THE DISSOLUTION IN FRANCE.
THE conduct of the Government of France in the matter of the Dissolution has been most unsatisfactory. Our readers are aware that the root of bitterness in that country is a profound belief on the part of the Republicans, who now re- present a majority of the population, that the Administration is not honest as to the Constitutional Laws. It has allowed them to pass, but it is believed to detest them, to hope that it may never be compelled to put them. in force, to trust that some accident may render it impossible to put them into exe- cution. It is seeking, it is said, for excuses for delay, and with this object avails itself of the secret reluctance of a majority of Deputies of all parties to vote their own political extinc- tion. If the Assembly can only be prevailed on to waste time in talk, and take long holidays, and leave inevitable business undone till December, there may not be time left sufficient to pass the inevitable Bills—the supplementary Budget, the Electoral Law, and an imperative Military Law—to elect the Senate, dissolve the House, and get the Constitution in marching order by the time specified in the Constitutional Laws,—namely, the first week in February. The new two- headed Assembly can only legally meet in that week, and the Government, in view of that regulation, may plead for another delay of a year. Whether this suspicion is well or ill-founded may be doubtful, but it is certain that it is entertained, that it menaces public peace by driving all Liberals to despair, and that it is prinvi fauie justified by the recent action of the Government. The Ministry first of all allowed the Assembly to appoint a Committee on the Prorogation, which recommended that the Assembly should prorogue itself to November 16th, a date which would render Dissolution this year nearly or quite impossible. It then on Thursday, resisted a proposal, brought forward by M. Raoul Duval, to fix the date for October 17th, and defeated it after a struggle by 360 to 327; and finally announced, by way of appearing moderate, that it had pressed the Committee to fix November 4th, and intended to support that proposition. So dangerous did it seem, however, to the Chamber, that it might have been defeated, but that M. Dufaure, the Minister of Justice, and a man believed to be both truthful and friendly to the Con- stitutional Laws, ascended the tribune and stated that the 4th November would leave time for the Dissolution. He had gone over the question of time with M. Jules Simon before the Committee "with a pencil," and he was sure. If on their re- assembling the Deputies, after reflection, believed the Dissolu- tion expedient, they could dissolve. If the Government be- lieved, it, they would propose Dissolution, and if not, they would state their doubts, hesitations, and fears. He might say, without trespassing on the independence of the House, that if Government advised Dissolution they would have a majority, and if they deemed that course expedient they would assuredly use their power. All this can have but one meaning, —that the Government, for some reason or other, is deter- mined not to pledge itself to a Dissolution, and is inclined to leave itself barely time to make the necessary preparations. It may, of course, be actuated by motives of which the outside world knows nothing, for instance by fears of external com- plications, rumours of which, as usual when Paris is agitated, are again beginning to arise. But it is not surprising that in the absence of any evidence as to a new cause, the public, re- membering the President's distrust of Liberalism, the Premier's declarations of sympathy for Bonapartists as one of the national parties of the country, the strong Napoleonic feeling entertained by many great officers and officials, and the reluctance visible everywhere frankly to acknowledge the Republic should see in these needless and artificial delays proof that the Government is at heart dishonest, that it would welcome any escape from the new Constitution, and that it would be happy if it could postpone its organisation till some new and great event changed the current of men's thoughts. The Republic, it is feared, though proclaimed, mayyet slip through, and be superseded by some form of Dictatorship, whether called an Empire, a Decennate, or a Monarchy. The suspicion thus created is most bitter, so bitter that it may by possibility offer the best chance of escape for France. The majority may be convinced by their consti- tuents that they must carry out the Constitutional Laws, or run the risk either of insurrections' or-of one of those explosions of opinion which Governments in France are powerless to re- sist, because they would, if neglected, be followed by insurrec- tions. Should this occur, the Assembly has left itself just time, by neglecting all other work, to carry out the Constitu- tional arrangements, and dissolve ; but should it not, there seems no reason why it should not delay Dissolution until
driven by menaces to dissolve. A more unsatisfactory prospect it would be difficult to imagine, and it has been produced by the usual French difficulty of inducing statesmen to accept the country as a master, and not as a necessary but ill-informed despot, whose will, when it cannot be resisted, should be evaded or turned aside. Through the whole of three months, from 4th August, the date of adjournment, to 4th November, the date of reassembling, France is left with- out a working Constitution. A quarter without an event is unusual in any country, and in France the man who expects it must be pronounced sanguine to folly. The Executive is left without. a check, and if the Pre- sident appoints M. de Broglie and M. Fourtou Premier and Minister of the Interior, gives them two months to manipulate the Departments, and then suddenly presses the Dissolution, he will have done nothing contrary to the law. He will only have convinced the Republicans once more that moderation and fair- play are useless, that only Republicans can be trusted not to cheat the Republic, and that honest Liberals must perforce advocate the greatest evil to which Liberals can lend themselves, —a policy of ostracism.
Previous page
