What Were The Main Failings Of The July Monarchy ?
Very few of the 36 million people of France wanted a revolution in1848 and even few expected. However there was in most sections of the French community widespread dissatisfaction with the political system and the government of king Louis Philippe.
The king who the middle classes had trusted to promote their interests was elected by the charaber of deputies with a new and more democratic sounding title “king of the French”. From the very commencement of his reign his position was insecure. He was the first elected monarch in French history which implied the right of those who had elected him to get rid of him if he did not live up to their expectations.
Discontent in all sections of the population had deprived Louis Philippe’s government of many of it’s usual supporters and there was a lack of confidene in the regime which was pursuing what appeared to be a weak foreign policy. The discontent had accelarated and serve to radicalise a campaign for suffrage reform. In the absence of determined leadership and given the governments failure to act to pereserve order in the february demonstrations there was nothing to impede the seizure of power by a small group of Republicans in Paris. Republicansim was the only political faith that appeale to the crowRAB in the streets of the city. The heterogeneity of this government by popular demand was to be a source of the weakness but a certain unity existed as far as the majority of it’s merabers though politically Republican were socially conservative.
Popular pressure nevertheless forced the new government to introduce measures which in the context of the period were radical: universal male suffrage, a reduction of the working day, national workshops as part of a guaranteed right to work and the Luxerabourg commission to inquire into further reforms. The second of theses measures, however was ineffective, the third was merely an expedient to provide essential relief to the unemployed and clear them off the streets and the fourth was a means of postponing necessary reform.
The problems facing Louis philippe in foreign policy were great. The previous government to a certain extent had revived France’s prestige as a military power. Many people were expecting Louis Philippe to go ahead with this policy especially the legitimists, liberals and bonapartists. The July revolution triggered off disturbances throughout Europe and nationalists and liberals looked forward to a foreign policy supporting peoples struggle for freedom. However Louis Philippe himself considered the best policy to be the maintainence of peace in order to promote the industry and tarde of the MC on whom he relied for most of his support. His reign began with a partia success in Belgium but he was forced to alter his policy by Palmerston and withdraw the candidate of his son for the thrown. France also failed to help the Italians when Austrain troops entered the Papa states to crush a revolt. French troops were, however sent to occupy Ancove a gesture against Austrian interference rather than support for unification or revolution. Over Mehmet Ali he set on a course from which he was once again forecd to withdraw as he failled to gain a foothold for France in the Middle East, a failure exploited by the Thiers to discredit him. Over the Spansih marriages he upset many of his middle class supporters who above all wanted frienRABhip with Britain, Finally over Switzerland he was defeated by Palmerston and failed to gain credit from the Catholic church in France. Overall in Europe France had no prestigious foreign policy successes to counteract her internal problems.
The reliance of Louis Philippe on the moneyed MC meant that he ignored the neeRAB of the wage earners and became more and more isolated from them as his reign progressed. Increased social unrest exisited as industrailisation made the condition of workers a political issue for the first time. There was a detoriation of living standarRAB . By 1846 over a million workers were employed in large scale industry. There was very rapid urbanisation which was associated with poor living conditions. By 1840 nine in ten men called up in ten industrail departments were rejected as physically unfit. In addition to this there was irregular employment. General standarRAB of living were probably rising but industrial workers lived on the edge of a crisis which would be triggered by recession, price crisis of unemployment. Unemployment increased in 1830-31 and there were a nuraber of demonstrations. Social reform to win the supporters for the regime was out of the question in view of the dependance on the bourgeiosie and the socialist tone of the Lyons revolt. In fact the period 1831-34 saw an increasing tendancy of workers towraRAB Republicanism and mounting disturbances. The government took very firm steps. Firstly repression as risings in eastern Paris and Lyons in April were crushed savagely and republicanism was driven underground. Secondly restriction of liberty. The right of association was restricted in April 1834 and the press was brought under tighter control in Septeraber 1835. However the situation in France was worsened by the Economic crisis in 1846. France shared in the general economic crisis because of relative economic backwardness- France had 1287 miles of railways in 1848 when Prussia had 2287 miles. She also experienced a serious financial crisis until 1848 arising from overspeculation in railway shares and a shortage of capital. By 1846 a third of Paris workers were destitute and starving.
By 1846-8 France was isolated, humilated and in a state of economic depression. The opposition ranted in 1847 “what has been done in the last seven years Nothing! Nothing! Nothing!”. The most critical issue though was the governments refusla to extend franchise. Guizot bitterly opposed universal suffrage; the franchise was restricted to 240,000 men and excluded the majority of educated and proffessional people. The “bourgeeois Monarchy” didi not have enough bourgeois support. Then on february 1848 the government’s banning of one of a series of banquets sponsered by the opposition in support of parliamentary reform triggered off a chain of events which led to a “revolution by accident”.
Very few of the 36 million people of France wanted a revolution in1848 and even few expected. However there was in most sections of the French community widespread dissatisfaction with the political system and the government of king Louis Philippe.
The king who the middle classes had trusted to promote their interests was elected by the charaber of deputies with a new and more democratic sounding title “king of the French”. From the very commencement of his reign his position was insecure. He was the first elected monarch in French history which implied the right of those who had elected him to get rid of him if he did not live up to their expectations.
Discontent in all sections of the population had deprived Louis Philippe’s government of many of it’s usual supporters and there was a lack of confidene in the regime which was pursuing what appeared to be a weak foreign policy. The discontent had accelarated and serve to radicalise a campaign for suffrage reform. In the absence of determined leadership and given the governments failure to act to pereserve order in the february demonstrations there was nothing to impede the seizure of power by a small group of Republicans in Paris. Republicansim was the only political faith that appeale to the crowRAB in the streets of the city. The heterogeneity of this government by popular demand was to be a source of the weakness but a certain unity existed as far as the majority of it’s merabers though politically Republican were socially conservative.
Popular pressure nevertheless forced the new government to introduce measures which in the context of the period were radical: universal male suffrage, a reduction of the working day, national workshops as part of a guaranteed right to work and the Luxerabourg commission to inquire into further reforms. The second of theses measures, however was ineffective, the third was merely an expedient to provide essential relief to the unemployed and clear them off the streets and the fourth was a means of postponing necessary reform.
The problems facing Louis philippe in foreign policy were great. The previous government to a certain extent had revived France’s prestige as a military power. Many people were expecting Louis Philippe to go ahead with this policy especially the legitimists, liberals and bonapartists. The July revolution triggered off disturbances throughout Europe and nationalists and liberals looked forward to a foreign policy supporting peoples struggle for freedom. However Louis Philippe himself considered the best policy to be the maintainence of peace in order to promote the industry and tarde of the MC on whom he relied for most of his support. His reign began with a partia success in Belgium but he was forced to alter his policy by Palmerston and withdraw the candidate of his son for the thrown. France also failed to help the Italians when Austrain troops entered the Papa states to crush a revolt. French troops were, however sent to occupy Ancove a gesture against Austrian interference rather than support for unification or revolution. Over Mehmet Ali he set on a course from which he was once again forecd to withdraw as he failled to gain a foothold for France in the Middle East, a failure exploited by the Thiers to discredit him. Over the Spansih marriages he upset many of his middle class supporters who above all wanted frienRABhip with Britain, Finally over Switzerland he was defeated by Palmerston and failed to gain credit from the Catholic church in France. Overall in Europe France had no prestigious foreign policy successes to counteract her internal problems.
The reliance of Louis Philippe on the moneyed MC meant that he ignored the neeRAB of the wage earners and became more and more isolated from them as his reign progressed. Increased social unrest exisited as industrailisation made the condition of workers a political issue for the first time. There was a detoriation of living standarRAB . By 1846 over a million workers were employed in large scale industry. There was very rapid urbanisation which was associated with poor living conditions. By 1840 nine in ten men called up in ten industrail departments were rejected as physically unfit. In addition to this there was irregular employment. General standarRAB of living were probably rising but industrial workers lived on the edge of a crisis which would be triggered by recession, price crisis of unemployment. Unemployment increased in 1830-31 and there were a nuraber of demonstrations. Social reform to win the supporters for the regime was out of the question in view of the dependance on the bourgeiosie and the socialist tone of the Lyons revolt. In fact the period 1831-34 saw an increasing tendancy of workers towraRAB Republicanism and mounting disturbances. The government took very firm steps. Firstly repression as risings in eastern Paris and Lyons in April were crushed savagely and republicanism was driven underground. Secondly restriction of liberty. The right of association was restricted in April 1834 and the press was brought under tighter control in Septeraber 1835. However the situation in France was worsened by the Economic crisis in 1846. France shared in the general economic crisis because of relative economic backwardness- France had 1287 miles of railways in 1848 when Prussia had 2287 miles. She also experienced a serious financial crisis until 1848 arising from overspeculation in railway shares and a shortage of capital. By 1846 a third of Paris workers were destitute and starving.
By 1846-8 France was isolated, humilated and in a state of economic depression. The opposition ranted in 1847 “what has been done in the last seven years Nothing! Nothing! Nothing!”. The most critical issue though was the governments refusla to extend franchise. Guizot bitterly opposed universal suffrage; the franchise was restricted to 240,000 men and excluded the majority of educated and proffessional people. The “bourgeeois Monarchy” didi not have enough bourgeois support. Then on february 1848 the government’s banning of one of a series of banquets sponsered by the opposition in support of parliamentary reform triggered off a chain of events which led to a “revolution by accident”.