212 



FRANCE. (HISTORY.) 



never been enacted, and the articles of the penal 

 code, which described certain offences, supposed to 

 be. similar to those with which the prisoners were 

 charged, not designating them as treasonable. The 

 managers of the impeachment asserted, in reply, that 

 the ministers had rendered themselves responsible 

 by signing the ordinances, and that the expulsion of 

 the royal family was only one consequence of their 

 criint 1 , from the punishment of which the accomplices 

 could not expect to escape, on the plea that the 

 principals had been condemned. On the 2lst, the 

 court found the prisoners guilty of treason, under the 

 fifty-sixth article of the charter, by having counter- 

 signed the ordinances of July 25, attempted to en- 

 force the execution of them by arms, and advised 

 the king to declare Paris in a state of siege, to sub- 

 due the legitimate resistance of the people. The 

 judgment then declared that, as no law had deter- 

 mined the punishment of treason, it belonged to the 

 court to supply the deficiency ; and condemned prince 

 Polignac to imprisonment for life, and to civil death ; 

 and Peyronnet, Chantelauze, and Guernon de Ran- 

 ville, to imprisonment for life, with the loss of their 

 titles, rank, and orders. See Prodis des derniers 

 Ministres de Charles X., 2 vols., Paris, 1830. 



While the trial was going on, the Luxembourg 

 was surrounded by a clamorous mob, demanding the 

 deatli of the prisoners, and threatening vengeance in 

 case the sentence was not satisfactory. As the trial 

 proceeded, and it began to be suspected that a capi- 

 tal sentence would not be pronounced, the violence 

 of the multitude increased, and every thing seemed 

 to menace a new insurrection. The troops and 

 national guards were kept under arms by night, and 

 bivouacked in the public places. The whole per- 

 sonal influence of the king and of Lafayette was also 

 employed to soothe the populace : still the number 

 and clamour of the mob became so alarming that it 

 was determined to remove the prisoners secretly to 

 Vincennes before sentence was pronounced. This 

 being accomplished on the 21st, the populace re- 

 ceived the annunciation of the sentence, on the next 

 day, without committing any actual violence, as they 

 had no direct object of attack. 



These disturbances were no sooner over, than the 

 question of the extension of the elective franchise be- 

 came a subject of division between the chambers and 

 also divided the ministry itself. The consequence was 

 the retirement of the keeper of the seals, Dupont-de 

 1'Eure, who was in favour of more extensive changes 

 than his colleagues in the ministry ; Odillon-Barrot 

 also resigned the prefectship of the Seine. The 

 chambers were, likewise, employed, at this time, in 

 the permanent organization of the national guard, 

 and were disposed to abolish the office of commander- 

 in-chief of that bo.ly, which had been created during 

 the summer, and bestowed on Lafayette. The in- 

 fluence of that illustrious patriot had been somewhat 

 diminished by the successful conclusion of the trials, 

 and the suppression of the riots of December, 

 results which his authority had contributed so much 

 to bring about, and the conservatists now became 

 desirous to get rid of those very men who had directed 

 the storm of the revolution, and calmed its fury. 

 Lafayette, therefore, perceiving the counter-revolu- 

 tionary tendency of the government, resigned his post 

 on the 24th December ; and count Lobau was ap- 

 pointed commander of the national guards of Paris, 

 tliat of commander-in-chief of the national guards of 

 the kingdom being thus abolished. Thus the party 

 of the movement, composed of many able and highly 

 popular men, was thrown into opposition to the go- 

 vernment, while the chamber of deputies, which, as 

 we have before said, had been elected before the 

 revolution, was disposed to look upon the ministry 



with jealousy, as partaking too much of the revolu- 

 tionary leaven. 



This, then, was the state of France at the close of 

 the year in which the act of the revolution liad 

 occurred. A new king, who was understood to have 

 no great regard for the " men of July," and who was 

 willing to end the revolution with the change of 

 dynasty which seated himself on the throne, had been 

 created by the two chambers, without any appeal to 

 the national voice. Those chambers consisted of 

 the peers, men in general attached to the old regime. 

 and enemies of the revolution, and of the deputies, 

 composed of a majority of men who had been inclineo 

 to oppose the arbitrary policy of the late government 

 as inexpedient and unsafe, and had so far yielded to 

 the popular call as to sanction the change of dynas- 

 ty, but had no wish to make further changes in the 

 constitution of the government. The courts of law 

 were composed almost entirely of friends of the old 

 order of things, many of whom had shown them- 

 selves the ready instruments of an arbitrary adminis- 

 tration in prosecuting the friends of freedom. The 

 body of the nation had, of its own accord, formed 

 itself into national guards, which chose their own 

 officers ; but it had never been accustomed to the 

 exercise of any political rights, and it now looked 

 to be admitted to the privileges of freemen. It 

 demanded the abolition of the hereditary peerage, 

 the extension of the elective franchise, and a new 

 organization of the municipal administration, in 

 which the nation should be admitted to take part. 

 In regard to foreign affairs, the patriots, or the move- 

 ment party, were urgent for a favourable answer to 

 the overtures of the Belgians. They complained of 

 the refusal to accept the crown, which had been 

 offered to the duke of Nemours, and they complained 

 equally of the interference of the French ministers in 

 preventing the election of the duke of Leuchtenberg. 

 '' When called upon," said Lafayette, " to explain 

 my notions of non-intervention, I declared that when- 

 ever the right of sovereignty was claimed by the 

 people, every intervention in the affairs of that 

 people should be considered as a declaration of war 

 against France. As to the union of Belgium and 

 France, I would not have stopped to inquire whether 

 it would be displeasing to this or that power ; I 

 would only have asked whether it was the will of a 

 majority of the Belgians to effect, and the will of the 

 representatives of the French nation to accede to, the 

 union." 



In the beginning of the year 1831, the public 

 mind continued to be agitated by conspiracies and 

 rumours of conspiracies of the Carlists, or partisans 

 of the exiled family. On the 15th of February, an 

 attempt was made to celebrate the anniversary of 

 the assassination of the duke de Berri ; and a print 

 of the young duke of Bourdeaux, his son, was crowned 

 with flowers. This foolish or criminal act rendered 

 Paris the scene of new riots. A mob collected and 

 entered the church, tearing down the crosses and 

 fleurs-de-lys , or emblems of Carlisrn. They then 

 sacked the archiepiscopal palace, and proceeded to 

 commit similar acts of violence ; and the government 

 were obliged to calm the excitement by causing the 

 fleurs-de-lys, and other obnoxious emblems, to be 

 removed from all public buildings. Another conse- 

 quence of this affair was the bringing in a bill for 

 the perpetual exile of the banished royal family from 

 France,which passed the chamber of deputies by a ma- 

 jority of 332 to 122, and the peers, by a majority of 29. 



On the 13th of March, the Lafitte ministry, which 

 had enjoyed neither the favour of the king, of the 

 conservatists, nor of the movement party, resigned, 

 and were succeeded by men of the former party, 

 Casimir-Perrier, president of the council, taking the 



