Page:The Royal Family of France (Henry).djvu/53

 Let us accept France as she stands now, that is, as the tool of wealthy parvenus, respectable stock-jobbers, and a meek bourgeoisie on the one hand, and of romantic Monarchists, unreasonable Radicals, and a considerable majority of ignorant or interested small shopkeepers, licensed victuallers, and peasants on the other side. These are the two most potent antagonists to political exertion in the right direction.

The civic education of a nation is no light task, and a most anxious one it is for her natural leaders, who should be the men of higher position and education in the land. But less so-called prudent reserve, more promptitude and zeal all over France will prove the most important and influential weapon against internal as well as external enemies. One of the commonest reproaches to which French Conservatives are rightly subjected in England, is their apathy to the promotion of the national welfare, grounded upon what is their politique d'effacement, or standing aloof from the electoral field, from political elections and provincial and communal meetings. Such is the language not seldom employed, both in conversation and in print, by the people in England who really wish to be friendly to France, and for whose kind sentiments, plain, honest common sense dictates that Frenchmen should not be ungrateful. Meanwhile, Frenchmen may venture to remind us with all due respect as an absolutely true fact, that Frenchmen of higher position and abilities have difficulties neither few nor slight to overcome before reaching the classes they are expected to lead: the rapprochement between classes of French society since 1789 is undoubtedly improving in tone and feeling to-day; but the higher are still usually misunderstood and unjustly judged by the Lower Middle classes. The semi-real and semi-apparent vanity in the national character goes a long way to explain the indifferent feelings of men for one another. So far so good. But with regard to the rest, the accusation of non-activity, so strongly levelled against contemporary Monarchists in France, is true, nevertheless, and honest. It is sufficient to read and see that the present political conduct of Monarchists is hostile to political freedom, preventing all growth, and nearly destroying all vitality in Conservative politics. The Historian's duty is, not to exhort only, but to act in the same spirit which guided his elders,