The Evening Star MONDAY, JULY 3, 1871.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2613, 3 July 1871, Page 2

The Evening Star MONDAY, JULY 3, 1871.

We forbore commenting upon the news from Europe on receipt of the telegrams via San Francisco, partly because it was bare, and partly because, with the exception of the Versailles army having entered Paris, there was little material for thought. We have endeavored, by scanning the papers to hand by the Nevada, to ascertain the true cause of dissension between the Communists and the Versailles party, for the ca-ixs

belli is not very clear. M. TniJiiw assumes to bo the friend ot order, and we trust it will prove so, now that the forces under his command have obtained possession of the capital; but it is by no means certain that even the Versaillists have agreed amongst themselves what form of government to adopt. There seemed at one time a probability that a restoration of monarchy would be attempted ; for one of the Bourbon family, of the Louis Phillippe branch, was resident there for some time. One great fault that M. Thiers committed was not declaring the idea of the Versaillists on this point. The Times blames him for this, and points out that he ought at least to have been explicit as to the proposed form of government; for notwithstanding the success of the army at his disposal, there may be another division when the true work of reorganisation begins. It appears that most of the members of the Versailles Government are country gentlemen, and the main motive to resistance on the part of the Parisians was that they objected to be ruled by the provinces. We are not, however, to suppose that this was the sole incentive. It might not be very pleasant to a Parisian to have to submit where he had been accustomed to imagine that he ruled, but it is hardly conceivable that unwillingness to admit the Provinces to their full share of political power would have led to a more desperate resistance than was made against the Prussians. The feeling in Paris against M. Thiers’s government arose from mixed motives, and assuming there is anything like unity of purpose amongst the conquerors, their victory may be a saving of many valuable lives ; for had the Communists succeeded, fresh complications must have led to fresh disasters. The San Francisco News of the World pronounces the quarrel to be a class question, and treats the whole affair as if it was an attempt on the part of those who had no wealth, by force of arms to compel the rich to share with them In an article on the subject, an analysis is made of the elements of which the Commune was made up. It is described as one of the most remarkable developments of our time, “It mastered “ Paris, defied the rest of France, got “ words of encouragement from all the “ large cities of Western Europe, and “ frightened Society everywhere, and “ yet people are asking what the Com- “ raune is. It has published no plat- » form, and authorised no statement of “ its precise purposes. It is a com- “ bination of elements, most of which “ prefer anarchy to the rule of the “ majority of the Assembly elected by “ the universal suffrage of the French “ people.” This is in all probability a rather too sweeping condemnation. That many that were discontented, and many that held peculiar political theories, and many that were in debt and did not wish to pay, united to resist the dicta of the Assembly at Versailles, there seems little reason to doubt. Perhaps the following extract from the Times of April 18th will aid our readers in forming some idea of the difficulty of the question :

The causes of the present state of Paris are various, and-some of them of long duration. Much might be said on this subject; but we may content ourselves with observing that of the immediate causes one was political—the fear of the imposition of Monarchy by the rural vote of the Assembly ; the other social and financial—the fear of being called on to meet the liabilities which had accrued during the war and the siege. The notion of an independent Commune, which should have the right to nullify within its own hounds the ignorant decisions

of the ruraux, and by connection with sister rotnmunes maintain Republican institutions in France, was not exactly new, for even under the late Imperial rule it had been put forward as the only possible counterpoise to the power of the priests and peasants who supported the Empire. But it was the character of the Versailles Assembly and its suspicious reticence that gave a sudden expansion to this idea of one or two obscure Democrats, and made it the impulse of a revolution. The Assembly was known to be Monarchial, and though a Prince said to be one of the pretenders to the throne was actually at Versailles, it declined to declare its adhesion to the Republic. Its halting position has satisfied no one, and whatever opinions men in France may hold with regard to the political institutions of their country, they unite in rebuking the cowardice or insincerity of the Assembly. We believe that political agitation in the large towns, and the coneec|ucnt necessity of keeping on foot an immense military force, will continue until the Assembly has honestly proclaimed the form of Government with which it proposes to endow France, or until it yields its place to another Assembly summoned for this purpore. , The financial state of Paris, which is we/ known to have powerfully affected the new Revolution, is, wo admit, more difficult to settle than even the institutions of France. The insurrection on the ISth of March was caused in no small degree by the terror which fell upon every lodger when it was known that the irois lermes were to be called for, and upon all the small shopkeepers at the intimation that their overdue bills must be met. The most popular and mischievous publication in Paris gained an instant success by an article in its first number, the refrain of -which was “We will not pay.” Now, an exceptional position such as this certainly deserves the attention of statesmen. Seven months of hostilities, five of siege by the Prussians, and a month of Civil War, have ) educed the people of Paris to such a state that the ordinary law cannot take its course. The dread of legality made the insurrection and helps to maintain it. it is not eisy to prescribe what must be done in such a case, how far the State may associate itself with the burdens of a section of the people ; but wc have no hesitation in saying that any loss the nation might sustain in aid ng Paris would be hss than that incurred by the prolongation of this struggle, which is fast bringing France to a condition that may be irretrievable during the present century.