firm determination to succeed? M. Thiers found no difficulty in bringing out the worst passions of the nation in less than nine months; bu to rouse what exists, and which is merely dormant from the want of opportunity to display itself, and to create new feelings, are different tasks. To preserve the peace of Europe, therefore, and to keep the French within reasonable limits, something more is wanting than an honest minister in France. We' do not unbind the hands of a lunatic merely upon his promise to be mild. We continue to watch him when he is unbound, and means are provided for his coercion if his malady should again assume a dangerous form. What is the republican fervour of the French but madness, and if M. Guizot be the mad doctor who keeps this fervour within bounds, are we to run the risk of outrage when the eye of the physician shall be removed, even if it be true that he has at present the power to restrain the madness which but for him would pass to its acute stage? The sovereigns of Europe are not so unwise as to receive the guarantee of M. Guizot for the conduct of the French nation, however great may be their respect for him. He can only bind himself. The security which they require is the want of means to do mischief, and by an European compact pledges may be exchanged between the different governments, including that of France, which should keep the French quiet in spite of themselves. In such a compact any thing short of the physical impossibility of breaking faith would be insufficient; but in a conference for the settlement of the equilibrium of Europe means may be contrived for restraining all the contracting parties for many years to come, from any of those demonstrations which would endanger the public peace. This is the consideration which should induce the other great powers of Europe not merely to invite, but even to insist upon the participation of France in au arrangement for the final settlement of the Eastern question. In settling that question, all the other points involving what is called the balance of power must also be discussed. Let not any improper intervention with the internal government of France be attempted, that would be unwise, not to say dangerous, in the excited state of parties there; but let the French nation at least be shown that it will not be permitted to propagate revolutionary principles elsewhere.

If the guarantees of the personal character of M. Guizot, and his means of obtaining the ratification of the people of France for his acts, are not sufficient for the powers of Europe, who have a direct interest in checking the restless and turbulent spirit of the French, still less satisfactory are the guarantees of the king. It is the misfortune of Louis Philip to possess none of those brilliant virtues which produce an effect upon a superficial nation,

VOL. XXVII. NO. LIV.

FF

whilst he possesses those which the French, of all nations in the world, can least appreciate. In any other country, the example which he sets to his subjects as a kind husband, a good father, and an excellent economist, would not be without its weight, and the influence of it would be increased by the success which has attended the display of domestic virtue in this king. In France, however, domestic virtues of any kind are little prized, even by the mass; whilst with thousands who never practise them, they are received only as a reproach. Even as a man, these bright shades of character in Louis Philip are much overclouded by vice. He is not merely economical: he is avaricious-avaricious to an extent which leads him to ingratitude and injustice. Ingratitude is a family failing of the Bourbons: Louis XVIII, acknowledged the hospitality of an Englishman, when that sovereign was in adversity, by a mere formal bow when he was upon the throne. Charles X. could find no more splendid present for an Englishman, whose house and purse were open to him when he was in distress, than a paltry engraved portrait. Louis Philip has, indeed, been rather more generous as to presents; but we have heard of more than one instance, in which he has refused to refund sums of money which were expended for him, as soon as his turn was served. The circumstances under which Louis Philip obtained the crown were not such as to command admiration or respect. He neither won it by his sword, nor was he entitled to it by his position; and in vain do his partizans endeavour to exonerate him from suspicion of intrigue. The party which sat him up is that most eager to pull him down; and those parties whose interests and feelings were outraged by the change in the succession, are, although from different motives, agreed as to the propriety of a further change. Louis Philip has, indeed, a party powerful both in numbers and wealth, by which he is protected; for nearly all who are connected with the industry of the country, and who feel that there is no security for industry without peace, naturally cling to a monarch who is regarded as the type of peace; but this party would abandon him to-morrow, if it saw the same security in any other candidate for the crown. Its attachment to Louis Philip is merely one of interest-it has no respect for him as a man. The conduct of Louis Philip since his accession to the throne has not been such as to win golden opinions, either from the unreflecting multitude, or the discerning few. He has offended the mass by his disregard of their external attributes of power-by which the mass is captivated; and no man of whatever party can reflect upon the connection between him and the Baroness de Feuchères without feelings of horror mixed with disdain. Everybody does not, indeed, believe, that

after the compact between the king and the notorious woman in question, by which she undertook to secure the settlement of the greater part of the fortune of the Duke de Bourbon upon one of the king's sons, she laid violent hands upon the life of that kind-hearted but infatuated old man; but there are few, who inclined to the belief that his death was the result of suicide, without the impression that it was produced by irritation and despondency, arising from the coercion which had been exercised over his mind, and regret that he should have consented to a donation in favour of a branch of the Bourbons, against which his profound aversion had been so frequently declared. The multitudinous sea cannot wash out the stain of this transaction from the character of the king. Without his cupidity, Madame Feuchères never could have ventured upon that exercise of power over the mind of the Duke de Bourbon, which, in the hypothesis of suicide, induced the act; and even the French, with their lax morality, have beheld with feelings beyond contempt, the partition of the spoil between their sovereign and the worthless person by whose influence it was obtained. God forbid that we should for a moment sanction the belief, that the Duke de Bourbon did not meet with his death from his own hand-but supposing that death to have been the effect of suicide, is the moral character of the affair which led to it at all changed? There are, however, thousands in France who believe that the duke did not destroy himself; and who refer to the evidence of his friend M. Rouen, as proof that such was not the case. M. Rouen, who resided near the duke's palace, was one of the first persons called in when the melancholy event had occurred; and from his opinion as to the position of the body, and other circumstances, the death was not voluntary. In a recent conversation on this subject, M. Rouen expressed himself nearly in the following words: "For many days previously, I had perceived that the prince was labouring under melancholy, and that he was evidently spirit-broken, which I could easily understand, from the coercion exercised by Madame de Feuchères; but never did I see anything to raise a suspicion in my mind that he would lay violent hands upon himself. I was with him on the evening preceding his death; we were playing at cards, and he was in better spirits than for some time past. I rose to take my leave at nearly twelve o'clock. The prince accompanied me to the door, shook hands with me, and said, 'Remember, Rouen, that you have promised to present your son to me to-morrow morning at nine o'clock.' Was this the language of a man who intended in a few hours to bid adieu to the world?"

The recent death of Madame de Feuchères has revived the remembrance of this melancholy event, in a manner fatal to the

reputation of the king as regards his possession of a portion of the property bequeathed by his will. Madame de Feuchères, whose share of it amounted to several millions, left the whole of

her fortune to a niece, to Has the exclusion of all other natural heirs.

and her desire to sink the remembrance of her

mentation of this niece one of the richest

18

In her own by heiresses in France, for the property was to go on accumulating until she should become of age-Madame de Feuchères omitted some essential formalities, and the will is declared null. It is now a question whether her fortune belongs of right to her natural heirs, or to her husband, the Baron de Feuchères. The opinion of most lawyers is, that the husband alone is entitled to it; and in this opinion one of the tribunals has concurred. The baron, who is a man of high honour, and who appears to have been ignorant when he married of the real nature of the connection between the lady and the prince, has formally announced his intention of declining any portion of a property obtained by such polluted means; and has, indeed, already transferred his right to various charitable establishments in France. What a commentary various charitable est is this upon the conduct of the king! The Duke d'Aumale, his son, is unblushingly allowed to retain his share; the Baron de Feuchères, a poor man, refuses to stain his hands with a partition of the spoil.

The affair of the

only one in whiSuccession of the Duke de Bourbon is not the

only one in which want of delicacy has been shown by the king of the French. The wanton exposure of the failings of the Duchess de Berri created a strong sensation against him, not merely amongst those who were disposed to view all his acts with dislike, but also amongst those who were his most determined palitical partizans. It was in his power to save both the reputation and the life of the Duchess de Berri; but he did not exercise his power over the latter until the former had been destroyed. Is it then to be wondered at, that the French should give credit to the charges of baseness and hypocrisy which are now made against him by the letters, real or false, put into circulation by Madame Saint Elme? What has he to oppose to these forgeries, supposing them to be so? His reputation for delicacy?-it does not exist. Be the charges

where, we ask, is the moral influence of such a man over the nation, to induce it to respect any guarantees which he may have given, or may be inclined to give to the other powers of Europe, for the sacred observance of his engagements, and the duration of peace

we ask for false, the odium will stick to him; and

It must be evident to all, that the moral influence of Louis Philip over the French nation is small; for a sovereign to com

to nitroq sto moi2292200 aid 2h18091 en mand respect in a people for the engagements which he contracts engagements peneral character, in their name, he must be himself respected for his general character, and for the good faith observed in the engagements into which he has entered with them. We have shown how little there is in the personal to command the esteem of the the st French. It may be replied, perhaps, that with such a people, personal example in the way of public virtue has little weight. This, to a great extent, is true: if Louis Philip had set an example of spoliation and propagandism as regards other countries, it would have been warmly responded to, for men are very willing to listen to the voice which urges them forward in the cou 2010 heir own passions approve they are they are not so willing to obey the example which tends the other e other way. But mankind, in general, and the French particularly, are not to be easily induced by the example of their rulers to do right; they are always ready enough to plead the absence of good example, when they are wrong. The most virtuous and generous-hearted man in the world, might find it difficult to govern the French nation by the force of example; but there are in France many thousands of enFrance many lightened men, who desire a change in the national character, and would promote the influence of good example in reign; and the personal character of a truly good man man could n be appealed to as the sanction of national outrage and wrong. As to the faith with which Louis Philip has kept his engagements with the French, we have only to refer to the circumstances under which he came to the throne. He received the crown from the Revolutionists, by promising that he would follow the programme which they prescribed. There was more virtue, indeed, in the breach than in the observance of this pledge; but to have given it at all, implies a readiness to gratify ambition, at the cost of probity, which does not tend to increase our admiration of the individual, whatever other claims he may have for our support; and whilst one party in France despises the ambition which led to the pledge, another is filled with animosity because it was not kept. Louis Philip received the crown from the hands of Lafayette, who, no match for him in finesse, believed that he would consent to be the president of a republic, with the empty title of king. Bitter was the disappointment, and deep-seated the anger of Lafayette, when the king had thrown off the tutelage under whose auspices he climbed to power to power. Tell the king," said Lafayette, when invited to dine with him after his assertion of of independence of the revolutionary party," that if Louis Philip has forgotten what he promised to Lafayette, the old Republican general has not." Europe has reason to bless the political profligacy of Louis Philip; and so, indeed, if the true interests of the French