European Reaction against Republicanism.
It looks as if those of us who distrusted the French Republic at its first, or rather its last, proclamation, were right. So long as France had for president a man who believed in maintaining republican institutions, all went merrily enough. The French people, submissive to the powers that be, accepted the accomplished fact, and elected Liberals to fill vacancies in their legislative body. But by a fusion of Royalists of both wings with the Imperialists, Thiers was driven from the presidency, and the impression studiously cultivated by MacMahon and his advisers, that the Republic was but a temporary affair, soon to give place to a more legitimate government. And how meekly the people accept the announcement! Judging from an American point of view, the parties which had united to overthrow the greatest statesman of France would meet only the contempt of the people. The fusionists understood the temper of France better. Frenchmen have learned to make it a first principle of political duty to “accept the situation.” The party in power is the party for them. Why should not those that rule do the thinking for those that obey? What else do they rule for? The drift of things in France is plain enough. What need of discussing the future of the Republic when, unrebuked, the president prevents the celebration of the anniversary of its proclamation, and even American citizens are forbidden in any public way to express their satisfaction that the land of Lafayette and the land of Washington are governed by the legislatures of the people? In the same direction points the great Catholic Revival in France, which builds new cathedrals to the sacred heart of Jesus, and carries in railway vans the pilgrim trains of the Middle Ages, that they may worship at the shrine of her who whispered to two children of La Valette the secret which made Pius IX. cry: “Poor France! poor France!” This religious revival must not be overlooked as a political power. No doubt, religiously considered, it is a sign of something better than mere indifferentism. For we would rather have a people ignorantly superstitious than ignorantly indifferent. But, politically, it forebodes nothing but evil. It is fostered by the reactionists in the interests of a government that shall be under Ultramontane control. When the Republic is overthrown—as, now that France has purchased the withdrawal of the Prussians, may take place at any time—we may expect the priests and bishops to rule, with a king as their figure head. And, then, who can tell how long Victor Emanuel will be allowed to hold Rome? In Spain, with all its confusion, the outlook is somewhat more favorable. Not that any one could have supposed Spain any better fitted for a republic; but that the opposition, if more noisy, is yet feebler than in France. We have no little hope that Castelar, at the head of the government, will put new life into the campaign against the Carlists, and succeed in teaching a people which seems willing to learn the principles of self-government. But it will be a task of the extremest difficulty to maintain a republic in Spain if France reverts to a monarchy. The sky cannot look bright to those who have hoped to see the Latin races accept the results which the Anglo-Saxon races have reached through their experiments in self-government.—Independent.