Senate Bill as a whole was passed, and the majority announced amidst a profound silence.

Then, without a moment's pause, the Assembly passed on to the third discussion of the Public Powers Organisation Bill. Again M. Raoul Duval interposed. He would have the law assert popular sovereignty. goes without saying," replied M. Lepère. The motion. was set aside.

"It

M. de la Roche

The text of the Bill was read. jacquelein made a solemn protest when Clause V. was reached: "You are making a Republic out of your hatred for the Empire," said he to the Rights, "and the Republic will lead you back to the Empire." He attacked the Right Centre, who though nominally Monarchical, had done nothing but prevent a Monarchy and found a Republic." He referred to October 1873: "The result is that those who wished to impose conditions upon the King meant to safeguard, not what in political language we call the principles and conquests of the Revolution, but a revolutionary spirit and revolutionary traditions." And, addressing the Duc de Broglie with cutting invective: "To vindicate in a few words the party to which I have the honour to belong, I cannot borrow more eloquent, more exalted language than the words of the honourable Duc de Broglie at the sitting of the 23rd May, 1873. 'To perish for a cause, holding the flag in one hand and standing at the foot of the ramparts, is a glorious death from which a party may rise again and which magnifies the memory of public men. On the contrary, to perish after having prepared, before suffering it, the triumph of adversaries; to perish after opening the gates of the citadel; to perish uniting the misfortune of being a victim to the ridicule of being a dupe and the regret of being an involuntary accomplice-that is a humiliation

which carries away with it the good name at the same time as the life of a statesman.'

The Duc de Broglie sat silent.

In spite of M. de Colombet, in spite of M. Raudot, Clause V. was voted.

On Thursday, the 25th, the sitting, presided over by M. Martel, offered the same determined aspect on the Left benches. The Rights protested in vain.

A new wording was given to Clause III., regulating the powers of the President of the Republic. M. Raoul Duval asked for the opinion of the Government. The Government, through M. Grivart, declared that it accepted the text proposed by the Committee and adopted by M. Wallon. Carried. "We are being strangled!" exclaimed the Duc de La RochefoucauldBisaccia. "It is a scandal!" cried the Marquis de Castellane. M. Raudot shouted amidst the tumult. Nobody heard, nobody listened. The majority was immovable. Every clause was adopted without discussion.

Now for the Bill as a whole. The hour was a solemn one. The Assembly was about to decide the fate of the country and its own name in history.

M. de la Rochette voiced the Legitimist protestation. He predicted the worst catastrophes. "Our country is very unhappy; it has gone through many sorrows, many reverses. . . . The Monarchy to-day would mean salvation; to-morrow it will mean deliverance. . . . Do not lose the memory of your kings. . . . You will return to them. From them shall your ultimate succour come."

The old Comte de Tocqueville, the son of the illustrious author of La Démocratie en Amérique, rose, on the other hand, to approve the energetic decision of the majority. "A man of my age has a right to be heard. Our country is tired of revolutions, tired of too many dynasties. Forget your divisions, your preferences, and

give us at last the rest and security which in the Republic alone can be found." The Marquis de Franclieu, M. de Belcastel, addressed a last supplication to the Assembly, M. de Belcastel, in a fine burst of oratory, beseeching it to pause in its course. But it was of no avail. By 425 votes against 254, the Law was carried. The Deputies stood up, groups mingled with groups; the rumour of conversations filled the vast hall which had seen the festivals of the Monarchy and now saw the birth of the Republic.'

The majority comprised the Lefts, the Right Centre, and a few members of the Moderate Right. The minority comprised the Right, the Extreme Right and the Bonapartists. The members of the Cabinet, save M. Tailhand and M. Baragnon, had voted for. The Prince de Joinville, who had voted with the Right Centre at most of the preceding ballots, did not vote; neither did M. Jules Grévy. But all the leaders of the Right, including the Duc de Broglie, voted.

The latter hesitated until the last minute.

When the ballot was opened, he left the hall, and, leaning against the wall in the lobby, he remained deep in meditation. 'I hope you are going to vote, my dear Duke,' said one of his friends, coming up to him. 'Can I?' said he, and do you not think that my vote may be

1 The Duc Decazes wrote on the 27th February: "We have just completed a very painful business; if parties knew how to be fair and just, our friends would recognise that this Constitution records and sanctions our right to establish a Monarchy in 1880-if we have the strength and the means—and that it condemns us to give it up only if we are then, as to-day, forced to acknowledge our powerlessness.

"In other words, we have merely said that, if we could not establish the Monarchy, the Republic would tacitly profit by it. . . . M. de Belcastel made a fine speech, full of faith and spirit; but it would have been more worthy of him to have spoken the whole truth and to recognise that the inexorable pride of one man . . . had rendered barren and powerless our true devotion to the cause of a Constitutional Monarchy. May God forgive him! . . . " -(Private, unpublished document.)

looked upon as a sign of ambition?' His friend, seeing his hesitation, went for the Duc Decazes, to whom he said, 'The Duc de Broglie hesitates about voting.'

"The Duc Decazes came up:

Come, Albert,' he said, 'you must, for the good of the country. . . . The Marshal will be grateful to you.' And the Duc de Broglie voted.”1

The members of the Extreme Left, MM. Barodet, Louis Blanc, Escarguel, Madier de Montjau, Marcou, Ordinaire, Peyrat, Edgar Quinet, did not vote. They resisted the supplications of Gambetta, of M. ChallemelLacour. "In order to evade their persuasions," writes M. Barodet, "I took refuge in the lobbies." And M. Louis Blanc (p. 172) pictures à propos of Edgar Quinet, the poignant drama which stirred these men's souls. "He, too, resisted, but at what price! I can still see the illustrious old man sinking on his seat in such a state of emotion that tears ran down his cheeks."

1 Ernest Daudet, p. 52.

CHAPTER IV

THE BUFFET CABINET AND THE 1875 SCARE

I. Parliamentary inquiry into the Bonapartist plot.-Bye-elections.-The Cissey Cabinet resigns.-Formation of the Buffet Ministry.-The Duc d'Audiffret-Pasquier President of the Assembly.-Uncertain policy of M. Buffet.-The Assembly adjourns from the 20th March to the 11th May.-Gambetta's Ménilmontant Speech.

II. The 1875 scare.-Germany and Europe.-German Press Campaign against France.-Rumours of War.-The Duc Decazes appeals to the Powers.-M. de Gontaut-Biron and Herr v. Radowitz.-Steps taken by Count Schuwaloff at Berlin.—Prince Hohenlohe and the Duc Decazes.— An article in the Times.-England, Austria and Italy intervene.-Change of front in Germany.-The Czar in Berlin.-Russian circular to the Powers; peace secured.-Conclusions to be drawn from the 1875 incident.

III. The National Assembly resumes its sittings.-Bye-elections suppressed. -Complementary Constitutional Bills.-The New Committee of Thirty.— The Higher Education Bill.—The Nièvre election and the Committee of the Appeal to the People.-M. Buffet and the Left.-The Organic Law on the relations between Public Powers and the Senatorial Electoral Law carried. The 1876 Budget.-The Assembly adjourns from the 4th August to the 4th November, 1875.

THE

I

HE sitting of the 25th February had a sequel. The constitutional laws had been voted from fear of Bonapartism: the Bonapartists were immediately put on their trial.

The Assembly, exhausted by the length and importance of the debate, found enough strength, however, to sit down and to listen then and there to the report presented by M. Savary in the name of the Committee of Inquiry into the election of the Baron de Bourgoing in