we have the brilliant essay written by Macaulay, and an excellent little volume by Longman, "Frederick the Great and the Seven Years War" published by Charles Scribner's Sons in the "Epochs of Modern History."

CHAPTER IX.

FRENCH REVOLUTION, 1789-1815.

INTERPRETATION OF THE PERIOD.

It was pointed out last month that at the close of the eighteenth century, Europe passed through a period of enlightenment, during which the old institutions were submitted to criticism and the need of re

form was made apparent. And the reform period came. In France, Prussia, Austria, Russia, the states of Italy, and Spain, public opinion made itself felt and the absolute monarchy became an enlightened despotism. The kings and princes attempted through their own efforts to realize the plans of the reformers. But the plans were not successful and the reform period was followed by revolution.

This relation between reform and revolution is not found alone in the eighteenth century. It is a relation that is to be met with repeatedly in European history. The fall of the Roman Republic was preceded by an era of attempted reforms. The Protestant Revolution, that separated all northern Europe from the Catholic church, followed a period characterized by reform councils, reform preachers, and reform writings. It is rather the exception than the rule that the transition from one social condition to another is not accompanied by revolutionary movements. The French Revolution formed no exception to the general rule.

Although the great movement has been called the French Revolution, because of its origin, yet it was not confined to France. All Europe was in need of reform, and it is by a knowledge of this fact that we are

able to understand the success and the spread of the revolution. The special conditions in France made. the revolution possible there when it was not yet possible in other parts of Europe, and the fact that it originated in France is the explanation of many of its characteristics.

The Ancient Regime.

The revolution broke out in France, not because the French people were more oppressed and more in need of reform, but for just the opposite reason. Nowhere on the continent were the people more advanced and more ready for the change. It was because great equality existed, because the educated, wealthy man of the middle class considered himself in every respect the equal of the nobleman, that the artificial barriers separating the different classes were looked upon as doing an injustice to those who were shut out from the privileged ranks. There was greater liberty in France than elsewhere and public opinion was stronger. For, although less than a hundred years separated the revolution from the reign of Louis XIV., public opinion had become so powerful that neither kings nor ministers could disregard it.

And this great equality and liberty existed in a country strewn with the remains of the feudal system and living under the so called "ancient regime." Politically, socially, and economically, the organization of France no longer corresponded to the needs of its people. And although the oppression was not so great as in other parts of Europe, yet the enlightenment of the French people made it seem many times greater than it really was. They bore more impatiently an injury to their feelings than the serfs in other parts of Europe bore the real hardships of life.

The fact of this disagreement between the needs of society in France and the social form was not a secret to the intelligent classes. For three quarters of a

century, under a government censorship, writers had appeared who had boldly criticised every part of the system. It is true that the earlier writers, like Montesquieu and Voltaire, looked to the monarch to reform these abuses and to readjust the social system, but their successors, the most noticeable among whom was Rousseau, attacked the monarchy itself, proclaimed the social contract, and announced that the right to rule was not a divine right but came from the people to whom the ruler was responsible.

The real needs of the people led to discussion, and the discussion to a growing impatience and an increased desire for reform. As this discussion continued, public opinion grew more powerful, although the increase of this silent influence, this intangible force, was not fully appreciated.

The Cause of the Revolution.

In the latter part of the eighteenth century, the situation in France was such that the revolution was really pending and simply needed a shock in order to precipitate it. The shock came in the form of a great financial distress, coupled with famine and hunger, due to loss of crops, severe storms, and uncommonly severe winters. The financial distress that was the immediate cause of the revolution dated back, at least to the time of Louis XIV. He left the state so burdened with debt, with such insufficient resources, and with such detestable methods of administration that the only escape that men of that time could see was by the way of bankruptcy. And more than one partial bankruptcy was indulged in by the state between the end of the reign of Louis XIV., and the outbreak of the revolution. As if the burden of debt were not great enough to bear, the government, urged on by public opinion, assisted the American revolutionists in their war against Great Britain and added another immense debt to the already existing burdens.

This war was undertaken in the early years of the reign of Louis XVI. and under a reform minister, Necker. When it ended, the reform period in France had closed and an aristocratic reaction had set in. The minister of this reaction was the notorious Calonne. But Calonne soon discovered that a government could not be run forever on borrowed money. The day of settlement finally came. The expenses of the American war had been met largely through loans and not through increased taxation. The great difficulty under which the financial administration in France struggled was due to the fact that all property was not assessed, while the portion that was assessed was excessively taxed. Calonne's experience in office had been long enough and he was shrewd enough to see that the salvation of the French monarchy could be found only in the abolition of abuses, and especially in the abolition of the privilege enjoyed by the nobles of freedom from taxation.

It is true that this freedom from taxation was not absolute, but only a small per cent of the taxes collected in France came from the pockets of the clergy and nobility. Calonne formulated a reform plan, and secured its acceptance by the king. He proposed to subject all classes to taxation in proportion to their wealth. Under the ancient regime, the practice had grown up of presenting to parliament for registration all financial edicts issued by the king. If the king wished to levy a tax or to obtain a loan, it was in accordance with the regular practice for him to present these edicts for registration. The Parliament had nothing in common with the British body bearing the same name. It was really a high court of justice. Its members held their seats by purchase and were irremovable. For a long time the kings had allowed this body to remonstrate whenever a new edict appeared illegal or anything in it conflicted with the existing laws. If the king did not please to take notice