M. Thiers made a great speech on Mexico on Wednesday,
which reads rather dull to Englishmen. Its great point is that the Emperor made a blunder which he would not have made had the Chamber had the courage, through responsible Ministers, to resist him, an argument open to M. Rouher's retort that the majority in the Chamber assented to the expedition. Moreover, although had the Chamber been absolute, Mexico would never have been invaded, yet Italy would never have been set free, and the one deed must be set against the other. If we understand M. Thiess, the crime committed by Napoleon in Mexico was failure simply; had he succeeded, invasion would have become a noble act. That reasoning would justify the 2nd of December, and its habitual use explains the limits of M. Thiers' influence in France. He expresses and excites the popular selfishness, but he never touches popular sentiment. Now, in France at all events, it is sentiment, and not selfishness, which overthrows Governments.
Previous page
