Paris under the Commune Part 19

An imitation of the Column of Trajan, at Rome, slightly taller.

It cost 1,500,000 francs!]

"THE COMMUNE OF PARIS,

"Considering that the Imperial column of the Place Vendome is a monument of barbarian, a symbol of brute force, of false glory, an encouragement of military spirit, a denial of international rights, a permanent insult offered by the conquerors to the conquered, a perpetual conspiracy against one of the great principles of the French Republic, namely: Fraternity,

"Decrees:

"_Sole article_.--The Colonne Vendome is to be demolished."

Now I must tell you plainly, you are absurd, contemptible, and odious!

This sorry farce outstrips all one could have imagined, and all that the Versailles papers said of you must have been true; for what you are doing now is worse than anything they could ever have dared to imagine.

It was not enough to violate the churches, to suppress the liberties,--the liberty of writing, the liberty of speaking, the liberty of free circulation, the liberty of risking one's life or not. It was not enough that blood should be recklessly spilled, that women should be made widows and children orphans, trade stopped and commerce ruined; it was not enough that the dignity of defeat--the only glory remaining--should be swallowed up in the shameful disaster of civil war; in a word, it was not sufficient to have destroyed the present, compromised the future; you wish now to obliterate the past! Funereal mischief! Why, the Colonne Vendome is France, and a trophy of its past greatness,--alas, at present in the shade--is not the monument, but the record of a victorious race who strode through the world conquering as they went, planting the tricolour everywhere. In destroying the Colonne Vendome, do not imagine that you are simply overthrowing a bronze column surmounted by the statue of an emperor; you disinter the remains of your forefathers to shake their fleshless bones, and say to them, "You were wrong in being brave and proud and great; you were wrong to conquer towns, to win battles; you were wrong to astound the universe by raising the vision of France glorified. It is scattering to the wind the ashes of heroes! It is telling those aged soldiers, seen formerly in the streets (where are they now? Why do we meet them no longer? Have you killed them, or does their glory refuse to come in contact with your infamy?) It is telling the maimed soldiers of the Invalides, "You are but blockheads and brigands. So you have lost a leg, and you an arm! So much the worse for you idle scamps. Look on these rascals crippled for their country's honour!" It is like s.n.a.t.c.hing from them the crosses they have won, and delivering them into the hands of the shameless street urchins, who will cry, "A hero! a hero!" as they cry "Thief!

thief!" There is certainly purer and less costly grandeur than that which results from war and conquests. You are free to dream for your country a glory different to the ancient glory; but the heroic past, do not overthrow it, do not suppress it, now especially, when you have nothing with which to replace it, but the disgraces of the present. Yet, no! Complete your work, continue in the same path. The destruction of the Colonne Vendome is but a beginning, be logical and continue; I propose a few decrees:

"The Commune of Paris, considering that the Church of Notre Dame de Paris is a monument of superst.i.tion, a symbol of divine tyranny, an affirmation of fanaticism, a denial of human rights, a permanent insult offered by believers to atheists, a perpetual conspiracy against one of the great principles of the Commune, namely, the convenience of its members,

"Decrees:

"The Church of Notre Dame shall be demolished."

What say you to my proposition? Does it not agree with your dearest desire? But you can do better and better: believe me you ought to have the courage of your opinions.

"The Commune of Paris, considering that the Museum of the Louvre contains a great number of pictures, of statues, and other objects of art, which, by the subjects they represent, bring eternally to the mind of the people the actions of G.o.ds, and kings, and priests; that these actions indicated by flattering brush or chisel are often delineated in such a way as to diminish the hatred that priests, kings, and G.o.ds should inspire to all good citizens; moreover, the admiration excited by the works of human genius is a perpetual a.s.sault on one of the great principles of the Commune, namely, its imbecility,

"Decrees:

"_Sole article_.--The Museum of the Louvre shall be burned to the ground."

Do not attempt to reply that in spite of the recollections of religion and despotism attached to these monuments you would leave Notre Dame and the Museum of the Louvre untouched for the sake of their artistic importance. Beware of insinuating that you would have respected the Colonne Vendome had it possessed some merit as a work of art. You!

respect the masterpieces of human art! Wherefore? Since when, and by what right? No, little as you may have been known before you were masters, you were yet known enough for us to a.s.sert that one of you--whom I will name: M. Lefrancais--wished in 1848 to set fire to the _Salon Carre_; there is another of you--whom I will also name: M. Jules Valles--a.s.serts that Homer was an old fool. It is true that M. Jules Valles is Minister of Public Instruction. If you have spared Notre Dame and the Museum of the Louvre up to this moment, it is that you dared not touch them, which is a proof, not of respect but of cowardice.

Ah! our eyes are open at last! We are no longer dazzled by the chimerical hopes we nourished for a moment, of obtaining, through you communal liberties. You did but adopt those opinions for the sake of misleading us, as a thief a.s.sumes the livery of a house to enter his master's room and lay hands on his money. We see you now as you are. We had hoped that you were revolutionists, too ardent, too venturous perhaps, but on the whole impelled by a n.o.ble intention: you are nothing but insurgents, insurgents whose aim is to sack and pillage, favoured by disturbances and darkness. If a few well-intentioned men were among you, they have fled in horror. Count your numbers, you are but a handful. If there still remain any among you, who have not lost all power of discriminating between justice and injustice, they look towards the door, and would fly if they dared. Yet this handful of furious fools governs Paris still. Some among us have been ordered to their death, and they have gone! How long will this last? Did we not surrender our arms? Can we not a.s.semble, as we did a month ago near the Bank, and deal justice ourselves without awaiting an army from Versailles? Ah I we must acknowledge that the deputies of the Seine and the Maires of Paris, misled like ourselves, erred in siding with the insurrectionists. They wished to avert street fighting. Is the strife we are witnessing not far more horrible than that we have escaped? One day's struggle, and it would have ended. Yes, we were wrong to lay down our arms; but who could have believed--the excesses of the first few days seemed more like the sad consequences of popular effervescence than like premeditated crimes--who could have believed that the chiefs of the insurrection lied with such impudence as is now only too evident, and that before long the Commune would be the first to deprive us of the liberties it was its duty to protect and develope? The "Rurals" were right then,--they who had been so completely in the wrong in refusing to lend an attentive ear to the just prayers of a people eager for liberty, they were right when they warned us against the ignorance and wickedness of these men. Ah!

were the National a.s.sembly but to will it, there would yet be time to save Paris. If it really wished to establish a definite Republic, and concede to the capital of France the right, free and entire, of electing an independent munic.i.p.ality, with what ardour should we not rally round the legitimate Government! How soon would the Hotel de Ville be delivered from the contemptible men who have planted themselves there.

If the National a.s.sembly could only comprehend us! If it would only consent to give Paris its liberty, and France its tranquillity, by means of honourable concessions!

XLIX.

The delegates of the League of the Republican Union of the Rights of Paris returned from Versailles to-day, the 14th April, and published the following reports:--

"CITIZENS,--The undersigned, chosen by you to present your programme to the Government of Versailles, and to proffer the good offices of the League to aid in the conclusion of an armistice, have the honour of submitting you an account of their mission.

"The delegates, having made known to Monsieur Thiers the programme of the League, he replied that as chief of the sole legal government existing in France he had not to discuss the basis of a treaty, but notwithstanding he was quite ready to treat with such persons whom he considered as representing Republican principles, and to acquaint them with the intentions of the chief of the executive power.

"It is in accordance with these observations, which denote, in fact, the true character of our mission, that Monsieur Thiers has made the following declarations on different points of our programme.

"Respecting the recognition of the Republic, Monsieur Thiers answers for its existence as long as he remains in power. A Republican state was put into his hands, and he stakes his honour on its conservation."

Ay! it is precisely that which will not satisfy Paris--Paris sighing for peace and liberty. We have all the most implicit faith in Thiers'

honour. We are a.s.sured that the words, "French Republic" will head the white Government placards as long as he remains in power. But when Thiers is withdrawn from power--National a.s.semblies can be capricious sometimes--what a.s.sures us that we shall not fall victims to a monarchical or even an imperial restoration? Ghosts can appear in French history as well as in Anne Radcliffe's novels. To attempt to consider the elected members who sit at Versailles as sincere Republicans is an effort beyond the powers of our credulity. You see that Thiers himself dares not speak his thoughts on what might happen were he to withdraw from power. Thus we find ourselves, as before, in a state of transition, and this state of transition is just what appals us. We address ourselves to the a.s.sembly, and ask of it, "We are Republican; are you Republican?" And the a.s.sembly pretends to be deaf, and the deputies content themselves with humming under their breaths, some the royal tune of "The White c.o.c.kade," and others the imperial air of "Partant pour la Syrie." This does not quite satisfy us. It is true that Thiers says he will maintain the form of government established in Paris as long as he possibly can; but he only promises for himself, and it results clearly from all this that we shall not keep the Republic long, since its definite establishment depends in fact on the majority in the a.s.sembly, while the a.s.sembly is royalist, with a slight sprinkle of imperialism here and there. But let us continue the reading of the reports.

"Respecting the munic.i.p.al franchise of Paris, Monsieur Thiers declares that Paris will enjoy its franchise on the same conditions as those of the other towns, according to a common law, such as will be set forth by the a.s.sembly of the representatives of all France. Paris will have the common right, nothing less and nothing more."

This again is little satisfactory. What will this common right be? What will the law set forth by the representatives of all France be worth?

Once more we have the most entire confidence in Thiers. But have we the right to expect a law conformable to our wishes from an a.s.sembly of men who hold opinions radically opposed to ours on the point which is in fact the most important in the question--on the form of government?

"Concerning the protection of Paris, now exclusively confided to the National Guards, Monsieur Thiers declares that he will proceed at once to the organization of the National Guard, but that cannot be to the absolute exclusion of the army."

In my personal opinion, the President is perfectly right here; but from the point of view which it was the mission of the delegates of the Republican Union to take, is not this third declaration as evasive as the preceding?

"Respecting the actual situation and the means of putting an end to the effusion of blood, Monsieur Thiers declares that not recognising as belligerents the persons engaged in the struggle against the National a.s.sembly, he neither can nor will treat the question of an armistice; but he declares that if the National Guards of Paris make no hostile attack, the troops of Versailles will make none either, until the moment, yet undetermined, when the executive power shall resolve upon action and commence the war."

Oh, words! words! We are perfectly aware that Thiers has the right to speak thus, and that all combatants are not belligerents. But what! Is it as just as it is legal to argue the point so closely, when the lives of so many men are at stake; and is a small grammatical concession so serious a thing, that sooner than make it one should expose oneself to all the horrible feelings of remorse that the most rightful conqueror experiences at the sight of the battle-field?

"Monsieur Thiers adds: 'Those who abandon the contest, that is to say, who return to their homes and renounce their hostile att.i.tude, will be safe from all pursuit.'"

Is Thiers quite certain that he will not find himself abandoned by the a.s.sembly at the moment when he enters upon this path of mercy and forgiveness?

"Monsieur Thiers alone excepts the a.s.sa.s.sins of General Lecomte and General Clement Thomas, who if taken will be tried for the crime."

And here he is undoubtedly right. We must have been blind indeed the day that this double crime failed to open our eyes to the true characters of the men who, if they did not commit it or cause it to be committed, made at least no attempt to discover the criminals!

"Monsieur Thiers, recognising the impossibility for a great part of the population, now deprived of work, to live without the allotted pay, will continue to distribute that pay for several weeks longer.

"Such, citizens, is, etc., etc."

This report is signed by A. Dessonnaz, A. Adam, and Donvallet. Alas! we had foreseen what the result of the honourable attempt made by the delegates of the Republican Union would be. And this result proves that not only is the National Guard at war with the regular troops, but that a persistent opposition is also made by the National a.s.sembly of Versailles to the most reasonable portion of the people of Paris. And yet the a.s.sembly represents France, and speaks and acts only as she is commissioned to speak and act. The truth then is this,--Paris is republican and France is not republican; there is division between the capital and the country. The present convulsion, brought about by a group of madmen, has its source in this divergence of feeling. And what will happen? Will Paris, once more vanquished by universal suffrage, bend her neck and accept the yoke of the provincials and rustics? The right of these is incontestable; but will it, by reason of superiority of numbers, take precedence of our right, as incontestable as theirs?

These are dark questions, which hold the minds of men in suspense, and which, in spite of our desire to bring the National a.s.sembly over to our side, the greater part of whose members could not join us without betraying their trust, cause us to bear the intolerable tyranny of the men of the Hotel de Ville, even while their sinister lucubrations inspire us with disgust.

L.

During this time the walls resound with fun. Paris of the street and gutter--Paris, Gavroche and blackguard, rolls with laughter before the caricatures which ingenious salesmen stick with pins on shutters and house doors. Who designed these wild pictures, glaringly coloured and common, seldom amusing and often outrageously coa.r.s.e? They are signed with unknown names--pseudonyms doubtless; their authors, amongst whom it is sad to think that artists of talent must be counted, are like women, high born and depraved, mixing with their faces masked in hideous orgies.

These vile pictures with their infamous calumnies keep up and even kindle contempt and hatred in ignorant minds. Laughter is often far from innocent. But the pa.s.sers-by think little of this, and are amused enough when they see Jules Favre's head represented by a radish, or the _embonpoint_ of Monsieur Picard by a pumpkin. Where will all this unwholesome stuff be scattered in a few days? Flown away and dispersed.

Eccentric amateurs will tear their hair at the impossibility of obtaining for their collections these frivolous witnesses of troubled times. I will make a few notes so as to diminish their despair as far as I am able.

A green soil and a red sky--In a black coffin is a half-naked woman, with a Phrygian cap on her head, endeavouring to push up the lid with all her might. Jules Favre, lean, small, head enormous, under lip thick and protruding, hair wildly flying like a willow in a storm, wearing a dress coat, and holding a nail in one hand and a hammer in the other, with his knee pressed upon the coffin-lid, is trying to nail it down, in spite of the very natural protestations of the half-naked woman. In the distance, and running towards them, is Monsieur Thiers, with a great broad face and spectacles, also armed with a hammer. Below is written: "If one were to listen to these accursed Republics, they would never die." Signed, Faustin. Same author--Same woman. But this time she lies in a bed hung with red flags for curtains. Her shoulders a little too bare, perhaps, for a Republic, but she must be made attractive to her good friends the Federals. At the head of the bed a portrait of Rochefort; Rochefort is the favoured one of this lady, it seems. Were I he, I should persuade her to dress a little more decently. Three black men, in brigands' hats, their limbs dragging, and their faces distorted, approach the bed, singing like the robbers in Fra Diavolo: "Ad.... vance ... ad ... vance ... with ... pru ... dence ...!" The first, Monsieur Thiers, carries a heavy club and a dark lantern; Jules Favre, the second, brandishes a knife, and the third, carries nothing, but wears a peac.o.c.k's feather in his hat, and.... I have never seen Monsieur Picard, but they tell me that it is he.

The young Republic again, with shoulders bare and the style of face of a _pet.i.te dame_ of the Rue Bossuet. She comes to beg Monsieur Thiers, cobbler and cookshop-keeper, who "finds places for pretenders out of employ, and changes their old boots for new at the most reasonable prices," to have her shoes mended. "Wait a bit! wait a bit!" says the cobbler to himself, "I'll manage 'em so as to put an end to her walking."