Alliance, formed by England, Prussia, Austria, and Russia, and in consequence of this failure the King’s prestige suffered.  But the question of extending the suffrage was kept always before the people, and when the King refused to go further with that reform its advocates urged their demands more strongly than ever.  Lamartine founded a journal in which he agitated for universal suffrage, and in this agitation many other newspapers joined.  Even Thiers, the leading statesman of the Moderate party, asked for suffrage reform.  Failing to control the Legislative Assembly, the reformers at last appealed to the people.  The King, relying on his majority in the Assembly, was undisturbed by the popular ferment.

Guizot, whose account of the “February Revolution” is here given, was the chief minister of Louis Philippe; and however partisan the author’s narrative may seem, it rests upon an intimate knowledge of the events recorded.

I come with profound repugnance and sorrow to those painful days by the faults and misfortunes of which France was launched into dangerous enterprises, such that men of the greatest foresight could not discern their end.  Our country has paid very dearly for the fatal error which overthrew the throne of the King who had for eighteen years governed it with a wisdom, prudence, and moderation acknowledged even by his enemies when attacking him.

“The Cabinet of October 29, 1847, and its political friends, had a clearly defined idea and purpose.  They aspired to bring to a close the French era of revolutions by establishing the free government which France had in 1789 promised herself as the consequence and political guarantee of the social revolution which she was completing.”  This policy, formerly the object of their youthful hopes, had become theirs, whether in power or in the opposition.  “It was in fact both liberal and antirevolutionary—­antirevolutionary both in home and foreign affairs, since it wished to maintain the peace of Europe abroad, and the constitutional monarchy at home; liberal, since it fully accepted and respected the essential conditions of free government; the decisive intervention of the country in its affairs, with a constant and well-sustained discussion, in public as well as in the Chambers, of the ideas and acts of the Government.  In fact, this twofold object was attained from 1830 to 1848.

“Abroad, peace was maintained without any loss to the influence or reputation of France in Europe.  At home, from 1830 to 1848, political liberty was great and powerful; from 1840 to 1848, in particular, it was displayed without any new legal limit being imposed.  It was this policy that the opposition—­all the oppositions, monarchical and dynastic as well as republican—­blindly or knowingly attacked, and tried to change.  It was to change it that they demanded electoral and parliamentary reforms.  In principle, the Government had no absolute or permanent objections whatever to such reforms; the extension