APR 20 1977 
 
 ^LOGICAL St^. 
 
 DC 266.5 .A5 1916 
 Allison, John Maudgridge 
 
 Snowden, 1888-1944. 
 Church and state in the 
 
 reian of Louis PhiliDDe 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2014 
 
 https://archive.org/details/churchstateinreiOOalli_0 
 
Church and State in the Reign of 
 
 Louis Philippe 
 
 1830-1848 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 presented to the 
 Faculty of Princeton University 
 in Candidacy for the Degree 
 of Doctor of Philosophy 
 
 JOHN M. S. ALLISON 
 
 INSTRUCTOR IN HISTORY IN YALE UNIVERSITY 
 
 PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 PRINCETON 
 
 LONDON: HUMPHREY MILFORD 
 OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 1916 
 
Published July, 1916 
 
 Accepted by the Department of History and Politics 
 April, 1914 
 
The author wishes to express his indebtedness to Professor 
 Henry R. Shipman of Princeton University, whose constant 
 interest and timely suggestions have been of invaluable assist- 
 ance. He also wishes to acknowledge the services of the 
 late Professor John H. Coney of Princeton, whose high 
 ideals of scholarship and historical method will always be a 
 source of inspiration toward more serious and conscientious 
 effort. In addition he wishes to thank Professor Chauncey B. 
 Tinker of Yale University for his kind assistance in the 
 matter of proofreading and correction. 
 
 J. M. S. A. 
 
 New Haven, July 191 5. 
 
MY MOTHER 
 
CHAPTER I 
 
 THE JULY MONARCHY 
 
 The Period of the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Em- 
 pire and the Bourbon Restoration offers a curious contrast, 
 for it presents in the brief space of forty-one years the 
 thoughts and actions of two centuries, the one the nineteenth, 
 the other the eighteenth. The first was modern while the 
 second, viewed in the light of present day conditions, seems 
 almost mediaeval. It is an odd coincidence that the modern 
 theories and ideals of the latter half of the eighteenth cen- 
 tury were rejected in the era of Napoleon and it is only 
 after the July Revolution that what are known as Nineteenth 
 Century principles, those very theories on which the Revolu- 
 tion was based, were expounded and put to practical use. 
 The Revolution, then, did not end with the Congress of 
 Vienna, nor, for that matter, with the July Revolution. 1 
 Metternich and his satellites had deluded the French into 
 accepting once more a Bourbon and had covered the reactionary 
 medicine which they sought to administer to them with a 
 coating of constitutionalism. But the Charter of 1814 had 
 soon appeared in its true form, and became for the French 
 a cause of disappointment in more ways than one, but prin- 
 cipally because it had been an act of grace emanating from 
 the monarch and granted by him to the people — "une charte 
 octroyee." Then too it was a veiled deception, for its four- 
 teenth article allowing the king to promulgate special laws 
 in time of danger, had rendered null and void all the so-called 
 liberties and political privileges granted to the people. If 
 Louis XVIII did not perceive its weakness and consequently 
 his own increased power, this was not to be the case with 
 his brother the Comte d'Artois (later Charles X). That reac- 
 tionary prince had at once seen clearly the possibilities of the 
 charter as affected by the article and seized upon the occasion 
 of the assassination of the due d'Orleans to show his brother 
 
 1 de Crozales Guizot Intro. 10. 
 
 1 
 
the hidden usefulness of the document the allies had nego- 
 tiated for him. But the old monarch's days were numbered 
 and he made little use of his newly discovered political me- 
 dium; and soon to Charles X fell the heritage of the throne, 
 the Charter and the Fourteenth Article. 
 
 Supported by the returned emigres, envious and eagerly seek- 
 ing compensation for their confiscated property, it was not 
 long before the new king made way with the very slight 
 vestiges of revolutionary privilege existing in the Restoration, 
 then upheld by the old regime, the "Congregation de la rue 
 du Bac" and the Holy Alliance, Charles X prepared to in- 
 augurate a thorough policy of reaction. In the meantime, 
 however, things had been happening under the surface to 
 which the old king was blind, flattered as he was by his 
 courtiers, by the unctuous praises of Metternich and the pious 
 wishes of the Pope who sought an annulment of the hated 
 Concordat. 
 
 Another Revolution had taken place, this time not in the 
 streets of Paris, but in the minds of her inhabitants and of 
 the people of the provinces. Two forces were at work, one 
 still nascent, the other on the verge of maturity. The former 
 was religious, reformative, Jansenist in a way, yet tinged 
 with a certain romantic mysticism that recalls the Molinists 
 of the seventeenth century. And as this new train of re- 
 ligious thought developed, the other movement, guided by 
 men more active in the affairs of the world, seized upon it 
 and applied its principles to politics. Thus almost simul- 
 taneously arose La Mennais and the adherents of his school 
 of ideas as set forth at La Chesnaie, and a notable phalanx 
 of the governmental opposition distinguished principally by 
 a small but efficient group known as the younger "Doctrinaires" 
 and composed of such men as de Broglie, Guizot, Thiers and 
 Mole, the apostles of a bourgeois rule and a policy of "juste 
 milieu" so soon to come. 
 
 The new movement for religious reform is easily accounted 
 for. The cause was the obvious evils of the Concordat which 
 restricted priestly activities and reduced the church to a state 
 of entire subordination to the policy of the government. This 
 new group, then, composed of men in accord, for the time 
 
 2 
 
being, with the Doctrinaires, were to seek to gain their political 
 privileges in an open and honest way, by a public campaign. 
 Charles X had placed the throne upon the altar and thereby 
 had given rise to a dangerous sort of Gallicanism somewhat 
 similar to that of the Empire but in no way resembling the 
 pure Gallicanism of 1682. It was to the breaking up of this 
 alliance and what must be its fatal consequences that the 
 new party for religious reform directed its energies. But if, 
 in their eyes, the good name of the church was smirched 
 by the toleration of a bastard Gallicanism it was still further 
 endangered by the ceaseless intrigues of the "petite figlise" 
 or "parti pretre" composed of Ultramontanes and Jesuits, both 
 of whom regretted the passing of the ancient regime with its 
 comfortable privileges. This internal evil too, they must 
 combat. The first intimation the clergy of France had re- 
 ceived of such a movement had come from the abbe de La 
 Mennais. It was an appeal to abstain from intrigue: 
 
 "Be bishops, be priests, nothing more. What are petty ^es 
 quarrels of the world to you ; quarrels in which men only Progres," 
 engage for error and self-interest." 
 
 But even as he wrote, it appeared to him that if France 
 was to be saved, the clergy must do more than merely survey 
 the course of events from their high station. And so farther 
 on in the same book he calls them forth to prepare for a 
 struggle not in the spirit of self-interest, but in that of 
 humanity. For La Mennais was a prophet and could often- 
 times forsee events with more clearness than the experienced 
 doctrinaires. Realizing that the fall of the existing dynasty 
 was near at hand he wished to have a party in readiness to 
 support the church at that time. Like others, he feared that 
 the church's time-worn policy of relying on the Bourbons 
 might in the end draw it down to a fate such as they had 
 suffered in 1789. He therefore sought a political theory which 
 by its very essentials would allow of a union between the 
 religious reformers and the better class of politicians. This, 
 he believed, would save the church and France. 
 
 "Si le liberalisme etait chretien, je serais liberal demain." E. F°^ gu ^ 
 
 He did not long search in vain. Already a moderate liberal La Mennais, 
 party was in the field which was in accord with liberal catholic 6 4 
 views and from which La Mennais had reason to hope for 
 
 3 
 
de Crozales, 
 
 much assistance. At one and the same time philosophical 
 and political the theories of the Doctrinaires were rapidly 
 coming into prominence. They find their origin in the experi- 
 ences of some of their elders who had seen the Revolution 
 and the Empire and who realized that the failure of these two 
 institutions had come about through the lack of a set doctrine 
 and a determined principle. Their basis was the correlation 
 of three factors, a nation, a king, and a parliament. Not one, 
 but all, were to make up the whole. The king alone cannot 
 reign without the parliament and the nation. These three 
 elements make possible the Law, which is the life of an in- 
 stitution; to borrow a simile: "Neither wood, nor air, nor 
 flint, taken separately is the unique principle of fire ; but when 
 they are properly related and applied to a common effect, the 
 "102 flame bursts forth." 
 
 Basing their views on a theory, then, this group headed by 
 Guizot, Royer-Collard, de Broglie, and for a time, Thiers had 
 become known as the Theorists or Doctrinaires. The Globe 
 was their political mouthpiece and was directed for the most 
 part by younger men ; while de Remusat, Duchatel and Sainte- 
 Beuve, all of them adherents of the "Jeunesse Liberale et 
 Romantique," were counted among its contributors. 
 
 W ith such views, it is not surprising to read that these 
 Doctrinaires and the "ecole menaisienne" soon found mutual 
 grounds of sympathy, and an alliance sprang up between the 
 two — a union further cemented by their common approval of 
 the expulsion of the Jesuits. And, while this combination 
 would never have been powerful enough to instigate a revo- 
 lution, nevertheless it was sufficiently strong to take advantage 
 of an uprising when it did occur. This opportunity, further- 
 more, was not far off and as early as 1827 one of the liberals 
 had heralded its near approach in the following terms: 
 E. Forgues "I see that many are worrying about the Bourbons: they 
 
 Corresp. de are no t mistaken in so doing for I believe they will experience 
 La Mennais, , . . , _ 
 3 Nov. 1827 the fate of the Stuarts. - 
 
 2 See also letter of d'Herbelot to Montalembert 9 Oct. 1824. "La 
 Jeunesse Liberale: Lettres d'Herbelot." Later in another letter (E. 
 Forges. Corresp. Lettre a M. de Champy) : La Mennais foretells 
 "une nouvelle crise dans la Revolution qui n'a fait que commencer; 
 bien qu'elle soit aussi vieille que moi." 
 
 4 
 
The years 1827-1829 witnessed the increase of political 
 tension and the rise of a genuinely hostile feeling towards 
 the government. This condition should have warned the 
 foolish king of his perilous situation ; but he seemed utterly 
 oblivious to it. In 1830 the crash came; the dissolution of 
 Parliament upon its reply to the King's address, Polignac's 
 fatal move, the unfavourable elections, and the July Ordinances 
 were all that were necessary to cause the more extreme 
 malcontents to revolt and the ''first emigre" to assume his 
 familiar role and retire to England. A new era was pro- 
 claimed for France, a new monarchy, and a new freedom. 
 
 Politically the reign of Louis Philippe falls into four prin- 
 ciple divisions ; the period of Formation, lasting to the fall of 
 the Laffitte Ministry in 1831 ; the Period of Parliamentary 
 Struggle, a time of the reformation and reorganization of 
 political parties ending in the breach between Thiers and 
 Guizot in 1836; this, in turn was followed by the Period of 
 Parliamentary Rivalry and Decline, and the "last Period" 
 which we will call the Transformation and Disorganization 
 of the July Monarchy ; eight years in all, during which time 
 the government under the sole leadership of one man, Guizot. 
 experienced a change foreign to its origin, and then fell. 
 
 At the very outset the July Monarchy was threatened by a 
 serious division, a sad augury for future times. The Legis- 
 lative Body, now somewhat depleted by the hasty departure 
 of certain timorous members, presented a curious aspect, com- 
 posed, as it was, of a heterogeneous crowd of political idealists. 3 
 A common agreement between them would have been im- 
 possible. There was, for instance, a distinct line of difference 
 between the deputies who met at the house of M. Lafrltte, 
 a prominent banker, and those who gathered at the Hotel de 
 Ville under the control of La Fayette. The first party made 
 up of prominent business men, favored some sort of a policy 
 
 3 "L'opposition, comme il arrive presque toujours au lendemain des 
 grandes commotions politiques, etait le refuge ouvert a tous les debris 
 des partis vaincus : demagogues endurcis. ardents republicans, bonapar- 
 tistes impatients d'une revanche, s'y rencontrent meles plutot qu'unis, 
 car ils n'avaient reellement de commun qu'une profonde aversion pour 
 ce qui personifiait a leurs yeux, l'ancien regime, c'est a dire, la cour, 
 la noblesse, le clerge." Boutard II. 24-25. 
 
 5 
 
of reconciliation with the family of Charles X, now at Ram- 
 bouillet, while the group who had established themselves at 
 the Hotel de Ville displayed marked tendencies toward 
 Republicanism. But, uncertain of their strength, both hesi- 
 tated to make a public declaration. Profiting by this delay 
 another group, not definitely organized but distinguished by 
 the adherence of a certain number of Doctrinaires, met at 
 the house of Casimir Perier, also a prominent financier, and 
 there, led by Guizot, Sebastiani and Yillemain, they set to 
 work upon a plan to organize a temporary form of government. 
 The next day the Monitear contained the following notice: 
 
 "The deputies at Paris have been forced to come together 
 in order to counteract the serious danger menacing the safety 
 of the people and of property. 
 
 "A committee has been appointed to watch over public in- 
 terests in the absence of all regular organization. 
 
 The above list made official by a second publication the 
 following day, is important for it shows what negotiations 
 must have been carried out on the night preceding its pub- 
 lication. It comprises men of different parties, but its main 
 significance is the fact that it marks the temporary union of 
 the two sections of Parliament convened at the houses of 
 M. Laffitte and Casimir Perier. Events no longer moved 
 slowly ; a regent was soon appointed. 
 
 It is difficult to ascertain just how the name of Louis 
 Philippe was proposed. For some time he had been the hero 
 of a certain group of politicians who were discontented and 
 who were believed to have democratic tendencies, Then too, 
 the Palais-Royal had long been the rendezvous for a rather 
 heterogeneous clientele, and as such had been regarded by 
 the family of Charles X as a by no means impossible menace 
 to their security. There have been much talk and many 
 anecdotes of the intrigue attending the nomination of Louis 
 
 Moniteur, 
 29 et 30 
 Juillet, 1830 
 
 M. W. Comte Gerard 
 Jacques Laffitte. 
 Comte de Laban 
 Mauguin 
 Odier 
 
 Casimir Perier 
 de Schonen." 
 
 6 
 
Philippe to the French throne ; in all likelihood, however, these 
 stories are mere fiction spun for the pleasure of the historical 
 romancers, for there is very little evidence to indicate that L- ^i^fe 
 the suggestion of the Duke of Orleans required any com- v< fhureau 
 plicated or insidious wire-pulling on the part of his supporters. Hi ^ a " g Q^ ^ 
 His name was probably brought before the public in the same 
 way that other names in other times had been proposed and 
 accepted, at the critical moment, and by a man who understood 
 only too well the time for a coup d'etat. In this instance, the 
 promoter seems to have been Adolphe Thiers who, by launch- 
 ing forth an unofficial proclamation caused Louis Philippe 
 to be accepted as lieutenant-general of the realm. After much 
 hesitation on his own part the Duke of Orleans was finally 
 persuaded to come to Paris and to assume his duties. His 
 journey to the Capitol, however, was but half the effort re- 
 quired and when he arrived in Paris the Duke found that 
 his most difficult part was yet to be played; he must con- 
 ciliate, and then be accepted by, the Republicans who had 
 not been consulted. This effort would bring with it a certain 
 amount of personal danger, but having gone so far the Regent- 
 elect was not to be turned back, and he determined on a 
 personal visit to La Fayette. Accordingly he set out at once 
 for the Hotel de Ville, accompanied by the deputies whose 
 escort he accepted only upon their urgent request. The march 
 to the Republican headquarters was not the calm affair some 
 would have us believe ; the mob was sullen, and even before 
 the end of the journey gave vent to a genuinely hostile demon- 
 stration, while the reception of the Orleanist couriers, sent 
 in advance, was not the most cordial. 4 Shortly after the 
 Duke's arrival occurred the historic scene on the balcony of 
 the Hotel de Ville where, wrapped in the folds of the tri- 
 colour, La Fayette, "homme aux indecisions" 5 embraced the 
 future king. The crowd cheered, flags waved, and by the 
 weak act of an old man France was led to accept the Duke 
 
 4 Metternich Memoirs I. 22 : Account of General Belliard. 
 
 L. Blanc (Hist. I. 166) relates that when the envoy of Louis Phillipe 
 arrived at the Hotel de Ville to warn La Fayette of the Duke's approach 
 and to offer him terms of compromise, the old general cried out 
 "Say not one word more of accommodation or I will call the people." 
 
 6 As Mirabeau called him. 
 
 7 
 
Proclama- as her deliverer and to believe his words — "La Charte sera 
 ion du due , • v >• 
 
 d'Orleans, desormais une vente. 
 
 M ° n }** u £ Q Thus the mob, swayed by La Fayette, played their part and 
 * 0U played it well, for it seems that the Orleanists believed as 
 
 firmly in the free selection of Louis Philippe by the people of 
 1830, as their over-credulous predecessors, the invaders of 
 1814, did in the popularity of Louis XVIII. It now remained 
 for the remnant of deputies in Paris to make the duke a 
 king. There were, however, other questions antecedent to the 
 choice of a king that must first be settled, otherwise they 
 would have the same vexing problem of constitutional prero- 
 gative to bring on another revolt. On the sixth of August 
 all negotiations with the Bourbons were closed, and, on the 
 motion of Berard, the amenable Chamber of Deputies declared 
 the throne vacant. The revision of the constitution became 
 the order of the day and this work, in turn, became the 
 privilege of a few, who, profiting by the confusion in the 
 Chambers, succeeded in presenting a charter conformable to 
 their own wishes. 6 Four main revisions were made and these 
 it is particularly our purpose to note. 
 
 The first two alterations took the form of corrections and 
 preventions of the evils in the charter of 1814. Charles X 
 had produced the July Ordinances by virtue of Article Four- 
 teen which allowed him to promulgate special laws of any 
 character whatsoever in times of danger. This clause was 
 suppressed. The preamble of the charter was the next clause 
 attacked. By reason of its opening statement the Constitution 
 of 1814 has become known as "la Charte octroyee," for, by it 
 the charter became an act of grace coming from the monarch 
 and conferred through his generosity and royal favour, when, 
 in reality, the Charter had -been intended to serve as a con- 
 tract between sovereign and subject, a contract, furthermore 
 submitted to him by the people. So at the outset two evils 
 of the Restoration were abolished. The two other changes 
 are important and curious as well, for, while they concern 
 
 ""We cannot close our eyes to the fact that the Chamber of 
 Deputies is pliable and does not understand its own policy. In their 
 eyes they seem to think it is a question of mere change of cabinet 
 and not of a revolution." d'Herbelot to Montalembert. 6 Aout 1830. 
 Lettres d'Herbelot. 
 
 8 
 
the social and religious welfare of the people, they became, 
 nevertheless, through the absurd policy of the government, 
 two evils that had almost the same effect on the July Monarchy 
 that the Preamble and Fourteenth Article had exercised on 
 the Restoration. Their content and purpose were excellent 
 but as interpreted by the government, they soon became gross 
 evils. One of the new articles declared that "the Clergy of 
 the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Religion, professed by 
 the majority of Frenchmen, and the clergy of other denomina- 
 tions as well, shall receive salaries from the public treasury," 
 while Article Sixty-Nine promised laws granting liberty of, 
 association, of the press and instruction. 7 These four changes 
 imply much and foreshadow what it was hoped would be the 
 future policy of France. In brief, they present in a clear 
 and concise form the very raison d'etre of the July Monarchy ; 
 a break with the principles of the Holy Alliance. This rup- 
 ture, in turn, involved many things : within the borders of 
 France it meant a change in the relations of Church and 
 State (where the throne had been upon the altar, the altar 
 would now be tolerated upon the throne) and a policy of 
 adherence to the charter in its widest and most comprehensive 
 sense ; while for international affairs it implied an entire read- 
 justment of foreign relations, a new alliance with England, 
 a neutral attitude in the case of rebellious bordering provinces 
 and yet a tacit approval of all liberal movements in countries 
 with conditions similar to those in France. On this policy 
 was the monarchical principle based and if he followed this 
 consistently the founders guaranteed to Louis Philippe the 
 continuation of his dynasty. 
 
 But it must not be supposed that the government enjoyed 
 at once the full support of all the French. Its existence de- 
 pended only upon the support of its founders, the concessions 
 of a moderate opposition and the toleration of the extremists, 
 many of whom leaned toward Republicanism. But the Re- 
 publican's day had not yet come. 8 In the meantime there 
 
 T Other alterations concerned the franchise enlarging the electorate, 
 taxation, the age of voters, deputies, etc. 
 
 8 It is interesting to note that even the people seemed to realize that 
 Republicanism was not yet strong enough to assert itself. One con- 
 temporary relates the following anecdote of the July Days : *'Un de 
 
 9 
 
remained only two parties really significant, the "parti du 
 mouvement" and the "parti de resistance," both to a great 
 extent bourgeois. 
 
 Upon his informal enthronement Louis Philippe found him- 
 self between two extremes and he was necessarily hampered 
 by this situation. The king, as the choice of the revolutionary 
 and conservative element alike, was unable to assume any 
 definite attitude. The scene at the Hotel de Ville had imposed 
 on him the duties and limitations of a popular monarch while 
 from the coalition of Conservatives and a few Progressives he 
 was expected to employ the charter only to what they judged 
 would be a reasonable and proper extent. Louis Philippe was, 
 then, the people's king as well as the choice of a partially 
 aristocratic body. Guizot and de Broglie were the leaders of 
 the "resistance'' ; La Fayette, Laffitte and later Thiers, the 
 leaders of the movement. And, as the foundation of the July 
 Monarchy was due to a compromise, so its first ministry was 
 to serve as a mean between the two parties. It was from 
 the "resistance" and "mouvement," then, that the king selected 
 the members of his cabinet. 9 
 
 As might easily be expected, such a combination was not 
 of long duration and was a very unsatisfactory affair while 
 it did last. The Ministry divided at once into its logical fac- 
 tions and a confused state of affairs prevailed which assured 
 Europe that there was no need to anticipate any immediate 
 danger from the revolutionary government. From this con- 
 
 nos amis qui est alle au camp de Rambouillet avec des ouvriers, bivou- 
 quait pres d'un homme du peuple. "Je sais bien" dit ce dernier, "que 
 de ce que nous faisons il ne nous reviendra rien et que nous n'en 
 mourons moins de faim ou a l'hopital ; mais nous l'avons fait pour la 
 patrie, pour vous, tenez," ajoutait-il, "qui est un bourgeois et qui en 
 profiterez." d' Herbelot a Montalembert— 6 Aout 1830. Lettres 
 d'Herbelot. 
 8 Dupin de l'Eure— Minister of Justice 
 Comte Gerard — " " War 
 
 de Broglie — " u Public Instruction and Sects 
 
 Guizot — " " Interior 
 
 Comte Mole — " " Foreign Affairs 
 
 Baron Louis— " " Finance 
 
 Comte Sebastiani — " " Marine 
 
 Laffitte, C. Perier, Dupin (Aine) and Beugnot— ministers without 
 portefolios. (Lesur Annaire 1830.) 
 
 to 
 
dition in the cabinet, there resulted in the political world in 
 France a veritable anarchy — religious, intellectual and politi- 
 cal, for no one, legislator, elector or minister, knew his power. 10 
 Thus at home the new monarchy had but a confused support. 
 What was its position in Europe? 
 
 France was sure of England's sympathies alone. The key 
 to the whole situation is found in the Russian question. For 
 a long time the Tsar's policy had been to convert the Black 
 Sea into an interior lake, to hold back the fleets of England 
 and France in the Mediterranean, and finally to gain the con- 
 trol of Egypt, Greece and the Islands. The ultimate end of 
 this policy was to obtain the English possessions in India ; this 
 necessitated the occupation of the Dardanelles. Charles X, as 
 one of the restored Bourbons, had felt the obligation he was 
 under to Russia, for it was the Emperor Alexander who had 
 been foremost in negotiating the Restoration. Then too, he 
 had the Bourbons' inherent respect for Legitimacy. It was 
 his creed. Hence forgetful of England's kindness to his 
 brother, he was inclined to allow the Russian policy to pro- 
 gress without protest on his part. This attitude, in turn, 
 had rapidly alienated England's sympathies, and upon the 
 return of the "premier emigreV' to the island as an exile, he 
 was coldly received and overtures were made to the July 
 Monarchy. This change in events could not but displease 
 the Tsar, a displeasure which was further aggravated by the 
 very evident sympathy entertained for Poland by a certain 
 party in France. We find, then, a gradual rapprochement 
 taking place between England and France as opposed to Rus- 
 sia. The Tsar's position, however, was not one of entire isola- 
 tion. For Austria, swayed by Metternich, was oblivious to the 
 probable outcome of the Russian policy and rather inclined 
 to an alliance, particularly since she was already harassed by 
 the dangers of Prussian ambition and the progress of liberalism 
 as agitated by the Carbonari in her Italian possessions. Prussia 
 was too well occupied with rebellious Rhine- provinces, and 
 
 10 "L'anarchie est moins dans les esprits que dans les pouvoirs; il 
 y en a des gens qui ne savent ce qu"ils veulent; mais a la lettre personne 
 ne sait ce qu'il peut." Madame Swetchine — Lettres. 12 November 
 1830. And also d'Herbelot a Montalembert, 22 Sept. 1830. Lettres 
 d'Herbelot. 
 
Spain and Portugal with difficult questions of succession, to 
 be much concerned in French affairs. But in three smaller 
 territories, to the north, south and east of France there were 
 people watching eagerly the progress of events in Paris, people 
 who felt that their very life depended on the yes or no of 
 Louis Philippe, and whose hopes were centered in his gov- 
 ernment. These countries were Belgium, Italy and Poland, 
 all but one of whom were to hope in vain. From the point 
 of view of external affairs, therefore, the situation was not 
 bad. Louis Philippe had a strong ally nearby, and was to 
 a certain extent protected from the Holy Alliance by the 
 unsafe conditions in the intervening countries. What a su- 
 preme opportunity there was for proving the worth of a 
 liberal and constitutional monarchy! But this was not to 
 be accomplished for in France itself there was nothing but 
 a hopeless confusion of political dissensions, financial un- 
 certainty, and an overpowering strain of personal egotism, all 
 the inevitable consequences of forty-one years of revolution. 
 Thus for foreign affairs the ministry declared "the doctrine of 
 non-intervention," their interpretation of which was a veritable 
 confession of the nation's weakness. In this France dis- 
 claimed any intention of intervening in behalf of the liberal 
 movements in Italy, provided, in return, no foreign interfer- 
 ence should take place along her frontier. And, for internal 
 safety's sake the Ministry of Progressives and Doctrinaires 
 had to call to their support and enlarge the national guard, 
 in former times a noble body of national defense, but now 
 transformed into an army of merchants and business men who 
 enlisted to defend their own interests and not to protect the 
 liberties of France. 
 
 "A military monarchy is not a very enviable form of gov- 
 ernment for those over whom its authority is exercised. But 
 a military democracy is perhaps the most to be deprecated." 11 
 This "military democracy" laid the foundation of a bour- 
 geois rule, a reign of petty business interests in France. 
 
 So the first ministry accomplished very little, and what they 
 did accomplish was not for the future good of France. Never- 
 theless there ensued shortly afterwards an all too brief period 
 
 "For an opposite view v. d'Herbelot to Montalembert 9 Oct. 1830. 
 Lettres d'Herbelot. 
 
 12 
 
of interest in national affairs. This was occasioned by the 
 trial of the ministers of Charles X. Republican sentiment had 
 finally asserted itself and brought the ministers to trial, but 
 the death penalty for political offenses was first abolished. 
 There can be no doubt but that this demand for justice was 
 brought about by the events in Belgium and by the examples 
 of the revolutionaries in Brussels. The demands for immediate 
 trial became so pressing that the Cabinet was forced to resign 
 and on the second of November the "parti du mouvement" 
 came into power, headed by Laffitte and Sebastiani. 12 But 
 this party brought very little relief, and, despite the appearance 
 of liberalism in its legislative work, the results proved un- 
 satisfactory. France is said to have suffered principally be- 
 cause of two policies pursued during their term of office. The 
 first was the debasing efforts of the Cabinet to obtain recog- 
 nition for Louis Philippe, and the second the passing of three 
 laws one of which, it is asserted, paralyzed the power of the 
 people in the commune and gave the "bourgeois full sway. 13 
 Thus, while the Laffitte Ministry was honest and of one accord 
 in its political professions, it was none the less incapable of 
 preventing the gain of selfish interests and could accomplish 
 nothing amid the confusing array of contrary political opinions. 
 This condition, unfortunately, was not confined to the realm 
 of politics, it extended to all branches of thought philosophical, 
 
 12 Laffitte — President of Council. Minister of Finance. 
 Marechal Maison — Minister of Foreign Affairs. 
 Dupont (de l'Eure) — Guard of the Seals. 
 
 Comte Montalivet — Minister of the Interior. 
 
 Merillon — Minister of Public Instruction and Sects. 
 
 Marechal Gerard — Minister of War. 
 
 Comte Sebastiani — Minister of Marine. 
 
 Maison shortly afterwards replaced by Sebastiani. 
 
 Gerard shortly afterwards replaced by Soult. 
 
 Comte d'Argent — Minister of Marine. (Lesur Annaire). 
 
 13 "It was, in fact, during this period that there was established by 
 the successive abandonment of all nations, the diplomatic system which 
 tended to bring France down to the rank of secondary powers in 
 order to obtain recognition of Louis Philippe's right to rule. It was 
 also during this time that by the law on municipalities they paralyzed 
 with the same blow the action of the people in the commune and 
 that of local influence. By the law on elections it possessed itself 
 exclusively of the State." L. Blanc, Hist. I. 410. 
 
 13 
 
social and religious. The result of such confusion was fatal 
 to intellectual as well as political progress. 
 
 France was proud. By a revolution she had formed a new 
 government ; why should she not, by an intellectual revolution, 
 L. Blanc establish a new system of philosophy, or economics, a new 
 
 Hist, I, 410 . r- a pl , , 
 
 socialism or a new religion r She was possessed by the same 
 overweening-pride that had ruled her in the first and great 
 v. Tasche- Revolution. 14 But in 1830 this pride was even greater, for 
 
 reau Reme having been in abevance a score of years, it now rose higher 
 Retrospec- * , /. . •« 1 • 
 
 ti V e mto the realms of the impossible, more venomous, more in- 
 tolerant and more dangerous than in the old time. There 
 was again revived, under a slightly different form, the degen- 
 teu^Xo 10 "- erate worship of Reason, and new sects appeared calling them- 
 selves Christian and embracing a vast and compound system 
 of political science, morals, philosophy and religion. They 
 became veritable centers of violence and riots. Among these 
 it is well to note the Society of the People's Friend, which 
 caused the sack of St. Germain l'Auxerrois, the Society of 
 the Rights of Man, interested in the riots of 1832 and 1834, 
 and the two Societies of the "Families'' and the "Seasons," 
 one or both perhaps, vitally concerned in the disturbances 
 Simon"* mc ident t0 the ministerial crises of 1839- 1840. The most 
 Oeuvres peculiar and most successful because of its leaders, was Saint 
 principally Simoni sm. 15 Originally a purely economic theory, Saint 
 Simonism degenerated into a form of religion and a rule of 
 life. Their principles were based on two time-worn theories, 
 the rehabilitation of the body and matter, and the legitimacy 
 of pleasure and passion. The head of the Saint Simonians 
 was a paradoxical personage of a pontifical character — having 
 two persons and known as one. He or they taken together 
 
 14 Le gout et le peche revolutionaire par excellence c'est le gout 
 et le peche de la destruction, pour se donner l'orgeuilleux plaisir de la 
 creation. Dans les temps atteints de cette maladie rhomme considere 
 tout ce qui existe sous ses yeux, le passe et le present, comme une 
 matiere inerte dont il dispose librement et qu'il peut manier et remanier 
 pour la fagonner, a son gre. II se figure qu'il a dans l'esprit des idees 
 completes et parfaites qui lui donnent sur toute chose le pouvoir absolu 
 et du nom desquels il peut a tout risque, et a tout prix briser ce qui 
 est, pour le refaire a leur image." Guizot, Memoirs II. 21. 
 
 19 Saint Simon, Enfantin, Bazard and even at one time A. Comte 
 and Proudhon. 
 
 14 
 
were called the "Pope." But — upon a quarrel between the 
 two persons of the "Pope" who happened to be Enfantin 
 and Bazard, the sect split up into separate factions and finally 
 disappeared. This is only one instance of the existence and 
 end of countless sects in which individualism seems to have 
 run riot. In addition to these groups there were, of course, 
 still others who prided themselves on professing no belief 
 whatever. They comprised for the most part a struggling 
 remnant known as the inheritors of the Encyclopedists. But 
 even they in their turn, felt the ground tremble under their 
 feet and saw their self-made confidence vanish. Then, feeling 
 the void they themselves had created and too proud to return 
 to the old faith, they must needs construct a belief of their 
 own only to have it crumble to ruins in a short time. This 
 was the anarchy of belief as well as of political doctrine in 
 the early years of Louis Philippe's reign, egotistical, confused, 
 illogical and of human fashioning. 
 
 Amid the general chaos in the first year of the July Mon- 
 archy, Christianity had not fared much better. Only with 
 effort had the Faith been enabled to survive the fall of the 
 Restoration, to which it had been so closely and so wrongly 
 allied. Catholicism existed but remained unrecognized. For 
 the first time in centuries a king of France had not been 
 blessed with the benediction of Rome. And had Louis Philippe 
 desired this act, he could not have asked it, for in public 
 he did not even dare mention the word "Providence." Re- 
 ligion had been severed from Royalty, and, indeed, from 
 authority as well. The crosses had been removed from the 
 tribunes, some places of worship had been officially closed 
 and when the "church" was mentioned it was nearly always 
 in secrecy. Even the priests must needs be careful not to 
 appear on the street if they would avoid insults. But if a 
 priests aroused the throngs to ridicule, an open church often 
 excited them to riot. St. Germain de l'Auxerrois was sacked, 
 and the archbishop's palace pillaged, in the presence, it is 
 asserted, of a member of the king's government. 16 The ex- 
 planation of all these events, however, is not so difficult as it 
 appears at first sight. About the same time that the above 
 
 18 Thiers, L. Blanc, Hist. I, 394- 
 
 IS 
 
atrocities were committed Louis Philippe removed the fleurs 
 de lys from his coaches. In the relation between these two 
 events is found the secret of all the trouble. In all probability, 
 the manifestations of hostility to the church shown by the 
 Paris throng had their origin in a political rather than a re- 
 ligious prejudice. By the Concordat of 1801 the church had 
 been allied to the governing power. The Pope himself had 
 seen this and must have regretted it, for, during the Restora- 
 tion he had made ceaseless appeals for the negotiation of a 
 new Concordat. But, all this had been of no avail, and the 
 restored Bourbons had made the church in France the instru- 
 ment of their own wishes and desires. In so doing they had 
 established a form of Gallicanism that, upheld and fostered 
 by the "petite £glise'' party, had resulted greatly to their own 
 increase of power but had been fatal to the good name of 
 the church in France. When, therefore, the government of 
 Charles X became more unpopular, the church, now almost an 
 integral part of the Restoration, was equally despised, and 
 upon the fall of Charles many, unable to distinguish the great 
 truths and the real virtue lying at its basis, sought to make 
 way with Catholicism as well. It was indeed a terrible punish- 
 ment for the faith that many of the men of 1830 failed to 
 distinguish Carlists from Catholics, not all of whom had joined 
 in the selfish and foolish desires of their more extreme and 
 reactionary colleagues. This, then, was the condition of the 
 church in 1830. A new Jansenius was needed, but more, a 
 new Arnauld, a Frenchman, not a stranger, who knew his 
 people and his country, who loved them both, and yet loved 
 above all his church. And so it was that coming out from 
 their obscurity at La Chesnaie, where they had laboured and 
 sent out from time to time messages of encouragement to 
 the struggling remnant left in the church, a small group headed 
 by the abbe de La Mennais, set out for Paris to begin a 
 new work for which they had prepared themselves with care 
 and continuous application. 
 
 Robert Felicite de La Mennais was above all others, the 
 man suited to appeal to those hardened patriots of the July 
 Revolution. He had passed through just such experiences, 
 just such vague uncertainties and just such doubts as they 
 had undergone. Born in Brittany June 19, 1782, La Mennais 
 
 16 
 
had been old enough to witness and consider in all its signifi- 
 cance the last years of the earlier period in the French Revolu- 
 tion. The Empire and Restoration had followed, and brought 
 with them many old and some new abuses. The first found 
 him without belief but the Restoration left him not only a 
 convert but a priest. The latter step had been a difficult one 
 and it had taken place only after a severe spiritual experience. v - are ~ 
 All the influences of the Revolution had thus had an oppor- Jeunesse de 
 tunity to play and leave their impress upon the young priest, La of"" 318 ' 
 from Rousseau, with whose works he became acquainted 
 through his uncle, Robert des Saudrais, to de Bonald and Pas- 
 cal, both of whom his interest in Chateaubriand's "Le Genie du 
 Christianisme" led him to read. What a contrast this young 
 priest must have been to many of his fellow-clergy, for the 
 greater part much older than he and so embued with the 
 importance of regaining their temporal powers that they 
 seemed to have neglected their chief priestly function — that 
 of ministering to humanity. From the very day of his ordina- 
 tion La Mennais seems to have perceived this evil and de- 
 termined to combat and resist it. It will be remembered that 
 he made this the main theme of his first work, "Reflexions 
 sur Tfitat de Tfiglise en France pendant le dixhuitieme siecle, 
 et sur sa situation acteuelle" (1808), and in future years La 
 Mennais did not relent in his attack, even when busied with 
 the management of his brother's order or occupied in the 
 instruction of youth. It was in 1821 that the young priest 
 came definitely before the public eye. In that year he pub- 
 lished an "Essai sur 1'IndirTerence en matiere de Religion." 
 This work is of prime importance, for it predicted the author's 
 future career and it contained the fundamentals of all the 
 themes expounded ten years later in "l'Avenir" ; the regenera- 
 tion of the church by liberty and the regeneration of mankind 
 by the church when once it had been freed from its faults. 
 The great evil of the church and people is a spiritual deadness. 
 One paragraph alone is sufficient to make this clear: 
 
 "The century the most seriously endangered is not one 
 that eagerly pursues error, but the century that neglects and 
 disdains the Truth. There Ts force and consequently hope, 
 when you see violent transports of passion one way or the La Mennais 
 other; but when all movement is stopped, when the pulse \ ndl pr e e7ac C e e, 
 
 17 
 
has ceased to beat, when the cold has gained the heart, what 
 is there left to expect but a rapid and inevitable dissolution? 
 You may try to hide it from yourself ; society in Europe is 
 fast approaching this fatal end." 
 
 With this hypothesis La Mennais set out to cure society 
 of its fatal malady, and in his beginnings he displayed remark- 
 able prescience. Realizing that the hope of the nation lay in 
 its youth, in the coming generation, and not in the individual 
 acts of one man alone, he gradually gathered around him a 
 small group of young enthusiastic spirits into whom he might 
 inculcate his ideas, the embodiment of which were later found 
 in the motto selected for Y Avenir — "Dieu et la Liberte." 
 In this group, composed for the greater part of adherents 
 to the liberal romatic youth of Paris, Henri Lacordaire was a 
 prominent member, and it was probably this future priest who 
 persuaded La Mennais to convert a small piece of family prop- 
 erty known as La Chesnaie into a sort of religious community. 
 The plan enjoyed immediate success and soon people came 
 to say that what in Paris the Romantic School was for Litera- 
 ture, the "ecole Menaisienne" at La Chesnaie became for re- 
 ligion. 17 It must not be supposed, however, that the "school'' 
 at La Chesnaie was an entirely isolated factor in the religious 
 life of the nation. Even before its founding La Mennais 
 had established relations in Paris that soon were brought into 
 close connection with La Chesnaie, and as the fame and popu- 
 larity of his books increased, he was forced to make more 
 frequent journeys to Paris in order to consult his publishers. 
 While in the Capitol he was accustomed to visit the home of 
 his old friend the abbe de Salinis. It was there that La 
 Mennais first met Abbe Gerbet to whom the project of the 
 "Memorial Catholique" had just been confided, Rohrbacher 
 even at that time writing his monumental history of the 
 church, Goesset, de Bonald and Eugene Bore famous orientalist, 
 
 17 Tandisque le pretre s'appliquait a orienter et a maintenir dans un 
 sens chretien le mouvement romantiqje, le poete s'efforca de con- 
 querir la jeune ecole catholique a sa reforme litteraire : Sainte-Beuve les 
 seconda Tun et l'autre, bien qu'il eut peutetre autant de scepticisme 
 en litterature qu'en religion. It mit a profit ses relations avec des 
 menaisiens pour leur precher le romanticisme, et il ne le precha pas 
 sans succes. La Mennais se laissa gagner." Boutard II. 93- 
 
 18 
 
editor of the "Journal Asiatique" and later superior of the 
 Order of the Mission. The Salon of the abbe de Salinis thus 
 became the cradle of the "ecole Menaisienne," and whenever 
 the solitary priest of La Chesnaie came to the Capitol the 
 abbe's home was crowded with friends and admirers, or others 
 seeking introduction to this man who dared advocate views 
 which they held but failed to express. 
 
 In addition to the clergy La Mennais had many friends 
 among the laity and they too flocked to the rendezvous that 
 was now become the nucleus of a new Liberal Catholic 
 Party. Among them were found such men as Foisset, Leon 
 Bore, the brother of Eugene Bore and equally talented, de 
 Cazales, de Carne a future champion of religious liberty in 
 the chambers, Alphonse d'Herbelot at first an interested ob- 
 server and then a convert, and Sainte-Beuve also a recent 
 convert. 18 Even from this brief summary it may be clearly 
 seen how the ideas of the young reformer had spread and 
 were beginning to dominate a certain group of the Romantic 
 School in Paris. But, La Mennais' ideas had gone still further, 
 they had even permeated the reactionary clergy. This fact 
 alarmed the more conservative of that body and, through the 
 exertion of their influence La Mennais and his principles soon 
 became a source of constant worry to the government and to 
 Rome as well. Up to 1828, however, La Mennais had not 
 been regarded as a controversialist, but beginning with that 
 year he entered upon the field he was not to leave until his 
 defeat. In all probably it was the July Ordinances that 
 aroused him. To the utter astonishment of all the Liberal 
 Catholics the Pope ordered them to submit to Charles X's 
 humiliating decrees. This was too much for the hot-headed 
 Breton priest. 
 
 "I do not believe/' he wrote, "that for centuries so great 
 a scandal has been known ; and how fatal the results may 
 be! Rome, Rome, what are you doing? What has become of 
 that voice that in the old time sustained the feeble and aroused 
 the negligent? That voice that has been accustomed to cir- 
 cumvent the world, giving to all in times of danger, the courage 
 to fight or to die. To-day they can only say: 'Submit.' If 
 
 18 V. G. M. Harper— Sainte-Beuve. 66. 
 
 19 
 
E. Forgues, our fall comes from the source whence we ought to expect 
 2oOct? S rite8 our salvation, what can we do but obey the words of the 
 prophet, who said : 'Elongavi fugiens, et mansi in solitudine.' " 
 From this time dates La Mennais' conversion to the belief 
 in the absolute necessity of the church's entire independence 
 and separation from the state. He now became an Ultra- 
 montane but in an entirely different sense from the generally 
 accepted meaning of that term. He desired Rome to throw 
 off all secular interests, and to become thoroughly spiritualized. 
 This done, he advocated complete subjugation to the will of 
 the Pope. This feeling he expressed in the last works he 
 published before the July Revolution: two letters to the 
 Archbishop of Paris, one of which was condemned, and a 
 work entitled "Des Progres de la Revolution et de la guerre 
 contre lfiglise." These works decided Le Mennais' future. 
 The Conservative Party, the largest and most strongly Gallican, 
 beheld in him a dangerous Progressive and Ultramontane of 
 and entirely new stamp, while his timid followers looked on 
 aghast. In a letter written to a friend in May, 1829, a little 
 over a year before his entrance into public life, La Mennais 
 describes his position in a striking manner. 
 
 "When I consider the astonishing phenomenon that the 
 present offers to us, I have difficulty in finding sufficient per- 
 sonal strength to console myself for having broken the silence 
 that many have kept so happily for their own welfare. The 
 church was there, alone in the arena, given over to the beasts 
 and gladiators : I felt the desire to fight for her, to defend 
 her with my own weakness. Immediately bishops and priests 
 ran to watch the spectacle, their pockets filled with stones. 
 They sat down and it became a contest to see who, from the 
 height of their comfortable seats where they reclined at ease, 
 could hit with greatest accuracy the misguided and daring 
 fellow who had exposed himself to the teeth of the bears 
 and tigers, without authorization ; these same people who play 
 the game witih such skill, become irritated when his actions 
 
 E Forgues, are n0 |. conformable to their desires ; they would not have 
 
 Corresp. . J 
 
 22 Mai 1829 done as he has, and the stone arrives to prove it to him." 
 
 This was the encouragement La Mennais received from the 
 
 church whose miserable condition has been described. Upon 
 
 his very first entrance on the field those blind ecclesiastics 
 
 20 
 
attacked the man who, for the salvation of humanity and the 
 church, sought to make them distinguish real religion from 
 an affair of politics, and an ideal and logical order in the church 
 from a condition of flagrant disorder and abuse. It now 
 remains to see how he and his school fared under another 
 regime whose head had cried aloud : "La Charte sera desormais 
 une verite." 
 
 21 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 LOUIS PHILIPPE AND LA MENNAIS 
 
 During the nineteenth century, the Liberal Roman Cath- 
 olics sprung from the school of La Mennais, exerted a con- 
 siderable influence in questions of internal and external 
 politics in France. This influence dates from the Charter 
 of 1830 and outlasts the July Monarchy. Those eighteen 
 years witnessed but the beginnings of a great movement 
 which seemed at first to have culminated in the Law of 
 Separation in 1905, but which, many believe, has not yet 
 reached its end. Like all such movements, the early period 
 (1830-1848) to which our study is confined, falls into two 
 divisions, the "epoque critique'' and the "epoque organique" — 
 to borrow an expression from the Saint Simonians. The first 
 half of the reign of Louis Philippe, then, is the formative 
 period when the movement centered about one principal figure 
 the Abbe de La Mennais, and when its action was diffused 
 and uncertain, seeking a point d'appui. In 1840, in turn, 
 a change seems to have come over it, transforming it into a 
 more reasonable and logical agitation for one definite object — 
 and that, the fulfilment of one article of the Charter — the 
 69th — by which Liberty of Instruction was guaranteed. It 
 was then that the Liberal Catholics exerted a positive influence. 
 From 1840 begins, then, the "epoque organique," a period 
 lasting even to our own day and full of interest and import 
 to the student of modern French history. But it would be 
 quite impossible to take up a study of the "epoque organique" 
 without a careful consideration of the earlier and more form- 
 ative agitation, for in the latter are found the fundamentals 
 and most of the origins of the later period. Events led La 
 Mennais and his group to make the first effort and Montalem- 
 bert and Lacordaire to profit by their first experience and 
 succeed in their second attempt. It is, however, a curiously 
 ironic comment on the short sightedness of human nature that, 
 
 22 
 
at the time of success, when these two leaders were at the 
 zenith of their activity the Liberal Catholics seemed loath to 
 acknowledge their origin. One of them, probably Louis 
 Veuillot, wrote : 
 
 "The history of ecclesiastical opposition in France may be 
 divided into three situations : the first the resistance of priests 
 and bishops, in 1811, to the imperial government, the second 
 the declaration of the French episcopacy in 1828 to the July 
 Ordinances, and the third the protest of the bishops in 1841 
 to the Monopole Universitaire and the proposed laws on 
 secondary instruction. About these three principal events 
 center all accessory questions ; the arena opened at these three 
 periods was filled with a crowd of 'petits combats partiels' ; 
 but all the efforts from one side or from the other are centered 
 in these three solemn debates." 
 
 And so they would place the great effort of La Mennais — 
 the founder of their own school, in the classification of 
 "petis combats partiels" ! Happily Time, more just, has ac- 
 knowledged the fault and given the credit where it is due. 
 
 The church, after the Revolution of 1830, presented a 
 curious paradox. 
 
 "Je ne sais ou nous abouterons, mais vraiment le catholicisme 
 est bien malade et ne sait qui le relevera." 
 
 So one of those interested in the "ecole menaisienne" had 
 written shortly before the fall of the Restoration. This may 
 be said to describe the condition of the church a year later 
 when the clergy seemed stricken with a hopeless apathy and 
 civil death. 1 But this appearance was a curious one for it 
 did not represent the true state of affairs. Legally, or from 
 the point of view of the Constitution, their condition was 
 much happier. For, the Charter of 1830, while declaring that 
 the state did not profess any specified religion, allowed the 
 people a free choice and provided that all clergymen should 
 be paid from the public treasury. 2 Furthermore, by the pro- 
 
 1 "Le Clerge est frappe d'une sorte de mort civile.'' Ami la Religion 
 et du roi. 12 Juillet 1831. 
 
 s "Art. 5. Chacun professe sa religion avec une egale liberte et 
 obtient pour son culte une egale protection. 
 
 Art. 6. Les Ministres de la religion Catholique, apostolique and 
 romaine professee par la majorite des frangais et ceux des autres cultes 
 Chretiens recoivent des traitements du Tresor." Charter of 1830. 
 
 23 
 
 L'Univers, 
 15 Aout, 
 1846 
 
 d'Herbelot 
 to Monta- 
 
 lembert, 
 1 Aout, 1829 
 
L. Veuillot, 
 "Rome et 
 Lorette," I, 
 39 
 
 Debidour, 
 "E et E," 
 414-419 
 Thureau 
 Danguin, 
 Hist., I, 246, 
 7 
 
 mise of a new law, liberty of instruction was guaranteed. 3 
 Despite these facts, however, the position of the clergy and 
 the state of religion in France were not so good as might 
 have been expected. To explain such a state of affairs would 
 necessitate a careful review of the preceding thirty-one years. 
 In brief this condition arose from two main causes. The first 
 cause was antecedent to the entire situation and lay in the 
 fact that the Concordat of 1801 and the Organic Articles were 
 still in force and restricted, to some extent, whatever liberties 
 the Charter might have promised, while the second cause was 
 the attitude of the new government and the people's response 
 to it. 
 
 The early legislation of the chambers under the July Mon- 
 archy indicated what would be its attitude to religion. In 
 politics they had demanded and successfully effected a sub- 
 ordination of all powers to bourgeois interest. For religion, 
 the}' were to act the same way. As the Concordat of 180 1 
 had been a protest against the possibility of the rise of reac- 
 tionary church principles, so the early religious policy of the 
 Bourgeois Monarchy was intended to serve as a counteraction 
 against the "dangerous doctrine of theocracy" (as they con- 
 sidered it) advocated by. the young Catholics through their 
 leader, La Mennais. The one desire of the legislature at that 
 moment was moderation, and, too confident in their own ability 
 to create institutions, they sought to establish in the Church 
 what, it was believed, would prove "a moderate and reasonable 
 faith." The Church, then, was in no immediate danger of 
 interference on the part of the chambers ; both houses only 
 sought to establish that very state of indifference which La 
 Mennais would have abolished. 
 
 The ministers, however, were in a still less certain position. 
 Divided as they were between "mouvement" and "resistance" 
 they could not arrive at any definite decision, could not carry 
 out any of the liberties guaranteed by the Charter, and soon 
 initiated that policy of promising and failing to fulfill their 
 
 3 "Art. 6. The following subjects shall be provided for successively 
 by separate laws within the shortest possible space of time. 
 
 8th Public Instruction and the Liberty of Teaching." Charter of 
 1830. 
 
 -'4 
 
promises that was to end in becoming a principal cause of the 
 downfall of Louis Philippe. It would have been better had 
 they heeded the words of more than one prophet who took 
 the trouble to warn them. 4 The attitude of the king, in turn, 
 was equally curious, and as time went on his personal feelings 
 in the matter of religion became more difficult to explain and 
 less creditable. During the early period he maintained 
 a discreet silence. Louis Philippe was, perhaps, afraid of 
 the Church questions, and in this he was not so unreasonable 
 as it might appear at first glance. A divided Church harassed 
 him on both sides. One wing the Gallicans, remnants of 
 the "petite eglise" or "parti pretre" held decidedly strong 
 legitimist sympathies, while in the other faction La Mennais and 
 his group were beginning to attract attention and to betray 
 every day more unmistakable signs of republican tendencies. 
 "Better not put your finger in church affairs. You will never Debidour, 
 
 F et F A2.' 
 
 get it out again. It will stay there." the king is said to ^ ec ' ^ 
 have remarked. 
 
 Among the French in general the attitude to Catholicism 
 may be summed up in three categories ; the faithful, the in- 
 different and the hostile. The former comprised the great 
 majority of the lower class known as the "people," and also 
 a number of the nobility, together with an occasional bourgeois. 
 The people believed in it, the nobles, for the most part, prac- 
 ticed it as both a political and a religious creed, while the 
 few bourgeois who accepted Catholic principles generally did 
 so in a sincerely reverent spirit. The second class, the indiff- 
 erent, held that some sort of a religion was necessary for the 
 lower classes. And why not Catholicism? Among their num- 
 ber were principally the members of the Right and Left 
 Centers, and a few nobles. The majority, however, came 
 from the rich bourgeois class. In the third category, are 
 
 4 At this time many pamphlets were published advising the new 
 government what attitude to take to the religious problem. As a type 
 I quote the following paragraph : 
 
 "Au reste, avant de terminer ce chapitre, je donnerai un dernier 
 conseil au government : c'est de ne pas opprimer la religion consacree 
 dans la charte ; il s'en trouvera bien. S'il en etait autrement, de grands 
 malheurs pourraient venir affliger notre patrie." "Reflexions d'un 
 Royaliste." Dolle 1831. 
 
 25 
 
found the adherents of the extreme Left — for the most part 
 a collection, and fairly large at that, of the discontented 
 political riff-raff. They were all violently opposed to the 
 Church as an institution and as a creed, and soon inaugurated 
 a disgusting anti-clerical campaign by launching forth a flood 
 of "literature'' some of which bore such choice titles as, 
 "Histoire scandaleuse, politique, anecdotique et bigote du 
 clerge de France/' "Infamie des pretres devoilee," "La chemise 
 de Femme et Correspondance Gallante trouvee dans l'oratoire 
 de l'archeveche de Paris," "L'archeveque de Paris accuse 
 d'assassinat sur la personne de soeur Veronique, pharmacienne 
 de St. Cyr" and so forth. 5 
 
 This was the spirit of the times and the state of affairs 
 when La Mennais left La Chesnaie and came to Paris in 
 September, 1830. He did not come this time, however, to 
 consult his publisher nor to visit the branch of his brother's 
 order in the rue de Vaugirard, but to found the newspaper 
 that was to become the mouthpiece of the Liberal Roman 
 Catholics. For some time negotiations had been under way. 
 It seems that immediately after the July Days in 1830 M. 
 Harel du Tancrel conceived the idea of founding a paper 
 which would force the government to live up to the Charter 
 in so far as Roman Catholic Liberties were concerned. He 
 suggested it to be abbe Gerbet of the "Memorial Catholique" 
 and the latter communicated at once with the group at La 
 Chesnaie. La Mennais had long been considering the starting 
 of a newspaper by means of which he could expound his 
 views for the redemption of the church and for the saving 
 of his fellow-men by the church once redeemed and raised to 
 its former state. A few weeks later he wrote to a friend: 
 
 "They are shortly going to publish here a newspaper, the 
 prospectus of which you must have received ; it will appear 
 the fifteenth of October; its name will be I'Avenir and its 
 purpose to unite, on the bases of liberty, men of all opinions 
 attached to order; this attempt which circumstances seem to 
 favour wonderfully, will not be without success, I believe. 
 
 8 V. Pamphlets of the date also. "Ami du Peuple" 30th Octobre 1830 
 and Janvier, Fevrier 183 1. 
 
 The more vulgar theatres produced plays entitled : "Victimes Cloi- 
 trees," "Papesse Jeanne," etc. 
 
 26 
 
In fact, I hope much good will come of it. Among us there 
 exists already a great group of liberals who are weary of 
 anarchy and despotism and who understand that the oppres- 
 sion of one party by another is not liberty but tyranny; these 
 come in crowds together under the banner of I'Avenir; the 
 clergy too will seek protection there. Only certain royalists Corres. ed, 
 are holding: off and among them even there are many whom Forgues, 
 
 •11 r u, » 2 9 SePt-' 
 
 time will enlighten. ^30 
 
 The editors and principal contributors of the new journal 
 
 were to be — La Mennais, Lacordaire, Montalembert, 
 
 who joined them in November 1830, Rohrbacher, de 
 
 Coux, Baade of Doellinger School in Munich, Count Merode Lejtres . de ! a 
 ' fe ' Mennais a 
 
 and Hartel du Tancrel who was called the editor-in-chief. Montalem- 
 
 In reality, of course, La Mennais was the leader. A prospectus Ed Fugues 
 brought forth many subscriptions, and La Mennais was much 8 Nov. 1830 
 encouraged. Perhaps, however, he was too sanguine, he 
 had failed to consider his enemies. The outlook for the news- 
 paper was of the very brightest, its board possessed talent and 
 it was announced that from time to time the greatest writers p^/gues^i 
 of the period would contribute. 6 Sept., 1830 
 
 In the middle of October the first number of I'Avenir ap- 
 peared, and in it the real editor-in-chief, La Mennais, did not 
 hesitate to expound his views : 
 
 "If you sincerely desire religious liberty, liberty of edu- 
 cation without which there can be no religious liberty, you 
 are one of us; but we too are in sympathy with you, for we 
 desire no less sincerely the liberty of the press, all the political 
 
 "In fact many famous writers did contribute — among the most 
 prominent of the Romantic School we note : V. Hugo — a chapter — 
 Xotre Dame de Paris, Lamartine, Verse and Letters to Montalembert. 
 V. I'Avenir 20 Juillet 1831 and numbers for December and January 1831. 
 
 Thureau-Dangin in his History of the July Monarchy renders 
 homage to the talent gathered in I'Avenir in the following eloquent 
 terms: "Apres tout, nul journal ne reunissait alors des ecrivains d'un tel 
 talent. C'etait La Mennais avec cette langue qui faisait de lui presque 
 l'egal de M. de Chateaubriand et de M. de Maistre, avec cette vehe- 
 mence sombre, terrible, qui serait a la fois du tribune populaire, et du 
 prophete biblique ; inflexible dans sa dialectique, amer et dedaigneux 
 dans son ironie, manquant souvent de mesure et de gout, mais n'en 
 demeurant pas moins Tun des rheteurs les plus eclatants, et l'un des 
 plus redoubtables polemistes de ce temps." 
 
 27 
 
and civil liberties compatible with the maintenance of public 
 VAvenir, order." 
 
 1 5 Oct., 1830 Thus at the very outset) a i most f rom t he opening lines of 
 the first number of VAvenir, it is evident how far in the 
 brief space of July to October, La Mennais' party of Liberal 
 Roman Catholics had wandered from the paths of the Doc- 
 trinaires with whom they seemed to be in alliance but a few 
 months before. They no longer demanded a mild and dis- 
 creet following of the Charter but a fulfilment "a outrance." 
 Republicanism, therefore, appeared in the very first number 
 of VAvenir and, as time went on this tendency became more 
 evident. Even the Republicans failed, however, until several 
 months later, to perceive the entirety of La Mennais' plan 
 as outlined in VAvenir/' Liberty to the editors of this paper 
 v. VAvenir, meant a firm opposition to Gallicanism, which was nothing 
 Corresp 1 e?' more ni their eyes than the cause of anarchy in the spiritual 
 Forgues II, world and despotism in the political. Moreover, they would 
 tolerate Louis Philippe's government only so long as the 
 Church remained independent in its teaching, its government 
 L. Blanc an< ^ * ts discipline. This, in turn, could lead to nothing else 
 Hist., I, than an abolition of the Concordat of 1801. So much for the 
 Church itself. 
 
 Their demands for civic liberties were still greater and 
 comprised such large questions as the liberty of education, 
 both school and university, the liberty of the press and that 
 of association. But the demands of VAvenir did not end 
 here, they extended even into the realms of diplomacy. In 
 this matter particularly, "VAvenir" found itself absolutely in 
 opposition to the policy of the government as set forth by 
 the two ministers of the Formation period. The new Catholics 
 were fundamentally and irrevocably opposed to the ministers' 
 interpretation of the doctrine of non-intervention, and they 
 maintained that the right and duty of a powerful and liberal 
 nation, if that nation be truly powerful and liberal, was to 
 intervene in behalf of all others less fortunate; hence VAvenir 's 
 attitude to Belgium, Poland, Italy and Ireland. 7 
 
 "Catholics, let us learn to demand, to defend our rights 
 
 7 For the most comprehensive exposition of l'Avenir's attitude in this 
 respect, V. l'Avenir 21 Fevier 1831. An article by Montalembert. 
 
 383 
 
which are the rights of all Frenchmen, the rights of every man 
 
 who is determined not to bend under a yoke any longer, to 
 
 refuse all kinds of servitude no matter under what guise it 
 
 appears or with what name it is cloaked. A man is free when 
 
 he wants to be; he is free when he knows how to unite and 
 
 fight and die rather than cede the very slightest portion of J ^ l [ emr A 
 . • , 1 r 1 . • „ 16 0ct -> l8 3i 
 
 those rights that are alone ot value to human existence. 
 
 This was not the language of the Moniteur, the Journal des 
 Dcbats, nor yet of Ami de la Religion et lu roi. Such a pro- 
 gramme could appeal only to the most ardent of the Liberal 
 Catholics and to those men of the political world who were the 
 most extreme Republicans. What a contrast to the language of 
 forty and more years before when another liberal Catholic 
 sought to join his cause to that of the Republicans ! 8 Vast is 
 the distance between 1790 and 1830. It is even greater than 
 that between Gallican principles and a new ultramontanism. 
 
 "God has placed the only real remedy in the law of the 
 Gospel destined to unite men by a fraternal affection; from 
 this it results that all live in each and each live in all. Real 
 liberty and Christian spirit are inseparable. He who does not 
 love his brother as himself, no matter what his opinions and 
 speculations may be, contains within himself a grain of tyranny 
 and consequently of servitude. Furthermore, the universal and 
 crying need of liberty today is to our eyes a certain proof that 
 Christianity, far from being weakened, is really more power- 
 ful than ever. For, leaving the surface of society where a 
 thousand constraints were sapping its life away, it has gone 
 down to the very basis of society and there in silence it is ac- 
 complishing a work that is just now commencing." 9 
 
 It was with such words that he called out to the bishops : 
 "Go, like the twelve fishermen, and recommence the conquest 
 of the world." 
 
 From the State, I'Avenir asked but little assistance ; they 
 already saw its weakness in the vagueness of its policy. 10 
 "I'Avenir proposed to defend the Catholic institution (sys- 
 
 8 Abbe Gregoire and the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. 
 
 9 La Mennais' account of the purpose of "I'Avenir," Affaires de Rome,. 
 P- 34- 
 
 10 C'est ainsi tres certainement qu'on prolonge les revolutions." 
 I'Avenir, 17 October 1830. 
 
 29 
 
Affaires de tern) languishing and persecuted principally by those very 
 ome 4-0 p 0wers ^hat afreet to call themselves its protectors." 
 
 But to do this, Christianity as a whole, not only the bishops, 
 must go back to the primitive Church eighteen centuries in the 
 past, and La Mennais intended VAvenir to show them the 
 way : 
 
 *'And now what way remained for her to become what 
 she had been in the beginning, to recover with the confidence 
 of the masses her influence, except that of returning to the 
 source, of identifying her interests, as much as possible, in the 
 interests of humanity, of coming to the assistance of its needs, 
 and of aiding it to develop in all its phases and all its conse- 
 quences applicable at that time, the Christian principle of 
 equality before the law. The realization of this principle con- 
 stitutes order without which there is no liberty, and liberty 
 
 Affaires de w i t hout w hich there is no law." 
 
 Rome, 7 
 
 Among the lower clergy such a philosophy found many wil- 
 ling hearers, but among the bishops few, for the majority 
 of the higher ecclesiastics were Legitimists and found their 
 opinions reflected in the pages of Ami de la Religion et du 
 rot. Moreover, La Mennais did not enjoy the favor of the 
 Archbishop of Paris who had already had occasion to condemn 
 him and who regretted the Bourbons. The Vatican, in turn, 
 maintained a strict silence, doubtless because they hoped to 
 obtain a repeal of the Concordat. Had Pius VIII but seen 
 what a later pontiff saw ; had he but realized that a Pope 
 should not be a Regalist if he would be independent and that 
 despotisms or absolute states were his greatest enemies ! 
 
 Their enemies — at home — however, were not long silent, 
 
 and as if to tempt the new group into a rash statement they 
 
 Ami de la con f ron ted them at once with a difficult problem. The coal- 
 Rehgxon et # r 
 
 du rot, 16-20 ition of Legitimists and Gallicans asked if the Church could 
 
 Oct, 1830 rea iiy recognize a government that was the issue of a revolu- 
 tion. The coalition held, of course, that it was impossible. 
 The answer, happily, was not so difficult for the Liberal Catho- 
 VAvenir ncs as their interrogators had anticipated. They replied: 
 17 Oct., 1830 "Populus facit regem." The statement of his opinion marks 
 the first point of departure from the political doctrines of the 
 old church party. The Gallicans could not tolerate an acknowl- 
 
 30 
 
edgment of Louis Philippe, and still more unpardonable to 
 their eyes were the republican sympathies of the new Catho- 
 lics. 11 To this first separation from the Legitimist branch of 
 the Church has been attributed the fall of the first movement, 
 unfavourable reports of which preceded La Mennais to Rome 
 and followed Lacordaire, the more timid, even to the pulpit of 
 Notre Dame. But time, it seems, has shown that this answer 
 was not the most important of several causes. 
 
 So far, the activity of the new party had been confined en- 
 tirely to propaganda in VAvenir, and was of a speculative 
 nature only, but it was not long before they were called upon to 
 test their theories. The Charter of 1830 while granting liber- 
 ties of which VAvenir had demanded the execution, had 
 also made stipulations against which it had loudly protested. 
 Their principal objection was based on an article declaring that 
 ''the clergy of the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Religion, 
 which faith is professed by the majority of the French, and 
 the clergy of other denominations as well, shall receive salaries 
 from the public treasury." Upon the presentation of a budget 
 for 1,670.000,000 francs by M. Laffitte, great opposition was 
 aroused. The Globe and its satellites protested strongly on 
 the ground of excessive expenses. Le Mennais and his school 
 lent their voices to this protest, but in a totally different sense ; 
 they objected to the servitude of the clergy in that they were 
 paid by the state. At the same time the king, acting upon the 
 Concordat, appointed two bishops. Here was the opportunity 
 for the Liberal Catholics to enter the field. Protests became 
 more violent. Alarmed by the opposition of the two parties 
 the government determined on a show of force ; La Mennais 
 and Lacordaire were brought before the tribunal for two arti- 
 cles they had published in VAvenir apropos of the budget 
 and the nomination of the bishops. 12 As usual, this display 
 
 11 X'avoir que du sucre et du miel pour les redacteurs du "Globe," 
 par exemple, et reserver tout son fiel contre nous, nous prodiguer les 
 signes de mepris, affecter avec nous des airs de hauteur; de tels pro- 
 cedes conviennent — lis a des ecrivains qui se respectent un peu, et sur- 
 tout a des chretiens et a des pretres?" Ami de La Religion et du roi. 
 3 Fevrier 183 1. 
 
 x "La Mennais' article appeared in VAvenir 26 November 1830, under 
 the title — "Oppression des Catholiques." He said, in part: "Ou le 
 
 Thureau- 
 Dangin, 
 Hist.. II, 
 293 
 
 Charter, 
 1830, Art. 6 
 
 3i 
 
of determination on the part of the government brought it 
 V. London little credit and resulted in a tacit victory for the accused. 
 7 eb. "4**1831 Thus the first persecution of I'Avenir ended in a gain, for it 
 
 had given the defendants an opportunity to express publicly 
 
 their views. 
 
 There is one phase of the affair, however, which must not 
 be overlooked. As has been noted, the Gallicans were offended 
 by the language of VAvcnir, and in their account of the trial 
 they inaugurated a policy of recrimination against the new 
 party, attacking it not from the point of view of the monarchy 
 or their own political opinions but from that of the Church 
 and orthodoxy alone. It is interesting to let them speak for 
 themselves : 
 
 "One phrase, among others, surprises us in this plea (of 
 M. Janvier) : here it is: "M de la Mennais has charged me 
 to tell you that for fifteen years he has worked to regenerate 
 Catholicism and to give it — under a new guise and according to 
 the new progress — the force and life that have abandoned it." 
 If we had only read this sentence in the Gazette des Tribunes 
 we could have believed that it had been inexactly reported ; 
 but it exists with the same text in V Avenir. Furthermore, M. 
 de la Mennais was present at the trial and did not protest 
 against the use of this expression. It is therefore, an establish- 
 ed fact that he had charged his lawyer to say that he had been 
 working for fifteen years to regenerate Catholicism and that 
 it had lost its force and life. This declaration certainly will 
 not displease the enemies of the Church ; they accused it of 
 
 pouvoir ne peut pas ou il ne veut pas, en ce qui nous concerne, etre 
 fidele a ce qu'il a promis. S'il ne peut pas qu'est ce que cette moquerie 
 de souverainete, ce fantome miserable du gouvernement, et qu'y a-t-il 
 entre lui et nous? II est a notre egard comme s'il n'etait pas, et il ne 
 nous reste, en l'oubliant, qu'a nous proteger nous-memes. 
 
 . . . S'il ne veut pas, il rompt le contrat qui nous liait e lui, condi- 
 tion expresse qu'il tiendra lui-meme ses engagements envers nous ; 
 sinon non." Lacordaire's article had appeared the day before and was 
 called "Aux fiveques de France," VAvcnir, 25 Xov. 1830. These 
 articles had a bad effect, they estranged more than ever the Gallicans 
 who reported the matter to Rome. Quite a correspondence is said to 
 have passed between La Mennais and Ventura who sought to extricate 
 him from this unfortunate situation, but to no avail. V. Boutard II. 225. 
 
having degenerated and M. de la Mennais supports them in de- A] ^ x eV ^ xQ l ° 
 claring that it has lost its life and its force and that he is striving et ^rol, 
 to bring about its regeneration." 8 Fevrier, 
 
 This word "regenerer" employed by M. Janvier with or 
 without the defendant's sanction was to cost La Mennais «Mj ra « 
 much. It was repeated in the Papal Bull which was later Vos," Greg., 
 directed against him. This, then, was the influence at Rome XVT I 'g 3 2 U§ '' 
 of YAmi de la Religion et du roi and its adherents. The 
 following year held another such victory in store for the Liberal 
 Catholics, but it was not to bring with it such unhappy results. 
 
 The government, in its turn, gained little profit from the 
 trial. It only served to accentuate more than ever its inherent 
 weakness, a fact which was made all the more evident by their 
 attitude in regard to the elections of a new Pope, and the mem- 
 orial service for Louis XVI. Well might others compare past 
 glories and the July Monarchy; the comparison was not flat- 
 tering for the "Liberals" of 1830! Shortly after the trial an- v. London 
 other event of interest to the Church occurred, the sack of St. ^ 73^^1830 
 Germain de l'Auxerrois. As has been previously noted, this ibid., 22 Jan. j 
 was probably an attempt on the part of the group in control to I ^3i 
 show the determination of the government. It was, too, a politi- 
 cal recrimination against the Church, but may it not also 
 have been an apology on the part of the government to the 
 bourgeois for its manifest weakness in December and Janu- 
 ary? By many parties it was regarded as a most unfortunate 
 affair. 13 At any rate, it gave Y Avenir the opportunity it was 
 waiting for, the chance to make a definite and public break 
 with the July Monarchy and the Gallicans as well. On the 
 morrow of the outrage the following article appeared in 
 V Avenir: 
 
 "Catholics, the foolhardy have just succeeded in compro- 
 mising both the peace of the country and your own just cause, 
 by covering with the cloak of religion their evil designs and 
 perhaps even their conspiracies. They have attempted to in- 
 
 13 A propos of the sack Guizot is said to have remarked : "De toutes 
 les orgies, celles de Timpiete revolutionaire sont les pires, car c'est la 
 qu'eclate la revolte des ames contre leur souverain. Et je ne sais en 
 verite, les quels sont les plus insenses de ceux qui s'y jeterent avec 
 fureur, ou de ceux qui sourirent en les regardant." Quoted from Bar- 
 doux-Guizot 60. 
 
 33 
 
augurate civil war beside a tomb, thus profaning prayer, the 
 temple, the sacrifice, the mysteries of God and of death. . . . 
 Break, therefore, break forever with men whose incorrigible 
 ignorance endangers this holy religion, who sacrifice their God 
 L'-p\' en i r ' to their king, and who, if they once gain the upper hand, will 
 1831 ' degrade your altars until they are nothing more than mere 
 thrones." 14 
 
 This article attacking as it did, both the Old Church party 
 and the State, produced a great effect, more, perhaps, than 
 VAvenir had anticipated. It offended all conservatives, and 
 such violent words were again unfortunate for so noble a 
 movement. Already hated by the Legitimists VAvenir had 
 now broken whatever ties of allegiance it may have had with 
 the men of the government who asserted that they had never 
 placed entire faith in the "ecole menaisienne." La Mennais 
 was to find that from now on he had practically all of con- 
 servative or even moderate opinion against him ; the govern- 
 ment frightened and angered at the tone in which VAvenir 
 had spoken of the throne, the Legitimists overjoyed at the false 
 
 ^iQ^vrier^ ste P °^ tne * r riv3L h ls an d many of the Liberals who were total- 
 1831 ly unable to understand such an attitude. His political enemies 
 now sought to discountenance "the Breton" among his fellow 
 clergy and superiors. It seems, however, that La Mennais 
 
 ^o^Fevrier^ was not tne autnor °f this article, as he was not in Paris at 
 
 1831 the time. 10 The blame fell, none the less, upon the leader of 
 
 the group. The cause of the Liberal Roman Catholics was not 
 
 lost, it was but endangered ; now, they must fight for their ex- 
 lAvemr. . . . . , 11, 
 
 29 Avril, istence, and this they proceeded to do. 
 
 ^31 It must not be supposed, however that this small enthusias- 
 
 "V. also Ami de la Religion et du roi. 12 Fevrier 1831 and numbers 
 for April 1831. 
 
 Even La Mennais' friends at Rome were alarmed by this extreme 
 language and they urged him to accede to the warning of abbe Ventura 
 who had written him shortly before : "Votre tort devient d'autant 
 plus grand que vous paraissez precher la Revolution au nom de la 
 Religion." Quoted from letter published in Ami dc la Religion ct. 
 du roi. 10 Fevrier 183 1. 
 
 "Commenting on this attitude they referred to part of an article 
 they had published before and claimed it was justified. V. Ami de la 
 Religion et du roi. 10 Fevrier 1831. 
 
 "It has been ascribed to Montalembert. Routard IT. 262. 
 
 34 
 
tic group in the Church had allowed themselves to go so far 
 without at least an attempt to obtain papal sanction for their 
 ideas. La Mennais himself relates that on the second day of 
 February, 183 1, the very date of the election of Gregory XVI, 
 the editors of I'Avenir somewhat surprised by the discussion 
 their actions had given rise to, and fearing perhaps that they 
 had gone too far, signed an exposition of their doctrines. The 
 document was given to a deputy who, in turn, presented it to 
 Monsieur Sebastiani. The Foreign Minister promised to see 
 that it reached the Pope through a diplomatic channel. For 
 some reason or other the exposition was not given to Gregory I'Avenir, 
 XVI at this time, perhaps because of the serious political con- ^ N °g e ™~ 
 dition existing in the Papal States. The unfortunate part of ' 
 the entire affair, however, is the fact that the government failed 
 to notify La Mennais of its decision not to transmit the docu- 
 ment and it was not until much later that the editors of I'Avenir 
 discovered the false position in which they had been placed. 
 They continued the publication, supposing naturally by the 
 Pope's silence and failure to reply, that they had his tacit ap- 
 proval. When they finally did discover the whole truth of the 
 matter, they were already in hard straits. Well might they I'Avenir, 
 question if the government had not done this purposely! The 
 above incident should be held in mind throughout the follow- 
 ing account of subsequent events, for it throws an entirely Memoire 
 different light on the later actions of La Mennais and his party, presentee 
 Furthermore, it is an important fact which many critics of this r *" n S pontif 
 period have failed to take into consideration. Greg XVI, 
 
 At this time, ignorant of the fate which others seemed to be ^cteurs ^e 
 holding in store for them, the Liberal Catholics felt the time I'Avenir, etc. 
 had come to put into practice their professed doctrines, and to 
 fight for their own justification. Happily the means were not 
 lacking. As if to prepare for such a contingency cautious and 
 less impulsive hands had already molded the foundations of 
 a great bulwark, the "Agence generale pour la defense de la 
 liberte religieuse." The organization of such an institution 
 had been principally the work of Montalembert, but here 
 again he had turned to La Mennais for the first impulse. In 
 1828 La Mennais had founded the "Association, pour la 
 defence de la Religion Catholique." This association had been 
 
 35 
 
Boutard, 
 182 
 
 II. 
 
 Thureau 
 Dangin, 
 Hist. Mon., 
 
 Juillet, 
 II, 293, et 
 seq. 
 
 Lettres de 
 La Menna 
 a Montalem- 
 bert, Ed. 
 Forgues 
 Lettre IV 
 
 V. Charter 
 of 1830, Art. 
 69 
 
 Boutard, 
 II, 171 
 
 dissolved at the time of the July Revolution, and, using it 
 as a basis, Montalembert constructed a new society of 
 greater proportions, more ambitious, and in the end, more 
 effective. 
 
 "It was a question of meeting together not to pray, nor 
 yet to discuss, but rather to act; and to work for the defense 
 not only of their own faith, but for every religious liberty." 
 
 At first the sole purpose of the "Agence" was to provide 
 legal assistance to Catholics prosecuted under laws restricting 
 their religious liberties, but later, through the influence of 
 Montalembert, it extended its field of interest. Its organiza- 
 tion was officially announced on the eighteenth of November, 
 1830 — just one month after the founding of VAvenir. In 
 speaking of it La Mennais had said : 
 
 "Nous avons depose dans la societe des germes qui ne 
 seraient pas steriles ; le temps les developpera et les devel- 
 oppera d'autant plus que les passions et les prejuges qui nous 
 ont combatv ameneront plus de calamities." 
 
 By its very name the "Agence" was a demand for another 
 liberty promised by the Charter and until now withheld by a 
 timorous and inefficient ministry — the right of association. 
 But the "Agence" aimed not only at the fulfilment of this 
 right and the defense of religious privilege; it would also aid 
 and encourage the faithful, and strengthen the hearts of those 
 uncertain through the profession of a liberalism more or less 
 anti-religious. It was governed by a Council of nine directors, 
 Montalembert being the most prominent, and over which 
 La Mennais, as Chairman presided. The purpose of 
 "L'Agence" as set forth in VAvenir was threefold ; the bring- 
 ing to trial of all cases involving the liberty of the clergy, 
 the support of all schools of all grades against any attempted 
 restriction of the privilege of liberty of instruction as promised 
 in the Charter and the maintenance of the right of association. 17 
 
 siastiques par poursuites devant les chambres et devant les tribunaux. 
 
 2. Le soutien de tout establissement destruction primaire, secondaire, 
 et Universitaire, contre tous les actes arbitaires, attentoires a la liberte 
 de renseignement, sans laquelle il n'y avait ni charte ni religion. 
 
 3. Le maintien du droit qui appelaient a tous les francais de s'unir 
 pour prier, pour etudier ou pour obtenir toute autre fin legitime 
 
 36 
 
Such was the programme of the "Agence." How then was it 
 received by its enemies? 
 
 'There has recently been formed an "Agence pour la defense 
 de la liberte religieuse," it has sent broadcast its prospectus, 
 it is strongly recommended in a newspaper, it has selected 
 legal defenders, and it promises to take care of the cases of 
 harassed priests; but that is much easier in theory than in 
 practice. No matter how great its zeal the "Agence"' will 
 have to surmount too many difficulties to arrive easily at its 
 goal. Would any association, no matter if it be strong and 
 more affluent than we can believe it to be, have any effect 
 whatever against a carefully organized policy of the adminis- 
 tration, against the orders of a Cabinet not too kindly disposed ; 
 the efforts of the irreligious party and the invectives of its 
 newspapers ?" 
 
 This, in part, was the opinion of its most hostile adversary. 
 But, this criticism -of VAvenir and the "Agence" for they Vidurox, 
 were, in reality, one and the same, is only a confession of Avri l 183 1 
 the moral weakness characteristic of the old party. More- 
 over, such criticism could not have any other effect than to 
 encourage the young Catholics, and soon after its organization 
 the "Agence" was well on the way to accomplish its aim. 
 
 Their first interference was in behalf of two persecuted 
 orders in the provinces. In both cases they obtained a moderate y D b • 
 success. 18 Encouraged by even this slight evidence of their dour, "E et 
 influence they developed their plans still further, and formed E >" 4^-3 
 an affiliation of all similar organizations in France. Three 
 directors were given various localities to supervise; Montal- 
 embert the Midi, de Coux the center and east, and Lacordaire 
 the northwest of France. But this first act of affiliation is not 
 the principal glory of the "Agence." Its greatest achievement 
 
 Ami de la 
 Religion 
 
 egalement avantageuse a la religion, aux pauvres et a la civilization" 
 V. VAvenir, Xos. 18-19, November 1830. 
 
 18 A republican commander at Aix had given the order to arrest every 
 person garbed in a monk's gown, on the charge of vagrancy. This was 
 directed against the Capuchines who had a house in Aix. ''Agence" 
 appealed to the Council of State and finally obtained the resignation of 
 the commander and the restitution of the rights to the order. A 
 similar incident wfth similar consequences occurred at Meileray. 
 For further details V. Boutard II. 186. 
 
 37 
 
is the fact that by the second act of its incorporation it gave 
 the primary impetus to a campaign carried on against the 
 "monopole universitaire"— a combat which was to last from 
 the formation of the "Agence" to the year 1850, to survive 
 Louis Philippe's fall and be actively concerned in it, to reverse 
 at least once the channel of exterior and interior politics, 
 and finally to be victorious under a republic. The "Agence" 
 then began the struggle for liberty of teaching. 
 
 i^Mai^i^i In one of tlie early numDers °f I'Avenir for May, 1831, 
 the following notice appeared : 
 
 "The 'Agence' generate pour la defense de la liberte re- 
 ligieuse" is founding a free day school (ecole gratuite 
 d'externe) without the authorization of the University, at rue 
 Bonaparte 5, Paris. They will teach there the elements of 
 religion, French, Latin, Greek, writing and arithmetic, and 
 later they will add, on a more extended plan, other branches 
 of human and divine knowledge. The "Agence" desires 
 that this school be free, not only because it is possible, and 
 the Christian should introduce charity wherever he can, but 
 also because instruction in order to become universal should 
 be free, an advantage that religion alone can procure for 
 society." 
 
 "The Agence," then, was attempting to test the charter 
 /' Avenir, which had promised liberty of instruction, but which so far 
 t Mai., 1830 had been refused on the ground that the Napoleonic "code 
 universitaire" was still in force, prohibiting the founding of a 
 school without direct sanction from the Council of the 
 University, at Paris ; which body, again, should supervise all 
 instruction therein administered. The question naturally 
 arises, how had this article come into the Charter when exist- 
 ing legislation already prohibited it? This question is difficult 
 to answer. It was doubtless the result of a compromise be- 
 tween the different parties, made at the time of the formation 
 of the July Monarchy. Some would have us believe that it 
 was due to the direct intervention of La Mennais. But as 
 there cannot be found the slightest evidence of any such in- 
 terference on his part, this assertion cannot be accepted. It is, 
 on the other hand, quite probable that La Mennais had, by 
 his own works, influenced certain persons already disposed 
 
 38 
 
to such a change, to suggest this article. In nearly all his 
 later works La Mennais advocated a policy of liberty of 
 teaching. As early as 1817 this liberty had been agitated 
 elsewhere, for, the Mercure of October 181 7, contains an 
 article by B. Constant on the subject. The question was 
 again agitated in 1828 by Duchatel. Again, in 1830 Guizot 
 and Constant published a "Memorial en faveur de la liberte 
 de rEnseignement," and the two were members of an organiza- 
 tion known as "la Societe de la Morale Chretienne." From 
 these facts, then, it may be inferred that the leaders of the 
 doctrinaires favoured such a change in regard to the school 
 system. 19 Its insertion was probably the natural result of 
 earlier discussion. 
 
 In 1 83 1, then, to Montalembert, de Coux and Lacordaire 
 fell the duty of managing the new enterprise — an "ecole libre" 
 sanctioned by the 69th article of the Charter. The School 
 was opened on the 9th of May in the presence of a great 
 assembly, many of whom must have come out of mere curi- 
 osity. As had been foreseen by its directors, the new institu- 
 tion was closed by the officers of the law on May nth, and 
 the principals were ordered to appear before the tribunal. This 
 was just what the "Agence" had wanted; now the Charter 
 would be tested legally, and public opinion would be called 
 upon to assert itself. 
 
 "We desire to set before citizens selected at random, this 
 University that has had twenty years in which to gain the 
 love of the families. We are all children. What had it to 
 fear? Why has not the University asked that a jury decide 
 between us? We who are nothing, it is we who defy it; and 
 our challenge is, to select by lot, wherever they will, twelve 
 fathers of families and they shall be our judges. We de- 
 clare this before you, gentlemen, who are the magistrates of 
 the country, before all those of our fellow-citizens who are 
 here present, before all of France, and since the University 
 will not accept, we will demand the jury to whom every 
 political transgression is answerable.'' 20 
 
 V. Espe- 
 cially "des 
 Progres de 
 la Rev. et de 
 la guerre 
 
 contre 
 l'figlise au 
 XIX Siecle 
 
 Thureau 
 Dangin, 
 E et E, 126 
 
 19 V. en plus — National, 6 Mai, 1830. Article by Thiers. Further- 
 more, LaFayette in his proclamation to the people made them the 
 promise of the liberty of instruction. 
 
 20 VAvenir, 4 Juin 1831. 
 
 39 
 
Fate, in a curious way, seemed to favour the accused, for 
 on the very eve of the trial, Montalembert succeeded his 
 father in the chamber of Peers, and therefore the case was 
 taken before the highest court of appeal in France. The 
 Ministry demanded a condemnation and the chamber acceded, 
 but the penalty (100 francs) was so small that the verdict 
 practically amounted to an acquittal. 21 
 
 The outcome of the trial had considerable effect upon the 
 Liberal Catholics. First it brought out the distinction between 
 the Liberals de fait and the Liberals de mot, and secondly 
 it laid firm the foundations for the great combat of 1841-1846; 
 the new movement was not to die out. The government, on 
 the other hand, did not gain much profit for this litigation and 
 the preceding one, had not added to the glory it so much 
 needed or its reputation for the liberalism it had so loudly 
 protested. Two articles, then, had been given a trial, and 
 had proven utter shams ; the liberty of the press, and the 
 liberty of public instruction. The former, the Liberal Cath- 
 olics had tested in concert with other papers (the Globe 
 and the Presse) but the latter they had tried alone. In 
 so doing they had unveiled and shown in its complete and 
 true light the weakness and inherent hypocrisy of the existing 
 government. This had given heart to the Liberals and had 
 assisted them in their own programme. Had Louis Philippe 
 and his ministers but followed their advice many unpleasant 
 complications might have been avoided, and La Mennais' party 
 might have been of great service to the France of 1830. 
 
 The entire interest of VAvenir and the "Agence" how- 
 ever, had not been centered about the trial alone. In a few 
 months the "Agence" had made magnificent progress ; its mem- 
 bership had been more than doubled, and the Council, having 
 affiliated the various provincial organizations of a similar sort 
 in France, was not content with this work. They now pro- 
 ceeded to put into operation a plan they had long had in 
 prospect, and one which in a single instance at least, did 
 enjoy permanent success. Formerly the "Agence" had de- 
 
 21 A propos of the trial Boutard II 197 relates an interesting incident: 
 "M. de Coux parla apres M. de Montalembert, et il fut moins heureux. 
 L'n mot lui echappa qui dechaina dans la chambre haute une telle 
 tempete qu'il dut renouncer a son plaidoyer. ... II avait designe Louis 
 Philippe par cette periphrase le roi provisoire de la France." 
 
 40 
 
clared itself the defenders of the oppressed, and by this it 
 had been understood that its officers meant to protect the 
 oppressed in France. Now, however, it became evident that 
 they wished to extend their influence to all parts of Europe 
 and the new world as well. Branch societies were established 
 throughout Christendom. M. de Coux was given charge of 
 Belgium and the United States ; Lacordaire of Switzerland 
 and Italy ; and Montalembert of Poland, Sweden, Germany 
 and Ireland. The plan was to seize upon the liberal movement 
 already active in these countries, and catholicise it. Such a 
 policy became known as the Liberal Catholic system of 
 "international ultramontanism." 
 
 It was in Belgium, especially, that the "Agence" had most 
 success. VAvenir and its illustrious editor were very pop- 
 ular in that country. In fact, it is said that many of the 
 articles appearing iru VAvenir on one day were reprinted 
 on the morrow in a similar paper at Louvain. Now Belgium, 
 like France, had had a revolution, but there was this distinction : 
 one of the fundamental causes had been of a religious nature, 
 the incompatibility of the citizens in the Kingdom of the 
 Netherlands, one half of whom were Roman Catholics and 
 one half Protestants. Furthermore, the Roman Catholics 
 were liberals, and when the Revolution broke out they applied 
 the doctrines of La Mennais — of whose ideas they had long 
 since expressed sincere approval. 
 
 A correspondent from Brussels wrote : 
 
 "En France les doctrines liberates n'approchent du 
 sanctuaire qu'avec une sorte de timidite. En Belgique, au 
 contraire, elles montent jusqu'a l'autel avec le pretre et en 
 descendent avec lui pour se repandre, en meme temps que sa 
 parole .... Ici, on ne concoit pas la religion separee de la 
 liberte." 22 
 
 Many times in the later struggle, champions of religious 
 liberty were to point with eager and envious hand to the 
 Kingdom of Belgium. 
 
 23 The same writer further points out the similarity of the two in 
 their common opposition to Gallicanism, by the following statement : 
 "Rien de plus incomprehensible pour un beige qu'um pretre Gallican." 
 VAvenir 5 Aout 1831. 
 
 4: 
 
This close religious alliance was further cemented by the 
 very evident desire of the French government to have a 
 friendly and peaceful neighbour. In regard to Belgium, then 
 Ami de la the July Monarchy and the Liberal Catholics were at one. 
 du^roi* io ^ 0t S0 Gallicans, however, who complained bitterly and 
 Fevrier, regretted the old regime in Belgium as well as in France 
 l8 3i Moreover, outside of France there were parties who, while 
 upholding the existing monarchy, condemned its policy and 
 the propaganda of certain of its parties: 
 
 "France has too extensive an idea of her duty if she 
 imagines herself called upon to prevent intervention in every 
 part of the world as well as in Belgium. The new State of 
 Belgium borders upon her territory and an aggression on her 
 neighbours to put down principles which were common to 
 both would be an aggression against France. But Poland is 
 not in the same predicament It lies at the distance of several 
 hundred miles from France with the barrier of Germany 
 interposed. To send an army to Warsaw would therefore 
 London necessarily kindle the flames of a whole continent. If Don 
 \priT^6 Quixote had redressed only the wrongs of his own village 
 1831 he might not have been a hero, but he would have avoided 
 the commission of mischief and the charge of madness in his 
 erratic excursion to find and redress them." 
 
 It is true, there were many eyes in France turned toward 
 the struggling Poles, but, in the end, the government was 
 not to heed the appeals made in their behalf. Two parties 
 principally led this agitation, the Liberal Catholics and their 
 now somewhat suspicious allies, the Republicans. The 
 V VAvenir "Agence" an< ^ party watched with many heart-burnings 
 Nos., 16 and great interest the progress of events in that kingdom, and 
 Sept ^831 & ave them their moral support, their prayers, and even a cer- 
 tain amount of financial assistance. Montalembert had 
 signalled the commencement of the struggle in the following 
 terms : 
 
 *DeIf W '?8 cf ^ aSt S ^ le ^ aS uttere< ^ ner cr y °^ awakening, at last she 
 
 has shaken off her chains and threatens with them the heads 
 of her barbarous oppressors, this proud and generous Poland, 
 so slandered, so oppressed, so dear to all free and Catholic 
 hearts.'' 
 
 42 
 
Some, too, of his more bold associates would have 
 joined with LaFayette and the Republicans who sought to 
 lend force to aid a people struggling with a cruel tyrant. One 
 party favoured it as a fight for nationality and political liberty 
 while the other cried out in its behalf for these reasons 
 and also because it was a struggle against the "nationalization" 
 of a Catholic faith. 23 The former, through LaFayette, based 
 their plea on the nation's safety: 
 
 "Whenever any country in Europe, whatever it may be, 
 attempts to recover its rights, it is a direct act of hostility 
 against us to interfere, not only because it revives the princi- 
 ples of Pilnitz and the Holy Alliance, and justifies future ag- 
 gression against our liberty and independence, but because 
 common sense assures us that it is the same as saying : 'Wait, 
 we are going to crush your national auxiliaries, the friends of 
 liberty in other countries, and when they have ceased to exist, 
 we will fall upon you with our whole weight.' " 24 
 
 Once more the government's selfish policy was demonstrated. 
 A weak show of compliance with so many demands was all it 
 attempted. This attitude did not help the July Monarchy. 
 Russia, more distrustful than ever, kept aloof from Louis 
 Philippe. 
 
 In Germany and in Italy, too, the influence of the "Agence" 
 was felt. There will be a better occasion to note its relations 
 with Italy in the next chapter. Among the German states 
 there was already in operation a sort of government V, I'Avenir, 
 bureaucracy which sought to limit the influence of Rome in J^J-}™ 
 church affairs. The distinction between Old and Young 1831 
 Catholics was increased by the growth of the Jung Deutsch- 
 land School. In Munich the Doellinger group under the 
 
 ,a Le Mennais, their leader, was to utter a year later these powerful 
 words on the fate of Poland : "Je vois un peuple combattre comme 
 l'archange Michel combattoit contre Satan. Ses coups sont terribles, 
 mais il est nu, et son ennemi est convert d'une epaisse armure. y y Avenir 
 
 O Dieu ! il tombe ; il est f rappe a mort, non, il n'est que blesse : Nos. 1 Mars 
 Marie, la Vierge — mere, l'enveloppe de son manteau, lui sourit, et et 15 Avril, 
 l'importe pour un peu de temps hors de combat." Paroles d'un 
 Croyant. II. 
 
 24 Commenting on this statement the London Times remarked: 'The 
 gallant general has here laid down too extensive a scale of duty for 
 his country." London Times, Jan. 18, 1831. 
 
 43 
 
name of the "Round Table" were seeking to combat govern- 
 ment influence, and were eagerly watching the progress of 
 Boutard, affairs in France. Later, they were to become the hosts of 
 214 La Mennais and the first to console him in the dark hour 
 of his condemnation. Still farther north as well, the influence 
 of the "Agence" had spread and was aiding in the re-estab- 
 lishment of the old Swedish priesthood, while in Ireland, the 
 Liberal Catholics displayed keen interest, and solicited sub- 
 scriptions for the cause of O'Connell's famished countrymen. 
 This last interest did not disappear with the dissolution of 
 the "Agence." 
 
 It was at the very moment when all seemed to be progressing 
 so well and when the Liberal Catholics appeared to be weather- 
 ing the storms around them, that VAvenir published what 
 has been known as its "testament publique." Having estab- 
 lished their power the Liberal Catholics now sought to bind 
 it by a great political union. It proved to be the last great 
 public act of VAvenir, and by this act alone it fell. In 
 appearance the "Acte d'Union" must have seemed immense, 
 even grotesque ; in reality, it was the logical development 
 of their principle of "international ultramontanism" declared 
 some months before, and La Mennais' traditional love of 
 order. 
 
 The "Acte" is divided into three parts, a consideration of 
 the spiritual rights of society, of its temporal rights and, 
 the consequent duty of the State. In the first section, basing 
 the argument entirely on the ground that the spiritual side of 
 society must be separate and absolutely independent of in- 
 tervention on the part of the political power, the "Acte" 
 establishes the right of liberty of conscience and belief (culte), 
 of liberty of the press, and of instruction. In Part II, these 
 three rights being established, constitutional power (govern- 
 ment) has only the right to intervene in temporal affairs. 
 But here again the government's power should be so limited 
 that it does not prevent those personally interested from 
 taking part in the administration of local affairs. The gov- 
 ernment should always remember that its principal duties are 
 those of maintaining political unity, a general and agreeable 
 harmony between the various particular administrations, of 
 
safeguarding the general interest and supervising the defense 
 of the State. All these other things accepted, Part III recom- 
 mends a more extensive application of the law of justice and 
 charity even to the point of educating and preparing the 
 masses that they may, by degrees, be enabled to participate 
 more and more in all the social privileges due them. 25 
 
 The "Acte d'Union'' was indeed for France the Magna 
 Charta of the nineteenth century. 
 
 Such was the document that brought forth protestations 
 of horror from ministers of state, prelates at Rome and 
 kings who heretofore had prided themselves on their quasi- 
 liberal policies. To the eyes of the Twentieth Century, and 
 to our own country in particular, it seems little more than 
 common sense — a reformed and spiritualized church ; a 
 liberal and republican form of government. But to those of 
 1830 it conjured up all the terrors and petty ambitions of 
 the Revolution, the slaughters and pitiless tyrannies of 
 Napoleon, of a Church which would not serve their purpose 
 and of a God whose real attributes most of them had forgotten. 
 The "Acte d'Union" was an anachronism, the ideals of its 
 authors were past the narrow comprehension of the early 
 nineteenth century. The State had lived so long from its 
 very creators that it no longer knew them; the Church 
 had wandered so far from its flock that it mistook them for 
 the greedy inheritors of its enemies in 1790. This 
 was the situation, La Mennais had been completely mis- 
 understood. A farcical examination followed, and then a 
 papal bull. Here again, La Mennais' actions were misunder- 
 stood. There has been talk of forged letters and the 
 deception of a papal legate, but these must be left aside, 
 for there is not sufficient evidence to substantiate such 
 assertions. But this evidence, in turn, is really unnecessary 
 for the subsequent action of La Mennais at this time (No- 
 vember, 1831) is a sufficient justification of his faith and a 
 proof that he did not know that his works had the disapproval 
 of the one who was for him the highest authority. Letters 
 had come from Rome, but the same words had come from 
 Ami de la Religion et du roi and from the French gov- 
 
 23 "For the Acte d'Union" in toto V. Appendix I. 
 
 45 
 
ernment. He knew not where he stood. Peter's successor 
 had remained silent. 
 
 The rest of the story is quickly told. Alarmed by the up- 
 roar they saw around them, by the unmistakable signs of 
 hostility from the higher clergy in France and by the de- 
 mands of the Conservative majority, the Liberal Catholics 
 resolved to go to Rome, following the advice of their youngest 
 member. In November, the last number of VAvenir 
 appeared : 
 
 "If we retire from the field for a moment, we do not 
 do so because of weariness or still less, because of discourage- 
 ment, but simply to follow the example of the soldiers of 
 Israel in other times, to go to consult the Lord in Shiloh. Our 
 faith and our intentions have been questioned. In fact, at 
 this time, who is not attacked? We leave, therefore, for a 
 brief time, the field of battle in order to fulfill another duty 
 equally important. The staff of the pilgrim in our hands, 
 we will journey to the Eternal City and there, prostrate at 
 the feet of the Pontiff whom Jesus Christ had appointed as 
 a guide and master to his disciples, we will say: "O Father, 
 look upon a few of your flock who are accused of being 
 rebellious to your infallible authority ; here they are before 
 you, read their minds ; there is nothing that they would hide. 
 If even one of their thoughts is contrary to yours, they will 
 VAvenir, disavow it forever. You are the rule of their theories ; indeed 
 I5 i83i V ' nave never known another. O Father, pronounce for them 
 
 the word that gives life, because it gives light, and may thy 
 hand extend to bless their faithfulness and their love.' " 26 
 Later, La Mennais said : 
 
 "En France on n'a des yeux que derriere la tete. As far 
 as my theories are concerned, I believed then and I still 
 believe that we have not advocated any others than those 
 upheld by the Holy See. If I am mistaken, they will tell 
 me, and I will cry from the housetops their words. While 
 waiting, we will be silent.'' 
 
 But painful revelations awaited at Rome "the pilgrims of 
 
 V Cori£ Ud God and of Li ^rty." 
 
 Incd. de La "Ami de la Reliaion et du roi announced the immediate condem- 
 Mennais Re- . ,„„.., ,• i A ui t- 
 
 vue des nation of YAvemr with a malice hardly pardonable. l*or this 
 
 deux mondes controversy see: Ami de la Religion et du roi, 17 Xovembre 1831. 
 
 1 Nov., 1905 Also Ami de la Religion et du roi, Lettre de Waille, 26 November 
 
 1831. 
 
 46 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 THE FALL OF THE LA MENNAIS MOVEMENT 
 
 Shortly before leaving Paris La Mennais had remarked: 
 "This accursed politics is everywhere the ruin of religion," e. Forgues 
 and his biographer has commented : "this observation, only Torres, hied, 
 too true, reveals the malentendu that already existed between tard, II, 269 
 La Mennais and the Court of Rome." 
 
 Subsequent facts bear out this statement ; the craving for 
 power still existed in the Eternal City. But, there is still 
 another sense in which the abbe Boutard's comment is true. 
 The malentendu existed also between La Mennais and the l nd n 
 Court of France. It is a curious and yet none the less typical Tunes, 
 fact that La Mennais when the Acte d'Union was promulgated, ^[ ch D ^ 6, 
 had not taken, or else did not wish to take, into consideration patch 
 the political conditions in his own country. If he had done f™™ Paris 
 so it is not unreasonable to suppose that he would have waited. 
 Truly, in this instance he had not well calculated his time. 
 "The Acte d'Union" had been formulated while the ministry 
 of the "mouvement" was still in power, but that body was now 
 fast approaching the time of its fall. The Period of Forma- 
 tion was over, and the Period of Parliamentary struggle was 
 already beginning. Louis Philippe, alarmed when he found 
 that he could not make peace at home and abroad through Moniteur, 
 the efforts of the progressives, had decided to call the "Re 18 Mars, 
 sistance" to power. Accordingly, on the thirteenth of March 
 he formed a more severe and more forceful ministry; the 
 monarchy could no longer afford to waste time with a weak 
 and indefinite party. At home they needed a strong resistance 
 to the recriminations of the Republicans and Legitimists ; 
 abroad a ministry, capable of settling the difficult questions V. Hille- 
 of Belgium and the London Conference, powerful enough to 
 strengthen the English alliance, and above all to adopt a con- 
 sistent and definite attitude. This new government, it was 
 
 47 
 
hoped, would explain to uneasy Europe, considering further 
 
 concerted action against liberal governments, the meaning of 
 
 q ^ ^ that ambiguous term — "non-intervention." 1 A policy of deceit 
 
 Memoirs, I, was n0 longer possible. The man whom the king chose as 
 
 215. Dupm, prime minister, was a typical bourgeois whose creed was his 
 
 218. de ' class and his king. Like his predecessor, a banker, Casimir 
 
 Barante, Perier would not, so the king thought, be unmindful of the 
 Lettres. 7 . , £ xl _ S 5 ' . . 
 
 Mars, 1831. economic needs of the country — a question becoming more 
 
 L. Blanc, I, se rious every day. To a certain extent Louis Philippe was 
 not deceived in this ; Casimir Perier was considerate of the 
 large vested interests. The new minister possessed at least 
 the quality of exactness ; he was stubborn to an extreme, and 
 the country soon had reason to believe that he would not 
 choose a middle course in regard to any one policy. 2 His 
 plan, therefore, was typical and his view of the July Monarchy 
 may be said to be the view of his class. For the July Rev- 
 olution, he had agreed with his confreres in the following 
 statement : "We have not had a revolution, we have experi- 
 enced only a slight change in the person at the head of the 
 State." So much for his attitude to the monarchy expressed 
 in the characteristically clear and concise form. He had also 
 upheld the principle of a double policy ; for France order 
 and authority without any restriction of liberty, for external 
 affairs a beneficial peace because, as he put it, "French blood 
 belongs to France alone." With this in view he selected his 
 colleagues, the great majority of whom belonged to his own 
 
 1 This Perier proceeded to do in his first speech before the Pari. 
 V. Perier Discours, 18 Mars 1831. 
 
 2 The new regime possessed all the strength that can possibly belong 
 to the mendacity of early concessions, it was founded and nothing 
 remained but to defend it. The natural course of things therefore called 
 a violent minister to office. . . . He entered it with an immense stock 
 of angry passions, a pride without bounds, a certain fierce impatience 
 to trample on his enemies. An opulent banker and always on the 
 alert, the noise of factions had caused him mortal alarms and he 
 burned to avenge the anguish of his fears. . . . Fully convinced how- 
 ever, that in saving the interests of the middle class he would serve 
 his own, he threw his whole existence into the conflict. The crown 
 too he wished to save, and he rushed to its defense, but without illusion, 
 devotedness or love, and simply because he chose to support in royalty 
 an institution protective to banking interests." L. Blanc. I. 412 and 
 Chap. IX. Bk. IV. 
 
 48 
 
party, while he was aided to some extent in the chambers by 
 Guizot, Dupin and Thiers. 3 
 
 The first interest of the new Premier was to silence the 
 Republican party who, during the preceding administration had 
 made such violent complaints against the pacific policy of the 
 government. He attacked the Society of the Peoples' Friend, 
 really a revival of the old Jacobin Club ; its members, Cavaig- 
 nac, Teste and Fortou, were prosecuted, but they were finally 
 acquitted. Thereupon the Premier persuaded Louis Philippe 
 to dissolve the Chambers. Accordingly, the dissolution was 
 announced for the last day of May and new elections were 
 ordered for the fifth day of July. The Chambers, however, 
 were not dissolved before they had passed a new law (April 
 15) reducing the franchise and doubling the electorate. There 
 were now 200,000 electors out of a total population of 30,000,- 
 000. Shortly afterward the riots of the 14th of June and 
 14th of July occurred, the latter beginning at the Bastile, as 
 had happened some forty years before. Moreover if the 
 Premier did not succeed in the impeachment of the Republicans 
 in April, the returns of the July elections only served to 
 heighten his anxiety ; and abroad, as in France, people began 
 to fear for the dynasty. 
 
 Outside the borders of France matters were not much better, 
 and the position of Louis Philippe's government was conse- 
 quently less secure. 
 
 " Poland tottering to its fall, and threatening to bring down 
 with it the old preponderance of the West ; the Papacy violently 
 reinstated in its temporal sovereignty, and thereby become once 
 more the accomplishment of all earthly tyrannies ; four powers 
 labouring hard to repair, to the detriment of one, the Euro- 
 pean balance which had been disturbed by the emancipation of 
 Belgium, lastly France abandoning the guardianship of the 
 world to the hands of some proud and incompetent men." 
 
 3 Casimir — President of the Council, Minister of Interior. 
 M. Barette — Garde des sceaux. 
 Baron Louis — Minister of Finance. 
 Marechal Soult — Minister of War. 
 l'Amiral Rigny — Minister of Marine. 
 
 Comte de Montalivet — Minister of Public Instruction and Sects. 
 Conte d'Argent — Minister of Commerce and Public Works. 
 
 7 Mars, 
 de Barante, 
 
 183 1 
 L. Blanc, I, 
 414 
 
 Thureau 
 Dangin, 
 II, 29 
 
 v. London 
 Times, 
 June 23, 
 
 1831 
 Dispatch 
 from 
 Paris 
 
 49 
 
These were the conditions confronting the new chambers 
 when they convened to hear the king's speech on July 23rd. 
 Of many important questions such as the Italian States, the 
 London Conference and the hopeless attitude of the govern- 
 ment to Poland, that discussed by the Deputies most fully 
 ' concerned the abolition of hereditary peerage. 4 This project 
 had not the entire sympathy of Perier, nor of such of his 
 satellites as Guizot, Thiers and Royer-Collard ; but the bour- 
 geoisie were so persistent in their demand for the revision 
 of Article Twenty-three of the Charter that, in the end, a law 
 was proposed providing for a system of nomination by the 
 king from a legally constituted list of eminent men and men 
 already in office. The law aroused, of course, bitter oppo- 
 sition among the nobles, but Casimir Perier's reply to their 
 protest was the Royal Ordinance of November 19th creating 
 thirty-six new peers. By means of this, the law, slightly 
 changed, was passed. The discussion attending the new law, 
 however, brought with it another evil, the renewed activity 
 of the Legitimists exhorted by such men as 'Chateaubriand 
 and Berryer. Their leaders, happily for Perier, were not men 
 fit to be political agitators and, except for the affair of La 
 Vendee and the duchesse de Berri episode, no other signs of 
 hostility appeared. But all these incidents, however small 
 in importance they may have seemed, were none the less signifi- 
 cant, and had the opposition been more centralized and less 
 divided, the July Monarchy might have been seriously en- 
 dangered. There are, in addition, two events that assume 
 a still greater importance in the calendar of the political 
 progress made under Louis Philippe. Between November 22 
 and December 30, 1831, occurred the revolt of the silk weavers 
 at Lyons, and a few months later a similar revolt at Grenoble. 
 The importance of these two uprisings lies in the fact that 
 they are the signs of the birth of a socialist party, springing 
 from the general discontent prevalent in France because of 
 economic changes, and also from the divisions in the Re- 
 publicans and St. Simonians. This new party, about a score 
 of years later, was to play a principal role in the formation 
 of a new government. 
 
 4 For an ex. of the agitation upon this subject v. : "Are 100,000 
 citizens 30,000.000 of men?" Cormenin. 1831. 
 
 50 
 
At the same time, however, that Perier was busied in a 
 vain attempt to establish order and prosperity in France, other 
 events were happening outside her borders, which were of 
 equal importance to her future. The Polish question had been 
 treated by Louis Philippe in a cowardly fashion, and Casimir 
 Perier could not have altered the results of this policy even 
 had he wished to do so. But there remained the difficult 
 questions of the new kingdom of Belgium and of the Italian 
 States. 
 
 Upon the separation of Belgium from the kingdom of the 
 Netherlands in August 1830, the Congress of London took 
 the matter up, and the Five Powers agreed to settle the prob- 
 lem according to their common interests. The Belgians had 
 themselves offered the crown to the due d'Aumale, but Louis 
 Philippe had not allowed his son to accept it. This action 
 was somewhat of a relief to the rest of Europe. The Congress 
 subsequently offered the throne in the name of the provisional 
 government at Brussels to Leopold of Coburg ; and he accepted, 
 not without first concluding a secret agreement of friendship 
 and marriage with the Orleans family. The Congress then 
 imagined that its work was ended, but such was not the case. 
 For William of the Netherlands protested against the treaty of 
 the Eighteen Articles, and renouncing the Armistice of Novem- 
 ber 5, 1830, entered Belgium. Thereupon Louis Philippe 
 sent a French army to the aid of Leopold. The act, an idea 
 of Casimir Perier, created great consternation in Europe, 
 for, it was construed as a direct violation of the principle 
 of "non-intervention," as they understood it. Later, after 
 order had been restored, the French army withdrew, but not 
 until the king of the Netherlands had retired to the lines 
 agreed upon the beginning of the armistice. Shortly after- 
 wards, the Congress at London drew up the treaty of the 
 Twenty-four Articles (November 5th), and the signature of 
 King William was all that was necessary to assure peace. 
 
 So ended the year 183 1. In France the aspects were 
 not good, discontent with the internal policy and a growing 
 hostility to the government increased by the pursuit of the 
 Republicans. With the foreign policy, also, there was equal 
 disgust, particularly at the attempt to make a nominal show 
 
 Metternich, 
 I, 44 
 
 L. Blanc, II 
 457, et seq 
 
 v. d'Haus- 
 sonville 
 Hist, I. 
 Ch. IV 
 
 Bourgeois, 
 III, Ch. I 
 
 Moniteur, 
 Mars. 15-30, 
 Aout 18-30, 
 
 Nov. 18-30 
 
 London 
 Times, 
 Nos. for 
 Nov. 18-31 
 
 5i 
 
of force which had been judged rather mal a propos by the 
 several countries interested. 
 
 The year 1832 opened dismally; the flattering felicitations 
 paid to the king had not kept from the ears of the government 
 the noise of riots and street fighting, such as those of the 
 Fourth of January, the Tours de Xotre Dame — a Republican 
 Conspiracy — and the Legitimist Revolt of the rue des 
 Prouvaires the fourth of February. Discontent was every- 
 where manifest. Armand Carrel had not hesitated to put 
 into print his Republican sentiments, Beranger's verses were 
 distributed widespread, and Perier knew that the prosecution 
 of the press alone would not stop the progress of a movement 
 so dangerous to him and to France. 5 
 
 Furthermore, the question of the budget would soon be 
 coming before the Chambers ; the people must be distracted 
 and their eyes turned in another direction during the discus- 
 sion of so serious a matter. Then too, Perier scented another 
 danger. That same demand for military conquest that had 
 appeared at such regular intervals so many times before, was 
 gaining its hold on the people and making them impatient. 
 Perier knew he must satisfy this craving or the French might 
 come again to regret the "glorious days" of the Revolution. 
 It was Italy and the Pope that offered him the occasion for 
 
 6 The following extract from Beranger is interesting as a type of 
 the political verse of the period : 
 
 "Comme un bon reve es tu done disparue, 
 O Liberte si chere a mes refrains! 
 Perier gouverne, et la France est vendue, 
 Peuple geant subit le joug des nains, 
 Gisquet t'assomme et Vienne t'empare 
 Vient te donner le coup de pied de l'ane ; 
 Pauvre Lion, n'es tu pas musele? 
 
 Rassurez-vous, Castillon et Tartare, 
 Peu vous importe ici le genre humain, 
 II ne s'agit que d'aider un avare 
 A depouiller un Royal orphelin. 
 Vous le voyez, e'est pour cette oeuvre unique 
 Que notre sang dans Paris a coule. 
 Mourrez Pologne, languissez Belgique, 
 Xotre Lion, n'est-il pas musele?" 
 
 — From "Le Lion Musele." 
 
 52 
 
which he was seeking. Moreover, in deciding to take a hand 
 in Italian affairs Perier hoped to accomplish two things, to 
 satisfy the general demand and to render himself more secure. 
 An intervention in Italy would be interpreted at home as the 
 upholding of the right of a state to settle its own affairs. 
 Austria was interfering in Italy ; a protest on the part of the 
 government would be a pose of liberalism for the July Mon- 
 archy, and an armed intervention redound to its glory. Then 
 too there was still another advantage ; by taking part in Italian 
 troubles Perier would be embarrasing the protests of the 
 liberals at home. This would be safe, for, he might ask the 
 Pope to grant political liberties, but he certainly did not expect 
 the Pope to accede to his request. Furthermore he would 
 render null and void any encouragement that the liberal fac- 
 tion in the Roman Catholic Church might have intended to 
 offer in France to "those other liberals, those very members 
 of the clergy who, lacking good education and knowing only 
 the practices of religion, hated the present liberal institutions 
 of France and attacked society "in general," and against whom 
 so much was now being said in the Chamber of Deputies." 
 
 In regard to the church Perier, if he took any definite 
 stand at all, was with the more numerous and less active 
 party of Gallicans. 6 This new interest of the Perier Ministry, 
 then, was not to assist the cause of La Mennais, and whether 
 it was intentional or no, the Premier's policy had a direct effect 
 on the fate of the three editors of VAvenir. It was to serve 
 a threefold purpose, then, to the eyes of his countrymen — 
 to satisfy the malcontents by a show of "gloire" ; to quiet 
 the extreme Liberals in Italy whose constant agitation had 
 served to keep alert the ultra-liberals — the party "du mouve- 
 ment," and lastly, to strike once and for all the Holy Alliance 
 based on the principle of interference and in defiance of 
 
 v. National, 
 2 Janvier, 
 
 1832 
 
 Moniteur, 
 17 Fevrier, 
 1831 
 
 v. also 
 21 Fevrier, 
 
 1831 
 
 * He is said to have remarked : "La liberte des cultes sera protegee 
 comme le droit le plus precieux de conscience qui l'invoquent." (Thu- 
 reau-Dangin. Mon. Juilet II. 68.) But, under his ministery the "Ecole 
 Libre" had been condemned and the "Acte d'Union" protested against. 
 Furthermore certain numbers of Ami de la Religion et du roi (April 
 1831 — January 1832) speak of the Premier in favorable terms: "On 
 assure qu'il blame les vexations exercees en tant de lieu contre le 
 clerge." 
 
 53 
 
Hillebrand, 
 II, 203 
 
 Barrv, 
 VIII, 217 
 
 Guizot, II, 
 292 
 
 Metternich, 
 IV, 122 Seq 
 
 Barante, IV, 
 Lettres, 27 
 
 Mars, 1831. 
 Dep. Off. 
 
 No. 45, 1 83 1 
 
 which Perier had inaugurated a policy of non-intervention. 
 In the eyes of the Premier, however, this diplomacy was to 
 serve a much smaller end — that of a mere distraction. The 
 inconsistency of such a policy is patent; why should Perier 
 object to the Austrian interference in the rebellion of the 
 Legations when he himself had allowed France to intervene 
 in Belgium? The fight, then, was not one of high principles, 
 it was directed solely against Austrian influence in Bologna, 
 the Romagna and the Marches. It was a good time for action ; 
 Russia was occupied with Poland, Prussia with the West and 
 England was Protestant. 
 
 One author has said: "Civil War is the only word that 
 will describe the condition of Italy and the Papal States 
 during the years 1820-1848/' Italy, reduced to a geographical 
 expression by the treaties of 1814-1815, composed of two 
 large kingdoms, the Papal States, and a number of duchies, 
 had become a real center of restlessness, but it was particularly 
 in the Legations that this condition prevailed. They had 
 hoped for a Liberal Pope. Taught by Gioberti they had even 
 dreamed of a theocratic republic, such as La Mennais had 
 predicted for them, but to no avail. In November 1830, Pius 
 VIII died and the College of Cardinals was convened. They 
 had been in session two months disputing the demand of Albani, 
 Austria's creature, that the successful candidate should upon his 
 election appoint him as Papal Secretary, when a message 
 was secretly introduced into the Conclave from the Duke of 
 Modena. In this he informed the wrangling prelates that a 
 serious revolution had broken out in the Romagna. Thus 
 the election was finally precipitated, and the fourth of Feb- 
 ruary 1 83 1 Cardinal Capellari ascended St. Peter's throne. 
 He took the name of Gregory XVI. Upon his accession the 
 new pope found himself entirely without means to put down 
 the rebellion, and he was forced to turn at once to the sole 
 consistent defender of "Legitimacy and the Temporal Su- 
 premacy of the Pope" — Austria, still ruled by Metternich. 
 The Austrian troops entered the Papal States. Immediately 
 France, through its ambassador M. de Sainte-Aulaire, pro- 
 tested, and Austria agreed to withdraw her troops. It was 
 decided that order should be maintained in the Legations 
 
 54 
 
by the guarantee of the Powers, and by July 183 1 the troops 
 had evacuated the Romagna. Furthermore, by an official 
 note (May 1831) the Powers recommended to the Pope that 
 he try to ameliorate the conditions in the Papal States. This 
 he promised to do, but his promises amounted to very little 
 and the condition of the Legations was not improved in any 
 way. A conference of the ambassadors to France was then 
 held in Paris, and it was suggested that a State be named 
 which should assist the Pope, as the Papal forces seemed 
 incapable of themselves overpowering the rebels in the very 
 likely event of further trouble. Perier nominated the King- 
 dom of Sardinia but the Powers held that Sardinia was not 
 strong enough. The French Premier then announced that 
 should Austria intervene in the event of another revolt, France 
 would find it necessary to take Ancona as a guarantee. Thus 
 one fact, at least, is evident, the warning had been given and 
 the taking of Ancona could not have been the unexpected event 
 they pretended at Rome. 
 
 Perier had hailed the withdrawal of the xAustrians as a 
 moral victory for French diplomacy, but this happy illusion 
 was not to last long. On the first of December the Ministry 
 was interpellated by the Chamber of Deputies on the subject 
 of the Legations and Perier again reasserted the principles 
 of "non-intervention" as he understood it — that France would 
 not allow other powers to intervene in the affairs of free and 
 independent states. This word, it is thought, gave courage to 
 the Italian Liberals, and before the end of the year, Menotti, 
 Mazzini and their party had stirred up another revolution. 7 
 The Austrian troops again crossed the border, while Metter- 
 nich once more explained this action by saying that they had 
 
 Memoran- 
 dum de Casi- 
 
 mir Perier 
 sur l'occupa- 
 tion 
 
 d' An cone 
 
 Dep. Off. 
 Xo. 75 
 
 Memoran- 
 dum 
 C. Perier 
 
 d'Hausson- 
 ville Hist., 
 I, 32 et seq 
 
 v. Moniteur, 
 18-20 Juillet, 
 
 183 1 
 Journal des 
 Debate, 
 19 Juillet, 
 1831 
 
 7 A propos of Perier's remarks (December 2) Metternich is said to 
 have commented: "C'est ce mot de non-intervention qui a donne aux 
 revolutionnaires Italiens le courage de tenter la fortune." Bourgeois 
 III 68. 
 
 "The reports from Tenera, Modena, Florence and every other quarter, 
 unanimously give expression to the opinion that the whole Italian 
 revolution is due solely to the action of the Paris committees based 
 on the assertion of the principle of non-intervention." Metternich 
 Mem. V. to Apponyi, March 18, 183 1— Dep. Off. 990. 
 
 Moniteur, 
 2 December, 
 183 1 
 
 55 
 
Metternich, 
 V, 10 Few, 
 
 1832 
 Off. Desp., 
 1049. I 
 
 Dep. Off., 
 Xo. 69, 
 31 Jan v., 
 1832 
 
 Journal des 
 
 Debats, 
 Feb. 15, 183 1 
 
 Affaires de 
 Rome, 119 
 
 Boutard, II, 
 313 
 
 to come to put down a Bonapartist uprising near the frontier 
 of France- There can be no doubt but that he was trying 
 to discredit the French in general as well as to show in 
 particular the weakness of the July Monarchy's position and 
 policy. His instructions to his own ambassadors bear out 
 this impression. In reality, he was already active in discredit- 
 ing France at the Court of Rome with the result that when 
 the French troops did enter Ancona the Pope believed that 
 they had come to incite rebellion. 
 
 The thirty-first of January M. Perier had sent a despatch 
 to M. de Barante, ambassador at Turin, announcing the 
 departure of a detachment for Ancona ; 
 "Monsieur le baron, 
 
 I have just received the despatch with which you have 
 honoured me, telling me of the entrance of the Austrians 
 into the Romagna. I hasten to send a courier to M. de 
 Sainte-Aulaire instructing him to demand the cession "de la 
 place et du port" of Ancona to our force, of land and sea ; 
 a measure to which the Court of Rome has already actually 
 acceded." 
 
 This is a curious document, for it presents a rather inter- 
 esting point. Had Gregory XVI, in sympathy with the "parti 
 de resistance," intimated to Sainte Aulaire his consent to the 
 French occupation of Ancona? Unfortunately, as far as 
 can be found, there are only a few facts to substantiate this 
 suggestion, and they are all indirect witnesses. The first 
 is the condition of the Papal Department of State. There 
 had never existed a clearly defined understanding between 
 Gregory XVI and Bernetti, the Papal Secretary. In fact, 
 throughout the Pontificate of Gregory, the Pope's own state- 
 ments to individuals and the official declarations of the Roman 
 Court were absolutely contradictory, and seldom, if ever, at 
 one. The second indication of the existence of some sort 
 of an understanding between Louis Philippe and the Pope, 
 is the fact that the French officers, Gaullois and Combes, 
 gained access to the citadel of Ancona by telling the comman- 
 der that they had come with the consent of the Pope. All 
 
 8 V. Metternich to Apponyi. March 9, 1831, Dep. Off. 998. Cf. with 
 later reference. Mem. V. 
 
 56 
 
histories agree on this point and are corroborated by Casimir 
 
 Perier's memorandum. The third piece of evidence is still 
 
 more indirect. Shortly afterwards the Pope made a bargain 
 
 with the Tsar; in return for his advice to the Poles to 
 
 submit, the Tsar was to aid Gregory against his enemies. 
 
 If France was in Ancona without authorization why did not ^^f 0 ^' 
 
 Gregory call upon the Austrians to put them out? They 425 
 
 would have been only too delighted to have done so. Why 
 
 did he call in a third person, unless he was legally impeded 
 
 from asking Austria to oust the French? The reasonable 
 
 inference, it seems, is that the Pope tacitly allowed the French 
 
 to enter as well as the Austrians, and that he may have 
 
 verbally communicated this decision to M. de Sante Aulaire. London 
 
 The French troops once ensconced in Ancona, Gregory mildly Times, 
 
 protested, but to no avail, and by the arrangement of April 16, Feb - 2 5> l8 32 
 
 1832, it was agreed that the French should remain in Ancona 
 
 until the Austrians had evacuated the Legations. 9 
 
 What, then, was the result of this complication? From 
 the point of view of foreign politics it did not strengthen 
 the position of the French government. Metternich had 
 gained his end, he had discredited one of the fundamental 
 doctrines of the July Monarchy and displayed its shameless 
 inconsistency. 10 
 
 This opinion, furthermore, was held by other countries as 
 well. So it was that by the Ancona affair Metternich accom- 
 plished the first step in his twofold plan to abolish the quasi- 
 
 'The troops stayed until 1838. 
 
 10 "The French government establishes a new principle; the principle 
 of intervention in everything, which is in direct contradiction with 
 the principle of non-intervention, which has been the political pro- 
 gramme of France since 1830. If non-intervention was folly, the 
 new political code is a menace ; neither the one nor the other will ever 
 acquire the force of law in the Code of Xations. 
 
 "The French circular, however, will have two useful results, the 
 first is the inference which the Italian Liberals will draw from it, that 
 the French government is false to them in their expectations; the 
 second lies in the fact that at every honourable opportunity, any inde- 
 pendent government will have the right of employing it for its own 
 ends, at the cost of those who first enunciated and applied the principle 
 in all its attendant consequences." Metternich, Mem. V. to Apponyi. 
 March 9, 1832, Desp. Off. 1033. 
 
 57 
 
v. London liberal appearances Louis Philippe gave himself and to teach 
 March\ tnat monarch tne principles of Legitimacy, or else if he failed, 
 1832 in the former, to destroy the July Monarchy entirely. Later 
 he wrote to Lutzow — ambassador in Rome — a letter which is 
 almost the proof of this intention, and in which he decries 
 the contradictory character of the July Monarchy and the 
 weakness of its moral and material calibre, laid bare once 
 again by the Ancona affair to which it had nearly succumbed. 11 
 Metternich's plan succeeded. The Ancona fiasco proved 
 France's worth — the real value of an over-ambitious pride 
 and of a too eager desire for military glory. Perier too had 
 followed the middle course without knowing it, and in France, 
 B. Sarrans, at least for a time, there was contentment. The Premier 
 II, 301 na d gained his point, the budget was passed — it was a veri- 
 table "coup de tete.'' But this distraction of Perier's was 
 to have few results and subsequent events have seemed to 
 show that France gained nothing from it. This, it is very 
 likely, had been the real purpose of Perier. Ancona, then, 
 served as a mere distraction and it was a dear one for Louis 
 Philippe. One base of his monarchy was swept from under 
 him, while the liberals, realizing the jingoism of the entire 
 affair, became more enraged than ever at the latest loss of 
 credit for France in the eyes of the world. The Ancona 
 policy had made Austria all the more powerful in Rome, while 
 Metternich's damning assertions increased Gregory's mild 
 apprehension of the French to the point of actual fear and 
 led him to call in still another power against her. It proved 
 a mere show of force for nothing. Louis Philippe the liberal 
 king was one step nearer his conversion to a "Bourbon policy" 
 through the blindness of his ministers to Metternich's tactics. 
 And, "a Bourbon" policy was one of the predecessors of his 
 fall. 
 
 11 "The Ancona affair is the logical expression of the golden mean, 
 that doctrine which always couples a vast amount of the thought- 
 lessness with a grain of reason, a want of consideration with an 
 affirmation. This affair is the symptom of the malady which is ravaging 
 the world ; it proves, by the clearest evidence, what are the real 
 tendencies of situations abounding in contradictions ; lastly, it gages 
 the moral and material calibre of the 'government of the glorious 
 days' and proves what the authority of the powers really amounts to." 
 Metternich, Mem. v. to Lutzow, April 3, 1832, Off. Desp. 1054. 
 
 58 
 
There was also another sense in which Perier was to gain 
 and France to lose, and this was the effect of the Ancona situa- 
 tion on the Liberal Roman Catholic Movement, as represented 
 by La Mennais, Montalembert and Lacordaire who had reached 
 Rome. The situation just discussed has shown what Powers £™ 
 were the most influential at the Court of Rome, those very 
 States that had tried so hard to discredit France in the eyes 
 of the Pope and to maintain the continuance of a reactionary 
 policy in Italy, and to whose eyes the principles of the Holy 
 Alliance seemed sacred. How did these influential Powers 
 look upon La Mennais? He seemed to them the reincarna- 
 tion of the Ancona policy in another sphere. Austria, of 
 course, by its very position was opposed to I 'Avenir and its 
 views. What could Metternich, the very embodiment of two 
 ancient principles, Legitimacy and the Temporal Power of the 
 Papacy, have in common with La Mennais, the champion 
 of a Republicanism hateful to the old regime and the ad- 
 vocate of an Ultromontanism utterly incomprehensible to the 
 men of the Ancient Regime ? The same question may be asked 
 of the king of Prussia, who sought to subordinate religion to 
 a state affair and in whose eyes Doellinger and the Round 
 Table found but little favour. . As for the Tsar of Russia, 
 his attitude to Louis Philippe is well known. He disliked 
 the Frenchmen of the July Revolution, and it may well be 
 imagined how much more he would hate La Mennais who 
 not only professed liberal ideas but sought to put them to 
 practical use as well; a Republican who must, then, agree 
 with LaFayette's speech on Poland, an Ultramontane who 
 could not favour the diminished authority of Rome in Poland 
 due to its submission to Russian power. With this in mind 
 it is not surprising to read that La Mennais and his two 
 friends were preceded to Rome by diplomatic notes from 
 these three powers advising the Pope to condemn once and 
 for all those revolutionaries who sought to preach revolt in 
 the name of religion. But, this charge was unjust, and how 
 selfish their attitude! For, after all, where can it be shown 
 that La Mennais or his school ever preached revolt from the 
 Papacy to the Italian Liberals? They had written in favour 
 of changes in Belgium, Poland, Germany, and Ireland, but 
 
 Affaires de 
 15-16, 
 Boutard, 
 II, 284 
 
 I' Avenir, 
 30 Aout, 
 183 1 
 
 l' Avenir, 
 Mars, 1831 
 
it is difficult to see just where any direct attack on Italy or 
 against the Pope was made. Had the Powers founded their 
 charge upon any substantial facts, they might, with a certain 
 amount of reason, have warned the Pope. But they did not 
 trouble even to search for evidence, they merely made the 
 charge and were listened to, if not by Gregory XVI himself, 
 at least by Bernetti, his secretary of State. Once only had 
 VAvenir shown itself at all severe in the discussion of 
 events in Italy. This was a propos of the amnesty granted 
 in 183 1 by Gregory XVI to the rebellious liberals, when a 
 criticism of this action appeared in the journal and concluded: 
 "en un mot, toutes les regies de la justice criminelle sont 
 oubliees dans cet acte, qui, grace a Dieu, emane du pro- 
 secretaire d'£tat, ministre du prince temporel et non du chef 
 des chretiens." 12 In interpreting this comment to the Pontiff 
 in the light of a rebellious and overbold criticism the Powers 
 must have forgotten that they had displayed their own dis- 
 approval and doubt as to the efficacy of Papal politics when 
 at Paris they tried to nominate a power that should enforce 
 the Pope's will. 13 What La Mennais had hoped for in Italy 
 was a liberal revolution which would end in its unification, 
 
 Ibid. under the Pope himself. "Purer hands than yours must lay 
 the foundation of liberty in a country," were the words 
 addressed to the Italian Liberals. 14 
 
 But it was not only with diplomatic notes from these powers 
 that the Court of Rome was besieged. Charges came from 
 France as well; from the emigres in Italy and from a govern - 
 
 [l^ S fy ' ment in France that displayed unmistakable "resistance" sym- 
 pathy and therefore was more amenable to the extreme 
 conservatives some of whom were Carlists. It is to be remem- 
 bered that Casimir Perier had been praised by V Ami de la 
 Religion et du roi. Cardinal de Rohan was the leader of the 
 Carlist party at Rome. He was a strong Legitimist and there- 
 fore, a member of the "petite figlise." His first admiration for 
 La Mennais soon died down when he found VAvenir unwilling 
 to support "this little prince" as he called Charles X. Still 
 
 U V. ; also VAvenir Mars 1831. 
 18 Memorandum de C. Perier, etc. 
 14 V. Affaires de Rome, 16-17. 
 
 60 
 
another enemy was Cardinal Lambruschini, an Austrian. Per- 
 haps the most powerful yet least evident opponents of La 
 Mennais, however, were the Jesuits. Their animosity dates 
 from the publication of "Des Progres de la Revolution et de la 
 guerre contre l'Eglise," and it had increased as La Mennais 
 developed still further his thesis of the freedom of the indi- 
 vidual will. All these were La Mennais' enemies, and with one 
 voice they demanded of the Pope the condemnation of the 
 innovators. 
 
 To the unbiased observer the Pope's position at this time, 
 and even his subsequent actions, are easily understood. And, 
 he should not be judged too harshly; Gregory XVI was bound 
 by the action of centuries. Rebellion in his own States, rebel- 
 lion threatening in all Catholic countries, two foreign armies 
 in two of his citadels ; Austria, for one, he trusted but feared 
 she would go to extremes, while of the sincerity of France, 
 he felt uncertain. And behind all this there remained the sov- 
 ereigns of the Catholic States, the only rulers in whom he 
 might place his confidence, advising him to condemn this auda- 
 cious liberal sprung himself from a country whose king was v ; Apostolic 
 
 1 • . . , ,. • r • Letters of 
 
 of revolutionary origin and whose religious professions were Gregory 
 
 none too orthodox in the eyes of the Roman Congregation. _. xv J^ n i / . 
 
 a ,1 , 1 • -i i . • i 11 • • i i i P U1S IX - w- 
 
 All these things considered, it is hardly surprising that he acted 
 
 as he did, and he should not be too heavily censured for his 
 
 actions. Gregory XVI was not a great theologian nor a great 
 
 savant ; his letters show this ; he was not a tyrant nor a proud 
 
 pontiff, and above all he was singularly inexperienced. This 
 
 inexperience and the knowledge of it, meeting with the more Boutard, 
 
 II ' ? 72 
 
 subtle character of Bernetti, could not but give rise to a certain 
 defiance and stubbornness which was more of a shield to a 
 weak character than an evidence of great resolution and 
 strength. Furthermore, it seems, that Metternich was supreme 
 in Rome at this moment, and it is not at all unlikely that the 
 Pope may have shared in the general opinion the Austrian had 
 spread in Rome; that the "Monarchy of the Glorious Days" 
 was weak — witness the Ancona affair — and might fall at any 
 time. With all this in mind, it is not unreasonable to suppose 
 that Gregory XVI had decided it would be better to rid Catho- 
 lic France of all these liberals at once, in the hope that when the 
 
 6i 
 
change took place and France returned again to the fold, she 
 might have as few of these liberals as possible to deal with ; 
 now to silence them once and for all. Moreover, if Gregory 
 had approved La Mennais' doctrines, could he have sanctioned 
 them at this time ? This seems doubtful, for to have sanction- 
 ed one word of them would doubtless have plunged Europe 
 into the worst civil war she had yet experienced. In practically 
 every country there was discontentment, and the slightest sign 
 of approval might easily have thrown open the gates of every 
 Capital to revolution. It is true, the restive districts had been 
 quieted but this had been done in many places in the name of 
 religion and the Holy Alliance. Even the tacit recognition of 
 such principles might easily have added the necessary spark to 
 the inflammable condition of Europe and caused a terrific out- 
 burst of revolutionary enthusiasm. The question arises, then, 
 if the editors had not demanded an answer, would their doc- 
 trines have been condemned? This again seems doubtful and 
 may explain the hesitating policy the Roman Curia adopted in 
 regard to the whole affair. Even La Mennais seemed to have 
 realized this fact, but too late. 15 
 
 But, the editors of VAvenir had demanded the voice of 
 Rome, and after a wait of six months it was to come to them. 
 In the meantime their patience was to be tried by petty ex- 
 cuses, formalities and procrastinations. "Fear is the greatest 
 enemy you have here in Rome," one prelate is said to have re- 
 marked to La Mennais. And commenting on this remark, La 
 Mennais added : "He was mistaken ; I believe it was political 
 interests." 16 
 
 From the very outset the two younger members of the "Pil- 
 grimage" seemed to have realized the utter hopelessness of 
 their cause, but La Mennais did not perceive the actual state of 
 affairs until much later, not, in fact, until June when the Pope 
 issued his bull to the bishops of Poland — a veritable premoni- 
 tion of the fate awaiting VAvenir. One thing, however, La 
 Mennais did perceive and that was the actual decadence of the 
 
 ""Affaires de Rome," p. 7: "Furthermore, it is certain that if, less 
 influenced by an overscrupulous delicacy they had scorned so many 
 unworthy attacks and continued so courageously their work, no act 
 of authority would have intervened to interrupt them." 
 
 J * v. Giraud, lettre, 10 Avril 1832. "Affaires de Rome," 38. 
 
 62 
 
Church in the city of its founding. This fact made a deep 
 impression on him, but, oddly enough, it also served to con- 
 vince him that his views were right and would be accepted. 17 
 If, on the other hand, they are neglected the Papacy will 
 thereby have refused the last means of salvation offered it. 
 
 The subsequent actions of the Papacy seemed to bear out 
 these observations. The three pilgrims had an interview with 
 the Pope, but with the express understanding that the real 
 purpose of their visit to Rome should not be discussed. La 
 Mennais was much encouraged by the reception given him by 
 Gregory XVI, despite the restriction which must have irritated 
 him. Furthermore, his hopes were raised from time to time 
 by the statements of cetain prelates — particularly Cardinal Mi- 
 cara, who is said to have expressed in no dubious terms his 
 thorough approval of the Liberal Catholics' policy. 18 But the 
 continued silence of the Court puzzled the three liberals, and 
 they finally decided to force an answer. Accordingly they set 
 to work to compose a "Memoire" for the Pope. When this was 
 completed (3 Fevrier 1832) it was given to Cardinal Pacca who 
 agreed to present it to Gregory XVI. The "Memoire" was a 
 frank exposition of the doctrines and policy of VAvenir from 
 
 "J'espere que mon sejour a Rome ne se prolongera pas desormais 
 longtemps, et l'un des plus beaux jours de ma vie sera celui-ci ou je 
 sortirai de ce grand tombeau, ou Ton ne trouve que des vers et des 
 ossements." Corresp. ed. Forgues, 10 Fevrier 1832. 
 
 Later he writes : "Le Pope est un homme pieux, conduit par les 
 hommes qui ne le sont guere, et qui se preoccupent uniquement des 
 interets temporels, qu'ils n'entendent pas. lis fondent toutes leurs 
 esperances sur les baionnettes des puissances ennemies de l'eglise, et, en 
 consequence cette eglise leur est sacrinee sans hesitations. Les gens de 
 bien gemissent et s'indignent. lis pre-voient de grands chatimens, des 
 catastrophes prochains, desquelles Dieu fera sortir le remede des maux 
 extremes qu'ils deplorent et qui desormais ne peuvent etre gueris que 
 par l'intervention immediate de Dieu. II n'y a plus de Papaute ; il 
 faut qu'elle renaisse ou l'eglise et le monde periraient. Voila l'etat 
 des choses." v. Giraud Une Corresp. ed. 10 Avril 1832. 
 
 "Boutard (II. 315) quotes a letter from La Mennais to M. de Coux 
 in which L. repeats the remarks of the Cardinal : "Vous etes venus 
 a Rome pour demander que Ton condamnat vos doctrines si elles 
 renfermaient quelque chose de condamnable ; vous avez fait cette de- 
 mande de vive voix, et par ecrit; on ne les a pas condamnees, done 
 elles ne sont pas condamnables. Recommencez VAvenir; e'est ce que 
 je ferai a votre place." 
 
 63 
 
the very beginning, and in it the writers tried to explain and 
 refute the charge of being political revolutionaries — a charge 
 brought by the Carlist interests at Rome. The first part was 
 taken up with the description of the position of the neo-catho- 
 lics in 1830 when they had two, and only two courses open to 
 them, either to become a political faction under the govern- 
 ment and gain power that way, or else to fight for it openly, 
 the healthiest and safest way. 19 Equally apt is their description 
 of the July Monarchy's attitude to religion and the efforts 
 made to stifle it by gradually rendering it more servile to the 
 State. 20 
 
 The rest of the "Memoire" is a defense of their doctrines, 
 showing first that no canon or apostolic tradition exists against 
 the separation of Church and State, that the Roman Catholic 
 Faith is not incompatible with the liberty of religious denom- 
 inations (Cultes), freedom of instruction, of the press or with 
 any form of constitutional government. The "Memoire" pre- 
 sents in a concise and convincing form the proof of the good 
 done by I'Avenir and the Agence in matters of faith, conver- 
 sion and religious indifference. In conclusion, the authors 
 speak of their enemies in the following terms; (this paragraph 
 is interesting as a portrait of the conditions existing in France 
 at the end of the first Liberal Catholic Movement) : 
 
 "To explain this curious situation it is necessary to go back 
 to the causes of the opposition encountered by the editors of 
 
 19 "II n'y avait evidement que deux parties a prendre; 011 s'en tenir 
 au systeme de la Restauration ou l'alliance indissoluble du trone et de 
 l'autel, a la solidarite de l'un et de l'autre, ou renoncer a ce systeme 
 et separer, autant qu'l etait possible deux causes dont l'union avait ete 
 si malheureuse. . . . Suivre ce premier systeme de conduit etait done 
 abandonner l'eglise au hasard dans un moment decisif pour elle ; et, en 
 supportant des esperances douteuses realisees meme dans un court 
 delai, e'etait l'attendre son salut cela meme, qui avait fait sa perte 
 pendant seize ans." Mem. Presentee Para. II. 
 Memoire 20 "La Revolution de 1830 avait ete faite autant contre l'eglise que 
 1v S ancf V contre * a c o uronne > et H etait impossible qu'il en fut autrement a cause 
 de leur intime alliance. Le gouvernement sorti de cette revolution, 
 devait, done etre hostile a l'eglise ; mais il n'avait le choix comme nous 
 l'avons dit, qu'entre une persecution ouverte et un asservissement 
 VII an P r ogressif et complet. II choisit la derniere mode comme moins 
 hasardeuse; et parce qu'il voulait en toutes choses conserver au moins 
 les apparences de l'ordre anterieur." Mem. Pres. Para. III. 
 
 64 
 
VAvenir. Of these, two are of prime importance; one political, 
 the other theological. When the partisans of the dethroned 
 Bourbons saw a newspaper appearing that defended religion 
 without defending the old dynasty, that even tried frankly to 
 combat the faults of the Restoration, they persuaded themselves 
 that its editors might become serious obstacles to their designs. 
 They feared that their own cause might lose the support of the 
 clergy, and as this support seemed essential to them they set to 
 work to ruin VAvenir with all the energy and all the eagerness 
 that parties employ in order to remove an obstacle to their own 
 progress. . . . On the other side, although dogmatic Gallican- 
 ism had been destroyed in France in the great majority of 
 cases yet there still existed traces of it ; and, in addition, practi- 
 cal Gallicanism, that is the long usage of a social order founded 
 on the Gallican theory, made it that even those who had logic- 
 ally sacrificed the principle still lived under the empire of things 
 that it had created. Then too, the separation of Church and 
 State attacked this practical Gallicanism. It was, in brief, the 
 setting into action of Roman doctrines in a society where con- 
 trary doctrines had only just recently perished after a contro- 
 versy lasting ten years." 
 
 This, in substance, was the nature of the exposition of their 
 doctrines presented by FAveni/s editors to the Pope. It now Mem. para., 
 remained for it to be put through an apparent examination and VIII 
 then there was a long delay. On the 9th of June, however, 
 Gregory XVI issued his encyclical to the Bishops of Poland 
 advising submission to the temporal power of the Tsar. This, 
 as has been said, came about as an exchange for the Tsar's 
 promise of assistance against his enemies to Gregory. One 
 phrase of this letter was interpreted as a warming to La 
 Mennais and his followers : 
 
 "In this cause you must use all diligence to be sure to pre- 
 vent evil-minded men and innovators from continuing to spread 
 their false doctrines and erroneous theories, from endangering 
 the common welfare as they have done heretofore by taking 
 advantage of the credulity of simple-minded folk, who, not 
 having been cautioned, are unconsciously becoming blind in- 
 struments to trouble the peace of this realm and to upset the 
 established order of Society." 
 
 65 
 
The above paragraph left little doubt in the minds of La 
 Mennais' harshest critics as well as his greatest friends, where 
 the Papacy stood in regard to I'Avenir and its influence. It 
 even seems to have warned La Mennais that he need expect 
 little or no encouragement from Rome. And so it was that 
 accompanied by Montalembert, for Lacordaire before this time 
 had left them, La Mennais went to Munich where he was cor- 
 dially received by the Round Table. Hardly, however, had he 
 left Rome when the Protest of Toulouse arrived. It was a 
 petition signed by the prelates of the "Midi," urging an imme- 
 diate condemnation. So Gregory XVI, influenced by the 
 bishops of the "Midi," the Carlists in France and Rome, the 
 three conservative sovereigns of Europe, and alarmed, per- 
 haps, by the assertion La Mennais is said to have made that, 
 not having received any order to the contrary he would return 
 and resume his work in France, was forced to act. On the 15th 
 of August, 1832, the famous Encyclical "Mirari Vos" appeared 
 and sounded the death-knell of the first Liberal Catholic Move- 
 ment in France. In this document the Pope condemned every 
 doctrine of YAvenir except that of the absolute independence 
 of the Church from civil authority. Almost at the outset the 
 Encyclical indignantly denies that the Church has any need 
 to be restored (regenere'e) . Thus at the very beginning the 
 proof of La Mennais' fatal move at the first trial is established, 
 and the great extent of influence exerted by Ami de la Religion 
 et dn roi and its adherents, the Carlists, affirmed. 21 In the 
 
 21 "Cum autem ut Tridentinorum Patrum verbis utamur, constet 
 Ecclesiam eruditam fuisse a Christo Jesu, ejusque Apostolis, atque a 
 Spiritu Sancto illi omnem veritatem in dies suggerente edoceri, ab- 
 surdum plane est, ac maxime in earn injuriosum, rcstaurationcm ac 
 regenerationem quandam obtrudi quasi necessariam, ut ejus incolu- 
 mitati, et incremento, consulatur, perinde ac si censeri ipsa possit vel 
 defectui, vel obscurationi, vel aliis hujuscemodi incommodis obnoxia ; 
 quo quidem molimine eo spectant novatores, ut recentis humanae insti- 
 tutionis jaciantur fundamenta, illud que ipsum eveniat quod detestatur 
 Cyprianus. ut quae divina res humana fiat ecclesia : (since it has been 
 proved, to quote the fathers of Trent, that the Church is instructed 
 by Jesus Christ and his Apostles and that she was taught by the Holy 
 Spirit who suggested to her every truth, it is absurd as well as ex- 
 tremely offensive to her that anyone should advocate as essential to 
 her duration and increase any restoration or reform; as if she could 
 be delivered or exposed to weakness, blindness, or any other failings 
 
 66 
 
next paragraph Gregory refutes La Mennais' idea of the con- 
 dition of indifference in matters religious, its cause, and also 
 the thesis of liberty of conscience. 22 This, in turn, is followed 
 by the condemnation of many of those political concessions 
 which La Mennais through VAvenir had advocated, among 
 them, the liberty of the press. 23 The next paragraph is inter- 
 esting, for it betrays the influences at work in the Papal Court 
 as well as the real motives at their base. It was the paragraph 
 demanded by the rulers of Austria, Prussia and Russia, and 
 the government of France, a command to the people to obey 
 the civil authority conferred on their superiors by Divine 
 Law — and to cease to consider the dangerous works on liberty 
 at that time so much in evidence. 24 But, the people once in sub- 
 
 of such a kind." Mirari vos — Gregorius XVI., XVIII. Kalendis Sep- 
 tembris die solemni assumptions, B. V. Mariae, anno Dominicae in- 
 carnationis MDCCCXXXII, Pontificatus nostri anno II. 
 
 22 ''Atque ex hoc putidissimo indifferentismi fonte absurda ilia fluit 
 ac erronea sententia, seu potius deliremantum, asserandam esse ac 
 vindicandam cuilibet libertatem conscientiae." ("And from this equally 
 shameful source springs that ridiculous and wrong idea, or rather 
 madness, that freedom of conscience should be defended and insisted 
 upon by any and all.") Mirari vos — Gregoribus XVI., etc. 
 
 83 "Cum autem circumlatis in vulgus scriptis doctrinas quasdam 
 promulgari acceperimus, quibus debita erga principes fides atque 
 submissio labefactatur, facesque perduellionis ubique incenduntur; caven- 
 dum maxime erit, ne populi inde decepti a recti semita adducantur. 
 Animadvertant omnes, non esse, juxta apostoli monitum, potestatem 
 nisi a Deo ; quae autem sunt a Deo ordinatae sunt. Itaque qui resistit 
 protestati Dei ordinationi resistit et qui resistunt ipsi sibi damnationem 
 acquirunt. Quo circa et divina et humana jura in eos clamant, qui tur- 
 pissimi perduellionis seditionumque machinationibus a fide in principes 
 desisciere ipsosque ab imperio deturbare connituntur." ("Since it has 
 come to our knowledge that certain works have been distributed among 
 the people advocating the very doctrines subversive to the fidelity and 
 submission due to princes, and light everywhere torches of revolt, it is 
 most necessary that you see to it that the people do not surmount the 
 bounds of their duties. They should remember that, according to the 
 words of the apostle, 'There is no power which is not of God.' There- 
 fore, he who resists that power, resists God and those who resist 
 God do so to their own condemnation. Therefore both divine and 
 human law is against those who attempt to overstep by civil plots of 
 sedition and revolt, the duty of fidelity to their princes, and who try 
 to dethrone them.") Mirari vos — Gregorus XVI., etc. 
 
 2i "Neque laetoria et religioni et principatui ominari possemus. ex eorum 
 
 67 
 
mission to their rulers, must not think of separating the Church 
 from the Temporal Power to whom they are subjected. 25 
 
 Having completed his condemnation of the doctrines of La 
 Mennais, the Encyclical then considers the work of La Men- 
 nais and his school YAvenir, to be sure, but more especially the 
 Agence and all similar organizations in other countries as well. 
 They are condemned as hotbeds of error and of revolution. 25 
 In conclusion, the Pope refers to La Mennais and his school in 
 the following paragraph : 
 
 "Embracing in your paternal affection all those who are 
 
 occupied in ecclesiastical sciences and religious questions; be- 
 Miran vos ° ^ 
 
 Gregorius, seech them constantly not to rely overmuch on their own intel- 
 
 XVI, etc. Hgence, which would take them far from the way of truth and 
 
 would lead them into the way of impiety. May they remember 
 
 that God is the way of all knowledge and the chastiser of the 
 
 wise, and that we cannot know God without God who teaches 
 
 us by His word to know God. It is for the proud and foolish 
 
 votis, qui Ecclesiam a regno separari, mutuamque imperii cum sacer- 
 dotio concordiam abrumpti dispiciunt. Constat quippe pertimesci ab 
 impudentissimae libertatis amatoribus concordiam illam, quae semper 
 rei et sacrae et civili fausta exstitit ac salutaris." ("We could not for- 
 bode anything more happily for religion and for the nations, in 
 following the wishes of those who deny a separation of Church and 
 State, than the mutual concord of empire and priesthood. For it is 
 certain that this accord, so favourable both to religion and to civil 
 authority in other times is the thing most feared by these relentless 
 partisans of a limitless liberty."). Mirari vos — Gregorus XVI, etc. 
 
 25 "Et ad caeteras acerbissimas causas quibus solliciti sumus, et in 
 communi discrimine dolore quodam angimur praecipuo, accessere con- 
 sociationes quaedam, statique coetus, quibus, quasi agmine facto cum 
 cuius-cumque etiam falsae religionis ac cultus sectatoribus, simulata 
 quidem in religionem pietate, vere tamen novitatis, seditionemque ubique 
 promovendarum cupidine, libertas omnis generis praedicatur, per- 
 turbationes in sacram et civilem rem excitantur, sanctior qualibet auctori- 
 tas discerpitur." ("And in addition to other reasons with which we 
 are troubled and also afflicted with grief in an unusual degree, there 
 have arisen certain associations and rlxed assemblies, in which a martial 
 spirit and liberty of every sort is proclaimed ; along with the follow- 
 ers of every cult and every false religion, under a pretense of respect 
 for religion, to be sure, but really because of a desire for a change and 
 for promoting revolutions everywhere they excite grievances against 
 the good of the Church and the State, they destroy the most respec- 
 table authority.") Mirari vos, etc. 
 
 68 
 
to weigh in a mortal made balance the mysteries of the Faith 
 which passes all understanding, and to rely on our own reason, 
 which is weak and helpless because of the state of human 
 nature." 
 
 Such, in paraphrase, was the document that put an end to the 
 first Liberal Catholic Movement in France and what a contrast 
 it is to the "Acte d'Union" promulgated by that party! The 
 Encyclical Mirari Vos might be called the final protest of The 
 Middle Ages, condemning all those principles so dear to the 
 men of to-day and all of which found birth in the Liberal 
 Romanticism of the nineteenth century. It is true, similar 
 doctrines had come to light before, but at a time when they . 
 
 • '11 TM oaintc 
 
 appeared in a form too exaggerated and too impracticable, the Beuve, 
 Liberal Romanticism of the early Nineteenth Century, then, Re ^ eu ^ es 
 was a rebirth of these very same doctrines in a wiser and more Mondes, 
 reasonable form; and, curiously enough, La Mennais, became Vo1 - 5, 1832 
 the precursor of Modern Realism, political, literary and relig- 
 ious ; indeed, as one of his greatest contemporaries has said he 
 was not of his age, he was a generation and more in advance. 
 
 La Mennais and Montalembert joined by Lacordaire at Mu- 
 nich, received the news of their condemnation in that city 
 which had thrown wide its gates to receive them. And, it did 
 not desert them in their hour of need. Accompanying the bull 
 was a letter from Cardinal Pacca that was intended to lighten 
 the weight of the blow. It recommended submission and at- 
 tempted to show them, in a kindly fashion, where they had 
 gone too far. 26 But the three did not need this advice, they had 
 sworn submission and they kept the promise. On their return 
 to France, I'Avenir was abandoned and the "Agence" with all 
 its brilliant and noble aims was dissolved. The editors seemed 
 to be resigned to their fate. 27 
 
 ^"Elle (so saintete) a ete beaucoup afflige de voir que les redacteurs 
 aient pris sur eux de discuter en presence du public et de decider les 
 questions les plus dedicates, qui appartiennent au gouvernement de 
 l'eglise et de son chef supreme, d'ou a resulte necessairement la per- 
 turbation dans les esprits et surtout parmi le clerge lequel est tou- 
 jours nuisible aux fideles." Pacca a La Mennais, Rome, 16 Aout 
 1832. ''Affairs de Rome, Pieces justificatives. 
 
 27 "Nous sommes de pauvres oiseaux enfermes dans le recipient de 
 la machine pneumatique. Que faire? Prendre patience, puisque c'est 
 Dieu qui nous a mis la et chercher dans l'etude et pour ainsi dire, dans 
 
 69 
 
Affaires Unfortunately, the story of their disgrace does not end here ; 
 p j 0 -™ 6, it would have been far better for both parties had this been the 
 case. But, there were to be separations and the severings of 
 friendships. 28 And even then their enemies were not satisfied 
 with a silence which, so La Mennais says, was too much like 
 that respectful silence of the Jansenists, and they demanded 
 further submission. Their requests became unreasonable and 
 *Enc * n t * me ^ S use ^ ess persecution became intolerable to La Men- 
 Gregorius, nais. He refused to make a second act of contrition and 
 
 VU^Kal another Encyclical followed, this time of definite condemna- 
 Julias An tion. Rome could not forgive La Mennais the "Paroles d'un 
 
 cccxxxiv cr °y ant ' 
 
 At this date, July 7, 1834, we part with La Mennais. He 
 lived longer, and did much good, even serving his country in the 
 capacity of a deputy, but this does not concern us, for from 
 now on he is removed from the course of events and the rela- 
 Ami de la tions between Church and State. It remains to follow through 
 ef^lfroi ^ ts ^ rst sta £ e tne £ reat movement to which he gave the first 
 6 Sept., impulse, an impulse which by no means spent its strength. 
 
 How had France, his country, received the condemnation of 
 the three Liberals at Rome? One party, of course, had rejoiced 
 and had closed the discussion of the affair in columns of its 
 journal with the triumphant words "Roma locuta est." Others, 
 happily, had foreseen the evil of such an action and the great 
 v. Journal spiritual havoc it might create. Another, still more violent, 
 des Debats demanded armed intervention. This, of course was ridiculous, 
 1832 ' Dut it served to show that La Mennais' work had not been in 
 Constitu- vain, and that those, even some of those who did not approve 
 13 Sept., % realized its importance and foresaw what we shall see and 
 1832 what one literateur of his country remarked at La Mennais' 
 death : 
 
 P Albert, "On croit La Mennais fini ; jamais il n'a ete plus vivant." 
 IT, 141 1 
 
 l'atmosphere de la science, l'air qui nous manque." La Mennais a 
 Montalembert Logue, 1 Oct. 1832. 
 
 2S For the account of Lacordaire's separation, v. La Mennais a Monta- 
 lembert, ed. Fogues, 12 Dec. 1832. 
 
 70 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 France 1832 — 1839 
 The Neo-Catholic Revival 
 
 The Premier who had inaugurated the Ancona policy did not 
 see its completion. On April 16, 1832, the very day of the 
 arrangement made between Pope, Emperor and King, Casimir 
 Perier died. For nearly half a year previous to this time, Paris 
 had been menaced with the cholera brought into Central Europe 
 via Poland whither it had been carried by the Russian troops 
 returning from Armenia. This disease claimed Casimir Perier. 
 France was thrown into utter consternation at the news of his 
 death ; men asked themselves whether it portended good or 
 evil, and even the King is said to have remarked : "Casimir 
 Perier is dead, is this an advantage or a misfortune? Time 
 will show." And time has shown that it was an advantage for 
 Louis Philippe. Such a violent policy as Perier had inaugu- 
 rated had accomplished much, but it could not have been tolera- 
 ted longer ; his death paved the way for men of a more peaceful 
 nature but equally talented, and also more subtle, perhaps. By 
 November, 1832, the political horizon seemed clearer; the 
 Monarchy had silenced the Republicans and Legitimists tem- 
 porarily at least, and the Bonapartists as well. The Republican 
 revolt of June 5, occasioned by the funeral of General La- 
 marque, had threatened seriously the safety of the Monarchy, 
 but the following day the government had gained a signal vic- 
 tory over them; the duchesse de Berri episode was decisively 
 closed in November, and several months before, July 22, the due 
 de Reichstadt had died. For two years Louis Philippe was to 
 remain unmenaced and secure on his throne. 
 
 After Perier's death there had ensued an interim when the 
 ministry was without a formal head, but about the first of June 
 Marshal Soult took charge, and resumed, after two years re- 
 
 71 
 
spite, a thorough policy of "juste milieu." It must not be sup- 
 posed, however, that the opposition, the Progressives, had re- 
 mained silent all these months. Finding themselves unable to 
 protest with any success in the chambers, they resorted to the 
 press and the attacks against the government became more 
 frequent and less moderate. There were many prosecutions 
 in which the State did not fare well. 1 Furthermore, if these 
 prosecutions displayed to the world the instability of Louis 
 Philippe's throne, they also betrayed its utter hypocrisy. The 
 liberal world began to ask itself if, after all, Louis Philippe 
 and the men of 1830 were really sincere in their protestations 
 of Liberalism. 
 
 ''Let the men under whose direction the government has been 
 worked since 1830 ask themselves whether the French people 
 have been allowed to reap all the benefits to which the victory 
 obtained at the price of their own blood had entitled them ; 
 whether they had not availed themselves of the power which 
 the people unsuspiciously confided into their hands to turn the 
 fruits of the popular triumph to the profit of their own selfish 
 interests and narrow-minded views ; and if they could convince 
 us that they conscientiously believe this not to have been the 
 case, we may deplore their blindness, but not think the less of 
 their unfitness to be at the head of public affairs." 
 
 This opinion may be said to have been held in France as 
 well, and so in a desperate attempt to please, Louis Philippe 
 formed a new Ministry. The presidency was first offered to 
 Dupin, but he refused, Guizot was too unpopular with the 
 
 1 "The acquittal of the National, a Paris paper, for a libel on Louis 
 Philippe, or rather for a seditious excitement to overturn his throne 
 shows the utter madness of the State prosecutions, in which the French 
 government has lately indulged. There can be no question that 
 several Paris journals contain every morning provocations to rebel- 
 lion. They do not disguise their hatred of the monarch or the mon- 
 archy nor their desire to see the establishment of a republican form of 
 government. In their abuse of "the Bourbons" they adroitly veil their 
 attacks and in praising the United States they recommend it to 
 France. The Tribune has now arrived at its sixty-second process and 
 glories in each summons. . . . When juries refuse to convict the 
 government should take the hint and cease to trouble the tribunals 
 with their complaints.'' Dispatch from Paris, London Times, Sept. 
 4, 1832. 
 
 72 
 
Republicans, and it fell to the due de Broglie to become the head 
 of a new Cabinet, de Broglie was a high-minded admirable 
 statesman but a "Doctrinaire'' ; still, Louis Philippe may have 
 felt that perhaps under him the men who wielded the real power 
 of the majority might be allowed to effect a middle course 
 policy, with the careful hand of the duke ever ready to re- 
 strain them. Hence it was that Guizot and Thiers found places 
 in the Ministry while Dupin was left in the Chamber of 
 Deputies. 2 
 
 It was a strong cabinet — "the Ministry of All Talents" — 
 but at the outset it was confronted with a difficult task; with- 
 in France to consolidate the throne by the arrest of the duch- 
 esse de Berri, and for foreign policy to secure the final consent v . Hille- 
 of William of the Netherlands still hesitating, to the Treaty j ra ^ 
 of the Twenty-four Articles. It will be remembered that one of 
 these ends was soon accomplished while the other they at- 
 tempted to bring about by following up the policy of the 
 Antwerp Expedition. But the king remained discontented ; 
 he did not like his Premier, who was of intractible honesty 
 and who seemed to him too much of an idealist. Moreover, 
 this feeling was not confined to the Court alone; there were 
 many other eyes who saw the danger as well. The "Doctrin- 
 aires" had returned, those very men who almost until the fall of 
 the old dynasty had failed to see its weakness, and who at the 
 beginning of the new regime had been unable to establish it as 
 firmly as they had promised. 3 In past times they had seemed 
 blind to actual conditions and again in 1833 their statements did 
 
 2 Broglie, Foreign Affairs; Thiers, Interior; Guizot, Public Instruc- 
 tion; Mennais, Finance; Soult, War; Barthe, Justice. 
 
 3 'The government of France is at present in the hands of the doc- 
 trinaires — men, who without desiring it, have contributed a good deal 
 to the downfall of the Bourbons. Their political science as formerly- 
 developed in the Globe and Journal des Debats gives us an idea of 
 the tendency of their views. ... In the Journal des Debats for the 
 nth of August of the same year (1829) we find the following pas- 
 sage : 'Irritation is daily appeased, the recollections of faction are on 
 the wane, and extinguish themselves in a general attachment to the 
 Charter.' Thus spoke the coryphaei of the 'doctrine' and within a year 
 the dynasty was expelled, the Charter, that 'object of general attachment,' 
 was torn to pieces by an imbecile monarch and the sublime populace 
 of July forced its way in arms into the palace of the king." Dispatch 
 from Paris, London Times, Jan. 5, 1833. 
 
 73 
 
not seem conformable to the general opinion of the country. 
 "The country wants no further troubles or disturbances, it 
 thirsts for legal order ; political passions become extinct daily." 
 In only one sense of the word is this statement true ; the coun- 
 try indeed did not seem to want any further disturbances or 
 troubles, and for a year there ensued an apathy — curious and 
 L jj B1 j^8 C ' > 7et none the less natural in such uncertain times. 4 Three laws 
 were passed by the Ministry and the nature of these laws cannot 
 but tend to confirm the observations made by the foreign press 
 on the system of the doctrinaires. The first law concerned 
 the reorganization and reestablishment of the "Conseils 
 London d'arrondissement." A proposition had been made by Odilon 
 \pj**3 Barrot and his confreres that the government form a new 
 1833 law allowing more opportunity to the electors living in the 
 country districts, to assert their wishes. This proposal failed, 
 and the older order, amounting to nothing more than an elec- 
 toral monopoly on the part of the government, was reestab- 
 lished. Guizot then proposed a more liberal law on primary 
 instruction ; this was passed but its effect was rendered null 
 by the passing of other contrary legislation. The Ministry 
 in its turn introduced and passed, on the ground of public 
 utility, a law on the expropriation of public property. In 
 external affairs the first year of the new ministry was not 
 much more successful ; France had cried aloud together 
 with most of the Western Europe that the integrity of the 
 
 4 Victor Hugo in the Preface to "Le Rois s'amuse," 1833, notes this 
 condition ; his explanation is pertinent : "The moment of political 
 transition in which we are placed is extraordinary. It is one of 
 those instances of general weariness in which any act of despotism is 
 possible in a society, even the most deeply imbued with notions of 
 emancipation and liberty. France proceeded rapidly in 1830. She 
 did three good day's work. She erected three depots in the field of 
 civilization and advancement. Now, many are wearied, many out of 
 breath, many call a halt. It is wished to hold back those generous 
 spirits who are never tired and desire to keep always in advance, and 
 wait for the laggards who are in the rear and give them time to come 
 up. Hence an extraordinary fear of everything that thinks. This is an 
 odd situation of things, easily understood, but difficult to describe. It 
 consists of all existing that tremble at all ideal things; the league of 
 interests pressed upon and bruised by theories; commerce which takes 
 fright at all systems; merchants who want customers; streets that 
 put counting houses in fear; trie armed shop that defends itself." 
 
 74 
 
Ottoman Empire must be maintained and yet she had taken 
 part in annihilation of the Turkish fleet at Novarino, 
 and was concerned in the Treaty of Adrianople. "Monstrous 
 Contradiction,"' cried the Republicans. It is true, the ministry 
 was one step nearer the English Alliance, but as yet it was 
 only in prospect, and men were beginning to have so little 
 faith in the "Doctrine" that they doubted if such a happy 
 situation would ever become a reality. In 1833, then, some 
 were again, because of present discontents, dreaming of a 
 Republic, but they bided their time, for they were still too 
 few in number to succeed. 
 
 The year 1834, however, opened more auspiciously for 
 Louis Philippe. The English entente was in immediate pros- 
 pect — it was the year of the Triple and Quadruple Alliances. 
 These two alliances were of great service to the "Ministry 
 of all Talents"; they brought to reality the English Entente, 
 an object in prospect for over four years, the first step 
 to which had been the Anglo-French accord in regard to 
 Belgium, and the marriage of Louis Philippe's daughter to 
 Leopold I, England's candidate. The occasion of the alliances 
 was the civil wars in Spain and Portugal. Isabelle II of Spain, 
 on the death of her father in 1833, found herself confronted 
 with a rival to the throne in the person of Don Carlos, while 
 in 1834, Donna Maria's right to the throne of Portugal was 
 challenged by Don Miguel, her uncle. England took the part 
 of these two unfortunate queens, one of whom was only 
 a child, and with them she formed a pact of protection known iv™' 
 as the Triple Alliance. On April 22, 1834 France joined the 
 three and this treaty marks the foundation of the Quadruple 
 Alliance. Thus was cemented the friendly entente with Eng- d'Haus- 
 land, and yet, like so many of the political sections of the Hj st jj 
 July Monarchy, it was founded on a patent inconsistency. It 
 was true that England, no longer a member of the "Holy 
 Alliance" needed an ally and France was in equal need, but B j°j U T rg j^ 
 that was their sole mutual ground for sympathy, as future ' 
 events will show. They had failed to take into account their 
 radically different policies in the East, and also England, 
 if she took the entente seriously, though of this there is some 
 ground for doubt, must have forgotten that Louis Philippe 
 
 75 
 
was part Bourbon, and once he held the reins of the gov- 
 ernment himself, might revert to old Bourbon policies — 
 witness Spain and the question of the Spanish marriages. 
 Except for a slight break in 1840, under Thiers' ministry, the 
 English alliance, nevertheless, was to hold good and be further 
 strengthened by visits exchanged between the sovereigns 
 (1843- 1845) until the fatal year 1846. 
 
 This, then, was the first advantage of the Quadruple Alli- 
 ance — France had an ally, even if she was excluded by 
 Metternich from the general European Concert. The second 
 advantage which the Ministry had foreseen, however, was to 
 make less of an impression on the minds of the French. Upon 
 the outbreak of civil war in their respective realms, the two 
 queens had found themselves almost without support at home. 
 Both turned, therefore, to the liberal party, and aided by the 
 liberal parties in their respective realms, Donna Maria and 
 Isabella were victorious, with this important result: the for- 
 mation of quasi-constitutional governments. So another 
 French Ministry was enabled to boast of a liberal policy. 
 But this advantage was comparatively nil in France. It had, 
 however, one serious result ; it opened the eyes of Metternich 
 to a new situation, a formidable coalition for constitutional 
 rights seemed imminent, 5 and he determined to break this 
 union as soon as possible. In still another quarter there was 
 discontent, and of a far more serious nature ; this policy had 
 not impressed the Republicans. In April 1834 another revolt 
 broke out among the factory workers in Lyons, principally 
 hatmakers and silk weavers. The Industrial Revolution as 
 before, was the cause ; but while the riot originated in the 
 form of a strike, it soon became more menacing. The Re- 
 Weill, p. publicans seized upon it, and attempted to use it as a means 
 to gain their own ends. The revolt spread to St. Etienne, 
 Clermont, Grenoble and finally to Poitiers and Luneville. 
 Soon Paris, too, was the scene of a riot where the Republicans 
 
 B "I reckon this to be a great stroke. In the first place it will settle 
 Portugal, and go some way to settle Spain also. But what is of more 
 permanent and extensive importance, it establishes a quadruple alliance 
 among the Constitutional States of the West, which will serve as a 
 power counterpoise to the Holy Alliance of the East." Letter of 
 Palmerston, quoted in Cruice VI, 65. 
 
 76 
 
of the capital with "sections" named after the great heroes of 
 the Revolution, Robespierre, Marat, etc., took to street fighting 
 under the direction of Cavaignac, Lagrange, Grinaud and 
 Louis Blanc. Louis Philippe's two years of internal peace 
 had ended. 
 
 The year 1835 saw several changes in the cast of characters 
 to play a part in the history of political progress under Louis 
 Philippe. La Fayette had died in May of the preceding year 
 and de Broglie during that year resigned from the Ministry. 
 But the principal interest of the new year was the trial of 
 the Republican leaders who had figured in the April Days of 
 1834. Here again, the government displayed almost incredible 
 weakness; there were no death sentences; deportation was to 
 be the penalty, and Cavaignac was allowed to escape from 
 Paris. The greatest event of the year, however, was not 
 the trial , of the republican conspirators but the attempt made 
 on the life of Louis Philippe July 28th. Its results were 
 far reaching. On that date Louis Philippe reviewed the 
 troops on the Boulevard du Temple. During the review an 
 infernal machine exploded near the king; forty people were 
 killed, but Louis Philippe escaped uninjured. This time the 
 government was not so lenient in its actions. The perpetrators 
 of the crime, Morey, Fieschi and one Pepin, were condemned 
 to death and guillotined. But the trial had been the scene 
 of constant riots and the government, alarmed, decided at 
 last on repressive measures. Accordingly the September laws Hillebrand, 
 were promulgated altering the assize court system by allow- x ' 480 et seq 
 ing the Minister of Justice to create as many of these special 
 courts as might be necessary in the event of attacks threaten- 
 ing the security of the State. In addition, jury decisions were 
 made possible by a mere majority vote (instead of two-thirds 
 vote as heretofore) and the censorship of the press was to be 
 vigorously enforced. Such were the direct results of the 
 Morey-Fieschi attempt. The indirect results were still greater ; 
 more stringent laws were passed forbidding associations, and 
 the paper hawkers were allowed to sell only specified journals. 
 There was, moreover, another result of this latest attempt on 
 the life of the King, and this is found in the changed attitude 
 of the monarch himself. Six attempts in all were made on 
 
 77 
 
Thureau 
 Dangin, 
 II, 439 
 
 v. Mazade, 
 "Thiers" 
 
 v. de Croza- 
 les, 
 "Guizot" 
 
 v. Bardoux, 
 "Guizot" 
 
 Hillebrand, 
 I, 621 ; also 
 498 
 
 the life of Louis Philippe during his reign and these experi- 
 ences taught him far more successfully than the cunning of 
 Metternich, the advantages of principles of Legitimacy and 
 a "Bourbon policy." The September Laws mark the first 
 step in this direction. 
 
 The effect of this Ordinance on the "Ministry of All Talents" 
 was fatal ; for, while the laws appeared to accomplish the 
 desired end, their authors found themselves unable to do 
 more. Accordingly in February, 1836 the Ministry was dis- 
 solved and from this date there ensued a period of four 
 years' struggle which may well be called the Parliamentary 
 crisis of the July Monarchy. It was during this interval that 
 the monarchical principle as understood by the founders of 
 the July Monarchy began to lose its hold. The reason is 
 obvious. By the fall of the Broglie cabinet all those elements, 
 that had been united under the Ministry of Casimir Perier 
 and that had given it and the succeeding Cabinet much power 
 were dispersed, de Broglie, Thiers, Guizot, Mole, Soult, the 
 great parliamentarians of the day, no longer acted in unison 
 and in harmony. They were now to act independently ; 
 politics became a matter of personal interest and personal 
 theories. The dissolution of the Ministry of the Doctrine 
 brought more anarchy into the field of political ideals. It 
 seemed, too, as if the most prominent of these leaders had 
 experienced a sudden political transformation. Thiers, no 
 longer of the "doctrinaires," became more affiliated with the 
 Left Center, while Guizot, abjuring his former policies, be- 
 came a leader in the opposition of the Right. 6 The period 
 
 "A propos of this change on the part of Guizot Heine (Lutece) 
 remarked a little later : "With Guizot it is different. For him the 
 victory of the bourgeois is a fait accompli. He evinces all the quali- 
 ties of a true doctrinaire, who never fails to find a doctrine by which he 
 proves all he does. He knows too much and is by far too intelligent to 
 be a sceptic at bottom, but his scepticism is easily conciliated with 
 the devotion to his system. Just now he is a faithful servant of the 
 Bourgeoisie and he will defend his idea to the last inexorably and 
 with the harshness of a Duke of Alva. He does not hesitate, he 
 knows what he wants at the present hour. Why even were he to fall 
 his very fall would not shake him; he would shrug his shoulders for 
 after all he is personally indifferent to the thing he is fighting for. Nay 
 even if by strange hazard victory should tumble into the hands of 
 
 78 
 
of rivalry was an actuality; it was no longer a thing foretold 
 or foreseen. The obtaining of a Parliamentary majority — 
 now a very fickle and elusive object, became a mere matter 
 of agility. One foreign observer, then a resident of Paris, 
 gives a very striking yet by no means inexact description 
 of the rivalry between the two leaders : 
 
 "He (Guizot) does not know how to come down 
 from the top mast of power. Whilst Thiers, who 
 is as agile as a monkey in getting to the top of this greasy 
 "mat de cocagne" is still more ready to slip down from it 
 again, and jump among the admiring crowd, full of smiles, 
 ease, elasticity ; Guizot neither climbs up nor comes down the 
 same way. He hoists himself up so heavily and with such 
 outrageous efforts of strength, that one invariably thinks of h. Heine, 
 a bear scaling a wall to get a honey pot; but when he is at 8 
 the top, he digs his strong paws vigorously in, and then it 
 is very hard to get him down. Perhaps he has not the easy 
 knack of descending possessed by his smart rival, and, once 
 'in,' it may require a positive commotion to get him 'out' of 
 his high place." 
 
 On the 22nd of February, 1836, Thiers formed a new 
 ministry. It was not to last long, however, and the sixth of 
 September, Thiers resigned owing to a reversal of policy by 
 Louis Philippe who, at the last minute, denied the advisability 
 of Thiers' policy to send troops to Spain for the purpose of 
 upholding the new Constitution granted by Isabella II. 
 
 The first ministry of Thiers had also witnessed the early v. Moniteur, 
 discovery of another attempt to be made on the life of Louis 4 5 I ^5 pt "' 
 Philippe, again this time planned by the Republicans now 
 known under two names "The Society of the Family" and 
 the "Society of the People's Rights." Thus the king was 
 a second time brought face to face with the grave dangers 
 menacing the dynasty and a new policy, long in contempla- 
 tion but never before tried, was inaugurated under the Mole 
 Ministry ( 1836-1839) . This new plan was known as the 
 
 the Republicans or Communists I would strongly advise these ex- 
 cellent weak-witted individuals to get hold of Guizot for their minis- 
 ter, and I would give just the same advice to 'Henricinquists' (Carlists) 
 in case they should be restored one day to power." Lutece, Franzosische 
 Ziistande II, L. 
 
 79 
 
"policy of personal government/' 7 The new cabinet proved 
 to be the training school in which Guizot prepared himself 
 for his long term of office after the fall of Thiers in 1840. 8 
 Mole desired to put an end to the policy of repression as 
 instituted by the September Laws ; he had visions of social 
 reform, and of bringing about a reconciliation between parties, 
 v. La Men* It is interesting to note that he was supported in this by La 
 "Troisiemes' Mennais. The entrance of Guizot into the Ministry, how- 
 Milanges ever, prevented the pursuit of this plan, perhaps too ideal for 
 such troublesome times, and the former "Doctrinaires'' headed 
 by the new minister, soon formed a separate faction in the 
 cabinet against their chief. The first event of importance 
 was the Strassburg plot of October 30th, originated by the 
 Bonapartists and headed by Louis Napoleon. The "Culte 
 Napoleon'' had been gaining the people for some time. For 
 fear of appearing cowardly had they done otherwise, the gov- 
 ernment had foolishly allowed plays dealing with Napoleonic 
 era to be produced at the various theatres, and the news- 
 papers of the time were filled with verse and anecdotes about 
 the great Emperor. But the "Prince" was finally seized, brought 
 to Paris, and then shipped to America where he remained 
 silent for a brief interval. New elections were called for 
 the fourth of November, occasioned by the discussion on the 
 v. also Ida laws of "appanage," and these served the purpose of arousing 
 "Le iSi^des ^ e P ress f rom its lethargy. Attacks against the government 
 Barricades" became violent and the famous caricature of Louis Philippe 
 "La Poire Couronnee" appeared. Taken all in all, however, 
 this agitation had little, if any effect, and a period of com- 
 parative prosperity followed. France was given a breathing 
 space and was allowed to pursue and to develop for a time 
 her colonial policy. The conquest of Algiers was completed ; 
 there was peace at home and abroad. This state of affairs, 
 was of short duration. 
 
 7 Louis Philippe is said to have remarked to the Prussian ambassa- 
 dor : "Priez le Roi de prendre en consideration en me jugeant les 
 difficultes de ma position. Aussi j'ai du prendre pour six mois 
 M. Thiers pour montrer a la France ce qu'il vaut. II me faut infine- 
 ment de patience et de persistence pour conduire ma barque. " Louis 
 Philippe's own words to Werther, quoted Hillebrand I, 636. 
 
 * Mole, Guizot, de Remuscat, Duchatel, Montalivet. 
 
 80 
 
In 1839 there occurred a memorable event in the history of 
 parliamentary government in France. For some time there 
 had been gradually forming a coalition that seemed to por- 
 tend a reunion of some of those very elements dispersed at 
 the fall of the "Ministry of All Talents." In the Chamber there 
 had come about a feeling of sympathy among the leaders of 
 the different parties. Guizot and Dufaure of the Right Center, 
 Berryer of the Extreme Right, Thiers of the Left Center, 
 Odilon Barrot of the Dynastic Left, and even to a certain 
 extent Lamartine of the Extreme Left were slowly finding 
 that they all had certain causes for mutual action. But, this 
 was not the reunion for which Mole had striven; in fact, it 
 was against the Prime Minister himself that they were form- 
 ing. There is only one reason for this phenomenal 
 rapprochement; the majority of the Mole Cabinet were be- 
 come the blind instruments of the king's policy. This policy, 
 as it appeared to everyone, would be fatal; it demanded con- 
 cessions with bad grace at home and too ready concessions 
 abroad. The Eastern Question was already of prime im- 
 portance and many felt that therein lay France's glory. Then 
 too, the Spanish question was still unsettled. Furthermore, v . Moniteur, 
 a change of attitude on the part of the king rendered their 4 ~ 5 I g^ pt '' 
 solution more remote as far as France was concerned. For 
 Louis Philippe had long since begun to regret that he was 
 of revolutionary origin, and he now sought to have this fact Journal des 
 forgotten. His recent experiences had shown him that he 
 need no longer expect much from the Liberals, and he had 1836 
 in contemplation a thorough policy of reaction. By 1839, 
 then, Louis Philippe was resolved to discard nearly all appear- 
 ances of liberalism and he was now more likely to listen to ^filnes^ 
 the cunning of Metternich. As we have seen, the Austrian Sept. 5, 
 until 1836 had employed a policy of intimidation in regard l ^ 
 to the July Monarchy, and during this period the king had 
 kept aloof from him in a wary fashion. 9 But upon the inau- v ^ e tter- 
 guration by Louis Philippe of a policy of personal govern.- rrich Xach 
 ment, the direct influenceof old reactionary doctrines became PapferTn, 
 
 V, VI and 
 
 "Metternich commenca par traiter Louis Philippe en ennemi sans yij • especi- 
 lui faire du mal, et finit par le traiter en ami sans lui faire du bien." ally VI and 
 Debidour, "Etudes Critiques," Metternich et la Monarchic de Juillet, VII 
 P- 331. 
 
 81 
 
apparent. The first evidence of this new influence is found 
 Hillebrand, in the year 1836 during Thiers' first term as Premier. It 
 ^et ' se? vv ^ ^ e remem bered that in that year Louis Philippe suddenly 
 reversed the policy he had formerly pursued in regard to 
 Spain, and a quarrel with Thiers, leading to the latter's resig- 
 nation, followed. At that very moment the king was hunting 
 a wife for his son and heir, the due d'Orleans, and was con- 
 sidering the possibility of obtaining the consent of the Emperor 
 to a marriage with the Archduchess Theresa. This quarrel 
 with Thiers also led to a brief estrangement with England, 
 for the latter country had interpreted his action as a re- 
 nunciation of the Quadruple Alliance. The significant fact 
 is that for the moment the king did not seem to care. The 
 second indication of a tendency on the part of the king to 
 reverse his former policies is still more convincing; Louis 
 Philippe seemed to have lost interest in the final settlement 
 of Belgian affairs. Here were two great events in which the 
 king had shown such interest in the years 1833 and 1834; 
 how account for this change of attitude T The question is 
 answered by the following fact ; for some time it had been 
 known that Louis Philippe, through Saint-Aulaire, was carry- 
 ing on a considerable correspondence with Metternich. It 
 was to combat this new influence, then, that the "Coalition" 
 was formed, and to save France from a new peril they re- 
 solved to strike at once. It was when Louis Philippe (through 
 Mole) seemed likely to definitely reverse his entire attitude 
 towards Spain that the Coalitionists decided to act. Other 
 questions, less important were pending, and using these 
 the coalition protested. New elections were called. On 
 March 8, 1839 the new chamber was returned, and it was 
 found that there were 252 Coalitionists against 207 Minis- 
 terial. Mole resigned on that day. The first effort of Met- 
 ternich had failed ; the English Alliance, one of the bases 
 of the July Monarchy, had been saved by the actions of the 
 Parliamentary Coalition. 
 
 If, however, Metternich's plot did not succeed the first time, 
 it was not long before another event would give him the 
 opportunity he sought. After a brief interval during which 
 time there occurred the riot of the "Society of the Seasons," 
 
 82 
 
the Soult ministry was formed. It lasted but six 
 months. Soult was not vigorous, and seemed totally unfit to 
 cope with a very serious question of foreign policy now ap- 
 pearing on the political horizon. The Chambers demanded 
 Thiers, and the disagreement upon the question of the dot 
 of the due de Memours became the occasion of the Marshal's 
 downfall. Nothing more remained for Louis Philippe to do 
 but to call a man from the Left Center. Accordingly, on the 
 fourth of March, 1840, Thiers formed his second ministry. 
 One main question occupied the entire attention of the country 
 during this year and that was the affair of Mehemet-Ali and 
 the Orient. 
 
 The Turkish Empire was at this time embroiled with one of 
 its former vassals, Mehemet-Ali, who more than once had 
 saved the Sultan from serious defeat. As a reward for his 
 services he had asked of Mahomet the hereditary vice-regal 
 rights over Egypt and Syria with the express stipulation 
 that he would always acknowledge the sovereignty of the 
 Porte. But the Sultan feeling more independent because 
 of a recent treaty with Russia whereby the Tsar in return 
 for promised protection obtained the right of entrance into 
 Dardanelles, refused his vassal's request. Mehemet-Ali then 
 complained to France, England and Austria, warning them 
 that Russia controlled nearly half the Ottoman Empire, and 
 was oppressing it under the pretext of protecting it and that 
 she would "become in the end a colossus which, standing l. Blanc, 
 between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, would make jj^fo' 
 the world turn left or right according to her own caprice." 
 The powers to whom this appeal was made acknowledged the 
 truth of this observation, but busied as they were with their v. de Malor- 
 own particular designs, they did not heed the warning it ^gj^^" 
 contained. England alone seems to have paid any attention AH 
 to it. But when Ibrahim, the son of Mehemet-Ali entered 
 into Syria with an armed force they all took fright, and cried 
 with one voice, "The Integrity of the Ottoman Empire must V * Queen* 
 be preserved." England, in accordance with her entente, had Victoria, 
 asked Louis Philippe to protest against the Dardanelles ar- ^^^0, 
 rangement in 1839, but he had declined. So, Palmerston in 
 1840 turned elsewhere to see what could be arranged, for he 
 
 83 
 
L. Blanc, 
 II, 643-4 
 
 Edinburgh 
 
 Review, 
 Feb., 1840 
 
 Metter- 
 nich's own 
 words, De- 
 bidour, 
 "Etudes 
 Critiques," 
 341-2 
 
 felt that there would not be the slightest hope of assistance 
 from France. Furthermore France had already shown her- 
 self favourable to Mehemet-Ali. This, from England's point 
 of view, rendered the French position all the more suspicious, 
 for Mehemet-Ali had refused to grant a trade route for 
 British commerce ; might this not be the price he had paid 
 for French favour? To Palmerston, therefore, the Algiers 
 occupation and this shown of friendship to Mehemet-Ali could 
 mean but one thing — the extension of the French sphere 
 of influence in the East. Public opinion in England was 
 rapidly changing to Palmerston's view, and in a few months 
 they had come to believe what one periodical had observed 
 earlier in the year ; that France desired to become at Alexandria 
 what Russia had become at Constantinople. Here, then, was 
 Metternich's opportunity ; Russia and England had a common 
 grievance, Russia because of the occupation of Algiers which 
 seemed to threaten her own influence, and England because 
 of the essential differences between her Eastern policy and 
 that of France. The steps leading up to the Quadrilateral 
 Treaty were many and complicated. In brief, it soon became 
 evident that England, Austria and Russia were to be lined 
 up against Mehemet-Ali and France. The treaty was signed 
 at London on July 15th between England, Russia, Prussia 
 and Austria, for the purpose of subduing Mehemet-Ali and 
 insuring "the integrity of the Ottoman Empire." War seemed 
 imminent, but suddenly Louis Philippe checked Thiers. Could 
 it have been the words of Metternich that arrested Louis 
 Philippe in the fulfilment of the policy of his progressive 
 Premier: "The King belongs to one party and the Ministry 
 to another. In such a situation, how can France be trusted?" 
 The "King of the Glorious Days" bowed before a veritable 
 reincarnation of the Holy Alliance, and Thiers resigned Oc- 
 tober 29th. France had been again excluded from the 
 European concert, the English Alliance seemed broken. It 
 remained for Guizot to repair for a time and then reestablish 
 the old state of affairs. 
 
 These were, in the main, the political events of importance 
 during the Period of Parliamentary Rivalry and Decline fol- 
 lowing the Ancona affair and the condemnation of I'Avenir. 
 
 84 
 
During that period personal government was established, then 
 
 overthrown, only to be reestablished through the weakness 
 
 of a king duped by the clever negotiations of one of the 
 
 greatest diplomats of his age. Having this outline of events 
 
 always in mind, it now remains to follow the fortunes of the R - p - ™ 51 
 
 party condemned by an act of Papal authority in 1832. La 
 
 Mennais, it will be remembered, was abandoned, Lacordaire 
 
 thrown into terror at his own rash acts and sayings, and 
 
 Montalembert torn between the love of his former leader Debidour, 
 
 and his faith. Disconsolate the latter wandered over Europe 430-1 
 
 seeking the distractions his former guide had bade him seek, 
 
 and after a long interval he found an interest in the forgotten 
 
 legend of St. Elizabeth. This labour prepared his mind for 
 
 a still greater work. In the meantime, the Liberal Catholic 
 
 0 , . . Thureau- 
 
 cause was not without its new disciples and reorganizers. Dangin, 
 Such a great movement could not be eradicated by the mere ^° n ' ^2*3^ 
 stroke of a pen on a Papal allocution. Another group was 
 forming, separate and distinct at first, but soon to have direct 
 continuity with the silenced party of VAvenir through the 
 adherence of Lacordaire, de Coux, de Carne, the brothers 
 Bore and Montalembert. And while these men did not carry 
 the mantle of La Mennais with them into the new group, 
 while his name was often openly disavowed, still they did 
 not escape from his general teachings, or his professed 
 theories. The new Liberal Catholic Movement, to be known 
 later as the "Neo-Catholic" Movement, was merely the "epoque 
 organique" of an earlier formative and critical period; much 
 was abandoned but nothing was added. In the end, Montalem- 
 bert and Lacordaire received the reward of their earlier and 
 less successful ventures, by seeing their efforts crowned in 
 the granting of some of those very rights which VAvenir 
 had so valiantly demanded — liberty of association and liberty 
 of teaching. After all are there not included in these two 
 privileges all the other liberties demanded by the young dis- 
 ciples of La Mennais? Why, then, was the new group to 
 succeed where La Mennais had failed? There are many 
 answers to that question and all of them are important, 
 but the principle reasons to be remembered at this time are 
 three in number. In the first place, they had the patience 
 
 85 
 
and the faith that La Mennais lacked. Then, too, they con- 
 centrated their efforts in three single directions, charity and 
 the demand for the two liberties mentioned above. And 
 lastly, they were careful always to have the support of some 
 of the higher clergy. It was indeed a smaller programme, 
 and less noble also in that its aspirations did not mount so 
 high. But these characteristics became the virtue of the 
 new movement and the secret of its success. L'Avenir with 
 its interests in Poland, Belgium, Ireland, and Germany, with 
 its demands for reforms really needed not only in France 
 but all over the world as well, had soared into the realms of 
 the impossible, and had created a real confusion of purposes. 
 There was to be little inconsistency after all, with the early 
 professions of this offspring of La Mennais' group and their 
 submission to Gregory XVI. In the end they found that 
 they could advocate and practice the same doctrines, in mod- 
 eration, as they had done in 1 830-1 831. If anywhere, the 
 inconsistency lay in the action of the Papacy, for two years 
 later it permitted the Liberal Catholics to recommence their 
 work, and yet the Encylical "Mirari Vos'* was not disavowed. 
 Such a contradiction is hard to explain. It only indicates 
 once again the subordination of the Vatican to the influence 
 of things temporal ; Italy was now comparatively at peace, 
 there was no danger. The Liberal Catholics might speak 
 again, but without the mention of politics. The whole affair, 
 on Rome's side is utter casuistry. There were, moreover, 
 other virtues the new school possessed which were to its 
 advantage. It was more general, less individual ; more human, 
 less theoretical ; and, finally, it appealed to all Catholics and not 
 to a small group of enthusiasts in that it required its members 
 to disregard all dynastic questions, all political turmoils in 
 France and elsewhere, and to fight for the rights of the 
 church alone. The era of Napoleon and Pius VII had wit- 
 nessed the renaissance of Ultramontanism, the era of La 
 Mennais and Gregory XVI had seen its first activity, while 
 the era of Montalembert, Ozanam and Piux IX witnessed 
 its transformation from the temporal to the spiritual alone, 
 and its triumph, as the logical result of such a change. This 
 gradual evolution, however, did not prevent it from exer- 
 
 86 
 
rising quite an influence on the political life of 1840- 1848, 
 years when Guizot as sole agent of the king was fostering 
 a policy that brought to its inevitable end the July Monarchy. 
 The Liberal Roman Catholics gained their victory in the 
 Period of Decline and Transformation of the Monarchical 
 Principle as established at the Revolution of 1830. 
 
 The beginnings of the new movement were much more 
 humble, much less important, and attended with far less eclat 
 than the debut of the former school. They began by a single 
 act of charity. 
 
 In 1834 a young student at Paris wrote to M. de Falconnet : 
 "I am surrounded in certain respects by many temptations ; 
 from every side they cry out to me, they urge me on, they 
 push me toward a career entirely different from my studies; 
 simply because God and my education have endowed me 
 with a slight 'largesse' of ideas and a certain breadth of 
 tolerance, they seek to make me the chief of 'la Jeunesse 
 Catholique' in this country. ... I do not tell you this from 
 pride, for, on the contrary, I realize only too well my own Lettre, 7 
 weakness, I, who have not yet attained my twenty-first year : Janv., 1834 
 their compliments rather humiliate me, and I often want to choisies 
 laugh at my own importance. But I have no cause for laugh- 
 ter, on the contrary I suffer unbelievable torments when I 
 realize that all these thoughts may rise to my head, in- 
 toxicate me, and force me to give up what until now I have 
 regarded as my chosen career, what has been the constant wish 
 of my parents, and what I really feel I want to do myself." 
 
 Thus wrote Frederic Ozanam, a student in Paris, just two 
 years after the fall of La Mennais. A youth delicate in 
 health but gifted with a wonderful energy, he was destined 
 to become the founder of the new school, and later, in the 
 highest circle of learning in France, a distinguished professor 
 
 of literature and history, who in all his works served the ~ , 
 t- • 1 j 1 ■•«•<■ Charles 
 raitn, and by his life as a scholar, a friend of the poor and Huit, 99 
 
 a Catholic, merits all the honours with which Rome has em- 
 bellished his memory since his death and which she may be 
 holding in store for him. 10 The life of young Ozanam reads 
 
 10 The centenary of the birth of Ozanam was celebrated recently 
 (1913) in Paris and there has been talk of his beatification. Surely 
 Rome could render no greater honour to herself, to those of her faith 
 
 8/ 
 
v. F. Oza- 
 
 nam, 
 'Thilosophie 
 Chretienne," 
 
 I, 4 
 
 v. ex La- 
 martime to 
 Ozanam, 6 
 Oct., 1831 
 "Pages 
 choisies" 
 
 like a poem of the golden ages of Christianity and yet is 
 tinged with enough of the modern thought of today to 
 serve as a noble example to his successors. His works, in 
 turn, possessed all the beauties of Chateaubriand with none, 
 happily, of his faults. They were scientific, logical and 
 persuasive but lacked the absurd sentimentality of the earlier 
 poet. His "£tudes Germaniques," "History of Civilization 
 in the Fifth Century" and his other great work "Dante and 
 Catholic Philosophy," revealed Christianity in its true and 
 original light, simple, trusting and of enduring power. Their 
 effect was remarkable; they raised the hearts of those readers 
 who believed but feared for their belief, and showed to the 
 proud men of the so-called "Enlightenment" the very light 
 for which they sought to create, a substitute which they 
 failed in the end to sustain. This, in brief, was part of the 
 service Frederic Ozanam rendered to his people. To others 
 again the example of his life, thought and friendship was a 
 still greater inspiration. 11 
 
 Such was Ozanam, not ascetic but moderate ; unselfish and 
 modest. Thus it was that at the very moment when a too 
 proud and therefore less exact science cried aloud that they 
 were sounding the death-knell of Christianity in France, a 
 young and ardent believer, their equal in ability, entered the 
 field of literature to defend and release his Faith. 12 The 
 
 and to the Christian world at large, than the elevation of this beautiful 
 character, the father of a family, a man of the world and a sincere 
 believer, to the ranks of the many prophets and martyrs in whose 
 steps he has followed. 
 
 11 Introduction of Pierre Chaveau to "F. Ozanam," P. A. R. D. 
 Chaveau. Intro, (p 3) : "Toute sa vie fut une simple predication, 
 par la parole, par l'ecriture et par Taction." 
 
 12 "C'est qu'en effet que cette historie litteraire et sociale des temps 
 barbares esquissee d'une main si habile et si sure, n'a qu'un but; 
 mettre en lumiere la longue et laborieuse education dont l'Europe est 
 redevable au Catholicisme." Charles Huit. Ozanam 10. Speaking of 
 his versatility : "En parcourant ce vaste ensemble de notes, de legons, 
 d'ccrits, on croit parcourir 1'atelier d'un sculpteur qu'aurait disparu 
 jeune encore, et qui aurait laisse beaucoup d'ourages arrives a un inegal 
 degre de perfection. II y a la des statues terminees et polies avec 
 une extreme diligence, il en est qui ne sont qu'ebauchees et degrossies 
 a peine mais toutes portent l'empreinte de la meme ame et la marque 
 
 88 
 
greatness of Ozanam's talent could not be denied even by his 
 strongest opponents and the men less likely to notice him be- 
 cause of his religious and political views could not fail to 
 render homage to him. 
 
 In 1832, then, this young scholar was in Paris, a student 
 at the Sorbonne and the Ecole de Droit. The conditions 
 among the students in Paris were not what might be called 
 happy, there was much restlessness and discussion. Every 
 day the University was becoming more proud of the power 
 given it by the "Code Universitaire" of Napoleon, and less 
 tolerant of its possible rivals. Hence its hostile attitude to 
 religion and to all those, not only Catholics, who desired 
 the right to teach their own systems of philosophy. Alarmed 
 to a considerable extent by the showing made in the courts 
 by the "Agence" in the "Ecole Libre" affair (1831), its at- 
 titude had become more and more hostile until the University 
 itself appeared in many ways to be the very center of anti-re- 
 ligious feeling, while such men as Jouffroy, Quinet, Michelet, 
 Cousin and others had not hesitated to attack the Catholic 
 faith in their lectures and in their works. Jouffroy, in par- 
 ticular, had become offensive in this respect, for, regarding 
 religion as a system of philosophy which was on the wane, he 
 had criticised it in this light and referred to the ancient Chris- 
 tian hierarchy as an institution of the past. This treatment 
 could not help but arouse in the hearts of some of his young 
 hearers newly come from homes where Christian principles 
 were still upheld, a decided feeling of resentment, and it was 
 not long before a small group of them, having common sym- 
 pathies in this respect, formed an organized opposition for 
 the purpose of contradicting either by writing theses or by 
 cross questioning their lecturers, certain statements made by 
 the "Universitaires" during their conferences. In 1832 
 Ozanam wrote: 
 
 "Twice already I have taken my part in this good work j^pj^ 
 
 by addressing to them (the lecturers) my written objections. 1832 
 
 But we have had most success in the course of M X fprob- "? a &? s ~7, 
 
 choisies, 
 
 ably Jouffroy). On two occasions he has attacked the Church ; 45 
 
 de la meme main." F. Ozanam. Introduction (2) of J. J. Amper to 
 Ozanam Works, p. 2. 
 
 89 
 
the first, in treating the Papacy as a passing institution, born 
 under Charlemagne and dying today ; the second in accusing 
 the clergy of having always favoured despotism. Our re- 
 plies, which were read publicly, have had the best result on 
 both the professor and on his hearers who have applauded 
 us. But the most useful effect in this work has ibeen to 
 demonstrate to 'la jeunesse etudiante' that it is possible to 
 be a Catholic and have common sense, to love religion and 
 liberty at one and the same time, and finally, to draw them 
 from a state of religious indifference and accustom them to 
 serious discussion." 
 
 This passage, particularly the latter part, is interesting in 
 more than one respect. It shows not only the tendency of 
 the "Universitaires" and the germs of a second nascent re- 
 ligious reaction under the July Monarchy, but it suggests also 
 the very ideals of La Mennais and the earlier school "Dieu 
 et la liberte," a reaction against indifference and the uphold- 
 3ebidour m & °^ Christian doctrine based on "sens commun." Fol- 
 E et E, lowing out still another ideal of La Mennais, almost, in fact, 
 432-3 seeming to have read his injunction "go, like the twelve 
 fishermen and reconquer the world," this small group began 
 to organize. In 1833 they founded, after the model of an 
 older society known as the "Society of Good Works", an 
 organization called for a time "les Conferences Saint Vincent 
 de Paul," later named "la societe Saint Vincent de Paul." 
 It was essentially a lay organization governed by laymen and 
 was, furthermore, distinct and separate from all political so- 
 cieties. Its aims were humble and consisted of the dispensing 
 of charity, the instruction of the poor and the assuring of re- 
 ligious consolation to prisoners and the dying poor. The 
 influence of this new society rapidly spread ; people were" 
 attracted to it by its very simplicity and by the fact that it 
 was a religious guild devoted to the sole interest of religion 
 and free from all political controversy. To the joy of its 
 founder it remained so. Phenomenal progress attended its 
 debut ; within a year it had four branches in Paris and others 
 in Nimes, Lyons, Nantes, Rennes, Dijon, Toulouse and Rome. 
 Bailly the first president, then organized a general council 
 at Paris. The Society Saint Vincent de Paul is now one 
 
 90 
 
of the greatest and most efficient organizations of the Roman 
 
 Communion. Branches of it are found wherever there is a 
 
 Roman Catholic parish, and in France, the country of its 
 
 birth, it is become the foremost charitable organization in 
 
 the church. Thus the very first effort of the New Liberal 
 
 Catholic Party enjoyed immediate success, and the young 
 
 leader, so encouraged, eagerly set to work on other plans. 13 
 
 But the Society Saint Vincent de Paul did not satisfy all 
 
 their needs ; a more open discussion was necessary, and this 
 
 the interest of the new society would not permit. The leaders, 
 
 therefore, decided on a bold step. Ozanam, assisted by a 
 
 few of his supporters Lejouteux, de Montazet and Madame 
 
 Swetchine, the friend and adviser of the young enthusiasts, 
 
 appealed to the Archbishop of Paris, Mgr. de Quelen, asking 
 
 him to throw open the pulpit of Notre Dame to the discussion 
 
 of present day religious questions. Their main object was 
 
 to combat thereby the theories of the University and the 
 
 lectures of M.M. JoufTroy and Michelet in particular. But, 
 
 de Quelen, who had had enough experience with the too 
 
 hasty eagerness of their predecessors was wary, and while Debidour 
 
 he did encourage them and is said to have exclaimed to E et E, 433 
 
 Ozanam: "J'embrasse en votre personne toute le jeunesse 
 
 catholique," he was nevertheless unwilling to comply with 
 
 their entire request and undertook to supervise and even Qiatelain° 
 
 deliver some of the sermons himself. For the time being "Pages- 
 
 ... >> 
 
 the conferences had little success. In the meantime, however, c ^1^%' 
 Lacordaire had found his calling, and by his lectures to the 
 students at the "College Stanislaus" he was accomplishing 
 the very work the New Liberal Catholics had wished to 
 begin. His conferences created a great sensation, became 
 fashionable, arid were attended by such eminent mem as 
 Chateaubriand, Victor Hugo, Lamartine, and Berryer. The 
 new group, in turn, were not slow to attend, and soon the 
 
 13 In May of that year Ozanam wrote : 'Taxes de bigots par nos 
 camarades impis, de liberaux, et temeraires par les gens ages; inter- 
 pelles a chaque jour sur ce que nous pensons, sur ce que nous f aisons ; 
 soumis au pouvoir arbitraire de nos professeurs de l'Universite ayant 
 a craindre quelquefois pour nous memes au temps des emeutes, et 
 surtout pour nos parents eloignes de nous; c'est une existence bien 
 bizarre et bien ennuyeuse." Ozanam, 16 Mai 1833. Pages choisies 65. 
 
 91 
 
"College Stanislaus" became the rendezvous of the Liberal 
 Catholics in Paris. Even these lectures, however, did not 
 escape a certain amount of protest from the reactionary party 
 at Rome and the Carlists in France. But the voice of the 
 latter was not, for the moment, strong enough and the lec- 
 tures continued for a time to enjoy the brilliant success 
 they had met with in January 1834. 14 
 
 Yet another circumstance favoured them; the efforts of 
 de Quelen, Frayssinous and MacCarthy at Notre Dame had 
 not met with much success and when the Young Catholics 
 appealed a second time, the Archbishop listened to them. In 
 1835 tne pulpit of Notre Dame was opened to Lacordaire, a 
 former editor of VAvenir. To the eyes of many it seemed 
 in itself a tardy recognition of the effects of the earlier school. 
 The success was immediate. One historian gives a description 
 of the scenes enacted weekly at Notre Dame well worth a 
 brief citation: 15 
 
 "To watch them only during the hours of waiting, talking, 
 unfolding their newspapers, reading profane books and turn- 
 ing their backs to the altar, you would have easily have rec- 
 ognized that this assembly was not composed of those ac- 
 customed to frequent churches. It was, indeed, the new 
 Society of the Nineteenth Century, just as it had emerged from 
 the Revolution of 1830. To quite an extent dechristianized, 
 it was that very society which after having assisted as indif- 
 ferent or amused spectators at the sack of St. Germain de 
 l'Auxerrois, four years later was forming about a Christian 
 pulpit such an audience as had not been seen, perhaps, since 
 the time of St. Bernard ; it was this society which thus re- 
 established its broken relations with religion and by its very 
 numbers gave to Catholicism formerly proscribed, a new 
 proof of its importance and popularity; it was a sudden tran- 
 sition from hate to honour which those Christians who had 
 seen the two periods before and after 1835 were later unable 
 to recall without their eyes filling involuntarily with tears. . . . 
 As if to complete the contrast and to mark more exactly 
 the progress made, the prelate who presided at these services 
 and for whose benediction the crowd respectfully inclined 
 
 14 d'Haussonville Lacordaire, ch. V. 
 "Debidour, E et E 433-4. 
 
 92 
 
was that very archbishop who was yesterday chased from Thureau- 
 his sacked palace and forced to hide in the capital of his eT^e', 
 diocese." 9" 12 
 
 This description cannot be the exaggeration of a later 
 historian for we have Ozanam's own words as confirmation. 16 
 But Lacordaire's success was not to be repeated the following 
 year for, the Conservatives and Carlists in the church, most 
 of whom were Gallicans, taking fright at the phenomenal 
 success of the "Neo-Catholics" as they now began to call 
 them, brought pressure to bear on Mgr. de Quelen. Conse- 
 quently the next year the Conferences were taken up by 
 another, de Ravignan, who performed his duty well but who 
 did not obtain the sensational success of Lacordaire. 
 
 At this point the question may well be asked: why had the 
 "Neo-Catholics" met with such good fortune? It could not 
 have come about through the eagerness of their young leaders 
 alone. The answer is found in the change of mind that had 
 taken place among the people many of whom were now 
 ready, willing and eager to receive the good news the "Neo- 
 Catholics" brought them. There are three principal reasons 
 for the transformation that was taking place in the minds of 
 so many men of the July Revolution. One was the fact that 
 the church now seemed to have lost all vestiges of political 
 power; another cause was that the general mental tendency 
 of the age was a deep melancholy, great discouragement and 
 a consequent seeking for something assured and fixed to which 
 they might attach themselves ; while the third reason was 
 the favourable attitude of the "Ministry of All Talents" at 
 the outset of the "Neo-Catholic" movement. 
 
 19 Le grand rendezvous des jeunes gens catholiques et non-catholiques 
 cette annee a ete a Xotre Dame. Tu as sans doute entendu parler des 
 conferences de l'abbe Lacordaire. Elles n'ont eu qu'un defaut, de n'etre 
 trop peu nombreuses. II en a fait huit au milieu d'un auditoire de 
 pres de six mille hommes sans compter les femmes. Ces conferences sur 
 l'figlise sur sa necessite, sur son infaillibilite, sa constitution, son his- 
 toire, etc., ont toutes ete tres belles ; mais la derniere a ete d'une elo- 
 quence superieure a tout ce que j'ai jamais entendu. Mgr. de Quelen, 
 qui avait assiste a toutes les conferences a adresse la derniere fois 
 a M. Lacordaire des remerciements solennels et l'a nomine chanoine 
 de la Cathedrale. Voila qui nous met du baume dans le sang." Ozanam, 
 2 Mai 1835. Pages choisies 75. 
 
 93 
 
As soon as it became evident to the people of the time 
 that the church had lost her political prestige and was in fact, 
 being persecuted by her enemies, the "Universitaires," the 
 attitude of the people seemed to change and many of those 
 who had been the first to pursue and attack the Catholic 
 faith now turned to it as the symbol of so many other in- 
 stitutions now menaced by the direction the new government 
 was following. The church appeared to them in a new light, 
 it seemed an institution noble yet humble, necessary and 
 meekly asking their support. If men did not believe in it, 
 they were at least disposed to respect it, and to defend it if 
 menaced. The criticism of religion and the caricatures on 
 the subject, so common a form of attack in the early days 
 of the July Monarchy, now seemed to be fast disappearing, 
 and even those who might have scorned its doctrines recognized 
 its political utility and were not unwilling to assist indirectly 
 in its reestablishment among the people. 17 The situation, then, 
 was not ideal but was certainly far improved from that of 
 former times ; at least a political sympathy had been created. 
 
 The second fact favouring a religious reaction is probably 
 the most important of the three — the actual mental condition 
 among the people of the time. It is a reason more human 
 v. chapter and more comprehensive, perhaps, but none the less exact. 
 1 To understand it, however, it is necessary to recall how in the 
 
 early days of the July Monarchy, Frenchmen again embued 
 Thureau wlt h an overcon fident pride, the inevitable result of years of 
 Dangin, Revolution, had sought to construct not only an original system 
 II, 357-8 0 £ political science, but of philosophical thought as well. Some 
 of these creations had lived a short time but all, in the end 
 failed. Then, their self-established creeds and philosophies 
 failing, their political ideals denied them, the men of 1830 
 found themselves before a great chasm which they themselves 
 
 17 "Ce n'est pas que tous ceux qui se taisent ainsi aient conQu un grand 
 amour pour la religion ; mais il est evident qu'au moins ils n'ont plus 
 d'haines contre elle. C'est deja un grand pas. La plupart des liberaux 
 que les passions irreligieuses avaient jadis pousses a le tete de Impo- 
 sition, tiennent maintenant un langage tout different de celui qu'ils 
 tenaient alors. Tous reconnaissent l'utilite politique d'une religion et 
 deplorent la faiblesse de l'esprit religieux dans la population." de 
 Tocqueville Corresp. ined. Mai, 1835. I. 48. 
 
 94 
 
had created and over which they knew not how to pass. At 
 first too confident in their own hand-made institutions they 
 had been able to forget the gap that had suddenly opened 
 before them, in the distraction of the rapidly passing political 
 events and the hopes attending the early days of the July 
 Monarchy. By 1835, however, they were weary of the rapid 
 political pace they had set, and many also were beginning 
 to feel that perhaps, after all this monarchy that they had 
 created was not to fulfill their highest hopes. It was not long, 
 therefore, until all except those vitally concerned, had lost much 
 of their former interest in the July Monarchy. Already that 
 very mental apathy had set in which Victor Hugo had de- 
 scribed in his preface to "le Roi s'amuse." For many, then, 
 the political interest with which they had served to veil the 
 chasm which they must one day cross, was fast disappearing, 
 and, as they gazed over the abyss now become more evident, 
 they found on the other side a deep impenetrable mist made 
 by their own minds. "Le dixhuitieme siecle a eu le plaisir 
 de' l'incredulite nous en avons eu la peine, nous en sentons le 
 vide," cried one of their number. 18 Furthermore, this con- 
 dition of melancholy prevailed not only among those who 
 sought for light and were beginning to find it, but among 
 the most hostile opponents of religion as well. 19 All was per- 
 meated with a profound melancholy and a tone of utter des- 
 pair. And so men's minds were prepared to receive the words 
 of the young enthusiasts. 
 
 18 de Sacy, "Varietes," II. 6, "de la Reaction religeuse," he con- 
 tinues : "C'est le moment ou il n'y a plus rien a atteigner, rien a detruire 
 . . . ou Ton s'apergoit trop souvent, non sans surprise, que Ton a fait le 
 vide en soi-meme et autour de soi, ce jour de reveil, c'est notre 
 epoque . . . cette incredulite, avec laquelle le i8 e siecle marchait si 
 legerement, pleine de confiance et de folle gaiete, est un poids acca- 
 blant pour nous, nous levons les yeux en haut, nous y cherchons, une 
 lumiere eteinte nous gemissons de ne plus la voir bruler." 
 
 19 v. Jouffroy, "Comment les dogmes finissent." He uttered a veritable 
 wail of despondency. In contrast to this despondency was the attitude 
 of the Neo-Catholics. Ozanam writes : "Tant que durera la vie 
 terrestre du genre humain, le mal est toujours quelque part sur la 
 terre, tantot comme tyran, tantot comme esclave. Jamais il ne fait de 
 si redoubtables efforts que lors qu'il voit sa tyrannie lui echapper; 
 pour ressaisir son sceptre qui tombe il remit toutes ses forces ; a toute 
 reaction religeuse correspond necessairement une reaction contraire du 
 
 95 
 
The attitude of the existing ministry was the third factor 
 influencing the beginnings of the "Neo-Catholic" revival. In 
 this factor the new party eventually found a real cause for 
 encouragement. The "Ministry of All Talents" were not blind 
 to the mental tendency we have just been considering, and 
 they soon adopted the policy of encouraging the prevailing 
 disposition to respect religion. From the very outset they 
 had recognized the political utility of Catholicism. The man 
 most responsible for the favorable attitude of the Broglie 
 Cabinet to religion was the Minister of Public Instruction. Al- 
 though a Protestant, Guizot did not fail to see the very great 
 interest the government should have to favour and foster such 
 a revival as the "Neo-Catholics" were trying to bring about. 
 Upon his entry into the Cabinet, therefore, he set to work 
 at once to resolve the difficult problem which had arisen as 
 to the proper functions of teacher and priest and to recon- 
 cile them. Such a policy alone, he thought, would settle the 
 question of instruction in France. 
 
 "If the priest defies or isolates himself from the instructor 
 or if the instructor regards himself as the independent rival 
 of the priest and not as his faithful auxiliary, the moral value 
 of the school is lost." 20 
 
 Pimpiete. Aussi tandisque le desert se fait autour des idoles du 
 XVIIP siecle, tandisque la solitude de nos temples se peuple de 
 nouveau, tandisque l'indifrerence s'aneantit et que M. Lacordaire fait 
 tonner la parole de Dieu sur une auditoir e de six mille hommes, le 
 rationalisme n'est point oisif; il multiplie ses revues periodiques, il 
 organise une propagande seductive autour des jeunes gens, il enfonce 
 de ses emissaires et assiege les hommes les plus illustres, il provoque 
 la defection entre ceux qui naguere etaient nos gloires ; il detrone l'abbe 
 de La Mennais de ces hauteurs ou son genie et sa foi l'avaient place; 
 il nous fait trembler pour la muse virginale de Lamartine . . . ces 
 choses sont tristes mais elles sont vraies. Nous sommes punis, catho- 
 liques, d'avoir mis plus de confiance dans la genie de nos grands 
 hommes que dans la puissance de Dieu. Nous sommes punis de nous 
 etre enorgueillis en leur personne d'avoir repousse avec quelque fierte les 
 efforts de l'incredule et de lui avoir montre pour nous justifier a ses 
 yeux, nos philosophies et nos poetes au lieu de lui montrer l'eternelle 
 croix." Ozanam, 16 Mai 1835. Pages choisies 77. 
 
 20 Guizot's own words, Bardoux 67. Guizot is said to have declared 
 before the chambers: "L'instruction morale et religieuse n'est pas, 
 comme le calcul, la geometrie, l'orthographie, une leqon qui se donne 
 
 96 
 
Following out this theory Guizot proceeded to widen the 
 bounds of religious privilege. In the very first year of his 
 administration as Minister of Public Instruction he passed a La ™ °J g ^ ne 
 law allowing the clergy to become members of the Committee 
 supervising primary instruction. Such overtures, however, did 
 not meet without opposition in the Chamber and the same Debidour, 
 year through the combined efforts of Dupin and Isambert laws E et E 345 
 were passed depriving the clergy of membership in the 
 "Conseils Generaux" and reducing the number of dioceses. 21 Thureau 
 Nevertheless, the church had made a decided advance along Dangin, 
 the path of governmental recognition and the law of 1833 by 342' 
 allowing the clergy to exert their influence in the Committee 
 on primary instruction practically allowed the existence of 
 private primary schools (for the most part religious) together v. Journal 
 with the public schools of the first grade in each commune. d Q* t \s3S 
 Later, in 1836, Guizot proposed another law that would have Moniteur, 
 allowed the free concurrence of all private institutions both I4 I ^5 in ' 
 primary, secondary and superior (University) with State in- 
 stitutions, but this was defeated. He had selected an un- 
 favourable opportunity to present his law, for it was on the 
 very eve of the dissolution of the "Ministry of All Talents." 
 This Cabinet had, however, done much for the cause of the 
 church in recognizing its rights and in declaring in no dubious 
 terms the right of the church to share in matters of public 
 instruction ; and later it was to prove a by no means unim- 
 
 en passant a une heure determinee apres laquelle il n'en est pas plus 
 question. La partie scientifique est la moindre de toutes dans l'instruc- 
 tion religieuse. Ce qu'il faut c'est que l'atmosphere generale de l'ecole 
 soit morale et religieuse. . . . Prenez garde d'un fait qui n'a jamais 
 eclate avec autant d'evidence que de notre temps . . . le develope- 
 ment intellectuel seul, separe du developement moral et religieux, 
 devient un principe d'orgueil, d'insubordination, d'egoisime et par 
 consequent de danger pour la societe." Guizot's own words. Thu- 
 reau Dangin, Hist. Mon., Juillet II, 341. 
 
 21 Among the opposition the general opinion seemed to be that the 
 "Doctrinaires" were again becoming allied with a liberal church party. 
 One paper criticized the ministry in the following terms : "L'associa- 
 tion doctrinaire de vouloir relever le clerge catholique de l'impuissance 
 dont l'avait frappe la resolution de Juillet" and their policy was 
 denounced as "un systeme suivi de la reaction en faveour du clerge." 
 Constitutionnel, 22 Mai 1833. 
 
 97 
 
v. London 
 Times, 
 Jan. 18, 
 1833 
 
 Montalem- 
 
 bert, 
 "Discours," 
 19 Mai, 6 
 Juillet, 1837 
 
 Foisset, 
 Monta- 
 lembert," 
 
 chs. 
 4 and 5 
 
 portant precedent that in the first years of their activity the 
 "Neo-Catholics" had found political allies timid but willing to 
 accord them the rights they demanded, in spite of the protests 
 of the opposition. This opposition, in turn, instead of proving 
 its boasted strength, betrayed rather its own inherent weakness 
 by its show of fear. 
 
 No party, no matter how ardent and sincere its protests 
 to the contrary, can, long exist without entering the field of 
 polemics, and the "Neo-Catholics" were not exceptions to this 
 rule. In fact, the need of some sort of representation in the 
 arena of politics became more urgent every day. Happily, 
 they did not lack fighters who would defend their cause — 
 not by riot as had been the case with their too enthusiastic 
 brethren of the provinces at Clichy in 1833, but in the 
 pulpit and in the chambers. Their preachers were already 
 well known and had been continuing their good work for 
 some time ; de Ravignan at Notre Dame, Lacordaire repeating 
 in the the provinces his success at Paris, and Dupanloup at 
 Orleans. A parliamentary champion now appeared in the 
 person of Charles de Montalembert, peer of France. It is at 
 this time that Ozanam, the real founder of the new group, 
 becomes less prominent as the movement assumes more the 
 aspect of a political controversy. His activity within the 
 church, however, lasted until the day of his death. To 
 the stronger and more able, physically, fell the duty of fight- 
 ing for her political rights. It was not until 1841 that the 
 leaders formed the groups around them into any definite 
 political party, but from 1836 they were regarded as a by no 
 means negligible faction in the political world. What, then, 
 were the political opinions of the leaders? Montalembert in 
 two speeches before the chamber of Peers had declared him- 
 self "partisan sincere de la Revolution de Juillet, ami loyal 
 de la dynastie que la representait." Lacordaire, on the other 
 hand was not so outspoken. He protested, "je n'ai jamais 
 ecrit une ligne qui puisse autoriser la pensee que je suis un 
 democrate" and he added that he also had not wished to ally 
 himself with the new government. This statement should 
 not be regarded in the light of an evasion or a quibble ; it is 
 simply an expression of the lack of party interest Lacordaire 
 professed in politics, a matter entirely subordinate, in his eyes. 
 
 98 
 
to religion. 22 Much later, Louis Veuillot (soon to become the 
 editor of the "Neo-Catholic," paper YUnivers) speaking of 
 their political attitude, said: "We accepted 1830 with its 
 charter, its king, its dynasty, and we exerted ourselves simply 
 to obtain from them the rights of the church. We had re- 
 solved to lean neither to right nor to left and adopted the 
 policy of no alliance with the Legitimists, no alliance with 
 any faction of the revolutionary parties." 23 It is not difficult 
 to imagine how the Gallicans received the appearance of a 
 church party entertaining such political doctrines and declin- 
 ing to ally themselves with them. Both factions, however, 
 mindful of the Pope's displeasure with Mgr. de Quelen at 
 an earlier date, refrained for the time from any political 
 unions with other parties. 24 
 
 From 1836 the government had a difficult part to play in 
 respect to religion. The office of Minister of Public Instruc- 
 tion came to require a man of almost infinite tact and patience, 
 for he had to steer a course between a discontented clergy, 
 part of whom formed the nucleus of a religious reaction, 
 and a University, now become the center of a Voltarian culte. 
 It will be remembered that during Guizot's tenure of office 
 he had shown himself favourable to the religious reaction; an 
 attitude which he confirmed by articles published after the 
 fall of the "Ministry of All Talents." 25 Under the Mole Cabi- 
 net the new party made a further gain, but more in the form 
 of an internal strengthening and upbuilding. Mole had said : 
 "The clergy shall be the sublime preserver of public order," 
 and then he had proceeded to leave the church free to act 
 in its own internal affairs. It was exactly the opportunity 
 the "Neo-Catholics" needed. Their progress must not be 
 too rapid and Mole's policy allowed them the opportunity for 
 internal development. In 1835 Lacordaire had retired from 
 the pulpit of Notre Dame and had spent the following year 
 carrying the conferences into the provinces. This work com- 
 
 Ibid., Oct., 
 
 1838 
 "Du Catho- 
 licisme et 
 de la Phi- 
 losophic en 
 France 
 
 Thureau 
 Dangin, 
 E et E, 63 
 
 v. d'Haus- 
 sonville, 
 Chap. VI 
 
 Thureau 
 Dangin, 
 II, 339 
 
 22 Lacordaire's own words. Thureau Dangin, E et E 57. d'Haus- 
 sonville. 134. 
 
 23 Louis Veuillot's own words. Thureau Dangin, E et E 59. 
 
 24 Le Correspondant, 10 Sept. 1872. 
 
 25 V. Revue Franchise, Few 1838. "De la Religion dans les Societes 
 Modernes." 
 
 99 
 
V. Genin, pleted, he made a second visit to Rome and while there he 
 cm l'Etat 6 rece i yeQl the habit of St. Dominique. Then, returning to France 
 he reestablished the order within its very borders. This ac- 
 tion has two significant phases ; it marks the commencement of 
 the return to France of the orders — the Trappists, Jesuits, 
 and Carthusians came back in flocks ; but it may also be 
 said to denote the alliance of certain of these orders with the 
 "Neo-Catholic" movement; Lacordaire of I'Avenir and "Con- 
 ferences de Notre Dame" fame a Dominican ! The contrast 
 is still more heightened by the appointment of de Ravignan 
 his successor at Notre Dame, as provincial of the Company 
 of Jesus in France. For the moment it really seemed as if 
 the eyes of Rome were opening to the importance of the 
 "Jeunesse Liberale. " Other orders quickly followed in the 
 footsteps of their more daring predecessors. In 1837 there 
 
 were four hundred establishments of the Lazaristes in France 
 v. Thureau . . 
 
 Dangin, with a capital of 20,000,000 francs, while the Sisters of 
 
 III, ch. IX Charity numbered six thousand. Protests from the opposition 
 became more frequent but the attitude of Mole and the 
 "Juste Milieu" party was a guarantee of protection to them. 
 Mole's action, however, was not entirely disinterested, for he 
 saw in the church a barrier against republican and socialistic 
 doctrines. Still another fact now apparent for the first time, 
 assisted the new group ; Louis Philippe began to coquette 
 with them. He now seemed desirous of forgetting his rev- 
 olutionary origin ; What better way offered itself than in 
 the protection and support of the church? The crosses 
 
 Debidour, that had been torn down from the tribunals at the time of 
 E et E 4^7 
 
 ' the July Revolution were now set up and adorned once more 
 all the public courts. It was indeed, a curious change that 
 had come about. What had the opposition to say to it? 
 Their view is curious : 
 
 "We are Catholics, barely Catholics by name, Catholics 
 without faith, without practice, and they warn us lest we fall 
 under the yoke of the ultramontane orders ! In truth, let 
 us look at ourselves more closely, and let us try to become 
 Journal des better acquainted with ourselves. Let us believe in the ap- 
 4 Janv pearance and in the truths of those liberties, those institutions 
 1839 of which we are so proud. Great philosophers that we are 
 let us at least believe in our philosophy." 
 
 100 
 
Shortly after the return of the orders to France Lacordaire 
 published his "Memoire pour le retablissement en France des 
 Freres Precheurs." The same year witnessed the appearance 
 of Louis Blanc's "Organization of Labour." It seemed as if 
 the government would have to choose between the two ex- 
 tremes these books represented. In the interim, a progressive 
 ministry came in and by Thiers' appointment, Cousin, a known 
 enemy of the church despite his many protestations to the 
 contrary, became Minister of Public Instruction. The "Neo- 
 Catholics" restrained themselves no longer, but demanded the 
 privilege of the charter not for themselves alone but for all. 
 Their protest against Cousin was not long in vain, for, Louis 
 Philippe, duped by Metternich, soon caused Thiers' withdrawal 
 and Guizot was called in to repair the evil he had done. 
 
 Throughout the entire period of Parliamentary Rivalry and 
 Decline, then, "La Jeunesse Romantique et Catholique" of 
 Paris continued to gain more adherents and sympathy in 
 the political, intellectual and social world. The chronicles 
 of the time are filled with accounts of the activities and 
 interests of such men as the leaders we have mentioned, and 
 too, of Ampere, of the salon of Madame Swetchine and the 
 beautiful story of Soeur Rosalie. It is true, these are all 
 individual cases but they may be taken as reliable indications 
 of what was going on under the surface of Society — a re- 
 generation of humanity and of the church, as La Mennais 
 had called for eight years before, and once humanity and 
 the church set on the road to reform under the guidance of 
 these leaders, the preparation for a great struggle for liberties 
 not Gallican, but those promised by the Charter to which they 
 had all sworn allegiance. Why were Louis Philippe and his 
 ministers so blind to this regenerating force now preparing? 
 Why did they not share in its reform, adopt its sincerity and 
 emulate its noble aims and acts? While the old institution, 
 a monarchical principle, was entering upon its last phase, a 
 new-old institution returning to its own had entered upon its 
 ascendancy. Patient hands were to show the church, no 
 longer mistaken in her children, the way to success — a way 
 requiring the abnegation of old and perhaps wrongly sought 
 glories, in order to gain the great prizes of the spirit. On the 
 26th of August, 1839, Frederic Ozanam wrote to Lacordiare: 
 
 v. Jean 
 Laur, "La 
 
 Femme 
 Chretienne 
 au XIX e 
 
 'Siecle ? ' 
 
 "Lettres," 
 Madame 
 Swetchine 
 L. Masson, 
 "Soeur 
 Rossalie" 
 
 101 
 
"Every day the number of those among the clergy increases 
 who understand that virtue without science is not sufficient 
 in the priesthood. And too, among the influential laymen 
 Ozanam who, in past years have so often interfered in our diocesan 
 Lacordaire, affairs, there are now those who are beginning to see that 
 26 Oct., the faith suffers from the alliance with political passions and 
 Pages- interests — an alliance with which they have compromised it." 
 Ch °o6 CS ' ^ esson was b em & rapidly learned ; the struggle was no 
 
 longer far off. 
 
 102 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 THE "XEO-CATHOLICS" AND PUBLIC 
 INSTRUCTION 
 
 The year 1840 witnessed the inauguration of a policy of 
 personal government under a ministry the nominal head of 
 which was Soult, but the actual leader of the Cabinet was 
 Guizot. This policy lasted eight years and during the period 
 when it was enforced many important movements took place, 
 the most prominent being: the rise of Radicalism engendered 
 by changed economic conditions, the transformation of the 
 July Monarchy from a professedly liberal institution to the 
 reactionary principles of Metternich and the Holy Alliance, 
 the struggle for liberty of instruction carried on by the "Neo- 
 Catholics," the growth of the Socialism of Louis Blanc and the 
 institution of Reform Banquets by Lamartine. 
 
 The period of Rivalry and Parliamentary Decline had nearly 
 laid low the July Monarchy. 1 There followed a period of an 
 apparently scrupulous form of parliamentary government chat 
 gave to France a semblance of outward stability and hid from 
 many observant eyes the fact that the July Monarchy was 
 undergoing a process of inward decay. In fact so strong was 
 the external appearance of the country, that most of France 
 and many outside observers were astounded when the govern- 
 ment fell. They had failed to perceive that for over eight years 
 it had been rotting at the core from a political disease, corrup- 
 tion, the most fatal and inevitable malady of every government 
 that does not know its own mind. When the July Monarchy 
 had been founded the bourgeoisie had believed that in so doing 
 they were saving France not only from anarchy and another 
 phase of the dreadful revolution, but were also securing 
 national honour and safeguarding the vested interests. How 
 
 1 About this time Lamartine is said to have remarked : "La France 
 est une nation qui s'ennuie." Thureau Dangin 105. 
 
 103 
 
had they been deceived ! Vested interests alone had been pre- 
 served, and these in turn were becoming more and more inse- 
 cure through the rise of Socialism ; Louis Blanc's ideas as exem- 
 plified in the national workshop would reverse all idea of vested 
 property. 2 In securing national honour they had met with equal 
 failure. It was denied in the Ancona affair and again by the 
 Quadrilateral Treaty. Nor had they succeeded in preventing 
 a still greater evil, for, they had seen anarchy in the streets of 
 Lyons in 1834 and in 1836, in the April Days at Paris, and in 
 the Morey-Fieschi episode. And all these disturbances were re- 
 peated during Guizot's last term of office ! It is not surprising, 
 then, to find at this time a marked tendency to return to the old 
 in politics, philosophy, and religion. This happened in many 
 cases, and to those who did not seek refuge in the old, what re- 
 sulted ? A political apathy — soon to be eating the very heart and 
 core out of the "Bourgeois Monarchy." It was to be, then, the 
 reign of selfish interests, a time when men's minds were taken up 
 with their own personal preoccupations. By day men laboured 
 for themselves alone, and when the day was over and they re- 
 turned to their comfortable homes it was only natural that 
 their minds should turn to the old and better times. Not to 
 the time of the Bourbons and Louis XVI, that was too remote 
 after the centuries of progress they had traversed in so brief a 
 space of years ; nor yet to Charles X and the "Congregation," 
 that was too recent an experience, but rather to Napoleon and 
 his glories now more vivid and real because of the recent 
 national funeral offered by Louis Philippe to him. It was 
 then to Napoleon and his conquests that the bourgeois turned, 
 he had forgotten the horrors of the glorious years of the First 
 Empire. With the workers it was different. They com- 
 menced to read their paper — the Journal du Peuple — written 
 by Louis Blanc and Ledru Rollin and containing a veritable 
 hodge-podge of Utopian schemes in which Individualism, Com- 
 munism, the Socialism of the National Workshops, the Relig- 
 ion of Reason and Anarchism were mingled inextricably. Such 
 was their daily mental food. The middle-class, in turn, had 
 found its solace in Republicanism, really the Socialism of the 
 "petit commergant." Their paper was the National, edited by 
 
 2 v. L. Blanc, "Organisation du Travail." 
 
 104 
 
the gallant young Arago, Carnot and Gamier Pages, men who, 
 at least showed their good sense in that they advised their 
 readers to bide their time. 
 
 With such a state of affairs all over the country it is indeed 
 surprising that one man coming to power at that time was able 
 to conceal this condition from the eyes of many of his con- 
 temporaries. Yet this was the task Guizot accomplished, and 
 though his methods were not of the most estimable, still he 
 well merits the praise bestowed on him for having kept Louis 
 Philippe on the throne eight years more. He was indeed a past- 
 master at this kind of game. 
 
 Guizot, himself, speaking of this period has said : "Before 
 entering on public life I witnessed the Revolution and the 
 Empire; I saw as clearly as day their faults and disasters 
 spring from their alternating prepossessions of mind and force; 
 the Revolution gave itself up to a flood of innovations ; the 
 Empire to a torrent of conquests ; warnings were not wanting 
 to each system; for both, sound policy was no secret tardily 
 disclosed ; it was repeatedly indicated to them by the events and 
 sages of the time. They rejected it at all hands; the Revolu- 
 tion lived under the yoke of popular passions, the Emperor 
 under the bondage of his own. This cost the Revolution the 
 liberties it had proclaimed, the Empire the conquests it had 
 achieved, and France immense afflictions and sacrifices. I 
 carried into public life the constant remembrance of these two 
 examples and a resolution instinctive rather than premeditated, 
 to search out all occasions for sound policy, conformable to the 
 interests and rights of the country, and to bow beneath no other 
 control. He who does not maintain, in judgment and conduct, 
 sufficient independence to see things as they truly are, and what 
 they counsel and command irrespective of the prejudices and 
 passions of men, is neither worthy nor capable of governing. 
 The representative system, it is true, renders this independence 
 of mind and action more difficult to governing power, for it 
 has precisely the object of assuring to the governed, to their 
 ideals and sentiments as well as to their interests a large share 
 of influence in the conduct of affairs, but the difficulty does not 
 do away with the necessity ; and the institutions which procure 
 the intervention of the country in affairs would guarantee but 
 
 105 
 
little good management, if they reduced the ministers to docile 
 agents of popular ideas and wishes." 3 
 
 From this statement of the former professor of history, it 
 may be seen very clearly how simple a matter it would be for 
 him to revert, if it would really be a reversion, consciously 
 or unconsciously, to old doctrines. For after all it was nothing 
 less than the restatement of these same principles couched in 
 more modern language. When the time came, therefore, Met- 
 ternich knew he would not have much trouble with Guizot, now 
 that Thiers was practically silenced, though at this time he was 
 still a member of the Cabinet. Any move of Metternich's at 
 this juncture, however, would have been inadvisable for, the 
 relations between England and France were for the moment of 
 too intimate a nature. Guizot himself seemed anxious to re- 
 establish the entente cordiale and with Thiers muffled, this 
 became a comparatively simple matter, after Guizot's party had 
 temporarily allied itself with the Left. Hardly had this been 
 accomplished, however, when the country was confronted with 
 a very serious problem, that of the succession. On the 13th of 
 July, 1843, tne due d'Orleans was killed in an accident. France 
 was thrown into despair, for such a contingency had never been 
 foreseen or even considered. People turned in hope to the Char- 
 ter, but they found there no provision for the succession. 4 It 
 was decided that the regency should be entrusted to the due 
 de Nemours in the event of Louis Philippe's death. 
 
 The English entente settled, the problem of the regency sat- 
 isfactorily resolved, and the last trials attending the Boulogne 
 Fiasco of Louis Xapoleon finished, the field of political con- 
 troversy seemed fairly clear. It was then that the question 
 of secondary instruction as promised by the Charter in Article 
 Sixty-Nine presented itself. Guizot may have congratulated 
 himself at the time that apparently so trivial a matter was to 
 
 3 Guizot, "Memoirs," VII, 3. 
 
 * de Broglie said : "Everyone in thought, calculated the number of 
 years which henceforward divide the heir to the throne from the age 
 when he will be able to grasp with a firm hand the sceptre of his 
 grandsire, the sword of his father; everyone asked himself what 
 would happen in the interval, if the days of the king were not meas- 
 ured by the wishes of his people and the wants of the State ; every- 
 one interrogated the Charter and regretted its silence." Guizot, "France 
 under Louis Philippe," 21. 
 
 106 
 
demand the attention of the chambers, but later he certainly had 
 occasion to regret his earlier self-felicitations. During the pre- 
 ceding ministry (March i-October 29, 1840), the Neo-Catholics 
 had remained quiet but they had by no means been inactive. 
 They felt their opportunity was approaching and they but 
 gained more strength and influence in waiting. In July of that 
 year Ozanam had written : 
 
 "It is apparent that the movement which has been carried on 
 under different forms, from time to time feeble or violent, 
 pusillanimous or indiscreet, philosophical and literary, the 
 movement which has animated the "Correspondent," the 
 "Revue Europenne," "l'Avenir," "FUniversite," "les Annales 
 de la Philosophic Chretienne," the "Conferences de Notre 
 Dame," the Benedictines of Solesmes, the Dominicans follow- 
 ing the abbe Lacordaire, and even the small "societe Saint Vin- 
 cent de Paul," all of them facts very unequal in importance 
 and merit, it is evident, I say, that this movement, the character 
 of which has been altered and adopted to suit the circumstances, 
 is beginning to carry with it the destinies of the country. At 
 first justified by the proselytising which resulted among un- 
 believers, by the strengthening of faith in many souls who, 
 without its aid perhaps, would have lost their faith, and forti- 
 fied by the constant adherence of some of the most distin- 
 guished men in the priesthood, behold it now encouraged by 
 the patronage of the new episcopacy, and the triple nomination 
 of Affre, Gousset and de Bonald to the three principal episcopal 
 thrones in France, raises necessarily the long quarantine that 
 our ideas, a little suspected perhaps, have had to undergo." 5 
 
 But this good fortune, the nomination of the three priests, 
 was emphasized by other developments following closely upon 
 the appointment of the "Neo-Catholic" sympathizers. The one 
 was the appearance in the pulpit of the Notre Dame of Lacor- 
 daire wearing the Dominican habit, while the other develop- 
 ment was the outcome of the appointment of Afire as 
 Archbishop of Paris ; cordial relations sprang up between the 
 Tuileries and the Episcopal Palace. 6 Certainly the fortunes of 
 
 5 Ozanam, 12 Juillet 1840. 
 
 6 A propos of Lacordaire's appearance in Xotre Dame wearing the 
 Dominican habit, one authority remarks : "Apres cela n'etait-il pas 
 fonde a dire en montrant sa robe Je suis une liberte?" Thureau-Dan- 
 gin, Mon. Juillet V, 462. 
 
 107 
 
the church had changed from those early days, ten years before, 
 when the clergy, suffering from "mort civile" feared to show 
 themselves on the street. The time seemed ripe to demand 
 their promised liberties; the "Neo-Catholics" no longer hesi- 
 tated. Consequently in May of that same year (1840) ap- 
 peared a pamphlet entitled "le Monopole Universitaire devoile 
 a la France liberate et a la France catholique par une societe 
 d ecclesiastiques, sous la presidence de Y abbe Rohrbacher." 
 This work contained a criticism of the teachings of the Univer- 
 sity, citing examples of the coures given by Cousin, Jouffroy, 
 Ouinet, Michelet, Libri and Mickiewicz. 7 It made three 
 charges: that the present system of instruction tended to de- 
 catholicize France, 8 that the Eclecticism of Cousin was a danger- 
 ous philosophy leading inevitably to pantheism or deism ; and 
 that it was the duty of parents to instruct and protect their 
 children's souls, and not a duty of the state. Such in brief 
 was the content of this pamphlet, the indirect influence of 
 which was to be more far reaching perhaps than had been the 
 intention of its unknown author. 
 
 What, then, was the "Monopole Universitaire?" In short, 
 by the Code that Napoleon had introduced regulating education 
 in France, all schools and universities were under the direct 
 control of the council of the University at Paris, and all private 
 schools must receive the sanction of the University for their 
 existence ; their professors must have passed the examinations 
 required by the University, and in addition these private 
 schools must pay what was called a "tribut d'allegeance" or 
 "retribution Universitaire." Furthermore unless it was proven 
 that a student had received his education either at the public 
 schools or at one of these favoured private institutions, he 
 could not be admitted to receive his "baccalaureat." Thus the 
 University of Paris was enabled to exercise a real monop- 
 oly over all education in France, be it secondary or su- 
 
 7 It is difficult to establish the authorship of this pamphlet. De- 
 bidour (l'Eglise et l'Etat 444-5) says: "Cet ouvrage inspire par les 
 Jesuites de Nancy, avait ete redige par un pretre de cette ville nomme 
 Jacot, et l'auteur est d'autant moins excusable qu'il appartenait lui- 
 meme a l'Universite comme aumonier." 
 
 8 v. "Le Monopole Universitaire devoile." 
 
 108 
 
perior. 9 The sole exception to this rule was the case of the 
 small seminaries that, under the Restoration, had been placed 
 under the direct supervision of the bishops. But this exception 
 was only a favour and might be withdrawn at any time. 
 
 The opponents of this system based their protest on Article 
 sixty-nine, heading eight of the Charter — which read : 
 
 "The following subjects shall be provided for successively 
 by separate laws within the shortest possible space of time; 10 
 . . . 8th, Public instruction and the liberty of teaching." 
 
 The question of instruction was indeed a debt against the 
 Orleanists which must be cancelled, but how? That was the 
 difficult question confronting Louis Philippe and his ministers. 11 
 
 It was not until 1841, however, that the "Neo-Catholics" 
 assumed a hostile attitude to the "Monopole Universitaire." 
 In the meantime, the leaders were trying to persuade M. Cou- 
 sin and later M. Villemain, his successor, to listen to their pro- 
 tests. With Villemain, in particular, this was difficult to do. 
 But the younger leaders and some of their older ecclesiastical 
 superiors persisted in their efforts, for they felt that an amica- 
 ble solution was the most desirable and, furthermore, they 
 believed that certain members of the government were at the 
 time kindly disposed to them. Moreover, in this their hopes 
 do not seem to have been founded on mere hearsay. On the 
 first of January, 1841, Louis Philippe had said to Mgr. Afire: 
 
 "The more difficult the task of my government becomes, the 
 more need it has of the assistance and co-operation of all 
 those who desire the maintenance of order and the reign of the 
 laws ... It is this moral assistance and support of all good 
 people that will give to my government the force necessary to 
 accomplish the duties it has been called upon to fulfill. And 
 I place among the first and foremost of these the duty of aid- 
 ing in the advancement and furthering of religion, of combat- 
 ing immorality and of showing to the world, no matter what 
 the detractors of France have said to the contrary, that the 
 
 9 The significance of these terms is about as follows : 
 
 Primary — primary grade. 
 
 Secondary — high school and part college grade. 
 Superior — university or graduate school grade. 
 
 10 "Article 69, Charter 1830," Anderson Const. Docs. No. 105. 
 
 u "Hist, de Louis Philippe et d'Orleanism," 430 et seq. J. Cretineau- 
 Joly. 
 
 109 
 
respect of religion, morality and virtue is still the ruling senti- 
 ment among the majority of us." 12 
 
 There was, moreover, still another fact that predisposed the 
 government and many of the people as well, to regard the 
 prospect of a struggle over the liberty of instruction as a 
 happy occasion whereby public opinion might be diverted from 
 the contemplation of a more serious evil. Socialism had 
 become more of a menace. Its ideas were embodied in the 
 theory of Communism. 
 
 One contemporary wrote at this time : 14 
 
 "The day is not far distant when all this bourgeois comedy in 
 France, along with its heroes and comrades of the parliamen- 
 tary stage, will experience a terrible end amid hisses and scorn- 
 ful cries, and following this comedy they will present an epi- 
 logue entitled "The Reign of the Commune." 
 
 It was to avoid this "Epilogue" that the government sought 
 a distraction. The first strike at Lyons, the great revolt of 
 1836, the April Days, the Journal da Peuple and the Labour 
 programme of Louis Blanc, then, had not been in vain. The 
 Industrial revolution continued, casting aside manual labour, 
 sowing famine and discontent everywhere. It made its slow 
 and inevitable progress along the poor streets of manufacturing 
 towns, tearing men from the earning of their daily bread, and 
 making no provision for their future needs. Machinery taught 
 men far more than the wild and imaginative preachings of 
 Louis Blanc and Ledru Rollin, the principles of socialism, 15 
 Proudhon had cried: "la propriete, c'est le vol." It is no 
 wonder that the government trembled. In opposition to this 
 
 u Moniteur, 2 Janv. 1841. In Guizot, too, they found an ally; he 
 said : "Wherever the principle of liberty of instruction is admitted, 
 it ought to be loyally exercised, without any attempt or subterfuge to 
 give and withhold at the same time. In an epoch of publicity and dis- 
 cussion, nothing injures governments more than deceitful promises 
 and false words." 13 
 
 (Strange words these, when one considers the Cabinet's subsequent 
 policy in regard to the question Guizot was discussing!) 
 
 "Guizot: "France under Louis Philippe," 1841-1847, 348. 
 
 14 H. Heine, Lutiee, 209. 
 
 15 "Subversive doctrines have taken hold of the lower classes of 
 France. They demand now not only equality before the law but also 
 equality in the right to enjoy all the fruits of this earth." H. Heine, 
 
 Lutiee, 210. 
 
 no 
 
vast wave of revolt spreading over France, what had the gov- 
 ernment to offer but the teachings of the old school of econom- 
 ics with its time-worn adage of "laisser-faire?" This was of no 
 assistance. Guizot and his satellites were fully aware of its 
 utter uselessness, and, following the example of one of then- 
 predecessors, they sought a distraction for the country in the 
 vain hope that, in addition to serving the purpose of a blind, the 
 government might also find in it a useful and helpful ally. The 
 question of the liberty of instruction was therefore allowed to 
 come before the legislature. 
 
 Unfortunately, the first advances of the government were 
 awkward. In 1841 Villemain proposed his law on public 
 instruction and at the very outset the author made a statement 
 sufficient in itself to turn the sympathies of the "Neo-Catholics" 
 from the bill : 
 
 "Liberty of instruction might have been admitted in principle, 
 but it is not essential (to political liberty) and the very nature 
 of political liberty has frequently been marked by the exclusive 
 influence and absolute control of the state in the education of its 
 youth." 
 
 In such a fashion the new law proposed to recognize the 
 promise of liberty of teaching made in the Charter ! Its other 
 provisions were in accord with its preamble; private institu- 
 tions were to be submitted to certain requirements of Univer- 
 sity training, and state certificates of ability which the "Neo- 
 Catholics" could not accept. Furthermore, while the small 
 seminaries were no longer restricted in the matter of the num- 
 ber of candidates, they were at the same time placed under the 
 direct supervision of the State. 16 After a brief discussion the 
 law was withdrawn. Nearly everyone recognized it as a veiled 
 deception offered to the "Neo-Catholics." 17 Was Guizot re- 
 sponsible? This seems doubtful for he was minister of foreign 
 affairs, and was at this time much engrossed in the rehabilita- 
 tion of the English entente. It was probably the work of Ville- 
 main alone, based to a certain extent on an unfinished project 
 prepared by his predecessor, Cousin. 
 
 The results of the law were unfortunate for the government 
 and for the ministry as well. Almost at the beginning of their 
 
 19 Debidour, E et E. 447. 
 
 "Thureau- Dangin Mon. Juillet, V. 465. 
 
 in 
 
"rapprochement'' with this new Catholic party, the government 
 
 had played false with them — the result was to be an active 
 
 campaign and a feeling of hostility that became more evident 
 
 as the new group approached their goal. The "Neo-Catholics" 
 
 now felt themselves fully justified in taking a more definite 
 
 stand and in commencing the struggle in real earnest. The idea 
 
 of a "parti catholique" was nascent. This time, however, the 
 
 v Lacor- former disciples of La Mennais would be more careful. Prof- 
 claire a . . . 
 
 Monta- iting by their earlier experiences they wisely made three reso- 
 30™Sept' m ti° ns > tnat their propaganda must not include a great number 
 1844 ' of subjects but one alone, the liberty of instruction; that they 
 must not seek to destroy but rather to reform; and that they 
 must have the support of a certain number of the higher clergy. 
 "Sangfn " ^' 1S ^ ast stipulation was, without a doubt, the most significant 
 
 E et E, 142 for them, and the very nature of Villemain's law made it possi- 
 ble. For, alarmed by the attack made on their own powers in 
 the clause regarding the small seminaries, the bishops prepared 
 
 Afire M "Otn t0 j°* n * n t ^ ie demands of the growing party of "Neo-Catholics." 
 servations" Forty-nine or fifty-six of them are said to have protested. 
 
 Their first method of attack took the form of recriminations 
 against the University, of vague charges of immorality rather 
 than definite accusations against the professors and criticisms of 
 their philosophical teachings. 18 In many cases these attacks 
 went too far and the over-zealous action of the pamphleteers 
 tended rather to hinder than assist their cause. But there were 
 others among the "Neo-Catholics" who knew the weakest 
 point in their adversaries' armour, and in directing their 
 energies to this single point they not only gained honour for 
 their cause, but also won the sympathies, and in some cases, the 
 help of those who, up to this time, had been mere interested 
 onlookers. This was the harm Villemain's law did to his own 
 cause, the cause of the University ; it laid bare the philosophy 
 of Cousin, the head, to the shafts of his enemies ; there was the 
 University's weakest point. 
 
 18 v. p. ex Desgaretes "Monopole Universitaire." Vedrine : "Simple 
 coup d'oeil sur les douleurs et les esperances de l'Eglise aux prises avec 
 les tyrans des consciences et des vices du XIX e siecle." Debidour 
 (Eglise et l'Etat 450) even accuses some of the pamphleteers of falsify- 
 ing texts quoted from Quinet, Michelet, Libri, etc., but we have failed to 
 find a corroboration of this statement elsewhere. 
 
 112 
 
Victor Cousin is one of the most pathetic characters of the 
 entire period of the July Monarchy. Brilliant and gifted he 
 was hindered by a manner and delivery so grotesque as almost 
 to detract from the force of anything he said or did. Con- 
 scientious to an extreme, upon his installation as head of the 
 University he had taken far too seriously his duties and the 
 importance of the institution he represented. The University 
 of Paris became to his eyes the entire world of science, and 
 therefore, the philosophy of the University, his philosophy, 
 Eclecticism became in his mind the philosophy, almost the 
 religion, of the world. It would not be an exaggeration to say 
 that what he considered Catholicism to have been for the past 
 centuries, he expected Eclecticism to become for the future. 
 From Hegel he borrowed pantheism and from Schelling deism. 
 All truth is known, but it is found scattered in a thousand dif- 
 ferent systems in all of which the truth is mingled with the 
 false. It is only necessary to discover in each system that part 
 conformable to the truth and to unite the parts of the truth thus 
 found in order to establish the full complement of truth. The 
 method by wmich this is done is known as Eclecticism, 
 and during the years 1830 and 1840 it was the philosophy 
 of the greater number of the Universities. To the claims 
 made by the Catholics that Eclecticism was opposed to 
 Christianity, Cousin replied that his philosophy and the Chris- 
 tian faith were one and the same. But the results as seen in 
 the University did not tend to confirm this rather surprising 
 statement. In the first place, the actions of the head himself 
 have shown that his own views were uncertain and unstable, 
 and he was regarded as a charlatan by some of his contempor- 
 aries ; he frequently changed his attitude and at the end of his 
 life practically renounced his entire system of philosophy. 
 Certainly his thesis that Christianity and Eclecticism were 
 one, did not seem to hold, for Christianity lost each day in the 
 alliance, and the students came out from the University with a 
 very vague and uncertain idea of the truths of the faith. 19 
 
 19 "Quoi qu'on puisse dire pour ou contre, en louant 011 en blamant, on 
 ne sort guere Chretien des ecoles de l'Universite." Sainte-Beuve 
 "Chroniques parisiennes," 100 ets. "J'ai l e droit de signaler tout ce 
 que j'ai trouve dans l'enseignement donne an college de France, comme 
 
 v. "U Un ho- 
 vers" 18 
 Mars, 1843 
 
 v. Cousin, 
 "du Vrai du 
 Beau et du 
 Bien" 
 
 v. Sainte- 
 Beuve 
 
 "Chroniques 
 parisiennes/' 
 I5I-IS2 
 
 H. Heine, 
 "Franzo- 
 
 sische 
 Zustiide," I 
 
 I, 260-261 
 
 113 
 
v. Comte de 
 Maistre 
 Essai sur 
 le principe 
 genera- 
 teur des 
 constitu- 
 tions 
 politiques 
 
 v. p. ex. 
 Quinet VUn 
 Mot sur la 
 polemique 
 religieuse," 
 Rev. des 
 
 deux 
 Mondes, 
 15 Avril 
 1842 
 
 The courses of Michelet, Quinet, Mickiewicz and Jouffroy 
 were such as to warrant this assertion. Furthermore, 
 the attitude of the University itself to its opponents is not con- 
 vincing. Their reply took the form of recriminations against 
 the morality of the Catholics and their institutions of learning, 
 rather than a critique of their doctrines. The controversy be- 
 tween the two soon became a question of politics and the 
 University was upheld by the opposition in the "National ," 
 "Courier Francois." "Constitutionnel" and "Journal des De 
 bats" 20 In the press the "Neo-Catholics'' found little sup- 
 port. The one great Catholic paper Ami de la Religion et du 
 Roi regarding them as the mental offspring of La Mennais, 
 rather damned them by its silence, and the Union Catho- 
 lique, a small paper was the only one to support them. The 
 new Catholics needed an official organ ; happily they did not 
 lack one for long. Early in the year 1843 tne Union Catho- 
 lique combined with another paper VUnivers and under the 
 editorship of Louis Veuillot it entered the field of controversy. 
 
 The paper, VUnivers had existed for sometime, having, beea 
 founded shortly after 1830 by the abbe Migne, but it was not 
 until the arrival of Louis Veuillot on the scene that it became 
 at all well known. The resemblance of VUnivers and 
 VAvenir of the earlier school, is striking, and it lies not 
 merely in the fact that the two papers were the mouthpieces of 
 the Liberal Roman Catholics. Their similarity is still more 
 evident in the characters of the two editors-in-chief ; Louis 
 Veuillot employed the same tactics in the struggle for liberty 
 that La Mennais had used. 21 Louis Veuillot had declared 
 "Notre role est le combat dans la patience et dans la chariti." 
 But there was too much of La Mennais in him to be always 
 patient and charitable, and it will be seen in following the 
 course events took during the "Neo Catholic" Movement that 
 
 etant peu conforme a la morale publique et a nor dogmes religieux." 
 Testimony of M. de L'Aspinasse before the Chamber of Peers. 
 Moniteur, 10 Juillet 1844, Supp. No. 192. 
 
 20 Nearly every issue of these papers for the year 1842 contains 
 articles praising the University. 
 
 ai " Deja sous la Restauration Lamennais avait introduit dans la 
 polemique des habitudes de violence de sarcasme et d'outrage. M. 
 Veuillot, sous ce rapport, fut son heritier direct." Thureau-Dangin : 
 Mon. Juillet V, 437. 
 
 114 
 
more than once VUnivers assumes the language of VAvenir 
 in discussing the University, the Church and the government. 22 
 By 1843, then, the "Neo-Catholics" had found support in the 
 press; articles now began to appear frequently from their 
 pens — all demanding the liberty of instruction. This same year 
 Montalembert published a pamphlet showing clearly the posi- 
 tion of his party in regard to the government. They no longer 
 feared it. The pamphlet bore the title "Devoir des Catholiques 
 dans la question de la liberte de rEnseignment'' and basing his 
 argument on the words of our Blessed Lord "docentes omnes 
 gentes" he declared "Teducation est une partie pratique de la 
 religion et comme un droit inherent au sacerdoce." Moreover, 
 by citing the sinister example of events in Belgium, he recalled 
 to his readers' minds the fact that it was the "Neo-Catholics" 
 and Jesuits in that country who had brought about the Revolu- 
 tion of August 1830. He then proposed the formation of a 
 "Neo-Catholic" Party to protect the church's rights. 23 Aided 
 by the bishops he formed the "Association Catholique" an 
 ultramontane society whose rule was to be absolute submission 
 to the wishes of the Pope. A lay committee was appointed to 
 work out a plan of compaign for religious freedom, and of 
 this committee Montalembert 2 * became the chairman. Their 
 programme and their challenge to the government was sent far 
 and wide. We quote from the paper so soon to be joined to 
 "WniverJ': 
 
 "If again you were only compromising your own existence, it 
 
 Monta- 
 lembert : 
 "Devoir des 
 
 Catho- 
 liques dans 
 la question 
 de la lib- 
 erte de 
 l'enseigne- 
 ment" 
 
 Deledom, 
 "E et E,' 
 455 
 
 22 For a most striking example of this resemblance: "Cherchant 
 reconcilier les besoins de catholicisme avec les entrainements les 
 plus legitimes de ce siecle, qui est le notre et nous acceptons, nous avons 
 fait retentir d'une voix convaincue un cri d'alliance entre l'Evangile et 
 la charte . . . Dieu et la liberte." L'Univers, 2 Janvier 1845. v. also 
 L'Univers, 7 Juin 1843. 
 
 23 In discussing the University, however, Montalembert did not fail 
 to render homage to the lectures of F. Ozanam and Lenormant. v. 
 "Devoir des Catholiques, etc." 
 
 24 About the same time there appeared in the Union Catholique the 
 following appeal for freedom: "Les Catholiques, les Protestants, les 
 Juifs de la France ont done ensemble le droit d'obtenir la liberte 
 promise pour l'enseignement. Vous ne repoussez pas les voeux legitimes. 
 Ainsi vous honorerez votre legislature, et vous sauverez en raeme 
 temps la France des malheurs que les fausses doctrines preparent 
 pour les peuples." L'Union Catholique, 12 Janvier 1843. 
 
 115 
 
"L'Union 
 Catho- 
 lique, 
 12 Janvier, 
 1843" 
 
 would matter but little to us, and placed, as we are in a sphere 
 superior to your narrow little rivalries, to your petty triumphs 
 and to your miserable defects, we might well consider you with 
 all the sangfroid with which the Agamemmons of the stage 
 receive their catastrophes. But from these disorders which 
 you foment and create "Quiquid delirant reges plectuntur 
 Achivi." If you are the kings of today we are the Archeans, 
 and we pay for your foolish acts ; that, at least, gives us the 
 right to complain. And then, behind us and with us is France, 
 the France which you are disorganizing, which you are tortur- 
 ing at will, which has need of peace, order, hierarchy, regener- 
 ation, and to whom you offer only the spectacle of your follies, 
 the fruits of your errors, the heritage of your discords ; the 
 France for whose welfare you are responsible to God and to 
 Frenchmen, the France that endures and tolerates you, so that 
 you may not fortify yourselves again under the cover of the 
 necessity of a contested existence and the imperious exigency 
 of saving yourselves at all costs." 25 
 
 This passage has been quoted in full because it is an example 
 of the very earliest propaganda of the now fully organized 
 "Xeo-Catholic'' Party, its language is sufficient evidence of the 
 strength to which they had attained in so short a time. On the 
 first of February, 1843, then, the two papers combined. Their 
 first editorial is strikingly similar to La Mennais' first editorial 
 in VAvenir : 
 
 "Catholics avant tout, united as brothers, we bring to the 
 common cause of the Church and the country, the sincere efforts 
 of our zeal. Above all the petty occupations of time and mat- 
 ter, to which they seem to have relegated the world of political 
 science, where interests and opinions are being agitated which 
 
 25 Again, on the anniverary of the death of Louis XVI the same 
 paper wrote : "Xon ! Xon ! la revolution ne s'est pas arretee. Com- 
 mencee il y a trois siecles sur la place de Wittenberg, continuee a White 
 Hall et sur la place Louis XV, reprise a l'Hotel de Ville, elle ne 
 cessera que par un repentir sincere, par une profonde et lente ex- 
 piation, elle ne cessera que par un retour aux verites et aux principes 
 dont elle est la negation vivante". L'Union Catholique" 21 Janvier 
 1843. 
 
 For the view of a neighbouring country v. quotation from an 
 editorial in Morning Post, quoted in L'Union Catholique, 28 Jan- 
 vier 1843. 
 
 116 
 
tend too often to divide men, the faith has appeared as a peace- 
 ful and regenerating power. Sovereign and divine truth can- 
 not refuse to exercise the right to rule the people ; its influence, 
 recognized and accepted, alone can place public prosperity on a 
 solid basis. Such has been and such always will be our belief. 
 
 "Furthermore a movement is undeniably at work deep down 
 in the conscience of all Frenchmen, in favor of Catholicism ; to 
 refuse to recognize it would be a strange act of blindness. It is 
 to second this work, to develop the action and influences of the \^tvrier 
 Catholic spirit in the heart of this country, that we consecrate 1843 
 all our efforts. " 
 
 The newspaper was received, of course, with some hostility, 
 but most of its contemporaries ignored, for the time, its exist- dienne*]:" 
 ence. This reception, however, did not calm its zeal. The first 1 Fev., 1843 
 question asked of it was an explanation of its political views. 
 Their reply was concise and neat : 
 
 "Religion is self-sufficient; it has no more need of politics 
 than God has of man; but man could not do without God, nor ^ , 
 can politics live without a fundamental basis and a superior 5 p^y. jg' 43 
 principle. Religion alone is this principle and furnishes this 
 basis, and religion is, therefore, the only, the most important, 
 and the most telling of a 1 l political things." 
 
 Despite the rather bold language of the early numbers of 
 
 rUnivers in regard to religion and to politics it had been v : ■ YUnivers, 
 
 1.1 • x 1 1 1 Xos. 20 et 
 
 very cautious, and wisely so, m one respect, it had been com- 25, Fevrier 
 
 mon gossip that Louis Veuillot had been placed at the head of 7_IO jg^ ars ' 
 the paper principally to combat the "Monopole Universitaire" 
 and yet so far reference had only been made to it in a vague 
 and general way, attacking its morality. Questions again were 
 asked, but the editors were patiently awaiting a good oppor- 
 tunity to strike. It was in March of that year that the occa- YUniyers, 
 sion appeared. Villemain presented a law requiring the students 6 Avril, 1843 
 of the "£cole Polytechnique" to take the "baccalaureat" 
 examinations stipulated for all schools. A great howl of protest 
 arose ; de Carne supported by such men of the Left as Barrot, 
 de Tocqueville and Billaudel protested against the plan and 
 UUnivers supported them in condemning what it called the 
 insatiable greed of the "Universitaires'' for power. It was then 
 that Louis Veuillot launched forth his dictum showing clearly 
 
 117 
 
the stand the paper would take in the matter of public instruc- 
 tion. 
 
 'The charter has declared the principle of liberty of instruc- 
 tion; petitions, come from all corners of France, demand this 
 promise of the Constitution, and the rights inscribed in the 
 justice and nature of things as in the Constitution. The power 
 of the father, the sacred prerogatives of the family, the most 
 inviolable titles of the citizen combine to reclaim this liberty. 
 The powers (the government) reply with a panegyric on the 
 "Monopole" ; they defend the "Monopole," they expatiate upon 
 '^1843™' its pretended benefits ; they hope to provoke its necessity. We 
 13 Mars seriously call the attention of all Catholics and of all honest 
 people to this affair. It is of prime necessity for the interest, 
 honour and future welfare of the country ; it is well worth a 
 portefolio quarrel (Cabinet quarrel). It is not a question of 
 who are the ministers, but of what they are doing. Betray the 
 charter, deceive the hopes of religion, violate the principles of 
 the most simple and most evident equity, that is a thing that no 
 man may do, even if he have the majority of the two chambers 
 to support him." 26 
 
 What was the attitude of the University to these protests? 
 Heretofore they had attempted to reply by proving that their 
 philosophy was not opposed to Christianity. This, as has been 
 seen, they failed to accomplish successfully. Then, theyf in- 
 stituted a policy of recrimination. This, in turn, failed. 
 
 Now, in a last desperate attempt they inaugurated the scheme 
 of attacking the Jesuits with the hope that they might in this 
 day avert the flood of charges now being turned against the 
 University by the "Neo-Catholics" and win more adherents to 
 
 * 8 It is interesting to note that this opinion was not held by "L'Uni- 
 vers" alone. One journal criticises the Monopole as follows: "L'Uni- 
 versite est l'oeuvre de despotisme imperial. Le conquerant legislateur 
 qui avait soumis 45 millions d'hommes a sa seule volonte, avait besoin 
 que Ton crut en lui a sa mission a sa suprematie, a son infaillibilite ; 
 il unit l'enseignement a son profit personnel par un simple decret, comme 
 s'il fut agi d'une levee des consents." It then asks what need has 
 France of this system today. National, 18 Avril 1843. Another paper 
 of different opinions writes : "M. le Ministre de l'instruction publique 
 vient de rediger un rapport claire, parfaitment ecrit, sagement pense 
 . . . les journaux hostiles a l'Universite declarent que M. le Ministre 
 de l'instruction publique a menti," Constitutioncl, 18 Mars. 1843. 
 
 118 
 
its side. In so doing, however, the Universitaires only betrayed 
 
 the symptoms of their own internal weakness. All were not 
 
 blind to this, and one paper, not of "Neo-Catholic" sympathies, Le National, 
 
 . , ' 18 Avnl, 
 
 remarked : jg 43 
 
 "What ought the University to fear when it has the favour 
 
 and support of the government, the subsidies of the budget, the 
 
 co-operation and affiliation of the academies who count among 
 
 their numbers the greatest philosophers, the most illustrious 
 
 scholars and the most celebrated savants? It must have very v - Constitu- 
 
 , r- i 1 r 1- 1 r • 1 • • • • tlOHHel, 5 
 
 little confidence m itself, very little faith m its own mission, jg 43 
 to see in a few rival schools set up beside those of the Univer- 
 sity, its own destruction." 
 
 The first evidence of the "aux Jesuites" agitation inaugurated ^ ou ^ n ^ t deiS 
 
 by the "Universitaires" is found in the press. Some of the 2 -6 Mai 
 
 newspapers of the day and even the Court journals, seemed to ^43 
 have the impression that the "Neo-Catholic" party was a 
 
 Legitimate clique. In fact, about this same time a rumour was £ onst it u 
 
 circulated at the Tuileries to the effect that the Jesuits were tionnel 
 
 instigating a reaction against the King. Pamphlets appeared 18 ^** s ' 
 
 written for the most part by the "Universitaires," confirming p 0 ntlevoy, 
 
 the rumour and, profiting by the already unsavoury reputation ^ e de Pre 
 
 of that order in past times the authors allowed their imagina- 11^62' 
 
 tion free rein in depicting in vivid colours the future evilsFrance v - P- ex - 
 
 would suffer under the order. Even Villemain, in a discourse j&uites e t 
 
 pronounced shortly before this time is said to have declared l'Universite 
 
 that the country needed a controversialist to fight against a-t-ii n encore 
 
 "cette societe remuante et imperieuse que l'esprit de gouverne- r des 
 ment et l'esprit de liberte repoussent egalement." Apropos to 
 
 this agitation appeared the disgusting romance by Eugene Sue Quoted 
 
 "le Juif Errant" — nothing less than a libel on the Jesuits ; while Thureau 
 
 Michelet in the columns of the "Constitutionnel" condemned Mon^/uiliet 
 
 the order in Essays entitled: "Le Pretre," "La Femme" and V, 502 
 "La Famille." 27 The methods of the Universitaires, however, 
 
 were despicable, and many of their contemporaries began to d e p on tle- 
 
 speak of them as "turn coat liberals," and to acknowledge v ^y, ^'Vk du 
 
 vignan," 289 
 
 ^Another work more reasonable and less fanatical on this subject 289 
 
 was "les Jesuites" (1843) by Michelet and Quinet. In this the authors , ^ 
 
 de 1 ocoue- 
 
 attempt to demonstrate that the system of the Jesuits requiring abso- v j|j e "Corr- 
 
 lute obedience may destroy and atrophy all reason, will, patriotism and esp. ined," 
 
 even civilization. 6 Decembre, 
 
 119 
 
 1843 
 
v. de Ravig- 
 
 nan "de 
 l'Existence 
 des 
 Jesuites" 
 
 v. Constitu- 
 tionnel, 
 Nos. 18 
 
 Mars, 5 Mai, 
 
 1843; 
 also Nation- 
 al, 10 Fev- 
 rier, 1844 
 
 that the government papers were perhaps even worse than those 
 of the opposition in this one respect. At the beginning of the 
 next year, de Ravignan now provincial of the Jesuit order in 
 France, issued a very noble and fairminded defense which 
 made a favourable impression. In this apology the author 
 showed how the Jesuits had more than once saved the country 
 from serious uprisings, and recounted some of the many noble 
 acts performed by individual members of the Society during 
 the Terror. Moreover the Society was not without support 
 outside their own body, and there were many who came to 
 the side of de Ravignan to defend and protect the order. It 
 was among the "Neo-Catholics" particularly that they found the 
 greatest sympathy. At the very outset, when the attacks had 
 first appeared in the Constitutionnel, under the title of "The 
 University and the Jesuits" I'Univers had come to their support, 
 and from May 1843 columns were filled with articles defend- 
 ing and praising them. Furthermore, the editor of 'TUnivers" 
 and his colleagues were not slow to perceive that it was not 
 so much the Jesuits who were being attacked as the "Neo- 
 Catholic" movement and the religious reaction 28 they had 
 
 28 Je fais tous mes efforts qui sont trops faibles sans doute, pour 
 contenir, de concert avec M. Lenormant . . . et quelques autres, 
 tine lutte vigoureuse contre l'enseignement des professeurs du college 
 de France. Pendant que M. Quinet et M. Michelet attaquaient le 
 catholicisme lui-meme sous le nom de Jesuitisme, j'ai tache de defendre 
 dans trois conferences consecutives, la Papaute, les moines, l'obeissance 
 monastique." Ozanam, 5 Juin 1843, quoted in "Ozanam" Mgr. Ban- 
 nard 28. 
 
 "We read this morning in the Constitutionnel an article entitled 
 'The University and the Jesuits.' Last year the same paper wrote at 
 the head of its diatribes : The University and the clergy/ as for us, 
 we will not be slow to reestablish the real terms of the discussion. 
 These terms are : 'The Monopole Universitaire-Liberty.' " 
 
 "The Constitutionnel wanted to change the subject, but we warn 
 them, they will not succeed. They uselessly evoke phantoms, the order 
 will not efface the promises of the charter. And as long as these prom- 
 ises continue to be maliciously violated our perseverance will not 
 flag. In fact, at bottom what is the polemics of the defenders of 
 the "Monopole"? What is it but a simple provocation to all the 
 passions and all the hatreds of impiety? What is it but a constant call 
 to a violent reaction from the religious movement now operating in a 
 peaceful and orderly fashion at the heart of society? These pretended 
 liberals claim that they have been attacked and that they are avenging 
 
 120 
 
instigated. It really seemed, however, as if the University 
 
 would carry this agitation still further and restrain in all 
 
 directions the principle of religious liberty, for, about this 
 
 time trouble broke out in an entirely different quarter. Other 
 
 religious denominations found cause for complaint, and among 
 
 these protests the most prominent was the case of the Reformed 
 
 Christian Church at Niort, d'apres les Veynes (Hautes Alpes) 
 
 where the functions of the pastor were interfered with by the 
 
 government officials. The fact that the Catholics were not 
 
 the only ones to complain, and that protestant bodies as well 
 
 found grievances tends to confirm the belief that the "Neo- * m^T*i843 
 
 Catholics" had a real "raison d'etre." Of their sincerity no 
 
 one could ever have the slightest doubt. 
 
 It was directly following the protestant protest that L'Uni- 
 vers feeling strengthened by their tacit support, called the 
 attention of its readers to a fact slowly becoming apparent to 
 every unbiased observer of the agitation; the University was 
 not entirely in sympathy with the government. This fact alone 
 could be explained by its origin : 
 
 "We have often remarked the accord existing between the 
 dynastic University and the revolutionary press of all degrees ; 
 between the University, self-styled orthodox, and the press 
 unorthodox in every way; between the University, daughter, 
 mother and consort of despotism and the entire liberal press ; 
 from the 'juste milieu' the most marked to radicalism the most 
 enflamed. . . . 
 
 "Will the government, parties and sects kindly tell us what 
 they have gained since 1830? Where is the doctrinaire's 
 majority of the nth of October? Where are the fighting 
 republicans of Paris, Lyons and Grenoble? Where are the 
 conspirators of the rue des Prouvaires and the insurgents of 
 La Vendee. Where is the wonderfully disciplined opposi- 
 
 themselves, that is to say that for thirteen years they have con- 
 tinued to refuse us the right of instruction promised by Article 67 of 
 the charter — see how we are the aggressors ! And because we dare 
 to reclaim a promise solemnly sworn, they threaten to withdraw or at 
 least to restrain still more the principle proclaimed by an article of v. I'Univers, 
 that very charter— religious liberty. ^Le^Si'ede 3 ' 
 "Fortunately all the world sees this and all the world judges them. 2 ^ r g^ 
 What! They have turned against the Jesuits!" L'Univers, 6 Mai 1843. 
 
 121 
 
tion of Odilon Barrot? Strange thing! Some have had their 
 victories, others their martyrs, both have had talent, fortune, 
 1'Univers reversals, triumphs, and all are weakened. Neither blood nor 
 12 i8 4 2 1 g 0 ^ nor renown nor power have been able to gain them their 
 proselytes; the future has betrayed them, but all of them have 
 betrayed more or less the needs of a society failing for want 
 of truth and faith." 
 
 It was indeed as the "Neo-Catholics" had said, the Univer- 
 sity was become a nucleus of the opposition, for the most part 
 republican, and therefore the attacks against the Jesuits were 
 republican in origin and in reasoning as well. To a certain 
 extent these attacks were a protest against an abstract principle, 
 Catholicism, but their object and base were real; the Jesuits, 
 by existing laws, had no right to be re-established in France. 29 
 In this attack on the Jesuits, then, the Republicans, through the 
 "Universitaires" were denouncing to a large degree Catholicism 
 in France, and the government also for being so weak as to 
 permit the existence of certain attributes of the Catholic faith 
 legally prohibited in France. In such a way had the govern- 
 ment's efforts to escape the more difficult questions of Social- 
 ism and Republicanism resulted ! They found themselves con- 
 Quoti- fronted with the very problems they had sought to avoid, and 
 dienne, their means of escape the revival of a Liberal Catholic princi- 
 Mai, 1843 p] e h a( ] become an almost equal menace. But in 1843 tne 
 "two evils'' (as they were regarded by the creators of the 
 dynasty) were more developed, more imperative in their de- 
 mands, and more dangerous. Furthermore, who knew but that 
 these two extremes, Radicalism (composed of the Socialists 
 and Republicans) and the "Neo-Catholics," might not become 
 embroiled, and that the Monarchy might not find itself between 
 the two, and fall in the combat? Neither one nor the other 
 were in a humour to be tampered with. 
 
 We have seen what the "Neo-Catholies" had to say, what 
 now, was the cry of the Republicans, the newly become 
 "Universitaires " Thiers, speaking of the religious reaction, 
 had declared : "Le temps est venu de mettre la main de Vol- 
 taire sur ces gens la." The Journal des Debats hearing that 
 Yillemain was considering the possibility of reconciliation by a 
 
 29 "La Majeste des lois est compromise." Constitutionnel, 4 Janvier 
 1844. 
 
 122 
 
law, urged him to postpone his action, and, another important 
 personage seems to have heard the warning of the Debats 
 for he declared : "Je ne souffrirai pas que l'etat soit trouble 
 par une guerre de cuistres et de bedeaux" 30 All the press 
 entered the arena and we find as little logic in their sympathies 
 and political positions as there was in their statements. Ex- 
 cept for the papers published under the supervision of the 
 religious parties, the principal combatants on the field were the 
 Journal des Debats and the Globe; the former declared 
 "If the State supervises the sects, she does so as much to the 
 purpose of protecting them as for restraining them," while the 
 other speaking of religious instruction repeated incessantly 
 "this request based on the charter is based on common sense 
 as well." These statements indicate clearly the divisions exist- 
 ing even within party lines, on the question of freedom of in- 
 struction. The following few lines from another paper betray 
 a division in a far more serious quarter : 
 
 "We are given to understand that the political faction of 
 the ministry, that faction that thinks itself so clever and so 
 superior, blames the impulse given to the press and to the 
 official chairs (of the University) by another party (in the 
 Cabinet) disposed to second the fanaticism of the "Universi- 
 taires." M. Guizot thinks differently from M. Villemain, and 
 M. Soult says he doesn't understand at all the "case of con- 
 science" of the Journal des Debats. But Guizot and M. 
 Soult have striven in vain, the University dominates and rules 
 them. . . . This is the antagonism that has just broken out 
 in the midst of the government ; on one side a practical spirit 
 of discipline, on the other a spirit-doctrinaire and chimerical ; 
 on the one, a policy clothed in the semblance of a system of 
 morality, on the other, a philosophy coquetting with theories 
 of disorder." 
 
 It did indeed seem a hopeless state of affairs, for, so divided, 
 the government certainly could not effect a reconciliation of the 
 two opponents. Between a divided ministry, between the "Neo- 
 Catholics" and the "Universitaires," stood Louis Philippe. 
 His attitude at this stage of the agitation is interesting. Of 
 
 ™ L'Univers, 18 Mai 1843. Debidour ("l'Eglise et l'Etat" 463) at- 
 tributes this remark to Louis Philippe. 
 
 I'Univers, 
 18 Mai, 1843 
 
 Journal des 
 
 Debats, 
 15 Mai, 1843 
 
 Journal des 
 
 Debats, 
 12 Mai, 1843 
 
 Le Globe, 
 14 Mai, 1843 
 
 Quoti- 
 dienHe, 
 18 Mars., 
 1843 
 
 v. Constitu- 
 tionnel, 1-3, 
 1843 
 
 123 
 
sympathies fundamentally Voltarian the king had wavered be- 
 tween the two ; alarmed one minute by the evidence of Republi- 
 
 18 iuCiS^ canism in the University, at another by the addition of certain 
 Legitimists to the "Neo-Catholic" Party, 31 again by the state- 
 
 v. d'Haus- ments of Thiers in regard to the University, and then by the 
 'Tacor- a PP ear ance of Lacordaire, the Dominican, at Xotre Dame in 
 daire," the last part of the year, he had assumed an attitude of "laissez- 
 faire" and appeared to desire to forget the entire situation. 
 Perhaps in this policy, he was not so indifferent and so unwise 
 as people thought him. 32 Nevertheless, the question could not 
 remain long in this unsettled condition; the state of mind of 
 both parties would not permit it. Montalembert increased the 
 -violence of his demands before the Peers, and the government 
 saw it could hesitate no longer. Some satisfaction must be 
 given to one or the other — the ministry were brought to realize 
 this fact, the people had long foreseen it, and all awaited with 
 anxiety the opening of Parliament after the new year. 
 
 From the very outset of 1844, however, the statements made 
 by the government did not augur well for the cause of the "Neo- 
 Catholics." An early number of Ami de la Religion et du 
 roi, too long silent on the question, opened with the follow- 
 ing comment : 
 
 "The reply of the King of the French to M. Letronne who, 
 in the name of the "College de France" came to pay his compli- 
 ments on the first of January, contains a sentence that has 
 Ami de la caused us as much pain as surprise. "The College of France, 
 duroi, 6 inaugurated by Francois i er for the perfection of human knowl- 
 Janv., 1844 edge, had honourably pursued its useful work. I am glad 
 to tell you how much I appreciate your efforts." This is the 
 
 31 M. de Vatesmil, one of the strongest men in the Legitimist party, 
 at this time became a member of the Committee on Religious Liberty, 
 which with Montalembert as Chairman, had been formed in the 
 chamber of Peers. Thureau Dangin E et E. 212. 
 
 32 "Le roi Louis Philippe dans cette querelle de l'Universite et des 
 Jesuites n'est pas tres favourable a l'Universite. Si Villemain n'a pas 
 propose cette annee sa loi organique sur l'instruction secondaire, 
 c'est parceque le roi ne s'en est pas souci. 'Laissez faire' disait-il au 
 Ministre, 'laissons leur la liberte a tous. moyennant un tout petit 
 article de police.' Le roi est peutetre meilleur politique en disant cela, 
 mais Villemain est meilleur Universitaire." Chroniques parisiennes 
 Sainte-Beuve 62. 
 
 124 
 
sentence that has left so lasting and unfortunate an impression 
 in the minds of the clergy, for the clergy do not consider 
 either as useful or honorable the courses of MM. Michelet and 
 Quinet, so abounding as they are in scandal, so hostile to re- 
 ligion and so full of calumnies against its priests." 
 
 The above remark of the King, while not so direct a compli- 
 ment to the University as his critics have interpreted it, was 
 nevertheless another indication of his attitude. He was afraid, 
 to a certain extent, of the clergy, he felt they were Legitimists 
 at heart, and as his relations with Mgr. Afire became less cor- 
 dial, this distrust seemed to increase. 33 But even this attitude 
 on the part of the King could not long be maintained without 
 serious danger to a government which was in need of support, 
 and every day statesmen urged more insistently upon Ville- 
 main the necessity for a new law. Among the most anxious 
 of these was Guizot. Although we cannot find any evidence of 
 M. Guizot's speaking in either House on the subject of instruc- 
 tion from 1840 until well into the year 1844 and although he 
 seemed up to this time to have left the question to Villemain 
 and his associates, still his belief in the absolute need for 
 church participation in public instruction had not waned. This 
 silence must have been caused by his desire to keep to his 
 ideal of maintaining to the end a conservative majority. Later, 
 when commenting on his actions at this time, he said : 
 
 "In the matter of public instruction, I said : 'All rights do not 
 belong to the State ; there are some, I will not say superior, but 
 anterior to, and coexisting with them. There are, in the first 
 instance, rights of the family, children belong to the family 
 before they belong to the state. The state has the right of 
 distributing instruction, of directing it in its own establish- 
 ments, and of superintending it everywhere; it has not the 
 right of imposing it arbitrarily and exclusively on families with- 
 out their consent or perhaps against their will. The system of 
 the Imperial University did not allow this primitive and in- 
 violable right of families." 
 
 The view of those of the Liberals not exactly allied with the 
 
 33 Louis Philippe is said to have remarked : "Je n'aime pas les col- 
 leges ecclesiastiques, on enseigne trop aux enfants de chanter le verset 
 de magnificat, Deposuit potentes de sede." Quoted in Thureau Dangin, 
 E et E, from Vie de Mgr. Afire Cruice 307. 
 
 125 
 
I' Universe, 
 18 Janv., 
 
 1844 
 
 Speech of 
 de Tocque- 
 ville, ch. of 
 
 peers, 17 
 Janv. 
 
 "Universitaires" at this time is somewhat different. An exam- 
 ple of this attitude is found in de Tocqueville's criticism of the 
 speech delivered by Louis Philippe to the Chamber of Deputies 
 on its reopening in January. In his discourse the King, strange 
 contradiction, had uttered the usual platitudes on the peace and 
 happy condition of the country: 
 
 "You say that peace reigns, I will tell you again that the 
 fight has simply changed ground; from political it has become 
 philosophical and religious. . . . Without a doubt the liberty 
 of instruction has been the principal cause and pretext of this 
 war, but the strife has extended far beyond these limits even. 
 Listen to the parties. Do some of them demand only liberty 
 of instruction ; rather do they not go so far as to attack even 
 liberty of thought, the very principle of education? Look at 
 the others and you will see that they do not limit themselves 
 to speaking of the University and its rules alone, but they at- 
 tack religion itself, and the general principles and rules on 
 which it reposes. I say to you that the question of liberty of 
 instruction was of such a nature as to irritate profoundly the 
 minds of men and more than any other, to give rise to the 
 struggle that we condone. You have left this question thir- 
 teen years without solution. . . . The clergy ... I say that 
 the clergy does not possess any of those ancient bonds which 
 formerly attached it to wealth and to power . . . the concor- 
 dat placed it in a position of happy dependence on the jurors; 
 that its only remaining force in the political world was the 
 sympathy of the men of liberty, and I add that by the very 
 action at this time of some of its members it is losing this 
 sympathy. Then, gentlemen, its isolation will become so com- 
 plete, so intolerable, so desperate, that sooner or later it will 
 throw itself into the arms of whoever offers it power. And as 
 in certain other countries, it will become transformed into the 
 political agent of the state ; then we will have the most despic- 
 able of all human institutions, a political religion, a religion 
 servile to the government and assisting in the oppression of 
 its people instead of preparing the way for liberty." 
 
 This was the warning de Tocqueville gave his confreres of 
 the possible result of their procrastination. This speech paved 
 the way for another law on the subject, the chambers were 
 
 126 
 
notified that a new proposition would be submitted to them in 
 the course of a few weeks. 34 
 
 On the second of February Villemain submitted his law. In 
 general it resembled very much the law proposed in 1841. 
 There were five principal provisions: 
 
 1. The right to open establishments of instruction is recog- 
 nized in principle, and this right is extended to all citizens, 
 but— 
 
 2. Members of unauthorized orders are excepted. 
 
 3. The State reserves to itself the right of supervision. 
 
 4. The right to open a school for instruction is subordi- 
 nated to guaranties of personal morality and ability, but the 
 first of these must come from the municipal or judicial authori- 
 ties for that purpose for each academy. 
 
 5. Ecclesiastical schools of secondary grade (small semin- 
 aries) are to remain under the regime of privilege. 
 
 This was the attempt the Administration made to prove it- 
 self liberal. It is in Article two, however, that we find what 
 was to prove the real bone of contention. In this clause may 
 be seen the direct influence of the "Aux Jesuites" cry raised by 
 those very "Universitaires" under whose direct authority all 
 educational institutions were not placed. Villemain's law did 
 not have a cordial reception, it was acceptable to one party, but 
 
 34 The remarks of the President of the Chamber of Deputies on the 
 announcement of this intention were, however, a fair premonition of 
 what the result would be : "Nous accueillons avec empressement 
 l'assurance que le projet de loi qui nous sera presente en satisfaisant 
 au voeu de la charte pour la liberte de l'enseignement, maintiendra — 
 l'autorite de 1' l'Etat sur l'instruction publique." L'Univers, 25 Janv. 
 1844. 
 
 A criticism of the above remark, made in the Chamber the following 
 day showed the "Neo-Catholics" that they would find some support 
 "L'autorite de l'Etat sur l'instruction libre ! Mais je ne comprends 
 pas cette alliance des mots; Qu'est ce que l'autorite? Cherchez en la 
 definition. Vou trouverez que l'autorite c'est le droit et le pouvoir de 
 commander. Commander a la liberte Messieurs, mais si on venait 
 nous demander ice d'etablir une autorite une action sur la liberte 
 de la presse y'aurait — il assez de voix pour fletrir une pareille heresie 
 contre la Constitution? Eh, bien, Messieurs, la liberte de l'instruc- 
 tion, est — elle moins sacree moins precieuse que la liberte de la presse? 
 Voulez-vous etablir les categories de liberte?" L'Univers, 26 Janv. 1844. 
 
 127 
 
 v. Grimaud, 
 "Hist, de la 
 
 Liberte 
 d'Enseigne- 
 ment, 329- 
 335 
 
VUnivers, 
 5 Ferier, 
 1843 
 
 v. Le Na- 
 tionel, Nos. 
 3-4, Fev., 
 1844 
 
 Constitu- 
 tionnel, 12 
 Fev., 1844 
 
 v. Journal 
 des Debats } 
 2 Fevrier, 
 1844 
 
 not to the other ; it was not a compromise and did not offer the 
 slightest possibility of solving the difficulty. 
 
 L'Univers addressed the following warning to the Cham- 
 bers who were to deliberate on it : 
 
 "Moreover, we do not forget, Messieurs, that article 69 of 
 the Charter of 1830 prescribed a twofold purpose to the atten- 
 tion of the legislators ; 'public instruction and the liberty of 
 teaching.' By these terms the Charter indicates that the exten- 
 sion and perfection of the schools should be coincident with or 
 even precede any serious modification of the legal regime under 
 which all "ecoles particulieres"' have heretofore existed." 35 
 
 The disappointment occasioned by the new law was general. 36 
 Even some of his own party turned against Villemain, claim- 
 ing that he has lost a glorious opportunity. 37 The Journal 
 des Debats and the National alone supported him and de- 
 clared that the law was in all respects perfect and that what- 
 ever secondary provisions had been made, such as in heading 
 two of the law, 38 were rendered necessary by the events of the 
 past three years. The majority of the people, however, seemed 
 to agree in the following opinions, the one expressed by a 
 paper formerly a supporter of Villemain, the other, by the 
 
 35 Another paper noting the attack on the Jesuits contained in the 
 new law remarked : "La pensee de ces dispositions n'est pas heureuse : 
 elle ne sera conciliee avec les principes d'aucun des systemes ac- 
 ceptables, mais nous ne concevons pas ce parti pris de voir tout le 
 projet dans une de ces dispositions secondares que sera necessairement 
 modifiee et a la quelle le ministere n'a certainement pas attache le 
 sort de son projet." La Presse, 7 Fev. 1844. 
 
 36 Another article from this same paper shows more clearly the 
 fact that certain of the liberals realized the necessity of real freedom: 
 ''Si l'instruction publique s'est renfermee jusqu' ici dans l'Universite, ne 
 voit-on pas que c'est precisement cet etat de choses qu'il s'agit de 
 changer aujourd'hui pour obeir a la charte? Xe voit-on pas que 
 l'enseignement libre doit etre constitue a l'enseignement national que 
 le ministre de l'instruction publique doit perdre desormais son role 
 unique et exclusif de grand maitre de l'Universite, pour devenir le 
 tuteur des ecoles libres comme celui des ecoles Universitaires et pour 
 peser egalment les uns et les autres dans la balance impartiale de 
 l'autorite publique?" La Presse, 8 Fev. 1844. 
 
 87 "Au lieu de se considerer comme le grand pontife de l'enseignement 
 universal, il est reste le general de corps enseignant laique, le superieur 
 du couvent Universitaire." Courricr Francois, 12 Fev. 1844. 
 
 "V. p. 56. 
 
 128 
 
Comte de Maistre in explaining the situation to the English 
 people : "It is a party act and not one of the whole government" 
 said the Constitutionnel; while de Maistre declared : 
 
 "If we do not return to ancient maxims, if education be not 
 restored to the clergy, and if science be not placed in second 
 rank, the evils which await us are incalculable ; we shall be 
 brutalized by science, which is the last degree of debasement." 
 
 Judging from the law itself and the criticisms quoted, it 
 does indeed seem as if the University had lost the only reason 
 it might have had for its claims, and had itself assumed the 
 very attitude toward secondary education which it had accused 
 the "Neo-Catholics" of seeking. The battle royal over the law 
 took place in the chamber of Peers. From the very beginning 
 it augured well for the "Neo-Catholics" as the "projet" was 
 given for examination to a committee headed by de Broglie and 
 Mole. The debate opened the 22nd of April and lasted twenty- 
 nine days. The Chamber divided at once into three parties ; the 
 "Universitaires exclusifs" who seemed to have but one leader 
 Cousin, the "Xeo-Catholics" under Montalembert, Seguier and 
 Beugnot, and the Ministers, not all of whom were even of 
 accord. At first it was a battle of Cousin and Villemain against 
 Martin who represented the government, and who was later 
 assisted by Guizot. The reporting Committee, however, was 
 weak, and while they did attempt to make a few reforms in the 
 bill, their efforts were so feeble that Guizot found himself em- 
 barrassed by the revised bill placed before the Chamber. 39 
 But while little actual gain was made by the Catholics in the 
 discussion, the results proved to be significant enough. Mon- 
 talembert, by his eloquence gained them more sympathy and 
 moral support each day. He routed entirely Villemain, as was 
 acknowledged even by his most hostile critics, 40 and M. Guizot 
 
 M "Du travail de M. de Broglie il resulte done: i° que l'Universite 
 est une ecole de mauvaises doctrines ainsi que les eveques Ten ont 
 convaincu ; 2 0 que toute concurrence religieuse, entreprise entre ces 
 doctrines sera vaine et illusoire sous la regne de la loi proposee." 
 L'Univers, 19 Avril 1844. 
 
 40 "Si de nos jours une question se decide par Tissue de combat 
 entre deux champions, apres le duel de M. de Montalembert et M. 
 Villemain a la tribune de la chambre de Paris l'Eglise pourrait se 
 croire triumphante, l'Universite n'aurait plus que demander merci. 
 Que voulez-vous? la partie n'etait pas egale. . . . Le debut de M. 
 
 129 
 
 London 
 Times, 
 Feb. 17, 
 1844 
 
 Le Com- 
 merce, Feb. 
 17, 1844 
 
did not fare much better in his plea, outwitted as he was again 
 and again by Montalembert. 41 
 
 So far the debate had not resulted favourably for the Univer- 
 sity, nor for the government. The ever-observant people, in 
 turn, were not slow to recognize this fact and the newspapers 
 hailed it with varying emotions. 42 Evidently the arguments 
 for their opponents had not been well presented, and the "Neo- 
 Catholics" might well anticipate a victory. They were not dis- 
 appointed. After much debate, at the suggestion of de Broglie 
 the matter was put to vote and the result was at least a partial 
 victory for the Catholics. For while they were defeated 185 
 to 51, they had succeeded in obtaining a larger opposition vote 
 in the Chamber of Peers than had been known for some time. 
 This fact in itself is significant. The "Neo-Catholics" had, in- 
 
 Villemain a eu lieu sous de tristes auspices. II avait pour lui l'assemblee 
 et il a ete vaincu. . . . Cet homme Montalembert croit, il croit dans un 
 siecle d'incredulite, il l'exprime avec une energique simplicie, et une 
 sorte de sainte arrogance; ou? Dans une tribune politique que M. Pas- 
 quier domine, et sa parole a librement et fterement passe entre la 
 curiosite de ce spectacle original et le respect de cette grandeur que 
 communique une croyance intrepidement sincere." Courrier Fran- 
 gais, 17 Avril 1844. 
 
 41 Montalembert's reply to Guizot was delivered ten days later. He 
 said in part: "J'appelle avec lui (Guizot) le moment de ce qu'il a 
 nomme la reconcilation entre l'Eglise et l'Etat. Je le desire vivement 
 tout le monde le desire. Mais, pour qu'elle soit durable et sincere, il 
 faut qu'elle soit fondee sur la justice. Le projet de loi que Ton nous 
 propose et que M. Guizot a couvert de son silence rend cette reconcil- 
 iation impossible, et c'est pour cela que je viens de la combattre." 
 L'Univers, 27 Avril 1844. 
 
 43 "Le ministre a defendu l'education universitaire et attaque les 
 Jesuites; c'etait simple, mais il n'a plus parle de la domination du clerge; 
 c'est un fait dont nous felicitons d'autant plus M. Villemain qui a 
 vraiment besoin d'etre encourage." Quotidienne, 27 Avril 1844. 
 
 "Rien de plus facile assurement que de refuter M. de Montalembert; 
 mais on a laisse le soin a M. Villemain, et celui-ci, devient deci 
 dement le plus mediocre des orateurs, comme il est le plus faible des 
 ministres." National, 27 Avril 1844. 
 
 "Sur tous les autres points du discours de M. de Montalembert, la 
 reponse, appartenait au ministre de l'instruction publique, et M. Ville- 
 main a engage, en effet, de refuter cette multitude d'affirmations 
 tranchantes qui tiennent bien des preuves pour les catholiques. Mais 
 comment refuter des pures affirmations?" Journal des Dcbats, 27 
 Avril 1844. v. also Messager des Chambres, 27 Avril 1844. 
 
 130 
 
deed, gained a victory, and their leader in the Chamber of 
 Peers had once told them that to do this, they must become an 
 "Embarras politique." The result of this vote seemed to show 
 that the time was not far off. 
 
 On the ioth of June Villemain's law was placed before the 
 Chamber of Deputies. Thiers was named chairman of the 
 Committee on revision. This appointment in itself boded ill 
 for the "Neo-Catholics," but the personnel of the committee 
 gave them cause for brief encouragement: M. M. de Tocque- 
 ville, Saint-Marc-Girardin, Quintette, Dupin de TAine and de 
 Carne. The Committee's work was not destined to accomplish 
 anything of importance, however, as Thiers, when making its 
 report, placed so much emphasis on the Jesuits that he uncon- 
 sciously turned the attention of the Chamber solely in that di- 
 rection. 43 There followed a second outburst of charges against 
 the "Neo-Catholics." The accusations brought against them 
 were much the same as those the Jesuits had had to disprove 
 the previous year — Legitimist sympathies. 44 The Journal des 
 Debats had not allowed this charge entirely to die out and 
 earlier in the year they had reminded their readers of it. 45 
 Other papers too, had followed their example and a flood of 
 recriminations followed. 46 . A tactical blunder was made in 
 directing the accusation against M. de Montalembert. Most of 
 his enemies could not doubt for a moment the sincerity of this 
 young champion of religious freedom, and he experienced little 
 difficulty in clearing himself of the complaints so ruthlessly 
 brought against him. 
 
 Persistent, however, in their efforts to discredit the "Neo- 
 Catholics" at all costs, their opponents, alarmed by the early ^J*,™^ 
 signs of success in the Chamber of Peers, revived that anti- ^ 
 Jesuit agitation which had been allowed to quiet down during 
 the discussion 1 of the law. Early in May the "Journal des 
 Debats had reopened this field of controversy by asking : 
 
 "Will the Jesuits become the masters of education in France v. supra 
 or not ? That is the question now being agitated in the Cham- Maw8 
 
 "Moniteur, 10 Juin 1844. 
 
 "Journal des Debats, 17 Dec. 1843; 12 Fev. 1844. 
 45 Courrier Frangais, 13 Fev. 1844. 
 
 "v. also their refutation I'Univers, 13 Fev. 1844. v. letter of 
 Montalembert to Journal des Debats, 12 Fev. 1844. 
 
 131 
 
Moniteur, 
 15 Juillet, 
 
 1844 
 Speech of 
 Thiers, 13 
 Juillet, 1844 
 
 ber of Peers, fourteen years after the Revolution of July, 
 under a government sprung from that Revolution, before a 
 ministry whose principal members were, under the Restoration, 
 deprived of their chairs and prosecuted by the Jesuits. The 
 reply in our opinion, is not uncertain. No, the Jesuits will not 
 become the masters of education in France. The government 
 of France will not thus betray its origin." 47 
 
 There were not many, however, who held the extreme view 
 of the Journal des Debats. On the contrary, there were 
 many who felt, what was probably true, that, according to the 
 letter of the law, the Jesuits should be expelled, but that the 
 other policy of an inquisition into the conscience of every 
 one who wanted to teach was odious. Of these, Thiers was 
 the principal advocate. On the thirteenth of July his famous 
 report upon Villemain's law was read. This report is impor- 
 tant for it marks the first beginning of a coalition between the 
 University and Adolphe Theirs, now become the new leader of 
 the Republican party. Furthermore, it was a readjustment of 
 his political creed to meet a new situation and it predicts his 
 policy for the year 1845. 
 
 "What will result, gentlemen, from this struggle? Nothing 
 but the triumph of Reason, if you know how to be patient and 
 persevere. The Church is a great, an august power, but she 
 has not exerted herself to have the right on her side in this 
 case. In former times she has triumphed over persecution ; 
 that is true, and ought to be to the honour of humanity. She 
 
 47 Another paper, more reasonable and yet really of the opposition, 
 saw the entire affair in another light. The contrast is curious : "Nous 
 comprenons et nous admettons qu'on exclue de la France l'ordre des 
 Jesuites. C'est ta dire que Ton l'empeche de etablir, d'acquerir, de pos- 
 seder des membres ; mais qu'on descend dans la conscience de tous les 
 citoyens, qu'on sonde inquisitorialement leur vie privee, leurs sentiments 
 intimes et qu'on les force a declarer et a signer, pour avoir la faculte 
 d'instruire la jeunesse, qu'ils appartiennent nia l'ordre des Jesuites, ni 
 a aucune ordre prohibe, par les lois, voila, qui est monstrueux autant 
 qu'insense; voila qui choque les idees les plus elementaires, voila qui 
 f erait reculer la France et toutes les conquetes morales de deux siecles ; 
 voila qui retablirait ce que Tesprit d'intolerance a jamais montres de 
 plus etroit, de plus tyrannique et de plus vexatoire ; viola ce qui met- 
 trait veritablement le gouvernement de Juillet en danger. Oui, excluez, 
 tant qu'il vous plaira l'ordre des Jesuites, mais n'excluez pas la liberte," 
 Le Globe, 10 Mai 1844. 
 
 132 
 
will not, however, triumph over Reason calm and respectful but 
 inflexible.'' 
 
 All this discussion was to come to nothing and the progress 
 of events was interrupted by a calamity. The "Universitaires" 
 had found in Thiers a leader ; they were to need him badly, for 
 Villemain was slowly becoming the victim of a mental disease. 
 In December insanity seized upon him, and Guizot appointed 
 in his place de Salvandy, a man more in sympathy with the 
 "Neo-Catholic" demands. Out of respect to Villemain and his 
 affliction a sort of armed truce ensued for the remaining few 
 weeks of the year 1844. 
 
 What an evolution had this young and ardent group of 
 Romanticists, the "parti catholique'' experienced in the brief 
 space of four years. 48 Beginning as simple religious teachers 
 they had become a real factor in parliamentary affairs. So 
 great, in fact, had been their progress that the men of the 
 opposition had had to resort to the policy of persecuting them. 
 This, in turn, had resulted to the glory and increase of the 
 persecuted, instead of to the advantage of their persecutors. 
 Even the government, misjudging them as harmless, had 
 brought them forward as a happy distraction from other 
 dangers, betrayed them, and then found their distraction 
 become an equally serious menace. Placed between this men- 
 ace and the danger of Communism, the government had first 
 attempted to conciliate, then failing this, to lavish its praises 
 upon the one and then the other. This, too, met with slight 
 success. In the meantime the opposition had presented the 
 Jesuit protest ; this seemed to have served as a fair distraction 
 and might have succeeded had it been handled more carefully, 
 had its agitators been less fanatical than their opponents. The 
 Ministry was not slow to perceive this possibility, and now, 
 in turn, they seemed to have resolved to seize upon the Jesuit 
 question, and, strange paradox, they believed that they could 
 make it a means of conciliation. By appealing to Rome they 
 planned to dissolve the order in France, that would conciliate 
 the opposition, and then, the Jesuits out of the way, they 
 
 48 "Ce que nous avons gagne dans cette derniere campagne, en verite, 
 
 en force, en avenir est a peine croyable. . . . Je ne crois pas que v> London 
 
 l'histoire presente une aussi surprenante peripetie." Lettres Lacor- Times, 
 
 daire, 1 Juin 1844. Dec. 17, i«44 
 
 133 
 
would try to submit a law satisfactory to the "Neo-Catholics." 
 So it was that his minister of public instruction become insane, 
 Guizot, the minister of foreign affairs, by the appointment of 
 de Salvandy, a man whom he knew could control, brought the 
 question of liberty of instruction into his own department and 
 determined to settle it himself by a policy of conciliation and 
 mutual concessions at home, made possible through diplomacy 
 at Rome. The Ancona affair was to be reacted in another 
 sphere, but after all, in the same sense, Guizot was to deceive 
 and then, in turn, be himself bitterly deceived. This new 
 policy will be considered in the next chapter. 
 
 134 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 THE VICTORY OF THE "NEO-CATHOLICS." 
 THE FALL OF THE JULY MONARCHY 
 
 In the last few years of the reign of Louis Philippe that 
 state of apathy and political indifference remarked at the be- 
 ginning of Quizot's administration (1840) became the 
 dominant characteristic of the French nation. Its cause, it 
 will be remembered, was found in the failure of the July 
 Monarchy to fulfill the hopes and ambitions of its originators, 
 and the consequent reign of selfish interests. But this fact 
 alone could not account for the political indifference France 
 displayed at that time. The mere statement that the bour- 
 geoisie had lost interest and were disappointed is not sufficient. 
 They did not even make the slightest attempt to force the 
 government to carry out their wishes, and there were several 
 reasons to account for this. In the first place they did not 
 know how to compel the Monarchy to follow the line of 
 conduct they desired, and, too, they had refused all help 
 offered them. 
 
 At the beginning of the July Revolution the bourgeoisie had 
 found themselves for the first time in power and they were 
 hopelessly inexperienced. Neither the Revolution with its 
 heroes of a day, the Empire with its dearly bought victories, 
 nor the Restoration, had given them any opportunity to take 
 lessons in the art of governing a people. They had come 
 to the front, then, in 1830, entirely without experience or 
 practice, claiming to uphold vague principles of Constitutional 
 government, but, untutored as they were in the practice of v xhureau, 
 those principles, they had found the load upon their hands Dangin, 
 far too heavy. Other men were well versed in politics but the 49-52 ' 
 stolid bourgeois did not appeal to them. They distrusted the 
 nobles, the only class who had had much experience in gov- 
 erning. In this distrust they were wrong. The old nobility 
 
 135 
 
v. I'Univers, 
 13 Fevr., 
 1845 
 et nos. seq 
 also 
 Monta- 
 lembert, 
 Discours, 
 13 Janv., 
 1845 
 
 was fast disappearing, and among the younger generation 
 there were many who could have helped them, and if they 
 had confided in them, they would not have abused that confi- 
 dence. Liberal Romanticism had, as has been seen, claimed 
 many adherents among the younger nobility who pos- 
 sessed those very elements of chivalry, heroism and generosity 
 which the average bourgeois lacked and yet so direly needed. 
 Among the younger aristocracy, then, there was much ma- 
 terial which would have been useful, but the bourgeoisie, 
 blind in its own jealousy, did not perceive the good and 
 saw only an evil that was slowly being eradicated. Had 
 they but realized their own short sightedness in time, it might 
 have been their salvation, but, as it was, selfish interests 
 reigned more completely than ever. It was only among 
 the members of Parliament then, that real political interest 
 existed. 1 These parliamentarians were scattered among a 
 number of groups; the "Neo-Catholics" with their pro- 
 gramme of liberty of instruction, the Republicans with 
 such questions as the supremacy of the University and 
 Electoral Reform — so soon to be made a more serious ques- 
 tion by Lamartine's inauguration of "Reform Banquets;" the 
 Extreme Left constantly advocating Socialism, Communism 
 and the Right of the Individual, and finally, the Government 
 with its few supporters interested in a personal policy of 
 saving their own necks. The greatest agitation, however, 
 continued to center around the "Neo-Catholics" and their de- 
 mand for liberty of teaching and of religion — a controversy 
 that the opposition had frequently sought to cloak with the 
 Jesuit question. 
 
 After the fatal illness of Villemain there ensued for a time 
 a sort of armed truce. During this brief period of calm Dupin 
 (confrere of Odilon-Barrot) published his famous "Manuel 
 du droit publique ecclesiastique," an indirect assault on all 
 ultramontane theses and an attempt to arouse what the author 
 believed would prove a salutatory reaction to Gallicanism. 
 
 1 "Le publique ne s'occupe que de ses speculations, de ses affaires. 
 II n'a pas de gout en ce moment pour la politique il s'en defie; il 
 craint en etre derange. II a eu ainsi des engouements successifs; 
 sous l'Empire, les bulletins de'l Armee, sous la Restauration la liberte, 
 aujourd'hui c'est la Richesse." Rossi, Revue des deux Mondes 1842. 
 
 136 
 
This effort, ably combated in L'Univers by de Bonald, Arch- 
 bishop of Lyons, failed. Another event of importance was the 3 " F ^ v ^ l84 ^ 
 definite nomination of Salvandy as Minister of Public Instruc- 
 tion. The appointment of an ally of Dupin and Saint-Marc 
 Girardin did not in itself offer too promising a prospect to the 
 "Neo-Catholics," but Salvandy was more kindly disposed than 
 Villemain. A belief in the church and its share in affairs, as 
 a political necessity was not a brief in religion for religion's 
 sake, but it was better than intolerance and vague protestation. 
 It was soon realized, however, that the new Minister would 
 play a minor and very inconspicuous part in the settlement of 
 the question that so vitally concerned his department; for it 
 was not long before it escaped the confines of the province of 
 instruction and was carried into the realms of diplomacy. 
 The Jesuit question was revived. 
 
 In reality, the Jesuit protest had never ceased, but had con- 
 tinued active under the surface from the time of its first en- 
 trance into politics. The Journal des Dcbats still declaimed 
 that their presence in France was contrary to the law, while 
 the Constitutionnel continued to publish regularly a chapter of I'jjnivers 
 "Le Juif Errant," by Eugene Sue. In 1845 all that was nec- 12 Avril, 
 essary to revive the question was an event attracting public 1845 
 attention. This was offered in the ''Affaire Affnaer," an in- 
 cident unimportant enough, but destined to become the occa- Consti- 
 sion for the reappearance and final "solution" of the agitation, tutionnel, 
 A former Jesuit named Affnaer, had been the economat (man- ^^s^ 1 ' 
 ager and treasurer) of one of the Jesuit establishments in 
 France. He had stolen, he had been expelled, and now, to 
 
 avenge himself upon the order which had ruined his reputation National, 
 
 12 ^\.v r il 
 
 and published his shame, he took advantage of the prejudice jg 45 ' 
 against that body to air his complaints, recounted with all the 
 black details of a Reformer of the Sixteenth Century. His 
 cause was taken up at once by the Republicans, and the matter 
 did not remain long outside the Debates of the Chamber. On 
 April 14, Cousin taking occasion to speak of the "Affaire Aff- 
 naer" before the Chamber of Peers demanded that the govern- 
 ment put into immediate execution the existing laws prohibiting 
 the establishment of the Company of Jesus in France. Im- 
 mediately the Republican papers circulated petitions upholding 
 
 137 
 
Journal des 
 Debats, 15 
 Avril, 1845 
 
 National, 
 15 Avril, 
 1845 
 
 v. Carica- 
 ture, by 
 A. Gill, 
 "La Carica- 
 ture Fran- 
 chise au 
 XIX 
 Siecl/e," pu- 
 blic par. 
 Armand 
 Dayot 
 
 Cousin's demand. The Opposition through the Journal des 
 Debats, asked : 
 
 "Why, in this question of the Jesuits, do they not enforce 
 the laws concerning "congregations d'hommes and if the 
 Order is good and worthy to be saved, do they not enforce 
 the laws concerning "congregations d'hommes" and ask the 
 Chambers to authorize the Jesuits' rights in France? We are 
 of the opinion ourselves that one or the other of these two 
 laws must be enforced while waiting for M. de Montalembert 
 to successfully proclaim "la liberte illimitee de toute chose." 
 
 To such protests the government, through M. Martin (du 
 Nord) replied: "I have already said that several associations 
 are tolerated in France. The duty of the government is to 
 discern and wait. It would never do to provoke the clergy to 
 angry protests." 
 
 The government and Guizot must have been in very hard 
 straits indeed, when they could make no better answer to the 
 demands of the people they were supposed to serve. Guizot 
 saw that he could not defend the Jesuits without serious danger 
 to the dynasty, but he must defend religious liberty. This was 
 the problem confronting the Ministry, and while it was deter- 
 mining on a plan of solution, the opposition were putting the 
 final touches to their scheme of assault. 
 
 This time the Jesuit Question was revived in the Chamber 
 of Deputies and Thiers was the principal agitator. From the 
 very outset, however, an important fact should be borne in 
 mind. Thiers, as leader of the Republicans, had become a 
 sponsor for the cause of the University, but in all probability 
 he was not fighting this fight for a great moral principle. In 
 fact, his own actions do not permit the acceptance of any such 
 idea. Undoubtedly there were other interests far more vital 
 to the political future of the "Oiseau sur la Branche." Thiers 
 had foreseen the inevitable end of the government, but it was 
 not to be for him the end ; he was determined that his own 
 political life should not be shortened by any possible fatality 
 to the dynasty. As leader of both oppositions he felt he had 
 a career to fight for, and the Jesuit question became in his eyes, 
 a mere political hobby-horse on which he hoped to ride into 
 the Cabinet, from which he had resigned, and wrest the 
 
 138 
 
portfolio from Guizot. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, on 
 the other hand, was well aware of the intention of his adver- 
 sary, and realized that the policy either of favoring or sup- 
 pressing the Jesuits would be a victory for Thiers and, in 
 either event, would lead to his own resignation. Guizot, then, 
 saw only one possible escape open to him — a recourse to Rome. 
 
 In the meantime, Thiers had roused the Deputies. On the 
 2nd of May, 1845, ne made his famous interpellation on the 
 legality of the position of the Jesuits in France and the danger 
 to the country. Posing as an apostle of the new era and a 
 believer in what he termed "the modern spirit" he traced the 
 history of the Jesuits in France from the very beginning, and ^ 
 showed how they had interfered in the affairs of State in past ' 118-9 
 time. Basing his complaint upon the early laws of the Revo- 
 lution, the Ordonnances of 1812 and 1825, and the July Or- 
 donnance of Charles X in the year 1828, he then criticised the 
 attitude of M. Martin (du Nord) and de Salvandy. His tac- 
 tics were clever, at some points in the interpellation he did 
 not fail to pose as a moderate. Could it be believed that this 
 attack was entirely sincere it would be an admirable piece of 
 work, but it is well to have in mind Thiers' policy and words 
 at a later epoch when reading the following citation from his 
 speech : 
 
 "As for me, I am convinced that by far the majority of the 
 French clergy is animated with a good spirit, with respect for 
 the laws of the country, and that it is faithful to the State. 
 But I also believe that there is a faction among them that Is 
 compromising the clergy in the eyes of the government. It is 
 just the same thing as existed at the time of the institution of 
 the Concordat when a part of the clergy did not recognize the 
 Concordat. This faction was still living during the Restoration, 
 and it exists today. 
 
 "Where will we find this faction? I will speak frankly; I Speech of 
 believe that the first impulse has come from the Jesuits. fore^Cham- 
 
 "I will not recall, gentlemen, all that has been said about ber of Dep- 
 the Order of Jesuits; I am fair-minded; I do not believe in uties ; 8 4 5 Mal ' 
 all the popular prejudices existing against this famous com- VUnivers, 
 munity ; things have changed since two centuries ago, and they 3 Cm^titu-^ 
 must indeed have been in a most unhappy condition not to tionnel, 
 
 139 
 
have changed. Today, however, the Jesuits are become the 
 refuge whither go restless and ardent souls that they may find 
 there the force of association. At every period there has been 
 a moderate and also an exaggerated spirit." 2 
 
 Thiers' efforts enjoyed immediate success, and the following 
 day the Chambers voted the famous "ordre du jour" of May 3, 
 appointing a bureau to draw up a law against the Jesuits. A 
 3 v^also 4 ^ £ reat victory was acclaimed by the opposition ; Thiers' paper 
 24 Mai, 1845 declared: "L'opposition avait fait une fois de plus l'office du 
 gouvernement." 
 
 j The question arises, however, whether after all, Thiers had 
 
 Debats not ^ or political purposes made a mountain out of a mole hill. 
 ;5 Mai, 1845 It would have been impossible for the Jesuits so recently re- 
 turned and living under such restricted conditions, to have 
 become a real menace to the government. There were some 
 who had not lost their heads and who realized this fact. 3 
 Moreover, the party of "Neo-Catholics," those really attacked, 
 did not fail to see that the Jesuit agitation and the question of 
 public instruction were being used by the opposition as a poli- 
 tical club to drive out Guizot. They, in their turn, uttered a 
 rather serious warning: 
 
 "Saturday's vote has caused the Journal des Debats some 
 anxiety ; they fear that M. Thiers is trying to make it a 
 weapon against the Ministry, and they devote the first part of 
 their article to explaining that 'this vote is rather a mark of 
 confidence than blame for the government.' The Constitution- 
 nel on the other hand, tries to prove that all the glory of that 
 
 I'Umyers, ^ay s hould go to their patron. It is evident that the anti- 
 6 Mai, 1845 " 
 
 ' It is interesting to note that de Ravignan and Dupanloup were in 
 the gallery of the Chamber on the 2nd and 3rd of May. de Pont 
 levoy Vie du P. de Ravignan. I, 313. 
 
 3 "En 1845, sous le regime de la liberte de la presse, a la clarte d'un 
 firmament de journaux, declarera-t-on sans rougir, qu'il n'y aura 
 plus d'associations autorisees se proposant un but de bienfaisance 
 ou de moralisation, que celles qu'il sera bien demontre que la religion 
 n'a aucune part, et si Ton recule devant une pareille monstruosite, 
 devant un tel anachronisme, dedlarera-t-on sans rire que l'existence 
 de trois ou quatre cents Jesuites vivant dessimines dans 27 maisons est 
 un danger qui menace le 19* siecle et 34,000,000 d'habitants, les libertes 
 publiques et le progres des idees, la tranquility de I'Etat et le repos 
 des families." La Presse, 5 Mai 1845. 
 
 140 
 
religious furor of these two sheets does not prevent them from 
 
 looking to their "interets de boutiques/' For that matter, both 
 
 are right. In fact, it was in the hope of grabbing the power 
 
 that Thiers raised the question of religious communities, and it L'Univers 
 
 • , , , ™ , r , 18 Janv. 1844 
 
 was in order that they might keep their portfolios a few weeks speech of de 
 
 longer that our Ministers have so promptly sacrificed religious Tocqueville 
 ... * T , • t t . + - * a a ch of Peers 
 
 liberty. That is how the government is run today. Are you I7 j anv 
 
 still surprised that a government that exists and legislates in 
 
 such a manner, is without force and without definiteness ?" 
 
 Seeing no help in prospect from the government, the Jesuits 
 were preparing a legal battle for their existence in France, by 
 basing their claims on the Article in the Charter allowing asso- 
 ciations, and in maintaining that the acceptance of a charter 
 which contained this article annulled all past legislation. Cer- v. de Pont- 
 tainly they had the law on their side. In fact what proofs but ^ evoy ' r ' 317 
 the slanderous and scandalous reports of their adversaries can 
 be found against them? The use of slander and scandal often 
 implies the lack of reliable statements and well-founded 
 charges. Of the latter, after a diligent search, not the slightest 
 evidence has been found for the entire period of the July 
 Monarchy, and it is impossible to admit as proof of their 
 evil at this time, a reference to a reputation in the past mani- 
 festly of an unsavory nature. 
 
 But the government had not been so inactive as the two 
 
 adversaries had imagined. In fact, while Thiers had been 
 
 occupied in publicly berating the Order and the weakness of a 
 
 government which would tolerate its establishment, Guizot had Devour, 
 
 , . . , E et E, 460, 
 
 set a curious counter policy to work. His adoption of it be- 467 
 
 trays his entire ignorance of the laws and usages of the Roman £^ re - au 
 
 Communion. It had not been easy, however, for Guizot to in- g et E, 
 
 augurate this last desperate attempt, for, from the very outset 409-410 
 
 he has been hampered by the king's words : "Do not deceive 
 
 yourselves, I will not risk my crown for the Jesuits." These 
 
 words did not serve to help, but rather embarrassed Guizot's 
 
 policy. He desired to defend the liberty of the Jesuits, but 
 
 not the Jesuits for themselves, for having in mind the fall of 
 
 Charles X, he feared for the July Monarchy in any case. 4 
 
 4 Apropos of this fear Thureau Dangin (E et E 391) remarks: "O 
 brievete de la sagesse politique quand elle pretend discerner ce qui 
 
 141 
 
Accordingly after the unsuccessful effort to force the bishops 
 to intervene, Guizot, sent M. Pellegrino Rossi, an Italian who 
 possessed a reputation not agreeable to the Apostolic See, 
 to lay the entire matter before the Pope and persuade him to 
 dissolve the Jesuit Order in France ! 5 When Thiers, then, made 
 his interpellation thereby rendering necessary some reply from 
 the government, Guizot shortly afterwards was able to an- 
 nounce that the government already had under way a plan of 
 solution and that M. Rossi would present in the course of the 
 month, a memorandum to Cardinal Lambruschini. Such was 
 the escape Guizot had planned for the government and for 
 himself. Under such circumstances and with such selfish inter- 
 ests in view it was just as well that he should have selected a 4 
 man of Rossi's calibre who possessed a reputation for extreme 
 liberal sentiments, and who certainly was not over-impressed 
 with the virtue or necessity of the "Neo-Catholic" demands,* 
 
 perd et ce qui sauve les gouvernements ! On jetait des religieux 
 pardessus bord pour alleger le navire qui portait la fortune de la 
 Monarchic ; et quand peu apres soufflera la tourmente ce sera ce grand 
 et beau navire que sombrera, tandisque la petite barque des jesuites 
 arrivera au port; la revolution qui jettera la famille d'Orleans en 
 exile, fera disparaitre les derniers vestiges de proscription pesant sur 
 la compagnie de Jesus, et M. Thiers lui-meme proclamera, devant le 
 pays cette sorte d'emancipation." 
 
 5 Apropos of the character of M. Rossi there are various reports 
 but all seem to agree that he was of a type not too acceptable for the 
 time at least, to the Pope. The Jesuits' opinion of him is as follows: 
 "M. Rossi etait un de ces conditierri de l'intelligence qui n'ont d'autre 
 patrie que le lieu 6u il leur est permis d'abriter la fortune sous leur 
 tente." J. Cretineau-Joly, "Hist, de la Compagnie de Jesus," IV, 392, 
 
 Guizot says of Rossi : "An Italian, avowedly liberal, and a refugee 
 from Italy on account of his liberal opinions, the embassy of Rossi 
 could not fail to startle, I will even say to alarm, the Court of Rome; 
 but there are salutary alarms, and I knew M. Rossi to be extremely 
 well adapted to calm those he might inspire ; and at the same time to 
 turn them to account for the success of his mission. His liberal con- 
 victions were deeply rooted, but expanded and untainted by any 
 spirit of system or party; his mind was extremely free, though not 
 fluctuating, and no one more capable of seeing persons and things 
 in their true light, and of restraining his daily actions within the 
 limits of what was practicable without ceasing the constant pursuit 
 of his object." Guizot, France under Louis Philippe. Chap. V. 363. 
 
 ' It has been asserted that Rossi even warned the Pope to beware 
 
 142 
 
Despite all this evidence, Guizot's language when explaining 
 his action is not indicative of any ulterior motives he may have 
 entertained at this time: 
 
 "I proposed to the King and Council not to abandon the 
 laws in vigour against religious communities, and to carry the 
 question of the dissolution of the Society of Jesus in France 
 to its supreme and uncontested Chief, to the Pope himself. 
 The Civil French Power did not thus renounce the legal arms 
 with which it was provided; but, in the interest of religious 
 peace, as also of religious influence and liberty in France, it 
 invited the spiritual power of the Catholic church to relieve it 
 from its exercise. The King and Council adopted my 
 proposition." 7 
 
 The general tendency, however, was to ridicule this resort 
 to diplomacy inaugurated by Guizot, and neither the "Neo- 
 Catholics" nor their opponents expected any result at all from 
 Rossi's mission. Montalembert, now the acknowledged and 
 undoubted leader of the "Neo-Catholic Movement" — as its de- 
 tractors continued to call it — felt, therefore that it would be 
 advisable to bring the Jesuit matter up before the Chamber of 
 Peers, and in that way demonstrate to the political world that 
 his party did not rely, by any means, on Guizot's policy. Ac- 
 cordingly, on the 12th of June, Montalembert, seconded by 
 Beugnot, laid the question before the High Chamber by inter- 
 rogating M. Martin (du Nord). He used this occasion to 
 deliver an eloquent defense of the Jesuits as well as to show 
 the government that the "Neo-Catholics" were aware that the 
 
 Guizot : 
 "France 
 under 
 Louis 
 Philippe, 
 362 
 
 of the . "Neo-Catholics" and their friends the Jesuits, who were 
 nothing else than "la coda di La Mennais." Thureau-Dangin., 411, 
 E et E. 
 
 7 It is a curious fact to note that even de Ravignan seemed to have 
 at first a certain amount of faith in Guizot. At the time of the first 
 agitation he had remarked : "II m'a etonnee par la superiority de ses 
 vues; par son estime pour la compagnie, par la maniere dont il se 
 prononqait contre toutes les preventions et les attaques aux quelles 
 nos sommes en lutte. Je sais positivement que, dans le conseil des 
 ministries, il a parle en notre faveur. . . . Je ne me confierai sans doute 
 qu'avec mesure a sa politique et a ses opinions, mais il merite cependant 
 plus d'estime que la plupart des nos gouvernants." Lettre, 29 December 
 1843. Pontlevoy Vie de Ravignan I, 338. 
 
 143 
 
Dep. off 
 Rossi a 
 Guizot, 23 
 Juin, 1845 
 
 Guizot, 
 "France 
 under 
 L. P," 409 
 
 Messager 
 des Cham- 
 bres, 5 Juil- 
 
 let, 1845 
 Journal des 
 Dcbats, 
 6 Juillet, 
 1845 
 
 entire agitation was a mere struggle to keep their portfolios. 8 
 In addition to showing the government that people were not 
 blind to their infidelity, this speech had the result of hastening 
 the negotiations at Rome. Montalembert had so routed M. 
 Martin (du Nord) that the government felt they could no 
 longer maintain their dignity without an immediate reply from 
 the Pope. 9 Acting on instructions, received from Guizot, there- 
 fore, Rossi became more urgent in his demands, and Lambrus- 
 chini is said finally to have assured Rossi that the order of the 
 Jesuits in France would be dispersed ; its novitiates dissolved, 
 and a few ecclesiastics who should exercise only the functions 
 of priests should remain in the establishment as caretakers. 
 But Guizot did not think this assurance binding enough, and he 
 instructed Rossi to ask that this promise be presented in writ- 
 ing to the French government. 
 
 The rest of the story, according to Guizot is as follows: 
 In the meantime Lambruschini had retracted slightly, the Pope 
 had found his Council unfavorable, and the Cardinal demanded 
 that the Jesuits "have the honour of acquiescence." Father 
 Roothan, general of the Order, then reluctantly transmitted his 
 injunctions to de Ravignan in France. Guizot now thought 
 himself justified in allowing the following notice to appear in 
 the official newspapers : 
 
 "Le gouvernement du Roi a regu des nouvelles de Rome. 
 La negotiation dont il avait charge M. Rossi a attteint son but. 
 La Congregation des Jesuites cessera d'exister en France et va 
 
 8 "When you have behind you, among the great statesmen of past 
 time Henri IV, and among the kings of today the wise and enlightened 
 Leopold, when you have behind you, in the spiritual world, the sov- 
 ereign authority of the church, you can await with confidence the 
 judgment of posterity and console yourself for having been denounced 
 by the Ministry of the first of March and betrayed by the Cabinet of 
 October 29 to passions far less powerful and less furious against 
 religion than against order, the throne and society as a whole." (Quoted 
 in I'Univers, 12 Juin 1845.) 
 
 8 "M. de Montalembert a ete plus heureux dans ses attaques contre 
 M. Martin (du Nord). II a mis dans tout son jour la conduite equi- 
 voque et incertaine du gouvernement, tiraille sans cesse entre la crainte 
 du clerge et la peur de la chambre, et le ridicule d'une mission diplo- 
 matique avortie avant meme d'etre commencee." Constitutionnel, 
 12 Juin 1845. 
 
 144 
 
se disperser d'elle-meme; ses maisons seront fermees et ses 
 noviciats dissous." 
 
 Thus the French government proclaimed itself victorious 
 without a scrap of paper except the letters of Rossi to prove 
 their victory. 10 
 
 For a moment the "Neo-Catholics" who had taken up the 
 cause of the Jesuits, believed themselves lost. They were even 
 astonished at what appeared to be the action of the Vatican, 
 for they had received the impression from their correspondent 
 at Rome that the entire affair was going in the opposite di- 
 rection and that Rossi was failing in his mission. 11 Further- 
 more, the opposition had shared in the impression of the "Neo- 
 Catholics" and even after July 6 were not inclined to credit 
 the official note of the government inserted in the Moniteur. 12 
 In this, the opponents of the government displayed extraordin- 
 ary clear-sightedness. The sorrow of the "Neo-Catholics" 
 was not to be of long duration, the doubts of the opposition 
 were soon to be confirmed. For on the 7th of July the fol- 
 lowing editorial appeared in one of the morning papers : 
 
 "Letters from Rome dated the 28th and 29th of May have 
 reached us. They contradict the notice inserted yesterday in 
 the Messager and this morning in the Moniteur. This notice 
 is based on a scandalous equivocation. Concessions were made, 
 it is true, but not at all of the nature intimated by the official 
 announcement. It is of prime importance to note that these 
 concessions do not emanate from the venerable authority 
 which they had wished to identify with M. Guizot's policy. 
 In brief, the honour and right of the Holy See are safe, and 
 
 National, 
 7 Juillet, 
 1845 
 
 Quotx- 
 dienne, 
 7 Juillet, 
 1845 
 
 10 1 have been unable to find any other official documents on this 
 subject except the notes of Rossi to Guizot. 
 
 "v. VUnivers, 1 Juillet 1845. When the official announcement ap- 
 peared, I'Univevs expressed some surprise and remarked. "Cette 
 nouvelle qu'aucune lettre de Rome nous avait laisse prevoir, brise nos 
 coeurs, rein ne peut ebranler notre foi ; si Rome l'ordonne, les 
 Jesuites se soumettront. L'Eglise de France luttera sans eux comme 
 elle a lutte pour eux. Leur depart n'enleve rien a ses droits, il ajoute 
 a ses devoirs." L'Univers, 6 Juillet 1845. 
 
 u "II reste toujours a demander compte au ministere en supposant 
 que cette nouvelle se verifie, de la dignite nationale dans une negocia- 
 tion pareille." La Reforme, 6 Juillet 1845. 
 
 v. Constitu- 
 tionnel, 
 6 Juillet, 
 1845 
 
 145 
 
the plot framed by the government will result to its own shame 
 and to its own detriment." 
 
 It was, as this paper had declared, and as the "Neo-Catho- 
 lics" themselves soon perceived, 13 an utter deception on the 
 part of the government. There are four witnesses substan- 
 tiating this opinion ; two official letters from the General of the 
 Company of Jesus to the provincial in France, a letter of Rossi 
 to Guizot, a letter of the Papal Secretary to the Apostolic Le- 
 gate in Paris, and finally the subsequent actions of the Jesuits 
 themselves, all of whom are bound to obey explicitly the orders 
 of their General. These documents, then, prove two facts, 
 first that the order came from the superior of the Jesuits and 
 not from the Pope as Guizot had desired, and also that the 
 official notice of the government published in the Moniteur and 
 Messager exaggerated the facts. 
 
 On June 14, while the negotiations were still in progress, 
 de Roothan had written a letter to de Ravignan, the provin- 
 cial, and in this letter he remarks : 
 
 "It is hard for me to give such an order, but I believe it is 
 my duty to advise this measure of prudence. I hope it 
 will be done quietly, and as I have told you, without any 
 show; this is much better from every point of view than if it 
 should take place later with trouble and tumult." 
 
 From this letter, then, it may be assumed that it was 
 Roothan who gave the orders and not the Pope. On the 
 2 1 st of January he wrote another letter to de Ravignan 
 directing him to dissolve entirely or in part according to his 
 better judgment, three houses, the establishment at Saint- 
 Acheul and several novitiates. He adds : 
 
 "Nous devons tacher de nous effacer un peu, et expier ainsi 
 la trop grande confiance que nous avons eue dans la charte et 
 qui ne se trouve que la." 
 
 ""La note publiee par le Messager, a pu, grace a l'ambiguite de sa 
 redaction, faire croire des choses qu'elle ne dit pas. Le but de M Rossi 
 a ete atteint en ce sens que les Jesuites frangais peuvent, sur 
 l'avis de leur general, renoncer a l'usage d'une partie de leur droits 
 de citoyens ne pas plaider, se disperser meme, il n'importe. mais le 
 ministre semblait annoncer une inter-vention du Saint Siege; tout 
 le monde y a ete trompe, et nous l'avons cru nous-memes." L'Univers, 
 8 Juillet 1845. 
 
 146 
 
There is only one possible letter from Rossi on which the 
 official notice of July 5th and 6th could have been modeled, 
 and then only by an inexact interpretation : 
 
 "The purpose of our negotiation has been reached. . . . The 
 Congregation will disperse of its own accord, the novitiates 
 will be dissolved, and only those ecclesiastics necessary to ^f^ 0 
 take care of their property will remain, while they, in turn, 23 Juin, 1845 
 will live as ordinary priests." 
 
 A comparison will show that the official note inserted in 
 the Moniteur and Messager does not correspond exactly 
 with the letter quoted. 
 
 The third corroboration is still more definite, the letter of 
 the Papal Secretary to the Legate at Paris. 
 
 "Now as far as the question of what steps to take is con- 
 cerned, I tell you that there never was any intention that the 
 Jesuits should close their houses or that their property should 
 be confiscated. After reading the Ministerial note (inserted 
 in the papers) I protested to M. Rossi and he declared most 
 emphatically that he had not written it. Furthermore, people 4 Aout, 
 who ought to know declared that M. Rossi has informed in- 1845 
 directly the Rev. Fr. General of the Jesuits that he ought ^1^324.5^ 
 not to interpret the words literally. 
 
 Your Excellency may, therefore, tell the Jesuits in the 
 guise of advice, to adhere strictly to whatever their Fr. 
 General tells them to do, but they are by no means obliged 
 to exceed the instructions of their superior." 14 
 
 By far the most convincing evidence of the real under- 
 standing between Rome and the July Monarchy, however, is 
 found in the subsequent actions of the Jesuits. Three houses 
 at Paris, Lyons and Avignon, were closed. Two novitiate 
 houses were abandoned — one at Saint-Acheul, the other at 
 Laval. This action corresponds exactly with the instructions 
 issued to the provincial, and as the government did not publicly 
 accuse the Jesuits of failing to fulfill the whole of their con- 
 tract, it seems that these injunctions must have been the sole and 
 
 "Debidour E et E 69. Quotes a letter from Rozaven to Ravignan 
 dated June 25, 1845, in which the above statement are confirmed. I 
 have not, however, been able to find any trace or mention of this letter 
 elsewhere, so refrain from using it. 
 
 147 
 
only agreement made between Guizot and the Jesuits through 
 Rossi, not an agreement with Gregory XVI personally. 
 
 The question of the understanding between these two courts 
 settled, another query arises. Why had Rome advised the 
 Jesuits to yield at all ? This time the cause lay not so much 
 in foreign influence as in the unsettled condition of the Italian 
 Barry, clergy. The aged Pope was failing, and at the very moment 
 of Thiers' interpellation the ideas of the "New Guelf were 
 becoming dominant. Led by such men as Gioberti and Cesare 
 Balbo they sought to place a "Lamennasian Pope'' in St. 
 Peter's chair. This new party did not favour the Jesuits 
 and their theories ; they were also the enemies of all despotic 
 and semi-despotic governments, and so they opposed Austria 
 and France. Their influence is said to have been exerted 
 against both Guizot's policy and the Jesuit order. So much 
 for a possible explanation of Rome's action. 
 
 How, then, had Guizot fared in France after the Jesuit 
 fiasco? Among the people there was general dissatisfaction, 
 and out of this unhappy condition appeared the first sign 
 of a rapprochement of the "Neo-Catholics'' and the Moderate 
 Republicans ; both demanded an explanation in the Chamber 
 of Peers. It remained for Guizot to defend a defenceless 
 policy. On the 15th of July Guizot pleaded his cause, main- 
 taining that his policy had been the wisest and most prudent 
 in extremely delicate circumstances. Montalembert contra- 
 er I p 434 di^d him in no dubious terms and tore aside the veil with 
 which Guizot had attempted to hide the real import of the 
 affair. He again established the original bases of the struggle. 15 
 Thus in the middle of the year 1845 tne Premier found him- 
 self confronted with the same question he had tried so hard 
 
 Thureau 
 
 Dangin, 15 "J'ai besoin a vous dire que toute la question n'est pas la, qu'il y a 
 yji s *"' dans l es lettres, qui ont ete portees si souvent a cette tribune et ailleurs, 
 ' 3$ depuis quelques annees, tout autre chose que la question des Jesuites. 
 Lorsque M. le Ministre des Affaires Etrangeres disait tout a l'heure 
 que maintenant le clerge ne courait plus risque de prendre la ques- 
 tion des Jesuites pour la sienne, il a oublie que le clerge avait deja sa 
 question, et non seulement le clerge mais encore tous les catholiques, 
 tous les hommes religieux de France etaient occupes d'une question 
 qui survivra a celle des Jesuits, comme elle l'a precedee, e'est a dire la 
 question de la liberte religieuse et de la liberte de l'enseignement." 
 Montalembert's words, 15 July, L'Univcrs, 16 Juillet 1845. 
 
 148 
 
to avoid and had attempted to divert into another channel 
 
 He was indeed in an embarrassing position; other questions, 
 
 of an economic nature were pressing, and to avoid these 
 
 he could not yet settle the matter nor discontinue the fight. v ; v £™ x . de 
 J la Keligion 
 
 The question, then, returned to its old basis. The Neo- e t du Roi, 6 
 Catholics" resumed their former activities and the Committee Auut > l8 4^ 
 for the Defense of Religious Liberty was enlarged. Mon- 
 talembert remained, of course, the President, while M. 
 Vatesminel, minister of Public Instruction under Charles X, 
 was elected vice-president and M. Henri de Riancey secre- 
 tary. The Committee now counted among its members such 
 men as the Marquis de Barthelemy, Amedee Thayer and M. 
 Clappier ; these names are significant as they were all members 
 of the Chambers. In August Montalembert issued his famous 
 charge to the electors of France and the opposition replied 
 by an attempt to prove the action of the Committee seditious. 
 But, this effort met with little success. 16 It is interesting to 
 note in passing, that at this time the "Neo-Catholics" were 
 confronted with an enemy long recognized as such, but here- 
 tofore silent. These were the old Gallicans under the leader- 
 ship of Ami de la Religion et du roi who seemed to regret 
 the fame and honour gained by their more progressive brothers 
 in the Faith, and condoned the activity of the Committee. 
 Among their own number, too, the "Neo-Catholics" began to 
 find some who believed that the new school had fought hard 
 and long enough. One of this number was Frederic Ozanam, Q or ^sp nai ji 
 while still another was Mgr. Dupanloup of Orleans, who, at 83 ' 
 this time, published his book "De la Pacification Religieuse." 
 Both of these men found their group of sympathizers. But, 
 to have given up now, would have been to lose the struggle 
 at the very moment when they were nearest their goal, and, 
 happily, Montalembert and his party realized this fact. Never- 
 
 19 "On sait ce que les Neo-Catholiques entendent par la liberte religi- 
 euse c'est particulierement, en attendant mieux la destruction de l'Uni- 
 versite, qu'ils apellent le monopole, l'accroissement des privileges dont 
 jouissent deja les petits seminaires, la multiplication indefinie des col- 
 leges ecclesiastiques jouissant d'une liberte sans autre limite que celle 
 qui peut venir la police correctionnelle, c'est ainsi l'abolition des articles 
 du concordat qu'empechent que l'Eglise devienne un Etat dans l'Etat." 
 Constitutionnel, 5 Aout 1845. 
 
 149 
 
theless a sort of truce did ensue for the rest of the year. 
 In this brief interval several important changes occurred, 
 Louis Yeuillot retired from I'Univers and was succeeded by 
 de Coux whose name had frequently appeared in the early 
 columns of VAvemr. The government, too seemed desirous of 
 peace, and as if to prove the sincerity of their desire, 
 Salvandy suspended Quinet's course at the College de 
 France. Montalembert's party, however, could not long re- 
 main inactive, and at the end of a year they were arranging 
 their cohorts for a final struggle. At the closing of the 
 Chambers their leader declared : "We await you next year 
 on the same ground." 17 
 
 The year 1846, however, witnessed a renewal of the con- 
 troversy, and many of those who had declared for peace 
 re-entered the field. It was a significant year for the nation 
 and for the "Neo-Catholics" as well ; France broke with Eng- 
 land and by that act definitely asserted her return to the 
 principles of Metternich and the Holy Alliance, while the 
 "Neo-Catholics" won the last step in their triumphant pro- 
 gress, a step which, in fact, predicted and assured the victory. 
 The prize was won in 1846, but for the reward they had to 
 wait till the beginning of 1850, when the prize was presented 
 Courier to them by the leader of their opponents. 
 2 Fevrier From December of the preceding year Montalembert's party 
 1846 had seen that they would be called on to the field of political 
 controversy at an early date. In that month Salvandy had 
 S h f P ro P ose ^ ^is ^ aw camn & f° r a reorganization of the "Conseil 
 Monta- Royal" of the University. Here, some thought, was a definite 
 
 lembert, overture on the part of the government. Would Guizot 
 Moniteur, . . ^ . , - . , 
 
 10 Janv., come over to them after all? Certainly, for a time, it did 
 
 1846 seem possible that an alliance might spring up between the 
 
 two. Early in January Salvandy's law came before the 
 
 Chambers for discussion. It proposed to substitute for the 
 
 "Conseil Royal" a University Council of thirty members, 
 
 twenty of whom should be appointed each year. On this 
 
 Guizot and Thiers again found themselves face to face and 
 
 if the former could have gained the support of the "Neo- 
 
 17 Montalembert, closing session 1845. Quoted Mrs. Oliphant. "Mon- 
 talembert," II. 89. 
 
 150 
 
Catholics" he might have succeeded in permanently silencing 
 his rival. But the law was not acceptable to Montalembert 
 and his colleagues because their party would not have any 
 guarantees for representation, and Guizot was again discom- 
 fited. The opposition took heart and their newspapers even 
 went so far as to declare the University's position secure 
 and impregnable: 
 
 'The fact is that the blow aimed at the old "Conseil Royal" 
 is only one episode in the great debate raging for two years 
 between secular and ecclesiastical power, between the Uni- 
 versity and the clergy. Perhaps the time has not yet come 
 to settle this important question. The Chamber, wishing to 
 reserve to itself the sole right of decision, is studying the 
 question and hesitates to announce any decision." 
 
 The Journal des Debats and the Universitaires were bitterly 
 deceived ! Three weeks later the Chamber of Deputies, led by 
 Berryer, announced its decision to go still further and help 
 the Church. 
 
 It will be remembered that a vote had not even been taken on 
 Thiers' report of Villemain's law, The 21st of February, the 
 opposition, thinking to discountenance Guizot still more, pro- 
 posed that the discussion and vote on Villemain's law be 
 made the "order of the day." This Guizot, as Premier, re- 
 fused to allow. It was then that one of the "Neo-Catholics" 
 made a brilliant move taking the Chamber entirely by sur- 
 prise. He informed Guizot that a refusal to submit the 
 law to discussion and vote, was equal to its withdrawal, and 
 asked him if this implied a promise on the part of the govern- 
 ment, of a new law. To the astonishment of everyone present 
 M. Guizot affirmed this statement. 18 This was the "conversa- 
 
 w Berryer: "Mais je viens d'entendre que le projet de la reprise de 
 la loi etait une forme de retrait d'une loi que je regarde comme mau- 
 vaise; c'est un retrait auquel on veut faire acquiescer la Chambre, par 
 la deliberation de ce moment; et ce n'est pas seulement un retrait, 
 c'est la promesse de nous apporter une loi basee sur des principes et 
 droits de l'Etat en matiere de l'enseignement public, d'accomplir la 
 liberte de conscience et la liberte d'enseignement, le retrait d'une loi qui 
 doit etre conque dans les idees plus generenses et fondee sur des 
 doctrines plus liberates, me determinent a participer au rejet de la 
 proposition de reprise." 
 
 Guizot replied : "Le projet de loi que la chambre auront a discuter 
 
 151 
 
tion tres vive, tres piquante" that took place in the Chamber 
 
 of Deputies. The promise of a law more liberally conceived 
 
 and more in accordance with the 69th Article of the Charter 
 
 was, indeed, a cause of encouragement to the "Neo-Cath- 
 
 olics." The following day the dissolution of the Chambers 
 
 v . I 1 mvers, was pronounced for July 6th, and new elections were called 
 No. 11, 15, . * ■ 
 Mars, etc., for August ist. 
 
 1846; Strengthened by this check to the cause of the University, 
 
 the Committee for the Defense of Religious Liberty set to 
 
 also Mon wor ^ to prepare for the coming elections. The columns of 
 
 talembert, L'Univers were filled with advice to the Catholic electors 
 
 ^Catho^ 65 anc * wlt ^ persuasive arguments for the uncertain. In the 
 
 liques dans midst of all this excitement, however, L'Univers did not 
 
 les pro- forget its fellow-sufferers in other lands, and frequently made 
 chaines & ^ J 
 
 elections eloquent appeals for the Poles and the Irish. 19 At the same 
 
 time that the committee seemed to be gaining the fruits of its 
 Corre- labour, the favourable attitude of the government and a shifting 
 spondant, 10 of position on the part of the various political parties gave 
 Juillet. 1846 t | ie "N eo _Catholics" cause for hope. A change was apparently 
 coming over the field of political controversy. Thiers' Re- 
 publicans and some of the Legitimists were coming together. 
 The milder Republicans and Moderate Legitimists, on the 
 other hand, seemed to favour the "Neo-Catholics," while the 
 attitude of the ministry led the few supporters of the gov- 
 ernment to the side of L'Univers. The "Neo-Catholics" posi- 
 tion seemed infinitely bettered ; already the University seemed 
 defeated. 20 But still another incident gained great numbers 
 
 »era en harmonie avec ces idees; il se proposera de maintenir les 
 droits de l'Etat en matiere de l'enseignement public, d'accomplir les 
 promesse de la charte en matiere de la liberte de l'enseignement, et 
 de constituer le gouvernement supreme de l'instruction publique, de 
 telle sorte qu'il reponde a ces deux buts." L'Unirers, 22 Fevr. 1846. 
 
 19 As early as 1830-1834 O'Connell visited them. On his death, funeral 
 services were held for him all over France. Lacordaire pronounced 
 his funeral oration at Notre Dame in the presence of many of the 
 high officials — ecclesiastical and secular — of the realm. 
 
 ""Aujour dhui, les repugnances qu'ils soulevaient naguere se sont en 
 grande partie calmee; demain l'opinion publique plus eclaircie, se pro» 
 noncera en faveur de la liberte religieuse et de la liberte d'enseigne- 
 ment." Courrier Francais, 22 Juillet 1846. 
 
 152 
 
for the government and Montalembert's party as well ; on the 
 30th day of August, forty-eight hours before the vote, another 
 attempt was made on the life of the king. The result was a 
 frightened reversal of opinion favoring a conservative policy. 
 Louis Philippe assassinated, a Regency and a liberal majority, 
 what might France become! The bourgeois shuddered at the 
 thought; as a result, Guizot and Montalembert came out of 
 the elections stronger than ever. For the "Neo-Catholics'' 
 it was indeed a ''true and legitimate success.'' Of the 226 
 candidates avowedly for religious liberty, 146 were elected. 
 A new era seemed to be opening for the "Neo-Catholics" ; 
 soon they would not have to fight their battles alone. The 
 government strengthened by the elections might come to their 
 assistance ; if not, they were now a considerable body, their 
 numbers and their influence would cause them to be reckoned 
 with, they could find support elsewhere. After sixteen years 
 of struggle the "Neo-Catholics" were at last an "embarras 
 parlementaire." They had finally gained the position their 
 leader had told them they must attain ; now they would not 
 be deceived in their prophecies. 
 
 One of the most significant phases of the elections had 
 been the arrival on the scene of M. de Falloux, the author of 
 Law Falloux (1850). Still another important incident was 
 the change in the personnel and attitude of the Papacy. Greg- 
 ory XVI had died, and Pius IX "Gioberti's Pope" was elected. 
 For two years Rome enjoyed a policy of Liberalism. For the 
 "Neo-Catholics" this change in papal policy meant much; 
 it did indeed seem as if the fulfilment of their wishes was 
 near at hand. 21 An "embarras parlementaire," a liberal Pope 
 was in the throne — so great was their gain that even when he 
 had gone over to the reactionaires they were able to hold 
 fast to the new position attained in the political world. 
 
 A really astounding state of affairs followed after the 
 elections, — a period of agreement between King, Pope and 
 the "Neo-Catholics." The chambers even flattered the new 
 Pontif. 22 The government and L'Umvers were at one in 
 
 v. Henri de 
 Riancey. 
 "Compte 
 
 Render des 
 Elections" 
 de 1846 
 
 21 "Xul Pape n'a plus fait que Pius IX pour que l'unit catholique devint 
 une vivante et puissante realite." Spuller Evolution Politique de 
 l'Eglise, ch. XV. 
 
 22 v. La Patrie, 20 Juin 1846. I'Univers, 21 Juin 1846. Moniteur 
 
 153 
 
regard to the policy of breaking the English Alliance and 
 the steps to be taken concerning Switzerland, and finally, it was 
 announced that the law promised in 1846 would soon appear. 
 A year later Salvandy proposed his law. While it upheld in 
 principle the right of families, it still maintained the require- 
 ment of a University certificate of ability, for all instructors 
 and professors. It was verbose and deceiving. The only con- 
 cession the "Neo-Catholics" had obtained from the government 
 was the omission of the clause prohibiting orders from teach- 
 ing. The "Neo-Catholics" were furious, and justly so, at the 
 government ; they felt they had again been betrayed, but 
 the government could do no more, it was already in its death 
 throes. Disgusted, the Church party turned to its new allies, 
 the Moderate Republicans. 23 The Teste scandal and the 
 suppression of the Chapter of St. Denis sealed this alliance: 
 Guizot had lost them forever. 24 Still others joined them when 
 the government became embroiled in the affair of the Baptists, 
 and even their old enemy VAmi de la Religion et du roi 
 rapidly cast aside the barriers between them and finally lent 
 its voice to the "Neo-Catholics' " demand for the liberties of 
 Italy, Poland and Ireland. 25 The threats made against the 
 church at the Reform Banquets only tended to heighten their 
 mutual hatred of a government that did not dare to put down 
 "the turn-coat liberals." 26 The February days came and the 
 Revolution followed. In that troublesome time Frenchmen 
 found that one institution alone remained stable and they fled 
 to it in utter despair. The church was no longer despised. 
 
 A Republic was established, with Louis Napoleon as Presi- 
 dent. Meanwhile Montalembert had found a confrere in 
 arms — the abbe Dupanloup, whose entrance into the field of 
 political controversy had been prepared by his book "De la 
 Pacification Religieuse" written four years before. As soon 
 
 Janv. 1848. I'Univcrs, v. nos. 4-9, Sept. 9 ct 1846, 2 Juil, 13, Oct. 
 10 and 14, Nov. 1847, 15 Janv. 1848. 
 
 23 v. Thiers et loi Falloux, L. Barthou 8. v. I'Univcrs, 15 Avril 1849- 
 
 24 v. Debidour "E et E" 447-8. v. VUnivers, 15 Avril 1847. 
 These three cases all concerned the question of religious liberty 
 
 and were decided by the government in a spirit contrary to the wishes 
 of the Liberal Catholics. 
 
 25 v. Ami de la Religion et \du roi, 9 Oct. 1847. 
 ae v. ibid, No. 13, Dec. 1847. 
 
 154 
 
as the affairs of the Second Republic were settled, Mon- 
 talembert, Thiers and Cousin were set to work on a law for 
 the liberty of public instruction. This was a strange partner- 
 ship. Thiers said he had been converted to the cause by 
 the social revolution, 27 while Cousin had renounced the greater 
 part of his philosophy. Early in the year 1850 the famous 
 "loi Falloux" was proposed. 28 The debate opened in the 
 "Chambre Constituante" on the fourteenth of January. In 
 the meantime many events had made the government favor- 
 able to the law; a large number of the clergy had joined 
 the Moderate Republican party and were become its back- 
 bone, and Louis Napoleon, too, needed the support of the 
 church. The June Days had clearly shown him this fact, 
 and his expedition to Rome had been but a prelude to what 
 the government was to grant. Beugnot reported the law, 
 Thiers and Montalembert defended it, 29 but it was not without 
 a hard fight that the proposed law was finally passed (March 
 15, 1850.) The "Monopole Universitaire" was destroyed; 
 a ''letter of obedience" from the bishops was to take the 
 place of a "brevet de capacite" from the University, for those 
 instructors who belonged to religious orders. Entire freedom 
 was allowed to private instruction. The only thing required 
 was a formal certificate of morality and ability. The Council 
 of the University was replaced by a "Conseil superieur de 
 l'instruction publique" composed of clergy, magistrates and 
 representatives from private institutions. In brief, the clergy 
 gained a double advantage in that they obtained not only 
 the right to establish their own independent institutions, but 
 
 27 Quant a la liberte d' enseignement, je suis change. Je le suis non 
 par une revolution dans mes convictions mais par une revolution dans 
 l'etat social. Je porte ma haine et ma chaleur la ou aujourd'hui 
 est l'ennemi. Cet enemmi c'est la demagogie, et je ne lui livrerai pas 
 le dernier debris de l'ordre social, c'est a dire l'e'etablissement catho- 
 lique." Thiers to de Montjau Ami de la Religion et du roi, 18 
 Juin 1848. 
 
 28 "La loi Falloux, comme on l'appelle, pourrait s'appeler aussi la loi 
 Thiers." Henri de Lacombe Proces verbaux de la commission de la 
 loi Falloux. 
 
 29 For the relationship of Thiers and Montalembert, v. Lecaunet — 
 "Montalembert" II, 390-5. 
 
 155 
 
also the right of sharing in the directing of the instruction 
 given in the public schools. 
 
 The fundamental cause of this striking victory, gained by 
 the "Neo-Catholics" in 1850 after their long struggle under 
 Louis Philippe, is found in the opening lines of an early 
 prophecy made by Montalembert, a prophecy that seemed, 
 for the moment, to have been fulfilled: "Dans un temps 
 ou nul ne sait que faire de sa vie, ou nulle cause ne reclame 
 ni merite ce devouement qui retombaient naguere comme un 
 poids ecrasant sur nos coeurs vides, nous avons enfin trouve 
 une cause qui ne vit que de devouement et de foi. Quand 
 notre poussiere sera melee a celle de nos peres, le monde 
 adorera ce que nous portons deja avec amour dans nos ames, 
 devant cette beaute qui a tout le prestige de Tantiquite et 
 tout le charme de la jeunesse, cette puissance qui apres avoir 
 fonde le passe de l'homme, fecondera tous les siecles futurs, 
 cette consolation qui peut seule reconcilier Thomme a la vie, 
 la terre au ciel, cette double et sublime destinee; le monde 
 regenere par Dieu." 
 
 The very heart of La Mennais is found in this eloquent pro- 
 phecy uttered by his disciple, but in 1850 the prophecy was only 
 half fulfilled. The Neo-Catholics had fought a good fight and 
 had won. Here was the golden opportunity for which they had 
 so valiantly struggled. Although the moment was at hand, the 
 opportunity seized and measures set in operation to begin their 
 noble work unhindered now by a vacillating government, or 
 by a Voltarian opposition, nevertheless they failed. And 
 why? Because at the very moment of reward, the church 
 suddenly again dominated by an over-ambitious faction, allied 
 itself with the temporal power, and the results were not 
 the happy ones foreseen by the men who had brought her 
 this rich gift. In view of the final outcome, it is hard 
 to avoid the final conclusion that to many who supported it, 
 the "loi Falloux" was only a step toward the ''Coup d'fLtat," 
 but there is no evidence that the "Young Catholics," now 
 veterans in the Chamber, were aware of this at the time. 
 
 The vision of Montalembert fades, but not forever. It 
 has never entirely disappeared. From time to time there have 
 been moments when an opening in the dark cloud hanging 
 
 156 
 
over Christianity in the Nineteenth Century has shown that 
 there is still the spirit there, that it has not died out. Such 
 examples are found in the subsequent history of the Church 
 in France, the later life of Mgr. Afire, for instance. This 
 gives to many the hope that it may some day appear in all 
 the beauty in which it was first conceived by the now for- 
 gotten and disowned La Mennais, by the young knight of 
 the Chamber of Peers, and by the saintly Frederic Ozanam. 
 May it stand forth in all the sublimity of its first birth, 
 free from political taint, pure, solemn, obedient and command- 
 ing. Only then will the prophecy of Montalembert come 
 true. 
 
 Little now remains to be done except to follow the other 
 institution to its end. One attained its victory, the other 
 was to fail. 
 
 The year 1845 was an important epoch for the July Mon- 
 archy in that it saw a great change come over the surface 
 of affairs in France. It witnessed the resignation of Thiers 
 from Guizot's ministry, and the beginnings of the controversy 
 incident to the break up of the English alliance — a con- 
 troversy of which the differences over Tahiti and Morocco 
 were a premonition. These episodes were indications of the 
 intention of France to continue her former colonial policy 
 in the Pacific and Mediterranean. In this one respect she 
 remained consistent; in all others she was uncertain and at 
 times contradictory. Thiers, then, weary of Guizot's policy 
 of following the King's dictation and seeing an opportunity 
 to become the leader of both oppositions in the Chamber of 
 Deputies, by means of the question about public instruction, 
 resigned, and became known as the leader of the Parlia- 
 mentary Republicans and the "Universitaires." At the time 
 of his resignation the Republicans too, had experienced a 
 change, otherwise, it is probable that Thiers never could 
 have become the chief of a particular faction of the Re- 
 publican party. A division had taken place in its ranks, 
 and it was separated into two groups; the one holding that 
 a mere change to a Republican form of government was all 
 that was necessary, the other believing that a social reform 
 was the only solution of the problem. But this difference 
 
 i57 
 
in opinion was not confined to the members of the Chambers, 
 it had spread to the Republican electorate as well, and, fur- 
 thermore, was beginning to be felt in the other parties. 
 For example, there was no longer one solid Legitimist Party, 
 there were now Extreme and Moderate Legitimists. Thus 
 redivided the aspect of French politics becomes, from the 
 point of view of parties, more complicated; the Moderate 
 and Extreme Republicans, the Moderate and Extreme Legiti- 
 mists, the Socialists and the Government's party, a small and 
 almost insignificant group of former ''doctrinaires." This 
 period of political transition or redivision is further marked 
 by three publications which had a considerable effect on the 
 reading public : Lamartine's "Histoire des Girondins," a 
 panegyric of the Revolution; La Mennais' "Livre du Peuple" 
 a religious glorification of Socialism ; and Eugene Sue's 
 ''Mysteres de Paris," an hysterical exposition cti the existing 
 social conditions and a condemnation of the existing social 
 system. 
 
 Despite this change in the field of politics, however, the 
 real leaders were few in number and remained the same. 
 As in 1840, they were Thiers and Guizot : "il n'y a plus que 
 deux possibilites politiques, vous ou moi," the latter is said 
 Quoted to have remarked to Thiers. The rivalry then, still continued, 
 B J 0 JI^ g 262 1S, the one always seeking to contradict the other. Thiers or 
 Guizot? That became the entire political question in the 
 last three years of Louis Philippe's reign. For the rest of 
 the year, while Thiers was occupied in attacking the min- 
 istry's system of parliamentary corruption, and preparing as 
 a remedy to the "pays legal" a plan of electoral reform, 
 Guizot was making promises to the Catholics, showing him- 
 self favorable to their cause in all its phases and seeking 
 to join their cause to his own in the forthcoming elections. 
 So much for the internal political occupations of France ; 
 in the field of external politics there was much less petty 
 policy, the break in the English Alliance was approaching. 
 The first sign of this change is found in the visit of the 
 McCarthy, Emperor Nicholas to England the latter part of the year 
 Hist., I, 443 1844. The two countries, England and Russia, after all, had 
 
 158 
 
much in common. In the first place two were far better 
 than three in the East. Russia could not be dislodged, and 
 it became a question of England or France. Here was ^y^^' 
 England's opportunity to assure her eastern policy. For the 
 English the situation seemed to resolve itself into a choice 
 between the Kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland, and 
 the British Empire. Allied with France, England would 
 never have become an Empire. This was the first and great- 
 est reason for the break. The other two causes are not of v. VUnivers, 
 such importance ; the one was a matter of sympathy, the ^^44 ' 
 religious policy of England in Ireland and of Russia in 
 Poland was somewhat similar, while the other was a question 
 of commercial rivalry between France and England. For 
 France, on the other hand, there were three forces at work 
 to break the alliance. The one, as has been noted, was 
 economic, but as the existing government seemed to hold 
 such matters in low esteem it was not, though it should have 
 been, of the greatest importance. The two prime factors for 
 France, then, were the "Neo-Catholics" and the influence 
 of Metternich. v> im also 
 
 The "Neo-Catholics" favoured a break with England from 2, 8 Janv., 
 principle rather than from policy, though they did admit, *^ 45 
 as we have seen, the commercial disadvantages of the entente. 
 But in their eyes the most important reasons were two in 
 number, England was Protestant, and the English govern- 
 ment had opposed the "martyred" O'Connell. And, as the 
 French ministry and government approached nearer and 
 nearer the "Neo-Catholics," for the elections were not now 
 far off, their policy must needs have conformed at least 
 temporarily to the desires of their new ally. 
 
 The most potent influence, however, was that of Metter- 
 nich. France under Louis Philippe became at this time the d'Haus- 
 dupe of Metternich. The wily diplomat tempted the king H^st^Dipl. 
 with the prospect of restoring the ancient dynastic glories of T. 
 the Bourbans if the King of the July Monarchy would but 
 conform to the principles of the Holy Alliance. He desired Debidour, 
 to transform "cette detestable boutique," as he is said to critiques 
 have called the July Government. His method was most 348 
 
 159 
 
Bourgeois, 
 HI, 355-6 
 
 v. Letter of 
 Louis 
 Philippe 
 to the 
 Queen of 
 the Bel- 
 gians, 14 
 Sept., 1846 
 
 Revue 
 Retro., 
 No. 22 
 
 Jesuitical. Ever so slowly Metternich had won Louis Philippe 
 from the British Alliance — at first by the Mehemet-Ali epi- 
 sode, then by the right of search controversy, later by the 
 policy in Tahiti and Morocco, and again by the "affaire 
 Pritchard." But, -above all, the advice of Metternich to 
 obliterate his revolutionary origin by a reversion to a far too 
 old tradition of dynastic glory was what appealed most to the 
 mind of the old king, and this, he saw, could only be accom- 
 plished by a rupture with England. Both governments, then 
 awaited the opportunity to break the bonds of the Quadruple 
 Alliance. In 1845, tne occasion presented itself in the 
 Spanish Marriage controversy. Isabella of Spain and her 
 sister, the Infanta Louisa Fernanda were both unmarried. 
 As early as 1841 it had been agreed by England and France 
 that Louis Philippe's son should marry the Infanta Louisa, 
 but not until the Queen of Spain had found and married a 
 husband. Suddenly in 1846, the French Ambassador suggested 
 to Queen Isabella's mother Maria Christina, that the due de 
 Montpensier be married to the Infanta at the same time that 
 the Queen's nuptials were celebrated, and he suggested as a 
 likely candidate for the Queen's hand, Don Francisco of Assis, 
 due de Cadiz, who was known to be physically unfit for 
 marriage. England at once protested, and this protest was 
 rendered all the more significant by the return of Palmerston, 
 the friend of Thiers, to power. He did not have, of course, 
 the slightest sympathy with the policy of Guizot. England 
 then proceeded to nominate a Coburg. To this Guizot ob- 
 jected on the ground that it was contrary to the agreement 
 of 1841. It is interesting to note that the French themselves 
 do not seem to have favoured this policy. Some feared the 
 second isolation of France from a European Concert, and 
 others the responsibilities such a marriage would impose upon 
 the country. In spite of the prevailing public opinions both 
 in France and England, however, Louis Philippe continued 
 his course, and on the tenth of October 1846, the marriages 
 were solemnized. England was deeply hurt and cordial re- 
 lations between the two countries were suspended, England 
 claiming that Louis Philippe had been guided simply by 
 
 160 
 
dynastic ambitions. 31 32 33 The entire affair seems to have been 
 carried on from a selfish point of view and without any 
 inquiries as to the wishes and desires of the British and 
 
 31 The following letters furnish interesting comments on the break: 
 "a S. M. La Reine de la Grande Bretagne, 8 Sept. 1846. Madame : 
 Confiante de cette amitie dont V. M. a donne tant de preuves, et dans 
 l'aimable interet que vous avez toujours temoigne a tous nos enfants ; 
 je m'empresse de vous annoncer le mariage de notre fils Montpensier 
 avec l'lnfante Louise-Fernande, Cet evenement de famille nous comble 
 de joie, parce que j'espere qu'il assure le bonheur de notre fils cheri 
 et que nous retrouverons dans l'lnfante une nouvelle fille aussi bonne, 
 aussi aimable que ses ainees, et qui ajoutera a notre bonheur interieure, 
 le seul vrai de ce monde, et que vous meme savez si bien apprecier. 
 Je vais demander d'avance votre amitie pour notre nouvelle enfant, 
 sure qu'elle partagera tous les sentiments de devouement et d'affection 
 de nous tous pour vous, pour le prince Albert et pour toute votre 
 chere famille. Je suis, Madame, de V. M. la toute devouee soeur et 
 amie. Marie Amelie. 
 
 a. s. M. la Reine des Frangois, Osborn, 10 Sept. 1846. 
 
 Madame : Je viens de recevoir la lettre de V. M. du 8 de ce mois, 
 et m'empresse de vous en remercier. Vous vous souviendriez peutetre 
 de ce qui s'est passe a Eu entre le roi et moi. Vous connaissez 
 1'importance que j'ai toujours attache au maintien de notre entente 
 cordiale et las zele avec laquelle jy ai travaille; vous avez apris sans 
 doute que nous nous sommes refusee d'arranger le mariage entre 
 la reine de Espagne et notre cousin Leopold que les deux reines 
 avaient desire vivement, dans le seul but de ne pas nous eloigner 
 d'une marche qui serait plus agreable au roi, quoique nous ne 
 pouvons considerer cette marche comme la meilleure. Vous pouvez 
 done aisement comprendre que l'annonce de ces doubles mariages ne 
 pouvait nous causer que de la surprise et un bien vif regret. Je 
 vous demande pardon, Madame de vous parler de la politique a ce 
 moment, mais j'aime pouvoir me dire que j'ai toujours ete sincere 
 avec vous. Je vous prie, etc. Victoria R. 
 
 Revue Retrospective — No. 8. 
 
 32 v. Aberdeen's letter to Guizot Sept. 14, 1846, in which he tells 
 of the general regret in England. Rev. Retros. Xo. 20. 
 
 33 "Le due de Cadiz ne donne aucun appui au governement espagnol : 
 Non seulement ceux qui paraissaient le preferer sont peu redoubtables, 
 mais encore ils ne le suivront point. Les partisans du Comte de 
 Montemoulin seraient devenus, au contraire, les defensers les plus 
 zeles, et les plus surs du trone d'Isabelle. . . . Dans ces conditions 
 nous ne pouvons applaudir au mariaige du due de Montpensier avec 
 l'lnfanta dona Louisa." I'Univers, 14 Sept. 1846. v. also Journal des 
 Debats, 16 Oct. 1846. Constitutionnel, 15 Sept. 1846. 
 
 161 
 
v. Chap. I 
 
 Le Goff, 
 116 et seq 
 I'Univers, 
 
 ii Nov., 
 1846 
 
 v. Constitu- 
 
 tionnel, 
 Nos. Dec, 
 
 1847 
 National, 
 Dec, 1847 
 
 I'Univers, 
 14 Nov, 10 
 Dec, 1847 
 Ami de la 
 Rel. et du 
 
 roi, 15 
 Janv., 1848, 
 19 Fev., 1848 
 
 P. B. St. 
 John, p. 10 
 
 French people. The general opinion in France was one of 
 disgust and keen anxiety for the future. The Spanish mar- 
 riages would prove a heavy burden. The Oppusition did not 
 hesitate to voice their protest in the Chambers. In another 
 country, however, there was joy: Metternich's point had been 
 gained, the transformation of the July Monarchy was 
 completed. 
 
 The result of this policy for Louis Philippe and his dynasty 
 is important. The last of the original bases on which the 
 monarchy had been founded, and on which alone the bour- 
 geoisie had guaranteed its existence, had been knocked from 
 under it. Louis Philippe had now accepted the principles of 
 the Holy Alliance, the monarchy had no longer a "raison 
 d'etre." Placed between two fires, the old School and the 
 Revolution, embodied in the Radicals, what could the July 
 Monarchy do but turn to the old? Louis Philippe had been 
 the dupe, he now became the accomplice of Metternich. "Con- 
 tradictions destroy themselves," cried one politician. Before, 
 the king had sacrificed everything for the English Alliance, 
 now he had thrown that alliance over; what remained? 
 
 The government, though temporarily strengthened by the 
 elections of 1846, compromised this newly gained force by a 
 foreign policy absolutely contrary to the wishes of many of the 
 people. Within its borders there was a financial crisis and 
 a terrific upheaval in the business world, while outside of 
 France another revolution occurred. The ministry sought to 
 appease the one by a foolish and heavy system of taxation, 3 * 
 while for the other, it sided with Metternich. Civil War had 
 broken out in Switzerland. Its cause was religious, it was 
 almost a repetition of the Reformation except that it lacked 
 the character of a "Pope at Geneva." The country desired 
 and finally demanded that troops be sent to protect the 
 borders. All were unanimous in this request, but some, for 
 example the "Neo Catholics," for an entirely different reason. 
 They desired the protection of the Jesuits to whom many 
 had ascribed the blame of the rebellion. An army was sent 
 to the borders and then its purpose was declared. It was to 
 
 The cinq per cent affair, v. Rev. Retros. Nos. 18-22. 
 
 162 
 
protect Jesuits! The cause of this policy is clear: France D |^°^ r 
 internally was in a terrible condition, economic crises had Critiques, 
 made the people call all the louder for electoral reform in P- 35i 
 order to correct the abuses of the government. In France, 
 then, the government had need of support, and in acting 
 in Switzerland as they did they were but trying to win the 
 good graces of the new party so recently become an "embarras 
 parlementaire" — and also the remaining Conservatives who had 
 joined the "Neo-Catholics" and who still believed in the 
 Monarchical Principle. This internal support, in turn, was 
 not sufficient; they needed the aid of the Powers as well. 
 Louis Philippe had already bent to the Holy Alliance, what 
 better support could he have than those very monarchs who 
 had restored his cousin to the throne? And so it was that 
 sacrificing Poland, forgetting a liberal Pope, and his liberal 
 supporters in Italy, the government joined in the support of 
 the Jesuits. Thiers and the Republicans made a violent pro- 
 test; all of France applauded them. The Reform Banquets 
 became more popular; Lamartine and Ledru-Rollin no longer 
 bridled their tongues when proposing a "toast." A mammoth 
 banquet was arranged for the 23rd of February. This date 
 was the occasion for the overthrow of Louis Philippe "A bas 
 Guizot" — "a bas le roi des barricades," the people cried. Noth- 
 ing was simpler — the July Monarchy had lost all raison d'etre; 
 on the 24th of February it had passed into the pages of 
 liistory. 
 
 It was a year of Revolutions. Early in the month, Italy 
 again shook off temporarily the Austrian yoke, and a few 
 weeks later the old regime at Vienna was forcibly discarded, 
 never to return. 35 
 
 It is one of the easiest tasks in the world to name and 
 present a long list of reasons for the failure of an institution 
 or the fall of a dynasty; it is not always so simple a matter 
 
 35 One author has remarked : "Ainsi par une consequence f atale 
 de leur alliance se trouvaient emportees dans une meme disgrace, 
 le roi des barricades et le champion des trones legitimes. L'un 
 apres avoir feint de servir la Revolution, s'etait ouvertement retourne 
 contre elle, l'autre l'avait meconnue toute sa vie. Unis pour la combattre 
 •et n'ayant pas vaincu, il n'est pas etonnant qu'ils avaient succombe 
 ensemble." Debidour, "Etudes Critiques," p. 353. 
 
 163 
 
to find the fundamental reasons. But in the case of the 
 July Monarchy the task is not so difficult. One principal 
 reason is found in the Industrial Revolution sweeping over 
 the world ; machinery could save men from hard labour, but 
 it could not provide them with other tasks. Its inventors, 
 furthermore, were not lawmakers, and therefore, could not 
 prevent the misfortunes it would temporarily bring. The pro- 
 fessional law-makers, on the other hand, were not experienced 
 enough to counteract this harm, while those who had had 
 experience were either silenced by the oversuspicious bour- 
 geoisie or were too blinded by old theories to perceive an 
 entirely new situation manifestly requiring new laws. Still 
 another fundamental cause, closely allied to the economic one, 
 was the transition the "haute bourgeoisie" had undergone. 
 Unsuccessful in the governing of the country, they had re^ 
 turned to their old occupations, but in a different sense, for 
 they were more protected by the government and aided to a 
 considerable extent by the saving invention of machinery. 
 They amassed great fortunes and became a new aristocracy 
 which lacked many of the essential elements of the older, 
 and was characterized by a sort of jealousy which made them 
 ashamed to be governed. The third and last cause is found 
 in the fact that the Monarchy had not lived up to the Charter 
 it had accepted. The Monarchy was one thing, the Charter 
 quite another. It is only necessary to turn back to the opening 
 pages of Chapter I to have this fact clearly illustrated. What 
 promises of the Charter had the July Monarchy fulfilled? 
 It came into life upholding that great but vague moral prin- 
 ciple of the Revolution — liberty. This principle it soon dis- 
 carded. The very Charter, the moral principle, then, aban- 
 doned, the bases of its structure removed, it could not possibly 
 have stood longer. It was really wonderful that the July 
 Monarchy endured as long as it did. These, then, are the 
 principal reasons for the fall of the July Monarchy, and 
 of these reasons the first and most important is the misinter- 
 pretation of the Charter. The proud and sanctimonious "Doc- 
 trinaires" had continuously refused to hear the words of 
 warning given them ! Two brief citations from pamphlets 
 written the year after the Revolution of July show more 
 
 164 
 
clearly than anything else could do, the fact that France was 
 in exactly the same position constitutionally in the February 
 Days 1848 as she was in July 1830. They might have served 
 as well for the later period as for the earlier: 
 
 "Let us tell all the truth; the revolution of 1830 was not 
 put down in order to overthrow the dynasty and save the 
 Charter, but rather it sprang from an equal desire to over- 
 throw both the charter and the dynasty. 
 
 "The dynasty, on the other hand, fell because from 1814 it 
 regarded the charter as a definite and complete treaty of peace prance *sur 
 when in reality it should only have seen in it the preliminaries les verita- 
 of a treaty the conclusion of which common interest rendered de^a^Rev. 5 
 necessary." de 1830," 
 
 How true this is of Louis Philippe as well, for what other lian> lg3I 
 purpose did the Charter ever serve under him than that of 
 a treaty of peace? Its noble promise of liberties and new 
 laws were kept in darkness except at times when a cloud ap- 
 peared on the political horizon, and then to disperse that cloud, 
 or to gain adherents to counteract the opposition, the charter 
 was brought forth and a new law on a liberty guaranteed 
 therein was promised. The political end gained, if the law 
 appeared at all, it proved a grievous disappointment — witness 
 the struggle of the "Neo-Catholics" for liberty of instruction- 
 how often were they made the dupes of the charter by the 
 false promises and fair words of the government. It was 
 the same with the Press laws and Electoral Reform. The 
 Charter, then, was a mockery, it might as well never have 
 been written. Many Frenchmen of the February Days must 
 have concurred in the w r ords written by one of their fellow- 
 citizens seventeen years earlier : 
 
 "Alas, if a constitution on parchment is hard to write, how 
 much more difficult is it to erase — and you call that a guarantee ! 
 But when, in accordance with the new ideas, you have sep- 
 arated the king from his people and have attributed to each 
 one his own particular rights, then if a disagreement arises 
 between them as to the exercises of their rights, who will 
 judge the case? Where will you find the supreme authority? 
 In force, evidently, "Cetait bien la peine de jurer une 
 charte !" 36 
 
 30 "Avertissements aux Souverains sur les dangers actuels de 
 1'Europe," Cte de Jouffrey 1831. 
 
 165 
 
Such a criticism is equally applicable to the end of Louis 
 Philippe's reign, and possibly the Liberal Catholic Movement 
 of 1830-1848 is the most striking illustration of this fact, 
 as a brief resume will show. In the early beginnings the 
 energies of the movement were dispersed in so many direc- 
 tions that its influence was more negative than positive. Still 
 even at that time it was able to gain a tacit victory over the 
 government (the "Ecole Libre" Affair) to strengthen the 
 bond between Belgium and France, and together with the 
 Republicans to form a large enough opposition favoring the 
 Poles, to place Louis Philippe in an embarrassing position 
 vis-a-vis the Tsar. Again, the "Neo-Catholics" were powerful 
 enough to arouse the newspapers of the time and force the 
 French government to join in their opponents' demand for 
 condemnation at Rome. Here their first effort failed. A 
 few years later we find them gathering together their dis- 
 persed cohorts, and then fighting with one sole object in 
 view — the liberty of instruction. They were sufficiently 
 powerful to cause the defeat of one law (1841), the with- 
 drawal of another (1844 and 1846), allied with Rome to 
 give the government a moral defeat in the affair of the 
 Jesuits (1845), an d then, their strength increased still more, 
 they succeeded in arousing, during a time of profound poli- 
 tical apathy, a larger dissenting vote in the Chamber of Peers 
 than had been known for a long time (1844-1845). The 
 year 1846 in turn was to be the test for the "Neo-Catholics" — 
 they were to come before the people — and with the surprising- 
 result that over one-half of the candidates avowedly in their 
 favour, were returned. Thus strengthened, they defeated an- 
 other law, and gained the object for which they had fought, 
 under a Republic. As has been said, it is true, this object 
 was the means to an end, of which the "Neo-Catholics" it 
 seems, were for the most part ignorant. But among the 
 men who presented them with this reward were Thiers and 
 Cousin, their former most bitter enemies. So much for the 
 positive influence that the "Neo-Catholics" exerted under 
 Louis Philippe. Such a career renders them an important 
 factor to the historian of France. But still another and 
 greater influence the church exerted through the prestige 
 
 166 
 
gained for her by the "Neo-Catholics," and this is shown 
 in the subsequent policy of the government after the new 
 party had become more powerful. It is an influence partly 
 negative, partly positive, more subtle, and consequently more 
 difficult to describe. We quote, therefore, as proof of this 
 influence, the existence of which had been frequently alluded 
 to, the words of one who was first their enemy and then their 
 friend, Adolphe Thiers : 
 
 "If I were to write the history of this reign, I should divide 
 it into two parts, the first from 1830-1840, the second from 
 1840 to the Revolution of 1848; and I should say that the 
 first period was characterized by the predominance of the 
 protestant and liberal spirit; that the second was marked by 
 a Catholic influence and that a result which necessarily fol- 
 lowed, personal royalty now became more prominent, and 
 there was a tendency to substitute the monarch's will for that 
 of the country. 
 
 "This fact showed itself in the marriages of the family, or 
 its attempts at marriages. In the first period, Louis Philippe 
 gave one of his daughters to a protestant prince, Leopold, 
 who after a revolution became King of Belgium ; he married 
 the heir presumptive, the Duke of Orleans, to a protestant 
 princess, and he had great hopes of being able to win for 
 his second son, the Duke of Nemours, the hand of the future 
 Queen of England, the Princess Victoria, to whom had been 
 sent the prince's portrait, which she admired too much to 
 please the old King William IV, whose preferences were 
 for a Coburg. The match fell through because of the Duke's 
 unwillingness to change his religion. This all occurred dur- 
 ing the epoch of the protestant ministers, Guizot, Gasparin, 
 Hunnaun and others, not to speak of free-thinkers. The 
 Tuileries was hermetically sealed to clerical influences. This 
 lasted so long as there were hopes of the celebration of the 
 English marriage. But, when these fell to the ground, the 
 royal father turned in another direction, and Catholic 
 princesses supplanted protestant princesses. You know all 
 about the affair of the Spanish marriages into which Guizot 
 entered eagerly, and from which he did not escape without 
 tarnishing his glory. I have told you the consequences, ul- 
 tramontane influences entered the palace, the government had 
 
 167 
 
to compound with Catholicism. This was clearly evident in 
 the case of non-sectarian education. Another consequence 
 still, which I have pointed out to you. So long as the family 
 considered its interests to be on the protestant side, it was 
 more liberal, more faithful to its origin; people governed 
 themselves, and were allowed to govern themselves, but from 
 the moment that Catholicism got the upper hand, the Bour- 
 bon came to the surface, the Duke of Orleans was forgotten. 
 They opposed the current so determinedly that it increased 
 by resistance, until one fine day it became a torrent and 
 swept all into the abyss." 37 
 
 In conclusion an explanation is, perhaps, necessary in 
 answer to the question why such a subject has been selected. 
 There is always the reason of interest, but that is only justi- 
 fiable when substantiated by other reasons less personal and 
 more worthy of consideration. In this instance, however, 
 the reasons seem justifiable and the grounds for this belief 
 are two in number. In the first place while it is an exaggera- 
 tion to say that religion is the sole key to history, it is ai 
 recognized fact, nevertheless, that religion is often one of 
 several necessary keys to the history of a people. For it is 
 frequently, consciously or unconsciously, at the very basis of 
 their thoughts, and unless we know their thoughts and the 
 fundamentals as well, it is difficult to truly explain their 
 actions. This is particularly true of the people of Central 
 Europe where for so many centuries the Church of Rome 
 held a dominating position, and it is still more true of the 
 Latin races. Many historians of today declare that to un- 
 derstand the early history of France, one must have a com- 
 plete comprehension of the relation of the political and re- 
 ligious world. But, this is equally true of the history of 
 the nineteenth century. Henry IV and the Edict of Nantes 
 are absolutely essential to the understanding of the later 
 Reformation and so also are the Civil Constitution, the various 
 concordats, the religious parties, the "Neo-Catholics," the 
 Law of 1905 for the Nineteenth Century. Church influence 
 
 37 Louis Philippe's reign as seen by Thiers — quoted in Le Goffe— 
 L. A. Thiers p. 52 from the article of one Mrs. Crawford — the Paris 
 correspondant of the London News, in an account of a conversation 
 she had with M. Thiers. 
 
 168 
 
in the France of today is as important as it was in the earlier 
 times. You will find it in the Jesuit Controversy, the Dreyfus 
 Case,- and it has been at the basis of the divisions in the 
 Right and Right Center in very recent times. Literature, 
 Art, Religion — all have played and continue to play their 
 part in the history of modern France. 
 
 There has been, however, still another reason for selecting 
 this particular period, and while that reason may not appeal 
 to every historian, still it should perhaps be acknowledged. 
 The Reign of Louis Philippe covers one of the brightest and 
 most noble periods in the history of the Modern Roman Cath- 
 olic Church. And it is of particular interest to recount in a 
 day when, despite the fact that the barriers seem to be fall- 
 ing, Christianity as a whole seems to be lying under a dark 
 and heavy cloud, one of the noblest strifes of a few members 
 of the mother-church. In the twentieth century, it is, here, 
 indifference, that very plague that La Mennais sought to 
 heal ; there, it is allied with politics ; at another place we find 
 hatred, and at still another, a condition that is still worse — 
 a belief in it as a beautiful institution of the past, a senti- 
 mental or worse an aesthetic resort to a fading practice and 
 belief! Surely the period of the "Neo-Catholics" show that, 
 despite the terrible obstacles of the time, Christianity was by 
 no means dead, and only the enthusiasm and firm belief of 
 a small group was needed to fan the dormant flame concealed 
 in the apparent ashes it had left in human hearts. There 
 have been other La Mennais, Montalemberts and Ozanams — 
 they have been in all countries — the "Round Table" in Ger- 
 many, the Young Liberals in Italy, the despised "Puseyites" 
 in England — all have at different times awakened a Faith that 
 seemed to be sleeping the sleep of the dead. And, if we are 
 to judge from examples in years not so far back, there are 
 and will be others to come who may carry to its last and 
 final fulfillment, after many changes and many struggles the 
 great vision of the "Xeo-Catholics." 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 The bibliography has been divided into sources and secon- 
 dary works. Under the former are found the subdivisions, 
 documents, newspapers, letters, memoirs, etc. The docu- 
 ments are scattered and access to them is difficult, the three 
 papal bulls quoted may be found in the archives of any 
 Episcopal library in France and a French translation of them 
 has recently been published in the same cover with La Mennais 
 "Affaires de Rome." The other documents cited with the 
 exception of M. Casimir Perier's Memorandum (Archives 
 Nationales, Paris, Dept. Ext. and Appendix Mem. du Baron 
 de Barante II) have been taken from the "Archives Par- 
 lementaires," J. Madrid et E Laurent, vols. LVI-CVI, Ander- 
 son's Constitutions and Other Documents Illustrative of the 
 History of France, Hansard's Parliamentary Debates 1840 
 (for Mehemet-Ali episode), the Apostolic Letters of Pius IX 
 and Gregory XYI and Taschereau "Revue Retrospective," a 
 collection of documents discovered at the Palace after Louis 
 Philippe's flight in 1848. 
 
 The newspapers which form the sources of the greater part 
 of the original material are found, for the most part, in 
 France. The most complete collection of VAvenir, the 
 journal edited by La Mennais, however, is found in the British 
 Museum. A complete collection of Ami de la Religion et 
 du vol (the Gallican paper), of L'Union Catholique and 
 L'Univers both "Neo-Catholics," is preserved in the Library of 
 the "Grand Seminaire" at Blois. In addition many other 
 papers have been employed^ selected for the most part, as 
 types of the various political opinions of the time. With this 
 in mind I have employed principally; Journal des Debats 
 (Republican), le Constitutionnel (Liberal) le Moniteur and 
 le Message? des Chambves (Government), le Drapeau Blanc 
 (Legitimist), le Globe (Doctrinaire), le National (Repub- 
 lican), la Presse (Opposition) and the three religious papers 
 
 170 
 
mentioned above. All but the I'Avenir, l : 'Union Catholique, 
 and UUnivers may be found in the Archives of the "Bib- 
 liotheque Nationale" and the "Bibliotheque Ste Genevieve" at 
 Paris. These, together with an excellent collection of con- 
 temporary pamphlets on the political and religious controversies 
 of the time preserved at the Grand Seminaire, the Bibliotheque 
 de la Archeveche and the Bibliotheque du Chateau, all in 
 Blois, give a complete and many sided view of the events 
 recounted. 
 
 In addition to these primary sources there is a vast number 
 of memoirs, collections of letters and contemporary literature 
 available — but most of these, in turn, are found at the Biblio- 
 theque Nationale. Among the most reliable and valuable 
 should be mentioned, the two editions of La Mennais' Letters 
 by Forgues and by Blaize, Guizot's Memoires, de Broglie 
 Souvenirs, Casimir Perier Discours, de Barante Souvenirs, 
 Metternich Memoirs, Ozanam, "Pages choisies" (ed. Chatelain), 
 Sainte-Beuve "Causeries du Lundi" and "Chroniques Paris- 
 iennes" and also perhaps, though less reliable Louis Blanc's 
 "Histoire de dix ans." Another very important addition to 
 this list are the Letters of Alphonse d'Herbelot (1828-1830) 
 published for "La Societe d'Histoire Contemporaine" in 1908. 
 
 The secondary authorities are numerous, but, as a rule, are, 
 not available in this country. Of the general histories on 
 Louis Philippe's reign Thureau-Dangin "Histoire de la Mon- 
 archic de Juillet" (7 vols.) is especially commendable abounding 
 in information, references and bibliographical material. Along 
 with this work, d'Haussonville's "Histoire de la Politique Ex- 
 terieure de la Monarchic de Juillet (4 vols.) and Bourgeois 
 Manuel historique de la Politique Exterieure de la France vol. 
 Ill should be mentioned. Stern's "Geschichte Europas" (vol. 3) 
 and Hillebrand's "Geschichte Frankreichs" (2 vols.) are ex- 
 cellent general histories on the period. There are many his- 
 tories on particular phases of Louis Philippe's reign but the 
 majority of them are mediocre. The best of this group are: 
 Debidour "Histoire de l'figlise et l'fitat en France de 1798 a 
 1879" in which the author gives a decidedly anti-clerical account 
 of the period, and Thureau-Dangin "Histoire de l'Eglise et 
 de l'Etat sous la Monarchic de Juillet," in which the author 
 
 171 
 
relates in a sympathetic spirit the "Neo-Catholic Movement," 
 devoting but a very few pages to the antecedent movement in 
 which VAvenir figured. Other important works almost in- 
 valuable to the student interested in the history of the church 
 in Europe are Spiiller's "Evolution Politique et Sociale de 
 l'Eglise," Nielson's "Geschichte der Papstums im 19 Jahrhun- 
 derts" and Gams "Geschichte der Kirche." Among the best 
 biographies the most important and best documented are : 
 Mazade "Thiers-Ciquante Annees d'Histoire Contemporaine" de 
 Remusat "Thiers," de Crozals "Guizot," C. Boutard "La 
 Mennais, Sa vie et ses Oeuvres," a very recent publication 
 (1913) C. Marechal — "La Jeunesse de La Mennais," a valuable 
 and scholarly consideration of the abbe's early years, G. P. G. 
 d'Haussonville, — Lacordaire ; Lecaunet-Montalembert, de 
 Meaux Montalembert, C. A. Ozanam, — Vie de Frederic 
 Ozanam, and Pougeois, Life of Piux IX. 
 
 172 
 
PRIMARY SOURCES 
 
 A. Documents: 
 
 Lettera Indirezzata dal S. Padre di Vescovi di Polonia II 
 -Giugno 1832 per inculcare la Massima della Chiesa Catholica 
 sulla soumessione alia podesta temporale nell ordine Civile. 
 
 Memoire presentee au S. P. Gregoire XVI par les Redac- 
 teurs de I'Avenir et les membres de l'Agence pour la Defence 
 de la Liberte Religeuse." 
 
 Sanctissimi Domini Nostri Gregorii Divina Providentia 
 Papae XVI Epistola Encyclica ad omnes Patriarchas, Primates, 
 Archiespiscopos et Episcopos. Aug. 1832 A.D. 
 
 Lettre de M. de la Mennais au Cardinal Pacca, Paris 27 
 Fevr. 1 83 1, Paris. Lettre du Cardinal Pacca a M. l'Abbe de 
 la Mennais, 16 Aout 1832, Rome. 
 
 Epistola Encyclica ad omnes Patriarches Primates Arch- 
 episcopos et Episcopos. 7 Jul 1834. 
 
 Memorandum de Casimir Perier sur les affaires d'Ancone. 
 
 Collections of Documents: 
 
 Henri Lacombe — Proces verbeaux de la Commission de la 
 loi Falloux. 
 
 Hansard — Parliamentary Debates vols, for 1840. 
 
 J. Madival et E. Laurent — Archives Parlementaires 2 e serie 
 T. S. LVI-CVI. 
 
 C. M. Anderson — The Constitutions and other Documents 
 Illustrative of the History of France, 1789-1901. 
 
 Apostolic Letters of Pius IX and Gregory XVI, 1899. 
 
 Taschereau — Revue Retrospective, 1848. 
 
 B. Newspapers and Pamphlets: 
 
 Correspondant 1832- 1848. 
 
 Constitutionnel 1832-1848. 
 
 Drapeau Blanc 1840- 1845. 
 
 Journal des Debats 1830- 1848. 
 
 l'Ami de la Religion et du roi 1830- 1848. 
 
 I'Avenir 1830-1831. 
 
 le Globe 1830- 1848. 
 
 La Patrie 1840- 1848. 
 
 173 
 
l'Univers 1835-1848. 
 Le Commerce 1836-1848. 
 La Reforme 1830-1848. 
 London Times 1830- 1848. 
 Messager des Chambres 1830- 1848. 
 Moniteur 1830-1848. 
 National 1830- 1848. 
 Quotidienne 1832-1848. 
 Revue des deux Mondes. 
 "le Roi des Barricades" I da St. Elme 1844. 
 "La Poire Couronnee" 1844 (Gill) 1844. 
 "Appel a la France sur les veritables causes de la Revolu- 
 tion de 1830," de Suleau Paris 1831. 
 "Avertissements aux souverains sur les dangers actuels de 
 
 l'Europe," de Jouffroy, Paris 1830. 
 "Compte Rendue des Elections de 1846," Henri de Riancey, 
 1846 Paris. 
 
 *'De l'Avenir de la France," de Conney, Paris 1832. 
 "Reflexions d'un Royaliste," F. Dolle, Paris 183 1. 
 
 C. Memoirs, Letters, Contemporary Literature, etc. 
 
 de Barante — Souvenirs, 4 vols, Paris 1890. 
 
 O. Barrot — Memoirs, 2 vols Paris, 1874-9. 
 
 P. J. Beranger — Ma Biographie, Paris, 1899. 
 
 L. Blanc — Histoire de Dix Ans, 2 vols, Paris 1841. 
 
 A. Berard — Souvenirs Historiques sur la Revolution de 1830, 
 
 Paris 1834. 
 de Broglie — Ecrits et Discours, Paris 1863. 
 
 Souvenirs TS III & IV, Paris 1886. 
 A. Capefigue — La Gouvernment de Juillet 1830-1835. 
 A. De Tocqueville — La Democratic en Amerique 1840. 
 X. Doudan — Melanges et Lettres, Paris, 1876-7. 
 A. Dupin — Memoirs, 3 vols, Paris 1855-1861. 
 Guizot— Memoirs TS VI & VII, Paris 1858-1868. 
 H. Heine — Lutece 1840- 1845. 
 
 Franzosische Zustande II, 1840-3. 
 A. d'Herbelot Lettres. "La Jeunesse Liberale," Paris, 
 
 1908. 
 
 V. Hugo — Preface "le Roi's s'amuse," 1834 Paris. 
 
 H. Lacordaire — Correspondance inedite T. X Paris, 1886. 
 
 de la Fayette — Memoirs T VI, 1832. 
 
 F. de la Mennais — Correspondance ed Forgues, Paris 1858. 
 
 " " " ed A. Blaize, 1866. 
 Une correspondance inedite published by 
 V. Girand — Revue des Deux Mondes, 1 Nov. 1905. 
 F. de la Mennais Oeuvres, Paris, i860. 
 Metternich— Memoirs, vols. V-VII N. Y. 1880-4. 
 
 174 
 
Montalembert — Discours, Paris 1861. 
 
 F. Ozanam — Pages choisies, ed. Chatelain, Paris 1898. 
 
 La Philosophic Chretienne T. I Paris 1846. 
 A. Pepin — Deux Ans de Regne, Paris 1833. 
 Casimir-Perier — Opinions et Discours, Paris, 1838. 
 Sainte-Beuve — Causeries de Lundi T XI, Paris 1874. 
 
 — Nouveau Lundis Paris 1870. 
 
 — Chroniques Parisiennes, Paris, 1876. 
 Saint Simon — Oeuvres T I, 1865- 1878. 
 Georges Sand — Histoire de ma Vie, Paris 1854-5. 
 de Talleyrand — Memoires, vols. Ill, V, Paris 1891. 
 A. Thiers — Discours Parlementaires — Paris 1879-1883. 
 L. Veuillot — Rome et Lorette, 2 vols. 1841 Paris. 
 — [Melanges 1845 Paris. 
 
 SECONDARY AUTHORITIES 
 
 A. Histories: 
 
 E. Bourgeois — Manuel Historique de la Politique Exteriure 
 
 T. Ill, Paris 1909. 
 Cambridge Modern History — vol. X, ch. 15, and vol. XI 
 
 ch. 2, E. Bourgeois. 
 /. B. H. R. Capefigue — Histoire de l'Europe depuis 1' Avene- 
 
 ment de Louis Philippe, 10 vols, Paris 1845. 
 Debidour — Histoire Diplomatique de l'Europe. Paris 
 
 1865-79. 
 
 /. 0. d'Haussonznlle — Histoire de la Politique Exterieure 
 de la Monarchic de Juillet to. 2 vols. Paris 1850. 
 
 K, Hillebrand — Geschichte Frankreichs 2 vols., 1877-9. 
 
 Lovisse et Ramband — Histoire Generale vol. X, chs. 11 and 
 10, Paris 1898. 
 
 P. Thureau-Dangin — Histoire de la Monarchic de Juillet ts. 
 
 7, Paris 1884-92. 
 5. Walpole — History of England. 
 
 L. Bardoux — La Bourgeoisie Franchise, Paris 1890. 
 
 /. Cretineau-Joly — Histoire de Louis Philippe et d'Or- 
 
 leanism t I, Paris 1862. 
 Dalling and Bulwer — The Monarchy of the Middle Classes, 
 
 1838. 
 
 A. Debidour — Etudes Critiques sur la Revolution, l'Empire 
 
 et la Periode Contemporaine, Paris 1886. 
 C. Girandeau — La Presse Periodique, Paris 1868. 
 E. Regnault — Histoire de Huit Ans, 3 vols, Paris 1894. 
 /. Tschernoff — Le Parti Republican en France, Paris 1901. 
 A. Weill — Histoire du Parti Republicain en France, Paris 
 
 1900. 
 
 W. Barry — The Papacy and Modern Times, London 191 1. 
 
A. Debidour — l'Eglise et l'£tat en France de 1789 a 1879, 
 Paris 191 1. 
 
 Nielson — Geschichte der Papstums ein 19 Jahrhunderts ed. 
 1902. 
 
 Gams — Geschichte der Kirche, Berlin 1899. 
 
 P. Thureau-Dangin — l'Eglise et l'Etat sous la Monarchic 
 
 de Juillet, Paris 1880. 
 /. Cretineau-Joly — Histoire de la Compagnie de Jesus, to. 
 
 3 Paris 1889. 
 Genin — Les Jesuits et l'Universite, Paris 1844. 
 de Grandmaison — La Congregation, Paris 1889. 
 Grimaud — Histoire de la Liberte de l'Enseignement, Paris 
 
 ed. 1906. 
 
 A. LeRoy-Beanlieu — Les Catholiques Liberaux de 1830 a 
 nos Jours, Paris 1885. 
 
 — Les Congregations Religeuses et 
 l'Expansion de la France, Paris 1904. 
 
 H. de Riancey — Histoire Critique de la Liberte da l'En- 
 seignement en France to 2, Paris 1844. 
 
 s.de Sacey — Varietes, (til de la Reaction, Religieuse.) 
 
 Georges Souruges — Regimes des Congregations en France, 
 Paris ed. 1908. 
 
 Bolton King — History of Italian Unity, vol I, London 1899. 
 Poggi — History of Italy, vol. II. 
 
 W . R. Thayer — Dawn of Italian Independence, 2 vols. N. Y. 
 1892. 
 
 B. Biographies, etc. : 
 
 W. Bagelot — Beranger. 
 R. Cruice — Life of Palmerston. 
 N. Peyrat — Beranger et La Mennais, Paris 1862. 
 W. R. Thayer — Life and Times of Cavour, vol. I, N. Y. 
 1912. 
 
 A. Bardoue — Guizot, Paris 1894. 
 Je. de Crozals — Guizot, Paris 1898. 
 
 B. Sarrans — Louis Philippe, Paris 1834. 
 
 R. Rush — Louis Philippe, King of France, London 1849. 
 LeGoff— Thiers, 1898. 
 
 de Mazade — Thiers, Cinquante Annees d' Histoire Contem- 
 poraine, Paris 1884. 
 
 C. de Remusat — Paris ed. 1900. 
 E. Zevort — Thiers, Paris 1892. 
 
 P. Chocarne — Vie du Pere Lacordaire, Paris 1867. 
 G. P. G. d'Haussonville — Lacordaire, Paris 1895. 
 Foisset — Lacordaire, Paris 1870. 
 Ledos — Lacordaire, Paris 1870. 
 
 176 
 
H. Villard £tude Biographique et Critique sur le Pere 
 
 Lacordaire, 1890. 
 Mgr. Lagrange — Vie de Mgr. Dupanloup, Paris, 3 vols. 
 
 1883-4. 
 
 /. Bonnet — La Renaissance Catholique au Debut du XIX* 
 
 Siecle, La Mennais et son £cole, Geneve 1905. 
 
 Abbe Charles Boutard — La Mennais, Sa Vie et ses Oeuvres, 
 
 2 vols. Paris 1908. 
 Hon. W . Gibson — The abbe La Mennais and the Liberal 
 
 Roman Catholic Movement in France, London 1899. 
 P. A. R. Janet — La Philosophie de La Mennais, 1895. 
 Christian Marechal — La Jeunesse de La Mennais, Paris 191 3. 
 /. H. Newman — The Fall of La Mennais, London i860. 
 G. Sainte-Foi — Souvenirs de Jeunesse 1828-35 La Mennais 
 
 et son £cole, Paris 191 1. 
 P. Lacannet — Montalembert, Paris 1897. 
 Vte de Meaux — Montalembert, Paris 1897. 
 Mrs. O lip hant— -Memoir of Montalembert, X. Y. 1872. 
 P. A. R. D. Chaveau — F. Ozanam, Montreal 1887. 
 Charles Huit — F. Ozanam, Paris ed. 1900. 
 Lacordaire — Xotice sur Ozanam, Paris 1855. 
 C. A. Ozanam — Vie de Frederic Ozanam, Paris 1882. 
 /. Laur — La Femme Chretienne au XIX e Siecle, 2 vols. 
 
 Paris 1895. 
 
 P. de Pontlevoy — Vie du R. P. de Ravignan, Paris i860. 
 Pougeois — Life of Pius IX, Paris 1877-81. 
 
 C. Magazine Articles, etc. : 
 
 British Quarterly Review, vol 9. 
 Contemporary Review, vol 9, M. Kaufman. 
 Edinburgh Review, Feb. 1840. 
 English Church Review, May-June, 191 5. 
 Fortnightly Review, P. Downden, vol. II. W. S. Lilly, 
 vol. 72. 
 
 International Review, A. Langel, vol. 9. 
 Living Age, vol. 6, 27. 
 Temple Bar Magazine, vol. 41. 
 
 Revue des Deux Mondes 1842 and 1905 (Victor Giraud.) 
 
 177 
 
APPENDIX I 
 
 ACTE D'UNION 
 I 
 
 La partie spirituelle de la societe doit etre afranchie com- 
 plement de Fintervention du Pouvoir politique. En 
 consequence : 
 
 1. La liberte de conscience et de culte doit etre entiere, 
 de telle sorte que le Pouvoir ne s'immisce en avcune manere 
 et sous aucun pretext, dans l'enseignement, la discipline et 
 les ceremonies d'un culte. 
 
 2. La liberte de la presse ne peut etre entravee par aucune 
 mesure preventive, sous quelque forme que cette mesure se 
 produise. 
 
 3. La liberte d'education doit etre aussi complete que la 
 liberte des cultes dont elle fait essentiellement partie, et que- 
 la liberte de la presse puisqu'elle n'est, comme celle-ci, qu'une 
 forme de liberte meme de l'intelligence, et de la manifestation 
 des opinions. 
 
 II 
 
 Par cela meme que la partie spirituelle de la Societe doit 
 etre affranchise completement, Taction du pouvoir constitu- 
 tionel ne peut s'exercer que dans l'ordre des interets materiels, 
 et dans cet ordre, nous admettons qu'il faut tendre a un etat 
 de choses dans lequel toutes les affaires locales seront admini- 
 strees en commun par ceux qui sont interesses, sous la pro- 
 tection du pouvoir destine des lois uniquement, qu'elle qu'en 
 soit la forme, a maintenir l'unite politique, l'harmonie entre 
 les diverses administrations, particulieres, a pourvoir aux in- 
 terets generaux et a la defense exterieure de l'Etat. 
 
 Ill 
 
 Et comme la societe, dont la justice est la base, ne peut 
 faire des progres reels que par un plus grand developpement 
 une application plus etendue de la loi de justice et de charite, 
 nous admettons aussi que Ton doit tendre incessament a elever 
 Intelligence et a ameliorer la condition materielle des classes 
 inferiueres, pour les faire participer de plus en plus aux 
 avantages sociaux." 
 
 i7f