republic; but the Constitution of 1848 had struck no root.
There was a feeling that the country had been surprised and
coerced into the act of declaring itself a republic, and that
a monarchical system of government was the only one adapted
for France. The sense of instability which sprang from this
belief was connected with an agonising dread of insurrections.
... Moreover, to those who watched and feared, it seemed that
the shadow on the dial was moving on with a terrible
steadiness to the hour when a return to anarchy was, as it
were, pre-ordained by law; for the constitution requited that
a new president should be chosen in the spring of the
following year. ... In general, France thought it best that,
notwithstanding the Rule of the Constitution, which stood in
the way, the then President should be quietly re-elected; and
a large majority of the Assembly, faithfully representing this
opinion, had come to a vote which sought to give it effect;
but their desire was baffled by an unwise provision of the
Republican Charter which had laid it down that no
constitutional change should take place without the sanction
of three-fourths of the Assembly. By this clumsy bar the
action of the State system was hampered, and many whose minds
generally inclined them to respect legality were forced to
acknowledge that the Constitution wanted a wrench." The
President of the republic, Prince Louis Napoleon Bonaparte,
"had always wished to bring about a change in the
constitution, but, originally, he had hoped to be able to do
this with the aid and approval of some at least of the
statesmen and eminent generals of the country." But, "although
there were numbers in France who would have been heartily glad
to see the Republic crushed by some able dictator, there were
hardly any public men who believed that in the President of
the Republic they would find the man they wanted. Therefore
his overtures to the gentlemen of France were always rejected.
Every statesman to whom he applied refused to entertain his
proposals. Every general whom he urged always said that for
whatever he did he must have 'an order from the Minister of
War.' The President being thus rebuffed, his plan of changing
the form of government with the assent of some of the leading
statesmen and generals of the country degenerated into schemes
of a very different kind; and at length he fell into the hands
of persons of the quality of Persigny, Morny, and Fleury. ...
The President had been a promoter of the law of the 31st of
May, restricting the franchise, but he now became the champion
of universal suffrage. To minds versed in politics this change
might have sufficed to disclose the nature of the schemes upon
which the Chief of the State was brooding; but, from first to
last, words tending to allay suspicion had been used with
great industry and skill. From the moment of his coming before
the public in February 1848, the Prince laid hold of almost
every occasion he could find for vowing, again and again, that
he harbored no schemes against the Constitution. ... It was
natural that in looking at the operation which changed the
Republic into an Empire, the attention of the observer should
be concentrated upon the person who, already the Chief of the
State, was about to attain to the throne; and there seems to
be no doubt, that what may be called the literary part of the
transaction was performed by the President in person. He was
the lawyer of the confederacy. He no doubt wrote the
Proclamations, the Plebiscites, and the Constitutions, and all
such like things; but it seems that the propelling power which
brought the plot to bear was mainly supplied by Count de Morny,
and by a resolute Major, named Fleury. M. Morny was a man of
great daring, and gifted with more than common powers of
fascination. He had been a member of the Chamber of Deputies
in the time of the monarchy; but he was rather known to the
world as a speculator than as a politician. He was a buyer and
seller of those fractional and volatile interests in trading
adventures, which go by the name of 'Shares.' ...
{1376}
He knew how to found a 'company,' and he now undertook to
establish institutions which were destined to be more
lucrative to him than any of his former adventures; ... It
seems, however, that the man who was the most able to make the
President act, to drive him deep into his own plot, and
fiercely carry him through it, was Major Fleury. ... He was
daring and resolute, and his daring was of the kind which
holds good in the moment of danger. If Prince Louis Bonaparte
was bold and ingenious in designing, Fleury was the man to
execute. ... The language held by the generals who declared
that they would act under the authority of the Minister of War
and not without it, suggested the contrivance which was
resorted to. Fleury determined to find a military man capable
of command, capable of secrecy, and capable of a great
venture. The person chosen was to be properly sounded, and if
he seemed willing, was to be admitted into the plot. He was
then to be made Minister of War, in order that through him the
whole of the land forces should be at the disposal of the
plotters. Fleury went to Algeria to find the instrument
required, and he so well performed his task that he hit upon a
general officer who was christened, it seems, Jacques Arnaud
Le Roy, but was known at this time as Achille St. Arnaud. ...
He readily entered into the plot. From the moment that Prince
Louis Bonaparte and his associates had entrusted their secret
to the man of Fleury's selection, it was perhaps hardly
possible for them to flinch, for the exigencies of St. Arnaud,
formerly Le Roy, were not likely to be on so modest a scale as
to consist with the financial arrangements of a Republic
governed by law, and the discontent of a person of his quality
with a secret like that in his charge would plainly bring the
rest of the brethren into danger. He was made Minister of War.
This was on the 27th of October. At the same time M. Maupas or
de Maupas was brought into the Ministry. ... Persigny,
properly Fialin, was in the plot. He was descended on one side
of an ancient family, and disliking his father's name he seems
to have called himself for many years after the name of his
maternal grandfather. ... It was necessary to take measures
for paralyzing the National Guard, but the force was under the
command of General Perrot, a man whose honesty could not be
tampered with. To dismiss him suddenly would be to excite
suspicion. The following expedient was adopted: the President
appointed as Chief of the Staff of the National Guard, a
person named Vieyra. The past life and the then repute of this
person were of such a kind, that General Perrot, it seems,
conceived himself insulted by the nomination, and instantly
resigned. That was what the brethren of the Elysée wanted. On
Sunday, the 30th, General Lawæstine was appointed to the
command. ... His function was--not to lead the force of which
he took the command but--to prevent it from acting. ... Care
had been taken to bring into Paris and its neighborhood the
regiments most likely to serve the purpose of the Elysée, and
to give the command to generals who might be expected to act
without scruples. The forces in Paris and its neighborhood
were under the orders of General Magnan. ... From time to time
the, common soldiery were gratified with presents of food and
wine, as well, as with an abundance of flattering words, and
their exasperation against civilians was so well kept alive
that men used to African warfare were brought into the humor
for calling the Parisians 'Bedouins.' There was massacre in
the very sound. The army of Paris was in the temper required.
It was necessary for the plotters to have the concurrence of
M. St. Georges, the director Of the state printing-office. M.
St. Georges was suborned. Then all was ready. On the Monday
night between the 1st and 2d of December, the President had
his usual assembly at the Elysée. Ministers who were loyally
ignorant of what was going on were mingled with those who were
in the plot. ... At the usual hour the assembly began to
disperse, and by eleven o'clock there were only three guests
who remained. These were Morny (who had previously taken care
to show himself at one of the theatres), Maupas, and St.
Arnaud, formerly Le Roy. There was, besides, an orderly
officer of the President, called Colonel Beville, who was
initiated in the secret. ... They were to strike the blow that
night. ... By and by they were apprised that an order which had
been given for the movement of a battalion of gendarmerie, had
duly taken effect without exciting remark. ... The President
entrusted a packet of manuscripts to Colonel Beville, and
despatched him to the state printing office. It was in the
streets which surround this building that the battalion of
gendarmerie had been collected. When Paris was hushed in
sleep, the battalion came quietly out, and folded round the
state printing-office. From that moment until their work was
done the printers were all close captives, for no one of them
was suffered to go out. ... It is said that there was
something like resistance, but in the end, if not at first,
the printers obeyed. Each compositor stood whilst he worked
between two policemen, and, the manuscript being cut into many
pieces, no one could make out the sense of what he was
printing. By these proclamations the President asserted that
the Assembly was a hot-bed of plots; declared it dissolved;
pronounced for universal suffrage; proposed a new
constitution; vowed anew that his duty was to maintain the
Republic; and placed Paris and the twelve surrounding
departments under martial law. In one of the proclamations, he
appealed to the army, and strove to whet its enmity against
civilians, by reminding it of the defeats inflicted upon the
troops in 1830 and 1848. The President wrote letters
dismissing the members of the government who were not in the
plot; but he did not cause these letters to be delivered until
the following morning. He also signed a paper appointing Morny
to the Home Office. ... The order from the Minister of War was
probably signed by half-past two in the morning, for at three it
was in the hands of Magnan. At the same hour Maupas (assigning
for pretext the expected arrival of foreign refugees), caused
a number of Commissaries to be summoned in all haste to the
Prefecture of Police. At half-past three in the morning these
men were in attendance. ... It was then that, for the first
time, the main secret of the confederates passed into the
hands of a number of subordinate agents. During some hours of
that night every one of those humble Commissaries had the
destinies of France in his hands; for he might either obey the
Minister, and so place his country in the power of the Elysée,
or he might obey the law, denounce the plot, and bring its
contrivers to trial. Maupas gave orders for the seizure at the
same minute of the foremost Generals of France, and several of
her leading Statesmen.
{1377}
Parties of the police, each under the orders of a Commissary,
were to be at the doors of the persons to be arrested some
time beforehand, but the seizures were not to take place until
a quarter past six. ... At the appointed minute, and whilst it
was still dark, the designated houses were entered. The most
famous generals of France were seized. General Changarnier,
General Bedeau, General Lamoricière, General Cavaignac, and
General Leflô were taken from their beds, and carried away
through the sleeping city and thrown into prison. In the same
minute the like was done with some of the chief members and
officers of the Assembly, and amongst others with Thiers,
Miot, Baze, Colonel Charras, Roger du Nord, and several of the
democratic leaders. Some men believed to be the chiefs of
secret societies were also seized. The general object of these
night arrests was that, when morning broke, the army should be
without generals inclined to observe the law, that the
Assembly should be without the machinery for convoking it, and
that all the political parties in the State should be
paralyzed by the disappearance of their chiefs. The number of
men thus seized in the dark was seventy-eight. Eighteen of
these were members of the Assembly. Whilst it was still dark,
Morny, escorted by a body of infantry, took possession of the
Home Office, and prepared to touch the springs of that
wondrous machinery by which a clerk can dictate to a nation.
Already he began to tell 40,000 communes of the enthusiasm
with which the sleeping city had received the announcement of
measures not hitherto disclosed. When the light of the morning
dawned, people saw the Proclamations on the walls, and slowly
came to hear that numbers of the foremost men of France had
been seized in the night-time, and that every General to whom
the friends of law and order could look for help was lying in
one or other of the prisons. The newspapers, to which a man
might run in order to know truly what others thought and
intended, were all seized and stopped. The gates of the
Assembly were closed and guarded, but the Deputies, who began
to flock thither, found means to enter by passing through one
of the official residences which formed Part of the building.
They had assembled in the Chamber in large numbers, and some
of them having caught Dupin, their reluctant President, were
forcing him to come and take the chair, when a body of
infantry burst in and drove them out, striking some of them
with the butt-ends of their muskets. ... Driven from their
Chamber, the Deputies assembled at the Mayoralty of the 10th
arrondissement. There, upon the motion of the illustrious,
Berryer, they resolved that the act of Louis Bonaparte was a
forfeiture of the Presidency, and they directed the judges of
the Supreme Court to meet and proceed to the judgment of the
President and his accomplices. These resolutions had just been
voted, when a battalion of the Chasseurs de Vincennes entered
the courtyard. ... An aide-de-camp of General Magnan came with
a written order directing the officer in command of the
battalion to clear the hall, to do this if necessary by force,
and to carry off to the prison of Mazas any Deputies offering
resistance. ... The number of Deputies present at this moment
was 220. The whole Assembly declared that they resisted, and
would yield to nothing short of force. ... They were carried
off, some to the Fort of Mount Valerian, some to the fortress
of Vincennes, and some to the prison of Mazas. ... By the laws
of the Republic, the duty of taking cognizance of offences
against the Constitution was cast upon the Supreme Court. The
Court was sitting, when an armed force entered the hall, and
the judges were driven from the bench, but not until they had
made a judicial order for the impeachment of the President."
_A. W. Kinglake,
The Invasion of the Crimea,
volume 1, chapter 14._
ALSO IN:
_E. Tênot,
Paris in December, 1851,
chapters 1-4._
_V. Hugo,
Napoleon the Little._
_M. de Maupas,
The Story of the Coup d'État._
_B. Jerrold,
Life of Napoleon III.,
book 8 (volume 3)._
FRANCE: A. D. 1851.
The bloody Triumph of the Coup d'État.
Destruction of the Second Republic.
"The second part of the Coup d'État, which drenched the
boulevards with innocent blood, has cast a shade of horror
over the whole transaction that time has been unable to
efface. Paris is never so reduced in a crisis, whether the
cause be just or unjust, that she is bereft of hands to erect
and defend barricades in her streets. In the Faubourg St.
Antoine an incipient rising on the 2d was suppressed
immediately by the troops. The volcanic district from the
Hôtel de Ville northward to the boulevards also showed signs
of uneasiness, and throughout the morning of the 3d the
military were busy pulling down partially completed barricades
and dispersing small bodies of insurgents. There seems to be
little question that the army was embittered against the
populace. If this were so, the proclamation circulated by the
president through the ranks on the 2d was not calculated to
appease it. He styled the soldiers as the 'flower of the
nation.' He pointed out to them that his interests and theirs
were the same, and that they had suffered together in the past
from the course of the Assembly. He reminded them of the years
1830 and 1848, when the army had fought the people in the
streets of Paris, and concluded by an allusion to the military
grandeur of the Bonapartes. During the afternoon of the 3d and
morning of the 4th the troops remained inactive; pending
orders from the minister of war, and in this interval several
strong barricades were erected in the restless quarters. On
the afternoon of the 4th the boulevards, from the Madeleine to
the Rue du Sentier, were occupied by a great body of troops
awaiting orders to move east through the Boulevard Bonne
Nouvelle upon the barricaded district. The soldiers stood at
ease, and the officers lounged about, smoking their cigars.
The sidewalks, windows, and balconies were crowded with men,
women, and children, thoughtless onlookers of the great
military display. Suddenly a single shot was heard. It was
fired from a window near the Rue du Sentier. The troops at the
head of the column faced sharply to the south, and commenced a
deliberate fusillade upon the crowded walks and balconies. The
battalions farther west caught the murderous contagion, until
the line of fire extended into the Boulevard des Italiens. In
a few moments the beautiful boulevards were converted into a
bloody pandemonium. The sidewalks were strewn with corpses and
stained with blood. The air was rent with shrieks and groans
and the breaking of glass, while the steady, incessant
rattling of the musketry was intensified by an occasional
cannon-shot, that brought down with a crash the masonry from
some fine façade.
{1378}
This continued for nearly twenty minutes, when a lack of
people to kill seems to have restrained the mad volleys of the
troops. If any attempt was made by officers to check their
men, it was wholly unavailing, and in some cases miserable
fugitives were followed into buildings and massacred. Later in
the day the barricades were attacked, and their defenders
easily overcome. By night-fall insurgent Paris was thoroughly
cowed. These allegations, though conflicting with sworn
statements of Republicans and Imperialists, can hardly be
refuted. The efforts of the Napoleonic faction to portray the
thoughtless crowd of the boulevards as desperate and
bloody-minded rebels have never been successful, while the
opposition so brilliantly represented by the author of
'Histoire d'un Crime' have been too fierce and immoderate in
their accusations to win public credence. The questions as to
who fired the first shot, and whether it was fired as a signal
for, or a menace against the military, are points on which
Frenchmen of different political parties still debate. It is
charitable to accept M. Hugo's insinuation that the soldiery
were drunk with the president's wine, even though the fact
implies a low state of discipline in the service. To what
extent was the president responsible for the boulevard horror?
M. Victor Hugo and M. de Maupas do not agree upon this point,
and it seems useless to discuss it. Certain facts are
indisputable. We know the army bore small love toward the
Parisians, and we know it was in the streets by order of the
president. We know that the latter was in bad company, and
playing a dangerous game. We may discard M. Victor Hugo's
statement as to the orders issued by the president from the
Elysée on the fatal day, but we cannot disguise the fact that
the boulevard horror subdued Paris, and crowned his cause with
success. In other words, Louis Napoleon was the gainer by the
slaughter of unoffending men, women, and children, and in
after-years, when referring to the 4th of December, he found
it for his interest to distort facts, and make figures lie.
... Louis Napoleon had expressly stated in the proclamation
that astonished Paris on the 2d that he made the people judge
between him and the Assembly. The citizens of France were
called upon to vote on the 20th and 21st of December 'Yes' or
'No' to the question as to whether the president should be
sustained in the measures he had taken, should be empowered to
draw up a new constitution, and should retain the presidential
chair for a period of ten years."
_H. Murdock,
The Reconstruction of Europe,
chapter 2._
ALSO IN:
_V. Hugo,
History of a Crime._
_E. Tênot,
Paris in December, 1851,
chapters 5-6._
_M. de Maupas,
Story of the Coup d'État,
chapters 18-24 (volume 2)._
_Count H. de Viel Castel,
Memoirs,
volume 1, chapter 4._
FRANCE: A. D. 1851-1852.
Transportation and exile of republicans.
The dictator's constitution for France.
Rapid progress of despotism.
The Second Empire ordained.
Elevation of Napoleon III. to the throne.
"The struggle was over: terror of the victors followed.
Thirty-two departments were in a state of siege. More than
100,000 citizens were languishing in prison. Trial followed
trial in rapid succession, the cases being classed under three
heads: 1st, persons found armed, or against whom serious
charges existed; 2d, persons charged with minor offences; 3d,
dangerous persons. The first class was judged at once by a
council of war, the second sent to various tribunals, the
third transported without trial. Many prisoners were not even
questioned. Numbers were set free; but multitudes were still
held. Under these conditions the date of the plebiscite,
December 20 and 21, approached. Notices were posted to the
effect that 'any person seeking to disturb the polls or to
question the result of the ballot would be tried by a council
of war.' All liberty of choice was taken from the electors,
many of whom were arrested on suspicion of exciting others to
vote against the president of the republic. When the lists
were published it was found that the 'ayes' had carried the
day, although many did not vote at all. Indubitably the
figures were notably swelled by violence and fraud. ...
December 31, ex-Minister Baroche presented the result of the
ballots to the prince-president,--a strange title now given to
Louis Napoleon, for the time being, in lieu of another. ...
Next day, January 1, 1852, Archbishop Sibour celebrated a Te
Deum in Notre Dame, the prince-president sitting under a
canopy. ... While the man of December 2 lodged in the palace
of kings, the chief representatives of the republic were cast
into exile. The executors of the plot treated the captive
representatives very differently according as they were
conservative or republican. When the prisoners were told that
a distinction was to be made among them, they honorably
refused to give their names, but they were betrayed by an
usher of the Assembly. The republicans were then sent to
Mazas, and treated like common thieves, M. Thiers alone being
allowed a bed instead of the ordinary hammock. The other party
were soon set free, with but few exceptions, and on the 8th of
January the generals imprisoned at Ham, with their companion,
Questor Baze, were sent to Belgium. Next day a series of
proscriptions came out. All persons 'convicted of taking part
in the recent insurrections' were to be transported, some to
Guiana, some to Algiers. A second decree expelled from France,
Algiers, and the French colonies, 'as a measure of public
safety,' sixty representatives of the Left, including Victor
Hugo and certain others, for whom it was reserved to aid in
the foundation of a third republic. A third decree commanded
the temporary absence from France and Algiers of eighteen
other representatives, including the generals, with Thiers, De
Rémusat, and several members of the Left, among them Edgar
Quinet and Emile de Girardin. ... The next step was to
establish the famous 'mixed commissions' in every province.
These commissions were to try the numerous prisoners still
held captive. ... The mixed commissions of 1852, as the
historian of the coup d'état (M. Eugène Ténot) declares,
'decided, without legal proceedings, without hearing of
witnesses, without public trial, the fate of thousands and
thousands of republicans.' They have left the indelible memory
of one of the most monstrous events known in history. An act
equally extraordinary in another way was the promulgation of
the new constitution framed by the dictator alone (January 14,
1852). ... The constitution of 1852 began by a 'recognition,
confirmation, and guarantee of the great principles proclaimed
in 1789, which are the foundation of the public rights and
laws of France.'
{1379}
But it did not say one word about the freedom of the press,
nor about freedom of clubs and association. ... 'The
government of the French republic is intrusted to Prince Louis
Napoleon Bonaparte for the term of ten years.' In the preface
Louis Napoleon threw aside the fiction of irresponsibility
'which deceives public sentiment'; the constitution therefore
declares the leader of the state responsible to the French
people, but omits to say how this responsibility may be
realized; the French people have no resource save revolution.
... The legislative body was to consist of 262 members (one
for each 3,500 electors), chosen for five years by universal
suffrage. This body would vote upon the laws and taxes. Louis
Napoleon, having profited so largely by the repeal of the law
of May 31, could scarcely refuse to retain direct universal
suffrage, but he essentially altered its character by various
modifications. He also so reduced the importance of the only
great body still elective, that he had little or nothing to
fear from it. Another assembly, the Senate, was to be composed
of eighty members, which number might be increased to 150. The
senators were irremovable, and were to be chosen by the
president of the republic, with the exception of cardinals,
marshals, and admirals, who were senators by right. The
president might give each senator an income of 80,000 francs.
The Senate was the guardian of the constitution and of 'the
public liberty.' ... The executive power chose all mayors, and
was at liberty to select them outside the town council. In
fact, the constitution of 1852 surpassed the constitution of
the year VIII. as a piece of monarchic reaction. It entailed
no consulate, but an empire,--dictatorship and total
confiscation of public liberty. ... Despotism spread daily in
every direction. On the 17th of February the liberty of the
press was notably reduced, and severe penalties were affixed
to any infraction. In fact, the press was made dependent on
the good-will of the president. Education was next attacked, a
decree of March 9, 1852, stripping the professors of the
University of all the pledges and principles granted by the
First Empire. ... The new power, in 1852, labored to turn all
the forces of the country to material interests, while it
stifled all moral interests. It suppressed education and the
press, and constantly stimulated the financial and industrial
movement. ... Numberless railroad companies now sprang to
life, and roads were rapidly built upon a grand scale. The
government adopted the system of grants on a long term of
years,--say ninety-nine,--plus the guarantee of a small rate
of interest. In everything the cry was for instant success, at
any cost. Great financial operations followed on the heels of
the first grants to railroad companies. ... This year's
budget, like the constitution, was the work of a single man.
The dictator settled it by a decree; then, having ordered the
elections for his Chamber of Deputies, just before his
constitution went into operation, he raised the universal
state of siege (March 28). This was only a feint, for his
government was a permanent state of siege. ... The official
candidates presented, or rather imposed, were generally
elected; the republicans failed to vote throughout a great
part of the country. ... March 29, the prince-president
proceeded to install the great state bodies at the Tuileries.
It was thought that he would hint in his speech that he
expected the title of Emperor, but he left that point vague,
and still talked of preserving the republic. ... During the
session a rumor was current that Louis Napoleon was to be
proclaimed emperor on the 10th of May, after the distribution
of eagles to the army; but this was not carried out. The
dictator had no desire to be made emperor in this fashion. He
meant to do it more artfully, and to make it seem that the
nation forced the accomplishment of his wishes upon him. He
therefore undertook a fresh journey through the provinces. ...
The watchword was everywhere given by the authorities and
influential persons, whose example was imitated by the crowd,
irreconcilable opponents keeping silent. ... He returned to
Paris, October 16, and was received in state at the Orleans
station. The official bodies greeted him with shouts of 'Long
live the Emperor!' ... Next day, the following paragraph
appeared in the 'Moniteur': 'The tremendous desire for the
restoration of the empire manifested throughout France, makes
it incumbent upon the president to consult the Senate upon the
subject.' The Senate and Legislature were convened November 4;
the latter was to verify the votes, should the Senate decide
that the people must be consulted in regard to a change in the
form of government, which no one doubted would be the case.
... The Senate ... passed a decree for the submission of the
restoration of the hereditary empire for popular acceptance
(November 7); the senators then went in a body to St. Cloud to
inform the prince-president of this decision. ... The people
were then called upon to vote for the plebiscite decreed by
the Senate (November 20 and 21). Republican and legitimist
protests were circulated in despite of the police, the
government publishing them in the official organ, the
'Moniteur,' as if in defiance, thinking that the excessive
violence of the republican proscripts of London and Guernsey
would alarm the peace-loving public. The result of the vote
was even greater than that of December 20, 1851; the
authenticity of the figures may indeed be doubted, but there
is not a doubt that there was really a large majority in favor
of the plebiscite. France abandoned the struggle! On the
evening of December 1, the three great state bodies, the two
Chambers and the State Council, went to St. Cloud, and the
president of the Legislature presented the result of the
ballot to the new emperor, who sat enthroned, between his
uncle Jerome and his cousin Napoleon."
_H. Martin,
Popular History of France,
1789-1878, volume 3, chapter 15._
ALSO IN:
_H. C. Lockwood,
Constitutional History of France,
chapter 6, and appendix 9._
FRANCE: A. D. 1853-1856.
The Crimean war.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1853-1854, to 1854-1856.
FRANCE: A. D. 1857-1860.
Allied operations with England in China.
See CHINA: A. D. 1856-1860.
FRANCE: A. D. 1858.
The Orsini attempt to assassinate Napoleon III.
Complaints against England.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1858-1859.
FRANCE: A. D. 1859.
Alliance with Sardinia and war with Austria.
Victories of Magenta and Solferino.
Liberation of Lombardy.
Peace of Villafranca.
Acquisition of Savoy and Nice.
See ITALY: A. D. 1856-1859, and 1859-1861.
{1380}
FRANCE: A. D. 1860.
The Chevalier-Cobden commercial treaty with England.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION (FRANCE): A. D. 1858-1860.
FRANCE: A. D.1860-1870.
Modifications of the imperial constitution.