« ПредишнаНапред »
itself next to a miracle. A majority now existed, most compact and resolute, on all political questions.
The army had been tried at Lyons, and had proved itself faithful. Paris was devoted to the ideas of order and Conservatism. The expedition to Ancona was the only extraordinary whim of Casimir Perier, but he defended it on the ground thatit was necessary to make- such a concession to France, in order to show to her that, though the Government was resolved on maintaining peace, it was also determined not to submit to any humiliation.
The expedition to Ancona was still, we think, though disposed to make every allowance to M. Perier, one of the faults of that honest and great man's Administration. It was not sufficiently large to oppose an Austrian army in Italy. It was not sufficiently powerful to keep in order the agitating spirits in the Papal and other States. It would have been as nothing, and less than nothing, in the event of a war between Austria and the Italian populations, and was calculated to excite false hopes on one side, and distrust on the other. But we know that, even to the hour of his death, he looked upon this as a master-stroke of policy, as he did the expedition of the French to the Belgian territory. M. Perier laboured, however, under the error, which is very common to public men who have been only a short time at the head of affairs, viz. that of supposing that all the secrets of the French Cabinet were not known to the other Cabinets of Europe. Yet the reverse of this was the case. Europe know that France had not an army to defend even her own territory, much less to carry war into an enemy's country; and therefore, when the Austrian, Prussian, and Russian Governments saw this paltry expedition to Ancona, knowing, as they did know, that France was unable to sustain a serious war in Italy—they perceived in it the proof, that even Casimir Perier, with all the firmness of his character, and witli all the resolution of his system, was obliged to make this concession to the war aud revolutionary parties in France. The subsequent continuance of those forces at Ancona has been more than absurd—it has been a fault; and it is high time that Louis Philippe should himself sec the propriety of withdrawing soldiers from the Italian shores.
The spring of 1832, unhappily, however, brought along with it the cholera morbus to Paris. At first Casimir Perier was not much alarmed by its invasion; but subsequently the scenes which took place in the capital filled his heart with anguish, and his eyes with tears. On the 1st April in that year ho visited, with the young Duke of Orleans, the splendid Hospital of the Hotel Dieu, and visited with him the first victims of that terrible disease. The following days reports were put in circulation that the fountains of Paris had been poisoned by Government agents, and then by the priests, and the most horrible assassinations were perpetrated in broad day, under the pretext of avenging the " people" of their poisoners. Never was a fouler calumny invented. It was the progress of the pest which 'carried off its victims, sweeping all before it.
On the 6th April, 1832, Casimir Perier was seized with an attack of the cholera. The malady was terrible. He suffered most excruciatingly from the cramp. The best medical talent of France was procured for him. No effort, and no experiment, was wanting or remained untried. Every plausible remedy was sought for with avidity. Those who were most opposed to his political system were as anxious as his friends to preserve his energetic and valuable life. But, though for a moment the disease appeared to cede, it returned with renewed power, and his exhausted and sunken frame at last became the prey of death, and ho expired on the 16tli May, 1832, in the fifty-fifth year of his age.
During the period that M. Casimir Perier was Minister, his speeches at the Chamber were very numerous, especially from September 1831 to March 1832. The subjects discussed were of the most exciting character, and comprised all the leading features of the Revolution of 1830. The policy of the Government—the conduct of the Legitimists—the questions of Austria and the Roman States— the Polish Revolution—the destruction of the hereditary peerage—the capture of Warsaw—the conduct of the foreign refugees—the settlement of the civil list—the troubles in La
Vendee—the National Guards' law
the troubles of Lyons—the frauds and deficits of Resuor—the floating debt
the secret service money—the foreign policy of France—the expenses of foreign embassies—the troubles of Grenoble, and the financial operations of the Government, were amongst some of the topies of the most interesting and important debates of modern French history.
The last time he ever spoke in the Chamber of Deputies was in the sitting of the 29th March, when he presented from Government bills providing for the secret expenses of the Government, for the caisse de vituana, and for the prorogation of the suspension of the municipal organization law. We cannot, however, do better than select as a specimen of his style and manner of speaking, some extracts from his celebrated address of 21st September, 1831, in reply to the attacks made by the Opposition on the Conservative policy of the Casimir Perier Administration.
The moment seized upon by the Opposition was when Warsaw had fallen, when Paris was in a state of unparalleled agitation, and when the Chamber was surrounded by mobs and tumults. The following are some specimens of his impassioned and manly eloquence :—
** A la nouvelle des événomens de Varsovie, la France a eprouvé un sentiment douloureux; mais tous les boas citoyens, en s'associant à la situation de la Pologne, n'ont pas oublié ce qn'ils doivent à leur propre pays, et assurement ils ne veulent pas réparer les malheurs de la Pologne par les malheurs de la France.
"On vous a parlé de vos deliberations, messieurs; vous délibérez ici sous la protection des lois, et le gouvernement, qui est charge de les défendre, a pour appui l'armée, la Garde Nationale, qui en criant Vive la Pologne! crie avant tout: Vivo le Roi! Vive la France! oui! Vive le Roi! Vivo la France! c'est là le cri de tous les Français; les cris factieux que nous avons entendus, nous saurons les réprimer. Ceux qui crient en ce moment, Vive la Pologne! en ajoutant, A bas le Gouvernement du Roi! A bas l'autorité du Roi! ne sont ni les amis de la Pologne, ni les amis de leurs pays. Délibérez tranquillement, messieurs; tant que le pouvoir nous sera confié, nous saurons le défendre et le faire respecter par les factieux."
M. Mnuguin having complained
voL. XUV. SO. CCLXXIV.
that the Opposition had been taken by surprise, and the Chamber cheated out of a vote of confidence, M. Casimir Perier demanded that a new vote should be given and a new decision come to. He said—
"Et pour que l'Opposition ne puisse pas un jour remettre en discussion ce second vote, comme le premier, sous prétexte de surprise, qn'il soit bien entendu, messieurs, comme nous avons dû croire qn'il l'avait été dans la discussion de l'addressp, que ce système, c'est le maintien de la paix, sous toutes les réserves de sûreté et de dignité nationales, dont nous sommes aussi jaloux que qui que ce soit; c'est f antipathie la plus diclarie pour toute espèce de propagande; c'est une médiation de bienveillance en faveur de toutes les infortunes, avec tous les ménagemens que dicte la loyauté pour les droits et pour les traités.
"C'est une attention scrupuleuse à ne considérer les questions exterieures que sous le point de vue des veritables intérêts de notre pays. Telle est, messieurs, dans tout pays libre et éclairé, la règle des hommes d'etat vraiment patriotes. Telle est celle que nous tracent à la fois nos intérêts matériels, l'honneur national, la paix interieure, et la securité de notre révolution.
"Sous tous ces rapports, également sacrés, nous avons donc la conscience, messieurs, d'avoir fait ce que voul.iit la France, non pas ce que veulent pour elle ceux qui la font écrire et parler, mais ce que ses interêts, étudiées consciencieusement, réclament de l'Administration qui les a compris.
"Nous persistons donc avec une conviction plus profonde que jamais, dans un système de paix que nous nous faisons gloire d'avoir défendu, d'avoir maintenu jusqn'à ce jour, et -dont la rupture jetterait une immense responsabilité, aux yeux de la France, do l'Europe, de l'humanité toute entière, sur quiconque s'en serait rendu comptable.V
At the death of Casimir Perier, he left two sons; one is Secretary to the French Embassy at the Hague, and the other undertook the direction of the commercial house founded by his father. His wife, whose maiden name was Pauline Loyer, and for whom he ever felt the most lively and tender affection, has no other consolation than that derived from the recollection
of the past, from the memory of having been the devoted companion of a man whose name is held in universal respect, and from the hopes of a pious and serene mind.
Casimir Perier was buried at thecemetery of the Pare la I'liaise, not far from his brother Scipion, and from his friend Camillo Jordan. The funeral rites were performed by all the capital —and the addresses over his tomb were delivered by ltoyer Collard, Bignon, Dupin, Berenger, Davilliers, Francois Dclessert, and the Duke do Choisicul.
Casimir Perier was very tall and well made. His face was manly and regular—and there was a penetration and a finesse in his features which often contrasted well with his imposing energy. His air, his manner, were prompt, and even imperious—and he would say sometimes, smiling, when speaking of the efforts made by his political opponents to compel him to yield,—" Comment veut-on queje cede aver, la taille quej'ai i"
M. Herseul has painted an admirable likeness—and M. David has sculptured a perfect medallion, of this celebrated man. In the last years of his life his features were changed by corporal sufferings, and by intense mental and moral application. His notions were nttte and his impressions lively. His reason was always contending with his passions, and perpetually subduing them. He presented the spectacle of a man whose powerful soul in vain attempted to convey to others the vivacity and force of tlie impression under which he himself laboured.' Ho often said of himself,—" // me manque bien des chosen, mats j'ui du caur, du tact, el die bonheur."
His mind was, however, disposed to hesitate. On vast subjects he was quick to poreeive, and resolute to act— but on the lesser and daily affairs of business or of the state he was prone to doubt and to adjourn. Ho was by no means a pleasant companion, an agreeable bon-vivant, or adapted to the politenesses and courtesies of life. He was rigorous towards others—and severe towards himself,—but though he loved few, he hated none. He had a passion for conquest—but not to injure, or to destroy. He had, how
ever, some tenderly attached friends who speak of him with enthusiasm, and for whom he felt the most passionate friendship. In the world, generally, he was reserved, cold, and uneasy; in his family he was gay in his conversation andlively in his sallies.
Casimir Perier is not forgotten. Six years have elapsed since ho descended to the common grave of the wise and the ignorant, the virtuous and the wicked. But he is not forgotten. The rapid stream of time ever flowing, and ever bearing away upon its bosom the names and the memories of those who have lived and who have acted, has not been able to sweep away the memory of Casimir Perier. His name will rest for ever engraved on the annals of the French monarchy.
The political system of Casimir Perier did not expire with bun.— When the news of his death was conveyed to Louis Philippe, he exclaimed, in the bitterness of his sorrow—" My cup is full—it only required this new disaster to complete its bitterness." But the policy of the departed statesman was persevered in—and France was saved as well as Europe from an universal war. It may be said of him, as it was said of Mr Pitt by Lord Castlereagh—" His policy trinmphed over his tomb." He died too soon for himself, his family, his friends, and his country—but, at least, if he had survived, he would not have had to deplore the trinmph of propagandists, or the victories of sanguinary factions. His policy grappled with die hydra whilst living, and crushed it after his death.
The glory of Casimir Perier is pure, as it is incapable of attack. He appeared as a meteor in those cloudy, dark, aud dreary days when all was mysterious, uncertain, and sad. But his work shall be durable, fur it was not the artificial creation of a party, but the reply to the demands of justice, civilisation, and true liberty. On his tomh, too early closed, as too soon opened, the drapeau of " Order 1" was raised;—and the laws have triumphed over faction and folly. This was the best homage which could be paid to his memory—and the lesson we should be taught from his life.
ON THE FOOD OP THE HERRING AND SALMON.
By John Stark, F.R.S., Edin.
[The following paper was drawn up in answer to " Observations on the Natural History of the Salmon, Herring, and Venduce, by Rosert Knox, F.R.S., Edin.," printed in Vol. XII. of the Edinburgh Transactions. It was read at the Meeting of 4th December, 1837; and the specimens referred to are in the Society's Museum.]
I.—Food O» The Hebkihg (Clupea harengus, Lin.)
The attention of naturalists in this country has of late been directed, by the Parliamentary enquiries into the state of the salmon fisheries, to the natnral history of the salmon. The importance of this branch of the fisheries to Scotland renders every fact connected with the habits, food, and reproduction of the salmon of great consequence, as tending to regulate the time and manner of its capture, as well as to provide for the increase, or, at least, to prevent the material diminution of the species. Though much valuable information was elicited before the Committee of Parliament upon the Salmon Fisheries of Great Britain—information which could not have been easily procured in any other manner—yet still, in a few particulars of the salmon's history, something remains to be done to make that history complete. The species of the family Salmonida, for instance, have not yet been so distinctly marked out as to be distinguished at their various stages of growth; and a good deal of mystery hangs over the history of the salmon, from the time the fry leave the spawning-bed and descend to the sea, until their return again, in their upward migration, as grilses and full-grown salmon. Much of that mystery, I have little fear, will soon be cleared up, from the investigations of our learned and active associates, Sir William Jardine and Dr Parnell, who, it is understood, have been directing their attention to this important subject. And experiments arc now in progress by another enquirer, Mr John Shaw, the results of which will be most interesting to science.
In the year 1803, the Highland Society of Scotland, with the view of promoting the fisheries of this part of the country, published, in the second volume of their Transactions, several papers on the Natural, Commercial,
and Economical History of the Herring, and on the Natural History of the Salmon. The practical details contained in these papers—the history of the salmon and herring fisheries— and the suggestions for their improvement, are, I have no doubt, worthy of every praise. But the authors of these papers do not seem to have been much acquainted with the writings of scientific men in other countries, who have recorded observations on the subject of which they profess to treat. On the food of tinherring and salmon, particularly, which must powerfully influence their habits, nothing positive is said, and no reference is made to any writer who had ever treated of this matter before. And hence a later author, without looking further, seems to have taken the statements in this volume, and founded on them, as a summary of all that could bo said on the subject of the food of the herring and salmon.
In these circumstances, I have thought it might be of some service to science, as well as a matter of justice to the memory of former observers, to give a short statement of tho facts regarding the food of the herring and salmon, which have been recorded by the best writers on natural history, and which seem to have been completely lost sight of by our Scottish naturalists. I have been the more induced to engage in this investigation, and to bring out the results here, that, a few years ago, a long and elaborate paper on the subject was read before this Society, and subsequently printed in its Transactions. This paper, with greater pretensions, is, I must be allowed to say, by no means exempt from the remark I have ventured to make upon the papers in the Transactions of the Highland Society. I allude to the paper of Dr Knox, entitled" Observations on the Natural History of the Salmon, Herring, and Vendacc," as printed in the 12th volume of the Transactions of the Royal Society. From the statements in that paper, though enunciated with the confidence of demonstration, I, in common with most naturalists, wholly dissent, and equally disclaim the manner and the terms in which the author has been pleased to speak of the works and opinions of others.
Statements apparently so inconsistent with all that had been previously recorded, I felt assured would not pass without comment in the Society which had sanctioned their publication; and I long flattered myself that some member of the Society better qualified for the task would have undertaken the duty of pointing out what had been previously recorded on the subjects of which the author of this paper claims the discovery. It is because no one has so come forward that I now appear before you; and it is because some weight may be attached to uncontradicted assertions, by those who have never investigated the subject beyond this paper, that the correction of these statements becomes absolutely necessary. In pointing out what has been recorded by previous writers on the subject, and comparing their statements with the assertions of Dr Knox, I desire it to be distinctly understood, that I am far from wishing to detract from that individual's merit as a cultivator, a successful cultivator it may be, of his own peculiar branch of science. It is as a naturalist, writing on a branch of natural history, that his claims come into competition with other naturalists; and the form into which I have thrown my observations seemed to me the best mode of eliciting the truth, and doing justice to all parties.
In the investigations into which I have been led as to the food of the herring and salmon, I may add, that I have verified the recorded observations of naturalists by occasional inspection of the stomachs of both fishes'. The preparations on the table afford the strongest corroboration of the statements of writers on natural history as to the nature of the salmon's food. They were prepared by my friend Dr Parnell from fishes in full season from tho friths of Forth and Tay. They are by no means intended to exhibit all the various kinds of
food that may be found in the salmon's stomach at different stations and at different periods of the year. It was considered to be an unnecessary waste of time to prepare the number of specimens that would thus have been required. The stomachs of the herrings were procured from fishes in full season, purchased in the Edinburgh market, and exhibit most of the kinds of aliment which have been referred to by naturalists as the food of the herring.
Trusting to your indulgence, then, I proceed, in the first place, to call your attention to what is stated by Dr Knox regarding the food and sex of the Vendace of Lochmaben; secondly, to the food of the Herring; and, thirdly, to the food of the Salmon, and the developement and growth of its ova.
But, before entering on the subject in detail, it may be as well to state the claims of Dr Knox, as the sole discoverer of the food of the three fishes referred to; and this, to avoid all misapprehension, I shall do in his own words. The Doctor's statements naturally arrange themselves into,
1. The jiositive.—" The nature of the food of the herring, coregonus, and salmon, was not to be stumbled upon by accident. I feel happy in having to offer it as a direct result of patient scientific enquiry."—P. 463.
2. The comparative "Modern
systematic writers on natural history, so far as I have been able to observe, maintain a profound silence as to the food of the herring." " In such works, all mention of the food is either omitted, or, what is much worse, mistaken, and consequently their habits." P. 513.
"In 1833, Professor Rennie of the King's College, London, declares the food of the herring to be altogether unknown."—P. 513.
"I am aware that there are many, whose regard for accuracy in scientific statements bei ng extremely coarse and loose, will not only assert they had examined the stomach of the hering, but had also seen its food."— P. 515.
"Wo have already seen a person assert, in open defiance of the statements of all practical fishermen, and of every writer on natural history, from I.inne downwards, to Professor llennie, that the food of the herring was known to every body! I The ob