« AnteriorContinuar »
to be in command at the Palace when the petition was brought for signature by the men under his orders. He instantly forbade the proceeding, as against discipline. Of course his action was forthwith made the subject of violent impeachment as against true principles of liberty, and contrary to the liberal ideas which alone can save the country. Cavour was called upon by the President of the National Club to give an explanation of his conduct. This he did promptly by letter.
· Having become aware,' he wrote, “that some one was asking the soldiers in the guard-house to sign a declaration of assent to a barangue delivered by Vincenzo Gioberti, I intimated to that indi. vidual, whose name I am ignorant of, that the law on the National Guard forbade soldiers on duty from taking part in political matters. On that gentleman proceeding to make observations in reply, I at once answered, that the law admitted of no exception. Thereupon the gentleman left the guard-house, and the incident ended.'
The Club, however, censured Cavour severely, who forthwith sent in his resignation.
The Radical opposition to Cavour was so intense, that he failed to secure a seat in the election for the first Piedmontese Legislature. The disappointment was sharp, yet it did not make him despond.
* DEAREST FRIENN,-I thank you for your sympathy with a poor defeated one.
At Vercelli, where I was told success was assured, I was beaten by the virtuous Stora; at Cigliano I was forsaken by my nearest neighbours. Lastly, at Monforte, I was disgracefully worsted by that great victor, the unapproachable Sineo.Oh, hard fate! That these electoral defeats have pained me I will not deny. I have been grieved at the enmities I encountered in villages close to our rice lands, still more at breaches of faith, broken pledges, deceptions, on the part of Vercellesi whom I esteemed; still I am not prostrated.'
The boast was speedily justified. At a bye-election in June Cavour was chosen in Turin. It is true he lost the seat again at the next general election, in January 1849; but in the following July he was once more successful, and this in the teeth of a fierce Radical opposition. The moment was one of sore need. Austria was dictating terms to prostrate Piedmont, which was, moreover, convulsed by demagogue agitators, and mined by Mazzinian plotters. Cavour was keenly sensible of the necessity to acquiesce in the unavoidable, though by no means enamoured of the policy that had been pursued :
• After splendid efforts, Piedmont has succumbed, less from the enemy's superiority than from the incomparable ineptitude of the Ultra-Democratic party which seized office. . . . Betrayed by Charles
Albert, badly supported by the country at large, the moderate party has been driven to surrender power to demagogues without energy or talent, who idiotically thought a nation could win independence and freedom by phrases and proclamations. It is impossible to foresee at present what will happen. This much is positive, that all we have before us is a choice of disasters.'
Gloomy as was this utterance, Cavour yet never gave way to real down-heartedness; for at this same dark hour he wrote these words to the distinguished Tuscan patriot, Solvagnoli :
Courage must not be lost. As long as freedom exists in a corner of the Peninsula, the future must not be despaired of. As long as Piedmont preserves its institutions against despotism and against anarchy, there will be the means for efficaciously working for the regeneration of our conntry.'
At the outset Cavour met with a decidedly bad reception in the Chamber; but he soon made opponents become aware of his capacity. His first signal success was the speech by which he supported the Siccardi law abolishing the Ecclesiastical Courts. When he sat down, cheers rang through the House, and members from all sides ran up to congratulate him. He had now his foot in the political stirrup; four months later he vaulted into the saddle on appointment as Minister of Commerce. The leap was made against opposition in high quarters. Victor Emmanuel inherited his father's prejudice against Cavour. When his name was submitted, the King exclaimed, “What on earth can make you propose a man who is sure to send you
all head over heels.'
Six months later, Cavour became Minister of Finance, and on the break up of the Azeglio Cabinet, the King's prognostications were verified by his becoming Premier. From that moment, with a firmness of direction equalled only by his quickness of judgment, Cavour initiated the financial and political reconstruction of humbled and disorganized Piedmont, carrying on the work almost to the completion of an United Italy.
In appraising the task achieved by Cavour, it should never be lost sight of, that it was brought about through a process of attraction. Cavour never had recourse to violent methods for forcing through his purposes. That constitutes the distinguishing feature in his execution of the great work of his life. At no conjuncture did Cavour try to twist and falsify the spirit of popular institutions. He never entertained even a passing thought of getting the better of forces he had to contend against -and the Mazzinian element was at one time of very formidable
strength, strength—otherwise than by weight of argument, by appeal to common sense, and by experience of good institutions. The Charter was to Cavour sacred; freedom of speech and liberty of the press were to him inviolable. In the period of the gravest internal conflict, Cavour retained imperturbable confidence in the ultimate triumph of good sense; and he relied on driving issues home by the forcible tones of masculine speech. And as he dealt in a large-hearted manner with great things, so likewise did he bear himself towards individuals. The withering debater, who mercilessly tore to ribands the fallacies of an opponent, was always ready to give a hand of good-humoured fellowship to the worsted adversary, when meeting him outside the ring in which he had inflicted a heavy fall. En politique
• il n'y a rien de plus absurde que la rancune,' was a saying of Cavour's, with which his conduct corresponded. Thus did it come about that, by a process of elective affinity, gradually and insensibly, Count Cavour drew to himself the really patriotic and capable men of various parties, and from various parts of Italy; and in conjunction with these, he was enabled to carry to the verge of completion the momentous achievement of Italian regeneration dreamt of by him in youth, and steadfastly kept in sigbt throughout his whole life.
ART. V.--1. The Law relating to Betting, Time-Bargains, and
Gaming. By G. Herbert Stutfield. London, 1886. 2. Tempted London (Young Men). London, 1888. 3. The Gaming Table. By Andrew Steinmetz. 2 vols. Lon
don, 1870. 4. History of Playing Cards. By D. A. Chatto. London, 1848. 5. “The Guardian,' Oct. 3, 1888.
recent Church Congress was devoted to a discussion of gambling and betting. The Town Hall was filled to overflowing, and more nuinbers than the hall could accommodate desired to listen to the onslaught of learned clerical speakers on the evils of the most prevalent vice of the age. The inability of the Church itself to cope with the mischief was fully admitted. The idea of the formation of a society to attempt the task was mentioned only to be rejected, and speaker after speaker cited public opinion as the only real power. Such an admission is in itself somewhat remarkable. Time was when the Church of England would have recognized no such inability. Even now we are by no means sure that all the religious communities of the United Kingdom would allow, that the work of discountenancing or even putting down a mischievous social habit was beyond their powers.
But the Church is much in earnest in this question, and wisely seeks a strong alliance. Lay opinion did more to put an end to drunkenness in the upper classes of society than pulpit oratory. Men in the higher and middle ranks have long ceased to drink more wine than was good for them; but they have been moved to the abandonment of a custom of their forefathers, less by a feeling that it offended against morality or religion, than by the opinion that it offended against good taste. Jf the lower classes once are brought to understand that drunkenness is ungentlemanlike, drunkenness will disappear. Let it come to be admitted that a man who drinks too much is not a very fine fellow, but a contemptible fool; and first public, and then private, intoxication will become a thing of the past. It is a grave mistake to suppose that the lower classes have no canon of taste. It would be easy, were the task before us, to give many instances affording incontestable proof, that the working classes of Great Britain have an abundance of fine feeling, which operates largely on their habits and modes of life. Already there are many signs, that this influence is working effectually on the side of temperance, and that the day is coming when it will be as bad form for a working man
or artizan to get drunk, as it is for a member of those classes whose example is still powerful for good or evil.
It is to the same influence that we must look for the discouragement of an even more baneful habit. That influence is at present absolutely quiescent, and vigorous efforts are apparently needed to rouse it. For we have good reasons for thinking that there never a time when the taste for gambling was more widespread than it is now. It has, in fact, become a trade or profession. It is not so much that cards and dice abound, as that betting is universal. Every class of society, from the highest to the lowest, is more or less affected with a mania for betting, for the development of which there are unhappily ample opportunities. To what extent these opportunities prevail, and what has been their recent development, we propose presently to discuss. Meanwhile a brief glance at gambling as a whole may not be without interest.
Gambling has been condemned by ethical authorities of many generations. Aristotle classes the gambler with the thief and the robber;* and we can well imagine the loathing which the philosopher, who hated even usury, had for so useless a means of seeking wealth. Blackstone calls gaming “a kind of tacit confession that the company engaged therein do in general exceed the bounds of their respective fortunes; and therefore they cast lots to determine upon whom the ruin shall at present fall
, that the rest may be saved a little longer.' And Burton devotes a whole chapter of his · Anatomy of Melancholy' to a vigorous denunciation of gaming.t
What is gambling and what is its wrong? A learned writer of modern days condemns the gambler on the ground, that he desires to acquire without earning. But this answer will not bear close examination. The man who invests money in Consols acquires without earning, and if earning were made a condition of acquisition, the employment of capital would be impossible in all cases where the capitalist was unable to supervise its employment. Nor does the evil lie in the risk. At times enormous profits are made by trading. Hallam fasserts that the interest of money was exceedingly high throughout the Middle Ages. He quotes a speech of Doge Mocenigo, reckoning the annual profit made by Venice on her mercantile capital at forty per cent. The speculator, who buys largely in one part of the world goods which he hopes to sell at a profit in another,
* ο μέν τοι κυβευτής και ο λωποδύτης και ο ληστής των ανελευθέρων εισιν, aio xpoxepdeis gyáp.-Aristot. * Eth. Nic.' iv. 1, $ 43.
+ Anatomy of Melancholy,' iv. c. 13, 8.