THE RUMOITR, IN PARIS. T HE extraordinary rumour current in Paris,
that "the Republic itself," or, in other words, the existing Government, may shortly take some violent step to "defend itself" against Reactionaries, is rejected in this country with too much haste. It is useless to study the affairs of one nationality from the point of view of another, and vain to deny that Liberals in France interpret the right of self-defence in a, very different way from Liberals in England. The Jacobins among them, and the "authoritative Republicans," as they call themselves, hold that if the State is in danger, proscription, even pro- scription by the guillotine, is permissible, and have no more scruple about arresting and deporting "enemies of the Re- public," than about closing clerical schools or turning Sisters of Mercy out of the national hospitals. Even more moderate and self-restrained Liberals think banishment by statute or by decree perfectly allowable, and this even when it involves a breach of direct pledges, such as the unmis- takable one which secures to every French officer his rank, unless deprived of it by a military tribunal. Liberals by no means noted for violence voted for the "expulsion of the Princes" and the degradation of the Due d'Aumale; and there are many not usually classed as fanatics—for example, it is said, M. Gravy—who would refuse to resist a project for sequestrating the possessions of the House of France. We by no means, therefore, think it improbable that if thoroughly alarmed by the success of the Reaction, the existing Government would listen to the counsels attributed by Paris, perhaps unfairly, to M. Jules Ferry,—that is, would arrest General Boulanger and some thirty other suspects ; would obtain from the Assembly some stringent "Law of Public Safety ;" and would then, amidst a tem- porary state of siege, carry through a Revision of the Con- stitution in a way which would leave the Chamber avowedly or virtually the only Sovereign in France. That is the plan which those intend who are perpetually saying that the Government must display itself, that the Republic must be energetic, that "the enemy" must feel "in their full rigour" the laws by which Republics, like Monarchies, are entitled "to anticipate treason." These things are actually said by grave men, and we can see nothing in the recent history of French Liberalism to make us believe that such counsels would be rejected by the majority of the Chamber with disgust.
Whether any such project has actually been entertained, of course time alone can decide. Denials are as valueless as affirmations, for every coup d'etal is denied until it has actually been struck, and those who affirm are necessarily relying upon information rarely to be trusted. Reasoning from this distance, we should be inclined to doubt if the plot had gone beyond the stage of more or less dreamy discussion, because it would require the sanction of the President, who is believed to be a legalist ; because the Government has hitherto not displayed either the necessary energy or the required unscrupulousness ; and because the Army, though it might obey orders, as hitherto it has always done, can- not be supposed devoted to the Chamber. There is no name in which to appeal to the soldiers, who detest M. Ferry's presumed fancy for colonial conquests, and the Deputies en masse excite neither loyalty nor enthusiasm. The Commandant of the garrison of Paris is no doubt a Republican ; but it is the unwritten law of the French Army that in dangerous times there must be no "Spanish ways," and that the barracks must act to- gether; and any doubt about the Army would compel the Government to keep rigidly within the law. Still, it is certain that when, during the Presidential election, it was thought the Opportunists might adhere to M. Ferry, extra- ordinary military precautions were taken to protect him, and that Reactionaries of all kinds, headed by General Boulanger, announce everywhere and publicly their belief in "a plot" for their destruction. They are accused, of course, of inventing the rumour; but it is much more probable, if they are wrong, that they are deceived by their own excitement. What have they to gain by representing themselves as in danger of an arrest which, unless they were immediately released, would pro- bably bring all waverers to the side of the Government, and perhaps throw back their cause for years ? General Boulanger, it is true, professes to like the idea of a coup (Petal against him ; but he knows his countrymen, and cannot point in the history of the century to a single movement against a violent policy at once spontaneous and successful. If, as we think, he really believes his own story in essentials,' and is honestly indifferent, it is because he knows that the Republic cannot rely on the military chiefs to carry out any policy beyond the law. He may be utterly wrong—we think he is—but he is not inventing. We express our inability to reject so utterly the idea that the Republic may be betrayed into violence, without, of course, feeling the slightest sympathy with the course rumoured to be under discussion. Revolutions are too sterile in France to excite in us any hope, and a Repub- lican coup d'etat, supported by military force, must be fatal to the Republic. It must leave the substance of power in the hands either of a Dictator or of the Army, and neither in France will long consent to tolerate a truly representative Government. It is too slow, to begin with, and it criticises too much. The Person, as Cromwell called him, at the top is expected to rule for himself ; and no free Parliament in any country will let the Person rule. The depositary of power, too, whether M. Jules Ferry, or General Boulanger, or General Mirabel, now in command at Nancy, would be distrusted by all Europe, and would be compelled in self-defence to guide his policy by the ideas and wishes of the Army. Freedom would be, in fact, suspended, and bitterly as the Republic has disappointed us, we cannot wish that France should pay the inevitable price for her follies and offences in a military tyranny. There is, moreover, no moral excuse whatever for such a coup d'etat, which is defensible only, if at all, when all other means have become impossible. The Government is in full possession of power, is supported by the Chamber and obeyed by the Army, and can in full security take any. steps it pleases against treason. If the Cabinet has evidence that treason is intended, it can appeal to one of the most severe laws in the world, and to Courts which certainly have never betrayed any bias against authority. French methods of resistance are not Irish methods ; and if there is evidence against the Reactionary chiefs, the Government would be as sure of convictions as if it named the jury. Nothing, moreover, prevents it, if it is sure, yet cannot produce legal evidence,. from asking the Chambers for more power, or even pro- ceeding by statute, as it did in the case of the " Pretenders." That course is, in the eyes of Europe, an oppressive one ; but still, it is legal, and so long as the law is not violently broken, a regime of moderation and freedom may be speedily re-established. If, however, the Government should be so wretchedly ill-advised as to violate the law out of panic, there would be no hope, for a Government which exists by tbe help of the soldiery must speedily become soldierlike, and soldiers demand and need a Commander-in-Chief. The very raison d'être of Republicanism would be gone. There must be some logic even in Constitutions ; and logic requires of a Republic that it should be bound by law, and that its control should be vested in the representatives of the people. If, on the other hand, the Government has no evidence of treason, and is only satisfied that Reaction is advancing and will ultimately win, then a coup d'etat of any kind, besides being a crime, would be a direct denial of the right of the people to self-government, an assertion that the Republic was sacred, even if approved of only by a caste. That is not self-government, and the Government which is not dependent on the people is not, in spite of all the phrases that may be used about it, a Republic. We trust that a step so rash, not to say so insane, is as impossible as some devoted Republicans declare it to be but we have as little confidence in the self-control of the majority of the Chamber as we have in their disposition to self-effacement, or their announced desire for thrift.
Previous page
