gators. Among the numerous sects ism by a succession of religious reinto which the pretended reform was volutions? Maxims destructive of immediately divided, some opened the all society were propagated, factions way for it, and others adopted it as formed, insurrections took place; uptheir standard. And what must have on the field of battle and upon the been the result in the political organ- scaffolds blood flowed in torrents : isation of Europe? I will tell you but no sooner did the instinct of social candidly: the disappearance of those preservation begin to operate, than, political institutions which enabled instead of popular forms being estabthe different classes of the state to lished and taking root, every thing take part in its affairs was inevitable. tended towards the opposite extreme. Now, as it was very difficult, consider- And was not this the country in which ing the character, ideas, and customs the people had been flattered by the of the European people, for them to prospect of unrestrained liberty, of a submit for ever to their new condition, re-partition, and even a community, as their predominant inclination must of property; in fine, by the promise have urged them to place bounds upon of the most absolute equality in every the extension of power, it was natural thing? Yet, in this same country, that revolutions should ensue; it was the most striking inequality prevailed, natural that future generations should and the feudal aristocracy preserved have to witness great catastrophes, its full force. In other countries, in such as the English Revolution of the which no such hopes of liberty and seventeenth century and the French equality had been held out, we can Revolution of the eighteenth. There scarcely discover the limits which sewas a time when it might have been parated the nobility from the people. difficult to comprehend these truths; In Germany, the nobility still retained that time is past. The revolutions in their wealth and their preponderance, which for some centuries the different were still surrounded by titles, privinations of Europe have been succes- leges, and distinctions of every desively involved, have brought within scription. In that very country in the reach of the least intelligent that which there were such outcries against social law so frequently realised, viz. the power of kings, in which the name that anarchy leads to despotism, and of king was declared synonymous that despotism begets anarchy. Never, with tyrant, the most absolute monat any time, in any nation (history archy was established; and the aposand experience prove the fact), have tate of the Teutonic order founded anti-social ideas been inculcated, the that kingdom of Prussia, from which minds of the people been imbued with representative forms are still excludthe spirit of insubordination and re-ed. In Denmark, Protestantism was bellion, without almost immediately provoking the application of the only remedy at the command of nations in such conflicts, the establishment of a very strong government, which, justly or unjustly, legally or not, lifts up its iron arm over every one, and makes all heads bend under its yoke. To clamour and tumult succeeds the most profound silence; the people then easily become resigned to their new condition, for reflection and instinct teach them that, although it is well to possess a certain amount of liberty, the first want of society is self-preservation.

What was the case in Germany, after the introduction of Protestant

established, and with it absolute power immediately took deep root; in Sweden we find, at the very same time, the power of Gustavus established.

What was the case in England? Representative forms were not introduced into that country by Protestantism; they existed centuries before, as well as in other nations of Europe. But the monarch who founded the Anglican Church was distinguished for his despotism; and the Parliament, which ought to have restrained him, was most shamefully degraded. What idea can we form of the liberty of a country whose legislators and representatives debased themselves so far

1 When this was written.-TR.

as to declare, that any one obtaining monarch exclaim, “I am the state.” a knowledge of the illicit amours of We have here the most complete the queen is bound, under pain of personification of the absolute power high treason, to bring an accusation which always follows anarchy. Have against her? What can we think of the European nations had to complain the liberty of a country in which the of the unlimited power exercised by very men who ought to defend that monarchs? have they had to regret liberty cringe with so much baseness that all the representative forms which to the unruly passions of the monarch, could ensure their liberties perished that they are not ashamed, in order under the ascendency of the throne? to flatter the jealousy of the sovereign, Let them blame Protestantism for it, to establish that any young female which spreading the germs of anarchy who should marry a king of England, all over Europe, created an imperious, should, under pain of high treason, be urgent, and inevitable necessity for compelled before her marriage to re- centralising rule, for fortifying royal veal any stain there might be on her power: it was necessary to stop up virtue? Such ignominious enactments every source from which dissolvent are certainly a stronger proof of ab- principles might flow, and to keep ject servility than the declaration of within narrow bounds all the elements that same Parliament establishing that which, by contact and vicinity, were the mere will of the monarch should ready to ignite and produce a fatal have the force of law. Representative conflagration. forms, preserved in that country at a time when they had disappeared from almost every other nation of Europe, were not, however, a guarantee against tyranny; for the English cannot assuredly boast of the liberty they enjoyed under the reigns of Henry VIII. and Elizabeth. Perhaps in no country in Europe was less liberty enjoyed, in no country were the people more oppressed under popular forms, in no country did despotism prevail to a greater extent. If there be any thing which can convince us of these truths, in case the facts already cited should be found insufficient, it is undoubtedly the efforts made by the English to acquire liberty. And if the efforts made to shake off the yoke of oppression are to be regarded as a sure sign of its galling effects, we are justified in thinking that the oppression under which England was groaning must have been very severe, since that country has passed through so long and terrible a revolution, in which so many tears and so much blood have been shed.

When we consider what has taken place in France, we remark that religious wars have always given an ascendency to royal power. After such long agitations, so many troubles and civil wars, we see the reign of Louis XIV., and we hear that proud

Every reflecting man will agree with me on this point. Considering the aggrandisement of absolute power, they will discover in it nothing but the realisation of a fact already long ago every where observed. Assuredly the monarchs of Europe cannot be compared, either by the fact of their origin or the character of their measures, to those despots who, under different titles, have usurped the command of society at the critical moment when it was near its dissolution; but it may be said with reason, that the unlimited extent of their power has been caused by a great social necessity, viz. that of one sole and forcible authority, without which the preservation of public order was impossible. We cannot without dismay take a view of Europe after the appearance of Protestantism. What frightful dissolution! What erroneous ideas! What relaxation of morals! What a multitude of sects! What animosity in men's minds! What rage, what ferocity! Violent disputes, interminable debates, accusations, recriminations without end; troubles, rebellion, intestine and foreign wars, sanguinary battles, and atrocious punishments. Such is the picture that Europe presents; such are the effects of this apple of discord thrown among men who are brethren. And what was

easily to be obtained, since between the aristocracy and the people there existed so much animosity and rivalry —a rivalry which, to a certain extent, was inevitable, owing to the opposition of their respective interests. We must bear in mind, however, that the nobility were not the only aristocracy; there was another much more powerful and influential than they - the clergy. This latter class was at that time possessed of all the ascendency and influence which both moral and material means can confer; in fact, besides the religious character, which insured the respect and veneration of

undertaking, the lords would naturally bring the whole weight of their influence to the support of the monarch; thus taking advantage of the false direction given to the popular movement to revenge themselves upon the people, whilst veiling their vengeance under the pretext of public utility. The people, it is true, possessed various means of defence; but when isolated and opposed to the throne, they found these means too weak to afford them any hope of victory. Learning, indeed, was no longer the exclusive patrimony of any privileged class, but knowledge had not had time to become diffused so far as to form a public opinion the people, they were possessed, at strong enough to exercise any direct the same time, of abundant riches; influence upon the affairs of govern- which easily secured to them, on the ment. The art of printing was already one hand, gratitude and influence; producing its results, but was not yet and, on the other, made them feared sufficiently developed to produce that by the great, and respected by monrapid and extensive circulation of archs. Now, here is one of the leadideas which has subsequently been ing mistakes of Protestantism: to crush attained. Notwithstanding the efforts the power of the clergy at such a time, every where made at that time to pro-was to accelerate the complete victory mote the diffusion of knowledge, we of absolute monarchy, to leave the need only understand correctly the people defenceless, the monarch unrenature and character of the knowledge strained, aristocracy without a bond of the period, to be convinced that of union, without a vital principle; it neither in substance nor in form was was to prevent the three elementsit calculated to become, to any general monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy extent, the property of the popular-from uniting to form a limited goclasses. Thanks to the progress of commerce and the arts, there arose, it is true, a new description of wealth, destined of necessity to become the patrimony of the people. But commerce and the arts were then in their infancy, and did not possess either the extent or the influence which at a later period connected them intimately with every branch of society. Except in some few countries of very little importance, the position of the merchant and the artisan could not secure them any great amount of influence of itself.

Considering the course of events, and the elevation which royal power had acquired on the ruins of feudalism, the only means for restricting monarchical power, until the democratic element should have acquired sufficient force to be respected, was the union of the aristocracy with the people. But such a coalition was not

vernment, towards which almost all the European nations appeared to be inclining. We have already seen that it was not at that time expedient to isolate the people, for their political existence was still feeble and precarious; and it is no less evident that the nobility, as a means of government, ought not to have been left to themselves. This class, possessing no other vital principle than that derived from their titles and privileges, were incapable of resisting the attacks continually aimed at them by the royal power. In spite of themselves, the nobility were under the necessity of yielding to the monarch's will, of abandoning their inaccessible castles, to resort to the sumptuous palaces of kings, and play the part of courtiers.

Protestantism crushed the power of the clergy, not only in the countries in which it succeeded in implanting its errors, but also in others. In fact,

or some sort of intervention to prevent violent shocks; if this mediator does not exist in the very nature of the circumstances, recourse must be had to the law for the creation of one. From this it is evident what an evil Protestantism inflicted upon Europe; since its first act was completely to isolate the temporal power, to place it in rivalship and hostility to the spiritual, and to leave no mediator between the monarch and the people, The lay aristocracy at once lost their political influence; for they had now lost their force and bond of union, which they derived from their connexion with the ecclesiastical aristocracy.

where it could not fully introduce it-ity, or the people. Whenever powers self, its ideas, when not in open oppo- and interests of different natures are sition to the Catholic faith, exercised to be combined, a mediator is essential, a certain degree of influence. From that time the power of the clergy lost its principal support in the political influence of the Popes; for whilst kings assumed a tone of greater boldness against the pretensions of the Holy See, the Popes, on their side, that they might give no pretext, no occasion for the declamations of Protestants, were obliged to act with great circumspection in every thing relating to temporal affairs. All this has been regarded as the progress of European civilisation, - as one step towards liberty; however, the rapid sketch which I have just given of the political condition of that period, clearly proves that, instead of taking the surest way to the development of representative forms, the road to absolute monarchy was chosen. Protestantism, interested in crushing by all possible means the power of the Popes, exalted that of kings even in spiritual matters. By thus concentrating in their hands the spiritual and temporal powers, it left the throne without any sort of counterpoise. By destroying the hope of obtaining liberty by peaceable means, it led the people to have recourse to force, and opened the crater of those revolutions which have cost modern Europe so many tears.

In order that the forms of political liberty should take root and attain to perfection, they ought not to have been forced prematurely from the atmosphere which gave them birth; for in this atmosphere existed together the monarchical, aristocratical, and popular elements, all strengthened and directed by the Catholic religion; under the influence of this same religion, these elements were being gradually combined, and politics ought not to have been separated from religion. Instead of regarding the clergy as a fatal element, it was important to look upon them as a mediator among all classes and powers, ready to calm the ardour of strife, to place bounds to excess, to prevent the exclusive preponderance of the monarch, the nobil

When once the nobles were reduced to mere courtiers, the power of the throne was entirely without a counterpoise.

I have said it, and I repeat it, that the strengthening of the royal power, even at the expense of the rights and liberties of the lords and of the commons, tended powerfully to the maintenance of public order, and consequently to the progress of civilisation; but, at the same time, the extreme preponderance obtained by this power is much to be lamented; and it may be well to reflect, that one of the principal causes of this preponderance was the removal of the clergy from the sphere of politics. At the commencement of the sixteenth century, the question no longer was, whether those numerous castles should be left standing, from the heights of which proud barons gave the law to their vassals, and held themselves justified in despising the ordinances of the monarch; nor whether that long list of communal liberties should be preserved, which had no connexion with each other, which were opposed to the pretensions of the great, and at the same time embarrassed the action of the sovereign, by preventing the formation of a central government capable of insuring order, of protecting legitimate interests, of giving an impulse to the movement of civilisation, which had every where commenced with so