Exit Faure.

LONDON, March 1, 1899.

The event of last month was the sudden death of President Faure. The late President had been somewhat overstrained by the anxieties of his high office, and also by his manner of living; but no one anticipated when the month began that the beginning of March would see a new President taking up his place in the Elysée. The unexpected, however, has happened, and so far the result of the change appears to have been altogether for good. The substitution of President Loubet for President Faure, instead of increasing the sense of instability so keenly felt in France at the beginning of the year, has had exactly the opposite effect. M. Loubet, who has quitted the Presidency of the Senate for the Presidency of the Republic, has begun his term of office by manifesting a determination to reassert the right of the Republic to exist in a quiet, sensible, but vigorous fashion that has already had the best effect both at home and abroad. Whether President Loubet will be able to justify the confident expectations that have been raised by the firmness with which he acted on assuming the reins of power, remains to be seen. For the present it is satisfactory to note that the Republic across the water has at last got a President who believes in the Republic, and intends to maintain it against all comers.

Enter Loubet.

It is difficult to conceive a greater contrast than that between President Faure and his successor. The late President had succumbed to the temptation which assails all entrusted with supreme power in France. He was not born in the purple, and he made up for it by insisting upon the pomps and vanities of power. His successor, a man of peasant birth, is simplicity itself. One of his first acts was to forbid the soldiers to pay him any military honours, excepting when he appeared in his official capacity as President of the Republic. It is a small thing, but significant. The action of President Loubet in taking steps to dissolve the various leagues which have sprung into existence of late for the purpose of menacing the prestige and stability of the Republic, is another indication of his determination to stand no nonsense, and defend the Republic of which he is the chief magistrate. The contrast between the vigour and resolution with which the affairs of the

Republic are being administered to-day, although there has been no change in the Ministry, is a remarkable illustration of the influence which may be exerted by the chief of the State, even although, according to the Constitution, he is supposed to leave such matters to the discretion of his Ministers.

Dupuy's

When M. Loubet was elected, it was reported that M. Dupuy, the Prime Notice to Quit. Minister, had arranged for M. Loubet's election in the confident belief that he would very soon be able to force his resignation and to secure his own election as President of the Republic. If such expectations were entertained, they seem to have been singularly without foundation, for already in Paris every one is saying that at the first convenient opportunity M. Dupuy will be overthrown, and that, but for the desire not to embarrass M. Loubet in the first week of his Presidency, the Senate would have thrown out the Bill providing for the transfer of the Dreyfus case to the Court of Cassation sitting as a whole. The Senate has passed the Bill, and now the question of revision will be transferred from the Criminal Chamber to that of the entire Court of Cassation, a highhanded proceeding which it is believed was ordered solely in order to defeat Revision and maintain the guilt of Dreyfus against all evidence. If, however, the French feel that M. Loubet is strong enough to hold his own, authority which makes itself respected will very soon find supporters, and we may, at last, see the interminable Dreyfus case settled by the whole judicial body of the Supreme Court, certifying that there has been a grave miscarriage of justice, and that Dreyfus has been the victim of an almost unparalleled conspiracy on the part of highly placed officials, among whom we may count as the leaders, General Mercier, M. Dupuy, and M. Faure.

of

It is generally admitted that General Let us not Despair Mercier, in his evidence before the the Republic. Criminal Chamber, admitted that the conviction of Dreyfus was obtained by the production of a secret document which was shown to the officers acting as judges, but was not shown to the prisoner or to his counsel.

now for the first time admitted by the author of this scandalous outrage upon the first principles of justice, is sufficient to justify all the agitation which has gone on for the revision of the sentence. Whether Dreyfus

be guilty or innocent, he was certainly unjustly condemned, and there is nothing for it but to order for him a new trial. It is assumed that he will be tried by a court-martial, and that the officers of that body will promptly avenge the insulted honour of the Army and condemn him, even if he is known to the officers of the court to be as innocent as an archangel. But that is to take too gloomy a view of the situation. The pretenders who have been airing their pretensions in the columns of the newspapers seem to be more anxious to secure funds with which they can enjoy themselves than to risk their skins in any enterprise against the Republic. It is well that Frenchmen should understand that on this side of the Channel at any

M. DÉROULÈDE AND M. HABERT.
(The two Deputies who were arrested for sedition.)

rate these conspirators are regarded with derision and contempt. The strong and timely declaration made. by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman in favour of the French Republic in his first speech on assuming the duties of Leader of the Opposition did but echo the universal sentiment of the English people. The French Republic has disappointed many of the expectations of its friends, but it holds the field, and with all its faults is much better than anything that can be expected from either the Orleanist or Bonapartist pretenders or from a military dictator.

Sir Henry

as

While the prospects of the French Republic have been improving, the Liberal Leader. fortunes of the great party which on this side the Channel has ever been in closest sympathy with the French Republicans has shown a change for the better which many of us hardly ventured to hope for. As I stated, the moment

man.

The

Sir William Harcourt retired from the leadership, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman was unanimously elected to the vacant post. There are only two evil things about Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman. The first is the unwieldy dimensions of his name. It is wearisome to be unable to mention him without writing four words. This may seem a small thing, but it counts for a good deal. We shall either have to make up our minds to call him Sir Henry, or to call him BannerSir Henry Campbell-Bannerman is an impossibility. It would be more courteous to call him Sir Henry, and so, by way of setting the good example, I shall use no other term in describing him. second evil thing about him is a certain sluggishness or indolence of temperament. Every one who knew him felt that if he could but be energised into action, he would be a good goer and a good stayer. But hitherto he has been too much like that patient quadruped which needed a fire of chips to be lit under its stomach to make it stir. If we may judge from Sir Henry's opening speech in the debate on the Address, the requisite fire has been applied; for, to the astonishment and delight of all his followers, he revealed himself in first-class fighting form, making a capital speech full of humour, dealing swashing blows at his opponents, and full of a cheery, sensible, good-tempered hopefulness which acted like a draught of generous wine upon his somewhat downhearted followers. At last it would seem the Liberals have found a leader. Of this they are exceeding glad, and in justice to their opponents it may be admitted that Ministers are probably as grateful as the Liberals.

The Liberals and their Leaders.

Sir William Harcourt did not put in any appearance in the House of Commons last month. Mr. Morley attended only in order to put in a weighty and serious protest against the indefinite extension of our Imperial responsibilities in the Soudan. As for Lord Rosebery, all that the country knows about him is that he has betrothed his second daughter to the Earl of Crewe, and that the marriage will shortly take place. At the present moment Lord Rosebery is said to be yachting somewhere in the Mediterranean. His former Under-Secretary and faithful henchman, Sir Edward Grey, has widened the rift which exists in the Liberal Party on the question of foreign policy by opposing Sir Henry and the rest of the Liberals who refused to endorse the Soudanese policy of Lord Salisbury. Of our other leading Liberals nothing need be said. Whether from lack of opportunity or lack of will, they have so far made no mark upon the history of the session.