THE FRENCH TARIFF AND THE DUKE OF HARCOURT.

In the first of a series of articles I addressed to you in August last, Mr. Editor, I predicted, with great confidence, that the Prince Louis Napoleon Bonaparte would arrive at the sovereignty of France. There was at that moment so little probability of that event, that the good-natured smiled at my partizanship, and the rest ridiculed my credulity. But there are many in this country and abroad who distinctly remember, that in the summer of 1845 I stated my convictions, that on the death of Louis Philippe the Prince Louis was the only inevitable man to fill the gap, and save the state from anarchy.

There are two persons I may incidentally allude to-one, unhappily, no longer living-to whom I expressed myself on this point, with great emphasis. The one, the celebrated Emile de Girardin; the other, our lamented late chargé d'affaires at Paris, Dr. Martin. I am glad of this occasion to pay a passing tribute to the worth of this excellent person. His mind was of a high order, active, sagacious, and singularly retentive. His information was consequently large, various, and solid. Guided by strong democratic convictions, he was gradually acquiring knowledge, through the various and valuable channels that his position abroad threw open to his observation, that would have been of inestimable value to his country at a future epoch. Trained early to habits of business, he was assiduous and indefatigable in the discharge of his duties and engagements. His disposition was amiable, his manners unassuming, and his character upright and constant.— His sudden and premature death is a grief to his friends, and a loss his countrymen may justly deplore. To return. My interviews with him were frequent in the summer of 1845, in Paris; and in our discussions of French politics, I pointed out to him the contingencies that promised the restoration of a Bonaparte to the government of France. I often succeeded in impressing his clear American mind, divested of transmitted prejudices, of the plausibility of my views, but they were invariably dispelled by the opinions of the numerous distinguished individuals, French and European, with whom he was in daily contact. With great fairness he used often to say, "You may be right, and were I to adopt your present views of France, it is possible we might come nearer to agreement; but those better informed than either of us, laugh aloud at the chances of Louis Napoleon."

In the case of Emile de Girardin, his rare sagacity was for a moment troubled. I remember distinctly my conversation with him on this topic.― M. F. Gaillardet, so well known in this country, and then editor of the Courier des Etats Unis, whose fortunes he so rapidly raised by his unrivalled talents, was present at our interview. On hearing of my visit to the prisoner of Ham, M. Girardin plied me with questions touching my impres sions of his character. 1 gave them honestly and somewhat fully, and I don't know why I should conceal my motives in doing so. I was really anxious to rescue the mind of so intelligent a man, exercising a wide influence over public opinion, from the effects of the injurious calumnies that had been actively propagated against the Prince. M. Girardin was gravely surprised at my statements, and I endeavored earnestly to conciliate his prejudices; and for this further reason, that I saw with astonishment and despair

the criminal neglect, and even contempt of the government of Louis Philippe, for the condition of the people. My profound sympathy for their sufferings, which any lover of his kind may be permitted to indulge, enlightened me as to their sentiments, and I foresaw clearly the denouement preparing Without weighing the chances of the king maintaining his position, I never doubted the overthrow of his dynasty at his death. The convulsions that would ensue were plain enough from the vital interests that would then come in direct collision, which only a man, acceptable on national grounds, could possibly hope to harmonize. That man could be no other than a Bonaparte, for none other had equal claims on popular sympathies. With these convictions, it was my privilege, certainly as a traveller, to exchange sentiments with a powerful journalist, and enable him, from the chances accident had thrown in my way, to arrive at just conclusions of the events likely to overtake his country, or to derive from his opportuties more correct views for my own guidance.

M. Girardin listened to my remarks with profound attention. His clear, bright face clouded over at times, as confused images flitted across his laboring mind.

At last he sprang up, I remember, and paced the room with energy, exclaiming "Non, je ne vois pas ses chances."

"If you do not see his chances, pray tell me, Monsieur," I enquired, "what do see at the close of the King's administration."

you

This seemed to perplex him not less than the shadowy contingencies he had already been dealing with.

"I see on the death of the King," he replied with a great deal of firmness, "the Regency of the Duke de Nemours; the troops which will then inundate Paris, will, without difficulty, preserve order, and his government will be sustained."

"I am not at all of your opinion, M. de Girardin," I returned; "but if you will allow me, pray let me ask, what chance his government, unsupported by capacity or experience, and suffering from his extreme unpopularity, will have against the complaints of the people and the demands of public opinion, should he madly persist, as is his declared intention, in the retrograde policy of his father. Do you think it will last six months?" "Yes, I think it will for six months."

"And afterwards?" I persisted.

"Eh, diable," he replied, fairly bothered. happen then; those who live will see."

"I don't know what will

M. Girardin is a remarkable man; bold, energetic, indomitable; quick in his perceptions, rapid in his logic, and dauntless in promulgating his conclusions. If he failed in 1845, to probe the future satisfactorily, it may be inferred there were few, or none in France, who saw more clearly.

Nearly two years after, I spent several months in the French metropolis, my interest deepening daily in the windings and eddies of the political current, bearing on its troubled bosom the fortunes of an empire, the destinies of a whole continent. My mind was wholly absorbed with the eventualities of the future, and through its mists I thought I could descry the grim outline of a revolutionary nemesis, carrying in one hand a naked sword, and the scales of justice in the other. Was this a brain-bubble, or a true ghost," that cast its shadows before? Deep settled as were my forebodings, I sought to relieve or corroborate them by constant communion with the leading minds of France. Nor did I stop there, for I mingled with all classes and kinds of men; and from every strata of society and every source of information, I sought either confirmation of my views, or sufficient reasons for discard

ing them. The result left me where I started. I heard nothing but asseveration of the solidity of the government; saw nothing but the most wanton blindness to the actual condition of things. Among others, I remember M. Galignani, the well informed editor of one of the best conducted and widely circulated journals of Europe-Galignani's Messenger-who shook his head positively, and expressed his confidence in the star of Louis Philippe. And a very different, but equally estimable personage, Mr. Green, the American banker, who daily joined the bustling groupe of capitalists at the Bourse, and applied with them his anxious finger to the public pulse of the capital, and withdrew satisfied with its regularity; he, too, putting his faith in the outward security of affairs, was given to jocose railing at times, and bantered me with having eaten of some insane root that disordered my fancy. "If I thought, sir," he said one day, with sudden vehemence, "there was the smallest chance of your predictions coming true, I should at any sacrifice close my business and go to America at once with my family." It was marvellous, indeed, the singular confidence, I should say, infatuation, which possessed nearly all minds in the stability of the dynasty of Louis Philippe. To be sure, there were some esprits forts, men whose judgments were under no bias, and who. looked down roads where neither passion nor advantage drew them. These attentive and anxious men, whose rapid view stopped not at the barriers of the capital, but from the height of their own calm observation, threw their sharp glance over the whole expanse of France, and who, connecting the past and the present-cause and effect―hesitated not to nod their heads in grave assent to my doubts, and pronounced the future a blank. It may not have suited their position, or propriety, distinctly to say all they thought. The last words of Lamartine, as I bid him adieu in the spring of 1847, were significant: Les grands evenements se preparent. Nor should I neglect to do signal justice to the excellent Abbe Lamenais. This good and great man, drawing his inspirations from his earnest commisseration for the unhappy people whose oppression he has championed so boldly, and at great sacrifice; this genuine Christian pointed out, as though passing before his vision, all the frightful catastrophes that were fermenting in the bosom of time. Yet, marvellous, neither he, nor any, could discover in any quarter, a symptom that promised the return of a Bonaparte. An illustrious person said to me impatiently one day, "don't talk to me of Louis Bonaparte; believe me, were the Emperor to come back again, France would turn her back upon him!" What does all this mean? Can a foreigner, from occasional visits, have acquired better knowledge of France than her own statesmen possess, or am I quite unconsciously gifted with some preternatural power of second-sight, that penetrates where mortal vision is at fault. The mystery lies not so deep. I regarded things with the clear, strong gaze of an American eye, and not through the false lens of prejudice and interest, which distorts everything to the European view. The upper classes of France, at both epochs that I have named, enjoyed the power and wealth of the state; they believed themselves in permanent possession, and through every channel of influence, the press, the tribune, the exchange, they commanded, or bribed the constant repetition of this fallacy. They were their own dupes, and holding Paris, as they thought, under martial control, they believed all France to be helplessly under their feet. Amid the music of their feasts, or the noise of their orgies, they heard not the groans, nor heeded the execrations of their victims, the masses. At times, misgivings, no doubt, seized them like a night-chill, and contracted their nerves with fright; but they fell to counting the army,

*Great events are before us.

But

400,000 strong, and treble that number of staunch National Guards. there were two things they never took into calculation, which would have brought them as it did me, to different conclusions-truth, and the power of the people. An American abroad must not go to the journals of the day, if he would truly know the state of things. In England they represent a class; in France a coterie; in the rest of Europe, till lately, a despot. He must consult history first, nor be misled by the prejudices of the writer, for they are all bought, and have all falsified at so much a line from Charlemagne to now. Let him merely sift out the facts and infer for himself. When, thus armed, he had best go into the streets, dive into dark cellars, or wing his way to dizzy garrets, and talk with the people. He may then read books, speeches, and newspapers, and laugh at their presumption and ignorance, without falling into pit-falls, dug for the unwary, and which sooner or later become the graves of their own authors-vide, the Revolution of February last.

But what has all this to do with the title of this article? A great deal, as will be seen directly. To sum up, I have shown hastily, that "the best informed circles" in France had no anticipation in '45 or '47, not the least, of any change whatever, and least of all, of a revolution. Again, neither party, monarchical or republican, nor yet the most intelligent of their leaders, dreamt as possible amid all the vagaries of events, that Louis Napoleon would ever review the National Guard as sovereign of France. They would just as lief have expected the statue of the emperor in the Place Vendome to walk down the stairs of its own pedestal and set off for the Tuilleries.For my own part, once convinced that a revolution was inevitable, I could discover no other than a Bonaparte that would be called to head it. The people were resolved, when once more at work, to make a final riddance of Bourbons, younger branches and elder; to tear the whole dynastic tree up by the roots, and cast it into the fire-nothing less, perhaps more. Now, what was so likely, if only for the romance of the thing, and the masses like stage effects, if they are true ones, than that they would shout again that mighty name that startled Louis XVIII. from his sleep one night, and swept him over the frontiers of France the next day. Well, it has all come to pass. The heir of that name, how fantastic is fate, has entered the very portal to power, which the emperor passed, as he laid it down for ever. he is a tenant for a term of years, in legal parlance, of the Elysee National, Bourbon no more. But was it only in joke or in vengeance, or from deeper, sterner motives, that the masses of France, in spite of the frantic opposition of monopolists, sent him there? Does Louis Napoleon Bonaparte understand their meaning? This is a vital question; for wrapped up in it is his own destiny, and the fate of France, and the well-being of the world.

Yes,

There is nothing on earth I desire more to know, and there is nothing under heaven so worthy the prayers of every friend to liberty and humanity. Will it satisfy the popular hope to discourse most eloquent words? No; for Lamartine failed there, and who could out-tongue his oratory. Will it fill the popular craving to give splendid feasts to troops of hangers-on, that would make even royal profligacy remonstrate? No-again; for Marrast has tried that, and discovered that his ideas of a republic and those of the starving people agree not at all. Will it do, to do nothing? A third time. No-for Cavaignac, a good soldier, and a great orator, and who might have achieved immortality, sat cowardly still on his bench of " Executive Chief," and let monopoly govern whilst he was not ashamed to be its tool. Will so many examples of error, hypocrisy, and weakness, and their swift punish2

VOL. XXIV.-NO. CXXVIII.

ment, enlighten the President of France, and dictate his policy? I pray God it may. His course is plain, and the light of the past shines full upon it. It is embraced in a phrase: Down with monopoly, and up with the people. Let him fly this banner from the highest tower of his palace, and the shout that will answer it will give him nerve for his work, and strike terror to the vultures that have fattened so long on the nation's vitals. These are the men, who have spat on the name of Bonaparte, for they hated, because they feared it Oh! let them not be disappointed in their worst imaginings. To listen to them would be folly; to compromise with them would be ruin. Reform, then-real, evident and sweeping reform, that is the mission of the President. Politics, finance, and commerce, these are the labors the modern Hercules must undertake; it is in these fields of civil conflict that the new Bonaparte must win his victories, and where only the glory of Austerlitz can be surpassed. The task is immense, far greater than any his gigantic uncle ever performed, for he vanquished with the whole nation at his back, enemies from without; it is a different enterprise to contend with divided forces against traitors to the people from within. But, with five-sixths of the masses with him, who will oppose him? Why, every politician who loves power; every capitalist, who dotes on usury; and every manufacturer, who thrives on monopoly. With the wealth of the state in their hands, they will buy orators and journalists, who will rant lustily for their pay-sake-mere sound and fury. But the commercial aristocracy of France have not only the national wealth in their grip, but still hold the political power. What a farce is the new constitution of Armand Marrast & Co. It is worse; it is an impudent cheat that ought, nay will, stamp them as the most arrant political tricksters that this century of prolific fraud has sent forth. In the name of the people-what an outrage-the Bourgeois Aristocracy of the National Assembly ordained a constitution, which confers on its astute authors nearly all the powers of government. This deceitful instrument decrees a single assembly which monopoly can corrupt with its wealth or control by its talent. What laws will ever be contrived there, but for their own benefit, and the impoverishment of the people. It sets up for form's sake, an Executive, who has power to sanction legal pillage-none to oppose it. The judicial power is strictly limited to the confines drawn around it. There is only one kind of constitution under which the people are safe, and that is where each of the co-ordinate branches of government, the legislative, executive, and judicial, are equal and independent. Then, they serve as checks on each other, and their combination to oppress is almost impossible. The world has seen only one such constitution, and that is our own. All the rest have been contrived only to deceive and defraud the nation according to law. It is idle to employ other terms, for such chicanery should be boldly branded. Nor will I except from this denunciation the constitutions of Lycurgus, or of Solon; for both, whether they meant it, or not, placed the power of the state in the sole hands of the aristocracy. Hence the abuses which eventually overthrew them, as will happen in our day, to every European constitution now existing, the new French, and the old English included. Let the constitution of Armand Marrast be sent forth for ratification to the people, and he will learn that the day of jugglery is past in France. Its term is approaching, even in England. Here's political reform for Louis Napoleon; but only the beginning. As for financial reform-the field is too wide, even, to touch the threshold. I will return this way again. Now for commercial reform. This is the point I have been reaching, perhaps, by a round-about way. The present French Tariff is one of the iniquities that centuries of abuse has bequeathed to our times; but with this remarkable exception,