From Agepedia

Jump to: navigation , search

FRANCE ; a country of Europe, situated between lat, 42° 20/ and 51° 5/ N., and Ion. 3° 51' E. and 9° 27' W., comprising an extent of 213,800 square miles, with a population, according to official returns, in 1827, of 31,851,545. According to the annual increase, it would be, in 1830, about 32,500,000. It is bordered on the northeast by the Low Countries, the Prussian province of the Lower Rhine, and Rhenish Bavaria; on the east, it is separated from Baden by the Rhine, and touches Switzerland and Sardinia; on thesouth, its boundaries are the Mediterranean, the Pyrenees, and the Bidassoa; the ocean bounds the rest. The island of Corsica, and the Hieres, in the Mediterranean, and the isles of Oleron, Re, Noirmoutier, BelleIsle, Dieu and Ouessant (Ushant), in the Atlantic, belong to France. The foreign possessions are of little value. They are, in Asia, Pondicherry and Karikal on the Coromandel coast, Yanaon in the northern Circars, Chandernagore in Bengal, Mahe on the Malabar coast, a factory at Surat, and some factories in Arabia, in all 179,000 inhabitants ; in Africa, Senegal, Goree, the isle of Bourbon, and some factories, containing 99,000 inhabitants ; in America, Martinique and Guadaloupe with its dependencies, Guiana, and the small islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon, near Newfoundland (see Colonies), containing 225,000 inhabitants. The territory is divided into 86 departments (q. v.), which generally derive their names from the rivers. They are subdivided into 363 arrondissements, 2844 cantons, and 38,339 communes. Each department is governed by a prefect, and each arrondissement by a subprefect. The cantons have no administrative powers. The communes are under a mayor. All these officers, with the counsellors of departments, arrondissements and communes, were, before the recent changes, appointed by the king. The empire under Napoleon comprised about 300,000 square miles,with 42,500,000 inhabitants, of which 28,000,000 were French, 6,500,000 Italians, 4,500,000 Flemish and Dutch, and 4,000,000 German. The principal mountains of France are, 1. The Vosges on the northeast. They are of a rounded outline, with gentle slopes, and afford much open pasturage. The highest summit is not more than 4500 feet high. 2. The Jura mountains lie to the south of these, and their summits rise to the height of 6000 feet. 3. Many Alpine branches intersect Dauphiny and Provence. (See Alps.) In the centre of the kingdom are, 4. The mountains of Auvergne, of volcanic origin, of which the Puy de Dome, the Monts d'Or and the Cantal are the principal groups. 5. The Cevennes lie to the southeast of the range last mentioned. Their highest summit is Mont Lozere (6510 feet). 6. The Pyrenees form the principal part of the boundary between France and Spain. (See Pyrenees.) These mountains divide the country into four great basins, the form and exposure of which necessarily have a great influence on their climate and productions. The narrow valley of the Rhine runs from north to south ; while the open basins of the Seine, the Loire and the Garonne stretch in a northwestern direction. The Adour rises in the Pyrenees, and washes the walls of Bayonne. The other rivers are principally tributaries. The Marne and the Oise fall into the Seine ; the Allier, the Loire, the Sarthe, and the Mayenne, into the Loire; the Rhone receives the Saone, the Isere, the Durance, the Am and the Sorgue; the Tarn and the Dordogne join the Garonne. The numerous branches of these rivers are joined by canals (see Canals, ii, 451), which form an extensive internal water communication. In respect to soil, the richest part of France is the northwest division, comprehending the provinces of Flanders, Artois, Picardy, Normandy and the Isle of FRANCE, where there is a deep, rich loam; about 18,179,590 acres in extent The valley of the Garonne is composed of a friable, sandy loam, with a calcareous mixture, and moisture sufficient for every purpose. This district contains 7,654,561 acres. The great valley of Languedoc is extremely prolific, though the soil is not so fine as that of the preceding districts. The Limagne, a valley of Auvergne, is considered to have one of the finest soils in the world. It consists of beds of earth, said to be twenty feet deep, formed from the decomposition of soft basalt. The calcareous and chalk formations are extensive. The chalk provinces are unfruitful in grain, but the genial influence of the sun allows them other riches. The calcareous loam on the borders of the chalk formation is more productive. In Bretagne, Anjou and Maine, are immense heaths. The landes are extensive tracts of sandy deserts, producing nothing but broom, heath and junipers. The most extensive are the landes of Bordeaux, twenty leagues in length by twelve in breadth. In the remaining provinces, gravel, or a gravelly sand, is the predominating soil. The woods and forests are estimated to cover a space of 18,795,000 acres. The principal are those of Ardennes, Orleans and Fontainebleau. The northern and western coasts are formed in a great proportion by immense downs or sandbanks, and, where the shores are formed by cliffs, they are seldom bold enough to be approached with safety. The harbors are therefore few. On the Mediterranean, the coast of Languedoc is very dangerous; but Provence abounds in good harbors. The culture, throughout the northern half of the kingdom, consists of wheat, barley, oats, pulse, and of late, much more than formerly, of potatoes ; in the southern half, corn (particularly maize), vines, mulberries and olives. The eastern parts, being more elevated than the western, have more rigorous winters and more ardent summers. Coal and iron are found in abundance. The most common fuel is wood. The superficial extent of France has been recently estimated by baron Bupin at 53,533,426 hectares, or 132,694,000 English acres, which are distributed in the following manner: Arable land,........22,818,000 Vinevards,.........1,977,000 Kitchen gardens,......328,000 Gardens and orchards, . . . 687,000 Miscellaneous culture, . . . 780,000 Olives,............ 43,000 Hops,............. 60,000 Chestnuts,..........406,000 Parks, groves, nurseries, . . 39,000 Copse wood, ........6,521,470 Osieries,........... 53,000 Pasturage,..........3,525,000 Meadows,..........3,488,000 Landes, heaths, &c, .... 3,841,000 Turbaries,.......... 7,000 Mines and quarries, .... 28,000 Buildings,.......... 213,000 Canals,............ 9,000 Ponds,............ 213,000 Marshes,........... 186,000 Roads, rivers, &c. ) a w nnn (unproductive), ]'o¦o W^U The value of capital vested in agricultural pursuits is estimated at 37,522,061,47(3 francs ; the gross annual produce at 4,678,708,885 FRANCs ; the expenses of cultivation at 3,334,005,515; leaving a profit of 3i per cent, on the capital. Previous to the revolution, the produce of the soil in France was burdened with an annual tax of about $95,000,000. The cultivators were chiefly metayers, or mere tenants at will, who supplied the labor while the proprietor supplied the capital. The rent paid was generally one half the produce. The cultivators also labored under a load of degrading and vexatious restraints and feudal oppressions ; thus weeding and hoeing were prohibited, lest the young partridges should be disturbed. The proprietors themselves were harassed by capitaineries, which engrossed all manorial rights as far as game was concerned. The game consisted of droves of wild boars and herds of deer, which the farmers were not suffered to kill, wandering over the country to the destruction of the crops. Then there was the corve'e, which fell very heavy on the laborers. But the conversion of the estates of the church and the nobility into national domains, and the sale of these in small parcels, and on easy terms, during the revolution, enabled the tenants to become proprietors, the number of which has more than doubled since 1789. The rotation of crops is but little practised in FRANCE, where fallows still hold a placein husbandry. The produce of wheat in the best cultivated districts, and on the best soil, hardly exceeds 18 bushels per acre: an English farmer expects 25 on the same extent. In 1812, the number of horses in France was 2,176,000; but, in 1819, the horses and mules together amounted only to 1,657,671: at present, the number is estimated at 2,500,000. The number of horned cattle is 6,973,000; of sheep, about 45,000,000. The total number of all kinds of poultry is about 51,600,000. The French are the best wine makers in the world. The Champagne, Burgundy, Claret, Hermitage (see the articles), are drank all over the world. For a long time, the choicest growths were in the hands of the church; and, in the frequent changes of property which have taken place since the revolution, many vineyards have deteriorated in consequence of bad management. The brandies (q. v.) of France are the best in the world. The value of the whole produce of wine and brandy is about 800,000,000 of FRANCs. The culture of the vine is supposed to have increased nearly one fourth since the revolution, owing principally to the small proprietors, each of whom endeavors to supply his own consumption by a little patch of vineyard. M. Dupin says, that many hectares of French territory are yet uncultiTated, merely for want of cattle to stock and manure them; that two thirds of the inhabitants are without animal food ; that more than one third subsist entirely on oats, buckwheat, rye, chestnuts or potatoes, and that the agricultural population is too great for the prosperity of France. Two thirds of the population is agricultural. Mr. Jacobs, who visited France in 1819, makes the same remarks. France possesses a soil and climate capable of furnishing her with all the raw materials of manufacture, except cotton. The manufacture of fine woollen cloths at Sedan was introduced under the auspices of Colbert. The machinery used was very defective until M. Chaptal engaged an English machinist to instruct the French artisans. Steam engines are rare ; the spinning mills being worked chiefly by water or by horses. The quantity of native wool manufactured in 1819 was 38,000,000 kilogrammes (of about2f lbs. each), and, in 1826, 42,000,000, with 8,000,000 of imported wool: the value of the manufactured articles was 265,000,000 francs ; of the raw wool, 105,000,000 : the quantity exported was about one thirteenth of the whole quantity manufactured. By the exertions of Henry IV, the mulberrytree was cultivated in all the southern provinces. At Tours, silkstuffs for furniture are chiefly manufactured; at Ganges, and other places in the Cevennes, silk stockings. Lyons is the principal place for silk manufactures of all kinds. Paris ranks next after Lyons. In 1812, the value of the raw material amounted to 45,560,000 francs, of which 22,000,000 were the price of imported silk. The value of manufactured goods, at the same period, was 107,560,000 francs; of which less than one third was exported. Forty years ago, the spinning of cotton by machinery was hardly practised in France. Cotton mills have been established within that period, and the manufactures of Alsace are now superior to those of England in the brilliancy of their colors. In 1812, 10,362,000 kilogrammes of cotton were spun by machinery, and, in 1825, 28,0Q0,000 of greater fineness. The cambrics, gauze and lawn of St. Quentin, Valenciennes and Cambray are among the most valuable products of French industry. Lace is made in great quantities. The whole produce of the linen and hemp manufactures is estimated at 200,000,000. In 1814,100,000,000 kilogrammes of cast iron were produced ; in 1825,160,000,000. Gilding and watchmaking are carried on, chiefly in Paris, to the annual value of about 38,000,000 francs each. Printing also employs a great number of persons at Paris. In 1814, the number of printed sheets was 45,675,039; in 1820,80,921,302, and in 1826, 144,561,094. Notwithstanding the low price of labor in FRANCE, the industry of that country cannot enter into competition with that of England. One of the circumstances which depress it is the want of internal communication by roads and canals. The practicable roads of France are not more than one third of the extent of those of England. The cross roads are few, and the great roads are not kept in good order. The length of the canals in France is not more than one eleventh of those of England. Another point, in which France is inferior, is in the use of steam engines, attributable, in part, to the deficiency of coal, or the difficulty of transporting it. The total force of steam engines in FRANCE, according to Dupin, is equal to that of 480,600 men ; that of England is equal to a power of 6,400,000 men. All the power derived from machinery of every sort, or from constructive ingenuity, and applied to purposes of industry in FRANCE, is only one fourth of the similar power employed in England. The commerce of France has been veiy much diminished by the loss of her colonies. The value of the colonial imports, in 1788, was 227,000,000 francs; in 1824, it was only 50,000,000: the exports for 1788 amounted to 119,000,000; in 1824, to 44,000,000. The total value of exports from FRANCE, in 1824, was 440,542,000 francs; of which 163,056,000 were productions of the country, and 277,486,000 manufactured articles. The amount exported to the U. States was 55,000,000, being more than that to any other country. The imports for the same year were of the value of 454,861,000 francs; of which 272,873,000 francs were raw materials for manufacture, 121,957,000 natural productions for consumption, and 60,030,000 manufactured articles. In 1824, the number of sailors in French ships was 328,489; of whom 26,649 were engaged in foreign commerce, 47,283 in the fisheries, and the remainder in the coasting trade. The navy, according to the budget of 1828, consisted of 36 ships of the line, 35 frigates, 8 steamboats, and 186 other vessels, and 14,963 officers and sailors. The army, in 1828, amounted to 233,770 men, and was recruited by voluntary enlistment and annual levies, every Frenchman of 20 years of age being bound to serve for a term of eight years. The receipts of 1828 were 1,037,104,491 francs; the expenditure, 1,035,415,552 francs. The impot fonder, or direct tax on land, the mobilier, on houses and furniture, the patcntes, on trade and profession, the window tax, stamp duties, salt tax, &c, are the principal taxes. The principal expenses were, for the civil list and royal family, 32,000,000; war department, 196,000,000; navy, 57,000,000; ministry of the interior, 92,721,400; of justice, 19,641,934; of spiritual affairs and public instruction, 35,000,000 ; of, foreign affairs, 9,000,000; of finances, 102,477,850; of collecting the revenue, &c, 137,512,551 ; arrearages of rentes, 201,357,867; sinking fund, 40,000,000. The receipts and expenditures, for the last nine years, have been as follows: Yea?. Revenue. Expenditure. 1821, 915,591,435 fr. 882,321,254 fr, 1822, 918,809,941 904,917,941 1&23, 914,498,987 905,206,653 1824, 909,943,636 909,379,360 1825, 905,306,633 904,732,072 1826, 924,095,704 915,504,499 1827, 915,428,342 916,608,734 1828, 1,037,104,491 1,035,415,552 1829, 986,156,821 908,186,158 The pub] ic debt is 3,000,000,000 francs. The estimated revenue for 1830 was 979,552,224 francs, and the expenditure, 977,935,329; but the recent revolution must have rendered this calculation uncertain. The system of public instruction, under the late dynasty, was subject to the ministry of ecclesiastical affairs. Previous to the revolution of 1789, there were 23 universities, of which the most celebrated was that of Paris. These were superseded by the central, primary and secondary schools. Under the empire, the university was organized, which, with some modifications, was preserved after the restoration. The university comprised 26 academies in the principal cities, each under a president, and containing several faculties and a college royal {lycee, under the empire). The system of primary instruction was discouraged by the Bourbons. In 1828, Dupin states that 15,000 communes were destitute of primary schools, and that 14,000,000 persons in France did not know how to read and write. The instiiut royal is divided into four academies. (See Academies.) Before the revolution of 1830, the Catholic religion was the established religion of the state. (For the numbers of the French clergy of the different degrees, in 1828, see the beginning of the article Ecclesiastical Establishments.) The number of the nunneries, at that time, was 3024, with 20,950 nuns. The Calvinists and Lutherans are differently estimated, at from 892,947 to 6,000,000; the Jews at 60,000 ; Anabaptists, Quakers, &c, at 4500. The present reigning family (since Aug. 9, 1830) is that of Orleans. The king is Louis Philip I, born Oct. 6,1773, and, previous to his accession to the throne, duke of Orleans; he received (1824) the title of royal highness. (See Louis Philippe I.) The house of Orleans is a collateral line of the late reigning family of Bourbon. This distinguished line is descended from the only brother of Louis XIV, Philip, duke of Orleans. The following have been the reigning branches of the Capet dynasty : 1. Hugh Capet (987), died 996; Robert, died l(fcl; Henry I, died 1060; Philip I, died 1108; Louis IV, died 1137; Louis VII, died 1180; Philip II (Augustus), died 1223; Louis VIII, died 1226; Louis IX (the Saint), died 1270; Philip III (the Bold), died 1285 ; Philip IV (the Fair), died 1314; Louis X (Hutin), died 1316; Philip V (the Long), died 1321; Charles IV (the Fair), died 1328:2. branch of Valois: Philip VI, died 1350 ; John (the Good), died 1364 ; Charles V (the Wise), died 1380; Charles XJUIA1Q ^VX) UlCU X^XKJKJ , WJUCUJ^O T o¦¦¦¦¦¦J U1CV1 1497:3. branch of Orleans: Louis XII, died 1515; Francis I, died 1547; Henry II, died 1559; Francis II, died 1560; Charles IX, died 1574; Henry III, died 1589:4. branch of Bourbon: Henry IV, died 1610; Louis XIII, died 1643; Louis XIV, died 1715; Louis XV, died 1774; Louis XVI, died 1793; (Louis XVII died 1795):[French republic, from 1792 to 1804 :Napoleon (Bonaparte), emperor of the French, from 1804 to 1814]:Bourbons restored by foreign arms: Louis XVIII, from 1814, died 1824; Charles, to 1830, when he was dethroned:5. new house of Orleans: Louis Philip I, with the title king of the French (roicitoyen). Of the dethroned Bourbon family, there are living the exking, Charles X; his son Louis Antoine, duke of Angouleme (late dauphin), born Aug. 6, 1775, married his cousin, Marie Therese, daughter of Louis XVI. The second son of Charles X, duke of Berry, born Jan. 24, 1778, married to Caroline, princess of Naples (born Nov. 5, 1798), was assassinated by Louvel, Feb. 14, 1820. His children are Marie Louise (mile. d'Artois, born Sept. 21, 1819), and Henry (Charles Ferdinand Marie Dieudonne), duke of Bordeaux, born Sept. 29, 1820, after the death of his father, late heirpresumptive. Charles and the dauphin abdicated in his favor, calling him king Henry V. The royal arms of France are the arms of the house of Orleans. The royal family continues to bear the names and arms of Orleans, and the duke of Chartres, eldest son of the king, takes that title. The members of the present royal family are, Louis Philip, king, married to Marie Amalia, princess of Naples, born April 26, 1782. Their children are, 1. Ferdinand (Philip Louis Charles Henry), late duke of Chartres, now duke of Orleans, born Sept. 3, 1810; 2. Louise Marie (Therese Charlotte Isabelle), mad. d'Orjeans, born April 3, 1812; 3. Marie Christine (Caroline Adelaide Francisca Leopoldina), mad. de Valois, born April 12,1813; 4. Louis (Charles Philip Rafael), duke of Nemours, probably now of Chartres, born Oct. 25, 1814 ; 5. Marie Clementine (Caroline* Leopoldina Clotilde), mad. de Beaujolais, born June 3,1817; 6. Francis (Ferdinand Philip Louis), prince of Joinville, born Aug. 14,1818; 7. Henry (Eugene Philip Louis), duke of Aumale, born Jan. 16, 1822; 8. Antoine (Marie Philip Louis), duke of Montpensier, born July 31, 1824. The nister of the king is Eugenie (Adelaide Louise), mad. de Orleans, bornIf the late changes become permanent parts of the system, it will be the most limited monarchy in Europe. The charter (see Charte Constitutionnelle) has undergone several important alterations. The principal are, that the Roman Catholic religion has ceased to be the religion of the state; the 14th article, which the Polignac ministry cited in their late attempt to overthrow the constitution, has been changed, so as to stand as follows," The king is the supreme head of the state ; he commands the land and sea forces, declares war, makes treaties of peace, alliance and commerce; appoints to all offices of the public administration, and makes all the regulations and ordinances necessary for the execution of the laws, under the responsible advice of his ministers ;'* any of the three branches of the legislature can propose laws; the chamber of peers may sit without that of the deputies only as a court of justice; peers may speak in the house at the age of 25 years; princes of the blood may sit in the house of peers without a special summons from the king; the deliberations of the peers are public ; the renewal of one fifth of the deputies every year is abolished; persons are eligible as deputies at the age of 25 years; the deputies elect their president without the concurrence of the king; and the electors choose the officers of the electoral colleges without the interference of the king (see Elections) ; articles 46 and 47 of the old charter, respecting amendments, and the adoption of the tax acts by the deputies, previously to being sent to the peers, are repealed, as is also article 56, exempting the ministers from impeachment, except for treason or extortion ; the prevotal courts are abolished ; the king takes the constitutional oath, not at the time of the coronation, but on his accession, as in England. Besides this, provision is to be made, by separate laws, foi, 1. the trial of offences of the press by a jury ; 2. the responsibility of ministers and other agents of power; 3. for the reelection of deputies promoted to offices with salaries; 4. the annual vote of supplies for the army; 5. the organization of the na o tional guard ; 6. the settling the rank of ali naval and military officers; 7. departmental and municipal governments, founded on the elective system; 8. public instruction provided for; liberty of teaching allowed to all; 9. the abolition of the double vote, and of the electoral candidates and their eligibility. The charter is intrusted to the protection of the national guard and the patriotism of the nation. §52 deputies voted on the subject of these changes, 219 for, 33 against them. The charter, with the " changes and modifications expressed in the declaration of the chamber of deputies," was presented to Louis Philip, who, on the 9th of August, 1830, took the constitutional oath; and thus the constitution octroyee (see Constitution) was changed into a real contract between the ruler and the people. The orders, under the Bourbons, were those, 1. of St. Michael, founded in 1469, and renewed in 1665; 2. of the Holy Ghost, founded in 1574; 3. of St. Louis, founded in 1693, since 1759 connected with an order of merit for Protestants; 4. of St. Lazarus, connected, since 1683, with the order of Our Lady of mount Carmel; 5. the religious order of the holy sepulchre of Jerusalem, founded in 1254 ; 6. the legion of honor, established by Napoleon, divided, since 1816, into five classes. French Decimal System. The decimal system of weights, measures and time, was introduced into France during the revolution. All measures and weights are reduced to one basisthe linear measure. This basis, called a metre, is the ten millionth part of one quarter of a meridian3 feet, 0 inches, 11 ytjfnj lines Paris measure, or 3 feet, 3 inches, fWo" English. This unit, increased or diminished in the decimal ratio, gives the other measures, which are designated by the name of the basis, with the Greek or Latin numerals prefixed. The Latin numerals express division; the Greek, multiplication. The former aredecern, 10; centum, 100; mille., J 000: the latterdeca, 10 ; hecaton, 100 ; Chilian, 1000; myria, 10,000. The following forms, therefore, are used (the word metre being always understood): 1. For the division : deci, y\y; centi, y^; milli, THW* 2. For the multiplication : deca, 10 times; hecto, 100 times; kilo, 1000 times; myria, 10,000 times. (The reader will observe, that all the names which express division end in i; those which ex, press multiplication, in a or o.) Thus, metre, 3.28 feet; decimUre, .328 feet; decametre, 32.8 feet, &c. The same process is applied to all other measures; and it is only necessary to know the relation of any given unit of measure to the basis measure, in order to be able to make the necessary reductions. These units of measure are1. Of square measure, the are^z. 100 square metres ; 2. of solid measure, the stere^zl cubic metre; 3. of measuresof capacity, the ZiYre1 cubic decimetre; 4. of weights, the gramme~the weight of 1 cubic centimetre of distilled water The following table will render the reduction of these weights and measures into the English, easy : The Metre is 3.28 feet, or 39,371 in. Are is 1076.441 square feet. Litre is 61.028 cubic inches. Stere is 35.317 cubic feet. Gramme 15.4441 grains troy, or 5.6481 drams avoirdupois. The old weights and measures of France were as follows :Long measure. The toise or fathom of France is equal to six feet French, the foot to 12 inches French, and the inch to 12 lines, each subdivided into 12 points. 76. French feet are nearly equal to 81 English feet; or, more accurately, 40,000 French feet, inches or lines, equal 42,638 English feet, inches or lines. Thus, one French foot equals 1.06597 English, or 12.78934 English inches ; and hence one English foot equals 11.26 French inches. The Paris aune was 46^J English inches. In the old French road measure, the lieue, or league, is two French miles, each mile 1000 toises; hence the French league equals two English miles, three furlongs and 15 poles. The French league, however, in different parts of FRANCE, has been applied to different distances. The marine league (20 to a degree) equals 2853 toises, or 6081 English yards ; and the astronomical league (25 to a degree) equals 2282fFrench toises, or 1865 English yards. The arpent, or acre of land, contained, in general, 100 square perches; but the perch varied in different provinces. The old French weight for gold and silver, called poids de marc, makes the pound or livre contain two marcs, 16 onces, 128 gros, 384 deniers, or 9216 grains. The French marc =3780 grains troy weight. For commercial weight, the poids de marc was likewise used, and the quintal of 100 livres=:108 lbs. avoirdupois, very nearly. Weights and measures, however, varied considerably in the different provinces. Corn measure was the muid of 12 setiers, 24 mines, 48 minots, or 144 bushels. Wine measure was the muid of 36 setters, 144 quartes, or 288 pints. This system extends also to coins. Some of the measures, however, have particular denomina tions. Among the measures of length, for instance, the millimetre is also called trait (line); the centimetre, doigt (fmger) o the decimetre, palme (palm); the decametre, perche (rood). Among the square measures, the hectare is called arpent (acre). Among the measures of capacity, the hectolitre, setter (12 bushels); the kilolitre, muid (barrel). In regard to money, the franc constitutes the unit. It weighs 5 grammes (4£ of silver, with an alloy of £ of copper), and is divided into decimes and centimes, 10th and 100th parts. The decimal system was also applied to the calendar. Each of the 12 months was composed of 30 days, and divided into three weeks (decades), each consisting of 10 days. At the .end of the year, five, or, in a leap year, six; intercalary days were added. The day was also divided into 10 hours, the hours into 100 minutes, and so on. Applied to the circle, the decimal division started from the quadrant, which was divided into 100 degrees (instead of 90), and these into 100 minutes, &c. History of France.I. To the Time of Charles the Bald. A confederacy of German tribes, having conquered the Lombards, assumed the name of Franks (the free). This confederacy extended from the mouth of the Lahn, down along the Rhine, and was composed of the Chauci, Sigambri, Attuarii, Bructeri, Chamavi and Catti. After several predatory expeditions through Gaul, in which they even passed the Pyrenees, they waged bloody wars with the legions of the Roman emperors Gordian, Maximian, Posthumius, Constantius and the Caesar Julian, in Gaul, in the island of the Batavians and in Britain, where, together with the Saxons, they supported the usurper Carausius. The Salians, inhabitants of the country on the Saale, were particularly distinguished. They penetrated to the Scheldt, and sustained a severe conflict with Julian. In the fourth centuiy, they became as formidable in the west of the Roman empire, as the Goths were in the east, and had already established themselves in Belgic Gaul, and on the Somme, when Clovis the Great, of the Merovingian race, put an end to the Roman dominion in Gaul, by the victory of Sois oil brought by a do\ this account, the received from the ] Christian king an church. The Mei tained the dominie Gaul and Germany sons of Clovis divid Austrasia and Neust Western monarchy into the kingdoms and Paris. They and Burgundy, but empirewhich pr< wars and family mu of the kings, and Saracens from Spai pire. But the pow mus (governors of t maires du palais) sti of the monarchy. ' dispossessed the I throne. Pepin of 1 tel, Charlemagne an particularly distingi of the second or Ca ristal made the Fris< frustrated the Moors quest, by the victoi tirely reduced the F Saxons to pay tribi extension of Christi Boniface, the apostli was still more favo Pepin the Younger. Ill was finally coi the purple for the n major domus Pepin with the consent of him sprung the Ca the crown of Fran< son Charlemagne e: from the Ebro to Saale and the Raat and the Eyder to tl pies. On him, tfr Germany and Ital} conferred (800) th which completed the separation of the German and Italian crowns from the French. Charles I, the Bald, obtained France. The history of the proper kingdom of France begins, therefore, with this treaty, in 843. (See Sismondi's Histoire des Francois.)2. From Charles the Bald to Hugh Capet (843-987). The decline of the monarchy began with Charles the Bald, who was obliged (877) to render the offices of counts and dukes hereditary. During his reign, the nobility acquired the prerogative of being summoned by the arrihre ban only when the whole country was threatened by the general enemies, such as the Normans and Saracens. The incursions of the Normans furnished the barons, who aimed at independence, with a pretence for building strong castles, which soon became the principal support of the feudal nobility, and the strong holds of the oppression which they exercised towards the nation. The royal power became a mere suzeraineti, or feudal superiority. Charles the Fat reunited, for a short time, the dominions of Charlemagne ; but he was deposed (887). Burgundy was separated from France, and Eudes, count of Paris, chosen king by the estates of France, on account of his great qualities. After a long war, Eudes was obliged to surrender the crown (897) to Charles the Simple. The Carlovingians continued to rule in France until 987 ; but the high nobility paid little regard to the royal dignity; they divided the domains of the crown among themselves, and the crown vassals (the principal of whom were the dukes of Francia, Burgundy, Gascony, Normandy, Aquitania (Guienne), the counts of Flanders, Vermandois, Champagne, Isle de France and Toulouse) finally made themselves masters of so many provinces, that only Soissons, Laon and some small districts, remained to the last of the Carlovingians. Lorraine was united with Germany. In this unhappy condition of the country, the importance of the ruling dynasty declined, until, on the death of Louis V (987), Hugh Capet, the powerful duke of the Isle de France, count of Paris and Orleans, ascended the throne. Charles, duke of Lower Lorraine, and uncle of Louis, was excluded from the succession, under the pretext that, as vassal of Otho, emperor of Germany, he could not become king of France; and the Capetian race (q. v.) occupied the throne of the Carlovingians. The government itself was a monarchy without strength, and limited by a feudal aristocracy. There were, besides a numerous civil and military nobility, 40 powerful vassals, descendants of those who had received shares in the distribution of the conquered territory, which they had rendered heredity as early as the reign of Charles the Bala the bearer of the crown only ruled as primus inter pares. The kings, therefore, were obliged to reconquer the prerogatives of the crown from these proud barons, until the itats gtneraux were finally established.3. The Increase of the Power of the Crown, and the Formation of the Feudal Estates (987-1328). The hereditary kings of the first Capetian line limited the power of the crown vassals, by uniting with a part against the remainder, and with the church against the lay vassals in general. In this way, they acquired the crown lands and royalties. The state itself, in the middle of the 12th century, contained only an area equal to about eight or nine of the present departments, with about 1,500,000 inhabitants. It included the cities of Amiens, Laon, Beauvais, Paris, Melun, Orleans, Nevers and Moulin ; so much were the proper possessions of the crown diminished by the encroachments of the imperious vassals. (The present population of this district amounts to 8,000,000.) At that time, 1. Thierry d'AIsace, count of Flanders, possessed, with sovereign power, 16 of the present departments, which now contain 5,600,00C inhabitants; 2. Thibaut, count of Champagne, seven departments, with the towns of Mezieres, Chalons, Troyes, Chaumont, Chartres and Blois, now containing 1,800,000 inhabitants ; 3. the duke of Burgundy, six departments (the duchy of Burgundy and the FrancheComte), which have, at present, a population of 2,000,000.4. All Southern France belonged to several sovereign princesthe counts of Toulouse, Languedoc, Lyons, Provence, &c.5. But the most important part belonged to the king of England, Henry II, who possessed 28 of the present departments, now containing 10,500,000 inhabitants. In this portion were Nantes, Bretagne, Gue ret, Limoges, all the provinces from the mouth of the Garonne to its source, from Carcassone to Bayonne, and Boulogne in the north. All these territories were destined to be recovered, successively, by the crown. The crusades favored this design, and, after the short administration of the abbe Suger, under Louis VI (die*I 1137), the gradual disappearance of bondage, and the rise of the free cities, prepared the way for the civil existence of tba people. Under Philip II, Augustus (1180 1223), the number of the pares regni was limited to six ecclesiastical and six iay vassals. Louis IX, the Saint (1270), by the introduction of a new administration of justice, gave new power to the crown. Another blow to the already declining power of the nobles was the introduction of letters of nobility in the reign of Philip III (died 1285). Still more important was the introduction, in the reign of Phihp IV, le Bel (died 1314), of the third estate (tiersStat), or deputies of the cities (3301), in the general assemblies of the clergy and the nobility. (See Champ de Mars, and Champ de Mai.) With the assistance of these feudal estates, Philip IV resisted the interdict of Boniface VIII and the clergy. The same Philip extended the jurisdiction of the parliament of Paris over all the crown lands. But the whole kingdom was still formed of discordant materials, and the cruel extirpation of the Templars (q. v.), 1314, is characteristic of an age in which justice was the victim of power.4. Military Power and Policy of Conquest in France. The Valois, the second branch of the male line of the house of Capet (1328-1589), ascended the throne with the consent of the states, in the person of Philip VI (grandson of Philip III). During this period, the wars with England kindled the spirit of revolt in the nobility, transformed the soldiers into robbers, and the suffering peasants into wild beasts. The king of England, Edwardlll, grandson of Philip IV of France, made pretensions to the French throne ; the Salic law, which excludes females from the throne, not having as yet been established as a fundamental law of the kingdom. WJile the conqueror of Crecy took Calais (1347), and compelled the captive king, John the Good, to resign Guienne and other provinces to England, by the treaty of Bretigny, 1360, France was plundered by banditti, and the Jacquerie, a mass of furious peasants (about 1358), satiated their spirit of vengeance in the blood of the nobility. Charles V, the Wise (died 1380), and his constable, the brave Du Guesclin, were able to restore order only for a short time. Then came, under Charles VI (died insane, 1422), the epoch of the Armagnacs. A. civil war of the crownvassals, conducted by Orleans and Burgundy, was stained by assassination, and the succession was settled on Henry V of England, soninlaw of Charles VI, to the exclusion of the dauphin, afterwards king Charles VII. Henry V died before Charles VI, and his son Henry VI, a minor, was acknowledged as king by the greater part of France, and crowned (1431) in Paris. At this time (1429), amidst the licentiousness of war, of factions, and of manners, a peasant girl (see Joan of Arc) animated the French in the cause of the dauphin, and the English lost all their possessions in France except Calais. During this period, the kings increased the extent of the crownlands (Philip VI, for example (1349), acquired Dauphiny); and the war enabled them to raise taxes without the consent of the states. Charles VII was the first who instituted a standing army (1444). From that time, it was the policy of the kings to obtain an unlimited authority by destroying the liberties of the states, and, at the same time, to turn the warlike spirit of the nation to foreign conquests. The despotic policy of Louis XI (1461-83), whose maxim was, Dissimuler c'est regner, obtained this object by violence and cunning. The 280 years' quarrel with the house of Hapsburg, which obtained the inheritance of Burgundy on the death of Charles the Bold (1477), originated during his reign. (See Netherlands.) On the contrary, his son and successor, Charles VIII (died 1498), obtained the hand of the heiress of Bretagne, and thus accomplished the union of that duchy with France. He then concluded a peace with Austria, at Senlis, 1493, and undertook the conquest of Naples (1494), to which he made pretensions as heir of the house of Anjou. Here began the schemes of conquest which armed the kings ot France against Italy, Germany and the Netherlands, and finally produced the modern political system of Europe. Charles was the last king of the direct line of Valois ; which was succeeded by the collateral branch of ValoisOrleans, 1498. The kindhearted Louis XII (q. v.) married Anne, heiress of Bretagne. He was a stranger to the Machiavellism of his predecessors, and the country was indebted to him for a paternal domestic administration ; but the ambition of conquest involved him in disadvantageous wars. He maintained the pretensions of his family to Milan, by taking possession of that duchy; he conquered the kingdom of Naples, which he divided with Ferdinand, the Catholic king of Spain; but his ally soon deprived him of his portion of the spoil; and in the war with the league formed against him by the pope, Julius II, whose confederates were Spain, Austria, England, Switzerland and Venice, he lost Milan and the supremacy of Genoa. His successor, Francis I (1515-47), and the son of the latter, Henry II, contested in five wars the power of Charles V and Philip II, and concluded an ineffectual alliance with the Ottoman Porte. On the other hand, Francis I united the duchy of Bretagne permanently with the crown, and rendered the royal power absolute ; whilst the powerful vassals accepted offices at court, and even the parliament began to yield to the wishes of the king. Henry II recovered Calais from the English (1558), and, in alliance with Maurice of Saxony, for the protection of the freedom of Germany, conquered the German bishoprics of Metz, Toul and Verdun. In the time of Francis I (q. v.), religious persecution opposed the progress of the reformation in France. During his reign and those of his successors, Henry II (1547-59) and Francis II (died 1560), Calvinists were burned in France; so little had the refinement of manners and the cultivation which flourished under Francis I, softened the ferocity of fanaticism. The foundation of the national debt, the weight of which broke down the throne 250 years later, was laid in this period. Intrigue and corruption gave to women a dangerous influence at court and in public affairs. Under the administration of Charles IX (conducted during his minority by the queenmother, Catharine of Medici), France was inundated with the blood of Frenchmen, shed in the religious wars from 1562. (See Barlhdomzw, St.) The haughty Guises removed the Bourbons, princes of the blood, from court, because they were Huguenots, and finally aspired to ascend the throne themselves. The feeble Henry III caused ihe duke of Guise to be assassinated, and his brother, the cardinal, to be murdered in prison (1588). This was the signal to the confederates at Paris, for the death of the king (1589). (See Henry III and IV.) 5. France, a European Power under the Bourbons until 1789. Two hundred years before the revolution, the first Bourbon of the Capetian race, Henry IV, king of Navarre, ascended the throne of France. He restored order, embraced the Catholic religion, and placed the Calvinists under the protection of the edict of Nantes (1598). Henry, aided by counsel of the wise Sully, labored diligently for the welfare of the state. The French now began to perceive the importance of colonial establishments: they founded the colony of Pondicherry in the East, those of Martinique, Guadaloupe and St. Domingo in the West Indies, and that of Quebec in North America. After the assassination of Henry IV (1610), French policy was wavering in the first years of the mi nority of Louis XIII, until the prime minister, cardinal Richelieu (q. v.), gave it a steady direction. He took advantage of the thirty years' war, to humble Austria and Spain. He created that domestic despotism in France, which rendered the government completely absolute, but finally occasioned the overthrow of the monarchy. The statesgeneral were assembled for the last time, 1614. The policy of Richelieu was carried to perfection by Mazarin. in the reign of Louis XIV. (See Louis, and Mazarin.) The peace of Westphalia (J648) gave France Alsace, the Sungaw, and confirmed her in the possession of the bishoprics of Metz, Toul and Verdun: the treaty of the Pyrenees (1659) with Spain united a part of the Low Countries, and the county of Roussillon, with France. After the death of Mazarin (1660), and the fall of Fouquet, superintendent of the finances (1661), Colbert (q. v.) raised France to a high degree of prosperity and refinement. He executed his splendid projects with an indefatigable activity. Louvois (q. v.) was at the head of the department of war; the generals Turenne, Luxembourg, Catinat, BoufBers, Vendome, bound victory to the banners of France; and Vauban girded the kingdom with fortresses. Thus Louis became powerful enough to dictate to the other powers of Europe in all important questions. But the revocation of the edict of Nantes (1685),* his interference in foreign affairs, and particularly in the Spanish war of succession (1701-13), destroyed the greatness of France. The ministers and generals of Louis were dead, and his cabinet was guided by his confessor, Le Tellier, and madame de Maintenon. (q. v.) On the death of Louis, 1715, whom, as well as Henry IV, the French call the Great, the national debt amounted to no less than 4500 million livres. He was succeeded by his greatgrandson, Louis XV, aged five years. The regency of the duke of Orleans, Law's scheme of finance, the administration of the infamous Dubois, the three years' ministry of Louis, duke of Bourbon, the admirable economy and honest policy of the venerable Fleury, the pernicious influence of the notorious mar* See the work of Rulhieres on the causes of this event, called Eclaircissemens historiques sur les Causes de la Revocation de I'Edit de Nantes et sur VEtat desProtestans en France, etc.;178S. France lost, particularly in the seven great emigrations oJ 1666,1681,1685,1688.1715,1724. and 1744., hundreds of thousands of industrious subjects, and a great amount of capital, besides experiencing great deterioration in point of morals. chioness de Pompadour, and the activity of the duke de Choiseul,these are the chief features in the history of a4 period in which the welfare of the kingdom and the happiness of the subjects became the sport of the vilest passions. The acquisition of Lorraine and Corsica, the changes in the colonial relations of France, produced by the peace of AixlaChapelle (1748), and that of Paris (1763), the war on account of the election to the Polish throne (1733), the war of the Austrian succession (1740J, and the war in support of Austria (1756-63), the suppression of the order of the Jesuits, the family compact of the house of Bourbon, the constantly increasing despotism, which was principally felt in the innumerable lettres de cachet, the distinguished names of Montesquieu, Buffon,Voltaire, Rousseau, &c,these are the subjects most worthy of notice in the reign of Louis XV, who, by all kinds of prodigality, by foolish enterprises, by his confidence in men who shamefully abused their trust, loaded the nation with oppressive taxes, and accumulated an immense mass of debt. (See the articles Louis XIV and Louis XV.) Much good was done under his grandson and successor, Louis XVI (1774-92; see this art.). But all that Maurepas and Vergennes, Turgot and Necker, did, were but palliatives of an incurable disease. By her participation in the war of the American revolution (1778-83), France hastened her own catastrophe. Necker left the difficult post of minister of finance, and Calonne, who followed him, succeeded for a "time in his efforts to conceal the embarrassments of the treasury. By his advice, the notables of the kingdom were finally assembled at Versailles (Feb. 22, 1787), to the number of 146; but they refused the proposition of the minister to introduce a landtax and stampduty. Calonne was dismissed, and Brienne, archbishop of Sens, succeeded him as prime minister. Brienne proposed economical reforms, with new loans and taxes, to cover the yearly deficit of 140 millions livres; the personal services of the feudal tenants were commuted into pecuniary supplies, and the king held a lit de justice, to compel the parliament of Paris to register the taxes proposed by Calonne, to which the BC tables had refused their consent. The jiarliament resisted with firmness, and was exiled to Troyes. It was soon after rerelied, but refused to register a loan of 440 million livres. The exile of the duke of Orleans, who was at the head of the peers, and of two members of parliament, hadno other consequence than a declaration of the parliament against the abuse of the lettres de cachet; upon which the king decreed the suppression of all the parliaments, and the introduction of a court of justice depending on his own will (cour pUnihre). This work of Brienne and Breteuil excited universal displeasure. The parliament of Rennes declared infamous whoever should accept a seat in that court. The people saw the constitution of the kingdom violated in its most vital parts, and never before spoke with such ardor and sympathy of the freedom of North America. Montesquieu, Voltaire, Diderot, D'Alembert and Rousseau were read, and analyzed, and their bold ideas placed in contrast with the actual state of things. The real state of affairs could not remain secret to the prime minister: he therefore yielded to the wish of the nation, and proposed an assembly of the statesgeneral: at the same time, he received his dismission, the king confiding solely on the personal reputation of the famous Necker, who was now recalled as superintendent of the finances and minister of state. He found in the treasury of France only 419,000 livres in cash! His first steps were the restoration of the parliaments, and the convocation of the notables anew (Nov. 5,1788), in order to adopt measures relative to the organization of the statesgeneral. The tiersetat received a representation equal in number to that of the two privileged orders, the nobility and the clergy, and the parliament requested from the king an equal distribution of taxes among all orders, the liberty of the press, and the suppression of the lettres de cachet. Hereupon the statesgeneral were summoned on May 1, 1789, the first time for 175 years. The election of deputies excited a violent agitation throughout France, and the epithets friends or enemies of the people already began to be pronounced at raris. The assembly was opened by the king at Versailles, May 5, with a speech from the throne. The question whether the votes should be given individually, or by orders, led to violent debates. The tiersetat,m the ranks of which was Mirabeau (q. v.), assumed (June 17th), on the motion of the abbe Sieyes, the title of the national assembly; a part of the nobility and the clergy united with it, andthe revolution was begun.II. France from 1789 to 1814, or the French Revolution fy JYapoleon. With the changes which time introduces in the character of society, new principles of social order are continually introduced, and every great change occasions a painful struggle. The middle ages established the principles of feudalism ; the present age is democratic. The struggles attending the introduction of democratic principles on the European continent began in France, and, perhaps, have not yet ceased there, certainly not in the other states of Europe. France has led the way in the political reformation of the European continent, as Germany did in the religious. This is the light in which the French revolution is to be regarded: that it took so very malignant a character was owing to particular circumstances; to the nobility and* clergy quite as much as to the people. The French revolution forms a most important epoch in the history of society. Whoever considers it as the effect of chance does not understand the past, and cannot see into the future. It was not the accident of a day that razed the Bastile, and tore in pieces Maupeou's edict relating to the parliaments; it was not the deficit, nor the convocation of the statesgeneral, that annihilated the feudal monarchy; even without the double number of the tiersHat, the revolution must have taken place. The deficit was not the cause, but a symptom; the same policy which had produced that deficit would have soon produced another, for prodigality is the companion of despotism. Hatred of oppression roused the people to revolt; they stormed the Bastile; they might have been dispersed with the bayonet ; but they would have destroyed that dungeon sooner or later. Permanent tranquillity could not have been restored by supporting oppression and tyranny, under cover of artillery; it was necessary that they should be overthrown. Louis XVI might have dispersed the constituent assembly at the point of the bayonet; he could not have rooted out the ideas of liberty from the hearts of his subjects. It was not merely the men of the last half of the 18th century; it was old abuses, passions and prejudices that produced the revolution. The French revolution must needs be considered in a double point of view, as the consequence of execrable abuses, and, at the same time, of the developement of the human mind; or, in other words, of knowledge, which always has a democratic tendency. The favorers of old abuses may say that this or that circumstance or individual was the cause of the whole revolution ; this is the way in which the conquered party always reasons ; and we have no doubt that Polignac believed the revolution of 1830 to have been occasioned by the fault of some par ticular person, under him. Its leaders were not its authors; they were only its instruments: the true authors of the revolution were the imbecile, the tyrannical and the criminal monarchs and ministers of France ; Louis XIV and his prodigality, his unprofitable wars and his dragoonades i The real authors of the revolution were an absolute government, despotic ministers, a haughty nobility, rapacious favorites, intriguing mistresses, and the indignation thus awakened, assisted by the general spirit of inquiry characteristic of the age. But if the French revolution finally assumed such a malignant aspect of anarchy as was evinced in the policy of the Jacobins, of selfishness and cruelty, to the almost total extinction of moral sentiment, on whom does the guilt of these excesses lie ? Had not priests educated the people which overthrew the throne? Had not ministers and courtiers, statesmen in the purple of cardinals, princes who assumed the name of roues (rakes), and ladies of the court, poisoned the manners of the capital by their example, from the times of the regency, and seduced the nation into impiety and profligacy ?* We shall o treat the revolution under the following divisions:1. From the Constituent .Assembly to the Establishment of the Republic (June 17,1789 Sept. 21,1792). The national assembly consisted of 616 deputies of the tiersMat, 317 of the nobility, and 317 of the clergy. The opposition against the throne itself, of which the feudal system was considered the basis, rose gradually from the contest of the nonprivileged with the privileged orders, of popular rights with the feudal prerogatives of the nobility and the clergy. When the representatives of the people continued their session, contrary to the order of the king, and pronounced the solemn oath (June 20th) never to separate until they had given a constitution to France ; when the tiersetat (June 23) asserted its rights in the royal presence; when the king was compelled to order the nobility and clergy to unite with the tiersMat (June 27), then the ancient royal authority was lost. If these concessions of the king had seemed to render his concurrence in the wishes of the nation probable, the irritation was, therefore, the greater, when an army* of 20,000 men was assembled under marshal Broglio, and Necker was suddenly dismissed. The tocsins were sounded, and, on the refusal of the king to* The Memoires du Due de Lauzun desciibw the profligacy which prevailed before tne revolution. dismiss the troops, an insurrection broke out in Paris, where the people were inflamed by the harangues of Camille I)esmoulins (guillotined April 5,1794). The Bastile was taken (July 14,1789), the national guard established, and put under the command of Lafayette, and Louis was compelled to recall Necker, to withdraw his troops, and to adopt the tricolored national cockade; whereupon, in the session of Aug. 4, after the feudal system, on the motion of the viscount de Noailles, had been unanimously abolished by the assembly, Louis was proclaimed the restorer of French liberty. In the midst of this tempest, the declaration of jthe rights of man was adopted, and the emigration (see i&migris) of the nobles and the popular excitement daily increased. The famine in Paris created a fermentation, which the banquet in the operahouse of Versailles exasperated to fury against the court and the queen. October 5, an immense multitude of people proceeded from Paris to Versailles, and, on the 6th, compelled the king to remove, with his family, to the Tuileries. He was followed, on the 19th, by the national assembly, who were preparing a free constitution for the state. The division of France into 83 departments; the declaring the estates of the clergy, estimated at 3,000 millions, national property; the alteration of the former title of king of France and Navarre into that of king of the French; the establishment of clubs, among which that of the Jacobins became the most powerful; the adoption of the new constitution by the king; the civil oath, " to be faithful to the nation, the law, and the king, and to maintain the constitution ;" the romantic celebration of the fete of the federation on the ChampdeMars (July 14,1790),were the principal events in the first act of this great revolution. The fixing of the civil list for the king (25,000,000 livres yearly); the conversion of the royal domains and the ecclesiastical possessions into national possessions; the suppression of hereditary rank and titles; the confiscation of the convents, and the grant of pensions to their tenants; the decree that the clergy should take the civil oath ; the erection of a supreme national conrt of justice, to try the offence of treason against the nation ; the abolishing of the taxes on leather, oil, soap, starch, salt and tobacco; the removal of the excise (douane) from the interior to the frontiers; the establishment of the land tax, of licenses for carrying on trades, of the fees for stamps and records; and the creation of assignats, according to the proposal of Mirabeau,these were the principal acts of the national assembly in the first period. The second act of this great drama begins with the decree of the assembly, that the king should not remove more than 20 leagues from Paris, and that, in case he should leave the kingdom, and refuse to return on the invitation of the assembly, he should forfeit the throne. The burning of the pope in effigy, at Paris, gave the signal for the revolution in religion, and the club of the Cordeliers (the party of Marat, Danton, &c.) inflamed the hatred of the king among the people. Louis now fled from Paris; but he was brought back from Varennes (June 25, 1791). He was hardly able to appease the irritated nation by accepting, in the assembly (Sept. 14), the new constitution of Sept. 3, 1791, by which he was declared commanderinchief of the army and navy, with a cabinet of six ministers, to assist in the administration. The constituent assembly separated (Sept. 30), and was succeeded, Oct. 1, 1791, by the legislative assembly, after the members of the first had agreed not to allow themselves to become members of the seconda circum" stance to which very serious consequences 'are ascribed. Meanwhile, the number of emigrant nobility and clergy increased. Among them were the brothers of the king, the counts of Provence and of Artois, prince Conde, with his son and grandson, the dukes of Bourbon and of Enghien, and the marshal Broglio. They assembled French troops of the line at Coblentz and Worms, and were joined by several German princes (Wiirtemberg, Deuxponts, Baden, Darmstadt and Spires), whose dominions in the French territory of the empire had been incorporated with France in the new organization, and were not restored, notwithstanding the intercession of the emperor, and the declaration of the diet, that this measure was a violation of the peace. France, however, offered to make compensation. The fear of the example of France, of the influence which its enthusiasm for liberty and equality, and the activity of the Jacobins, might have on other nations, and the sympathy of the other sovereigns in the fate of Louis XVI, led to the project of saving the Bourbons, and extinguishing a flame which threatened the general conflagration of existing institutions, by an armed interference. The declaration of Pilnitz, by Austria and Prussia (Aug. 27, 1791 \ to the brothers of the king, was only general and conditional. The assembly proclaimed its peaceable intentions, and de clared that France would never undertake a war of conquest. This only increased the hatred of the nobles and the cabinets against the new order of things in France. Louis's declaration to the foreign powers, that he had freely accepted the constitution, was of no avail. Russia and Sweden entered into an alliance (Oct. 19,1791) for the restoration of the emigrant princes. In vain Louis wrote to recall his brothers, and issued decrees against the emigrants ; they continued, their levies of royalist corps, under the protection of the German princes and of Russia. When the alliance of Austria arid Prussia (concluded at Berlin, Feb. 7,1792) was known in Paris, the war party gained the ascendency in the legislative assembly, and war was declared against the king of Hungary and Bohemia (April 20, 1792), on the motion of Dumouriez, minister of war. July 14, 1792, Russia joined the coalition against France, to which Hesse and Sardinia had already acceded, and the German empire became a party to the same in the year 1793. During this war, the Jacobins gained strength in Paris. They meditated the overthrow of the throne ; their influence predominated in the assembly; their attack on the Tuileries (Aug. 10) decided the victory in favor of the democracy. (See Petion.) The unfortunate Louis was. suspended by the assembly, as a traitor to the country, and imprisoned, with his family, in the Temple. The popular fury was raised to the highest pitch, when it was known that the Prussians had penetrated into France, and that Lafayette had left the army. It began to ue suggested that the most dangerous enemies of liberty were in the capital itself. Hence the bloody 2d and 3d Sept., 1792 (similar to the day of the Armagnacs, June 12,1418), in which a band of human tigers massacred several thousand prisoners. At Rheims and other places, similar scenes of horror occurred. The oath of the assembly (Sept. 4), "swearing hatred to kings and royalty, and that no foreign power should ever be suffered to dictate laws to the French," was followed by the decree of the national convention, which took the place of the second national assembly, Sept. 20, 1792, declaring the abolition of royalty (Sept. 21), and the French republic one and indivisible (Sept. 28). With the former day began the new republican computation of time terminated by Napoleon, Jan. 1, 1806.2. The History of the French Republic till the Establishment of the Empire (Sept. 21, 1792_May is, 1804). The birth of the republic was ushered in with news of victory. Custine had taken Mentz; the enemies had been compelled to leave the territoiy of France. Dumouriez had conquered at Jemappe. The convention declared itself henceforward ready "to assist all nations desirous of recovering their liberty," by promising the suppression of feudal services, in all countries occupied by French troops. At the same time, it decreed the penalty of death against all emigrants taken with arms in their hands, and condemned Louis XVI. (q. v.) The majority in the convention was overawed by the furious populace, who demanded the head of the king; and war was declared against the kings (not the people) of England and Spain and the hereditary stadtholder of Holland. (See J5nssot.) Thus the empire, England, Prussia, Spain, Holland, Portugal, Naples, Tuscany, Sardinia and the pope formed a coalition against the republic, which was acknowledged by Venice alone. To foreign war was added the civil war of La Vendee, which rose to avenge the death of the king. The republic seemed to be lost, and armed itself with the weapons of terror and despair. The Mountain overthrew the moderate party, the Girondists (q. v.), who, there is little doubt, would not have been able to save the country. The revolutionary tribunal was erected, and the terrorists, Danton, Robespierre and Marat {see these articles), ruled the nation with the guillotine. Marie Antoinette, the queen of France, met the fate of her husband (Oct. 16, 1793); the duke of Orleans (Philippe Egalite), and the pious Elizabeth, the magnanimous sister of Louis XVI, soon followed her; all the churches of Paris were shut; the church plate wras declared the property of the nation. Nov. 10, the festival of Reason was celebrated in the ancient cathedral of Notre Dame, instead of divine service. The democratic constitution of France was given to the colonies, and freedom was granted to the Negroes, the signal for the massacre of the whites! (See Hayti.) The exnobles were persecuted with the greatest fury; the oppressions of centuries were revenged with a savage ferocity. The reign of terror continued nine months, during which Robespierre celebrated the festivals of Mankind, of the Supreme Being, of Stoicism, of the French people, &c, while the blood flowed in torrents from the guillotine, and under the mitrailles of Collot d'Herbois and others (particularly at Lyons, Bordeaux, Nantes, Toulon, &c). The reign of terror was finished with the fall of Robespierre, 9th Thermidor (July 27), 1794. The hall of the Jacobins was elosed, and the revolutionary tribunal received a new organization. The convention no longer allowed the affiliation of popular societies; and the free exercise of religion was established (Feb. 21, 1795). Still, however, it cost many struggles with the Jacobins and the terrorists, who opposed the spirit of moderation ; as, for instance, on the 1st Prairial (May 20), 1795. A new (the third) constitution was adopted. The sections of Paris endeavored in vain to restore royalty; they were dispersed by Barras and Bonaparte (see these articles), in the service of the convention, on the bloody 13th Vendemiaire (Oct. 5), 1795. On the 26th October, the convention finished its session, and the directory commenced. (See A. C. Thibeaudeau's Mem. sur la Convention et le Directoire, Paris, 1824, 2 vols.) The legislature now consisted of the council of ancients (250 members) and the council of the five hundred. The executive directory (Barras, Rewbel, Carnot, LareveillereLepeaux and Letourneur) restored order in La Vendee, but substituted mandats for assignats (March 11,1796) without ruccess. This measure only increased the embarrassment of the finances, arising from the double bankruptcy of the republic. The national institute of science held its first session Oct. 6, 1796, and a national consistory, sworn to conform to the ordinances of the council of Trent, was established. The revolution of the 18th Fructidor (Sept. 4), 1797, confirmed the power of the directory. During these numerous internal revolutions, the French arms had conquered Savoy and Nice, Belgium twice, Germany to the Rhine, and the Netherlands. Able generals, at the head of inexperienced troops, were rendered victorious by the strategy of Camot. The old European tactics could not resist the new military system. The nation rose en masse, and 13 armies of the republic were victorious over the Hanoverians, the English, Dutch, Austrians and Prussians. Tuscany concluded a peace with the French republic Feb. 9, 1795. The fortune of the French arms in the Netherlands, and other causes, induced Prussia to conclude a separate peace at Basle (April 5, 1795). Spain followed the 22d July, and HesseCassel the 28th August, the same year. A line of demarcation assured the neutrality of Northern Germany, under the protection of Prussia. The United Provinces /Mav 16) entered into an offensive and de fensive alliance with the republic against England. Austria, England and Russia, however, formed a closer alliance (Sept. 28,1795), to arrest, if possible, the increasing predominance of France. While the French were thus victorious by land, they suffered much by sea. England put forth her whole strength to extend her supremacy on the sea and in both the Indies. Pitt's impracticable system of starvation was not less injurious to other states than to France. The attempts made by the English to support the royalists by landing in France, did not answer the expectation. But most of the French colonies fell into the hands of the English, and their attacks on the fleets of Toulon and Brest inflicted an incurable wound on the marine of the republic. Austria, Prussia and Sardinia carried on war principally by means of English subsidies. On the other hand, the directory maintained its armies of conscripts by requisitions of munitions and by paper money. The enemy's country furnished, also, the richest resources, particularly Holland, Germany and Italy. The arms of general Bonaparte finally effected a peace. The victories of Montenotte, Millesimo, Lodi, Arcole, Rivoli and the Tagliamento, in Italy (April 11, 1796, to March 16, 1797), notwithstanding the successes of the archduke Charles, in Germany, and the retreat of Moreau, led to the preliminaries of Leoben (April 18, 1797), which were followed by the peace of CampoFormio (q. v.), Oct. 17, with Austria, and the congress of Rastadt, for the negotiation of a peace with the German empire. Meanwhile an alliance, offensive and defensive, had been concluded between France and Spain (Aug. 18, 1796), and England had declared war against Spain. Venice wTas converted into a democracy, Genoa into the Ligurian republic, and a peace was concluded between France and Sardinia, Holland was stripped of many of her colonies by England, who monopolized commerce. Misunderstandings, also, arose between the French and North American republics, and new occasions of war soon sprung up on the European continent. Rome was transformed into a republic (Feb. 10, 1798), Switzerland conquered, and the execution of the project of attacking Great Britain in her most vital point, the Indies, was attempted, by Bonaparte's expedition into Egypt. But the French fleet was annihilated, at Aboukir, by Nelson ; general Bonaparte was unsuccessful in Syria; and the second coalition was formed, at ?lie instigation and by the subsidies of England. The Porte declared war against France ; the congress at Rastadt was dissolved after the assassination of two French ambassadors; Austria and Russia united themselves with the Porte, and Naples undertook to avenge the pope. The republic crushed its ally, the king of Sardinia (December, 1798), to secure Upper Italy, and the republican army entered Naples in triumph, and founded the Parthenopean republic. Tuscany was likewise occupied. But the fortune of arms was soon changed. The Austrians and Russians gained several battles, and conquered Italy (1799). But Holland and Switzerland were successfully defended; the former by Brune, the latter by Massena. It was then that general Bonaparte, recalled from Egypt (q. v.) by his brother Joseph, who informed him of the state of things in Europe, placed himself at the head of the republic. The weak directory was abolished, and the 18th Brumaire (Nov. 9, 1799) gave France a consular government and her fourth constitution. This was, again, an approach to monarchy. Three consuls, chosen for ten years, and capable of being reelected, were placed at the head of the government; but the first consul (Napoleon Bonaparte) alone had the power of appointing and dismissing the counsellors, ministers, ambassadors, and all military and naval officers; he also decided finally in all other affairs of government, the two *>ther consuls (Cambaceres and Le Brun) having only a deliberative voice. The legislative power was in the hands of a tribunate of 100, and a corps legislatif of 300 members, a fifth of whom were to be renewed annually. The former discussed the laws proposed by the consuls; the latter decided upon them by a silent vote: neither of these bodies could propose any law. The consuls, legislators and tribunes were chosen, not by the people, but by a senat conservateur, which consisted of 80 members, at least 40 years old, and supplied its own vacancies, on the nomination of the first consul, the tribunate and the legislative body. None of these bodies were responsible. This constitution underwent some modifications in August, 1802, when Bonaparte was declared consul for life: the government now appointed the presidents of the departmental assemblies and the electoral colleges, and the first consul appointed his successor and the senators, &c.; the government convoked, adjourned and prorogued the legislative bodies at pleasure. Bonaparte had scarcely seized the reinsof government, when everything received a new form. He levied an army, and, after ineffectual offers of peace to England and Austria, passed the great St. Bernard, restored the Cisalpine republic, and conquered at Marengo (June 14, 1800); after which Moreau decided the war with Austria by the battle of Hohenlinden (Dec. 3,1800). La Vendee was appeased, and a treaty of peace concluded with the United States of North America. Austria was compelled to abandon England, and to sign the peace of Luneville in the name of the German empire (Feb. 9, 1801). The left bank of the Rhine was ceded to the republic, and this river became the boundary between France and Germany. This treaty was followed by those with Naples, Russia, the Ottoman Porte, that of Amiens with England (March 27,1802), and the concordate, concluded with Pius VII, which made the Catholic religion once more the established religion of France. From that period, the diplomacy of Napoleon governed the continent of Europe for 13 years. The kingdom of Etruria was created, and given to the duke of Parma; the great plan of indemnification was dictated to the German empire by France; Switzerland received an act of mediation, and united itself with France; Holland was treated almost as a part of France, and received a constitution from Paris; Piedmont, Parma and Piacenza were incorporated with France, and the first consul was appointed president of the Italian republic. In France, order, security and tranquillity succeeded to the tumult of a revolution. Many deported individuals obtained permission to return home; the severe measures against the emigrants were softened; free exercise of religion restored; and the establishment of the legion of honor (May 19, 1802) united the nation and the army with the head of the government. When the war with England was renewed (May 18, 1803), and conspiracies spread terror in France, the victories of Napoleon won him the favor of the nation, and enabled him to convert the republic into a hereditary monarchy. (For further information, see the article Napoleon.)3. History of the Empire of France to the Restoration of the Bourbons and Royalty (May 18, 1804-May 3,1814). May 18, 1804, appeared the senatus consulte organique, which declared Napoleon emperor of the French, and the imperial dignity hereditary in his family. This decree of the senate, and the imperial decree of March 30, 1806, regulated the privileges of the imperial family, the inheritance, the titles and appanages of its members, and their particular relations to the person ofthe emperor. The civil list remained as it had been fixed by the constitution of 1791- 25,000,000 livres annually. At the same tkne were established the great officers of the empire, to whom the marshals and court officers belonged; and the supreme imperial tribunal, which was to judge offences of members of the imperial family and ofthe higher officers of state, high treason, and all crimes against the state or the emperor. The electoral colleges also received a precise organization. The senate remained; but the appointment of the senators, and the right of fixing their number, were given to the emperor. The legislative body was also preserved; but the tribunate, which alone ventured on opposition, was suppressed August 19, 1807. The new emperor crowned himself and his wife, in presence of Pius VII, in the church of Notre Dame, December 2, 1804. Three months later (March 18, 1805), the emperor of the French was made king of Italy, and solemnly crowned (May 26) in Milan, and the order of the iron crown was established. Genoa (the Ligurian republic) and the principality of Guastalla were soon after incorporated with France. Lucca and Pionibino were erected into a duchy, and conferred on one of the emperor's sisters, and Parma and Piacenza were placed under the French government. The emperor of Austria and many German princes acknowledged Napoleon as emperor. The Russian and Swedish charges d'affaires left Paris, and the French ambassadors, Petersburg and Stockholm. Sweden concluded a subsidy treaty with England, and Russia entered into a third coalition with England (April, 1805) against France. The French had already (June 3, 1803) taken possession of Hanover. The emperor of France rigorously prohibited the introduction of English manufactures, wherever his power extended, and threatened England with a descent. Pitt therefore drew Austria (August, 1805) into the coalition, and the French army marched from their encampment at Boulogne to Germany. The war was of short duration. The surrender of an Austrian army, under Mack, at Ulm (October 17), and the battle of Austerlitz (December 2) produced the peace of Presburg (December 26, 1805), in which Austria was compelled to sacrifice about 21.190 square miles, and 3,000,000 of inhabitants (among them the Tyrolese). Napoleon gave to his allies, the rulers of Bavaria and Wurtemberg, royal crowns and full sovereignty, which they did not enjoy under the German empire. The latter was also granted to Baden. Each of these three states likewise received a considerable increase of territory and inhabitants. The kingdom of Italy was enlarged by the addition of 10,600 square miles, and France obtained a decided predominance over the German princes, The victory of the English at Trafalgar (October 21, 1805) over the united fleets of France and Spain destroyed an armament which had cost six years of preparation and 60,000,000 francs. 1654 cannons and 15,000 men fell into the hands of the victors. Napoleon now changed his system against England. Instructed by repeated experience, that he never could meet the English successfully by sea, he resolved to conquer them by land, and attempted, by the continental system fq. v.), to suppress all intercourse with England. With this view, he abandoned Hanover to Prussia, which involved that power in a war with England. The dynasty of Naples was declared to have forfeited the throne, on account of the breach of its engagements with France. Joseph Bonaparte was made king of Naples and Sicily (March 30, 1806); Louis, the second brother of Napoleon, king of Holland, Napoleon's soninlaw, Eugene Beauharnais, whom he had adopted, was created viceroy of Italy, and married to the daughter of the king of Bavaria; Alexander Berthier, the companion in arms of the emperor, was created prince of Neufchatel; Talleyrand, the minister of foreign affairs, prince of Benevento ; Bernadotte, prince of PonteCorvo; Joachim Murat, grandduke of Cleves and Berg; and Stephanie Beauharnais, niece of the empress, whom Napoleon had adopted, was given in marriage to the crownprince of Baden. All those who immediately belonged to the new dynasty, or were united with it, were to be attached to France by a federative system. The imperial family statute was promulgated March 30, 1806. The accession of Bavaria, Wurtemberg and Baden to the federal system of the " great empire," and the incorporation of the electorate of Hanover with Prussia, had torn asunder the political union of the German states. Napoleon established the confederation of the Rhine (q. v.), of which he was recognised protector July 12, 1806; and Francis II resigned the imperial crown of Germany August 6, Meanwhile, Fox's communication to Tal leyrand of a plot against the life of the emperor had awakened feelings of mutual confidence. Russia, who had not been included in the peace of Presburg, entered upon negotiations; but the death of the English minister Fox, and the changes in the situation of affairs, prevented them from resulting favorably. The emperor of Russia refused to ratify the preliminaries adopted by Oubril. The English ambassador Lauderdale was recalled; and, in the autumn of the year 1806, Prussia was seen united with Russia, Sweden and England against France. The Prussian cabinet had been induced to assume a threatening posture towards France by the advices of the offers of France to restore Hanover to England, and had projected a northern confederacy, to counterbalance that of the Rhine. Napoleon, after offering peace more than once in vain, accepted the challenge, and the battles of Jena and Friedland cost Prussia half of her territory; three German princes (HesseCassel, Brunswick and Orange) were erased from the catalogue of sovereigns, and two new kings (of Saxony and Westphalia) were created. The confederation of the Rhine was strengthened by the accession of 11 princes; and the accession of Russia and Prussia to the continental system was made the basis of the peace of Tilsit (July 7 and 9, 1807). Austria had remained neutral, awaiting a more favorable opportunity of effecting its longcherished projects against France. Napoleon had no sooner secured himself in the east and north, than the condition of the Peninsula of the Pyrenees drew his attention to that country. Portugal was still reluctant to break with England. A French army was therefore marched through Spain, which occupied Portugal without resistance. The royal family fled to Brazil (November, 1807). A family quarrel, of the most indecorous character, distracted the court of Madrid. Napoleon interfered in the character of a mediator, and the feeble Charles IV was induced to resign the crown of Spain, at Bayonne, in the emperor's favor. The Spanish princes, too, were obliged to renounce their claims. Joseph, the king of Naples, was created king of Spain, and the grandduke of Berg ascended the throne of Naples. But the events in Spain affected the family interests of the house of Hapsburg; and the resistance of the Spanish nation, supported by the English, to the French troops, seemed, to the cabinet of Vienna, to afford an opportunity for overthrowing the new arrangements in VOL. v. 19 Germany and Italy. Notwithstanding the interview of Napoleon and the emperor of Russia at Erfurt (q. v.), (September, 1808), the pending negotiations with Vienna and London, the union of Paris and Petersburg, and the progress of Napoleon in the Peninsula, Austria, though she had previously disavowed unfriendly intentions towards France, entered into a new alliance with Great Britain, and resumed hostilities in April, 1809; but the battle of Wagram compelled her to submit to the treaty of Vienna (October 14, 1809), which dismembered her provinces, and distributed them among the neighboring states, erected a new state from the Illyrian provinces, incorporated the papal dominions with France, and cut off Austria herself from all communication with the sea, by the loss of her ports on the Adriatic. She lost about 42,300 square miles, with more than 3,000,000 inhabitants. The dominion of France in Italy and Germany now seemed firmly established. The dominions of the emperor of Austria were still indeed considerable, but entirely surrounded by states under the protection and influence of France. The powerful emperor of Russia, united by the ties of personal friendship with the emperor of France, compelled Sweden to accede to the continental system; whilst the Ottoman Porte, fluctuating between France and England, was prevented by the fear of Russia from undertaking any thing of consequence. In France, the revolution was considered at an end when the emperor divorced his former wife, and married Maria Louisa, archduchess of Austria (April 1, 1810). Even at an earlier period, to give splendor to his throne, and surround himself with faithful adherents, Napoleon had, by an ordinance, March 1, 1808, in conformity with the decree of the senate of August 14, 1806, but contrary to the constitution, reestablished a hereditary nobility and the primogeniture. This was, however, different from the former feudal nobility, since the title was connected with a certain income, without any privileges in regard to taxes, jurisdiction, conscription, offices, &c, and the rank was lost with that income. While lying before Vienna (1809), Napoleon added to the two orders of the legion of honor and of the iron crown, that of the three golden fleeces. (See Fleeces.) Thus he provided for the splendor of the throne, for the reward of merit, and the gratification of vanity. Meanwhile he directed his attention to all the depart ments of government. He provided for the more effectual administration of justice by a new code, and for the execution of the laws by the organization of courts of every degree. To repress usury, he issued a decree (March 17,1808), which secured the peasantry from the extortions of the Jews ; and it was one of the favorite, but impracticable plans of the emperor, to effect a political and moral regeneration of the Jews throughout Europe. (See Jews.) He exerted the same activity in the encouragement of industry and internal commerce,witness the efforts to discover useful substitutes for the prohibited colonial products; the great prize offered for the invention of the best machine for spinning flax; the construction of roads, canals, ports, and his various architectural works. But comparatively little was effected, because every thing was subjected to military orders, where free action is the soul of success, and because of the disturbed state of Europe. The institutions for education in the empire received a military organization. March 17, 1808, the imperial university, which united all the seminaries of instruction in the empire into one great whole, was established. Napoleon's policy in regard to colonial products exerted the greatest influence on the political connexions of Europe. It determined the political direction of all the continental powers, and was most injurious to commerce. (See Continental System, and Colonial Products.) England opposed her orders in council to the decrees of Berlin and Milan, and still kept up her commercial intercourse with some parts of the continent. Napoleon therefore had recourse to violent measures, in which we are to look for the immediate causes of the war with Russia in 1812. In the treaty of March 16, 1810, between France and Holland, the latter had been obliged to cede to France Dutch Brabant, Zealand, with the island of Schowen, and the part of Guelders on the left bank of the Waal, for which the attack of the English on Holland, in 1809, had given a pretext. The king of Holland having resigned the crown in favor of his son (July 1, 1810), the kingdom was incorporated with France, by the decree of Rambouillet, July 9, 1810. But England persevered in maintaining the orders in council, and Napoleon declared it was necessary that the whole coast of the North sea should be placed under his immediate inspection. The mouths of the Ems, the Weser and the Elbe, with the Hanse towns (about 12,714 square miles, and more than 1,000,000 inhabitants), were therefore arbitrarily incorporated with France (December 10,1810). The Valais had already (November 12, 1810) experienced the same fate, for the securing of the road over the Simplon.* The tariff of Trianon, which was designed to prevent the use of colonial articles on the continent, by the imposition of enormous duties, was forced on all the federative states, while the decree of Jontainebleau ordered all articles of English manufacture found in France and the dependent states to be burned. This order was strictly observed in France, whilst means were taken to promote the production of certain important articles, such as sugar, tobacco, indigo, in the country. The importation was also permitted by licenses to the advantage of the government. But the union of Northern Germany with the empire had injured some of the princes of the confederacy. The indemnifications which had been promised to them could not overcome the odium of this step. The principal of these injured princes was the duke of Oldenburg, a near relation of the Russian emperor; and the continuance of peace had already become problematical. But, before these apprehensions were realized, the birth of the king of Rome (see Reichstadt) gave the emperor new hopes. In 1809, when Napoleon declared the papal territory a province of France, and Rome a city of the empire, he determined that the heir apparent of France should bear the title of king of Home, and that the emperor of France should be crowned in Rome within the 10 first years of his government. The state of things in Spain, the inhabitants of which opposed the French with unexpected firmness, and the daily increasing prospect of an approaching war with the North, which refused to cooperate any longer in the views of France (although the friendly relations hitherto maintained with the court of St. Petersburg were not yet formally broken off, and the prince of PonteCorvo, the near* At this time, the French empire, under Napoleon, consisted of 130 departments. The territory annexed to the crown, from the commencement of the subjection of the great crown vassals, and the expulsion of the English from France, to the close of the conquests of Napoleon, who nearly restored the ancient empire of Charlemagne, comprised 82 of these departments, of which the German empire had furnished 39. witn 12,000,000 inhabitants; the Dutch, 24 5 Italy, 18; and Spain, 1. The kings of France had conquered 38, the French arms until 1799, 17, and the emperor, 27. connexion of Joseph, the brother of the emperor, had been elected successor to the throne of Sweden), did not promise favorably for the future. The English also carried on an important commerce with Russia, in colonial produce, through Gothenburg and the ports of the Baltic, of which complaint was made to the courts of Stockholm and Petersburg. The commercial policy of Russia in 1810 and 1811, and its disapprobation of the treatment of the duke of Oldenburg, had excited the distrust of Napoleon. He was confident of a declaration of war against England by the U. States, with whom he had been reconciled, and he felt that he might speak the language of offended confidence towards Russia. The consequence was a war, which commenced in July, 1812, and in which, besides the states of the confederation of the Rhine and the duchy of Warsaw, Austria and Prussia were allies of France. (Concerning this war, which rolled back from the Kremlin, where Napoleon had his headquarters amidst the smoking ruins of Moscow, across the battlefield of Leipsic, to the heights of Montmartre, see the article Russian German War from 1812 to 1815.) The immense preponderance of the French empire, and its endless wars and exactions, had exhausted the patience of tb<3 nations of Europe; and princes and people rose together to throw off the load. (The disappointment of the expectations held out to the people of Europe, when they made common cause with the princes against Napoleon, this is not the place to discuss.) An army of 812,000 men, to which, according to the agreement made at Trachenburg, in Silesia (July 12, 1813), Austria had furnished 262,000 men, Russia, 249,000, Prussia, 277,000, and Sweden, 24,000, destroyed the French empire, and the trophies of 20 years of victory, in 9 months. On March 31,1814, the allied troops entered Paris, and Alexander declared, in the name of the allied sovereigns, that they would not negotiate with Napoleon Bonaparte, nor with any of his family; that they acknowledged the right of France only to the territory embraced within its ancient limits under its kings; and, finally, that they would acknowledge and guaranty the government which the French nation should adopt. They therefore invited the senate to establish a provisory government for the administration of the country and the preparation of a constitution. Accordingly the senate assembled April 1, under the presidency of Talleyrand, whom, with four other members, they charged with the provisory government. On the next day, it declared that Napoleon and his family had forfeited the throne of France. The legislative body ratified this decree, which the provisory government published, and soon after made known the recall of Louis XVIII (q. v.) to the throne of France. Meanwhile (April 11) Napoleon had resigned the crown unconditionally in favor of his son, at Fontainebleau. A treaty was concluded the same day ceding to him the island of Elba. (For the histories of this period, see the article Napoleon, and his Time.)III. History of France, from the Restoration of the Bourbons, to tlie Declaration of LouisPhilip, King of the French; from 1814 to 1830. The Bourbons were restored to the throne of France by the senate. But did the nation receive them with joy? Those, no doubt, who had nothing to expect but from a change; those who wished for a return of the feudal times ; those who still cherished a sort of religious attachment to the old dynasty; the greater part of the clergy, and those who desired the restoration of the ancient ecclesiastical establishment; and, finally, those who were sick of war, and hoped for peace under the Bourbons, these welcomed their return; but the nation at large received them with reluctance, chiefly for three reasons: 1. because they had been placed on the throne by foreign arms (Louis XVIII openly acknowledged that he owed his throne to the English); 2. because, while they had been absent from France, it had undergone a total change, and they had thus become strangers to the country in which the principles of the revolution were permanently established; 3. because they brought back with them an obsolete noblesse, opposed to the whole spirit and tendency of modern French politics. The Bourbons were, in fact, in a situation similar to that of some families in the middle ages, who seated themselves on conquered thrones, but formed no integrant part of the nation. There was, from the beginning, a feeling of distrust between the rulers and the nationa state of things which can never continue long in a constitutional government. During the 15 years in which the Bourbons once more occupied the French throne, the division between the two parties was constantly widening, and the partisans of the government were becoming more and more explicit in their demands for an absolute monarchy. In addition to all this>, the public indignation was excited by the absurd theory of legitimacy, as promulgated by the congress of Viennaa theory of which a definition never could be given, and for which, nevertheless, u Sophistry lent her colors to the most extravagant pretensions of tyranny," to repeat the words of sir James Mackintosh; a theory which offended the deepest feelings of the nation, and declared the struggles of 26 years to be nothing but insurrectionary disturbances; and which, while it declared Napoleon an illegitimate ruler, acknowledged the lawfulness of the sway of the kings of Bavaria, Wurtemburg, Saxony, and several others, whom he had created. So entirely was the spirit of the Bourbonists at variance with that of the nation, that many individuals, who had at first welcomed the return of the royal family, declared for Napoleon when he landed from Elba, convinced that the Bourbons and France were no longer fit for each other. We must be content here with a brief enumeration of the events which have taken place, for a developement of the causes which have produced them would far exceed our limits. Louis XVIII entered Paris, May 3, 1814. A plan of a constitution had already been adopted by the senate, April 5th, and by the legislative body on the following day. This fundamental law was to be confirmed by Louis XVIII, before ascending the throne; but he merely issued the declaration of St. Ouen (May 2), in which, as king of France and Navarre, he publicly declared his adoption of the principles of the new constitution, as his brother, the count D'Artois, had already done in the character of lieutenantgeneral of the kingdom, but reserved for himself the right of revising the document, which bore marks of the haste in which it had been drawn up by the senate. The new constitutional charter was presented to the nation by the king on the 4th of June. (See Ckarte Co7istitutionnelle.) It contained the principles of a limited monarchy; as, the equality of nil Frenchmen in the eye of the law; the equal obligation of all to contribute to the expenses of the state; the equal right of all Frenchmen to all offices ; personal liberty ; the free exercise of religion, and the liberty of the press; the security of property; the oblivion of the past; the suppression of the conscription. The person of the king (in whom was vested the executive power, the command of the forces of the kingdom, the right of declaring war and making peace, of appointing officers, and proposing and pub lishing the laws) was declared inviolable; the legislative power was vested in him in conjunction with the two chambers; laws relating to imposts and taxes were required to be presented first to the chamber of deputies; the two houses were permitted to petition for the proposal of a law; the legislature was required to grant the civil list of the king for the period of his reign. The king convoked the chambers, named the peers, hereditary or personal, prorogued the chambers, and dissolved the chamber of deputies, but was required to summon a new one within three months; the two chambers could only be in session at the same time the chamber of deputies was to be composed of deputies chosen by the electoral colleges, one fifth part to be renewed yearly; to be eligible as a deputy, it was necessary to be 40 years old, and pay 1000 francs of direct taxes. The king appointed the presidents of the electoral colleges, and the president of the chamber of deputies, out of five candidates proposed by the chamber. The chancellor presided in the chamber of peers. On the 14th of May, Louis created the new ministry, and, on the 3d of August, a new council of state. The king's household was newly organized; and the old nobility were restored to many of their former privileges at court. The royal orders of the Holy Ghost, of military merit, the order of St Louis, and that of St. Michael, wei e revived ; the legion of honor received a new decoration (the portrait of Henry IV) and a new organization, and the order of the silver lily was founded. The peace concluded with the allies at Paris, May 30, 1814, confined France to the limits of January 1st, 1792; it retained, however, the territories acquired in its interior by the incorporation of Avignon and Venaissin, notwithstanding the protest of the pope (see Moureau's Reflexions sur les Protestations du Pape Pie VII, relatives a Avignon et au comte de Venaissin, 1818); Montbelliard, too, and similar places, re mained in its hands. It was also permitted to retain Annecy and Chamberry, from Savoy. On the other hand, Great Britain retained possession of Malta; and France resigned to that power the islands of Tobago and St. Lucia, in the West Indies and the Isle of France. The other colonies were restored to France, who also kept possession of the treasures of art carried off from countries which had been occupied by her arms. A number of ordinances provided for the reorganization of the kingdom. The formation ofa new army was to be effected by recruits. Measures were also taken to retrieve the disordered finances; but the state of affairs did not allow any diminution of the taxes: the droits reunis (q. v.), and the monopoly of tobacco, notwithstanding their unpopularity, were preserved* The civil list of the king was again fixed at 25 million francs, and the debts, amounting to 30 millions, which the king had contracted during his residence in foreign countries, were assumed as the debts of the state. But the freedom of the press, promised in the charter, was subjected to restrictions by the establishment of a censorship, and various police regulations excited the discontent of the nation, especially of the Parisians, who could not tolerate the restoration of the ancient forms and principles. It was soon perceived, that a great difference of opinion prevailed among the members of the royal family and among the ministers. The rising ambition of the clergy was discerned, and bigotry began to raise its head. The honors conferred on the old nobility, and the emigrants, who had returned with the court, also excited great discontent. The national pride was offended by the public declaration of the king, that he owed his crown to the prince regent of England. The army was in the state of the highest irritation; the remembrance of him under whom they had acquired so much glory and power was yet fresh, when they saw their corps dissolved, their dotations, their pay and their pensions diminished, their importance and their influence destroyed, and they themselves compelled to change their favorite badges for others, on which they had formerly trampled. The holders of the national domains feared to lose them. The people were discontented with the burden of the taxes, the alleviation of which had been promised to them. In this state of public feeling, nothing could be more fatal for the royal government than the sudden reappearance of Napoleon on the coast of France, the 1st of March, 1815. These circumstances explain why, without the existence of an actual conspiracy in favor of Napoleon, the measures taken to oppose his progress were unsuccessful; why the army and a great part of the nation declared for him; and why, after a march of 18 days, which resembled a triumph, he was able to enter Paris (March 20) without shedding a drop of blood. The king and his partisans left the country. Napoleon immediately annulled most of the royal ordinances, dis19* solved the two chambers, and named a new ministry. Re declared that he should content himself with the limits of France, as settled by the peace of Paris, and that he would establish his government on liberal principles. But he could not satisfy the expectations of the different parties; much less could he avert the danger of a new war with Europe. As soon as the news of Napoleon's landing in France was received at Vienna, the ministers of all the allied powers, who were assembled in congress there, declared Napoleon (March 13, 1815) the enemy and disturber of the repose of the world ; and that the powers were firmly resolved to employ all means, and unite all their efforts, to maintain the treaty of Paris. For this purpose, Austria, Russia, England and Prussia concluded, March 25th, a new treaty, on the basis of that of Chaumont (March 1, 1814), whereby each power agreed to bring 150,000 men into the field against Napoleon, who, on his part, was indefatigable in making preparations for war. At the same time (April 22), he published the additional act to the constitutions of the empire, and summoned the meeting of the Champ de Mai, which accepted that act (June 1). (See Champ de Mars, and de Mai, and Cent Jours.) On the 7th of June, the new chambers met. The army expressed great attachment to him, but the nation was less confident. His greatest difficulty was the want of supplies. The expedition of Murat against Austria (April, 1815) frustrated the secret negotiations of Napoleon with the court of Vienna. War was unavoidable. The armies of the allies formed a cordon around the frontiers of France, extending from Ostend to Switzerland, and beyond it to Italy. Napoleon, with his main army, advanced to meet the English and Prussians, under Wellington and Bliicher, who were approaching from the Netherlands. After some skirmishes with the outposts on the frontiers, the French attacked the Prussians at Thuin on the Sambre, June 15, and drove them back. On the 16th, Napoleon gained a victory over the Prussians ir the plains of Fleurus. (See Ligny, and Quatrebros.) But, on the 18th, he was entirely defeated at Waterloo (q.v.), end the allies advanced, almost without resistance, towards Paris. As Napoleon saw that France was lost to him, he resigned the crown, on the 22d of June, in a proclamation to the French nation, and at the same time declared his son emperor, under the title of Napoleon II. A provisional government, at the head of which was Fouche, was vested with the administration of the state. Napoleon left the capital, and surrendered himself to the English, as the way to the United States was shut against him. (See Napoleon.) (For the history of the hundred days, see the works of Benjamin Constant, and Fleury de Chaboulon.) The army of the allies had, in the mean time, arrived at Paris, where, on the 3d of July, a military convention was concluded by Bliicher and Wellington, with marshal Davoust, according to the articles of which the French army retired behind the Loire, and Paris was surrendered to the troops of the allies. On the 6th, they entered Paris; and, on the following day, Louis XVIII a second time took possession of his throne. Hereupon a new chamber of deputies was convoked, the French army behind the Loire was disbanded, and an order was issued for the formation of a new army. Severe measures were adopted against the adherents of Napoleon. (See Louis XVIII.) The condition of France was deplorable; a forced tranquillity prevailed where the armies of the allies were stationedthey occupied almost two thirds of the countrybut the other parts of the kingdom were the scene of troubles and bloodshed. The allied powers did not treat France with the same forbearance that they had done the year before. After much negotiation, the treaty of Paris was concluded between them and Louis XVIII (Nov. 20), on the following conditions: the limits of France were to remain as in 1790; France was to surrender four fortresses (Landau, Philippeville, SarreLouis and Marienburg), the duchy of Bouillon, that part of the department of the Lower Rhine situated on the left bank of the Lauter, a part of the district of Gex, and the part of Savoy which had been left to France in 1814 (in all, 434,000 inhabitants); she was bound not to erect any fortress within three leagues of Basle, in the place of the fortifications of Hiiningen, which had been demolished immediately after its surrender; renounced her claims to the principality of Monaco; agreed to pay to the allies a contribution of 700 million francs, to give up 17 citadels for from three to five years, and to support 150,000 troops of the allies within her frontiers. The French government was further bound to satisfy the lawful claims of individuals, corporations or institutions in the countries of the allies, and to restore all the treasures of literature and art which the French had carried off from conquered countries. The last article was executed while the foreign troops were in Parisv Finally, France agreed to abolish the slavetrade unconditionally. This treaty was signed by Richelieu, the president of the new ministry, appointed in September, 1815. The nation was discontented; but the spirit of reaction, which was perceived in the chambre introuvable (q. v.), silenced all opposition. The law of the 29th of October, 1815, granted to the government the extraordinary power of confining all persons suspected of designs against the king and the state, without previous conviction by a judicial tribunal, and often without publicity. Finally, the two chambers passed the law of amnesty proposed by the king (January 6, 1816), by which all those who had voted for the death of Louis XVI, or had accepted offices from Napoleon during the hundred days, were forever banished from the kingdom. This victory of the royalists was succeeded by the dismissal of several thousand judges and other officers. Yet the ministers and other officers were not royal enough for the ultra royalists (see Ultra), who considered the government of France in 1789 as the only legitimate one. All events posterior to that period were to them a series of crimes, and every individual who had been concerned in them a criminal. Those who had never contaminated themselves by any participation in the revolution, but had opposed it from the first constitution, they called pleinpurs, or true Frenchmen; those who had been in favor of the first assembly, but had adhered firmly to the king, were pure in a less degree. All others were in their eyes more or less suspicious, and not true Frenchmen. On the other hand, the party directly the opposite of the ultras considered every thing which had happened in France for the preceding 25 years, as belonging to a period of great national developement, to which it was the duty of every Frenchman to have contributed according to his means. Whoever abandoned France at that time, whoever deprived her of his services, or bore arms against her, whatever may have been the form of government, was a traitor to his country. Thus each party defended its own cause as the cause of justice, and accused the other party of treason. The attacks of the ultras in the two chambers upon the ministers, finally led to the decisive step of the 5th of September (see Louis XVIII), when the king dissolved the chamber of deputies. The new chamber was opened Nov. 4, 1816^ with a speech from the king, which described in plain terms the unfavorable condition of France. The budget of 1817 was much greater than that of 1816, on account of the deficit of the three preceding years. The principal objects discussed in the two chambers related to the electoral colleges, the finances, the responsibility of the ministers, and the freedom of the press. The independents and liberals obtained the law of election of February 5, 1817, and the recruiting law of March 6, 1818, but did not succeed in their attacks on the laws of exception (see haws of Exception),by which the complete operation of the charter was prevented. Meanwhile, the ultras lost ground, particularly by the discovery of their intrigues in exciting the troubles in Grenoble, 1816, and in Lyons, 1817. The ministers had also the majority in the session of 1817, which was closed May 16,1818. The administration, however, oscillated between the contending parties, until the discovery of the white conspiracy, in July, 1818, by which the ultras wished to engage the allies to assist in abolishing the charter, when it inclined more to the liberals and the national party. (See Decazes.) On account of the appearances of permanent tranquillity in the kingdom, the ministry succeeded in obtaining a diminution of the army of occupation one fifth, in the spring of 1817; and the financial difficulties of 1817 were obviated by a loan from the Barings in London, and Hope in Amsterdam. The public confidence in the administration of the finances was increased by the admission of French houses in the loan of 1818, who offered more than was wanted, and on better terms than the foreigners. But the new loan of 24 millions, which was necessary to effect the complete evacuation of France by the army of occupation in the autumn of 1818, was concluded, at the request of the allies, with the houses of Baring and of Hope, notwithstanding more favorable conditions offered by the French bankers, Lafitte, CasimirPerrier and others, who were willing to engage for the whole sum. This circumstance gave such offence in France, that the foreign houses finally relinquished a part of the sum in favor of some of the French houses. With the evacuation of the French territory by the foreign troops, which was determined upon by the congress of AixlaChapelle, the 9th of October, 1818, and accomplished in the course of the same year, was connected the payment of the expensesof the war, and of the individual claims of the subjects of foreign powers on the French government and nation. Here the French diplomacy was successful. In the settlement of the matter of liquidations, the amount of which was reduced from 1600 to 1390 millions, the payment of the debt which had been assumed by France, by the treaty of May 30, 1814, and acknowledged by the chamber of 1815, as well as by the treaty of November 20,1815, was postponed until the year 1818; and, as Russia and Wellington were agreed on this point, the other commissioners were obliged to accept, in payment of these 1390 millions, a rent of 16 millions and 40,000 francs, which, at the market price, corresponded to a capital of 275 million francsabout the seventh part of their lawful claims. A rent of 3 millions was granted to England in a separate article, to satisfy the claims of British subjects. Finally, the remaining 280 millions were reduced at AixlaChapelle to 265 million francs. France was admitted, November 12, into the alliance of the great European powers (see Quadruple Alliance), and concurred in the declaration of the Christian law of nations, as the new basis of the European policy, at AixlaChapelle, November 15, 1818. The old royalist spirit continued to revive in France, and the prime minister, the duke de Richelieu (q. v.), declared himself against the further developement of the constitutional system, and against the retaining of the existing mode of election. A schism in the ministry was the consequence, until December, 1818, when the minister Decazes gained a complete victory over the ultras, in the defence of the law of election antl the maintenance of liberal principles. Louis XVIII named a new ministry, December 28 (the third since 1815), in which the marquis Dessoles (general and peer) succeeded Richelieu as president of the ministerial council ; baron Louis succeeded Corvetto in the department of the finances; marshal St. Cyr received the department of war; Laine was followed by the count Decazes, in the ministry of the interior (after the suppression of the ministry of the police), and De Serre was made keeper of the seals, and minister of justice. But in the double conflict with the ultra royalists, and the extreme left (see Cote droit), this ministry was overthrown the 19th of November, 1819. Dessoles, St. Cyr and Louis, who defended the liberal construction of the charter, resigned; Pasquier, LatourMaubourg and Roy succeeded them, and Decazes became prime minister. Decazes, with De Serre and Portalis, concurred in the views of the moderate right side, since the liberal party went too far for them in their demands. The new ministry was as violently attacked by the ultra royalists in the chamber (the extreme right), on account of its moderation, as by the liberals (on the extreme left). The administration had carried several measures, in opposition to the provisions of the charter, by the second ministry (Richelieu and Laine), the object of which was to overcome the opposition of all parties. Among them were the severe measures against constructive offences, and the censorship of journals and periodical writings on political subjects. Hence the continual disputes of the liberal journals (the Minerve Francaise, the BibUolMque Historique, the Censeur Europtcn, &c.) with the ministerial papers, among which the Journal des Debats was the most distinguished, and with the papers of the ultra royalists, the Quotidienne, the Conservateur, the Drapeau blanc, and others, which attacked the charter itself. Able writers, such as Benjamin Constant, Comte and Dunoyer, wrote for the liberals ; Bonald, Fievee and Chateaubriand (q. v.) for the ultras. As writers often understand the laws differently from the judge and the crown advocate, fines and imprisonments were often the share of those who wrote on the liberal side. The 'prevutal courts were abolished at the close of the session (1818), and crimes, which, till then, had been under their jurisdiction, were again subjected to the jurisdiction of the assizes. The droit d'aubaine (see Aubaine), which had been restored by Napoleon, was abolished in 1819. While this secret reaction of the adherents of the old system (among whom the theocratic party, or the pkres de la foi, endeavored to undermine the constitutional system by means of missions and schools) was going on, the majority of the nation desired a pure constitutional ministry, which should fortify the charter by laws, and national institutions resembling it in spirit, and thus frustrate the intrigues of the ultras, who aimed at the restoration of the ancient feudal systemthe three estates with their privileges, the parliaments and the lettres de cachet A gouvernement occulte was maintained, under the direction of baron VitrolJes, to forward the views of the ultras. Some officers of state abused their power; the administration of criminal justice suffered gross abuses, and wasby no means in accordance with the provisions of the charter, in favor of personal liberty. (See Berton's Observations critiques sur la Procedure criminelle d'aprcs le Code qui re1 git la France, and Berenger, De la Justice criminelle en France, Paris, 1818.) The charter had abolished the penalty of confiscation; but the enormous fines, imposed by the law of November 9, were equivalent to actual confiscations. Close confinement (le secret) was a kind of moral torture, which often lasted for years, before an innocent individual was set at liberty. In the prisons, condemned criminals were confounded with those who were merely confined for trial, or sentenced to imprisonment; the dregs of the people with men detained for political offences. It was also a source of discontent, which existed till the final banishment of the Bourbons, that the nation was not permitted to choose a single magistrate. All officers were appointed by the government, and the councils of the departments declared the wishes of the nation in the name of their departments, without any authority from them, so that their voices were often opposed to the opinion of the majority in the departments. Even the national guard, which was not permitted to elect its officers, was not every where composed of proprietors, but often arbitrarily formed of persons without a residence, and without property; so that, in several departments, it was merely an armed instrument of a party. This was the reason that so many outrages against the Protestants escaped unpunished in different parts of France. In reading the work of Aigrmn, member of the French academy, Dc VEtat des Protestans en France depuis le seizieme Sieclejusqu'a nos Jours, 1818, we find ourselves transported back to the times of the dragoonades. Government at last put a stop to these outrages; but the murderers were left unpunished.* The recruiting law of St. Cyr, which restored equality in the military service, was particularly odious to the friends of aristocratic privileges. The nobility complained of persecution, while the state calendar proved that they held seven eighths of the prefectures and the most important mayor* These violences did not cease until March, 1819, when a great number of the inhabitants of the Cevennes presented themselves at the city of Nismes, with the declaration," that30,000 men are ready to descend from the mountains with the weapons of despair, if the safety of their brethren require it." The Methodists in England exerted themselves, at that time, in favor of the French Protestants. alties! They were at the head of the military divisions, of the legions, of the gendarmerie, of the tribunals, of the embassies ; and were even to be found in the financial department! Hence the complaint, that civil equality did not exist in France, and that the executive power was mostly in the hands of a caste, which remembered its lost privileges, and hated the new order of things. In addition to this, the accusations of sedition and treason, the conduct of the missionaries, and the intrigues at the elections of the deputies, inflamed the passions of the people. The legislation and administration, sometimes more and sometimes less influenced by the constitutional system, are the most important subjects of the domestic history of France. The external policy of France, in the modern European system, was in unison with the internal change. While strict monarchical principles were gradually gaining strength and influence in all departments of the domestic administration, the French cabinet entered more and more deeply into the continental system of the great European powers. The accession of France to the holy alliance, at the congress of AixlaChapelle (1818), engaged the government in a policy, the tendency of which was to bring the constitution and administration of the country more into accordance with the absolute principles of the system of stability, as it was called by the sovereigns. The left side in the chamber of deputies, however, struggled to obtain a liberal ministry; while the government leaned towards the views of the centre, or moderate royalists, and was supported by the majority of the extreme right. The election laws were found too favorable to the liberal party, and the ministry therefore proposed a new election law, for the purpose of giving the richest landholders the preponderance in the elections of the deputies, and, at the same time, some laws of exception, relative to personal ministry, had already propose bills (jjrqjets), calculated to gaii moderate of both sides to the when the bloody act of a politi< (Feb. 13,1820), the murder of of Berry (see Louve% astonished nation, and drew forth the l lent accusations from the extre M. de Labourdonnaye called chamber to use all means foi pression of doctrines equally da the throne and to humanity, side was particularly violent in on Decazes. (q. v.) He brought f( projet of a new law of electioi two laws of exception ; but, find had lost the majority, he resigne The duke of Richelieu, who w ed to the king by Decazes himsel ed him as president of the mini 20,1820), and count Simeon as r the interior(the fifth minist] contest concerning these three j minated in the triumph of the over the liberals; and their infl soon perceptible in the legislatic ministration. The power of th was gradually increased by the of Deserre, and (after 1822) by of Villele. The first law of (hi sur la liberte individueUe) of 1820, gave the ministers the po1 resting any individual, on a ; picion of treason, by an order three ministers; the person s< was to be brought to trial wi months, at the farthest; the I continue in force only until th< the ensuing session. The prir tors of the opposition in vain r that the existing laws contained provisions against seditious desl second law of exception, of 1820 (loi sur la publication des icrits periodiques, desseins, &c.) the censorship, was contested greater violence. Both parties satisfied with it. The left side manded a. majority of votes in both chan> Ttiers. The law establishing the censorship, which Was to remain in force only till the close of the session of 1820, had a great effect on the journals ; for, as the censorship was exercised with rigor against the liberal papers,"these were deprived of much of their influence on the approaching elections. The new law of election, June 29, 1820, was Carried, after the most violent opposition on the part of the doctrinaires and the liberals, in both chambers. (See Elections.) The first consequence of this new law of election was, that in 1820, of 220 new deputies, only about 30 were liberals; in 1821, two thirds of the 87 new deputies joined the right side; the remaining third belonged partly to the centre, partly to the left side. Many officers of government, by their writings, and in their places as deputies, opposed the new system; so that with every new ministry there were numerous dismissions, and many names were even erased from the armyrolls for political opinions. August 19, 1820, a number of officers and subalterns were arrested for an attempt to excite the troops in Paris and other places to revolt; the pretended author, captain Nantil, had fled. This was a case of treason, to be tried by the chamber of peers, as the supreme tribunal for such crimes; and on this occasion it was maintained, that this chamber has the power to decide, whether a case comes tinder its cognizance or not. In the present case, the chamber considered the accusation proved, and condemned three absent persons to death, and six to fine and imprisonment: the rest were acquitted. The exaggerated fears of the government were shown in the case of the conspiration de PEst, all the persons accused being acquitted. On the opening of the session of 1820 (from Dec. 19, 1820, to July 31, 1821), Laine, De Villele (q. v.) and Corbiere (q.v.) were appointed (Dec. 21), ministers' C< £\ f% "./"" f* O "*o I i r\4? D"nln iri+1-. n *r<i+rk in "T.r" +ls"v wish to see a reforn duced by a religious tern of education. ' continual conspiracy of which they reprc with being the causegave rise to the mos bitter recriminations rals (as Benj. Cons it, at the close of h on the election law Bourbons, rien que charte, toute la charte The most import foreign relations, ar in the chamber. O RoyerCollard devel opposition in the n ner. But Deserre, t] succeeded in carryir on the conduct of ed to check the viol chamber. Several I mestic affairs, and th< in particular, gave discussions of grea The censorship was 31,1820. The min drew its projet of a ganization of the n mental * ad mi n i stratic repeatedly demande the centre), because parties. Shortly be session of 1820 (Jul; try was divided, pa and partly on the qu which the ministers should take in the lele and Corbiere, th resignation, the cons< the alienation of the ministry. The min standing, so confide that they hastened session of 1821, for i the budget of 1822, foers of the right side united themselves more closely, in order to obtain a majority. They were the speakers and the reporters of the committees of the chamber. Both sides were equally discontented, although for different reasons, with the policy of government in respect to Naples and Piedmont, as displayed in the congress at Laybach, (q. v.) The address of the deputies to the king (November 26), which touched on this point, gave offence, and, instead of being presented, as usual, by a great deputation, only the president and the two secretaries of the house were admitted; and it was censured by the king in his reply. The keeper of the seals, Deserre, proposed two bills, one for continuing the censorship till the close of the session of 1826, and the other imposing additional restrictions on the liberty of the press. They were received by both sides of the chamber with a decided opposition. The ministry, unable to resist the combined attack of both parties, and not daring to dissolve the chambers, gave in their resignations, Dec. 17,1821. The sixth ministry was now formed, consisting of Peyronnet, minister of justice, the viscount de Montmorency, of foreign affairs, the duke of Belluno (Victor), of war, Corbiere, of the interior, the marquis de Clermont^Tonnere, of the marine, and Villele, of finance. Ultra royalism was now triumphant; the right side seemed satisfied, and the left formed but a feeble opposition. The new ministry immediately withdrew the proposition for a continuation of the censorship, which, therefore, expired, Feb. 5, 1822. But the trial of all offences of the press was taken from the jury, principally through the influence of the lawyers of the right centre. As it was now too late to discuss the budget of 1822, a provisional supply for three months was granted. The change in the ministry had no bad effect upon the public credit; but the dissatisfaction of the democratic party was displayed in the provinces. In 1821, a conspiracy in favor of the young Napoleon was discovered, and, in 1822, several projects of revolt in different garrisons, two of which, conducted by general Berton and colonel Canon, actually broke out, but failed. The missionaries also caused some troubles in Paris; and several seditious acts of the students were punished by the suppression of the medical faculty (restored, with a new organization, in March, 1823) in Paris, and the prohibition of all lectures on modern history, natural law and intellectual philosophy. At the same time, some of the departments were disturbed by numerous fires. These events provoked the fanatics (as the ultra royalists were called) to #ie most violent attacks upon the liberajs, who boldly maintained, that the results of the revolution were sbeneficial for France. But, as the left side was constantly growing weaker, and their speakers were often called to order, they finally resolved not to vote any longer. In the chamber of peers, the aristocracy also pre*ivailed; and they resolved that no peer could be arrested on account of civil suits, although all Frenchmen were pronounced hy the charter to be equal in the eye of the law. The stormy session of 1821 finally closed May 1, 1822. The elections of the new deputies were managed almost entirely by government. Villele even puhlished a circular letter, requiring all electors, who were public officers, to vote for the ministerial candidates. Although the opposition prevailed in Paris, yet only 31 out of 80 new depu^ ties were liberal. The session of 1822 was opened by the king, in the hall of the Louvre, June 4, and continued to August 17. On the 11th of June, the minister of finance, Villele, declared, that the grant of the provisional supply, which had been necessary for the last nine years, would now cease, as he was ready to open the hudget of 1823. The talents of this minister gave him such an influence in the administration of affairs, that, on the 4th of September, he was appointed president of the ministry. He also exerted a great influence upon public opinion, through the ministerial journal, the Journal des Dibats But the ultras of the right side were dissatisfied with his moderation. He neither did all that they wished, nor did he act with sufficient promptitude for them. Villele, like every other French statesman, as soon as he had reached the highest step of the administration, from which he could survey all the relations of the country, understood that France could no longer be governed as an absolute monarchy; ^md that, if the attempt were once made, iin abyss must open between the nation ".nd the throne, into which the minister who should make the trial would be the first to fall. Corbiere, minister of the interior, then agreed with these views of Villele. The most important acts of the session of 1822 related to the new tariff, which, conformably to the prohibitive system of England, and of some of the continental states, laid new restrictions upon commerce. The foreign policy, in relation to Greece and Spain, was also the subject of several warm debates, which only delayed the discussion of the revenue Jaw above mentioned, with the adoption of which the session closed. On the trial of Berton and the other conspirators, before alluded to, the attorneygeneral of Poitiers had attempted to implicate the deputies Lafitte, Keratry, Benj. Constant and general Foy, as accomplices. He was therefore accused by them as a libeller; but he was protected by his office, and Benj. Constant was condemned to a heavy fine, on account of his severe remarks on the attorney. The contest now approached its decision by the general defeat of the liberal party, on the great question, Shall France suppress democratic principles in Spain bv force ? The king opened the sessions of 1823 (closed the 9th May, 1823), on the 28th January, with a speech announcing the march of 100,000 French troops to Spain, for the purpose of reconciling that kingdom with Europe. Of 51 deputies, who had voted against the ministry, 45, and among them Benj. Constant, had not been reelected; and the opposition was entirely without influence. Villele, who did not unconditionally favor the war, not being able to agree with the duke de Montmorency, minister of foreign affairs, concerning the note to be sent to the Spanish government, had the good fortune to obtain the approbation of the king; upon which the duke de Montmorency resigned his place, and was succeeded by the viscount de Chateaubriand. In the latter part of the session, the bills for the budget of 1824, the loan of 100 millions for the extraordinary expenses of 1823, the calling in of the veterans, and the dotation of the chamber of peers and deputies, proposed by the minister of finance, wrere adopted. As the declaration of war was a prerogative of the crown, the chambers could only consider the policy of a war with Spain during the discussion of the extraordinary credit of 100 millions. The peace party, in both chambers, was composed of the ablest and most experienced men. Manuel, the deputy of Vendee (who, in the former session, had spoken of the repugnance of France to the Bourbons), by some allusions to the danger to which Ferdinand was exposed by the invasion of the country by foreign troops, drawn from the history of the French revolution, exasperated the right side to such a degree, that they voted (March 3) his exclusion from the present session, without allowing him to make his defence, and in violation of the rules of the chamber. Manuel, nevertheless, took his seat in the house on the 4th March, and, the national guard refusing to act, was forcibly dragged from the chamber by the gendarmes. The left side, with the exception of a few members, quitted the house ; those who remained, with several of the left centre, declined voting: 62 members presented a formal protest against the exclusion of Manuel. There was now only a silent opposition in the right centre in favor of peace; but the extreme right, or the party of Labourdonnaye, continued to attack Villele, the president of the ministerial council, and Labourdonnaye publicly declared his dissatisfaction with the charte, and with the neglect to restore the national domains to the emigrants. In the discussion of the budget of 1824, in which the estimated expenditure amounted to 900 millions, the report attributed the greatness of the sum to the revolution, which had swallowed up the estates of the church, leaving the clergy to be paid by government; had consumed the funds of charitable institutions, now to be supported by the state; created a great number of officers, which could only be diminished gradually; lost the greatest part of the colonies, those which remained costing 6,000,000 francs more than they yielded; and finally augmented the public debt 100,000,000 in rentes since 1788. The war began, and the result (see Spain in 1823) was the triumph of the Bourbons; the monarchical principle was established; the Bourbons acquired a little popularity with the army; and this ex pensive campaign of six months was thus of some importance in strengthening legitimacy. Baron Damas had succeeded the duke of Belluno, as minister of war, in the beginning of the war. The session of 1824 was opened March 23; the number of liberals was reduced from 110 to 17. A supply of 107,000,000 francs for the extraordinary expenses of 1823 was granted, and the bill providing for the septennial election of deputies (see Septennial Elections) was adopted. The Spanish war had cost 207,827,000 francs. Spain had stipulated for the payment of only 33,877,700. To meet this exigency, Villele brought forward a proposal to reduce the rentes from 5 per cent, to 3 per cent., which was adopted by the deputies, but rejected (3d June) by the peers. Chateaubriand (q. v.), for refusing to defend the bill, was deprived of the portfolio of foreign affairs, and became a violent opponent of government. The other measures of the ministry were carried, in both houses, by a great majority; and the motion of Labourdonnaye for the indemnification of the emigi'ants was rejected. Soon after the close of this session (August 4), the government renewed the censorship of the public journals, chiefly through the influence of count Frayssinous, bishop of Hermopolis. and grandmaster of the university, who had been intrusted with the new ministry of public worship, Louis XVIII {q. v.) died the 16th September, and his brother (see Charles X) ascended the throne. The king declared his intention of confirming the charter, appointed the dauphin (duke of Angouleme) a member of the ministerial council, and suppressed |Sept. 29) the censorship of the public journals. The count de ClermontTonnere was appointed minister of war; the duke de Doudeauville, minister of the royal palace; and baron Damas, minister of foreign affairs. Villele secured the confidence of the king, by his prudent administration, and by his concessions to the aristocratical and theocratical spirit. Chateaubriand continued, by his organ, the Journal des Dibats, to be a most eloquent opponent of his measures.In the session of 1825 (from Dec. 22, 1824, to June 13, 1825), the triumph of Villele was complete. The bill for the indemnification of the emigrants, by granting 1,000,000,000 francs in rentes, as an indemnity for their estates, the proceeds of the sale of which had been deposited in the public treasury, and that for the reduction of rentes, now passed. Both measures were loudly condemned by the nation, which became more and more opposed to the policy of the government. A law was also passed punishing sacrilege (the profanation of sacred places and utensils) with death. The civil list of the king was fixed at 25,000,000 annually, for life; the appanage of the royal family at 7,000,000. The duke of Orleans received the title of royal highness. Immediately after the acceptance of the budget for 1826, the splendid coronation of the king, Charles X, took place (May 29) at Rheims, according to ancient custom, with the addition, however, of the oath of the king, to govern according to the charte. The king had already acknowledged the independence of Hayti {q. v.), by the ordinance of April 17, 1825. Commercial intercourse with the Spanish American republics was also permitted, but without a recognition of their independence, to which Spain refused to accede. A preliminary treaty of commerce was concluded with Great Britain, and a treaty of commerce and amity with the empire of Brazil (Oct. 4,1826). In the session of 1826 (opened Jan. 31st, and closed July 6th), the ministry was strengthened in the chamber of peers by the nomination of 31 new peers. The bill establishing the right of primogeniture and entails (substitutions) was passed, however, only after striking out the provisions on the former point, in which the nation discerned the foundation of a new aristocracy, and the destruction of the legal equality of all citizens. It was rejected by the peers on the 8th April, 1826. The public attention was most attracted by the trial of Ouvrard. (q. v.) When the French army, in the Spanish campaign, had reached Bayonne, the duke of Angouleme found the supplies of food and clothing deficient. In this emergency, Ouvrard stepped in, and, by large advances of money, saved the army. The terms of his contract were exorbitant, and he succeeded in effecting it by extensive bribery, which, however, was not the only shameful part of the transaction. Double rations were drawn for 100,000 men, because the troops, whilst employed in the Spanish war, still remained on the rolls at home, and the allowances for pay were made in the same ratio. This was one of the causes of the enormous expense of the campaign, stated in the American Annual Reg. at 397,000,000 fr.; in the German Con. Lex. at 207,827,000. Villele, on the first report of the business, had Ouvrard arrested; but he soon repented this step, when Ouvrard was tried by the courroyale, and then by the peers, because the more the matter was investigated, the more fraud appeared, and the more persons were found to be implicated. At length the ministry induced the peers to give up the trial without convicting the peers implicated ; but this step was taken too late to conceal from the nation a scene of detestable abuses. An effect not unlike this was produced by the count Montlosier's denunciation of the Jesuits, who were reestablishing themselves in France, contrary to law. (See Jesuits, and Ultramontanists.) The court of appeal, at Paris, declared itself incompetent to decide on this subject; but the abbe de la Mennais was condemned and punished for his attack upon the privileges of the Gallican church, as established by the declaration of 1682. On Lafayette's return from the U. States, in 1825, the citizens of Havre having received him with some demonstrations of joy, the government manifested their resentment by ordering out the gendarmes, who charged the multitude with drawn sabres* Thg influence of the Jesuits was seen in the prosecution Of the Constituti&iinel and Cowrrier Francois, two of the best liberal journals. ViHele, who had discernment enough to see to what this fanaticism would lead, arid Who was, at trie same time, obnoxious to the liberals, t)ri account of his anticonstitutional principles, and his operations in the funds, became less secure. The parties assumed a more hostile attitude towards each other. The royalists and the supporters of the Jesuits became more open in the expression of their real sentiments; the liberals became stronger arid bolder; and the government assumed more and more the character of an institution supported by force and intrigue, and not forming an integrant part of the nation. The state of Portugal, Sputh America and Greece contributed to mcrease the agitation. The session of 1827 was opened Dec. 12,1826. Damas, minister of foreign affairs, informed the chamber that all the continental powers had endeavored to prevent the interference of Spain in the affairs of Portugal ; that France had cooperated with them, had withdrawn her ambassador from Madrid, and had entered into arrangements with England to leave Portugal and Spain to settle their affairs in their own way. M. de Montlosier presented a petition to the chamber of peers, praying that the laws against the Jesuits might be put in force. After a violent discussion, the petition was referred to the president of the council of ministers. A popular triumph, of greater importance, was the result of the discussions concerning the liberty of the press. The bill proposed by the ministers was adopted by a majority of 233 against 134, in the chamber of deputies, but the majority of the peers being found to be opposed to it, the project was withdrawn by an ordinance of April 27, 1827. Paris was filled with rejoicings. Illuminations, fireworks, &c, testified the tri francs. The excess < expenditure was 5,1 lfl congratulated the nati be an excess, after ] expenses. M. Hyd< merly French ministc having accused the F] Madrid of connivance Vasion of Portugal, } immediately struck f bassadeurs en disponih ous censorship of the an ordinance of June obnoxious than any p the ministry. The sometimes appeared i blank; a thousand inj were invented for e^ ion, and the liberal more active in othe Some excitement wi this time, by the ass de Maubreuil on the Talleyrand. The mi down by a violent 1 the presence of the co reason for his conduc employed by Talleyi the first restoration, 1 leon, and to waylay Bonaparte, in order to the crown jewels. H ly in the latter enter] fused the promised re his complaints with six months. The st< inade little impression he was fined and impi The interment of Mai ust 20, at the country '. a new cause of irr: refused permission to his house in Paris, g thence; he therefore neral procession shou the cemetery of Phre lice eagerly accepted removing the coffin. A compromise was finally made, and two horses were slightly harnessed to the car, whilst the people continued to draw it. Lafayette delivered a short speech at the grave. The immense multitude dispersed without further disturbance. During this year, France was obliged to agree to accredit the agents of the southern republics of America, as Mexico and Colombia would not consent to the halfway measures by which the French government wished to obtain commercial advantages, without compromising her adherence to legitimacy. Early in the summer, war broke out with Algiers, but was carried on with little spirit. It arose chiefly from a controversy respecting a debt due the Algerines for corn purchased on account of the French government, in 1793. Villele was not so blind as not to see that the ministry was losing ground. He therefore determined to dissolve the chamber, which had still three years to run. This he did either because he expected to obtain a majority by a new election at this time, of which there might be kss chance three years later, or because he really wished to throw himself upon the nation, and receive his sentence from its decision. In Paris, out of 8000 votes, only 1114 were for the ministerial candidates ; the rest were for the liberals, Dupontde l'Eure, Lafitte, CasimirPerrier, Benj. Constant, jDe Schonen, Ternaux, RoyerCollard and baron Louis. The same result took place in the departments, and a majority of the chamber was liberal. This result occasioned the greatest joy in Paris, and caused some disturbances, in which nearly 50 persons were killed by the gendaimes. The ordinance which had dissolved the chamber had been accompanied by another, dated November 5,1827, creating 76 new peersan act certainly unconstitutional in spirit, although the right of the crown to create new* peers is not limited by any^ precise rule. Among the list, we hardly find one, except Soult, who eould be considered entitled to the honor by past services. January 4,1828, when the ministry was partially dissolved, the names of Villele, Peyronnet and Corbiere were added to the number. The seventh ministry was now formed. Count de la Ferronaye, late ambassador to St. Petersburg, was created minister of foreign affairs ; count Portalis, whose report against the Jesuits was not forgotten by the liberals, keeper of the seals and minister of justice; M. de Caux, minister of war; JYL Martignac, minister of the interior; count Roy, minister of finance. The department of commerce was erected into a separate ministry, and assigned to M. St* Cricq, who had been for several years at its head, as directorgeneral of the customs. M" de Chabrol, minister of the marine, who was said to have opposed the dissolution of the national guards, remained in the new ministry,as did,likewise, count de Frayssinous, minister of ecclesiastical affairs; but the department of public instruction was taken from this minister, andraised to a separate branch of administration, to which M. de Vatismenil was appointed. The session was opened February 5,1828 ; and the king, in his speech from the throne, congratulated the nation on the victory of Navarino. The new peers were received without any question respecting the legality of their creation. The chamber of deputies was so equally divided, that the balance of power remained with a fraction of about 30 members detached from the right side. RoyerCollard was chosen president of the chamber by the king, from the five candidates presented to him. The king, in this instance, deviated from the custom, of selecting the candidate who had the majority of votes. Before the discussions respecting the answer to the king's speech took place, Chabrol and Frayssinous, the two members of the Villele ministry, who had remained in the cabinet, resigned their posts, and were succeeded by Hyde de Neuville and Feutrier, bishop of Beauvais. Several illegal returns of deputies had been set aside, and the liberal party gained new strength by supplying the vacancies. A proposition of M. de Conny, to subject all members of the chamber accepting office to a new election was passed, after some warm debates, by a vote of 144 to 133, but was rejected by the peers, by a vote of 210 to 41. The discussions on the abuses in the postoffih ces, and the existence of a cabinet noir, where all suspected letters were opened (as is the case in many countries in Europe), were also animated. A salutaly law, providing for the annual revision of the jury and electoral lists, was passed, and many abuses connected with them, which had grown up under the late ministry, were exposed. A committee was appointed to inquire whether there were grounds for impeaching the late ministry for peculation and treason ; but, as they had not the power to send for persons and papers, they reported u that there wTas occasion for procuring further informatiqn respecting the accusation of treason, that had been advanced against the late ministry." The consideration of this report was deferred till after the discussion of the budget, which virtually amounted to abandoning the impeachment. The clergy were dissatisfied with the ordinance, directing that no person should thenceforth be intrusted with the charge of schools, and with instruction in any uouse of education, unless he declared, in writing, that he did not belong to any religious congregation, not legally established in France, which was chiefly directed against the Jesuits. They pronounced this law to be a conspiracy against the Catholic religion ; the bishop of Toulouse even announced his intention of opposing it in his diocese, but the pope prevailed upon the clergy to submit. The session was closed August 18 ; and reflecting men were of opinion, that this juinistry could not probably stand. We have seen that they had little unquestionable support in the chamber. The ultraroyalists and Jesuits were still more violent against the present administration, than against Villele's. The left side by no means entertained a full confidence in it; and the court was under the influence of the clergy, which seemed to abhor every thing liberal. In general, it must be said that the ministry had no strong interest for its foundation. During this year (1828), the French troops returned from Spain, and formed a part of the expedition, consisting of from 13 to 14,000 men, which sailed for the Morea under general Maison, in the month of August, for the purpose of delivering Greece from the hands of the Turks. The Morea was soon occupied (see Greece) by the French forces. The ministry determined not to remove any offieer for his political opinions. This truly liberal measure offended the warm partisans, and probably contributed, with the other causes above mentioned, to their downfall. The session of 1829 began January 27. The most important subject touched on in the king's speech, was the promise to propose laws " for placing the municipal and departmental organization in harmony with the existing institutions"the want of which had been felt ever since the restoration of the Bourbons. RoyerCollard was again elected president of the deputies. Martignac, the minister of the interior, presented, early in February, two projets ; one regulating the organization of the communes; the other, respecting the councils of the departments and ar~ rondissements. After a long discussion, the ministers withdrew the projetsa measure which undoubtedly hastened their approaching overthrow. The discussion of these important points of government exposed theministry to the assaults of the right and left sides at the same time. An unpopular law was passed by a majority of 90 votes, in the chamber of deputies, providing pensions for such peers as had not 30,000 francs clear income. These pensions were made unalienable rentes, and transmissible to the successor to a peerage, only in the event of his not having a clear revenue of 30,000 francs. It appeared, also, that 50,000,000 francs had been distributed in the chamber of peers, in conformity with the act of 1825, for indemnifying the emigrants. On this occasion, the liberal journals attacked the ministry with violence. Before the close of the session, M. Portalis had been appointed minister of foreign affairs, and M. Botirdeau keeper of the seals. The ministry became more and more embarrassed, as the session advanced ; the supplies which they asked for were not granted. A few days after the prorogation of the chamber, the ministry was dissolved. M. Portalis had kept open for himself the office of first president of the court of cassation, the highest judicial station in France. Messrs. Bourdeau and Vatismenii received neither decorations, pensions, nor even the usual title of minister of state.On August 9, 1829, the following appointments were announced: prince Polignac, minister of foreign affairs ; M. Courvoisier, keeper of the seals and minister of justice ; count Bourmont, minister of war; count Kigny, minister of marine and the colonies; count de la Bourdonnaye, minister of the interior; baron de Montbel, minister of ecclesiastical affairs and public instruction ; count Chabrol de Crousol, minister of finance. The departments of commerce and manufactures were suppressed. Rigny, the commander of the French fleet at Navarino, declined the offered portfolio, and M. d'Haussey, prefect of the Gironde. and a deputy of the right side, was named in lys place. The ministry was decidedly ultraroyalist. Bourmont had served under Napoleon, declared for Louis XVIII, had again taken office under Napoleon, whom he deserted on the field of Waterloo, fled to the Bourbons, whom he joined at Ghent, had been created a peer, and commanded the army of occupation in Spain, after the return of the duke d'Angouleme. Prince Polignac (for whom it is thought that the place of president of the council of ministers had been left vacant during the last administration) was completely identified with the ancient regime. Attached, from his very birth, to the person and fortunes of Charles X, Polignac is, in his religious and political sentiments, a royalist. He and his brother Armand were implicated in Pichegru's conspiracy, but were pardoned by Napoleon. Since 1823, he had been ambassador at London, and always showed a great predilection for England, without entering at all into the liberal spirit of her institutions. It was also suspected, that he owed his elevation to English influence, and particularly to that of Wellington; and, as the prince had no redeeming qualities, the majority of the nation at once pronounced against him. M. de la Bourdonnaye, minister of the interior, was next in importance to prince Polignac. He had always been one of the most active and violent members of the extreme right* As soon as the ministry was composed, the question arose, how it was to procure a majority in the chamber. La Bourdonnaye proposed to try the dangerous policy of Villele, viz. to dissolve thd chamber, and to procure a majority in the new elections by the active and united exertions of the royalists, using, of course, all means in the power of the ministry. But this proposal was not adopted by his colleagues, and, in fact, there is no doubt that they would have been entirely baffled, although the clergy would have done every thing in their power to secure the victory to Polignac. The rejection of this proposition, and the creation of prince Polignac president of the ministerial council, induced M. la Bourdonnaye to resign. Baron Montbel, who had been elected a member of the chamber by the congreganistes of Toulouse, was transferred they present,the noblesse of regime and of the imperial d; one the offspring of feudalisn of the revolutionthe soldier of the officer of the republican encountered him in the field; want of any political privileg with some other circumstance the noblesse entirely without co Even the peers do not contain tocratical elements. Without th wealth and patronage of the B age, they are not able to es great influence ; they are obli low, not lead the nation. (S< Peers.) One of the measures < dynasty, which had recoiled u selves, was the allowing only th and to be eligible to office, w] highest taxes. (See Election, nobility were not rich, it very pened that barons and counts co be eligible nor even electors, manufacturers, bankers, &c, en privileges. Those very persor was the great object of the gov exclude from the legislature, persons who paid the highest who, consequently, were electo quently were elected. The Bo not understand France, and ually alienated the nation ; knew the sentiments of the they knew what they had to e: the new ministry, and were c from the beginning, not to to illegal projects. The genera of the people, at this time, wi ous; commerce and manufaci ished ; and the question was c Of what do the French compl they not all they want? It cessary, in this country, to r< who consider the physical co people as the sole standard o ness of a government or of th< of a nation. It is one of the nation. But the war was resolved upon without a calculation of the relative strength of the parties* 1830. March 2, the speech from the throne announced that war had been declared against Algiers on account of the insults offered to the French flag (the dey had also struck the French consul at a public audience, on receiving an answer m the negative to his question whether the debt abovementioned, due from France to Algiers, had been settled); that active negotiations were on foot to effect a reconciliation between the members of the Braganza family; and that the revenue of 1829, though less than that of the preceding year, exceeded the estimates of the budget The speech ended with the following words J " Peers of France, deputies of the departments, I do not doubt your cooperation in the good I desire to do. You will repel, With contempt, the perfidious insinuations which malevolence is busy in propagating. If guilty intrigues should throw any obstacles in the way of my government, which I cannot and will not anticipate, I should find force to overcome them, in my resolution to preserve the public peace, in the just confidence I have in the French nation, and in the love which they have always evinced for their kings." The funds fell as soon as the speech was made public. There was a considerable majority in the chamber of deputies against the ministers. RoyerCollard was reelected president. When the doyen (Page (see Dean) gave up the chair, he addressed the president by the term citizen, which excited a great sensation. On the 18th of March, the usual deputation of the chamber, with the president at their head, presented to the king the answer of the chamber. The address declared, in a frank, but respectful tone, that a concurrence did not exist between the views of the government and the wishes of the nation; that the adminis peers bad answered mere echo of the spe< Chateaubriand's disc* was a bold attack on two chambers were voked for the next c ceive a conimunieatic ment, when the char to be prorogued unt same yeara measu great excitement throi journals became mo The Jesuitical and ro ed in the measure, anc for its firmness, whils began to predict the since taken place. T in general, with great ministerial journals vi and reproaches of th< they denounced as t of the throne. To t erals against Poligns was added contemp A society was form purpose of printing t partments and distri of them, and removi to their publication ( fusal of printers to 1 papers opposed to t ernment. In Brittan formed to refuse th not regularly grantee deputies. The men tion agreed to assist < prosecution. The nounced, but was a royale at Paris. 221 for the answer to th 181 against it. Tin were printed in han 221 was seen on snu des 221 soon becam Benjamin Constant, himself, in the Gazet the answer. Goven Polignac seethed to have become more violent in proportion to his weakness; and it would seem as if schemes of vengeance bad .mingled with his absurd ideas of governing France. The aaniversary of the entry of Charles X (then count d'Artois) into Paris, in 1814, was celebrated April 13. AH the public bodies made flattering speeches, and received graeious answers, and all the hollow pageantry of monarchy (of a very different complexion from what was soon to follow) was displayed.We have already mentioned the difficulties which existed between the king of France and the dey of Algiers, and the intimation, in the king's speech, of his determination to take effectual measures on this point. A war with Algiers could only be agreeable to the administration. The same reason which was one of the inducements to the war with Spainthe desire of making the army familiar with the name of the Bourbons, and the drapeau blancstill existed. But there were many other reasons which rendered a war, with a reasonable probability of success, particularly desirable for the ministry at this moment* It enabled them to assemble an army, which, in case of necessity, might be used at home, andr even if it were absent at Algiers, the military preparations might be useful for their purposes. A war of this kind would, the partisans of the ministry hoped, divert the public attention, and victory would at once render them popular with a nation so enthusiastically fond of military glory, m both calculations, the ministry, as we shall see, were grievously mistaken. Count Bourmont, the minister of war, was appointed commanderinchief of the expedition, and admiral Duperre, the commander of the fleet. April 20,1830, the Motriteur stated the reasons for the war to be, that the dey had raised the ancient tribute of 17,000 francs per annum to 60,000 francs, and, finally, to 200,000 francs; that, though this sum was duly paid from 1820 to 1826, the dey had been unfavorable to the French interest, insulted the French flag, and struck the French consul, &c. May 10, the army, consisting of 37,577 infantry, and 4000 horse, embarked at Toulon, and the fleet, consisting of 97 vessels, of which 11 were ships of the line and 24 frigates, set sail. June 14, at four o'clock, the army began to disembark at Sidi Ferrajh, on the coast of Africa. May 17, the royal ordinance dissolving the chamber appeared in the Moniteur. At the same time, new elections were ordered, and the two chambers con voked for August 3. The Momteur of June 15 contained a. proclamation of the king in which be called upon all Frenchmen to do their, duty m the colleges, to rely upon his constitutional intentions, &c. In this proclamation are these remarkable words: "As the father of my people, my heart was grieved; as king, I felt insulted. I pronounced the dissolution of that chamber." It ends thus: rt Electors, hasten to your colleges. Let no reprehensible negligence deprive them of your presence! Let one sentiment animate you all; let one standard be your rallying point! It is your king who demands this of you ; it is a father who calls upon you. Fulfil your duties. I will take care to fulfil mine." The elections for the new chamber took place in the latter part of June and in July. The activity arid talent displayed in the opposition papers during this struggle were admirable. Though the success of the army in Algiers* became known during the electoral struggle at home, and though all parties exulted in the success of the French arms, it appears that the ministry gained no popularity by it. All the returns of the new elections indicated a strong majority against the ministry, so that, in the beginning of July,* Algiers surrendered July 5. According to a telegraphic despatch to the minister of marine (Toulon, July 20, 1830), the treasure found in Algiers amounted to 90,000,000 of francs in money, and 10,000,000 in gold and silver bullion and plate. There were besides 20 or 30,000,000 not inventoried. The Journal du Commerce subsequently stated the amount obtained at 43,000,000. It appears that the army landed precisely at the place pointed out by Mr. Shaler, in his Sketches of Algiers. We subjoin the passage, in Mr. Shaler's work, in which he lays down the plan of a campaign against Algiers : " The several expeditions against Algiers, where land forees have been employed, nave landed in the bay eastward of the city, which is evidently an error, and discovers an unpardonable ignorance of the coast, and topography of the country; for all their means of defence are concentrated there. But it is obvious that any force whatever might be landed in the fine bay of Sidi Ferrajh without opposition, whence, by a single march, they might arrive upon the heights which command the castle del Emperador, where, as nothing could prevent an approach to the foot of its walls, they might be scaled, or breached by a mine, in a short time. This position being mastered, batteries might be established on a height commanding the citadel, which is indicated by two cylindrical ruins of windmills, and where are the ruins of a fortress, which was called Stau, which the jealous fears of this government caused to be destroyed, for the reasons here alleged, that it commanded the citadel, and, consequently, thcs city. The fleet, which had landed the troops, would, by this time, appear in the bay to distract their attention, when Algiers must either surrender at discretion or be taken by storm." intelligent med spoke of a change of the ministry as a natural consequence; and the funds rose; but the infatuated ministry had determined otherwise. It preferred to attack the charter, violate the social contract, and expose France to a civil war, rather than to yield. Priests governed the monarch; ambition blinded his ministers. The ministerial papers now began to assert, that, after the enemies in Africa were subdued, those at home remained to be conquered. They began to utter the phrase coup d'etat, which several papers, under the more direct influence of the clergy, actually demanded. During this time, the king and queen of Naples visited Paris, and many festivals took place, strongly in contrast with the state of political affairs. The king also ordered Te De%m to be sung in all churches of the kingdom for the victory of his army in Africa, the news of which reached Paris (July 9) four days after the capture of Algiers. The capital was illuminated.At an earlier period, the negotiations between France, Russia and Great Britain, at London, relative to Greece, had come to a conclusion, the three powers coinciding in the offer of the sovereignty to prince Leopold of SaxeCoburg. (See Greece.)In several departments, numerous conflagrations had taken place, which were evidently the work of incendiaries. Many people, whether reasonably or not, believed these atrocities to have been perpetrated by the instigation of the ministry. This appears from the cries of the populace, when prince Polignac was arrested " This is the monster who has burned our houses. Hang him, hang him!"Of the 221 who voted for the answer of the chamber, 220 were reelected. The liberals in the new chamber were 270, the ministerial members 145, and 15 were undecided. In consequence of this result, the ministers made a " report to the king" (July 26), setting forth at length the dangers of a free press (of which they say, " At all epochs, the periodical press has only been, and from its nature must ever be, an instrument of disorder and sedition"), and calling upon the king to suspend the liberty of the pressa measure authorized, as they asserted, by the 14th article of the charter, which declares, that the king has the power to make all regulations and ordinances for the execution of the laws and the safety of the state. u The state," they said, " is in danger, and your majesty has the right to provide for its safety. No government can stand,if it has not the right to provide for its own safety; besides, the 8th article of the charter only gives every Frenchman the right of publishing his own opinions, but not, as the journals do, the opinions of others; the charter does not expressly allow journals and the liberty of the press. The journals misrepresent t*he best intentions of government; and the liberty of the press produces the very contrary of publicity, because illintentioned writers misconstrue every thing, and the public never knows the truth." This report, to which its consequences have given a historical importance, is one of the shallowest and most preposterous state papers on record. It combines unconstitutionality with miserable sophistry and the verbiage of despotism. Despotism must never argue, or it is lost. The Polignac ministry had resolved to violate the constitution, and had not talent to play the despot History proves, that nothing is so violent and so blind as bigotry, religious or political ; and this was the characteristic of the whole party, priests and laymen, who supported, or rather instigated, Polignac. This report was accompanied by three ordinances, one dissolving the chamber, " according to the 50th article of the charter" (this was plainly annulling the election, not dissolving the chamber, because the new chamber had not been organized) ; a second, suspending the liberty of the periodical press, although, according to law, the liberty of the press, even if suspended, revives of itself, on the dissolution of the chamber. The third ordinance prescribed a new law of election, from which the ministers expected more favorable returns. The Constitutionnel, the National, Courrier Frangais, Temps, Globe, Journal de Commerce, Messager, Figaro, and others, all liberal papers, resolved to appear without the authorization of government, required by the new ordinance. The Journal des Dibats refused to unite in this measure. An opinion of eminent lawyers was published, declaring that the property in a journal was like any other property, and could only be attacked by regular judicial process. All the liberal papers in Paris were suppressed, and only the Moniteur Universel, Quotidienne, Gazette de France, Drapeau Blanc, allowed to appear. The same thing was done in the departments. The seizure of the liberal journals, on Tuesday morning* July 27, was the signal of the revolution. July 26, the bank refused to discount bills, and all the manufacturers discharged their workmen, which, of course, increased the discontent. The revolution, however, began by an attack of well dressed people upon the gendarmes. It is a striking feature of the recent revolutions or political insurrections in France, Italy, Germany and Spain, that they have emanated from, and been principally, executed by, the well informed middle class, not by the rabble, under the pressure of some physical necessity. Some persons were killed at the Palais Royal. Prince Polignac received the congratulations of his party at his palace, on his complete victory over the insurgents. Marshal Marmont, duke of Ragusa,* had received the command of the king's troops. Wednesday, July 28, all Paris was in arms early in the morning. The national guard appeared in their old uniform; the tricolored flag was displayed on several buildings. The battle began in the place de Greve; the Hotel de Ville became the point of attack; it was repeatedly taken and retaken, but finally remained in the hands of the people. The Swiss guards were attacked at the Louvre; the royal lancers fought on the PontNeuf. Evening came on. The loss of both parties had been considerable. In the night of July 27, the streets and boulevards were barricaded, the pavements were torn up, to serve as missiles, and arms of every description were seized, wherever they could be found; the women attended the wounded. The Hotel de Ville had remained in the hands of the citizens on the evening of the 28th. The Tuileries and the Louvre were now to be taken. Many of the troops had been disarmed ; some were unwilling to fire on their countrymen ; some openly went over to the citizens. On the 29th, general Lafayette was appointed commanderinchief of the national guards by the liberal deputies (a considerable number of whom had assembled in Paris), and was received with enthusiasm by the Parisians. These deputies also protested against the dissolution of the chamber, and declared themselves to be still the lawful representatives of the nation. The scholars of the polytechnic school had joined the people on the morning of the 29th, and, in some cases, taken the command. A youth of twenty years of age, belonging to this school, led the attack on the Louvre, from which the Swiss retreated to the Tuileries. This palace was also taken, by the people, with one of these youths at their head. The Luxembourg had already fallen into their* This general has promised an explanation of his conduct during the memorable three days. hands. The young men of this school rendered the greatest service during the day in the cause of the nation, and displayed an astonishing coolness and courage. They afterwards declined the medals granted to them, and also the rank of lieutenant, offered to each, in case he entered the army. At one o'clock, Paris had obtained the victory. From 5000 to 8000 persons were killed and wounded. The number of troops engaged was 17,200. The people fought heroically throughout. Amidst the fire of musketry, several deputies, viz., general Gerard, count Lobau, M. Lafitte, M. CasimirPerrier and Mauguin, went to marshal Marmont. Lafitte entreated him to stop the carnage, and declared him personally responsible for it. Marmont said he felt with them, but, as a soldier, he must obey his orders. He offered to ask prince Polignac whether he wrould treat, but, after a quarter of an hour, returned with a decided refusal. " We have then a civil war," replied Lafitte, and the deputies retired.July 31, the deputies published a proclamation, declaring that they had invited the duke of Orleans to become lieutenantgeneral of the kingdom. At noon of the same day, Louis Philippe d'Orleans issued a proclamation, declaring that he had hastened to Paris, wearing the " glorious colors" of France, to accept the invitation of the assembled deputies to become lieutenantgeneral of the kingdom. A proclamation of the same date appointed provisional commissaries, for the different departments of government, as follows: for the department of justice, M. Dupontde l'Eure ; of finance, baron Louis ; of war, general Gerard; of the marine, De Rigny ; of foreign affairs, M. Bignon ; of public instruction, M. Guizot ; of the interior and public works, M. CasimirPerrier; signed Lobau A. de Puyraveau and Mauguin de Schonen. The king, with his family, had fled to St. Cloud. History has but few events to show that can be compared with this struggle in Paris. The Parisians left their habitations to fight, without organization, we might almost say without arms, against some of the best troops in the world; and for what ? Were they a rabble driven by hunger, or a rebellious nobility endeavoring to wrest new privileges from the monarch ? No; they were men who would not suffer themselves to be stripped of their civil rights, but firmly and manfully defended them to death. It is in this respect a moral revolution, like that of the Americans, fighting for principles. Tho Marseilles Hymn, the song of the revolution, which once had fanned in so many Frenchmen the fire of liberty, did wonders during the revolution of 1830. It brought back to the mindsiof the people a world of old associations. M. Rouget de Lisle received, in consequence, a pension of 1500 francs from the private purse of the duke of Orleans. (See Ca Ira, and Marseilles Hymn,) In the (departments, events took place similar to 4hose in Paris, &c, and the people were ©very where victorious. The king and his household fled on July 31, from St. Cloud to Rambouillet, a small place six teagues W. S. W. of Versailles. Three commissioners, Messrs. De Schonen, marshal Maison and O'Dillon Barrett were sent to treat with him. They informed the authorities at Paris, under date of August 3, that the king wished to leave France by way of Cherbourg; to restore the crown jewels, which he had taken from Paris, &c. These concessions were produced by the advance of the national guard toward Rambouillet. On the morning of August 2, the abdication of Charles X and the dauphin, Louis Antoine, was placed in the hands of the lieutenantgeneral. The abdication, however, was made in favor of the duke of Bordeaux. A letter of the king, of August 2, appointed the duke of Orleans lieutenantgeneral of the kingdom, and ordered him to proclaim the duke of Bordeaux (born on the 29th August, 1820), king, under the title of Henry V. August 3 (the day originally fixed for the opening of the session), the chambers met. The lieutenantgeneral addressed the peers and deputies, and announced the abdication of Charles. CasimirPerrier was chosen president of the chamber, which had acted, during the Jate memorable events, under the vicepresident Lafitte. August 6. The chamber of deputies declared the throne of France vacant, de jure and de facto, and discussed those changes of the charter, which we have already given in the former part of this article. On the 7th, the proposed changes were adopted, and it was voted to invite the duke of Orleans to become king of the French on condition of his accepting these changes; the vote stood 219 in favor, 33 against. The whole number of deputies is 430; so that 219 is not only an immense majority of those present, but a majority of the whole chamber. On the 8th, the chamber went in a body to the duke of Orleans, and offered him the crown, which he accepted; and, on Au gust 9, he took the prescribed constitutional oath. A majority of the chamber of peers, actually present, concurred '"in these measures. The Moniteur of August 12 contained the names of the new ministry, as follows : foreign affairs, count de Mole; war, general Gerard; finance, baron Louis; interior, Guizot; marine, general Sebastiani (q.v.); keeper of the seals and minister of justice, Dupontde PEure; president of the ministry, duke de Broglie. B. Constant was made president of the committee of legislation and the administration of justice in the council of state. Lafitte and CasirnirPerrier were also appointed ministers of state, without special departments.The count de Mole was minister of justice in 1813, and minister of the marine in 1817, and is an admirer of the institutions of England. General Gerard served with distinction in the French armies, from the early campaigns of the revolution to the final overthrow of Na^ poleon. Baron Louis, who is a man of large landed property, and, therefore, deeply interested in the preservation of order and good government, was considered one of the most honest and skilful ministers of Louis XVIII, and he enjoys the respect of all parties. The duke de Broglie is a statesman of distinguished merit; he is considered the chief of the political litUraires of Paris, and is well known by his essays in the Revue Ency^ clopedique, and, more particularly, by an admirable paper in that work on the criminal law of Europe, in which he has displayed equal good sense and humanity. M. de Broglie (q. v.) was also a regular contributor to Le Globe, a journal of great influence among the constitutional royalists. M. Guizot (q. v.) is a literary man of much reputation, and is said to have a general talent for business. The omission to fix the requisites for electors, in the new charter (leaving the qualifications to be settled by an ordinary law, liable to alteration and repeal), also the provision for revising the instrument itself during the session of 1831, will, probably, give rise to warm party contentions. The spirit of order, manifested by the people during the struggles in Paris, which prevented all outrage and plundering, was still further shown in the unmolested retreat of Charles X, who took passage for England in two American vessels. He was received there merely as a private person. Some individuals, including M. Chateaubriand, proposed to acknowledge the duke of Bordeaux, as king, on the ground of expediency. But the policy of giving the crown to a minor in such troubled times, and to one who could only regard the privileges of the people as wrongfully wrested from his royal authority, would seem to be hardly deserving of discussion. The abdication of Charles X, in favor of his grandson, cannot give him a right to the throne in the eyes of the adherents of legitimacy, as this would be an acknowledgment, on their part, of the right of the people to extort from the sovereign a resignation of the crown. The reasons which justify the expulsion of Charles equally justify that of his whole family. The claims of Napoleon II would seem to stand on somewhat better ground, as his father, who had received the hereditary crown by the votes of the nation, abdicated it in his favor, and the subsequent establishment of the Bourbons was effected by foreign arms, and was not in accordance with the will of the nation. But all such claims are superseded when the nation, for whose benefit government is instituted, interferes by a revolution, and changes the established order. Some persons were in favor of a republic; but we need not discuss here the adaptation of such a government to France in its present state. The stability of the Orleans family on the throne has been doubted, destitute as it is of the ancient prerogatives and prestige of royalty. But we conceive that it is supported by the only principle which can aow give stability to the hereditary succession of the throne in any familythe conviction of the people of the necessity of such an establishment for the good order of the nation, as few reflecting men, at the present day, will be disposed to defend hereditary monarchy in the abstract. The revolution of 1830 in France has been hailed with delight by the civilized world, and it is of the greatest importance for mankind, that Liberty should become established in that country on a solid basis. May her richest blessings be granted to a nation which has shown itself so deserving of them. May the parties of France never forget that, however important the forms of government are, there are things still more importantthose for which governments are instituted, and the security of which is their chief objectwe mean, order and justice. As the affairs of France, whatever turn they may take, must be of the highest interest, we propose to continue the account of them at the close of the last volume of this work. In the preceding pages, we have givena brief summary of the history of France; we shall now proceed to consider more minutely the state of that country Defore the revolution of 1789, as the character of that revolution cannot be understood without an exposition, at some length, of the state of things which preceded it. France before the Revolution*Organization of the JVation. The most profound writers on French history agree, that there was no hereditary nobility under the first dynasty of the Frankish kings, and that, among the Franks, the principles of freedom, which prevailed in the municipal organization, were extended to the general administration of the state. But under the successors of Charlemagne the offices of the empire began to become hereditary ; the hitherto presiding officers of the communities then became hereditary proprietors, and the general liberty of the Franks was merged in the feudal system, which afforded the only protection of the weak against the oppression of the strong. Every individual was obliged to have a feudal superior, every piece of ground its feudal lord. Then arose the maxim, nulle terre sans seigneur. The change of gov eminent in 987, when the third dynasty ascended the throne, completed, on the one hand, the general introduction of the feudal system, and, on the other, the independence of the immediate vassals of the crown, the most powerful of whom, as princes and peers of the realm, enjoyed a complete sovereignty, restrained only by their own vassals. This very circumstance, however, became favorable to the union of the sovereign power in France? under one head. For when the kings succeeded by degrees in uniting all these territories, partly with the domains of the crown, partly with their own private domains, they acquired not merely a nomt o nal supremacy (as was the case with the German emperors over the ancient duchies), but an actual sovereignty. These changes had little effect on the liberties of the people, because these were already lost under the feudal system. With the consolidation of the great fiefs, the dignity of princes of the kingdom became extinct. To these succeeded the princes of the bloodroyal, and, at a later period, some foreign princes (in 1505, Engelbert of Cleves was made duke of Nevers and peer of France). Finall),':: the middle of the 16th century, the principal families of the lower nobility were invested with the dignities of peers and dukes, without, however, becoming, on this account, equal to the ancient peers of the realm. The first of these was the baron de Montmorency. In 1789, the secular peerage consisted of 44 members, of whom the dukes of Uzes (Crussol, 1572) were the oldest, and the dukes of Choiseul and of Coigny (1787) were the most recently created. The six ecclesiastical peers, however, had held the peerage from the earliest times. They were the archbishop of Rheims, and the five bishops of the family duchy of Hugh Capet. The secular peers (among whom the archbishop of Pans had a place, from 1690, as duke of St. Cloud) merely formed the highest class of the lower nobility; but there were six families (branches of the houses of Lorraine and Savoy, Grimaldi, Rohan, Tremouille and Latour d'Auvergne, residing in France) who preserved the rank of sovereign princes. The first estate of the realm was the clergy, which, if it did not enjoy the rank, enjoyed all the exemptions of the nobility from taxes and most of the public burdens, and had the first voice in the statesgeneral. A distinction was made between the clergy of ancient France, which consisted of 16 archbishops and 100 bishops, with the priests and monasteries under their jurisdiction, on one side, and the foreign clergy (or those of the provinces added to France since the reign of Henry II), consisting of two archbishops and 22 bishops, on the other. The revenue of the clergy was estimated by Necker at 130,000,000 annually. The amount of their real estate was to that of the lay proprietors in the proportion of 1 : 5|. The priests who actually performed spiritual services, and formed the most respectable part of the clergy, received about 40or45,000,000 of the 130,000,000 revenue. The abbeys were assigned by the king, partly to abbes commendataires (q. v.), partly to actual monastic superiors. Those abbeys only were excepted which were the chief seats of an order, as the great Carthusian monasteiy at Grenoble, the seat of the Cistercians at Citeaux, near Dijon, that of the Premonstratenses at Premontre, near Soissons, &c. Of the former kind, there were 225, some of which had very large revenues. The abbe' commendataire received one third of the whole revenue of the monastery, without being obliged to reside in it, or to follow the monastic discipline, which the prior was obliged to observe. Abbeys of this sort formed pensions for the younger sons of the nobility, only the least valuable ones being sometimes bestowed on learned men. The income of the abbes commendatairt? (therefore one third of the reve nues of these monasteries) is stated, in the Almanack Royal of 1789, at about 8,000,000. The regular abbeys in France were 368, of which 115 were monasteries, and 253 nunneries. From the rich revenues of these institutions, the clergy, it is true, contributed something towards defraying the expenses of the state. Besides the tithe, established under Francis I (called, from the first commissioner, the decime Paschaline), which, however, bore no proportion to the real amount of the income, the clergy made certain grants every five years, called the dons gratuits ordinaires, of from 15,000,000 to 18,000,000, with occasional grants (dons gratuits extraordinaires), when required by the government, in the shape of loans, on long credit, and not bearing interest. Government used to anticipate these grants by loans. In 1789, it had contracted, in this way, a debt of 136,000,000, the interest and gradual redemption of which were provided, for by taxes on the holders of the property of the church. The foreign clergy, so called, in some provinces, paid the regular taxes. The total amount of taxes annually paid by the whole clergy, is stated by Necker, in his Administration des Finances, 1,127, to be 11,000,000. This sum, however, did not go into the royal treasury, but was employed to pay the interest of the debt above mentioned, and to sink the debt itself. Besides the amount paid by the foreign clergy, the clergy did not contribute more than 3,500,000, annually, to the treasury. Long before the revolution, the respect for the clergy, among the lower classes of the people, had considerably decreased. The number of monks had sunk, within 50 years, from 80,000 to 20,000, and the higher clergy had fallen into disrepute in consequence of their prodigality and dissoluteness. The signification of the word noblesse was very different according as it was employed to comprehend all those who had a claim to the privileges of nobility by law, or only those who were really descended from the old hereditary nobility. As there were about 4000 offices in the kingdom, which conferred on their holders, either immediately or after 20 years' service, the privileges of nobility (generally hereditary), and as letters of nobility were frequently granted, the number of the nobles was much increased every year. Not only the offices of minister, counsellor of state, counsellor of the parliament of Paris, and of some other parliaments, of the court of accounts, or of the court of taxes, of highbailiffs, but even the office of coun eeflor, in some cities, the title of royal secretary, and the post of first huissier of the parliament of Paris, conferred the privileges of nobility. These places were bought, and, after being held for the requisite period, were sold again. But the old nobility did not treat these novi homines as their equals. The noblesse, de robe was not acknowledged in society. Notwithstanding the laws, says Montlosier, Tout cela resta dans la roture. He who could prove a noble descent of two or three centuries was something; those only, the origin of whose nobility could not be traced, or was merely legendary, were considered perfect; as was the case with the premiers barons de chretienU, the Montmorencys. The old nobility only had the right, by birth, of being presented at court; and, as late as the reign of Louis XVI, a royal ordinance provided that no person should be appointed to the office of sublieutenant, who could not prove a noble descent of at least four generations. The post of colonel en second was created in every regiment, for the higher nobility, so that young men of this class began their career at a point where the others could only arrive after long service. Only a few years before the revolution, it was also asserted, that ecclesiastical benefices (those of parish priests only excepted) could be bestowed only on noblemen. The titles of nobility were duke, count, marquis, viscount, baror'; but the four last, which were principally derived from estates, did not designate any real difference o^ rank. The ducal title alone conferred some privileges at court, as, for instance, the duchesses were allowed to sit on stools in the presence of the queen. There were three kinds of dukes; dues etpairs, dues Mr6ditaires non pairs (15 in 1789), and dues a brevets et brevets d'lwnneur, some of which latter possessed the ducal privileges without the title. But the privileges attached to every class of the usual seigneurial rights of tion, and enjoyed exclusively the hunting, &c. These exclusive ri tending even to very small thing keeping of pigeons, owning ol warrens, &c, had become intole: pressive to the peasants. In some the country, villenage, which was J on all the crown lands in 1779, stil It is difficult to determine the rei the nobility before the revolution, estimated the whole income i landed property (with the exce the crown lands, and the possei the knights of Malta and the c about 400,000,000, to which is to the tithe of the clergy. How c< ble a part of this belonged to the may be inferred from the fact, thi the revolution, after all tithes an dues had been abolished withou demnification, and after (from M to 1801) the national domains 1 sold to the amount of 2,609,000,C still remained, in the old French p domains of the value of 340,00 the conquered provinces, their \ 160,000,000), and 200,000,000 ii although the sales had been mad low prices. The proportion of bility to the rest of the populate may believe the old estimate of was as 1 to 250; but this proporti in different provinces. But alth nobility, as owners of the soi members of the clergy, or office government, absorbed the greater the national income, and hardl; peasant and the artisan the con cessaries of life, still they refuse their proportion of the expense state, and opposed all the plans o not only those of Necker, wh hated, but also those of Calonne, ter entirely devoted to the cour aristocracy. Besides this, the ei ments of government were chie tions and answers: I. Qu'est cequeletiers^ Hat% Total % QuVW eUjusqu'ctpri^ setd dans VordrepolUique? Rien! 3* Que demandetUf litre quelque chose! These few phrases contain the whole secret of the revolution of 1789, and of the struggles of parties until the revolution of 1830; for it was not the power and consolidation of the crown, but the reestablishment of the same aristocratic privileges, which had precipitated France into such a state of confusion and suffering in 1789, that agitated her until the final expulsion of the Bourbons, The third estate, as it existed before the revolution of 1789, comprised the most different classes of citizens, from the poorest peasants and the humblest artisans to the wealthiest merchants and the most distinguished scholars. To this class also belonged, as far as their social connexions were concerned, the new noblesse, who had acquired titles from the possession of office, but were despised by the old nobility as upstarts and intruders. This circumstance was a double source of complaint to the nation. The whole weight of the taxes fell upon the lower classes with such an inconceivable severity, increased by the iosolence, and frequently by the cruelty of the lords of the soil and their officers, by the abuses of a corrupt and arbitrary administration of justice, and, on the part of the government, by a system of taxation equally corrupt, arbitrary and preposterous,that general impoverishment and suffering were the necessaiy consequences ; thence came the bitterness and fory, with which the peasants in many places, and the lower* class in the cities, fell upon their nobles and those in power, when the signal of opposition was raised. In the second place, the higher class of the third estate were, in point of information and wealthy superior to a great part of the old nobility; and yet the latter endeavored to maintain an aristocracy, the basis of which had long since been lost. Talents and riches always demand the highest stations in society, and where they are denied them a change will follow, unless the system is supported by mere force. Necker was considered the only man who could save the state, at the time that the administration of the finances was conferred upon him; yet the title of minister, and a seat and voice in the privy council, which were indispensable for his station, were long denied him, because he was not of noble descent. Government knew the causes of the evil only in part; the court was infected with all the preju dices of the aristocracy, and the power of the king was not sufficiently great, even when right measures were adopted, to carry them into effect, in opposition to the court nobility and the aristocratic parliaments. Constitution of the State. Just before the revolution, whole volumes were written on the question whether France had a constitution, or whether the power of the sovereign was absolute. One of the most important works on this subject, Maximes du Droit public Franpais, Brussels, 1775, 2 vols. 4to, by Aubry, Mey and Maultrot, is in reality only a learned argument against the absolute power of the king, and in favor of the right of parliament to refuse registering the decrees of the king until they had satisfied themselves of their legality, or, at least, the right to make remonstrances against them before their publication. The authors prove this from the Bible, the fathers of the church, and the most approved theologians of modern times, and, what is of more consequence, from the practice of the government. Madame de Stael devoted to this question a whole chapter of her Considerations on the French Revolution ; and while the ministers, such as Calonne, denied any constitutional limitations of the regal power, the privileged classes, with the parliaments, were the more zealous in maintaining their existence. Monthion, chancellor of the count d'Artois, refuted Calonne's assertions as late as 1796, in a work published in London Rapport a Sa Maj. Louis XVIII. But at the same time that it is not to be denied, that the constitution of France, in the earliest times, was based on those free principles which were common to all the German tribes; that at a later period the feudal system contained some faint traces of them; and that the statesgeneral, even in the reign of Henry IV, had, at least, an undisputed right of granting taxes ; yet, on the other hand, it is certain, that fhe constitutional institutions of France did not form an organized whole, but only disconnected and jarring fragments, the relics of different ages, destitute of all practical force. All the limitations of absolute power, which existed (in theory rather than in fact) in the French constitution of that period, were wanting in the first requisites of justice and stability; they were not intended to promote the general welfare, but were merely in favor of certain classes, who formed a very small portion of the whole nation; hence the importance, which had been sometimes ascribed to them, was entirely imaginary. They were besides wanting in every thing which could give them a beneficial influence. They impeded the operations of government, without restraining its abuses. On the contrary, by throwing obsta^ cles in the way of the: regular action of the administration, they often rendered the irregular exercise of power necessary. All branches of government, the executive, legislative and judicial, were so confusedly entangled, that neither could acquire its free action; and yet there were so many insulated points, that all unity of government was destroyed, and the exertions of the best intentioned ministers were rendered ineffectual.A. In the constitution of the estates, the provincial states, which existed in some of the provinces, must be distinguished from the statesgeneral of the realm. The former originated in the times when the great feudal princes in France were almost as independent as the princes of the German empire; and they were preserved in Artois, Burgundy, Beam, Brittany and Languedoc, when those fiefs were united to the crown. They were composed of fiile clergy, nobility and cities; but they had no power, except to distribute the taxes in the province, and to determine how they should be raised. This gave rise to different systems of taxation in different provinces, which not only increased the expenses of the administration, but were also attended with many other disadvantages. This diversity in the financial administration of the provinces was the chief cause that the ruinous internal customs (tiaites), and the threefold division of France by douanes (into 1. the provinces des cinq grosses fermes; 2* repuUes itrangeres; and 3. trcrites comme itrangeres), were maintained, notwithstanding all the exertions of Colbert and his successors. Of the gabelle (salt tax) we shall have occasion to speak hereafter. The other provinces also had estates in the earlier times, but they soon fell into disuse. Their abolition is perhaps chiefly owing to the appointment by Charles V (in 1373) of two deputies of the states in each episcopal see, to distribute the taxes, and to settle all disputes relating to them. This arrangement was gradually changed ; the deputies (elus) were erected into boards of taxation, which were established in each bailiwic; and that part of France, which had provincial estates, was divided into 181 dections. But, on the establishment of these boards, the right of election was taken from the estates, and the members of the Sections, from whose decisions an appeal lay to the cours des aid4s (higher boards of taxation), were appointed by the king. In all other matters, the provincial administration was conducted wholly by toe royal intendants. Their powers were finally settled by Richelieu, in 1637. France was divided into 32 ginkralith, at th© head of each of which was an intendant. The great power intrusted to single officers, the total absence of all control over them, the difficulty of obtaining justice against them from the ministers, connected with the inexperience of many of their number, and the frequent changes' made in them, gave rise to numberless gross abuses, oppressions, and arbitrary acts, which made the intendants very obnoxious. It was, therefore, one of the most useful measures of Necker, during his. first administration of the finances (from 1775 to 1781), to restore the administration of the provinces, in a measure, to colleges of the estates. He proposed, in 1778, to establish in each province assentblees provinciates, composed of the three estates, the king appointing sixteen persons in each province (3 clorgymcn, 5 noblemen, and 8-of the third estate), by whom the other members, from 32 to 36 should be chosen. This plan was generally approved by the nation (the duke of Burgundy, heir apparent in the reign of Louis XIV, and the dauphin, father^ of Louis XVI, had entertained similar views), but was prevented from being executed by the opposition of the parliaments and higher nobility. These reforms were accomplished only in Upper Guienne and Berry, where they produced good effects, as Necker proves in his De VAdministration des Finances, II, ch. 5. The further execution of this plan, which would have made the administration of the provinces similar to the English quartersessions of the justices of the peace, and the grand jury of the assizes, was interrupted by the dismission of Necker, in 1781. On Necker's recall to the ministry (in 1788), this plan was again brought forward, and was fully executed, during the revolution, by the creation of conseils gineraux (departmental councils), whose operation, however, was again changed through the establishment of prefects by Bonaparte. These departmental councils, with a conseil d'arrondisse ment in each subprefecture, still exist for the distribution of the taxes on real estate, and the regulation of the common expenses of the departments and arron dissements. Their members were, however, appointed by the government until the late changes, of which we shall speak hereafter, and much still remains to be done for the improvement of the administration of the communes. The introduction of the requisite improvements was one of the measures to which the d'ike of Orleans was made to engage himself before he took the oath as king of the French. The statesgeneral of the realm (Matsg&neraux) were first convoked by Philip IV, the Fair (1285-1314), in three branches; and his reign may be considered as the period when the ancient feudal anarchy gave place to an organized government. From this time, the peerage was but an empty dignity; none of its old privileges remained to it except a seat in the highest court of justice, which Philip made permanent at Paris, and to which he appointed judges learned in the Jaw. But in the new statesgeneral, the peers named by Philip, in the place of the ancient princes of the realm, had no separate place. There were no hereditary nor official members of this body, but all were elected. The clergy, nobility and third estate assembled in the chief bailiwics, whenever the states were convoked, and chose, each estate by itself, an optional or prescribed number of deputies, which was, therefore, never the same. Thirtythree sessions of the statesgeneral were held from 13Q2 to 1614: the last consisted of 104 deputies of the clergy, 132 of the nobility, and}192 of the third estate. It separated without having accomplished any thing, because the three chambers could not agree. The parliaments first revived these assemblies in the reign of Louis XVI, by declaring (for the purpose of giving weight to their opposition to the reforms of the ministers) that the consent of the statesgeneral was necessary to the laws regulating the finances. At an earlier period, the parliaments had declared themselves the successors of the ancient council of peers of the realm, and general estates on a smaller scale. Once (in 1568) they were even summoned, as a distinct estate, to an assembly of the notables. On .this ground they demanded that laws passed by the king, even with the consent pf the states, should not become valid, unless made public by being entered on their journal. To support this pretension successfully, they ought to have secured the confidence of the nation, by acting for the general welfare, instead of displaying, as they too often did, a selfish "regard for their own corporate interests. For want of this, their opposition to gov ernment had no firm foundation. Louis XIV was sensible of this, when, at the age of 17 years, he appeared in parliament in his riding dress, with his whip in his hand, and ordered his ordinances to be registered. Government was not able, however, to abolish the parliaments altogether, as was twice attempted, under Louis XV, by the chancellor Maupeou, in 1771, and under Louis XVI, by the minister Brienne (archbishop of Sens), in 1788. But the power of resistance did not lie so much in the general spirit of the constitution as in the intimate connexion of the parliaments with the aristocracy on the one hand, and with the lawyers on the other. The government could not prevail upon the lawyers to appear at the sessions of Maupeou's parliament, nor in the cour pUnihre established by Brienne, and was thus under the necessity of yielding. When, therefore, the parliament, in contradiction to its former pretensions, declared itself incompetent to register new taxes, and demanded the statesgeneral, it expected to find, in the two first estates, such an opposition to the ministers as to baffle all their exertions to reform the abuses of the aristocracy, and abolish hereditary offices, the exemption of the nobility from taxes, &c. This very resistance of the parliaments obliged the government, from different motives, to convoke the statesgeneral, as the only means of obtaining the support of the third estate against the aristocracy, as Philip IV had formerly obtained their support against the great vassals. On this account, government was obliged to strengthen the third estate, by giving it a double number of deputies, and by uniting the three estates in one chamber (which was only a restoration of the old custom. Paillet's Droit public Frangais, p. 98). This was due to it as the real representative of the nation, and necessaiy to enable it to be of any assistance to government. But the king had not the courage or wisdom to be a king of the nation ; he suffered himself to be so far misled by his courtiers, as to be the first opponent of his ministers, and thus the design failed.B. What we have already said sufficiently points out the great defect of the judiciary, viz., that it was not distinct, but interfered with the legislative and executive departments. There were also other circumstances, which rendered the relations between the government and the courts of justice very complicated. Precisely in those points in which judicial tribunals ought to be under the control and direction of the executive, they were almost entirely independent; whilst, on the other hand, the administration of justice was grossly obstructed by the ministers and the court. This was a consequence of the whole judicial organization, which was still confusedly mixed up with the ruins of the feudal system, in its most important points. We will not enlarge upon the point, that the administration of justice in France was, as yet, a privilege attached to the property of the soil, and that the justices seigneuriales were every where the first elements of the judicial system. A strict control, on the part of the government, over the officers of justice, might have improved the state of things, but such a control did not exist; they were totally dependent upon the feudal proprietors. Nor have we space to treat fully the division of the feudal tribunals into the high, the middle and the low, the first of which had unlimited jurisdiction. Sometimes there lay an appeal from the seigneur has justicier to the seigneur haut justicier; otherwise generally to the royal bailliages et sMchaussees. These were not merely territorial courts of the royal domains; but, by the exemption of certain crimes, cas royaux, from the jurisdiction of the feudal courts, their own jurisdiction had been also extended over the estates of the great vassals. The inferior courts of the royal domains were generally called pr&votes. The superior courts (bailliages et sene'chausstes) were under a bailli, who was not necessarily a lawyer; and if not, justice was administered in his name by a lieutenant de robe. The superior courts of the large cities were organized by Henry II, in 1551, under the name of prisidiaux. They consisted of a chief justice (prhident) and at least six justices (conseilteurs). The number was thus large for the purpose of raising more money by the sale of the offices. The supreme tribunals of justice were the parliaments, which were created successively from the year 1302, in the different feudal principalities, as they became united with the crown. The principal parliament, which was also the first erected (1302), was the parliament of Paris. (See Parlement.) Its jurisdiction extended over more than half of France, including the provinces of the Isle of France, Picardy, Champagne, Lyons, Berry, Bar, Perche, Poitou, Anjou, Touraine, &c. Those who were subject to its jurisdiction were often, therefore, under the necessity of undertaking long journeys in order to obtain justice. It had one first president, nine presidents of the grand chambre, eight presidents of the four other senates or chambers, and 116 active counsellors, who transacted business in seven chambers. Besides these, there was a legion of subalterns, procureurs and avocats (attorneys and advocates) attached to it. The nine presidents of the great chamber wore round caps, hence they were called presidents a moiiier. The princes of the blood royal, and all peers of the age of 25 years, had a seat and vote in the parliament of Paris. This body claimed to make one whole with all the other parliaments (that of Toulouse, established in 1444 ; Grenoble, 1453; Bordeaux, 1462; Dijon, 1476; Rouen, 1499; Aix, 1501; Rennes, 1553; Pau, 1620; Metz, 1632; Besancon, 1674 ; Douay, 1686; and Nancy, 1775), which was merely divided into different classes; but this pretension was never acknowledged by the crown. It is evident that such a mass of business and such a number of counsellors (the other parliaments were formed on the same scale) could not be advantageous to the administration of justice ; and though there were usually some distinguished and honorable men among the counsellors, yet a great number of ignorant and corrupt members was never wanting. The court had always some in pay, and a considerable amount of money was annually distributed among them. All the parliaments were called cows souveraines, because no appeal lay from their sentence. Some other judicial tribunals in the provinces also bore that name. By virtue of this sovereignty, they enjoyed \ certain peculiar privileges. The ministry had no official influence upon their proceedings, any more than on the appointment of the members ; they had the direction of their own conduct, except that the crown officers, the avocat and procureur gtne'ral, were obliged, alternately with the president, to pronounce a semiannual address respecting abuses, and to propose measures for reforming them. In Paris, this was done on the Wednesday after the long vacation ; hence the name mercurial* was given to these addresses. The parliaments also claimed the power to deviate from the letter of the law, and to decide according to principles of equity, against which the provinces often made remonstrances; hence the proverb, Dieu nous garde de Viquite' du parlement. They also claimed the privilege of not being obliged to particularize the crime in their sentences, like the provincial courts, but merely to impose a punishment pour lest cas retndtans du pricks. The independ enceof the parliaments, and of the judicial office in general, was increased by their having a perfect property in their places. The venality and hereditary transmission of most public offices (from which only the offices of ministers, intendants and others, which it was absolutely impossible to expose to sale, were excepted), originated m very early times, but were systematically converted into a means of raising money by Louis XII, and more particularly by Francis I. The states, on every opportunity, remonstrated against this abuse, and sometimes effected their object, as in the reign of Henry III; but the difficulty of restoring the sums which had been paid for the offices, and the convenience of raising money by the creation and sale of such places, preserved this abuse until the revolution of 1789. For the judicial offices, including the places of clerk, notary and procureur (attorney), the state was obliged to refund 450 millions, which was merely the sum that had obeen paid to government, and did not include what the actual holders of the offices had paid to their predecessors. Henry IV made the sale of offices legal, and extended it, according to the plan of a certain Paulet, still farther, by which, for the payment of a certain tax (one tenth of the revenue of the office, called annuel, or paulette, from the inventor), the heirs acquired the right to sell the office. As even those persons who were removed from office <for crimes, still retained the right to sell the office, it may easily be conceived that the independence of the officers amounted to an absolute irresponsibility. As all places were venal, the desire of promotion could not ever induce any one to distinguish himself, or to be obedient to government. One of the immediate consequences of this institution was the enormous increase of offices. In most cases, two, three or four officers were appointed to the same office, who exercised its duties alternately, every quarter or every six. months. Thus most of the treasuries had two or three receivers each, of whom one managed it a year, and then transferred it to one of his colleagues; the whole financial system was thus thrown into endless confusion. The esorit du corps, nourished by the attempts of the superior courts to obtain political influence, was favored by the venality of offices, though by no means advantageously for the nation. The whole class of judges, advocates, &c, considered itself as one body, notwithstanding the constant disputes of the parliaments with one another and with the other courts, and was ready to support its members against the government and the nation, even in cases of the most crying injustice. Hence it wTas so difficult to obtain relief from their superiors against the mistakes and the malice of judges; and many innocent persons were sacrificed to the caprice, the pride and the ambition of the higher and lower courts. (See Labarre.) Voltaire and Linguet attacked this appalling judicial despotism, which was carried to its perfection under Louis XIV, by the ordonnance criminelle of 1670, establishing the double torture, and giving a great extension to the judicial power. A sentence of death could be passed on the slightest grounds, perhaps from some preconceived opinion of the judge ; and several acknowledged instances of injustice (as in the cases of Lebrun, Langlade, Calas, Montbailli, Labarre, Desrues, Lalli, &c.) rendered the administration of criminal justice an object of distrust and horror. In the administration of civil justice, the processes were slow, loaded with formalities, and extremely expensive. The salaries of judges were small, but they received fees, which consisted, originally, of presents of fruits, sweetmeats, spices (hence the fees were called e'pices), &c, but gradually became obligatory, and were changed into considerable sums. The account was made up according to the workingdays (vacations), for each of which a counsellor of parliament received 19£ livres; and it was not uncommon to charge from two to three hundred workingdays. The first president was considered, by a legal fiction, present at all the business which came before the parliament, and received his fees accordingly. It was calculated that D'Aligre, the last president of parliament but one, who was celebrated for his avarice, had from 1768 to 1783 received fees for 400 years. Of course, this was in favor of the most laborious counsellors; but the place of member of parliament carried with it so many privileges, nobility, numerous immunities, and so much dignity, that it was much in request, and was usually sold for 60,000 livres. The office of president in Paris brought 500,000 livres. Besides the parliaments, there were, also, boards for the examination of the accounts of the treasuries (chambres des comptes), at Paris, Dijon, Grenoble, Aix, Nantes, Montpellier, Blois, Rouen, Pau, Dole and Metz, all with numerous officers; and for the decision of revenue cases, 13 cours des aides, of which, however, only those of Paris, Montpellier Bordeaux, Clermont and Montauban formed separate boards; the other eight were united with the parliaments and chambres des comptes. From these tribunals there was no appeal; they stood on the same footing with the parliaments. These offices had also the same privileges attached to them ; and the cours des aides at Paris was highly popular, because it had always protected the nation against the oppressions of the revenue officers and the farmersgeneral. The same cannot be said of the chambres des comptes, in which the places were, generally, bought by rich citizens for their sons, to procure for them a respectable rank as well as a good income. The counsellors of these chambers were not in high repute for learning or talent. JEh I messieurs, si favais eu de Vesprit m?auraiton mis parmi vous, one of the candidates is said to have exclaimed, when he was reproached for his ignorance. As the independence of officers was much too great, so that they could easily impede the measures of government, so also was the power of government too great in the administration of justice. Complaints against the inferior courts could be brought before the intendants, and justice was often compelled to yield to private interests. The crown interfered with the administration of justice, by the right it assumed of issuing lettres de cachet, which enabled it to exercise an arbitrary power over the persons of the subjects, and which were often employed to imprison the innocent, and to deliver the guilty from the hands of justice. If the government desired to manage a trial to further its own views, a special commission was appointed; though this, it must be acknowledged, had become rare in later times. Petitions for annulling the decisions of parliaments could be received by thl royal council (conseil du roi), and were generally received with pleasure. The conseil (that division of it which was called conseil prive", and was composed of 21 counsellors of state, the maitres de requites and the intendants of finance, under the presidency of the chancellor or keeper of the seals) often reversed the decisions of the superior courts; but their arrets were held in such little esteem, as to give rise to the proverb, il raisanne eomme un arret du conseil. The maitres des requetes, of whom, in 1789, there were 78, and who served par quartier, brought forward all propositions in the conseil prive. The most injurious consequences arose from this eterual conflict of the superior courts and the crown; the public authority was weak ened, and all respect for the laws annihilated. The voice of the nation accused the parliaments of partiality in all cases in which the interests of rank were involved. One of the most profound inquirers into the French administration, Pfeffel, attributes to them the failure of all schemes of financial reform, and particularly of the cadastres, because they had the richest landed proprietors among their members, and well knew how to relieve themselves and their relations from the taxes which they were legally bound to pay. France groaned under two insufferable burdens^an antiquated feudal system, and the venality of offices the consequence of which was, that all the superior courts were in the hands of the richest landholders. Another consequence of the venality of offices, assisted by the exertions of the parliaments to prevent the entrance of new families into their corporations, was, that the majority in these bodies, at least, was always preserved to that class. Besides this, the parliaments meddled with every thing. They protected the Jansenists against the archbishop of Paris, Christophe de Beaumont (died 1784). The archbishop prohibited the Jansenist priests from administering the sacraments ; the parliament issued threats of punishment against the priests who should obey the archbishop; the council of state annulled the decrees of the parliament, which repeated them on the next day. "This anarchy," said Voltaire, in 1775 (Histoire du Parlement de Paris), " cannot last. Either the crown must resume the necessary power, or the sovereignty must pass to the parliaments." The first did not succeed; the second led to the revolution, which therefore originated with the higher classes.IV. Organization and Mministration of Government. Although the power of the government was limited by the aristocracy of the parliaments and of the nobility, yet, as there was no legal organ to express the wishes of the nation, in this view the government must be called absolute. The despotic power of the government is shown, 1. in the abolition of all independent municipal administration, so vitally important in every well regulated government, monarchical or republican* When the kings of France, of the third dynasty, had found in the growing liberty and consequent power of the cities, means of effectual opposition to their aristocratic vassals, the municipal governments were developed for some time without re* straint. They chose their own magistrates, in most cases, without being subject to the royal approbation; they made their own laws; they exercised the right of selfdefence, and occupied an important station among the lords of the soil; they were more important to the kings than the nobility and clergy, on account of their contributions of money and men; they were convoked as the third estate in the statesgeneral from the 14th century. Francis I and Henry II made the first encroachments on the liberties of the cities. The reign of Louis XIV was fatal to them. Hereditary and venal offices were ereoted in the cities (royal attorneys, city clerks, maires, assessors and municipal counsellors), which thus lost the right of electing their magistrates. Some, however, maintained their old constitution, by purchasing the offices of the king, and electing the officers as they had always done. Among these was Paris, in which the king, indeed, appointed the first officer (the prevot des marchands\ but the four e'chevins (corresponding somewhat to aldermen) were elected by the notables of the city ; the 26 municipal counsellors and the 16 chiefs of the quarters of the city, had their places by inheritance. On the whole, however, the municipal administration was without influence or power. 2. The provincial administration was, as we have mentioned above, in the hands of the intendants, who governed pretty much like pachas. The administration of the finances was partly in the hands of royal officers, with hereditary and venal offices, partly farmed out. The last practice was among the most crying evils of the old regime. The fact already mentioned, that the royal treasuries had, regularly, two or even three receivers, who were changed annually, rendered the direction of the whole impossible, even for the most experienced minister of finances, as an examination was only made once in four years. Besides this, the swarm of officers rendered the administration of the finances very expensive. The taxes on consumption, viz., the monopoly of salt and tobacco, the internal customs, the excise of the city of Paris, and the tax on liquors in the country, were farmed out. The 44 farmersgeneral, with their subalterns, were in the highest degree odious to the people. (See Far'/iters General.) Notwithstanding the attempts to limit their profits as much as possible, it was evident that their incomes were very large, and easily obtained ; and, though there were among them some men of merit, as Helvetius, Lavoisier, De la Borde, and though others made a noble use of their riches, yet, as a body, the farmersgeneral contributed greatly, to render the government odious, by their prodigal expenditure of wealth which had been wrung from a suffering nation. They were called the leeches of the state. Their luxurious habits, their ignorance, then purseproud insolence, their hardheartedness, rendered them a standing character on the stage. The most intelligent men were opposed to farming the taxes, because the expense of collecting them was much greater in this way; according to Necker, it amounted to 16£ per cent., whilst the collection of those managed immediately by the government cost only 6| per cent. But the farmersgeneral were closely connected with the actual ruling powers of Francethe nobility and the coteries of the courtsince all who had any influence had free access to their coffers, so that no minister dared to touch these pillars of the state, as they were satirically styled. "You will be astonished," said a courtier to the courtbanker, De la Borde, " that I, who have not the honor of your acquaintance, ask you for a loan of 100 louis d'ors." " And you," replied the banker, " will be still more astonished, that I, who have the honor of knowing you, should lend them to you.M Necker calculated the number of officers employed in collecting the taxes on real and personal estate, and the customs, at 250,000 persons; though most of them united with their offices other occupations. 3. The central government was in the hands of the king, or rather of the ministers and the court. Though the will of the monarch was the only source of the laws (si veul le roi, si veut la loi), yet great strength of character was necessary to resist the unitea force of family influence, and the influence of other persons surrounding the sovereign. No minister could, therefore, hope to find, in the monarch alone, that support which was necessary to carry him successfully through a struggle against abuses. Good and bad ministers, Turgot and Necker as well as Calonne and Brienne, were unable to maintain themselves without reforms, and yet all were wrecked alike on this rock. At the head of the administration were the chancellor of France, the four secretaries of stateof foreign affairs, of the royal palace, of the navy, and of war and the controllergeneral or directorgeneral of the finances. Each of these six heads of departments, who did not always hold the rank of minister, nor enjoy a seat in the conseil dtbtat, was vested with absolute power. His orders were in the name of the king, and had the royal signature attached; the king did not, however, sign with his own hand, but the minister had a stamp bearing the royal name, which he attested with his own countersignature. The rank of minister was conferred without any written patent, merely by the royal invitation to a seat in the conseil d^tat, but, once conferred, could only be revoked by a formal judgment. Hence it became, in a manner, necessary to exile dismissed ministers to a certain distance from the city. In the conseil d^itat, the king heard the reports of the ministers. The other sections were the conseil des dtpeehes, for foreign affairs; conseil des finances; and the secret council of war, in which all the secretaries of state and all the ministers had a seat and vote. Another body also bore the name of conseil d'etat, consisting of counsellors of state and mai~ tres des requites, under the presidency of the chancellor, or keeper of the seals. This was a judicial body, which received appeals from the superior courts, decided questions of conflicting jurisdiction, &c. It was also called, in contradistinction from the other council of state, abovementioned, the conseil d'&atprive' or conseil des parties. The grand conseil was another superior tribunal, consisting of five presidents, fiftyfour counsellors, &c, whose jurisdiction in matters of which it took cognizance, as in disputes relating to ecclesiastical benefices, bankruptcies, usury, certain feudal taxes, &c, extended over the whole kingdom. From the grande chancellerie, consisting of a chancellor (keeper of the seals), two grands rapporteurs, four grands audienciers, &c., all letters of nobility and of officiaLappointments, acts of legitimation, naturalization, &c, were issued. From a consideration of the foregoing statements, we shall easily be convinced that, in the administration of France, it was rather an object to provide places for the higher classes than to secure the welfare of the nation. This principle of considering France as a great fief of the nobility, and the nation as their bondslaves, was likewise faithfully acted on, both in the manner of raising the taxes and in that of spending them. 4. The system of taxation pressed heavily only upon the peasant and the citizen; the contributions of the clergy and nobility amounted to very little. What the clergy paid fell principally upon the smaller benefices and parishes, and took hardly any thing from the incomeof the higher clergy. Besides, the manner in which the revenues of the larger ecclesiastical estates were spent, contrasted most strongly with the legitimate objects of the church. They were, as has already been observed, merely sinecures for the younger sons of the nobility, who, notwithstanding their clerical character, yielded to no other class in profligacy and licentiousness of morals. First, all the smaller proprietors were subject to heavy and numerous feudal burdens, corvees (q. v.), and manorial services, and were generally obliged to pay the tithe. From these feudal taxes the clergy and nobility derived the principal part of their income. They were abolish * during the revolution of the last cer *ry, first with a small compensation, afterwards without any ; yet, after this abolition, there remained a mass of property, belonging immediately to the clergy and nobility, of the value or more than 3,000,000,000 francs; to which must be added the large estates of that part of the nobility which did not emigrate. For, from May 17, 1790, until 1801, 2,609,000,000 had been raised by the sale of national domains (estates of the clergy and emigrant nobles); and what remained unsold at that time in the old departments was valued at 340,000,000. These unsold estates, after the restoration of the Bourbons, were given back to their former owners. If we deduct this enormous mass of real estate, which belonged to the clergy and nobility, from the total property of the nation, we shall find, that, at the highest estimate, but one third remained for small proprietors or for land not owned by either of the privileged classes. This third was alone subject to the taille, which was a tax both on real and personal estate, and yielded a revenue of 95,000,000 annually to the state. Another tax on income, la capitation (poll tax), was paid by the nobility also, but was comparatively very small, as it amounted only to 41,000,000 a year. A third kind was a tax on income merely, chiefly on that from real estate, and consisted originally of one twentieth of the whole income ; hence its name, vingtieme. But it was soon doubled (les deux vingtikmes), and afterwards increased by one tenth (4 sous pour Ivftre en sus du premier vingtihme); and, in 1782, a third vingtttme was established, which was intended to be levied only until the return of peace. The nobility was not legally exempted from these income taxes, but they succeeded, by their connexions, in freeing themselves almost entirely from them. The deux vingtibmes with the addition of 4 sous, amounted to 56,000,000; so that the net income of the nation, at this rate, would have amounted to only 500 millions, which was much less than the real amount, Pfeffel, above cited, asserts that a number of the great land owners had a net income of from four to five million livres, which paid only 44,000 livres of taxes, only one tenth of the lawful sum (Schlozer's Staatsanzeigen, xii, 136); so that this tax also fell almost entirely upon the citizens and peasants. The total amount of the land taxes, before the revolution, was 210,000,000 livres, of which the third estate, though they owned only one third, or perhaps only "one fourth of the soil, paid at least three fourths. To this must be added, 1. the corvies, or the obligations to make and repair the roads, which fell entirely upon the peasantiy, and the value of which Necker estimated at 20 millions. Those magnificent roads, which traversed France in all directions, principally for the benefit of the higher classes, because the crossroads, the most important for the farmer, were neglected, were built by the sweat of the oppressed peasants. 2. Another oppressive burden was the quartering of soldiers, which also fell entirely upon the working class, as the nobility was exempted from it. It was necessaiy to furnish the soldier with lodging, fire, light, salt and washing, and, where cavalry was quartered, also with fodder for their horses. 3. The third estate alone were obliged to do military duty. 60,000 men were annually drafted by lot for the land service, which lasted six years. It is easy to conceive what sufferings, in such a "tate of things, this conscription produced. But it was the magnitude, and still more the absurdity, of the indirect taxes, that drove the people to despair. The internal customs between the different provinces (traitts) have already been mentioned; they were farmed. The imposts on liquors, with some others, were managed by the government, and amounted to 52 millions. The tobacco monopoly of government, the customs in the interior and on the frontiers, the duties on colonial goods, and, particularly, the monopoly of salt, were managed by a company of 44 farmersgeneral, who, towards* the end of that abominable administration, paid 180 millions to government. A third of this sum came from the sale of saltan article which is used by the poorest almost in equal quantity with the richest. These 60 millions of livres, which flowed from the, salt trade into the royal treasury, wereby no means the whole sum paid by the nation ; besides this, there were the profits of the farmersgeneral, the salaries of their officers, their spies, and the armed force which was maintained to suppress smuggling, estimated together at about 20 millions. The price of a hundred weight of salt, which, if left free of duty, might have been bought for 1<| livre, and, in some provinces, for less, if the manufacture had not been limited, was raised, in some parts of the country, by the gabelle, or salt tax, to the monstrous price of 62 livres. It is hardly necessaiy to observe how much the agricultural classes must have suffered by the artificial scarcity of so indispensable an article ; but the worst effect of the tax was that which it had on the national morality, and the relation between the nation and the government. This tax had distorted the ancient provincial constitution of France. France was divided, in respect to the salt trade, into six classes of districts, which were very confusedly intermingled:1. Provinces /ranches, those districts in which the salt trade had remained free, and salt was, therefore, to be had at its real value. These were chiefly those provinces in which seasalt was manufacturedBrittany, part of Poitou, Navarre, in which a hundred weight cost 1£2 livres, the French Netherlands, where it cost 7-8 livres ; 2. the provinces redimies, which had purchased exemption from the salt tax under Henry II, for the sum of J,700,000 livres. They obtained their salt from the manufactories of seasalt of Saintonge and Poitou, which, after paying the customs, cost them from 6 to 10 livres per cwt. Guienne, Poitou, Au* vergne, and much of the south of France in general, belonged to this class. 3. Low"r Normandy manufactured seasalt, of which, in earlier times, she gave a quarter to the king; hence the name of pays de quart bouillon. This quarter was afterwards commuted into a tax in money, by which the price of salt was raised to ISIS livres. 4. The pays de salines, which were supplied from salt mines, Alsace, FrancheComte, Lorraine and the three bishoprics (Metz, Toul and Verdun), obtained salt for 12, 15, 27 and 36 livres. 5. The pays de petites gabelles (we pass over some of the smaller distinctions) consisted of Provence, Languedoc, Dauphine, Lyonnais; in short, a great part of the south of France. They obtained their salt from the Mediterranean sea, for from 22 to 40 livres per cwt. 6. The pays de grandes gabelles, or the central provinces of northern France, IsledeFrance, Normandy ,Picardy,Cham pagne, Orleannais, Tourraine, about one third of France, paid the highest taxes, or two thirds of the whole salttax (about 40,000,000) was drawn from them. The price of salt was, in these countries, from 54 to 62 livres. The most important consequence of this establishment was, that the people were constantly at war with the government, and that the smuggling of salt (faux saunage) became the general occupation of vagrants and criminals. By smuggling a cwt. of salt over the frontiers of Brittany to Maine or Anjou, twelve dollars could be earned in an hour. Even the carrying a few pounds in the pocket was equal to a day's wages. The salttrade required an army of officers, and, as the smugglers were armed, soldiers were also necessary. A body of bold and desperate men was, therefore, constantly on foot, and the courts were continually occupied with the trials of smugglers. There were generally about 1800 of them in the prisons, and it was considered a remarkable year, if more than 300 were not sentenced to the galleys. However severe the punishment might be, it could not deter men from engaging in this business. The people considered this war against the government officers rather meritorious than otherwise ; and, as the farmersgeneral, every year, seized the whole property of many persons for arrears of taxes, they were driven to an employment in which the risk was counterbalanced by the great profits. To this list of oppressions must be added the interdiction of all trade in corn between the different provinces. oColbert, the author of this system, expected to effect by it the reduction of the price of grain, for the purpose of encouraging manufactures. What, under his administration, was a mistake in theory, became, under his successors, and particularly in the reign of Louis XV, a new source of oppression. The intendants, without whose permission no grain could be exported from their gene'ralite, granted this permission only for bribes. Capitalists raised the price of grain by buying it up largely, in order to sell it again, at enormous prices, to government,winch endeavored to keep bread at a fixed price at the expense of the royal treasury. It is known, that Louis XV partook in these infamous speculations. Agriculture fell into decay, and in some parts of the country, particularly in large cities, much suffering was caused by dearth. When, however, Turgot, under Louis XVI, abolished the restrictions on the ccrn trade, his enemies succeeded in so fa? olinding the people to their own interest as to be able to excite great disturbances against him. It is true, that, from 1774, free trade in grain was permitted in the interior, but the exportation was in general still prohibited, and agriculture, once depressed, could not easily rise again, as it was charged with so many other burdens. The supply of bread for the capital was always a matter which required much attention; and it was easy to alarm the inhabitants on this subject by artful contrivances, as was frequently done during the revolution. The reader will already have seen, from this sketch of the system of taxation, to what a depth of poverty and misery the lower classes must have been reduced. The slavetrade in the colonies was defended on the ground, that the slave generally lived much better than the French peasant. "Misery," says Mad. de Stael (Considerations sur la Revolution, I. ch. 6), " produced ignorance, and ignorance, in turn, augmented misery; if, therefore, it is asked, why the people showed themselves so cruel during the revolution, no other cause need be assigned, than that poverty and misery had also produced a moral corruption, which was the more unavoidable, that since the time of Louis XIV, or, rather, since that of Francis I, the higher classes had set the example of immorality and contempt of every thing sacred in religious observances." The outrages of the revolution were a terrible judgment upon the corruption and oppressions of the higher classes. It has been said, that France now pays more taxes than in 1789. But this is a mistake. It is true, that, in 1789, only 585,000,000 passed into tfie royal treasury ; but we must add to this the tithes and feudal taxes which have since been abolished ; and, if we consider that all exemptions are abolished, and that the taxes are now assessed on the incomes of all, it will appear that the working classes at present pay much less than before the revolution.At the same time, 5. the waste of the public money, which disgraced the government, has been prevented by the constitutional government of France, and the present government, it is to be hoped, will carry the system of economy much farther than the Bourbons. What could have exasperated the people more than to see the public revenue, wrung from their scanty means, so criminally squandered ! The wars of Louis XIV, his buildings, his love of show, did not imbitter the feelings of the people half so much as the insolent prodigality of a Pompadour and a Dubarry under Louis' XV. Under his reign, a custom was introduced into the accounts, which became a source and cloak of the greatest disorderthe, so called, acquits a comptant, receipts signed by the king, for moneys which were by no means actually received by him. This was merely a method of avoiding a statement in the accounts of the objects for which the money was paid. Louis XVI was not a spendthrift, and, in every thing which regarded himself personally, was a careful economist. Even the queen, MarieAntoinette, who, before the revolution, was accused of prodigality, has been lately defended by a credible witness, madame Campan ; but on this subject more particular explanations are yet wanting. But the abuse of the acquits a comptant, or, as they were also called afterwards, ordonnances au porteur, was continued under Louis XVI, and the sums taken in this way from the treasury, the application of which appears only in part from the private book of the king (livre rouge), amounted, from 1779 to 1787, to 860,000,000: secret services in foreign affairs, and pensions and presents to the courtiers, were the principal items of expenditure. These favors were so freely distributed, that it was impossible to say who could not lay claim to them; and Keeker {Administration des Finances, III, 95) devotes a whole chapter to a consideration of the claims of the high nobility, and the duty of a minister of finances to oppose them. Whoever could not produce an ostensible ground for a pension or gratification, offered the king some property or some right for sale, and obtained thus what he wanted. Debts of one of the princes of the blood royal, to the amount of 16,000,000, were paid, in two years; to the useless minister of the marine, Sartine, considerable sums were granted in a similar way. The notorious Beaumarchais received at one time more than 1,000,000 for secret services. Here, also, the evil was not alone in the weakness of the monarch, but chiefly in the power of the aristocracy ; to break down which, even a Richelieu or a Louis XIV would not probably have found themselves sufficiently strong, and which could he overthrown only by a radical revolution. In addition to this, the royal family was possessed with the unfortunate idea, that what they had most to fear was the people, not the aristocracy; though, long before, one of the most judicious politicians of France, the minister of state D'Argenson, had endeavored to refute this prejudice in his Co~isidfrations sur le Gouvernement de la France, 1764. When the revolution had once begun, it was clear that it must involve the throne in the ruins of the ecclesiastical and feudal tyranny, to which it had attached itself.V. The Revolution (of the \Wi century) and its Consequences,A nation in this condition, with such deeplyfelt grievances, needed but a slight impulse to urge them to resume, by force, the freedom which the higher classes had wrested from them by centuries of usurpation. All parts of the nation were thoroughly prepared for such an eventthe lower orders, by their misery, the cause of which lay before their eyes in the enormous exactions to which they were subject; the higher classes of citizens, by the hatred with which the overbearing arrogance of the nobility inspired them. The most contemptuous appellations (see Canaille) were applied to them by the nobility, for the purpose of keeping up a distinction, which the cultivation and wealth of the citizens had long deprived of all truth. Although a great part of the nation was deficient in regular education (the lowest classes of Frenchmen, before the revolution,were among the most ignorant of all the Europeans), yet there had been a considerable advancement in the intelligence of the nation; and, as reform was loudly called for by all classes, it was natural that, even without the writings of Voltaire and Rousseau, the primitive and natural state of political society should have become the general subject of reflection. The foundation of the state on a social contract, the derivation of all power from the will of the nation, is by no means an idea of late origin, as many persons would persuade us; it is the most natural and the oldest theory of society; and it had been propagated in France by works which were read by much greater numbers than Rousseau's Control Socialby the works of Fenelon, Bossuet and Massillon. Bossuet's Politique tirie de VEcriture sainte is full of passages of this nature. Fenelon, in his Directions pour la Conscience d'un Roi, says (Direct 36, p. 65) plainly, C'est un contrat fait avec les peuples pour les rendre vos svjets ; cominencerezvous par violer votre litre fondamental ? lis we vous doivent Vobeissance que suivant ce contrat, et si vous le violez vous ne meritez plus qurils Vobservent. Massillon, in his Sermons in Lent (Petit cartme)that manual of the peoplerepresents to the king, that he owes his power only to the choice of the nation, and concludes with the following words: En un mot comme la premiere source de leur autoriti vient de nous, Its rois nren doivent faire usage que vour nous. No sooner, therefore, had the parliaments effected the meeting of the statesgeneral, than these ideas presented themselves, at once, from every quarter. It required only a motion by Mirabeau (in July, 1789), for the establishment of a national guard, and all France was under arms. This general arming of all the communities on one day, merely on account of an empty rumor, that the harvest was to be burnt down, and the insurrections of the peasants against their lords, which followed immediately, are among the most mysterious and important events of the revolution. How many castles were destroyed, how many archives burnt, the historians of the revolution do not inform us; but it was evident that the common people were already aiming at the destruction of all feudal documents in the hands of the nobility. It was a practical anticipation of the decrees of the national assembly, adopted on the night of August 4,1789, and on the following days, abolishing all feudal rights. These decrees are the real basis of the whole revolution; they tnrew off the restrictions on landed property which had been imposed by the feudai system, and thus paved the way for a municipal organization, upon which the constitution of modern France is founded. All the feudal services and their substitutes were abolished without indemnification ; all other seigjieurial imposts, perquisites and rents were declared redeemable by the tenant. The exclusive right of the nobility to keep pigeons, and to let them loose, in sowing time, on the fields of the peasants (apparently an insignificant privilege, but a great annoyance to the peasantry), was abolished. The game laws were also abolished. The right to kill game on his own ground was given to every one, on condition of his observing the general police regulations. The feudal tribunals were suppressed, and a new administration of justice provided for. The organization of the judiciary, introduced by the national assembly, still exists in its essential features, and has v.ver been considered by the nation as one of the greatest benefits of the new order of things. The tithes paid to the church and ecclesiastical orders were abolished, and the state took upon itself the maintenance of the church and the public support of religion. The tithes in the possession of laymen were declared redeemable. The venality and hereditary descent of all juVOJ,. v. 22 dicial and magisterial offices, the exemption of the nobility from taxes, the exclusion of the third estate from military offices, from places at court, and from the higher dignities of the church, the provincial estates and privileges, the annates of the pope, and other abuses in the church, were abolished. <A new order of things was established, and the revolution accomplished. If, at a later period, when the redemption of the feudal services proceeded too slowly, they were absolutely abolished without indemnification, this was merely an anticipation of the natural course of things; it was not a change of the new order. Much has been said against the justice of these decrees, and there is much ground for argument. If the former destruction of free municipal institutions, of which history gives us an account, was lawful, their restoration was equally so; for both changes arose from the character of the times. If the necessity of protection in a state of brute force, when there was no legal security once drove the freemen into bondage, yet, wnen things were changed, and the power of the state came to depend on the people at large, the good order and security of the state required that the people should be set free from their feudal subservience. By those decrees, France at once reached that point, at which all the European states must, sooner or later, arrive. As the imperial government was able to exist, in France, after those changes, the throne of Louis XVI might have stood with the new principles, had he been able and willing to become the leader of the nation in its reforms. The limitation of the royal power, which the parliaments, clergy and nobility constantly contended for, and in many cases effected, would have satisfied the national assembly, if they had not been obliged, by the court itself, to leave as little power to the king as possible, because even this little was used to annul, in secret, what had been publicly sanctioned. Even the royalists, in the struggles which have taken place in the French chambers since the restoration of the Bourbons, have contended foi the same constitutional restrictions on the monarch, which have been demanded by their opponents of the left side. They only differ from their opponents by wishing to be themselves depositaries of all the power taken from the king. The independence of the judiciary, a share in legislation, the responsibility of ministers, the right of granting the taxes, and even the liberty of the press, have been con tended for as warmly by the royalists as by the liberals, with this difference, only, that they claimed, Jn addition, restoration; of the; privileges last in 1789, or, at least, compensation for them; an exclusive right to seats in both chambers, so far, at least, as only to share ifcwith the magistrates of some large towns; exclusive right to all offices of trust and honor. None could be absurd enough tp go beyond mis, to the restoration of tithes, corvees^ feudal tribunals of justice, &c.In regard to* the social relations of France, the principal effects of the revolution may bee described as follows :1. A more general division of landed proper tit has been already remarked, that, m May, 1790, until the end of 1800, national domains to the amount of 2,609,000,000 were sold. These were mostly estates of the church and of the religious orders, as a reluctance existed to buying the estates of the emigrants. These estates were generally sold at very low prices, partly because many did not believe their possession certain, partly because there were not many buyers capable of paying their full value. Towards the end of 1800, there were national domains of the value of 700,000,000 still remaining unsold (340,000,000 in the old provinces, 160,000,000 in the conquered provinces (so called), and 200,000,000 in national woods). Among these, there were many estates of the church, which were used to constitute the funds of the legion of honor and of the senatorships. According to an old work (Le Cabinet du Jtoij quoted by Linnaeus, Notitia Regni Francice, Strasburg, 1654), the property of the church in ancient France consisted (with the exception of the foreign clergy, so called, mentioned above), of 180,000 fiefs (of which 83,000 had superior courts), 249,000 farms and metairies, 1,700,000 acres of vineyards (besides 400,000 acres, from which they received J or J of the wine), 600,000 acres of unoccupied land, 135,000 of ponds, 900,000 acres of meadow land, 245,000 water wheels in flour and paper mills, iron works, &c, 1,800,000 acres of woods, 1,400,000 acres of pasturage. The greater part of the soil was also subject to the tithe to the clergy, and there was not a patch of ground on which there was not a mortgage, rent or religious foundation (an annual tax of from 5, 10 to 50 sous for a mass, a burning lamp, &c); even the royal domains were not exempt. 2. This mass of landed property is now divided among a great number of smaller or lar ger proprietors, and thus, with the abolition of the feudal system, was created a class of free prvprietors of the soil, so necessary for the safety and liberty of a state* The subdivision of the soil appears from the fact, that of the numerous class of landed proprietors (about 5,000,000), who pay taxes, there were, in 1820, only 90,879 who had to pay an annual tax of 300 francs and over, and, consequently, could vote in the election of deputies. The number of electors was afterwards consid erably diminished by the division of property and the diminution of the land tax. (In the lists of 1818, there are, altogether, 10,414,121 taxable persons, of whom only 40,773 paid over 500 francs annually; and these, together, paid one fifth of the land tax, whilst the petite propriety paid four fifths.) By the budget of 1822, it appeared that only 216,000,000 were then paid by the whole mass of real estate, while, before the revolution, the smaller portion of it paid 170,000,000. It appears from this single fact, that the burdens of France are comparatively much smaller than before the revolution. The comparison, however, is not complete, unless we consider, also, the abolition of the tithes, the corvees, the quartering of soldiers, and the feudal privileges. This division of the soil into small properties, which is naturally connected with a more careful cultivation, must be considered as the chief cause of the rapid increase of the population of France, Within 30 years, it has increased one fifth. It was, in 1789, a matter of great dispute, whether France had more than 20,000,000 of inhabitants. Those who estimated it highest, never rated it at more than 25,000,000. After all the destruction of the revolution, and of 25 years' war, the population amounted, in 1821, to 30,465,291. We are far from considering the increase of population as the chief aim of states, or even as the principal standard of public welfare ; but, in most cases, it will be found a proof of public prosperity. 3. The distribution of property is secured by the civil code, which requires that all estates should be divisible. The power of creating entails was very limited before the revolution, and, by the laws of August 25 and October 25, 1792, such restrictions on the free disposal of property were abolished altogether. Napoleon, it is true, reestablished entails in 1807, and the modern legislation has not only sanctioned them, but even rendered them necessary for peers by the ordinance of August 25,1817, ac cording to which no one could, in future, be raised to the peerage without previously establishing a majorat. But the amount of these estates, exempted from the common rule of distribution of inheritances, is comparatively small. The majorat of a duke need only yield 30,000 francs net income; that of a marquis or count, 20,000, and that of a vicomte or baron, only 10,000. The nation is opposed to this system, and, though the old nobility has often spoken of the necessity of strengthening the aristocracy by imitating the English constitution and usages, according to which all real estate, small or large, generally goes to the eldest son (the fundamental idea in Cottu's workDe VAdministration de la Justice Criminelle en Angleterre)9 the proposition has always been rejected by the nation at large ; and, since the revolution of 1830, there is little probability that the aristocracy will succeed in this point. (See Bcmde Noire.) It would have been madness to imitate England in this point, as the organization of France is founded on totally different principles from that of England. 4. The equality of all* in the eye of the law, has been established in France so firmly by the revolution, that it probably cannot be eradicated. It is true, that the cJiarte constitutionnelle (q, v.) violated this principle in spite of its own wordsTous les Frangais sont egaux devant la loi. The law of election, in 1820, extended this abuse, and would have become truly aristocratic had Polignac's law of election, promulgated in 1830, taken effect; but the revolution, which the measures of this year produced, shows how firmly the nation is attached to the legal equality of all. (See Election.) Indeed, had the laws of election previously existing been allowed quietly to take firm root, and had the law of primogeniture been at any time added, a lower nobility would have been created, consisting of hereditary electors (from which the large mass of the nation would have been excluded), and the rendering of the offices of mayors and justices of the peace also hereditary would have been a single and easy step. Hardly the fiftieth part of the nation enjoyed the right of voting. Of 10,000,000 of taxable heads of families, only 90,879 paid 300 francs direct taxes in 1820 ; and of these 74,000 paid that amount on land, only 3836 on manufactures,, and 12,140 on mixed property. Had primogeniture been introduced, an electoral nobility would have been formed, of which those would have constituted a distinct class, who paid 1000 francs annually, and who alone, by the 40th article of the old ckarte constitutionnelle, were eligible to office, and of whom there were, in 1820, according to a ministerial report, only 16,072. Our readers may think that, notwithstanding these laws, there was yet a wide distance from the ancien regime to the modern state of France; but, although the law of March 17,1788, which declared that no person, not of noble descent, through four generations, could be appointed sublieutenant, was not actually reenacted, yet it was silently practised upon, and few officers, not so descended, were retained in service beyond the term required by law.We have not space to explain minutely all the details of the great regeneration effected, by the revolution, through all the different branches of the administration, the education, and moral condition of the nation. (For what has been done in criminal and civil legislation, see Cassation, Court of, and Codes, les Cinq.) Although, of late years, the administration of justice, under the Bourbons, exhibited alarming symptoms of the influence of party spirit, it will doubtless be one of the noblest fruits of the revolution of 1830, to secure a pure and independent judiciary, as it was one of the first objects of the revolution of the last century to establish it. The whole system of finances, which is so vitally important to a government, owes much to Napoleon. Although formerly so confused that nine years were necessary to correct the chief account of the state, it is now very simple. The municipal constitutions remained, as we have already mentioned, in entire and intentional neglect under the Bourbons. From 1814, the councils of the communes were not regularly appointed. (See De V Organisation de la Puissance Civile dans rintirit Monarchique, Paris, 1820.) The old laws were silently permitted to become obsolete, and new ones were not substituted. Ministers could never agree on this nice point, as it necessarily brought aristocratic or democratic principles into collision. No impartial observer can overlook the great difference between the French before the revolution and after it, the frivolity of the ancien regime, and the manly spirit of the French of the present day, so clearly manifested during the long struggle, which they have maintained ever since the restoration of the Bourbons, and most strikingly during the glorious days of July, 1830. Language, manners, literature, every thing, has taken a more manly character. French Language, The Celtic, remnants of which were long preserved in Brittany, was the language of the Gauls. After the conquest of the countiy by the Romans, under Julius Caesar, Latin became the predominant language. On the overthrow of the Western Roman empire, this language was corrupted partly in its pronunciation by Teutonic organs, and partly by the mixture of words and expressions originally Frankish, Burgundian, Ostrogothic or Visigothic. This corrupt language was called the Romance, and was divided into two branches. They are denominated from their respective terms for expressing yes. The Southern, or langue oVOc (dialect of Oc, Occitanic dialect), and the Northern, spoken north of the Loire, or langue ef Out or d'Oil, from the latter of which the modern French language is derived. In the beginning of the 12th century, Raymond de St. Gilles, count of Provence, united the south of France under one government, and gave the whole the name of Provence, From that period, the two dialects were called the Provengal and the French, The former, though much changed, is still the dialect of the common people in Provence, Languedoc, Catalonia, Valencia, Majorca, Minorca and Sardinia. In the 13th century, the northern, or Norman French dialect, which was much more prosaic than the former, gained the ascendency. This was partly owing to the influence of the Conteurs, who roamed into all parts of the country, but chiefly to the circumstance that Paris became the centre of refinement, philosophy and literature for all France. The langue d*Oui was deficient, from its origin, in that rhythm, which exists in the Italian and Spanish languages. It was formed rather by an abbreviation than by a harmonious transformation of the Latin. The Franks and Normans deprived the Latin words of their characteristic terminations, substituting, in their stead, the obscure German vowel, which was afterwards entirely dropped in conversation, and retained only in singing and orthography. With the exception of these differences, the French Romance dialect was formed on the same grammatical model as the Italian, Spanish and Portuguese. A regular accentuation of syllables, according to their quantity, was at first preserved; but the metrical character of the language was gradually lost. The French thus became more accustomed to a rhetorical measure tnan to poetical forms. The nature of the language itself led themto eloquence rather than poetry, and theii natural liveliness contributed essentially to encourage nice dialectics. Francis 1 established a professorship of the French language at Paris, in 1539, and banished Latin from the courts of justice and public documents. Cardinal Richelieu, by establishing the academy (Acadimie Frangaise, or des Quarante), in 1635, carried the language to a higher degree of perfection The French academy became the su preme tribunal both for the language and literature. It put an end to the arbitrary power of usage, and fixed the standard of pure French; but it deprived genius of its prerogative of extending the dominion of the mind over the language. Nothing was approved by the academy unless it was received at court, and nothing was tolerated by the public which had not been sanctioned by the academy. The language now acquired the most admirable precision, and thus recommended itself, not only as the language of science and diplomacy, but of society, capable of conveying the most discriminating observations on character and manners, and the most delicate expressions of civility which involve no obligation. Hence its adoption, as the court language, in so many European countries. But when fancy or deep feeling sought utterance, then genius was compelled to yield to the despotic laws which rejected every turn that was proscribed at court and by the courtly academy. In the reign of Louis XIV, the superiority of the French writers, the cus torn of visiting France, and the great number of refugees and French instructed in other countries, contributed to render the language universal. From 1735, it also became the common language of diplomacy on the continent of Europe. During and since the revolution, new words and turns have been introduced, many of which have become a part of the language (of the revolutionary words and phrases, a particular dictionary exists by Snetlage). Among the dictionaries of the French language, that of the academy holds the first rank. It first appeared in 1694 (2 vols., folio), and has since been repeatedly republished (last edition, 1825, 2 vols., 4to.) Those of Richelet (new edition by Goujet), Furetiere (new edition by Basnage, Beauval and La Riviere), Trevoux and Boiste, deserve to be mentioned. For the inquirer into the old French dialect, the Recherches des Anttqaites die la Langue Franpaise, ou Dictionnaire Gaulois, par P. B, (Pierre Borelle, Paris, 1667, 4to.), is interesting. Among the Dest grammatical treatises are the grammars of Wailly, Restaut, De Laveaux, Mozin, Levizac, Le Tellier, and Duvivier's Grammaire des Grammaires, &c. Girard's Dictionary of Synonymes (new editions by D'Olivet, by Bauzee, and considerably augmented by Roubaud), is an excellent work. French Literature. Although Charlemagne had done much for the advancement of learning, yet, at the time when Dante was laying the foundation of a classical national literature in Italy, the French had made less progress in literature than the Spanish and Portuguese. The north and south of France were entirely distinct in their literatures until the 16th century. The Normans, who contributed much to give a new impulse to the imagination of the European nations in general, exercised a decided influence upon the north of France; they carried the love of the wonderful along with them from their native land; their imagination was bold and inventive, rather than tender and glowing. They were valiant, rather than enthusiastic. " They were fond of heroic, wonderful and merry tales, and their songs were composed in quite a different style and metre from those of the southern French. In these the Provencals preserved a character akin to that of the Italians. The art of the Troubadours flourished long before poetry awoke in the north of France. But when the French monarchy fixed its centre in the metropolis of Paris, the north acquired the ascendency, while the poetry of the Provencals sunk into oblivion. Their literature belongs to the history of the middle ages. The same romantic spirit, which at that time pervaded and animated all the European nations, in the north of France united the charms of poetry to all the forms of society. The same chivalrous gallantry flowed out in poetical strains on the banks of the Seine, the Arno and the Tagus. Thibaut, king of Navarre, and count of Champagne, sang in the service of the lady of his heart, as a Troubadour. But the French poetry was rather a display of ingenuity and wit than the language of passion and deep feelings. At that period, only the rude poetry, displayed in the romances of chivalry, could gratify the taste of the French; but as soon as chivalry really ceased to exist, the poetry which owed its character to it began to fade gradually, and the literature passed over, through the airy, gay faHiaux, into the entertaining anecdotes. The univer22* sity of Paris, which had been founded as early as the 12th century, became the seat of scholastic philosophy and theology. Here the scholastic system of dialectics was cherished and cultivated, and, through its influence, the literature took such a turn as ever after to incline more to eloquence than poetry. The French aimed, earlier than any other modern nation, at a natural prose. Clearness, precision, euphony, a good structure of the sentences, and a pleasing facility, were cultivated ; and these are the qualities by the combination of which the French prose rose to classical excellence, particularly in the reign of Louis XIV, the golden age of French literature. Such a style was not consistent either with depth or enthusiasm of expression ; and Voltaire's remark, " Whatever is not clear, is not French," is applicable to the whole of French literature down to the revolution, since which, French genius in letters and the arts has been under less subjection to the tyranny of criticism than formerly. In giving a view of the most interesting points in the history of this rich literature, we shall take Chenier's Tableau Historique de la IAtterature Franpaise for our guide, referring, for further information, to the Histoire littiraire de la France, commenced by the Benedictines of the congregation of St. Maur, and continued by the members of the Institute {Acad, des inscript. et belleslettres). French Grammar, &c. Fifty years after Bacon had explained the difference between practical and philosophical grammar, Lancelot, under the direction of Arnaud, wrote TJame de PortRoyala universal grammar, with which the scientific literature of the French commences. Robert and Henry Stephens, who lived in the reign of Henry II, were the first writers on the French language. Since the establishment of the academy, Vaugelas, T. Corneille, Patru, Menage, Bouhours, Beauzee, Desmarais, &c, have written on this subject. Girard, by his Synonymes; D'Olivet, by his Treatise on Prosody ; and Dumarsais, by his Remarks on Figurative Expressions, settled the rules of the language. A still clearer light was shed on them by Condillac's Grammaire gMrale, which is esteemed a master work. Domergue distinguished himself as a grammarian, and introduced many judicious innovations. Lemare's Cows theo rique et pratique de la Langue Francaise is an important work. Marmontel also displayed much acuteness and taste in his Legons dhm Fere. The influence of tha valuable Dichonnaire de VAcadimie, has al but less originality. Pi ready been mentioned. bered among the most Rhetoric and Criticism. The French ters in the golden age works on rhetoric and criticism are nu ture. His moral as merous, but many of them have lost their meditations, and even former celebrity. Who would feel inclin searches, breathe a dh;ed, in our times, to study the laws of epic The natural beauty of poetry with Bossu, or those of the drama become obsolete to this with the abbe d'Aubignac ? Rollin's Traite vinciales, ou Lettres ea des Etudes will always be esteemed as an talte a un Provincial de elementary work, on account of its clear ed and annihilated th ness. Batteux's Cours des Belleslettres, Jesuits. We rarely in Dubos's work on Poetiy and Painting; so much earnestness is Diderot's Observations on the Drama; with the most pleasing IVIarmontel's Poetique, with his JElimens de tainment of a great enc IAtUrature; Rapin's Reflexions surV Usage la Religion are heartde VEloquence; Burner's Traite1 philoso moral and religious t phique de VEloquence ; Fenelon's Dialogues pious scholar was ac sur VEloquence, and Reflexions sur la Rheto his solitude for the w rique; Corneille's Discours sur la Tragedie; the discriminating am Voltaire's Commentaires sur Corneille, his of the duke de la I Melanges, his Dictionnaire philosophique, ripening in the great t his Lettres, and, finally, Thomas's Essai His Maximes are mode sur les Eloges, are works which made They are pointed and epochs in this branch of literature. One strikingly true in thenof the most important and instructive greater part of mankir works of this kind is cardinal Maury's French derived a tas Traite sur les Pnncipes de VEloquence de la matic mariner, and lea Chaire etduBarreau. Among the produc want of moral ardor, tions of more recent times, we must men his principles, must i tion Suard'sMelanges de LiUhature, which philosophical treatises, are distinguished by profound observa fame of LaBruyere's v tions, an elegant style, and a correct taste: is widely spread. 'in this collection, the essays of the abbe Theophrastus are dra Arnaud are of superior merit. The hand of a master, bi Etudes sur Molibre of Cailhava; the Me general forms. La '. moires pour servir a VHist&ire de la IAttera how to draw the indi ture Frangaise, by Palissot; Chamfort's generating into caric* Memoires, and Ginguene's writings, are tated him. Two imn valuable. The latter was engaged, at the to be mentionedF time of his death, in his extensive work and J. J. Rousseau's jon Italian literature, the interruption of was intended to ser which is much to be regretted. La Harpe's youthful princes, in th Lycee de Litter ature, particularly the first of rulers. Never, perh part, is a valuable work: the last volumes clothed in a more betray too much prejudice. Madame de garb than in this my Stael's J)e VAllcmagne. which abounds in Fenelon's Inquiries ir being entertaining; his conversations on astronomy pleased once through this means. At a later period, French literature was indebted to the ingenious widow of Condorcet, for an excellent translation of Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments, to which she subjoined Letters on Sympathy. The work of Madame de Stael, on the Influence of the Passions upon the Happiness of Individuals and Society, presents, like all the other writings of this remarkable woman, ingenious views, novel turns, and a rare independency of mind. De Volney's Catechism for the French Citizen, and SaintLambert's General Catechism, or Principes des Mozurs chez toutes les Nations, deserve notice. At the present day, Droz (q. v.) has distinguished himself by his work on morals. Degerando's Perfectionnement Morale has much reputation. It has been translated in America (Boston, 1830). The political writers in France commence with the venerable chancellor de PHospital. Although at no period the laws were so frequently violated as in the reign of Charles IX, yet the improvement of legislation begins with that epoch. Dumoulin, one of the greatest jurisconsults, contributed much to it. Hubert Languet, under the assumed name of Junius Brutus, wrote a remarkable work on the lawful power of a prince. La Boetie, Bodin (Jo. Bodinus), Boisguilbert, Lamoignon, D'Aguesseau, St. Pierre and Melon are celebrated names in this branch of French literature. The Economies royales, by Sully, must not be forgotten here. The first place, however, is due to Montesquieu, for his great work, De VEsprit des Lois; he lived from 1689 to 1755. J. J. Rousseau, in his Control social, disclosed truths which before had scarcely been suspected. Mably gained reputation by many works, especially by his Entretiens de Phocion. Servan, Dupaty, Forbonnais, Turgot, distinguished themselves in this department; and Necker's writings on finance are well known. Mirabeau will always be celebrated for his bold and powerful productions. No writer, however, in this branch, during the revolution, was more distinguished for sagacity and extensive knowledge than Sieyes. Lebrun, BarbeMarbois, Roederer, Dupont de Nemours, Garlier, J. B. Say, Ganilh and Merlin, Perreau, Bourguignon, Bexon, Pastoret and Lacretelle, are able writers on the science of legislation and jurisprudence. Pulpit Eloquence and Works on Education. Lingendes first distinguished himself by his sermons and funeral discourses, in the reign of Louis XIII. Bossuet warmed his audience by his noble zeal for truth and piety no less than by his splendid eloquence, which bears the character of the age of Louis XIV. His celebrated Oraisoixs funebres contributed very much to the cultivation of French prose. Bourdaloue was his rival, and was acknowledged to be the first of French preachers; he lived from 1632 to 1704. Anselme and Flechier were popular preachers. Massillon learned much from these great predecessors, and touched the heart by the most moving language* of Christian humility. Among Protestant preachers, Saurin is distinguished.In Works on Education, the French literature is very rich. Not to repeat here the works which have been already mentioned, we shall only notice, among the productions of the latest times, the works of Mad. Leprince de Beaumont, Mad. de Genlis, De Bouilly, Berquin, DucrayDumenil, &c, as written in an intelligible and pleasing style, and adapted to the tender age for which they are designed. History, Biography. The earliest monuments of French eloquence must be looked for in historical writing; and the first rank among writings of this class is due to the m6moires. The French were always happy in their observation of character and manners, in public as well as private life. The study of their numerous mimoires is now rendered easy by the valuable Collection universale de Mimoires relatifs a VHistoire de France, the first 12 volumes of which contain only those from the 13th to the close of the 15th century. At the head of the authors of valuable m&+ moires stands the chevalier Jean de Joinville, who accompanied St. Louis in the crusade to Palestine. The honest, warm h earted simplicity of this writer has all the charm of romance. He wishes, with an honest zeal, to raise a literary monument to his pious sovereign. Christine de Pisan, daughter of the astrologer at the court of Charles V, comes next to him. Her style is more graceful, without possessing Joinville's strength and cheerful ease. Philippe de Comines has given a striking picture of the gloomy, hypocritic Louis XL He is the most ingenious, and, both in point of style and matter, the first among the writers of French memoirs, from the 13th to nearly the beginning of the 17th century. Froissart wrote a larger historical work, to which he endeavored to give an epic character, by the charms of strik ing narratives. In the memoirs of the life of the chevalier Bayard, are perceived the last traces of the honest simplicity of those old historians and chroniclers. A mixture of this simplicity of former writers, with an assurance that stands unparalleled in historical literature, characterizes the notorious memoirs of Rrantome. They describe the times of Charles IX and Henry III, in which the most revolting licentiousness prevailed. Sully portrayed Jnis age in an interesting and dignified manner. It is to be regretted that the learned De Thou wrote in Latin. Mezerai wrote the histoiy of the French monarchy with independence. Pelisson, in relating the conquest of FrancheComte^ is a panegyrist rather than a historian. Variilas filled 15 volumes in quarto with the histoiy of the period from Louis XI to the death of Henry III. He is somewhat exaggerated in his manner. St. Real imitated him, but his language is purer. At the same period, Daniel, Joseph d'Orleans, Rapin de Thoyras, and Aubert de Vertot distinguished themselves as historians. The sketch of universal history, by Bossuet, is unique. It contains a comprehensive survey of the great events in the ancient world, in reference to the destiny of man. Cardinal de Retz understood the art of interweaving the most interesting anecdotes, in the most ingenious and vivid manner, into his narration. Bougeant wrote on the peace of Westphalia. Roliin's works are written for the instruction of youth. They exhibit neither genius nor profoundness of research, but are good for beginners and amateurs. Next in time comes Crevier's history of the emperors, and Lebeau's Histoire du BasEmpire (revised and enlarged by Royou, Paris, 1814, 4 vols.). The ecclesiastical history of the abbe Claude Fleury, who lived from 1640 to 1723, is a superior work. Henault gave a chronological survey of French histoiy (continued to the latest times, by Walckenaer). Montesquieu wrote on the Romans, with a Roman spirit. Voltaire,' as author of the Histoiy of Charles XII, of the Essai des Mazurs, and of the Histoiy of the Age of Louis XIV, holds a distinguished rank among historians. Duclos's Memoires secrets are valuable. Millot is correct and impartial, but timid and feeble. Gaillard's merits are obscured by his difFuseness. Raynal's philosophical histoiy of the commerce carried on by the Europeans in the Indies, deserved and acquired celebrity. Rulhieie's Histoiy of the Revolution by which Catharine II was raised to the Russian Throne, and his History of Poland, are written with veracity, elegance and fire. Midland's Histoire des Croisades received the prize of the national institute, in preference to Heeren's work on the same subject. Mirabeau's History of the Prussian Monarchy under Frederic the Great is extremely rich, but wants method. Frederic the Great, himself, must be mentioned here among the French historians, on account of his Mimoires de Brandenbourg, and Histoire de mon Temps. Thouret's elementary work on the Revolutions in the French Government is a profound and instructive view, written in a simple, severe, but concise, pure and appropriate style. This great work, of which every line breathes a regard for the rights of man and the love of liberty, was written in prison, and the author was led to the scaffold as an enemy of the people. Anquetil and Desodoards have written the history of France. De Segur's picture of Europe, in his Histoire des principaux Evenemens du Regne de F. Guillaume Z7, Roi de Pritsse, deserves to be distinguished. Caillard's excellent memoir on the revolution in Holland (1787) fills almost the whole of the first volume of that work. Rabaut St. Etienne's Precis Historique de la Revolution Franpaiset 2 vols., continued and completed by the younger Lacretelle, 5 vols., is esteemed, as is likewise Precis des Evenemens militaires, written by Matth. Dumas. f The Considerations sur les pnncipaux Evtnemcns de la Revolution Frangaise, a posthumous work of Mad. de Stael, and Mignet's Histoire de la Revolution Franpaise, deserve, likewise, an honorable mention here. French literature is also rich in excellent translations of ancient as well as modern historians of all nations. Letters, Travels. The French epistolary style, which has since been justly considered as a model, and imitated by all Europe, was yet rather unpolished in the age of Richelieu. Henry IV wrote to the beautiful ladies, to whom he paid his addresses, with the old chivalric tenderness, in a veiy gallant and complimentary style. The Lettres de Henri IVa Coriandre d'Andoise, Comtesse de Guiche, sa Maitresse (Amsterdam and Paris, 1788) are interesting and well worth reading. The letters of business of that period were written in the common official style. Even the letters of Malherbe, the lyric poet, are wanting in ease. But Richelieu wrote even his official letters with a manly precision and ease, and not without elegance. They are distinguished by a compressed eloquence and great penetration. It became the general ambition, among the wits of the time, to be distinguished as Iettefr writers; and the national liveliness of the French, combined with wif and ease, but without deep feeling, led to a finished epistolary style. At that period* the word betesprit first came into vogue, and two of the politest writers at court vied with each other in letter writing. Balzac's principal aim was to write elegantly, without pomp, and with the seriousness of Cicero; he was admired, but considered dry. Vincent de Voiture understood the art of trifling in a more pleasing manner; he was a man of wit, but affected; his gallantries were farfetched, spun out into artificial periods, and bristling with ano titheses. It next became a matter of ambition to combine the merits of these two writers. Costar wrote with correctness, elegance and delicacy; but the female writers are the most distinguished in this branch of literature. The first rank among them is due to the amiable marchioness de Sevigne. We may also mention the letters of Mile, de l'Espinasse, and Mad. du DefFand. The letters of the beautiful Ninon de 1'Enelos are characterized by a charming grace, yet their genuineness is doubtful. Those of Babet are distinguished for delicacy of sentiment and expression. The letters of count Bussyftabutin are overcharged with the refinement of a belespritj but are not unin* teresting. Chaulieu gave a pleasing example of letters intermixed with verses. The art of epistolary composition became so common an accomplishment among the French, that, even in Voltaire's letters, they admired his genius, rather than his particular talents for letter writing. The art of reasoning and of delicate raillery in epistles, was carried to perfection by Gresset, one of the wittiest men of his time. Dorat, Sedaine and De Pezay wrote pleasing epistles of this species. The abbe de Bernis is particularly rich in beautiful descriptions. Montesquieu's JLettres Persannes must be mentioned here as models of a fine style.French literature abounds in excellent Travels; but, as they cannot exercise any great influence on the peculiar genius of a literature, it is unnecessary to enumerate them. The celebrated Travels of Anacharsis the Younger, by the learned abbe Barthelemy, are every where known. The Lettres sur Vltalie by Dupaty are much esteemed. Volney, Denon, Delaborde, and, above all, Humboldt and Bonpland, are among the most distinguished of modern travellers. To the student of antiquities, the observations of Millin and Champoliion on their travels are highly interesting. A good view of me literature of travels may be obtained from Make Brun's Jhmales des Voyages, Romances and Novels, The earliest French romances relate to the knights of the round table, and Alexander the Great. They are by Lambert di Cors, continued by Alex, du Bernay, and were written in the 12th century. The romances of the round table comprise the St. Graal, Tristan de Leonnais, Perceval and Lancelot, and were originally written in Latin, then translated into French prose, and, m the same century, put into French verse,which, in the 14th centuiy, was again remodelled into French prose. In the 13th century succeeded the romances of the Twelve Peers of France. A higher interest, how* ever, was excited by the allegorical Romance of the Rose, which, for two centuries, was looked upon as the triumph of French genius. It is wholly in verse, but ia very lame verse. It forms a didacticalle* gorical poem, which some Frenchmen were bold enough to compare with the work of Dante, which was finished the same year! William of Lorris wrote the 4150 first verses in the first half of the 13th centuiy ; 100 years later, it was continued, atud completed by Jean de Meun, surnamed Clopinel. The object of this romance is to exhibit a complete art of love. A host of allegorical personages make their appearance in it; all the virtues and vices are per* sonified; all the characters moralize; but, at the Same time, the most frivolous allusions are interspersed through the whole work, which, towards the end, are converted into the most vulgar obscenities. French poetical genius here reasons in its very outset. The work contains pleasing passages, but no traces of much elevation of spirit. It was finally denounced from the pulpit. One of the oldest printed editions of it is that of Paris, 1521, folio. Towards the close of the 13th century, an allegoricromantic poem was written by Jacques Gelee, under the title of he Roman du nouveau Renard, which was, probably, the origin of the German poem, Reinecke der Fuchs (Renard the Fox) ; and, in 1330, an ecclesiastic, by the name of Deguilleville, wrote three large religious allegories, founded on the idea of a pilgrimage. The hundred tales of Margaret, queen of Navarre, sister of Francis I, L'Heptameron on VHistoire des amans fortune1s de tr&sittustte. et tresexcellente Princesse MargutHie de Valois, Reine de Navarre (1559), aie written in the manner of Boccaccio, and it can hardly be conceived, how a woman could so entirely divest herself of female delicacy. The tone, however, was not offensive to the manners of her age. The 100 tales of the Burgundian court had appeared at an earlier period, in the reign of Charles VII, and also the two following romantic poems, written with a charming simplicityGirard de Nevers, and Le petit Jehan de Saintri, which were afterwards published in a revised edition by Tressan. During the crusades, the French knights became acquainted with Arabian poems, which gave rise to the faiiy tales that afterwards became so popular, and which, with the romances of chivalry, became the sole repositories of whatever romantic enthusiasm was yet left in France. These little romantic tales were called Fabliaux (See Meon's Nouveau RecueU de Fabliaux et Contes ine'dits des Poktes Frangais, of the 13th and 14th centuries, Paris, 1823, 2 vols.).The romances of chivalry. Huon of Bordeaux, Ogier the Dane, and similar stories of the Paladins of Charlemagne, were written at the beginning of the 15th century. In the beginning of the 16th century, the taste for this species of literature again revived in France; but the genuine romance gradually passed over into the historical, which, in turn, degenerated into histories of intrigues and court anecdotes. A new species, the satirical romance, was introduced by Rabelais, in the first half of the 16th century. His Oargantua and Pantagruel is coarse, but full of wit, comic originality and inexhaustible fantastic invention. When Anne of Austria became queen of France, pastoral romances, on the model of the Spanish, became popular. Agreeably to the French character, the comic was introduced into them by Nicolas de Montreux, in his Bergeries de Juliette. The first Frenchman who rivalled the Spaniards in this department was Honoree d'Urfe, in his Jlstrie, which was received with enthusiasm. The Provencalromantic spirit seems to breathe from this work, the ingenious and enthusiastic author of which was born at Marseilles; his own history is interwoven in his work (5 vols., the 1st 1610). It depicts no world of Arcadian shepherds, but one of chivalric gallantry. The romantic sentimentality of this work had an influence on the historical romances, which became popular during the reign of Louis XIV. Calpr6nede treated Grecian and Roman subjects in such a manner as to leave nothing Greek or Roman but the names. He had a rich and poetical imagination, but he belonged to the school which endeavored to elevate genius at the expense of taste, and which,by its excess, threw the victory into the han4s of the opposite party, which found merit only in a close adherence to the rules of art. Calpren^de found an imitator in Mile, de Scudery. She wrote seven longwinded novels, of which the first, Clelie, extends through ten octavo volumes. There are also ten volumes of Conversations et Entretiens from the same prolific source. In Mile, de Scudery's works, tenderness of sentiment is lost in an affected sensibility, and a shallow stream of words. She died in 1701, at the age of more than 90 years. The ladies appear to have felt a special calling for the cultivation of this field, and by their efforts the romance gradually descended into the sphere of realities. The historical novels of Mile. Rose de Caumont de la Force met with a very favorable reception; she had the art of giving to them the coloring of tine history. Madame de Villedieu made it her peculiar business to metamorphose anecdotes from ancient history into tales of gallantry. Her Galanteries Grenadines are written in the Spanish style. Fairy tales then came into vogue. The Arabian Thousand and One Nights, which were translated into French by Antoine Galland, found numerous imitators. The Contes de ma Mere VOye, written by Perrault, and the Tales of the countess d'Aunoy, were very much read. Hamilton's stories were distinguished for wit and boldness of imagination; even the venerable Fenelon wrote fairy tales for the instruction of the duke of Burgundy. The romances of the countess de la Fayette were much admired, and her Princesse de Cleves will always be ranked among the best historical novels; her Za'ide is distinguished for elegance of style and tenderness of sentiments. The number of comic romances was not so great. Paul Scarron, well known for his wit, and his marriage with Mile. d'Aubigne, afterwards marchioness de Maintenon, displayed the talents which afforded so much amusement to his contemporaries, in his Le Roman comique. He portrays successfully the comic in situations. His sallies are bold, but his humor is often insipid and verbose. The novels of Lesage are in imitation of Spanish works. His Gil Bias, and Diable Boiteux, were universally admired ; besides these, he left six other works of the same kind. The Roman Bourgeois of Furetiere, was read for a time, and then forgotten. The invention of the domestic novel belongs to the English. The abbe Prevot translated the works of Richardson ; and his own novels, Cleveland, Le Doyen deKiUerine, and particularly Manon Lescairt, touch the heart. The same may be said of Segrais's novels. In Montesquieu's Lettres Persannes, fiction serves merely to convey philosophical satire. In comic novels, as Candide, Zadig, Micromegas, and the Princess of Babylon, Voltaire's genius appears in a striking manner. They are characterized by originality, piquancy, nature, sparkling wit, and an interesting style. J. J. Rousseau's Nouvelle Heloise, by its overpowering eloquence and glowing pictures of the passions, excited universal admiration. Marivaux, Diderot (whose James the Fatalist, and The Nun, are among the earliest moral novels, although he afterwards disgraced himself by his Les Bijoux indiscrets), Mesdames de Tencin, de Graffigny, and Riccoboni, Marmontelin his Belisaire, Incas, and Contes morauxwere distinguished in this class. Florian showed how the historical romance may be combined with the romance of chivalry, in his Gonzalve de Cordove; he succeeded in reviving the pastoral novel, by his free imitation of the Galathee of Cervantes, and by his own lovely Estelle. The younger Crebillon, than whom no writer better understood the art of combining the most voluptuous situations with a nice description of character, stands at the head of a long series of writers of frivolous novels. The works of some of his imitators are stained by the most shameless immoralities. Such are the Liaisons dangereuses of Laclos, and Justine, One of the best novelists in the latter half of the 18th century was Retif de la Bretonne. Two later writers in this branch of literature throw all their predecessors into the shade Bemardin de St. Pierre and Chateaubriand, (q. v.) The former gained the reputation of a writer of much sense and feeling by his titudes de la Nature, while he won all hearts by his Paul and Virginia, and La Chaumiere Indienne. His works are distinguished by charming pictures of nature, a simple and unaffected style, and a tender sensibility. Chateaubriand's religious tendency, and his warm and glowing imagination, appear every where in his* works. His Mala, his Rene", and his Martyrs, are written in a touching style, but with a tinge of melancholy and mysticism entirely unknown in France before him. Among the modern female writers, Madame de Stael is the most distinguished. Her Corinne, ou Vltalie, is a masterpiece. Her Delpkine contains many beauties, mixed with many faults. The well known Madame de Genlis is an extremely prolific writer. She possesses ease and talents, but neither genius nor depth. The romances of Madame Cottin, Malvina, Jhnelie Mansfield, Elisabeth, and Mathilde, are full of tenderness and loveliness. The works of Madame de Flahaut (subsequently Madame de Souza) are written with taste, and display a nice talent of observation, an intimate knowledge of life, and delicacy of feeling. AdSle de Senanges, Mademoiselle de Tournon, and Eugfaie de Rothelin, are the best. Le Nhgre comme ilya peu de Blancs, by Lavallee, Les Quatre Espagnols, Le Manuscrit JVouvS au Mont Pausilippe, by Montjoye, and VaUrie, by Madame de Krudener, rank among the best modern novels. The prolific Pigault le Brun often assumes too much liberty in every respect. Fievee's Dot de Suzette, Salvandy's Monso, Madame de Montolieu's Caroline de Lichtfield, deserve mention. Poetry. In treating of French poetry, we shall begin with the lyric and light narrative poetry. The oldest Norman French poems were songs. (See Fauchet's De VOrigine de la Langue et Poe'sie Frangaises.) The romances and fabliaux, however, are older than the chansons. With the Provencals, on the contrary, poetry, properly so called, was the branch of literature first developed. It was called by them the gay science (gaya ciencia), and it breathed the romantic spirit of the south* The first Troubadours probably came from the Provence to the north of France, in the reign of Philip Augustus, towards the close of the 12th century. Chretie* de Trbyes, who translated the romances of the round table into Norman French verse, is considered to have been the first who imitated the Provencal song in French verse. The Norman Alexander (from whom the Alexandrine verse derived its name) lived between 1180 and 1223, at the court of Philip Augustus, where7 he composed and sang his life of Alexander the Great in rhyme, which is full of allusions to the deeds of Philip. Thibaut, king of Navarre, addressed to the lady of his love, Blanche, queen of Castile, songs written in the simple style of the Provencal lays, with deviations which sometimes resemble the canzoni. Almost all his songs consist of five strophes, the last of which concludes with the Provencal close (envoy), which the Italians retained in their canzoni. The language is as different from modern French as the language of the Suabian minnesingers from modern German. The Norman Trouveurs and the Provencal Troubadours saluted each other as brethren in art. The chatelain ds iCoucy became famous by his romantic fate. Messire Thierry de Soissons was one of the ehivalric poets who accompanied St. Louis to the East. To this period belong the Poc'sies de Marie de France, PoMe AngloNormand du XIII Siecle1 Paris, 1820, 2 vols.). The songs of many French poets of the 14th century surprise us by the similarity of their metres to those of the old Spanish songs. The celebrated poetess Doete de Troyes lived about that period. Philippe Mouskes of Arras wrote a history of France in verse. Allegory then became popular. Jean Froissart (q. v.), the celebrated historian, introduced the Provencal pastorals into French literature. His poems consisted principally of paMoureUes and rondeaux. They are distinguished by the most graceful simplicity and loveliness. We have also a great number of lays andvirelays by him. He collected part of his poems in the form of a romance, under the title Meliador, or the Knight of the Sun. His allegoric poem, the Paradise of Love, and a religious poem, the Three Marys,' were favorites. The comic fabliaux, in verse, were in favor in the 12th and 13th centuries. They are often extremely indecent. This error, of mistaking an anecdote in verse for poetry, has survived through all the periods of French literature. Two monks, Coinsi and Farsi, distinguished themselves by their moral and satirical fabliaux. The Provencal lyric poetry was most flourishing in the north of France, during the 15th century. The triolet, tic quatrain, the long's song, so called, were cherished particularly on account of the burden, which was essential to them, for in it plays of wit could be exhibited. Charles, duke of Orleans, who, at the battle of Agincourt, fell into the hands of the English, was distinguished by the unaffected grace of his songs. During that war, which had nearly destroyed the French monarchy, there were several such princely minstrels. John and Philip, dukes of Burgundy, Rene of Anjou, John of Lorraine, and several others, were connected with one another; and their songs may be found in the old manuscript collection of songs (Balladier); but genius of a high order must not be sought among them. To this period belong Clotilde du VallonChalys, Alain Chartier, Villon, who made his own tricks the theme of his songs, Coquillart, distinguished for copiousness of burlesque expression and for licentious sallies, and Gretin, or Du Bois, and Bordigu£ Michault, Martial d'Auvergne, Olivier de la Marche, Chasteilain, Michel d'Amboise, &c, belong to the lyric poets of the beginning of the 16th century. Their complaints of unrequited love are affected and spiritless. Their comic productions show some power. With Francis I, a prince often rash, but always noble and amiable, ehivalric glory threw its last gleam over France. He was himself a poet, but much more distinguished for devotion to all that was truly great and excellent than for poetical merit. He first introduced the study of the Greek and Latin classics into France, and was j ustly called the father of letters. Throu gh the influence of Catharine of Medici, sonnets came into favor. Jean Marot and his son, Clement Marot, make an epoch Their imitators were called Marotists. Both lived entirely at the court. They were witty profligates, admired for their talents, but certainly esteemed by none. Elegance is conspicuous in the poems of Marot; but he had no feeling of the dignity and sacredness of the art. He wrote allegories, eclogues, comic poems, elegies, epistles, heroic poems, epigrams and chansons in great numbers. He was also distinguished for his metrical translations from the Latin and Italian. He had warm friends, and not less violent enemies. Among the former were MellindeSt.Gelais, who, like him, aimed at classical elegance in trifling, and Dolet, who was burned as a heretic. Margaret of Navarre and Mary Stuart wrote songs in French. With the poet Jodelle, began the school of French sonneteers. He and his friends formed the pleiades, as they were called, and were the first who gave poetry a more serious and elevated direction. Ronsard was the head of this body, and was still called the prince of French poets in the following century. He boldly discarded the trite allegories and stale conceits of his predecessors, but he was destitute of feeling, and ran out into endless subtleties and an empty pomp of phrases. Of the other pleiades, Du Bellay and Baif had the greatest reputation. Another reform soon became necessary to abolish the Latinizing school of poetry. Bertrand and Desportes became the reformers of taste, and predecessors of the celebrated Malherbe. This writer, who is considered, by the French, as their first classical lyric poet, discovered the true nature of French prosody. He was without poetical fancy or boldness of imagination, but he was an able critic, and a powerful tyrant of words and syllables. The classic dignity of language, foi vntch the French are indebted to him, is particularly exhibited in his odes and stanzas. He died in 1627. Regnier distinguished himself by his classical satires and pictures of manners. Theophile Viaud rivalled Malherbe, and possessed the rare talent of improvisation. The pastorals, or bergeries, then came into vogue. Racan and Mairet distinguished themselves in this species of poetry* As epigrammatists, Gombaud and Brebeuf were celebrated. The influence of Aristotle on French poetry was already apparent in the 16th century. The lyrical poems of Racine have more elegance of language than poetical merit. Jean la Fontaine, born in 1621, died in 1694, was a popular favorite. An inimitable simplicity of description, which sprung from a truly childlike heart, is the characteristic of his fables and conies. The latter are chiefly imitations of Boccaccio, and are sometimes tainted by obscenities. BoileauDespreaux heartily hated all affectation and extravagance. He had very little imagination, but great clearness of observation. His critical rules had the more influence as he himself followed them minutely. His Satires and his Art of Poetry are wellknown. The writers of his school prided themselves on the severity of their taste. Benserade's son^s Were popular. At the head of the comic boets of that period were Lullier (Chapelle), Bachaumont, Chaulieu and La Fare. J. B. Rousseau, born in 1669, became celebrated as a lyric writer, who treated every subject with ease. The poesies fugitives now came more and more into favor. Pavilion, St. Pavin, &c, recommended themselves by elegant trifles. Segrais's eclogues were esteemed. Still more pleasing are those of Madame Deshoulieres, who lived from 1634 to 1694, and wrote with feminine tenderness. The idyls of Fontenelle are written with a cold elegance. Louis Racine, the son of the famous tragedian, is distinguished for the earnest piety of his poetry. The sacred odes of Pompignan, who lived from 1709 to 1784, are noble and full of feeling. Berquin, Leonard of Guadeloupe, and Mademoiselle Rose Levesque, distinguished themselves by lovely idyls, "n which they imitated Gessner. Among the modern poets, Lebrun's odes rise to a higher flight than most of the French poems. The Epitres of Ducis and Do Fontanes are excellent. Legouve is distinguished for elegance of style and melody of versification. Three of his poems, Les Souvenirs, La Melancolie, and Le VOL. v. 23 Miriie des Ferrmes, met with great success. The fables of Florian, Arnault and Ginguene are happy imitations of Lafontaine's; and Andrieux, in his Meumer sans Souci, reminds us of the manner of that celebrated writer. The early death of Millevoye, whose Amour Matemel and Belzunce are characterized by a pure and deep feeling, was a loss to poetry. The writings of De Boufilers and De Parny prove that no calamities are able to change the propensity of the nation to frivolous subjects. Bertin (died in 1790) is the most distinguished elegiac poet. Chenier excelled in idyllic poetry. Of the late lyric writers, Lamartine is the best.In epic poetry of merit, French litera* ture is very poor. The first epic attempt of any consequence was made by DesmaretsdeSt.Sorlin, a protege1 of Richelieu. He died in 1676. Boileau ridiculed him with much severity. Desmarets was indeed destitute of what Boileau himself possessed in so high a degreecritical judgment and a chastened tastebut his invention was rich. The plan of his Clovis, though not judicious, displays a rich poetical conception. The machinery was borrowed partly from the Christian heaveL, partly from the romantic world of enchantment. Far below him was Jean Chapelain, whose Joan of Arc is equalled in length and tediousness only by Scudery's Alaric, or Rome Delivered. Le Moine's St. Louis, ou la sainte Couronne reconquise, is monotonous and without taste. LimojondeSt.Didier sacrificed Clovis anew. Ronsard's Franciad must not be forgotten in this catalogue of unfortunate epics. Fenelon's TeUmaque is considered, in France, as a masterpiece of epic composition; but, although the noblest tone of reason and morality pervades that work,^t is far from being a true epopee. The Henriade of Voltaire is undoubtedly the principal French poem in this department. The plan is well conceived, and the characters well drawn, the descriptions happy, and the language pure and noble; but the total want of poetical illusion is severely felt throughout the poem. The allegorical personages are particularly unpleasing. Voltaire stained his fame by his Pucelle, to which, however, the rank of the first mock heroic poem in French literature must be given. Madame du Boccage's Colombiade, ou la Foi porte'e au Nouveau Monde, contains, at least, some beautiful descriptions. Masson's Helvetiens is historical rather than epic. Chateaubriand's Martyrs is ranked by some critics, and perhaps more justly than Tdimaqut, among the epics. In the mock heroic, besides Voltaire, Boileau stands distinguished by his Lutrin, which the excellence of its invention and the elaboration of its finish render classical. Parny's La Guerre des Dieux, Les Rosecroix, and Le Paradis perdu, prove the talents of the author, however offensive to good morals. Les Amours Epiques are only episodes, which Parceval de Grandmaison borrowed from other poets. The Achille a Scyros of Luce de Lancival contains fine passages, though the plan is very defective. BaourLormian, in his Poe'mes Galliques, imitates Ossian. Creuze de Lessees Chevaliers de la Table Roude (1811) received great and well deserved applause. Less successful were his Amadis de, Gaule, and Pairs de Charlemagne, which were intended, according to the original plan of the author, to comprise, with the Table Ronde, a complete picture of the whole period of chivalry. Brebeuf, who lived from 1618 to 1661, first distinguished himself in didactic poetry by his Entretiens Solitaires, Boileau's Art Poetique has been already mentioned. Two didactic poems of the younger Racine, La Religion and La Grace, as also Voltaire's Discours sur VHomme, La Religion Naturelle, and Le Desastre de Lisbonne, and Dulard's La Grandeur de Dieu dans les Merveilles de la Nature, deserve to be mentioned. Watelet wrote a poem on tbe art of painting, and Dorat attempted to sketch the theory of the drama. The descriptive poems of the English, particularly Thomson's Seasons, have found imitators in France. Of the class of these imitations, are Les Saisons, by St. Lambert, and Les Mois, by Boucher. Bernard's and Lemierre's didactic poems, It Art d*Aimer and Les Pastes, are imitations of Ovid. Delille rendered this department a favorite by his Les Jardins, 12 Homme des Champs, in which he imitated Virgil, his La Malheur et la Pitii, and La Conversation, His larger poem, UImagination, is particularly rich in beautiful descriptions and episodes. Of the valuable work of Lebrun, La Nature, only a part has been published. La Navigation, by Esmenard, L?Astronomic, by Guidin, Le Merite des Femmes, by Legouve, Le G6nie de VHomme, by Chenedolle, Les Trois Ages, by Roux, are of superior merit. The last great work of Delille, Les Trois R&gnes de la Nature, abounds in beauties. Lamartine is also distinguished in this department of poetry. Dramatic Poetry and Art, The principal work on the French drama and stageis the Histoire du Theatre Francais depuis son Origine jusqrfa present (Paris, 1734 and 1756), in 15 vols., by the brothers Fr. and CI. Parfait, who also published a Didionnaire des Theatres de Paris, contenant toutes les Pieces qui ont Hi reprisenties jusqu 'a present, des Faits Anecd. sur les Auteurs,ActeurSyActrices, Danseurs, Danseuses, Compositeurs de Ballets, &c. (Paris, 1756 and 1758,7 vols.). The treatises of Fontenelle, Suard (in his Melanges de Literature), La Harpe, Lemercier and A. W von Schlegel (Lectures on Dramatic Literature) should also be consulted. The French themselves admit that it is difficult to give a connected history of their theatre. The earliest period to which the origin of the French theatre can be referred is the reign of Charlemagne, when we find the first mention of histriones, or clowns, jesters, ropedancers and jugglers. Charlemagne banished them on account of their licentiousness ; and, under his successors, no traces of them are to be found. The people, however, did not lose their taste for public spectacles, and thus originated the feast of fools. (See Fools, Feast of,) The Troubadours, the creators of French poetry, also presented their songs in the form of dialogues, and first received the name les comiques, or comidiens. Among the dramatic Troubadours was Faydit. But these performances were so rude that the origin of the true theatre in France, as in the rest of Europe, must be dated from the 14th and the beginning of the 15th century, with the introduction of the mysteries. In modern as in ancient times, the drama had a religious origin. Towards the end of the reign of Charles V, the songs which the pilgrims used to sing on their return from their pilgrimages, gave the first idea of that kind of dramatic poetry which was called mystery. The performers received the title of brethren of the passion (confi'Srie de la passion), by letters patent from Charles V, because they represented the passion of our Lord ; and, during the reigns of Charles VI, Charles VII and Louis IX, the drama made a rapid progress, notwithstanding the civil wars and the distracted state of France At first the mysteries, which always repre sented some biblical or legendary history, were considered rather as acts of devotion than as an amusement; and the religious services in the churches were shortened to give the people time to attend them. But they soon degenerated into mere travesties of the most sacred subjects. The fraternity at first performed their plays in the streets, in the open air; afterwards, in4 hall, in the hospital of the Trinity, and, at a later period, in the hotel de Bourgogne. The spectators were seated, as at present, in rows of seats, rising one above another (etablies), the highest of which was called paradise, the others, the palace of Herod, &c. God the Father was represented in a long robe, surrounded by angels, seated upon a staging. In the middle of the stage was hell, in the form of a dragon, whose mouth opened to let in and out the devils which appeared during the play. The rest of the stage represented the world. An alcove with a curtain belonged to the theatre, in which every thing was supposed to happen which could not be exhibited to the spectators ; as the delivery of the virgin, circumcisions, &c. On both sides of the stage were benches, upon which the actors sat in the intervals of their performance, as they never left the stage until they had finished their parts. The mysteries were not divided into acts, but days (journees). A performance lasted as many days as it had such divisions, which were generally so long that the play was interrupted for some hours, merely to give the players time to eat. The mysteries were, in fact, Jong dramatized histories, in which the whole course of a person's life was represented. Historical truth was not much regarded in them. Thus Herod, for instance, was represented as a pagan, and the Roman governor of Judea as a Mohammedan. The tragic and comic were mixed together, in the most ridiculous way. The crucifixion of the Savior, or the martyrdom of a saint, was succeeded by the buffooneries of the clown. Parts of the play were sung, some even in choruses. The verses were principally iambic lines of different length. Such was the infancy of the art. By the side of the mysteries sprung up the plays of the Bazochean old corporation of legal and judicial officers, wnich had the privilege of superintending public festivals. In the reign of Philip the Fair, they had received permission to receive pupils, to assist them in their duties. These clerks afterwards formed a corporation, the head of which was called the roi de la Bazoche; and, excited by the success of the mysteries, they invented a new species of playsthe tnoralities and farces, which they perform 3d under the name of clercs de la Bazoche. They performed, at first, in private houses; jut a theatre was afterwards given them in he royal palace. Some of the pieces dismayed much wit and humor, as appears rom some remains which have come Sown to us. The farces, which served as afterpieces to the moralities, were of different kinds, historical, fabulous, comic, &c, and consisted of short plays, in verse, representing characters drawn from real life, with much satirical license and comic power. . The most celebrated among them is the witty farce of the Avocat Patelin (probably first represented about 1480), which still maintains itself upon the French stage (as remodelled by Brueys and Palaprat), and which has had a decided influence upon the comic drama of the French. Pierre Blanchet is said to have been the author. The piece is rude as a whole, but the dialogue has a spirit and ease which have ever since characterized the French comedy. The Bazoche plays maintained themselves in favor at Paris for two centuries; but their indecency and personalities became a public scandal. The parliament repeatedly caused the theatres to be shut. In 1542, the actors were all thrown into prison; and, in 1545, the society was abolished. About the same time with this, a third society was formed, called the children without care (enfans sans souci). Its members were young men of good families; their president was called the prince of fools (prince des sots), and their performances were called follies (soties). They were satirical plays, having no other object than to lash fools, and to ridicule individuals or bodies of persons in high life. For this purpose, allegorical personification was used, and the children of Folly and their grandmamma, Stupidity, who brings them into the service of the world, &c, appeared as acting persons. These soties, performed on stages in public places, were received with great applause, so that the Bazoche exchanged their moralities for them. As early as the time of Charles VI, this gay company received a privilege. But they assumed such a license, that their plays were subjected to the censorship of the parliament, in the reign of Francis I; and, as they evaded the censorship by using masks and inscriptions, in order to designate individuals, a new order of parliament became necessary. Their most brilliant period was under Louis XII, and shortly after the famous poet Clement Marot (the favorite of the great queen Margaret of Valois) became a member of the society, which was finally abolished in 1612. Both these latter societies played gratuitously, Not so the brethren of the passion, whose prices the parliament was even obliged to limit. On condition of an runual payment of 1000 livres to the poor, they received the exclusive privilege of exhibiting all plays for money at Paris, and thus prevented those societies from performing which occasionally came from the provinces. Meanwhile, the acquaintance with Roman and Greek literature had become more general in France, through the invention of printing. Several tragedies of Sophocles and Euripides, and the comedies of Terence, had appeared in French translations, and thus the French drama, which appeared under Henry II, was silently preparing under Francis I. Jodelle (died 1557), who had been formed in the school of the classics, wrote plays, of which there had hitherto been no model in France, and which gave the French drama that direction which it has ever since retained. Jodelle conceived the bold idea of making the Greek drama the model of the French, and effected a total reform of the French drama. The first piece of this kind, in French dramatical literature, was his comedy in verses of eight syllables, Eug&ne ou le Rencontre, and his tragedy, the Captive Cleopatra (in which we find the ancient chorus), which Jodelle wrote with all the fire of youth, and in which he played himself, with some of his friends, as Remi Belleau and JeandelaPeruse, in 1552. This performance, which decided the fall of the old theatre in Paris, was received with the greatest applause, by a numerous audience. Henry II, who was present, rewarded the author with 500 crowns from his private purse. Jodelle's last and best work is the tragedy of Dido, which contains great beauties. Within the next half century after Jodelle, Spain had her Lope de Vega, and England her Shakspeare. Jodelle introduced the strict observance of the three Aristotelian unities, chose the purely historical manner, excluded eveiy thing supernatural, and took his subjects from Roman and Greek history; but his personages all spoke like modern Frenchmen, and with a most violent exaggeration of the rhetorical character of the old tragedy. Jodelle's friends followed in the path which he had opened ; they formed the society called the Pleiade Franchise, of which Ronsard was the most brilliant star. Jodelle was successfully followed by La Peyrouse, agthor of Medea (appeared in 1555), the first tragedy in the rhymed Alexandrines, which are still used; by Grevin,a writer of comedies; by MassinueSt.Gelais, author of the tragedy of Sophonisba, in prose ; by Jean de la Taiiie, author of the touching tragedy La Famine by Gamier, who, in his chef (Pamvre, Hippolyte (1573), eclipsed all hfa predecessors by the harmony of his verse, and who first ventured to bring other personages, besides Greeks, Romans and Turks, upon the stage, as his Juices and Bradamante show; and by PierredelaRivey, who distinguished himself as much in comedy. Thus the second half of the 16th century was the period in which French dramatic poetry was formed, with some peculiarities, after the model of the ancient classics. The succeeding poets, until the time of Louis XIII, the prolific Alexander Hardy, of whose 800 plays 40 remain on the stage, Nepee, Theophile, &c, contributed little to the progress of the French drama. Mairet, author of a piece called Sophonisbe, which is still esteemed; Rotrou, whose Venceslas is yet played at the tMaire Frangais; Duryer, fearo, &c, who united elegance of expression, sound judgment, and a refined taste, went far beyond those who preceded them. At length appeared the great Pierre Corneille, eclipsing all his predecessors. He had the rare talent of making great characters speak the language of passion with dignity. He first showed his nation a model of tragic power and elevated style; yet he himself bent under the yoke of rigid criticism and prejudice. He is the only French poet, on whom the French bestow the epithet of great. Medea was his first tragedy; the Cid, Cinna, Bolyeucte and Rodogune are considered his masterpieces. Jean Racine became the favorite of the nation in tragedy His first tragedy was Les Frkres Ennemis. His Andromache (1667) was received with as much applause as the Cid had been 30 years before. Racine became the man of his age and his nation. He is the most polished and most elegant of the tragic writers of France. Poetical boldness appeared to him contrary to good taste ; the tone of the court was his constant model. Athalie is his best piece. Voltaire is the third great tragic poet of the French, and his Zaire and Mahomet are admired as masterpieces. Voltaire caused the stage to be enlarged and more highly adorned ; but the costume still remained incongruous with the characters; Roman and Greek tragedies were played in hoops and long perukes. At the time of the revolution, Talma, guided by David, first reformed this abuse, after the impulse had already been given by Clairon. (q. v.) The elder Crebillon closes the list of French tragk' writers of the first class. To the second belong Thomas Corneille, Lafosse, GuimondedelaTouche, Lefranc, Laharpe, Lemierre, Be Belloi, &c. Diderot introduced the sentimental corned}7" in his Ptre de Famille and his Fits Naturel. Among the more recent tragedians are Ducis, who adapted several tragedies of Shakspeare to the French stage, and showed much originality and fire in his Abufar; Arnault, whose tragedies are dis* tinguished by power and tenderness; Legouve, Lemercier, &c. Les TempLiersy by Raynouard, his only tragedy, has given him a deserved reputation. The hero of Mardius was the favorite part of Talma. Jouy's SyUa, the Vhpres Siciliennes and the Paria of Delavigne, and the Clovis of Viennet, are among the chief ornaments of modern French tragedy. These authors have entered on a new path, overstepping the limits which the imitation of the classics had set to French tragedy, and leaving the declamatory eloquence which had previously formed so essential a part of it It has been already mentioned, that French comedy originated with the farces of the Bazoche, particularly with that of the Jlvocat Patelin and the soties of the enfans sans souci. Jodelle introduced a reform into the comedy likewise. His first comedy, the Abbot Eugene, in the manner of Terence, was admired by the court and the city. It was the first regular national comedy, with characters adapted to the age, and without allegoric personages. The wit in it is rude and indecent In 1562, the brothers DelaTaille wrote comedies in prose. Attempts were made to unite the favorite pastoral poetry with the drama. The moralities were turned into pastoral plays, in which Christ wa^ the bridegroom and the church the bride. The cultivation of true comedy was couanued by PierredelaRivey ; his comwes were founded chiefly on intrigues and comic surprises. In 1552, the " brethren of the passion" leased their privilege to a society of actors, which, under the name of troupe de la come'die Frangaise, exists to this day. They played in the hotel de Bourgogne. Shortly after, Henry III filled France with clowns, whom he brought from Venice. They called themselves i gelosi (people who endeavored to please). When they began to play hi the hotel de Bourgogne, great crowds of people went to see them. Farces of all kinds became popular; eyen Richelieu did not disdain the jokes of the Gros Guillaume, the clown of the Parisians. The Italian arlecchino was supplanted in the French farce by the Tabarin and Turlupin, who played comic parts of servants, amd were extremely popular in the time 23*of Louis XIV. Corneille first felt the want of a true characterpiece; he was much less restrained by prejudices in the eomedy than in the tragedy. His youthful trials in comedy are finer, more correct and decent than any thing which had been known before in France, in the comic drama. He had but just finished his 18th year, when he wrote his comedy Melite. His later work, the Liar, is the first French comic characterpiece of classical value. As a writer of operas, he distinguished himself by his Andromeda. The comedy of Racine, Les Plaideurs, is full of comic power. But Jean Baptiste Pocquelin, called Moliere, born in 1620, is at the head of French writers of comedy. L'Etourdi was the first piece by which he became known. His theatre soon became the most frequented in Paris. His company received the honorary title comldiens ordinaires du roi. We have 35 comedies of his. He played himself, and always with applause, and communicated his own spirit to his company. He united the study of nature with a perfect knowledge of the dramatic art. His chefs d'ceuvre, Tartufie and the Misanthrope, became models of the higher comedy. To the second class of his comedies belong the characterpieces in prose, of which L'Avare, George Dandin and Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme, are the most celebrated. The manner of these is more free, and the humor more broad. He allowed the greatest freedom to his humor in those pieces in which he often introduced music and pantomime, such as Les Fourberies de Scapin, Monsieur de Pourceaugnac, and Le Malade imaginaire. The comic was earned, in these pieces, to a height which it had never reached since the extinction of the old Greek comedy. Moliere's pieces on festival occasions merely prove the remarkable versatility of his talent. The French comic writers kept themselves free from the prejudices which shackled the tragic authors. Plays of intrigue were less popular than characterpieces. None of the later poets came so near to Moliere, in delicacy and comic power, as Regnard (q. v.), (1647 to 1709). Dancourt was inexhaustible in the invention of comic situations. Le Grand was more negligent in his style, but full of comic merri ment. His Ami de tout le Monde is still per formed. Shows and ballets rendered hih comedies still more attractive. Baron, a celebrated actor of his time, endeavored to imitate the more elevated characterpieces of Moliere. Dufresny wrote good conversationpieces. Montfleury was the fiist who wrote tragedies in the Spanish manner, with comic interludes. Le Sage also imitated the Spanish, though not in the same way. He likewise wrote many popular comic operas for the tMdtre de lafoire. Destouches was the first who, by investigations into the objects of the drama, began to misapprehend the true nature of comedy, and to render the comic effect subordinate to the moral aim. He excelled in touching scenes. No writer has produced finer delineations of characters than Destouches. Bergerac, Boursault, Brueys, La Font, Palaprat and the younger Corneille were some of the most popular composers of farces. Since Corneille's Andromeda, much had also been done for the opera. The marquis de Sourdene founded, in 1699, the acad&mie royale de musique. The rich imagination and melodious poetry of Quinault fitted him to be the first of opera writers. He is the most musical poet of his nation. Duche, Oampistron and Fontenelle imitated him. The pastoral pieces of the latter could please only in that affected age. Houdart de la Motte wrote in all branches of the drama, but was not much distinguished. The comic opera originated from the circumstance that, in 1707, the popular comedies of the fail's had been prohibited. More connexion was then given to the Vaudevilles, and the place of the dialogue was supplied by pantomime. This change was so successful, that the interdiction was soon removed. Marivaux's plays are affected and pedantic. Boissy and St.Foix enriched the French theatre with some witty productions. Piron was famed for his inexhaustible wit, but only one of his comedies, ha Metromanie, has maintained itself on the stage. He died 1773. Gresset's Michant is still esteemed. Sedaine's comic operas and comedies were popular. Beaumarchais, whose sentimental pieces had already obtained applause, delighted the public by his Barbier de Seville, and by its continuation, Le Mariage de Figaro. The latter piece was represented 73 times in succession, after its first appearance, in 1784-a distinction which, no doubt, is rather to be ascribed to its bold ridicule of the higher classes, than to its intrinsic value. Colle, Fagan, Moissy and Fabre d'Eglantine, Cailhava, Laujon, Laya, Francois de Neufchateau, are some of the most popular of recent writers. Collin d'Harleville's Vieux Ctlibataire,Ij Inconstant,!? Optimiste and Les Chateaux en Espagne are full of truth and interest. Andrieux, whose Les Etourdis and Le Souper d'Auteuil are in great favor, writes with much taste. His comic muse has been educated in the school of the graces. Picard, who had written 35 comedies before his 40th year, knows how to combine gaiety with morality. The tragic writer Lemercier has also written two comedies, Pinto and Plaute, which possess a rare interest. Biboute pleased by his first trial, UAssemblie de Famille. Among the modern sentimental comedies are distinguished M6-lanie, by Laharpe, UMbe1 de VEpSe, by Bouilly, and La Mori de Socrate, by Bernardin de St. Pierre. Jouy, the author of the Vestale, Etienne, Esmenard and Hoffmann are the most celebrated among the living authors in the serious opera; Monvel, Marsollier, Duval, Dieulafoi, Piis, Scribe and Barre in the comic opera and the vaudeville.A glance at the history of the French drama will convince us that Corneille, Racine, Moliere and Voltaire gave its present form to the French theatre: and time only can determine whether a new path shall be opened in the direction to which the romantic school, as it is called, has pointed, and a new criterion of the art shall be fixed by some commanding genius. Hitherto, the increased acquaintance with Shakspeare, and the views of Diderot, Beaumarchais, Mercier and others, deviating more or less from the old classical school, have not produced much effect. If, however, we may venture a conjecture, it would seem that France, so totally changed by the revolution, and in close literary intercourse with England and Germany, cannot forever adhere to the old standard, though a long time may elapse before the new principles are firmly established. In comedy, a great change has already taken place since the revolution ; and numerous authors, as Andrieux, Collin d'Harleville, Duval, Picard, &c, have successfully substituted the comedy of intrigue for the characterpieces of Moliere. But in tragedy, every deviation from the old standard is still considered an offence against good taste. French Idteralure in Late Years. The French literature of the day has not escaped the influence of the political events of the age, and of the heated party conflicts which have rent society in France. The literary productions of late years have excited interest in proportion as they were connected with the absorbing political questions, which have engaged the attention of all the thinking part of France. The great number of works on political economy and legislation, which have lately appeared, bear testimony to the great interest taken in these subjects. Desmarais's Considerations sur la Littirature et sur la SocUti en France au 19me Sibcle (Paris, 1821), may ^e consulted on this point. The language itself, since the example of Madame de Stael, has not escaped innovations. Layaux, in his Nouveau Dictionnaire de la Langue Franpaise, armed with the treasares of the language of writers of the 17th and 18th centuries, attacked the more limited stores of the dictionary of the academy, showing a richness of forms and composition entirely foreign to the compilers of that work. Charles Pougens' Tre'sordes Origines et Dictionnaire grammatical raisonnie de la Langue Franpaise, 4to., and Mesangere's Dictionnaire des Proverbes Franpais (3d edition, 1823), are valuable works. Great attention has been excited by the metaphysical writings and lectures of Victor Cousin, (q. v.) The works of De Gerando, Laromiguiere, Destutt de Tracy, Aza'is (Systhne universel de Philosophic, 8 vols., 1824), Toussaint (Essai sur la Maniere dont les Sensations se transforment en Idies, 1824), have also attracted the public mind to the department of metaphysics. The general principles of law, to the study of which Lanjuinais's work, Sur la Bastonnade et la Flagellation pinoles (1825), gave an impulse, and the law of the country, have been more deeply investigated, both historically and scientifically. The intrigues of the clergy have attracted philosophical inquiries towards religion also. Benjamin Constant, in his work De la Religion, considerte dans sa Source, ses Formes et ses Developpemens (2 vols. 1825), has displayed his usual acuteness; while the abbe Mennais, in his Essai sur VIndifference en Matihre de Religion, 8 vols. (8th edition, 1825), and in his smaller work, De la Religion consideree dans ses Rapports avec VOrdre politique et civil, shows how far impartial inquiry was to be substituted in die place of authority. The histoiy of the regeneration of Greece has been more ably treated in France than in any other country. RaffenePs Histoire des tivinements de la Grece (Paris, 1823, sqq., 3 vols.), Dufay's work, Pouqueville's Histoire de la Regeneration de la Grece (new edition, 1826), appeared at the moment when Michaud's Histoire des Croisades (8th edition, 18L6), Lebeau's Histoire du BasEmpire, idit. nouv. Revue et corrigee par SaintMartin, retraced the events of the past. Mollien's Voyages dans la RdpubL de Colombie is also favorably distinguished The profound works of an earlier period have been reedited {Art de veri fier les Dates, by Allais, and Art de verifier les Dates depuis VAnnie 1770 jusqu'a nos Jours, by Courcelles, 1821), and accompanied by numerous works on French history. Among those which afford materials of earlier history, are Collection des Chroniques nationales, par Buchon; Collections des Mimoires relatifs a VHistoire de France, by Guizot; Coll, Compl. des Memoires relatifs a VHistoire de France, by Petitot; Depot des Charles et des Lois, tant nationales qu'etranghes, by Constantin. The collections of materials for modern history have kept pace with these (Collection des Mimoires relatifs a la Re1 volution ; Memoires particuliers pour servir a VHistoire de la Revolution). (See Memoirs.) The works of Dufau and Delbare, Lacretelle and SismondeSismondi, on the history of France and the French, the histories of the revolution, by Mignet, Thiers, Rabaut, and Lacretelle, have been very extensively read. For recent times, Lacretelle's Histoire de France depuis la Restauration may be consulted. Besides these general works, valuable researches have been made in regard to separate periods (Fastes civils de la France depuis VOuverture des JYotables jusqu'en 1821; Jouffroi's Fastes de VAnarchie ; Barginet's Histoire du Gouvernement feodal). In regard to the ancient history of France, the learned and ingenious treatises of Guizot (Essais and Lepons); the works of the brothers Thierry on the Gauls and Normans; Barante's Histoire des Dues de Bourgogne de la Maison de Valois ; Beugnot's Les Juifs d* Occident, ou Recherches sur VEtat civil, le Commerce et la Litterature des Juifs en France, en Italie et en Espagne pendant le moyen Age; Depping's Histoire des Expeditions maritimes des JYormands et de leur Etablissement en France au Xme. Siecle; the Histoire de la Ste. Barthelemy d'apres les Chroniques, 1826; the Memoires et Correspondance de DuplessisMornay pour semir a VHistoire de la Reformation, &c, are of great value. (For the works relative to Napoleon, see the article Napoleon and his Times, the Works on.) Guizot's History of the English Revolution, not yet completed, and Dam's History of Venice, are among the most valuable contributions that modern history has received. A great number of places, historically important for their monuments, or on account of events of which they have been the theatre, have been carefully examined, and many interesting works have appeared in this department (Dulaure's Histoire Physique de Paris (3d edition, 1824), and Histoire des Environs de Paris; Manurnens de la France, par w®. de JLaborde, and Antiqmtte de VAlsace, par Golberryet Schweighauser). Fiction is obliged to assume the historical garb of sir Walter Scott's muse, whose works have been translated and imitated {as in Tristan le Voyageur ou la France au XlVme, Siecle, par Monsieur de Marchangy). Some works, however, describe the manners of the age, as Mortonval's Tartuffe Moderne, or address themselves to a sickly state of feeling, as the Ourika and Edouard of the prin* cess de Salm, or Arlincourt's gloomy pictures, and the countess de Souza's Com* tesse de Fangy. Dramatic literature also presents a great number of works, in which Soumet and Viennet endeavor to emulate the fame of the old tragic writers; while the sportive Scribe, Delavigne, Gabriel and Edmond (the authors of Jocko, Thame a grand Spectacle,), bringing forward the strangest subjects, are sure of applause from all quarters. NOn this subject, Geoffroy's Cours de LdttSrature dramatique, and Lemereier's Remarques siir les bonnes et les mauvaises Innovations dramatiques, may be consulted. The lamented Talma, in his Reflexions sur Lelcain et sur VArt Matrale, endeavored to preserve, at least, the traditions of his art. Intercourse with other countries has introduced new opinions on many subjects of literature, entirely opposed to the old ruk& of French criticism. The partisans of these innovations, are called the romantic school. The classical school may be styled the legitimes of literature, while the romantic are a sort of literary liberals, actively engaged in combating old prejudices and errors. (See Le Classique et le Romantique par BaourLormian, and Essai sur laLattirature romantique, 1825.) At the head of one party is Lamartine, author of the Meditations poitiques, who, by his Chant du Sacre, brought himself within the sunshine of court favor. At the head of the other is Delavigne, author of the Messfoiiennes. More light than both, and more French in ideas and expression, is Beranger, author of Chansons and Chansons nouvelles, which are in higher favor with the public than they were with the attorneys of the crown, under the late dynasty. The monuments of distant periods are also brought to light by the industry of French scholars, as is shown by Meon's Roman du Renard, and Guillaume's Recherches sur les Auteurs dans lesquels Lafontaine apu trouver les Sujets de ses Fables, Salfi's continuation of Ginguene's Hisknre IAtUraire de Vltalie is a valuable con tribution to the history of literature SeholPs Hist, de la IAtttrahire Grecqut (2d edition, 18mo.), Gaultier's Essai sur lalMttraturePersanne, the valuable contributions in the Journal Asiatique, and those in the memoirs of learned societies and in the journals (Revue Encyclop. Bulletin universel, par Ferussac), are well known to the literary public. Barbier's Dictixmn. des Ouvrages anonymes etpseudonymes, 2d edit., Renouard's Annal. de VJmprimerie des Aides, 2d edit., as also the Catalogue des IAvres imprimis sur Vttin, prove that bibliography is cultivated in France with zeal and ability. (See Boucharlat's Cours de Ldttbrature,faisani Suite au Lycie deLaHarpe,lS26,2 vols.) French Mathematics in the \§th Century. In mathematics, pure as well as mixed, the French have been so much distinguished in modern times, by the ardor of their researches and the brilliancy of their results, that the superiority over all the nations of Europe may perhaps be adjudged to them. Considering the importance of the works, rather than the order of the matter, and confining ourselves to a mere sketch, we may mention among the French mathematicians of this period, first, Laplace (q. v.), who in his Mtcanique celeste (Paris, 1823, 5 vols. 4to., translated into English by doctor Bowditch, with extensive notes, first vol. Boston, N. E. 1829), has given the laws of the most complicated motions of the celestial world, and, with the aid of a perfect analysis, has completed the fabric, of which the foundation had been laid by Newton's Philosophic naturalis Principia mathematical The results of those great calculations are also contained in his Exposition du SysUme du Monde (4th edit. Paris, 1813, 2 vols.), on which Hassenfratz's Cours de physique celeste (Paris, 1803) is a commentary. Francoeur's TraiU ilimentaire de Mkanique (4th edition, Paris, 1807) is a good introduction to the study of celestial mechanics. The means of further investigation may be found in Lagrange's M6-canique analytique, Prony's Micanique philosophique, and Carnot's Principes de PEquilibre et du Mouvement. In the branch of astronomy, Lalande had already published the third edition of his Astronomic, 3 vols., 4to. (in 1792), when Delambre published his Astronomie tMorique et pratique (Paris, 1814,3 vols., 4to.; Abregi, 1 vol.8vo.;, and Biot supplied the wants of a more extensive public, by his TraiU Uementaire dAstronomie physique (2d edit., Paris, 1811, 3 vols.). Biot's Trait6 de physique expirimentale et mathAmatique (Paris, 1816,4 vols.), of which there is a Pricis llimentaire, is the most valuable work of the period on the subject which it treats. In the department of geodesy and topography, Puissant,in his Traitt de Gtodisiefid edit, Paris, 1819, 2 ¦vols. 4to.),andTraxUde Topographie d'Arpentage et de JVwellement (2d edition, Paris, 1820,4to),has furnished two classical works. In the branch of hydraulics, Prony's Architecture hydraulique bears a high character; and, among the recent works on military mathematics,Gay de Vernon's Trailed'Art militaire et de Fortification (Paris, 1805, 2 vols. 4to.) deserves a favorable mention. Nor have pure mathematics been less enriched in this period. Lagrange's TMorie des Fonctions analytiques (2d edition, Paris, 1813,4to.), and the same author's Lepons du Calcul des Fonctions, with a commentary, forming a sequel to the preceding work, are indispensable as an introduction to the secrets of the higher analysis, which have been exposed in their widest extent by Lacroix, in his TraiU du Calcul differentiel et du Calcul intigral (Paris, 3 vols. 4to.), which is surpassed by no work on this subject, in comprehensive and profound views. Among the elementary works, Bezout's Cows de MatMmatique, 5 vols., has always been esteemed. Analytical geometry has been enriched by Biot, in his Essai de Giomitrie analytique (5th edition, Paris, 1813); trigonometry by Lacroix in his TraiU de Trigonometrie rectiligne et spMrique (6th edit., Paris, 1813), and descriptive geometry by the same, in his Elemens de Giometrie descriptive (4th edition, Paris, 1812). The recent works on algebra are innumerable ; the Complement dJAlgebre (3d edition, Paris, 1804), by Lacroix, deserves to be mentioned. Laplace's analytical and philosophical essay on the doctrine of chances, Essai phUosoph. sur les ProbabiliUs (4th edit., Paris, 1819), and Lacroix's TraiU du Calcid des ProbabiliUs (Paris, 1816), may conclude this short survey of the most important works in the mathematical department in France during the last century. French School of Painting. The arts which the Romans had introduced into Gaul were swept away by the devastations of the Normans. The first indications of the revival of painting appear in some miniature pieces which are among the treasures of the royal library. Charles the Bald loved the arts, and invited artists from Greece to Fiance. Under William the Conqueror, a great number of fresco paintings were finished. In the reign of Louis VII, the arts began to flourish, particularly painting on glass. The enamel paintings, which afterwards became known under the name of Emaux de Limoges, also attained a higher degree of perfection, at that period. With the reign of Louis IX commences an epoch for the arts. His adventures and expeditions to the Holy Land furnished the artists with interesting materials, as did the adventures of Joan of Arc at a subsequent period. Ren6 the Good, the prince of poets, belonged to the celebrated painters of the 15th century. His portrait, by himself, is preserved at Aix, in Provence. But the history Qf French painting properly begins with the reign of Francis I, when it flourished under the influence of the Italians. Leonardo da Vinci went to France in 1515, and died in the arms of the king. Andrea del Sarto was in his service for several years. Rosso de' Rossi, known under the name of Maitre Roux, became first court painter in 1530, and director of the decorations at Fontainebleau. As painting, at that time, was commonly connected with stucco work, Francis I invited Primaticcio to Paris, and made him his chamberlain. He was followed by many Italians, who formed a colony of artists, like that of the Greeks, in ancient times, in Rome. (For information on this point, see the fife of Benvenuto Cellini, by himself.) Engravers multiplied the works in Fontainebleau, which constituted a school for the French painters. Francis Clouet, called Janet, and Corneille of Lyons, were the first nati ve portrai t painters of a better cast. The French distinguished themselves particularly in glass, emerald and miniature painting, and in tapestry. They used art as an instrument of embellishment, rather than as something elevated and sacred; their genius appeared in the technical and academical rather than in the poetic. Bramante, who was employed by pope Julius II to paint the windows of the Vatican, invited the French artists Claude and Guillaume de Marseille to Rome, to assist him. With Jean Cousin, born at Soucy, near Sens, who was living in 1589, commences the list of celebrated French painters. He was profoundly versed in the rules of perspective and architecture. His paintings on glass, particularly those in the church cf St. Gervais in Paris, are celebrated. His oilpainting representing the day of judgment, in the convent of the Minimes, near Vincennes, was the first historical painting of a considerable size. Francis I encouraged him and his contemporaries to emulate each other in the production of works of art, which he collected, uniting with them many excellent works of Leonardo, Raphael, and Michael Angel ;.. This was the beginning of the museum in Paris. At that time, the manufacture of gobelinstapestry was established. Martin Freminet, born in Paris in 1567, formed himself particularly after Michael Angelo, and was made court painter in the reign of Henry IV. Hardly, however, had French art begun to flourish, when it withered like a hothouse plant, owing principally to the licentiousness which prevailed at the courts of Francis II and Charles IX. Art was profaned for licentious purposes, and lost its purity and elevation; the design became incorrect, the coloring feeble and void of harmony. In Simon Vouet (born in Paris in 1582, died in 1641) France had a distinguished national artist, who established a school, and purified the corrupted taste. He had visited the East, and formed himself in Venice and Rome. His style was noble and animated. He was employed to paint the gallery of distinguished persons, which had been begun by Philip of Champagne. He afterwards fell into an affected ¦ manner. Le Brun, Le Sueur, J. B. Mola, Mignard, Du Fresnoy, Chaperon, Dorigny, and his own brothers, Aubin and Claude, were his pupils. His most celebrated contemporaries were Noel Jouvenet, Allemand, Perrier, Quintin Varin, &c. The last was the master of the great Nicholas Poussin (q. v.), who is called the French Raphael. He was born at Andely, in 1594, and descended from a noble but reduced family. He received his education entirely in Rome. His elevated manner, depth of meaning and noble simplicity, were not understood at the court of Louis XIV, where nothing pleased unless it bore the character of pomp and splendor. Poussin was a philosophical painter; he painted for the understanding rather than to the senses. His works often awaken serious reflection. He was the first painter of landscapes in the heroic style. His disciple, Gaspar Dughet, who adopted the name of Poussin, was particularly distinguished as a landscape painter. The other celebrated artists of this period are, Le Valentin, born at Colomiers in 1600. died in 1632. He formed himself after Caravaggio, and possessed more boldness and power than his French predecessors. Jacques Blanchard, born in 1600, died in 1638, received the surname of the French Titian, and was the most perfect colorist of the age. Claude Gelee, called Claude Lorraine, born in 1600, and died in 1682, the most eminent landscape painter of any age, formed himself entirely in Italy. Chaveau was distinguished for the strength and vigor of his compositions. The two Mignards of Troyes, in Champagne, were also celebratedthe elder brother, Nicholas, called Mignard of Jlvignon, particularly as a portrait painter ; the younger, Pierre, called Mignard le Romain, for his masterly portraits and his frescopaintings, one of the finest of which is the cupola of the church of Val de Grace in Paris, which contains more than 200 figures. He was born in 1610, and died in 1695. He also possessed a rare talent of copying old masterpieces. The grace of his style and the charms of his coloring are well known : they render him one of the first artists whom France has ever produced. Seb. Bourdon, too, deserves to be mentioned. The first rank, however, among the artists of that period, is due to Eustache le Sueur, born in 1617, died in 1655. He formed himself without having ever left Paris. He studied the works of Raphael, with the genius of which he made himself familiar by engravings, with the greatest assiduity. His style is simple, noble, quiet; his drawing is correct; his coloring is tender, but wants force. His principal work is the life of St. Bruno, in 22 pictures. His works ere little known out of France. Charles le Brun (q. v.), born in 1619, and died in 1690, is celebrated. All these artists had obtained their reputation before the accession of Louis XIV, whose love for pomp and magnificence was prejudicial to the art. Le Brun was the only painter who reached his greatest celebrity in his reign. His celebrated masterpiece, representing Alexander visiting the captive family of Darius, was painted under the eyes of the king, who had assigned the painter a room near his own apartments at Fontainebleau. His works are veiy numerous. They all exhibit genius, fire, and ease. They are characterized, however, by the genuine French style, and a tendency to the theatrical. Through his influence, Colbert established the French academies of art in Rome and Paris ; the latter of which served to oppose the despotism of the academy of St. Luke in Paris. After Le Brun, the French artists deviated from the right path, and neglected the study of the great Italian masters. Le Brun, being desirous of having his works multiplied, had persuaded many distinguished young artists to become engravers. The most eminent among them are Girard Audran, J Mariette, and Gabriel le Brun. The artists of the following period of the most note, are Mola, the brothers Ccurtois, called Bourguignon, distinguished as painters of battlescenes; Noel Coypel and nis sea, Antoine, whose inventive imagination and beautiful coloring procured them universal applause, but who mistook theatrical exaggeration for natural expression. The family of BouUongne produced many excellent painters. Vivien, Jouvenet, Cheron, Parrocel, Silvestre, De Largilliere, Rigaud, Andre, La Fage, were industrious and able artists of that period, yet not entirely free from affectation. Watteau, who painted only little sportive pictures, in a very affected style, became the favorite of his time. Under Louis XV, the taste for mirrors, for pastil painting, and for cameos, entirely supplanted true ait. Loriot discovered at that time the art of fixing pastilcolors. The family Vanloo first began to arrest the decliue of taste; they, with Ant. Pesne, Pierre Subleyras and Le Moine, might have succeeded, had not Christopher Huet and Francis Boucher effected the total ruin of the art. The latter, who was born in 1704, and died in 1770, devoted himself entirely to subjects of the lowest debauchery and immorality. No painter has ever profaned art like Boucher. Attiret, born at Dole in 1702, went, in 1737, at the invitation of the Christian missionaries, to Pekin, where the emperor of China and the grandees of the empire were so much pleased with his performances, that he established a school for drawing, and was constantly employed for the emperor, who intended to bestow on him the dignity of a mandarin. He died there in 1763. After a long reign of corrupt taste in France, the first appearance of a reform is presented in the works of Jos. Vernet (q. v.), a landscape painter, born in 1714, died in 1789. His representations of the sea, in all its different aspects, and his views of seaports, are inimitable. Strong feeling, a rich imagination, and an unremitted study of nature, were the causes of his success. Count Caylus, born in 1692, diedin 1765,______1. /"_" T71____a zealous antiquary, C._____J~J ^, did Montpellier, became the first r< taste, and the father and Nesl modern school. His paintings g;uished by a noble simplicity, < sign and faithful imitation of na celebrated David (q. v.), the f< the present French school, was pie. This artist was the first i duced the rigid study of antiqu nature, and thus gave rise to a 3 and a more correct drawing thai before existed in France. His in refining the taste of his natio and unremitted industry, his af and paternal interest in, his dis unparalleled in the whole hist Vincent, Regnault and Menage tinguished contemporary arti* revolution broke out, and, in 1/ stitutions of art were abolishe national assembly. The mos works of art were destroyed b of the populace ; but the artist spired with a new spirit. A s formed under the name of tl republican society of artists, to tin of which, in the Louvre, eveiy ( free access. The principal eve revolution were the subjects th? their pencils; and, if the expre harsh and exaggerated, the insijj of ^ the former period entirely dii In the reign of Napoleon, every spired powerfully to promote th a great number of distinguish appeared. The three most schools of painting were those Regnault and Vincent. Among pies of David was Drouais, who at Rome, in 1788. His love ( was sublime, and good, and tenderness, and his high standi cellence, would probably have the greatest of French artists, who gained celebrity by his gr< ical painting, representing the ei Henry IV into Paris, stands atof the first rank. Of his other pupils, Landon (editor of the Annates du Music), JVf enjaud, Blonde], Moreau, and especially the portrait painter Robert le Fevre, deserve mention. Regnault has educated many female artists ; and several of his female pupils are very distinguished, as, Mad. Auzon, Lenoir, Romany, Mile. Lorimier, Benoit, DavinMirvaux, &c. Among the older artists in Paris, Vincent, La Grenee, Taillasson, Peyron, Monsiau, Le Thiers and Prudhon (who has taken Correggiofor his pattern), deserve honorable mention. Girodet (died in 1825), a historical painter, Isabey and Augustin, miniature painters ; Drolling, painter of conversationpieces ; Redoute, an excellent painter of flowers; Valenciennes, the landscape painter; Mad. Claudet (the wife of an able statuary), a successor of Greuze; Mad. Kugler, a painter in enamel, and Desnoyers, and Berwick, engravers, are ornaments of the modern school. A great impulse was given to the talents of the French painters by the collection of works of art, the spoils of conquered F"urope, which so long graced the museum of Paris, under the superintendence of the zealous and talented Denon. But few of the great number of modern Frencn artists are inspired with the calm, sacred spirit of art; they are often too theatrical, possessing more sentimentality than depth of feeling. The mechanical part of the art, however, they execute in a masterly manner,with ease and boldness. They are particularly distinguished for their excellence of design. French Academy, A society of learned men and poets, having been formed in Paris, in 1629, cardinal Richelieu declared himself their protector, and a royal patent constituted them, in 1635, the Acadimie Franpaise, and fixed the number of members at 40. Richelieu hated Corneille, and, therefore, one of the first literary decrees issued by this academy, was to pronounce the Cid a miserable tragedy. After the death of Richelieu, the chancellor Seguier took the academy under his patronage. Louis XIV next declared himself their protector, and granted them a room in the Louvre, where they thenceforth held their meetings. (For an account of the divisions and doings of this body, see Academy.) In 1795, it was converted into the Institut de France, which was charged with the collecting of discoveries and the advancement of the arts and sciences. In 1804, Napoleon divided the national institute into four classes : the first consisting of 63 members, for the physical and mathematical sciences; the second of 40, for the French language and literature ; the third of 40 members, 8 foreign associates and 60 correspondents, for ancient literature and history. The fourth class, for the fine arts, had 20 members, 8 foreign associates and 36 correspondents. In 1815, the name of Institute wras retained; but the four classes received their former names: Academie des Sciences, Academic Francaise, Acadtmie des Inscriptions et Belleslettres, Academie de Peinture et Sculpture* (The well known Biographie des Quarante de VAcademie Franpaise, Paris, 1826, is more caustic than witty.) French Sculpture. (See Sculpture.) French Politics, The kings of France aspired, at first, to independence, afterwards to absolute power, and finally, aftei the restoration of the house of Bourbon, to the independent authority of the legitimate throne. Capet and his immediate successors rendered themselves independent of the feudal aristocracy, by establishing a hereditary succession. From the death of Hugh Capet, in 997, the father was always succeeded by the son, fr o the space of 200 years. This introduced unity into the government of France, which had been divided among 40 great vassals of the crown. The establishment of the municipal corporations, in 1103, under Louis VI, contributed much to strengthen the royal authority against the feudal aristocracy. The power of the throne was still further increased by the devolution of 23 great feudal counties to the crown, during the reigns of Philip Augustus and his successors (1180-1310). At the same time, the king obtained jurisdiction over the territories of the barons ; and the division of the kingdom into districts, in which justice was administered by the royal judges, gave consistence and unity to his power. In the same policy of aggrandizement and domination, the crown acquired, under the Valois, several prerogatives, as the right of coining money and imposing taxes. Philip the Fair (died in 1314), with equal success, rendered the royal power independent of the church. From that time, the privileges of the Gallican church were secured by several concordates with the popes; but it was not till the reign of Louis XIV, in 1682, that they became firmly established, by means of the celebrated Four Articles. The kings next aimed at absolute power. From 1302, the three estates of the nation had been assembled. The Valois used their efforts against them with various success, till Louis XI (1461-83) laid the foundation of the absolute power enjoyed by his successors. The increase of the royal domains continued, and the gradual formation of a standing army (from 1444) furnished the throne with an instrument of oppression. The parliaments, also, gradually acquired political privileges, to the prejudice of the power of the statesgeneral. But after the latter had been destroyed, the Bourbons also annulled the decisions of the latter by authoritative commands (in the lits de justice). The parliament, however, always recovered itself, till this contest became, at length, one of the causes of the revelution. From the time of Louis XI, French policy became deceitful and violent, and ambitious of foreign conquests, in order to divert the attention of the nation from the increase of the royal power at home. This tendency completed the overthrow of the rights of the nation. On the other hand, a warlike and ambitious spirit was awakened in the nation by the conquests of Charles VIII and his successors in Italy, from 1494. The disputes with Spain and Austria, to which the Italian expeditions led, made the French cabinet the centre of the modern political system of Europe. The military treaties with the Swiss (the first was concluded by Louis XI in 1475) showed the strong point from which France could shake Germany and Italy. The alliance of Francis I (died in 1547) with the Porte and the Protestants of foreign countries, taught her how to entangle all Europe in her snares. Her chief object became the weakening of Austria and the German empire by internal divisions, and the managing of the North by forming connexions with the factions that divided Hungary, Poland and Sweden. But, without any clear and consistent plan, she obeyed the warlike ambition of individual sovereigns, and the impulse of circumstances. The civil and religious wars, which placed the house of Bourbon on the throne, gave to the policy of the court, and to the nation in general, a stormy and violent character, which, at a later period, when Richelieu had made it subservient to the calculations of a superior mind, gave it that impetuosity which shook the balance of Europe. Richelieu (died in 1642) by disarming the Huguenots, combating the great, and subduing the parliaments, rendered the royal authority completely absolute, and established the ascendency of France in Europe by the humiliation of the house of Hapsburg, which had been the object of Henry IV. From this time, VOL. v. 24 French policy assumed that diplomatic form, which gave to foreign affairs the first place in the administration of the state, and rendered every thing else subservient to them. But Richelieu had introduced into the French cabinet a Machiavelism, which spread fear and discord over all Europe, and which was entirely at variance with the open policy of Henry IV and his great ministers, Sully, Villeroi, Jeannin and D'Ossat, whose object was defence rather than conquest. Fearful of the consequences of peace, he thought himself secure only amidst the conflicts of nations, whom he set at variance with their princes by secret emissaries, or when upheld by a despotism which prostrated all resistance. French policy, from the peace of Westphalia, was, therefore, directed to the increase of power and influence abroad ; and the selfish ambition of the ministers entangled the state in continual quarrels, in order to render themselves necessary to the king. French emissaries, secret and public, were scattered over Europe ; even in Transylvania, Poland and Russia. They incited the parties against each other in Sweden* and French diplomacy extended its snares over Persia to India and China. Richelieu had given to French policy a character of boldness and craft, to which Maza rin afterwards added the forms of cold politeness. Timid and faithless in his measures, he took advantage of ambiguous expressions in treaties, or endeavored to gain time, and attain his purposes by ai+ and cunning. This mixed character of violence and craft prevailed in French policy till the restoration in 1814, except that, according to circumstances, sometimes the one, sometimes the other of these characteristics predominated. Under Louis XIV, the splendor of the court, the prevalence of the French language and manners, and the military success of the nation, gave the French policy greater promptitude and decision. After the peace of Nimeguen, it became despotic. The ministers of Louis arbitrarily interpreted treaties. Violence, espionage, corruption and falsehood, even the encouragement of sedition in secret, were all practised, if necessary to gain their object. What particularly distinguishes French policy in the age of Louis XIV, is the introduction of the diplomatic artifice of subjoining to public treaties separate, and, soon after, secret articles. At an, earlier period, Richelieu had concluded mocktreaties, in order to conceal the true ones. Although the French policy of conquest, al that time, also included views of commercial advantages and naval and colonial power, yet these were not pursued on a steady plan, the increase of territory and continental influence being always the principal object. Among the distinguished statesmen of the French diplomatic school, since Richelieu, must be mentioned Bassompierre, the two D'Avaux, Servien, Lyonne, D'Estrade, Courtin, Pompone, Croissi, Torcy, and the cardinals Janson and Polignac. The noble and resolute Torcy (minister of Louis XIV) used to say, Que le meilleur moyen de tromper les cours, c'itait d?y parler toujours vrai. On the other hand, after the death of Louis XIV, the French cabinet was disgraced by the cardinal Dubois. The grossest frauds, falsification of stateletters, the employing of abandoned men, and a general system of bribery and espionage, mark the administration of this venal minister, whose favorite principle, ¦ which he instilled into the king during his youth, was, Que pour devenir un grand homme, il fallait etre un grand scelerat. Dubois, however, displayed great diplomatic skill and activity in the conclusion of the triple and quadruple alliances which gave France a 30 years' peace with England. It must not be forgotten, however, that the disinterested Pecquet labored with and under him. The French cabinet regained the esteem of Europe by the peaceable and honest character of cardinal Fleury. This cautious but too irresolute minister maintained peace until 1740, when he was involved in the war of the Austrian succession, through the ambition of the two BelleIsle. Besides him, Morville, Chavigny, Villeneuve, the marquis D'Argenson and marshal Adrien de Noailles were distinguished for diplomatic talents. But soon after, under Bernis and other ministers, the French cabinet betrayed a weakness and want of address, which proceeded partly from military reverses. Louis XV, a king who usually said and did the contrary of what he thought, conceived the strange resolution of establishing a secret diplomatic cabinet, the existence and activity of which were not only unknown to his minister of foreign affairs, the duke de Choiseul, but were frequently directed against him. The prince de Conti conducted its foreign negotiations, and not without success, against Austria, for 1*2 years (1747- 59). He formed, in Poland, that system which was called, in France, the northern. This secret diplomacy, at the head of which stood the count de Broglio, finally received a direction entirely contrary to the acknowledged interests of France, by the treaty between the court of Versailles and the cabinet of Vienna, concluded May 1,1756, in which the marchioness de Pompadour had a great share. It was not seldom the case (as, for instance, in the singular correspondence concerning the abolition of the order of Jesuits), that the minister altered the letters of the foreign ministers, which he answered to suit his own purposes. Besides this, diplomacy was influenced by the intrigues of the royal courtiers and mistresses; one of the consequences of which was the exile of the duke de Choiseul in 1770, an able and experienced statesman, though a prodigal minister. He had counteracted the effects of the military reverses of France by his alliance with Austria and Spain in opposition to the preponderance of England, and by checking the progress of Russia by means of Poland and the Porte. After his dismissal, the feebleness and uncertainty of the French cabinet became more and more striking. There was nothing, therefore, to prevent the division of Poland. Count de Maurepas yielded to circumstances, instead of endeavoring to govern them. Count de Vergennes, who always observed the greatest dignity and delicacy, notwithstanding his industry, placed his policy rather in delays, and screened himself behind diplomatic forms. He was obliged to adopt this system by the domestic condition and foreign relations of France at that time. His greatest error, so far as royalty was concerned, was his support of the North American colonies against England. The immediate consequence was the French revolution. Among the later French statesmen who have distinguished themselves by political works, must be mentioned Praslin, Nivernois, Chavigny, Havrincourt, Vauguyon, Breteuil, ChoiseulGouffier and Rayneval. French policy experienced a total change with the revolution. All the slumbering energies of genius and pow er, boldness and cunning, were at once awakened. The revolutionary policy changed its character at different epochs of the revolution. The majority of the first, or constituent assembly, had the best intentions ; but, inexperienced and impetuous, they undertook a work above their strength. By the establishment of a diplomatic committee, they intruded into the secrets of the cabinet of an irresolute king, whose weakness had already appeared in the disturbances which took place in Holland in 1788, and had rendered him contemptible in the eyes of the nation. Two ministers, Montmorin and Delessart, were obliged to yield to the popular hatred. Dumouriez was then placed at the head of foreign affairs (1792), and with him the new revolutionary diplomacy commenced. He introduced into the negotiations a language offensive to the dignity of sovereign powers, the first consequence of which was a rupture with Sardinia. When the sum of 1,500,000 for secret expenses was increased to 4,500,000 livres, he endeavored, by separate treaties with the German princes, to secure the neutrality of the empire, which the violation of existing treaties by the national assembly had provoked. He then challenged Austria to a war. The management of foreign affairs, having been wrested from the hands of the king, was conducted entirely according to the impulses of national pride, which had been wounded by the proclamation of the Prussian commander, the duke of Brunswick, of July 25,1792. The whole political system of Europe was finally overthrown with the destruction of the French monarchy; and the peace of Basle, in 1795, was the first triumph of the revolutionary diplomacy over the cabinets of the coalition. But when the former, overpowered by the commercial and colonial policy of England, was incited to new conquests on the continent, the French continental system became the consequence. The directory endeavored to establish and extend it, by founding republics and spreading republican ideasNapoleon, with better success, by alliances, and by incorporating the conquered territories with France. The rights of nations and good faith were equally disregarded. By holding out the prospect of increase of territory, by the show of liberal ideas, or by threats, the princes were divided from their subjects, and subjects from their princes, till, at last, both princes and subjects were overcome. The consequences of this cunning on the one side, and the grossest error on the other, are too well known. But Napoleon's aihbition overthrew his own throne. In vain the prudent Talleyrand and the cautious Fouche warned him. Pitt kept alive the hopes of the cabinets, Spain the hopes of the nations ; and when the flames of Moscow blazed over all Europe, and the enthusiasm of the people of the north of Germany was awakened, the military government fell to pieces. After the overthrow of Napoleon, the courts returned to the former pohcy. Talleyrand's principle of legitimacy reestablished the throne of the Bourbons, and with it the old French diplomacy. The right of nations to give a constitution to themselves and to their kings, was wrested from them. A secret party, no less violent than artful, has labored ever since to restore the former state of things. On the other hand, the bold language of liberal ideas was heard in both the chambers, and Louis XVIII, by the advice of Decazes, grasped for a time the anchor of the constitution, to strengthen the tottering throne in the conflict of parties. The domestic policy might now be called constitutional, while the foreign policy was still fettered by the treaty of Chaumont. But when the French cabinet was leagued with the four other principal powers, by the congress of AixlaChapelle, in 1818, and quiet appeared to be restored in the interior, the government then aimed at a greater independence of the chambers, and prevailed by destroying the form of election which had been before established. From that time, France, in her foreign policy (at Laybach and Verona), inclined more to the system of the three great continental powers, than to the principles of the English ministry. The invasion of Spain by the French army, under the duke of Angouleme, in 1823, was an act in which the French government went to the full length of the principles of legitimacy and the right of armed interference maintained by the holy alliance. The same devotion to the principles of legitimacy prevented them, for a long time, from acknowledging, in any manner, the independence of the South American republics, notwithstanding the earnest petitions of the mercantile classes. At length, in 1827, they consented to accredit, publicly, such agents as the new republics might send to reside in France, although regular diplomatic relations have not as yet been established with these countries. When the troubles broke out in Portugal, in 1826, the firm attitude of England prevented any interference on the part of the continental powers in the affairs of that country, and the French government cooperated with the English in the endeavor to prevent any such interference on the part of Spain. In completing the independence of the Greeks by the expedition sent to the Morea in 1828, as well as in the part which the French fleet had taken the year before in the battie of Navarino, the French government cooperated in the policy of Russia. The foreign policy of the new dynasty which now occupies the French throne, we have reason to hope will be of a noble and highminded character. (See Flassan's Histoire generate et raisonne'e de la Diplomatic Francaise, (until 1772, 2d edition, Paris, 1811, 7 vols.), and the sketch of the history of France, in the preceding part of this article; also the articles Louis XVIII, and Charles X.) French Church. (See Gallican Church) French Theatre. (See Paris Theatre.) FRANCE, ISLE OF ; an ancient province of France, so called because it was originally bounded by the Seine, Marne, Ourcq, Aisne and Oise, and formed almost an island. It was finally extended much farther, and was boimded N. by Picardy, W. by Normandy, S. by Orleans and Nivernais, and E. by Champagne. (See Departments.) FRANCE, ISLE OF, or MAURITIUS ; an island in the Indian sea, belonging to Great Britain. It is situated about 600 miles E. of the island of Madagascar; between 19° 58' and 20° 31' lat. S., and 57° W and 57° 4& Ion. E. It is of circular form, about 150 miles in circuit, and composed chiefly of rugged and pointed mountains, containing caves of great extent. Some of the mountains are said to be so high as to be covered with snow throughout the year. The climate is warm, but, notwithstanding, very wholesome ; the air serene, and very little exposed to hurricanes. The soil is generally red and stony, though mountainous towards the seacoast; but within land there are many spots both flat and fertile. The whole island is well watered. It produces all the trees, fruits and herbs which grow in this part of the globe, and in great plenty; and is famous for its ebony, esteemed the most solid, close, and shining of any in the world. Groves of oranges, both sweet and sour, are common, as well as citrons; and the pineapple grows spontaneously in very great perfection. The island produces little grain, or any other useful vegetable, ex ners. Education is The Lancastrian me much in use. The { ernment are kept cents, and those c piastres of 10 livres, 1820, the medium oi principally paper mo in Spanish dollars, covered in the 16l Pedro Mascarenhas, called Mha do Cer Dutchman, having i in 1598, called it prince of Orange. ] took possession of abandoned by the was taken by the Ei to them by the peace