TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE REPORTED "CRISIS" IN FRANCE.
THE Paris correspondent of the Tines is not to be trusted when he is writing of the Panamists. He is so possessed with the idea that to probe the corruption recently raging in France will be injurious to the State, that he tries to overthrow every Government which shows a tendency towards merciless exposure. The Government of M. Bourgeois is clearly honest in its attempts in that direction, for it has reopened the Panama inquiry, it is prosecuting those accused of bribery in the matter of the Southern Railway, it has arrested Arton, believed to be the grand intermediary between " capital " and the Chamber, and it has actually made a new treaty of ex- tradition with Great Britain in order to get at information as to Baron Reinach's proceedings, supposed to be in the possession of Cornelius Herz. The Times' correspondent therefore wishes to compel the Cabinet to resign, and knowing that his published opinions greatly impress French politicians—often with reason, for M. de Blowitz is among the shrewdest of mankind—he represents that the French Premier is risking a collision between the Chambers, that a Dissolution is impossible, that there will be a deadlock, and that consequently there may be a cry for Revision of the Constitution, or a mob-uprising, or a coup d'etat by a Pretender, or, in short, a Revolution with all its dangers and disasters. The thesis is pursued with such art that the respectables of Paris tremble under it, that Ambassadors become atten- tive, and that the President is urged, if M. Bourgeois will not resign, to dismiss his Ministers, and so prevent any descent into the streets.
We believe very little of it all. There is a clear " collision " between the Senate and the Cabinet, but that is no reason for drawing such alarmist deductions. M. Bourgeois, as we have said, means to expose the bribe-takers ; and his Minister of Justice, M. Ricard, finding that the examining Magistrate intrusted with the inquiry, M. Rempler, was slow or lax, or, like many most reputable Frenchmen, averse to creating a grave political scandal, which, as such men think, "dig- honours France," transferred the immediate conduct of the case to another lawyer whom he could more completely trust. That was technically, no doubt, an "interference of the Executive with the course of justice," but it has been done times without number in France, and but that the inquiry affects politicians no one would have said a word. The Senate, however, took the matter up, and being full at once of timid men and of the Opportunist party— the one supposed to be most smirched—passed a vote of censure on M. Ricard. The Premier was annoyed at this, refused to dismiss M. Ricard, and asked the Chamber for a general vote of confidence, which was given by an over- whelming majority on Monday, and repeated, though with diminished figures, on Thursday evening. He therefore refuses to resign, alleging, as Ministers constantly do in England, that the confidence of the direct representatives of the people is a sufficient reason for going on. Thereupon it is alleged that the Senate is " belittled" and deprived of its constitutional power of dismissing Ministers, that it must repeat its vote, and if M. Bourgeois is still obstinate, must reject all his legislative projects on the ground that constitutionally his is a "dead Ministry." The only legal course would then be for the President to demand a Dis- solution, and as the Senate would refuse one, there would b3 a deadlock, and consequently, in a land of Impatients, a resort to violence with unknown results.
It all sounds very logical, but it brings no conviction to our minds. We doubt if the Senate is the kind of body to push its legal powers to extremities. The Senators are no doubt jealous of their position, they are anxious not to probe Panamism too deeply—for one reason, because if the Supply Departments are at all corrupt the conscripts might be irritated, in which case the prairie might catch fire—and they would like very much to defeat the Income- tax Bill before it had been discussed. But they are sensible men with fortunes to protect, they are only indirectly products of universal suffrage, and they will be very reluctant to fight a fairly successful Government, the mot-, which is always against them, and the permanent chief of the Executive, all at once. We write at a great • disadvantage,—a few hours before their vote will be taken ; but we fancy before the debate is ended they will have found a way of qualifying their censure, or at all events- of making it inoperative. If they do not, the mob will infallibly accuse them of shielding corruption, and, how- ever conscious they may be of the cleanliness of their motives, that is just now a deadly accusation in France.. They will, we believe, shrink back before this danger ; but even if they do not we see no reason to apprehend a- political cataclysm. The President, who is said to be heartily in favour of investigation and of M. Bourgeois, has still the right publicly to ask the Senate to permit him to dissolve ; and with all deference to the wide knowledge which the Times' correspondent possesses of the class from which Senators are drawn, we do not believe that permission would be refused. M. Faure in such an event could only resign, and then indeed the crisis, with the two Houses quarrelling but forced to- sit together for a new election, would be a real one. The Assembly might be balloting for weeks before any candi- date obtained a clear majority. The people, too, would be seriously disturbed, and Paris might give expression to their dissatisfaction by an unarmed but still very em- barrassing demonstration. It is all very well to talk of the Senate's rights under the Constitution ; but when the Head of the State publicly declares that be must consult the people, the people are absolutely certain to approve- that consultation. You might as well expect to make a, Czar angry by asking him for a "supreme order" on an important subject, as to irritate a people by asking it to- vote. The Senate would therefore have against it the Head of the Executive, the responsible Government, the popular Chamber, the masses, and as we should imagine, the Army, for General Saussier's notion of his duty is to- protect the Republic, which could not be endangered by a Dissolution, and could be shaken by a period of legisla- tive anarchy. The Senators are not the men to resist that mass of force, or to continue the struggle to a point where anybody would benefit rather than themselves. They are a co-ordinate Chamber now, and it is certainly not as a co-ordinate Chamber that they would emerge from a struggle produced by their own obstinacy and desire to- avoid an inquiry which even the Executive Government demands.
Things might go differently if France were heartily sick of the Republic, or had before it a Pretender whom she would like to try ; but neither of those hypotheses rests upon any evidence. The mass of the people are contented enough with the Republic, which keeps the peace, which has secured a great ally, and which, though it spends too- much, gives education and protection to all, and opens careers to all in a way not yet witnessed in any other civilised land. They know that under it all power vests ultimately in their own hands, and they are as yet under no alarm vivid enough to produce a readiness to surrender their authority. What have they indeed to be afraid of? As to the charm of a Pretender, where is the Pretender who charms ? Is it the Duke of Orleans, half of whose followers have just "rallied" to the Re- public, or Prince Victor Napoleon, who, if elected, must at once declare war, in order to consolidate his throne ? Or is it the bourgeois President, so genial, and so con- ciliatory, who represents so admirably everybody in France, except her cultivated class, her peasants, and her artisans ? There is no Pretender visible, not even a General Bou- langer, and whatever changes are made must be made within the limitations produced by the antecedent condition that the regime must remain Republican. We do not believe that the changes will be great, or that the hour has arrived for anything like a serious political disaster in France. It is quite possible, and greatly to be regretted, that the corrupt will not be fully exposed, for the electors are not in earnest, and sent back all the Deputies accused of Panamism except M. Clemenceau, who was riot guilty ; but the existing system, though it has the seeds of decay in it, will last for some time yet. France has not been startled, and it is a startled France which pulls down her walls just to see if she would not be safer behind gilt. toppedpalisades.
Previous page
