A new assembly called the national convention was elected and convened in Sept., 1792. This body by the law of its existence had uncontrolled power. The guarantees of individual liberty secured by the constitution established by the national assembly, were abrogated by it for " the defense of France." The Girondists who had been with the left in overthrowing the monarchy and establishing the republic, now became the center and the right. They had a majority in the new convention. The mountain, now led by its real ;enders restored to their seats who were still leaders of the .Jacobin club, and that under the control of Robespierre, was practically a unit for all combats, knew what it wanted, and knew how to make the people seem to impel them to do it. Driven by this power of Robespierre, not alone the leading Girondists, but Denton and Camille Desmoulins as well, went to the guillotine during the life of that convention. The moun tain has always suffered much of the reproach for the horrors of that time; yet it suf fered almost as much from the infernal policy of Robespierre as the right or the center. Dantotaand his friends of the left would gladly have joined with the Girondists in polit ical legislation to check the tyranny of the clubs; but the leaders of that party rejected help which did not subordinate itself to them. It was lack of appreciation of the good motives and practical sagacity of such members of the mountain that dissipated the power of time majority and enabled a few leaders of the clubs to commit France to the reign in which accusation, trial, and judgment, all emanated from the same individual, Robespierre. He at last, and not the left or the mountain, reigned in the convention, in the clubs, in the committee of public safety, and in the Paris commune. It was the mountain that first dared his power. Its leaders made the overtures to the moderate of the center and the left center. which resulted in his.complete overthrow. On Nov. 11, 1794, soon after the death of Robespierre, the reactionists of the right and the republicans of the center and left center had become strong enough to suppress the Jacobin club, and the high left or mountain complained that the reaction was against the republic. A crowd of Girondins proscribed from the convention when their leaders were guillotined, returned to it. They demanded and procured time accusation of time remaining leaders of the commune and the Jacobin club; even those who had been conspicuous in aiding the downfall of Robespierre. The'remaius of the Girondist party became time extreme right, vindictive in retaliation. The guillotine, which had laid low the heads of all the great leaders of both parties, left the followers to beat against each other in aimless conflict. The mountain was stigmatized as time top-knot. It kept up its habit of trying to secure its influence over the convention by organizing outside mobs to make a show of pressure of public opinion upon it. That old trick was now met by the other side, by the organi zation of similar mobs to meet them on the way. The center and right, with a majority of the convention, had the advantage of the law, that made the defense of the convention the defense of the representatives of the republic. On April 1, 1795, the leaders of the clubs, with the sympathy of a small knot of the mountain, made a last attempt by a mob to overawe time convention. Again the convention found its salvation in summoning a counter-crowd of its friends from the streets of Paris, and gent 17 members of the high left to prison. On May 20 time mob of Paris succeeded in getting possession of the hall of the convention; beheaded one of its orators who expostulated with them; scattered the deputies of the right, and dictated to the rest of the convention a series of measures to restore themselves and their proscribed friends to power. Curiously enough it was the same butcher Legendre whose brutal violence at the top of the mountain in the beginning of the revolution made him one of the most notorious leaders, who now came to the relief of the besieged convent-ion at the head of a resolute body of Parisians better organ ized than the other, and drove out the intruders. The victory of the moderates was com plete. But no sooner were men secure from the tyrannies of the Jacobin club end the revenges of the Girondists than the royalists raised their heads, and the extreme right and right center used the laws to shed the blood of the Jacobins, which flowed at their instigation all over France. The reaction was called the "white terror." In legislative valance it was a reaction of the right against the left. Toward the close of the session of the convention in Aug., 1795, it bad matured a new constitution, called the constitution of the year, 3 which gave the future power of government to three distinct and co-op erative bodies, called the council of the five hundred, the council of the ancients (sen ate), and an executive directory of five members. Naturally when the discussion of pub lic questions was divided between two deliberative bodies, and executive authority lodged in a third, the divisions among members were less sharply defined, both in real opinions and in leadership, than when all the powers of the state were wielded by one body. There was still the old division of left, right, and center to mark three shades of opinion, but there was far more freedom for all opinions. Old Jacobin leaders had secured is majority in the directory, but the right and center controlled the new councils. Honest royalists were not strangled for their opinions, and the center or belly of the council, as the Parisians called it, was swayed to the right or to the left as the reaction, or the Jacobin side, seemed to be the stronger. The conflict between the mountain and the con servative part of the council was changed to one between this conservative majority aid the majority of the directory. Nut long before this time the last well-o•ganized insurrection against the convention had been crushed by the skill of the young lieut. Bonaparte, and the actions of the new councils were therefore more free from popular intimidation than any of their predecessors. The glamour of Bonaparte's umphs, and his assumption of all powers in France., soon made its legislative assemblies only the echoes of his will. Ott the accession of Louis XVIII. it was the same, but from a different cause; the people were tired of wa2 both in the field and in the forum. In 1817, however, the weak attempts to re-establish the feudal system awakened the republicans, who elected 25 members to the chamber of deputies. Among them were Lafayette, Benj. Constant, Dupont, Lafitte, and Manuel They were the nucleus of a new left. Their ability and integrity gave them an influence disproportioned to their numbers. In 1819 their number had increased to 86. In 1820-21 the left and the extreme right joined votes against the ministers, though with different objects in view. In 1822 the right became the governing power, and under Villele, the chief minister of Louis XVIII., went forward boldly to restore France to the feudal condition preceding the revolution. The press of Paris was the chief weapon of the left. Its opposition and that of the republican leaders in the chamber of deputies was met by suppression and arrest. Charles X., on coming to the throne, pursued tho same policy. But while that Bourbon policy was apparently suffocating all republican aspirations in France, the pamphleteers, the caricaturists, the eueyclomdists, were filling the nation with the yeast of a great rising. The left, crowded out of tho halls of legislation, found expression as it best could through the press. The revolution of 1830 which chased Charles X. out of Fiance and installed Louis Philippe was the work of the journalists. Thiers and Gui zot appear among its leaders. For a time the new chambers were composed principally of men so anxious to avoid the confusion and anarchy to be dreaded. in a change of gov ernment that no other thought seemed to be dominant than that of crystallizing the con stitutionality of the last kingly experiment. The nucleus of a distinct left hardly showed itself in the chamber of deputies until the election of Armand Carrel and Gamier-Pages in 1832. They took seats as avowed republicans. 'The great mass of the deputies of the center, however, who supported the government of Louis Philippe, were at heart repub licans; but they were so fearful of revolutionary uncertainties that they desired to test in peace the value of the change already made before attempting another. The right, while dreading the power that could so quickly banish one branch of the Bourbons and plant another in its place, were mostly wealthy members of the old aristocracy, who decidedly preferred to save their estates at the sacrifice of their titles, rather than make war against the new monarchy. On April 1, 1833, an occasion offered for the left to show itself. The Tribune newspaper had charged tho government of Louis Philippe with constructing the fortification around Paris for the purpose of buckling it in—to menace rather than to defend. The editor was summoned to appear at the bar of the hrynse. The left opposed it as unbecoming to the house and unjust to the editor, against whom the laws alone should be used if he had violated them. Rochefoucauld, Gautier de Rutnilly, generals Bertrand and Lafayette, Thouvenel, and Garnier-Pages, were its speakers. The vote was 205 to 92, the latter being the full strength of the left. But, after hearing the bold and able speeches of Cavaignac hod Marrast, the two arrested editors, their censure was confirmed by a vote of 304 to 204 against, Notwithstanding the terrible exposures of the selfishness and corruptions of Louis Philippe's government, the king managed to keep the chamber of deputies at his service till near 1848. In the beginning,. Thiers, Guizot, Lawartine, and many who subsequently became thoroughly republican, were his supporters; but Odillon Parrot, Gamier-Pages, Beranger, Portalie, Lafayette, and others, divorced themselves from his government, and opposed his meas ures almost from the beginning. The defensa of the liberty of the press against the laws fur its suppression was the main subject of difference between the left and the center. In Feb., 1848, the left and the center were gradually uniting against the then pronounced ten dency to despotism of Louis Philippe. Guizot was endeavoring to sustain his policy; Odilion Parrot and Thiess were joined in the opposition. The government could com mand but 33 majority against them. Paris rose in revolution, and on the :24th the king abdicated in favor of his son. Thiess and Odilion Barrot—the one leader of the center, the other of the left—were called to form a new cabinet. But the nation then demanded a provisional government, and not a new king's cabinet. Lamartine, Dupont de l'Enre, Arago, Gamier-Pages, Marie, Ledru-Rollin, Crernieux, all radical republicans of the left in the assembly, were made the provisional government, with Lamarthie the leading spirit of the committee. A singular incident in the flight of the old king was that Cr6iiieux, one of the extreme left in the assembly, helped him into the carriage hired for the occa sion, and when the king expressed his obligation for the kindness, he replied—" Not at all; it is 17 years I hat e been waiting for this day." Until the election of a new assembly under the provisional government., there was of course no right or left. That body,
composed of 900 members, convened May 4. Lamartine, to the astonishment of those who supposed that his thoroughly aristocratic culture would entrain his opinions against a democratic republic, became frankly the leader of the left in the assembly, and, u bile wielding all the power of his eloquence to prevent excesses by Paris mobs, defended the progressive republic. In fact, the left-center became suspicions that lie was abandonieg the conservatives to throw himself into the current of the democrats. At this time lie acted frankly with LedrusRollin. The assembly reappointed five of the old members of the provisional government as their executive committee, leaving out Critinieux and Dupont de l'Eure; the former a radical of the left, and the latter the superannuated leader of the center. On May 15 the hall of the assembly was invaded and taken possession of by the communists of Paris under the lead of Barbe, B]anqui, and others, using the name of Ledru-Rollin as one of their party. The latter tried to expostulate with them in the assembly, but was obliged to desist. Lamartine could not be heard, and retired to wait an opportunity to make head against the movement outside the assembly room. When the mob left lie joined Ledru-Rollin, put the troops of the government in motion, and soon afterward arrested the leaders of the mob. Speaking of the commission appointed by the assembly to draft a new constitution for France, lord .Normanby. then English ambassador in Paris, and a watchful eye-witness to the daily legislation of the assembly, writes: The composition of the committee is good. There are hardly any of the very violent party upon it, and almost all the leading men of the gauche." This shows how well the patriotic republican movement of that time was divorced from the violent leaders of the Paris commune. By the month of June, Lamarthie's popularity was on the wane. The government was in disrepute. It was too republican to suit the provinces, too conservative to suit the Paris commune. The election to fill some vacancies showed a large vote of republicans and royalists accidentally united on the same persons. ThiersNictor Hugo, Louis Napoleon, were among the members return( tl. In general the election showed a desire to strengthen the center rather than the left. Louis Napoleon's name caused uneasiness at once; and Ale more, that the hangers-on around the assembly were raising a hurra for Napoleon that indicated the dangerous popularity of the name. Lire l' Empereur was heard on the streets. and so promptly was the danger of that name felt, that Lamartine at once moved for the exclusion and exile of Louis Napoleon by virtue of an old law. It was adopted by the executive committee, though Napoleon had been regularly elected from three different districts. The next day au order was issued by the executive committee for the arrest of Napoleonwherever lie 'night he found. The left was nervously afraid of the name. The mountain recog nized instinctively the divergence between republicanism and Bonapartism. On this occasion M. Jules Fevre, though of the left, reflected severely upon the committee fcr its unwarranted subversion of the rights of Napoleon as a deputy. In the tile vote for his admission was carried by a large majority against the executive committee. 31. Thiers,'Lonis Blanc, and the extreme right or legitimists, found themselves voting together with the left in the minority; the 'center and scattering votes from both the extremes being apparently spontaneously united to support Napoleon's right to sit as deputy in the assembly. The army soon afterward began to cry, "Down with liberty! lire l'Empereur!" letter from Louis Napoleon to the executive committee, dated Lon don, 'lupe 14. 1848, was rend in the assembly on the 15th, and created great excitement. It was a shrewdly modest missive. It expressed regret that his election should bejhe occasion of unfortunate wrangles and suspicions of his ambition; but that if the people imposed upon hint It duty he would fulfill it: that his name was a, symbol of order. of nationality, of glory; and lie announced his willingness to remain in exile rather loan to add to the present misfortunes of France. He caused to be distributed at the same time a letter of thanks to the constituencies who had voted for him. The letter produced a tumult in the mountain. There had not been a word of mention by Napoleon of the existence of the republic. The republicans felt, rather than knew, its import. Even those who the day before had voted for his admission, now perceived the imperial shadow Favre openly expressed regret for his vote of the day before. The next day, however, another letter, dated London the 15th, directed to the president of the assembly, contained his resignation as deputy in cunning phrases, well adapted to increase his popularity, and alluded to the republic in these words; "I desire order, and the maintenance of a wise, grand, and intelligent republic," etc. The assembly had no ground then for any action concerning him. Legitimists now hardly raised their voices, and there was there fore no extreme right. The center continued to be more and more Napoleonic in its desires. The commune, red republicans, and ultra radicals of the laboring classes, fought their battles outside the halls of the assembly, in clubs, emeutes, and barricades. On Jan. 23, 24, Paris was declared in a state of siege, and the executive powers were placed in gen. Cavaignac alone; the five members of the executive committee resigning. Three days of bloody fighting in the streets of Paris resulted in the defeat of the insurrection on the 26th, after some of the most horrible incidents of such warfare; among which was the death of the archbishop of Paris when seeking to prevent the further effusion of blood. On the 28th, the insurrection having been repressed, a law for the transportation of the prisoners was opposed by a group in the mountain, but passed by an immense majority. The other part of the left, among whom were Tillers and Berryer, busied them selves to secure an executive council in conjunction with Cavaignac. It resulted in making Cavaignac president of the assembly, with power to nominate heads of bureaus; in short, president of the republic. Measures, vigorous, despotic, and essential for the moment, were sanctioned by the assembly. Liberty of the press and the clubs was required to con form to laws of surveillance akin to suppression. The center, by some again called the Gironde, was becoming anti-republican. Louis Napoleon sent in another letter of resigna tion of another election, with characteristic words of devotion to the republic, " devoid of personal ambition," etc. The law against the clubs passed by a majority of about 6 to 1. A proposition of Proudhon for the confiscation of property, under the guise of a new system of taxation, was voted down by a majority of 691 to 2; Ledru-Rollin, Louis Blanc, and others of the mountain, being of the majority. M. Emile Girardin had been imprisoned, and his journal, La Presse, had been suppressed by Cavaignac. This grievous stretch of dictatorial powers against a fellow-republican called up a discussion, in which Victor Hugo took part and asked Cavaignac whether the duration of the suppression was a mere matter of personal will on his part, or to be regulated by law: to which the presi dent made no reply, and the assembly acquiesced in that assumption of power. A week afterward he relieved eleven journals, including La, Presse, of the disabilities imposed on them. In August the left were searching for means to delay elections for vacated seats in the assembly, evidently afraid of the conservative turn in public sentiment. The legitimists, or right, were gaining strength. The country in general endured the existing government, called a republic, not because it liked it, but because it dreaded a worse. The legitimists were stronger than the Orleans party in the country. Both, however, voted for candidates who endured the republic rather than for those who desired a republic. The legitimists of these days were a very different class of men from the disso lute courtiers of Louis XVI. in the first revolution. They had profited in the school of misfortune. They had become country gentlemen in the true sense of the word; and while a part of their old family possessions had been restored to them, they had been forced to attend to their management in order to secure incomes, and had become citizens identified with the interests around them. They, therefore, took part in polities with a strong common sense and courage in doing the best thing possible under the circum stances that was wanting among the ancient emigres. They now voted for the best can didates put up, and used their influence for them without much reference to the class from which they came; thus exercising a sort of balance of power in the provinces. Their candidates were usually elected. In this assembly they numbered from 120 to 130. M. Berryer was their leader, as M. Thiers was of the center. These two great men usually worked together for the consolidation of the republic as the intermediary by which the legitimists might come to the monarchy without plunging France into a worse revolution; and the republicans that they might arrive at a better form of republic through the present experiment. But after Napoleon had been elected a deputy, the left, the right, and the right-center had to make common cause against a senti ment in " the belly of the assembly," which sprang into existence with unexpected fnrce. His skillful letters of resignation brought him into a prominence that surprised every body. His strength in the provinces spread like fire in a dead forest that has waited for the torch. The dissatisfaction of all parties with the miserable failures and blunders of the last three Bourbon kings, and with the equally bad record of half a dozen ephemeral constitutional republics, made the advent of Napoleon seem like a godsend to the dis satisfied of every shade. Memories were awakened of all that was glorious about the first empire in a generation that had not felt, or had forgotten, its meannesses and the horrors of its glory. With such a mingling of all shades of opinion, the strong men of the assembly were able to form another republican constitution, with a president to be elected. But when the election came on, to the surmise of the left, Louis Napoleon had an enormous majority of all the votes of France. He took the oath of office Dec. 20, 1848. From that time the left had to make a strange battle to try to defeat his foreseen perfidy to the republic by efforts to abridge the universal suffrage which they had always before insisted on. Napoleon had the logic of the situation all in his favor, and, had ho been content to keep his oath as president, it is difficult to see what remedy the demo cratic republicans would have had against his domination without stultifying their own democratic principles. But they did seek to revise the constitution so as to get rid of the preponderating peasant vote by which Napoleon was made president. 1`he latter finally cut short the struggle by his coup d'etat of Dee. 2, 1851, by which he accepted perjury as the price of the imperial crown, and stifled the voice both of the left and the right for a period of eighteen years of his remarkable reign.