arose in the National Assembly on the foreign policy of the Republic, and chiefly with reference to the conduct and intentions of France in respect of the Italian question.

M. Buvignier said that foreign affairs presented a truly alarming aspect. Movements of troops were in progress, particularly in Germany; territories had been invaded, and it was evident that a new coalition of the despots of the north was being formed against the free nations of the south. The advanced guard of the new Holy Alliance was already menacing Italy. The state of affairs was precisely the same as in 1792. A party in France, who had reluctantly accepted the Republic, had since secretly conspired against it, and now relied on foreign intervention to restore monarchy. The Government was in connivance with that party, and tacitly admitted the existence of the treaties of 1815, in virtue of which the Austrians had been allowed to occupy Ferrara without even a protest on the part of France. Instead of fraternally receiving the envoys of the Roman Republic, the French Government obstinately refused to recognise any other envoy than the nuncio of the Pope, whose power had ceased to exist. The French Government similarly treated the new Tuscan Republic. M. Buvignier then contended that, even were the treaties of 1815 in full force, none of the Powers, parties thereto, had a right to interfere in Rome, Tuscany, or Venice. The Assembly, he maintained, could not come back on its decree of the 24th of May, 1848, in favour of the emancipation of Italy, to which the honour of France was pledged, nor violate the 5th Article of the

preamble of the Constitution, by which France was bound to respect foreign nationalities, and never employ her forces against the liberty of any nation. He accordingly moved that the Assembly should give a new sanction to its decree of the 24th of May.

M. Drouyn de Lhuys, Minister of Foreign Affairs, replied that the Government, in compliance with the wishes of the National Assembly, pursued the course of policy approved by several of its votes, and he trusted that the Assembly would not belie itself by adopting a contrary resolution.

M. Ledru Rollin next rose, and said that he would endeavour to explain the policy followed by the Government with regard to Italy. He then gave a short history of what had passed in Europe since the publication of the manifesto of M. Lamartine, and strenuously insisted on the maintenance of the principles it proclaimed, and the carrying into effect of the resolution of the National Assembly of the 24th of May, which recommended "a fraternal compact with Germany, the re-establishment of Poland, and the emancipation of Italy." By the manifesto of the Provisional Government, France undertook not only to oppose foreign intervention, but to defend by her arms nations who had asserted their independence. M. Ledru Rollin next read passages from a speech delivered by M. Odillon Barrot in 1831, in order to place his present conduct in opposition with the sentiments he had expressed at that period with regard to the temporal power of the Pope. Rome had imitated the example of France; and those who denied the Romans the right to expel their temporal sovereign,

denied the right of the French to expel Louis Philippe. England had offered the Pope a loan of 15,000,000l. and an Irish legion to seize on Italy, as she had seized on India. What, he asked, must be the opinion of the army and peasantry, who voted on the 10th of December the abrogation of the treaties of 1815, when they find the heir of the glorious name of Napoleon becoming the oppressor of Italy? In conclusion, he declared that the intervention of France in Italy would be a violation of the decree of the Assembly of the 24th of May, and of the 5th Article of her Constitution.

M. Lamartine, who followed, considered diplomacy, when practised in the broad daylight and from the tribune, as extremely dangerous. He should have remained silent if he did not feel bound to explain the passages of the manifesto of March, referred to by Messrs. Buvignier and Ledru Rollin. It did not follow from those passages that France was obliged to make everywhere common cause with all revolutionists. The manifesto declared that France knew no other party than that of justice, right, and the liberty of nations. She had made no promise to Italy that she had not fulfilled. The Provisional Government had told Piedmont that if Italy, invaded by foreigners or menaced in its internal transformations, demanded the armed intervention of France, she was ready to send an army to her assistance; and, with that view, it had concentrated 60,000 men at the foot of the Alps. But no such application had been made to France. On the contrary, from one end of the peninsula to the other a unanimous cry

arose against French intervention. France had not consequently deceived Italy. As respected what was called the Roman Republic. at the same time that he would blush to see his Government contest the right of a people to give themselves the form of Government they pleased, he did not consider France imperatively condemned to enter into an alliance with every nation who thought proper to call itself republican. After showing the difficulty attending the adjustment of the Roman question, M. Lamartine proposed that France should declare to Europe that she would permit no foreign intervention in Italy, and offer to meet all the Catholic powers in a Congress, to settle the question of the liberty of the Roman people, and the independence and dignity, he would not say of the sovereign, but of the Pontiff.

General Cavaignac, who followed, contended that no act of his administration had been in opposition either to the manifesto of the Provisional Government or the decree of the 24th of May. He had deceived neither the Assembly nor the country, as insinuated by M. Lamartine, who stated that there had been between his policy and that of his successors the entire breadth of the Alps. He then reminded the Assembly that he had declared, with its full approbation, that he would strain every nerve to save his country from war. He then alluded to certain manoeuvres, practised by the Provisional Government, to excite neighbouring nations to overthrow their Govern

ments.

M. Lamartine protested on his honour that neither he nor any of his colleagues of the Provisional

On the 30th of March the state of Italy became again the subject of discussion in the National Assembly. The renewal of the campaign against Austria by Charles Albert and the Piedmontese had been followed by a signal catastrophe, and the battle of Novara (an account of which will be found in another part of the volume) had crushed the hopes of those who fancied that the cause of Italian liberty and independence was involved in the struggle.

M. Bixio stated that the Committee of Foreign Affairs had keenly felt the deep emotion produced in the Assembly by the communication made by the President of the Council relative to Italy. It had immediately met to deliberate on that grave matter. A frightful catastrophe had annihilated the only regular force organized for the defence of Italy, and he would not pass over the bodies of that heroic army without paying a just tribute of regret to their manes and to the glorious temerity of their king. Austria now menaced the whole Italian peninsula. The question was no longer an European or Italian question. It was a French question. The in tegrity of Piedmont, under Louis XIV., as well as under the Republic, was indispensable to the security of France. The passage of the Ticino or the Var by the Austrians was identically the same. The Committee was accordingly of opinion that the Austrians should be immediately invited to retire, and that the French Government should not confine itself to a mere exchange of notes, but take up a position on the menaced territory. That occupation could not give umbrage to Europe. Such was the substance of the report he was

instructed to present to the Assembly, together with its final resolution. It was as follows:

"The National Assembly, jealous of securing the preservation of the two greatest interests confided to it, the dignity of France and the maintenance of peace founded in respect for nationalities, and concurring in the language held in the sitting of the 28th by the President of the Council of Ministers, confiding also in the government of the President of the Republic, declares that if, the better to guarantee the integrity of the Piedmontese territory and protect the interests and honour of France, the Executive Power should think it necessary to give force to the negotiations by the partial and temporary occupation of any point of Upper Italy, it would find in the National Assembly the most sincere and cordial co-operation."

the

M. Drouyn de Lhuys, Minister for Foreign Affairs, after giving a resumé of the negotiations which had taken place at Turin after the battle, said that the situation of Piedmont imposed upon French Government a great duty, and that it would exert itself to maintain the integrity of the Sardinian territory, as well as the interests and dignity of France. With that view, it would apply to the Assembly for the necessary powers and means, and concur with readiness and gratitude in any resolution like that prepared by the Committee of Foreign Affairs. The conduct of the French Government had been both prudent and energetic. It had communicated to the Cabinet of Vienna the apprehensions inspired by the occupation of the Sardinian territory, and the indication of the measures