Page:The Royal Family of France (Henry).djvu/34

 a mere plaything, or rather a useless toy! From Gibraltar to Port Said, from Aden to Madagascar, the shores make sport of it with jeer and laughter. When speaking of French intervention of the &apos;Invincibles&apos; and &apos;Monitors&apos; of France, it might well be said of them as of the cuirassiers of Jean de Nivelle: 'When they are called, they turn and fly.'"

The Third Republic in its foreign policy has certainly assumed an attitude quite uncongenial to the French genius and temperament. Yet we cannot quite perceive what measures the Voltaire advocates to remedy this state of affairs. "There exists," it says, "an ancient, a clear tradition to guide the diplomacy of a great nation." France then should return to this tradition at once. And to make up for the shortness of information from our Republican fellow-scribe, we will tell him that this well-defined tradition of French diplomacy has had representatives illustrious enough in the persons of Armand Duplessis Cardinal de Richelieu, and Mazarin, in Hugues de Lyonne, de Talleyrand-Périgord, the Duke de Richelieu, in Prince de Polignac, Drouyn de Lhuys, Thiers, the Duke de Broglie. Each of these Ministers for Foreign Affairs whilst holding office confronted Europe with proud and patriotic attitude. But to return to their traditions would be to return to the traditions of Monarchy; and we do not imagine that the Voltaire is inclined to renounce its gods, to trample under foot its Republican convictions, and to sigh for the restoration of the Monarchy to France?

By having established a Republican form of government, France has doubtless laid herself open to the suspicions of the other Powers of Europe, which have all adhered to the Monarchical system. The bad example she has given, and keeps giving, may be overlooked on condition that she conducts herself properly and quarrels with no one outdoors. No European Government is anxious to enter into alliance with her. As long as she makes no sign she will be unmolested in her isolation and impotence. Were she to show the slightest inclination towards combativeness, a coalition would be formed against her immediately. M. de Freycinet would not venture on such risks, and we cannot blame him. His mistake, as regards the Egyptian Question, was not that he left his sword sheathed, but that he drew it half out only