within herself, and await the course of events.

M. Duchatel (minister of the interior) followed, and professed his agreement with the general principles of M. Thiers, as to the policy to be pursued by France. That policy was to arrest the progress of Russian ambition, and maintain the system of the statu quo, for which the best guarantee, was the continuance of the alliance between France and England. Afterwards the chamber almost unanimously adopted the paragraph in the address relating to the question of the East, and when that which alluded to Algiers became the theme of discussion, M. Lanyer proposed, instead of the concluding words "after victory, we do not doubt that your government will seek, in concert with the two chambers, the definitive means of guaranteeing the security and stability of the establishments which France wishes to preserve in Algiers," the following amendment, "will seek the definitive means of guaranteeing in the province of Algiers, and in that of Constantine, the progress and security of our establishments in a soil which French dominion will no longer relinquish." To this statement M. Dufaure (minister of public works), expressed his assent, but proposed the following slight variation at the end, which France wishes to preserve in a soil which her dominion will no longer relinquish." This was adopted by a large majority of the chamber, and in the end the whole of the address was submitted to the ordeal of the ballot, and out of 255 votes, 212 were in favour of it, and only 43 against it. So that it was carried by a large majority.

We have devoted a somewhat

disproportionate space to the opening of the session and the debate on the address, because we conceive that the reader will be best enabled from it to judge of the state of political feeling in France, particularly as regards what may be called foreign questions. In the rupture that had taken place between the Sublime Porte and the pasha of Egypt, there were elements of strife which might ultimately convulse the whole of Europe, and the utmost moderation and caution, on the part of the great powers, were necessary to prevent mutual jealousy and mistrust from kindling the flames of a general war. It was well known that France took the part of Mehemet Ali in the quarrel, and it was generally believed that the refusal of that victorious pasha to deliver up the Turkish fleet to his nominal master, the sultan, arose from his reliance on French promises, and his expectation, in case of need, of French assistance. Several circumstances may have influenced the policy of France in the course she adopted with reference to the affairs of the Levant. In the first place, no doubt, there was her old hereditary jealousy of England, in the fact of whose Indian possessions she always pretended to see daring projects of ambition in the East, and she might hope, therefore, to diminish the power of Great Britain in that quarter, by erecting Egypt into a strong and independent kingdom, worked upon by French influence, and supported by French power; in the second place, France had established a footing on the soil of Africa, which, as was emphatically declared in the address carried by a large majority in the chamber of deputies, she was determined never

to abandon; and in severing Egypt from Turkey, she might look forward, at some distant day, to approximate her own conquests in Africa to the former kingdom, which would, as a separate state, yield to her dominion much more easily than if it remained part of the great Ottoman empire. But, whatever may have been the motives of France in the matter, there can be no doubt of the fact, that of all the great powers in Europe, she was one which favoured most the ambitious view of the pacha of Egypt, and it was her obstinate resolution, in this respect, which led to that isolation of herself in diplomacy, and that explosion of violent hostility against England which we shall soon have

to narrate.

On the 9th of February M. Guizot was appointed ambassador of France in England in the room of general count Sebastiani, and, as the sentiments of this eminent statesman were known to be favourable to a good understanding between the two countries, it was hoped that his nomination was a sort of guarantee, on the part of France, that she wished to bring all matters of difference to an amicable settlement. For some time in the early part of the year negotiations had been going on for a marriage between the duke de Nemours and the princess Victoria Augusta Antoinette, daughter of the duke of Saxe Coburg, and cousin of queen Victoria of England. It was a question connected with this marriage which caused the downfal of the Soult ministry. It was proposed by ministers that 500,000 francs should be immediately voted by the, chambers in order to defray the expences of the marriage, that an annuity of the

same amount should be settled on the royal duke during his life, and a jointure of 300,000 francs on his wife if she should survive him. This project was vehemently attacked by the opposition, with M. Odillon Barrot at its head. They said, that previous to the revolution of July, the private property of every prince who ascended the throne of France merged in the royal domain. That Louis Philippe, however, had stipulated that his property, estimated at 80,000,000 francs (£2,200,000), should be divided amongst his children, whilst he himself had the direction of it during his life, and they asked why the king, whose annual income, private and public, exceeded 25,000,000 francs, (or £100,000), should not support his own family, without imposing that burden on the country.

He

M. Odillon Barrot said, that the compact made in 1830 with the king was, that it was only in case his private property was insufficient, that the state was ever to be called upon to make such a provision as was now demanded. deplored this as a bad measure, but as such a compact had been formed, he insisted that they were bound to see that the private fortune of Louis Philippe was unable to provide a suitable apanage for his son, before they called upon the people to support the burden of it.

A committee of deputies was appointed to draw up a project with regard to this apanage or dotation of the duke de Nemours, and it became the most exciting topic amongst the politicians of Paris. Louis Philippe was naturally anxious to have the dotation voted by the chamber, and the ministry exposed themselves to great

obloquy by supporting their royal master, at a time when much public distress was prevalent, and the manufacturers were loud in their complaints as to the state of trade. Perhaps, however, nothing tended to make the measure unpopular, more strongly than the appearance of a brochure attacking it, from the pen of M. de Cormenin, a member of the chamber of deputies, better, perhaps, known under his assumed name of Timon, and one of the most brilliant pamphleteers in Europe. The chief argument he used on this occasion was bringing together the immense number of pensions and salaries which this annuity of 500,000 francs demanded for the duke would pay off, showing, that for a single general they were asked to vote the pay of 12 marshals and 3 admirals of France; for a single member of the legion of honour the pay of 2000 members; for a single christian the pay of 50 bishops, and so on. To give some idea of the impression produced by this pamphlet of M. de Cormenin, we may mention that three editions of 10,000 copies were sold within a week.

When the committee presented their report to the chamber at the end of February, the deputies, without any debate, by a majority of 226 to 200, refused even to consider the paragraphs of the projected measure. The chamber adjourned immediately after the vote, and the ministers tendered their resignations to the king. The politicians most active in defeating this measure were M. Thiers and M. Odillon Barrot. The former exerted himself to the utmost in influencing the deputies in private against the bill, which had become so unpopular, that many of the departments, and one or two of

the arrondissements of Paris, had called upon their representatives to oppose it. The king felt the rejection of the proposed dotation keenly, and his former dislike of M. Thiers was increased now to personal aversion. He sent for the duke de Broglie to see whether he could form an administration, and had communications with count Molé and M. Guizot, who had not yet left Paris for London in his capacity as ambassador, and who had voted for the "dotation" bill. But it was of no avail, and, after trying various combinations, Louis Philippe was obliged, on the 26th of February, to send for M. Thiers to the palace, and give him authority to form a ministry, with the office of president of the council for himself. The following cabinet was accordingly formed and installed in office.

M. THIERS, Minister for Foreign Affairs, and President of the Council.

M. VIVIEN, Keeper of the Seals, and Minister of Justice and Religion.

GENERAL DESHON CUBIERES, Minister of War.

ADMIRAL ROUSSIN, Minister of Marine and Colonies.

M. REMUSAT, Minister of the Interior.

M. GONIN, Minister of Com

merce.

COUNT JAUBERT, Minister of Public works.

M. COUSIN, Minister of Public instruction.

M. PELET (de la Lozere) Minister of Finance.

The strength of the new ministry was soon put to the test, when M. Remusat moved for a grant of a million of francs for secret service money. The result was their signal triumph. A mo.

tion to reduce the grant by 100,000 francs was rejected by a majority of 241 votes to 158, and the original proposition carried by 246 to 160. This large majority was secured by the accession of the conservatives of the right centre to the side of ministers, influenced by the representations of M. Thiers, that it was to save the Orleans dynasty from obloquy, and preserve the constitution from the attacks of the extreme party in the state, that he had voted as he did on the dotation question. They also hoped that he would pursue a moderate course in politics.

On the 20th of April, the marriage of the duke de Nemours with the princess Victoria, of Saxe Coburg, was solemnized. The sugar question at this time was the principal topic of discussion in the chamber of deputies. The strife lay between the growers and manufacturers of beet-root sugar, who insisted upon a high protecting duty on colonial sugars, and the mercantile and colonial interests, who wished to suppress the manufacture from beet-root, and have the preference given to the sugar

produce of the French foreign possessions. Ultimately, a sugar bill was passed by a large majority, imposing a duty of 20 francs per kilogramme on foreign sugar more than on French colonial sugar.

The French ministry at this time brought forward a measure which was exactly suited to give them popularity in a country whose inhabitants are so fond of effect and spectacle. M. de Remusat, in the chamber of deputies, proposed that the prince de Joinville (the third son of Louis Philippe) should be sent in a frigate to St. Helena to bring the ashes of Napoleon to France, and deposit them on the banks of the Seine, where the deceased emperor himself had expressed a wish to lie "amongst the French people whom he loved so well." He stated that England had magnanimously consented to this proposal of the government, which was received with acclamation by the chamber. A bill was afterwards passed in the month of June for making a railroad from Paris to Rouen, and on the 15th of July the session was closed by a prorogation.