THE SITUATION IN FRANCE. FROM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.]
PRINCE Ne.roenon. has left for Naples. In spite of the denials of the Monileur no one doubts the political tendency of his journey. It appears certain that lie is empowered to settle with Victor Emanuel the terms of the ultimatum which, as we announced in our last letter, is to be proposed to the Pope by the Cabinet of the Tui- leries. This will bring the Roman question into a new phase. We persist in our opinion (and we believe we are well informed) that in case of a refusal the French troops will not be immediately recalled. The utmost we can hope for is the establishment for a time of a mixed garrison. But, in any case, the array of occupation would continue to hold Civita Vecchia. We have already said that we do not think Napoleon III. at all disposed to withdraw his troops from Italy without having obtained agood compensation. Of this we feel more than ever assured; and, if we are to credit the reports in circulation concerning the visit of the Queen of the Netherlands, we have grounds for believing that certain ideas of territorial aggran- dizement are constantly before the Emperor's mind. It is positively asserted that serious conferences have taken place with the Queen of Holland, that the proposal of a marriage between the Prince of Orange and the Princess Anna Murat has been discussed, and that the question of a division of Belgium was raised in regard to the settlement of the marriage treaty. This report, too widely prevalent to be without any foundation, and supported by a host of minor details, has convinced us that Napoleon III. has already profitably studied the conditions of the territorial indemnity which he might claim the day when his troops left Rome, and when, in consequence, he must cease to wield so strong a sway over the destinies of Italy. But it
may very well happen that the recovery of the King of the Belgians will disturb.all these fine projects, trumped up, it must be said, only in the expectation of his imminent end, and of the antipathies which might be provoked in a fraction of the Belgian population against his successor.
Prince Napoleon was prevented from being present at the opening of the International Exhibition in England by the grave political mission with which he was entrusted. It is pretended that this was not the only motive which induced him to postpone his journey to London. Ile Due d'Aumale, it is said, loudly expressed the satisfac- tion with which he looked forward to an opportunity of expressing to him, in the most striking manner, the supreme contempt which he entertained for his person. The report, they add, having reached the Prince's ear, he elected the road to Italy. True or not, the anecdote faithfully reflects the well-known character of the Prince, and is en- joyed in the drawing-rooms of Paris. The home news is of less in- terest than intelligence from abroad. The commission of the Legis- lative Body is slowly plodding through the budget. A deficit of 250,000,000 fr., or thereabouts, is certified in the " budget rectificatif " of last year. The discovery is very ill received, and the exorbitant Agures of the new budget of expenses is not of a nature to abate the painful impression produced. The Legislative Body, as well as the public without, seems very generally disposed to think that severe retrenchment in the expenditure would be a more appropriate remedy for the financial embarrassments of our present situation than the creation of new imposts at once onerous and unpopular. We can easily foresee, therefore, that the new financial plans of M. Fould,
i which have already been vehemently criticized in the bosom of the Council of State, will not be adopted without a lively opposition on the part of the Legislative Body.
We have had occasion more than once to touch upon the present condition of the French press. This position, which public opinion, too careless still of the liberty of writing, views with far less anxiety, than the bad state of our finances, is one of the most curiously dismal features of the actual regime. The dictatorial decree of 1852 which now rules over the press, does not allow the creation of any new paper without the sanction of the Government. The same authori- zation is required for all the changes which may arise in the staff of responsible contributors, editors, and even proprietors of a journal. The death or the retreat of any one of these suffices to put the existence itself of the paper in renewed jeopardy. We are not now talking of the right of warning, which, independently of any personal changes, places the journal at the disposal of the Minister.
Judging by the fashion after which M. de Persigny exercises this omnipotence one might be tempted to believe that he had studied the art of governing in the school of Turkish statesmen, rather than in the midst of those free institutions of England for which lie pro- fesses in theory such a noisy admiration. Four newjournals have of late been permitted to appear : but two of them, which will belong to M. Louis Jourdan, formerly editor of the Siecle, and to M. Gondon, once editor of the Univers,—will be in very suspicious hands. The other two will simply swell the ranks of the Government press. The equilibrium which the Government has laboured to maintain between the journals of different hues will not be broken, or, to be more accurate, it will turn to the profit of the Government. The same will equally be true, if as they pretend, authorization should be granted to a fifth newspaper, which is to be started by a woman, Madame de Solms, nee Bonaparte-Wyse (a cousin of the Emperor and a friend of Eugene Sue), whose socialistic principles and eccentricity have long since given her an unenviable notoriety. This journal might very well be the organ of the " emancipated woman" Vemnie libre), but would in no sense be that of liberal France.
The really liberal press, however, is exposed to the utmost jealousy of the authorities. Whenever a journal, whatever may he the pecu- liar bias of its editor, treats directly and exclusively upon political liberty, it is sure to meet with insurmountable opposition on the part of the Government. One of the most honourable and distinguished representatives of the democratic opposition, M. Emile 011ivier, failed last year to obtain leave to found a journal. Now, M. Leymairie the year before was refused the same authorization because several important members of the Orleanist party were to have helped to establish thepaper. To these instances we will add a few more of very recent date, which clearly prove what is the rule of conduct which the Government intends to pursue in the use of the absolute control which it has usurped over the press.
About a year ago authorization was asked to found ajournal under the title of La France Liberate by a society of men belonging to the Conservative constitutional party. M. de Persigny, who had just entered the cabinet, did not venture to deny the first request addressed to him in the name of the liberal ideas, which he declared bimself called upon to promote in the imperial policy. He confined himself to require that a second responsible editor, M. le Comte Angles, whom he deemed fit to give guarantees to the Government, should associated with the editor presented to him: This requi- sition was complied with, and the journal was about to appear, when M. Angles chanced to die. The next day the Minister notified to the proprietors that the authorization granted to them was withdrawn. The excess of power was clear. The Minister has the right, by the decree of 1852, to suppress an existing journal, to reject such and such an editor presented for his approval, but he has evidently not the right to withdraw from a journal which has not appeared the authorization which has been granted. The proprietors applied to the Council of State to annul the decision of the Minister. The Council will decide in a few days, but whatever its decision may be, it will not modify in fact the position of the journal, for the Minister
preserves the right of rejecting, one after another, all the editors that are presented to him.
Two other journals have endeavoured, with as little success, to in- troduce certain changes in their internal organization. The share- holders of the well-known Presse wished to replace M. Peyrat, the editor-in-chief, whose political line displeased them, and whose ma- nagement endangered the pledged material prospects of the paper. The necessary authorization was denied them. In vain they pleaded that the violent articles published recently by M. Peyrat, and especially those in which be lauded the judicial murder of Louis XVI., were not of a nature to conciliate the authorities. They were given to understand that the Government was not ill pleased to see a controversy waged, the result of which could only be to keep alive in the great body of the Conservative middle class the whole- some horror of the "Spectre Rouge," and that this was altogether more desirable than a liberal and constitutional oppositio'n, "all the more inconvenient" (according to M. Billault's well-known phrase) "in proportion to its moderation." Another journal, the Courier du Dimanche, is in much the same perplexity. 'Phis paper, which had been in its origin the organ of a coalition of the different shades of the Liberal opposition, and which for some time past had taken a more decidedly democratic turn, was edited by M. Ganesco, a Wallachian by birth, whose name is possibly known to your readers. Last year, M. Ganesco had been administratively kicked out (expulse) of the French territory by M. de Persigny after an article conceived in a somewhat lively vein of opposition. A little later he was allowed to come back and take the head of his journal. Then two months ago he was arrested preventively under colour of a plot against the State. M. Ganesco has only lately recovered his liberty, but not wishing any longer, it seems, to return to his editorial post he sold his share in the journal to his co-partners. When the latter presented themselves before the Ministryto accomplish the formalities required for thealtera- tion they were told that the Government meant to keep M. Ganesco where he was. M. Ganesco persists in his refusal to remain editor- in-chief, and to keep any share in the property of the paper. How then are,we to account for the determination of-the Ministry to force a situation upon him which he declines, and to compel his co-partners to keep him at the head of the journal It is confidently stated that the Director of the Press himself volunteered to explain the mo- tives of their conduct with singular candour : " It is much more easy for us," he said, "to act upon a journal, which has already been con- demned, whose editor is a foreigner and has been driven out of the country, then prosecuted upon a political charge of great gravity, than to influence a paper whose proprietors have never been compro- mised, and whose authority in the public mind would be all the greater for seeming to represent moderate and perfectly independent opinions." .
Here we have assuredly the true secret of the absolute regime in the matter of the press. If, as it is asserted, the proprietors of the Presse and those of the Courier du .Dimanehe carry the discussion before the tribunals, the revelations will be likely to prove of great service to public opinion. While the newspapers are going through severe trials, one of the most justly-esteemed writers of the democratic press, M. Eugene Pelletan, lies in prison, to which he has been condemned for a re- markable and courageous article entitled Liberty as in Austria. M. Pelletan has received in his prison the visits and testimony of sym- pathy of the most eminent men of all the fractions of the Liberal op- position. M. de Montalembert was one of the first to convey his congratulations to a writer who in other times had been his political adversary. M. Pelletan equally received a visit from AL d'Hausson- ville, which was marked by a curious incident. On presenting him- self to the director of the prison, M. d'Haussonville asked to be taken to' M. de Bourqueney. "M. de Bourqueney ?" quoth the director ; " we have no one here of that name. "Oh !" replied M. d'Haussonville, " forgive the confusion, Mr. Director; I mistake; I was thinking not of M. de Bourqueney, who said in the Senate that the press was less free in France than in Austria, but of M. Pelletan, who was condemned for having written it. Please to take me to M.
Previous page
