fied with their rulers, and look for a remedy against the evils of bad government, they will find it but in one, which has never been provided for by human institutions--a resort to the ultimate right of all human beings, to resist oppression, and to apply force to preserve them from ruin.*

This is the relative position of the subjects of France, to the government of France. In the absence of a constitutional means of removing causes of dissatisfaction, their natural excitability leads them into insurrections, and the commission of intemperate acts upon slight impulses. It therefore becomes necessary for the government to adopt strong measures for the preservation of order; and if for the accomplishment of this object, they are compelled to violate a radical principle of liberty, it is a necessity which is incident to the form of government, and the character of the governed.

"What does the history of France show us?"--says Mr. Henry Bulwer, in the first series of his work on France, published two years ago--"The reign of a court--the reign of philosophers-the reign of a mob--the reign of an army--the reign of priests and a provincial gentry-a revolution effected at once by the populace, by the soldiery, and by the journalists-have any of these epochs sown the seed for a government of the 'bourgeoisie? Then there are influences arising out of the character and history of a nation. What are these in France? Female influence--military influence-literary influence--are any of these influences favourable to a government of the bourgeoisie?"

No--not one of these influences. Gay, witty and chivalricoften frivolous, but highly imaginative, the French people have more love for the poetry, than for the sober realities of life. This is the character of the great mass of the nation. We have said that the existing government is a system of peace and order— it is not based upon the character of the mass--it has no root in their affections, no power over their passions-their interest is not consulted, their imagination not excited, their vanity not gratified. The character of the "bourgeoisie," on the other hand, differs from that of the inferior and more numerous classes, in their comparative seriousness, their industry, their morality, their love of peace and order. Their pursuits are those of utility. The government of France is utilitarian.

It is, as Mr. Bulwer observes, a strong, a good government, founded upon principles which will probably give it stability; but for many years it cannot be popular with the mass. Napoleon sneered at England as a nation of shopkeepers. France is now rapidly approximating to that condition. The character of the government and the character of the people, are as yet at

* Judge Story.

variance with each other, and until time, by its insensible operation, shall reconcile these conflicting elements of the nation, "shall introduce the character of the nation into its institutions -the institutions of the nation into the character of the people," the position of the government will be one of much peril. The philosophy of the doctrinaires, with their system of rule, could not work-measures and expedients adapted to times and circumstances, and varying with them, must be used; and the affairs of the nation administered with a strength, sufficient to counterbalance the weakness which exists in the principle of government.

We now proceed to consider the remarks of Mr. Bulwer, upon the different classes of society; they are contained in the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of the second volume of the work whose title is at the head of this article. The object of our author, in the volumes before us, is to describe the social condition of France, under the influence of her existing political institutions; and seizing upon his leading idea, he has adopted, as he acknowledges, a somewhat ambitious, but nevertheless appropriate title-"The monarchy of the middle classes." Of the work itself we will merely remark, that it contains a mass of valuable information, doubtless collected with great industry, but thrown together without care, and apparently with little skill; presenting to the reader a confusion of elements, which his own ingenuity must arrange and classify-many of the pages are filled with light and amusing anecdotes, some of which we have heard before, and others, we will venture to say, no one ever heard, or ever would have heard, but for the rich imagination of Mr. Henry Bulwer. These are merely collateral to the main object of the author, like the by-play of a modern tragedy. Our limits will not allow us to do more, than thus briefly to refer to them.

"In France there is a middle class, not like the nation in America, not like the middle class in this country, (England), but a middle class composed of the ruins of an old, and the elements of a new, state of society. We see there, as in those strata of the earth, where we find the mingled fossils of animals, and of fish, and of herbs, some antediluvian, the traces of a mighty shock, which threw into unexpected companionship, things, once heterogeneous, and buried the witnesses of a former world in the womb of a present one. Not only did the revolution of '89 break down the fortunes which separate ranks-it broke down the habits. During that terrible reign, in which a noble name was a title of proscription, the lower classes lost all deference for the upper, and the upper all contempt for the lower.

"The feelings which, on either side, had kept the two portions of society apart, disappeared; and as the victories of the consulate succeeded, elevating the peasant to the command of provinces and armies, and carrying a successful soldier of fortune to the topmost pinnacle of power, even that halo which sheds itself upon the aristocratic mansion and princely palace, descended upon the cottage. High place and great con

sideration obtained by a quality, which, for the very reason, perhaps, that it is the most common among men, is the most commonly respected,-high place and great consideration-the consequence of successful valour-created a nobility without ancestors, and which had frequently its relations among the humbler orders of the people."

Since the revolution of 1789, the political condition of France has presented many aspects, each bringing in its train some new influences, and each leaving behind it, when its day has gone by, its mark upon the character of the people. At the period of that revolution, there existed in the kingdom a haughty and exclusive nobility, inferior in all respects to their ancestors: holding themselves aloof from the new society which was rising around it—fallen in condition-possessing no power—idle, dissi•pated, and vicious.

At this time, the influence of the middle classes was rapidly rising, their wealth increasing-they were full of ambition, and completely disgusted with the arrogance of a degenerate nobility. The doors of civil and military office were closed upon them— ́ colonial employments and church preferments were reserved for the lordly few.

The inferior classes, too, possessing no property themselves, were yet without that reverence for the lords of the soil, which still remains in many countries, a remnant, or rather a reminiscence, of feudalism. But the series of abuses which led to the revolution of '89, are too familiar to the historical reader, to require a recapitulation from us-nor is it necessary to our present purpose. The exaggerated notions of liberty, entertained by the actors in that revolution, drove them into the horrible extremes which deluged France in blood, and deferred the enjoyment of that genuine freedom, which the more moderate desires of the people secured to the revolutionists of 1830. The first was a revolution begotten by abuse, and carried out by popular enthusiasm, uncontrolled by reason. The second had its origin in the indignation of the people, but modified and tempered by the experience of 1789. The first resulted in a military republic, which itself resulted in a despotism. The second ended in a constitutional monarchy with a liberal charter.

All the historical changes in the nation, from the revolution of '89 to the consulate; from the consulate to the empire; from the empire to the "restoration ;" and from the government of the restoration, through the revolution of '30, to the government of Louis Philippe-if they had not so modified the character of the masses, as to render a government of the "bourgeoisie" a popular one, have at least given to the nation a tone of comparative thoughtfulness, which the operation of time will bring to maturity, and render the people satisfied with the existing order.

The government of Napoleon, although it excited in the people a love of action and a passion for military glory, and so far unfitted them for the sober business of life, nevertheless encouraged a love of political equality, and a hatred of that aristocratic policy, which closed the avenues to public distinctions upon all who wanted the influence which is derived from a line of noble ancestors. Birth had the strongest prestige under the old monarchies-merit under Napoleon-wealth possesses it under the present government. The middle classes of France, then, representing the property of the country, and having the greatest interest at stake upon the permanence of the government-it is its policy to give them the most powerful voice in the affairs of the nation. The judges are taken from them— the deputies, the juries, the municipal councils, all are taken from them.

Let us see of what materials this new influence is composed.

"The seigneur has fallen into this class-the servant has risen into it; and these changes have taken place, and this amalgamation has been brought about, not by the steady hand of time, that great but slow revolutionist, but by the running blow of fortune, which, altering the position of men, still leaves their manners and their memories.

"Thus though the middle class in France may, to a certain degree, represent what may be called the shopkeepers, still it does not wholly represent them; while the shopkeepers themselves are not, if I may so express myself, so completely shopkeepers as in other countries. They are more connected and more in the habit of mixing with other persons and other classes. They have less of frugality and caution, and more of elegance and luxury in their tastes and pursuits. They live in intimate companionship with the artist, the littérateur, the soldier; and feel no sort of barrier, either between themselves and those who have not yet risen into their sphere; or between themselves and those whose fortunes are superior to theirs."

It is for this reason, viz.-that they are not, in France, so distinct a class as in other countries, that Mr. Bulwer thinks them better qualified to perform the duties assigned to them in the nation. The different ranks are more mingled and thrown together, and therefore those feelings of caste do not exist to the same extent as in some other nations.

"Still, the man who has sunk from opulence to mediocrity, or the man who is rising from indigence to wealth, is equally partial to order and tranquillity; and here the middle class in France, though composed so differently from that elsewhere, is moved by the same impulse. Containing the soldier, it is averse to war; and springing in part from the lower ranks of the people, it is averse to revolution."

If these positions of Mr. Bulwer are correct, and we believe them to be so, the constituent power of the nation is confided to safe hands. Listen for a moment to Mons. Duvergier d'Hauranne, a deputy of the "juste milieu"-

"To whom indeed ought power to be given, if not to the 'bourgeoisie' of whom we speak? To the aristocracy? I am far from undervaluing the services that those classes have rendered in former times, or to deny the kind of historical pomp which still surrounds them. But the blindest must see that the time for an aristocracy has gone by.

"To the classes the most numerous and poorest? I know not, for my own part, if these classes will ever arrive at such a degree of intelligence, of civilisation, and of leisure, as will give them the power of governing instead of being governed; but this I know, that at the present time they are not arrived at this state of capacity: that at all events we must govern, not by them, but for them.

"To the middle classes, then, to the middle classes alone, belongs the government of France."

"The time for an aristocracy is gone by."-The principle of Mirabeau, as proposed in his celebrated declaration of rights before the national assembly,* has been carried through the charter of the "restoration," into that of the present government, and now stands in the firstt article of that instrument, the guarantee of civil liberty and political equality.

We say the guarantee of political equality, as contradistinguished from social equality, of which there exists as little in France as in any country of the universe. We will suppose a

case.

There lives in Paris a Mr. A-, a foreigner of immense fortune. He is burning with a thirst for fashionable notoriety. There is in that city a haughty and exclusive aristocracy, into whose circle he aspires to gain admission. This is the darling object of his life--the subject of his daily thoughts-of his nightly dreams. He possesses not the influence which is derived from noble birth, and he finds the doors of this magic circle closed upon him. Money he has, in abundance, and upon this he relies for the accomplishment of his purpose.

There lives, in a dark street of the gay capital, a noble duchesse of the old régime. She is poor. Her poverty amounts almost to want. She has barely sufficient to support existence. By right of birth, she is one of the clique of which we speak.

The restless eye of Mr. A- falls upon this duchesse. He seeks her out, and gains an interview-long negotiations follow-a bargain is struck between them. It is as follows.

Mr. A. is to hire, for the old duchesse, a splendid suite of apartments in the Faubourg St. Germain. These are for her separate and exclusive use, as a winter residence. He is also

* "Tous les hommes naissent égaux et libres; aucun d'eux n'a plus de droit que les autres, de faire usage de ses facultés naturelles ou acquises; ce droit commun à tous n'a d'autre limite que la conscience même de celui qui l'exerce, laquelle lui interdit d'en faire usage au détriment de ses semblables."

"All Frenchmen are equal in the eye of the law, whatsoever be their titles or ranks."