constitution. They demand an elective president, in other words, 

 propose the United States as their model. This party has Lafayette for 

 chief, and the National newspaper as its organ. 



Now in all consideration of the affairs of France, it is absolutely 

 indispensable to form a distinction betwixt this honourable party, and 

 the revolutionary one, who insist upon a single legislative chamber, who 

 worship the convention with all its horrors as the perfection of energetic 

 government, and for whom liberty has no charms, except in that frenzy 

 of its first conquest and excitement. The Tribune is the organ of this 

 party, to which the needy and the dissolute, and all the outcast portion of 

 society is naturally ready. 



The great difference betwixt the principle of these parties, it is need- 

 less to dwell upon more minutely. One great distinction not to be 

 overlooked, is that, whilst the republicans of the American school 

 lay it down as a rule to support their views merely by the weapons oF 

 argument and free discussion, their brethren avow, that their best hopes 

 are placed in exciting the people to rise against what they please to call 

 the aristocracy, of not only the higher but the middle classes. Lafayette 

 says, " I am a republican, but my duty is to bow to the prevalent 

 opinion of my countrymen, as it is felt and expressed by the majority. 

 That majority has declared for a monarchy. I submitted and aided in 

 uplifting the Duke of Orleans to the throne. I am still republican, 

 still profess my principles upon paper and by word. Whilst in act, 

 every one shall find me a monarchist, that is loyal, and no plotter." 



