Les miserables (Abridged) - Victor Hugo [296]
The commission of a fault does not constitute a class. Egotism is not one of the divisions of the social order.
Besides, we must be just even towards egotism. The state to which, after the shock of 1830, that part of the nation which is called bourgeoisie aspired, was not inertia, which is a complication of indifference and idleness, and which contains something of shame; it was not slumber, which supposes a momentary forgetfulness accessible to dreams; it was a halt.
Halt is a word formed with a singular and almost contradictory double meaning: a troop on the march, that is to say, movement; a stopping, that is to say, repose.
Halt is the regaining of strength, it is armed and watchful repose; it is the accomplished fact which plants sentinels and keeps itself upon its guard. Halt supposes battle yesterday and battle to-morrow.
This is the interval between 1830 and 1848.
What we here call battle may also be called progress.
The bourgeoisie, then, as well as the statesmen, felt the need of a man who should express this word: Halt! An Although Because. A composite individuality, signifying revolution and signifying stability; in other words, assuring the present through the evident compatibility of the past with the future.
This man was “ready to hand.” His name was Louis-Philippe d‘Orleans.
The 221 electors made Louis-Philippe king. Lafayette undertook the coronation. He called it the best of republics. The City Hall of Paris replaced the Cathedral of Rheims.eg
This substitution of a demi-throne for the complete throne was “the work of 1830.”
When the clever had finished their work, the immense defect of their solution became apparent. All this was done without reference to absolute right. The absolute right cried “I protest!” then, a fearful thing, it retreated into darkness.
3 (4)
CRACKS UNDER THE FOUNDATION
AT THE MOMENT the drama which we are relating is about to penetrate into the depths of one of the tragic clouds which cover the first years of the reign of Louis-Philippe, we could not be ambiguous, and it was necessary that this book should be explicit in regard to this king.
Louis-Philippe entered into the royal authority without violence, without direct action on his part, by the action of a revolutionary transfer, evidently very distinct from the real aim of the revolution, but in which he, the Duke d‘Orleans, had no personal initiative. He was a born prince, and believed himself elected king. He had not given himself this command; he had not taken it; it had been offered to him and he had accepted it; convinced, wrongly in our opinion, but convinced, that the offer was consistent with right, and that the acceptance was consistent with duty. Hence a possession in good faith. Now, we say it in all conscience, Louis-Philippe being in good faith in his possession, and the democracy being in good faith in their attack, the terror which arises from social struggles is chargeable neither to the king nor to the democracy.
The government of 1830 had from the first a hard life. Born yesterday, it was obliged to fight to-day.
It was hardly installed when it began to feel on all sides vague movements directed against the machinery of July, still so newly set up, and so far from secure.
Resistance was born on the morrow, perhaps even it was born on the eve.
From month to month the hostility increased, and from dumb it became outspoken.
The Revolution of July, tardily accepted, as we have said, outside of France by the kings, had been diversely interpreted in France.
To the old parties, who are attached to hereditary right by the grace of God, revolutions having arisen from the right of revolt, there is a right of revolt against them. An error. For in revolutions the revolted party is not the people, it is the king. Revolution is precisely the opposite of revolt. Every revolution, being a normal accomplishment, contains in itself its own legitimacy, which false revolutionists sometimes