Browsing named entities in C. Edwards Lester, Life and public services of Charles Sumner: Born Jan. 6, 1811. Died March 11, 1874.. You can also browse the collection for Louis Philippe or search for Louis Philippe in all documents.

Your search returned 6 results in 5 document sections:

C. Edwards Lester, Life and public services of Charles Sumner: Born Jan. 6, 1811. Died March 11, 1874., Section Fourth: orations and political speeches. (search)
irection, in harmony with the usage and the genius of popular governments, to a Movement which stirs the whole country, and does not find an adequate and constant organ in either of the other existing parties. In France, under the royalty of Louis Philippe, the faithful friends of the yet unborn Republic, formed a band together, and by their publications, speeches, and votes, sought to influence the public mind. Few at first in numbers, they became strong by united political action. In Englan we first meet this form of definition. At a later day, after France had passed through an unprecedented series of political vicissitudes, in some of which the rights of Equality had been trampled under foot, when, at the revolution of 1830, Louis Philippe was called to a throne surrounded by republican institutions, the charter then promulgated repeated this phrase. In its first article it declared, that Frenchmen are equal before the law, whatever may may be their titles or ranks. While r
r Party a permanent National Party.—Fellow-citizens; we make our appeal as a National party, established to promote principles deemed to be of paramount importance to the country. In assuming our place as a distinct party, we simply give form and direction, in harmony with the usage and the genius of popular governments, to a Movement which stirs the whole country, and does not find an adequate and constant organ in either of the other existing parties. In France, under the royalty of Louis Philippe, the faithful friends of the yet unborn Republic, formed a band together, and by their publications, speeches, and votes, sought to influence the public mind. Few at first in numbers, they became strong by united political action. In England, the most brilliant popular triumph in her history, the repeal of the monopoly of the Corn Laws, was finally carried, by means of a newly-formed, but wide-spread political organization, which combined men of all the old parties, Whigs, Tories, and
embers. The natural and imprescriptible rights of men are Equality, liberty, safety, property. And in the next article it shows what is meant by Equality. It says, All men are equal by nature, and before the law. (Moniteur, 1793, No. 178.) Here we first meet this form of definition. At a later day, after France had passed through an unprecedented series of political vicissitudes, in some of which the rights of Equality had been trampled under foot, when, at the revolution of 1830, Louis Philippe was called to a throne surrounded by republican institutions, the charter then promulgated repeated this phrase. In its first article it declared, that Frenchmen are equal before the law, whatever may may be their titles or ranks. While recognizing this peculiar enunciation of the Equality of men, as more specific and satisfactory than the naked statement that all men are borne equal, it is impossible not to be reminded that this form of speech finds its prototype in the ancient Gree
so must parties change or multiply. This is so strongly the conclusion of reason and philosophy, that it could not be doubted, even if there were no examples of such change and multiplication. But we need only turn to the recent history of France and England, the two countries where opinion has had the freest scope to find such examples. Thus, for instance, in France—and I dwell on this point because I have observed myself, in conversation, that it is of practical importance —under Louis Philippe, anterior to the late Republic, there was the party of Legitimists, supporters of the old branch of Bourbons; the party of Orleanists, supporters of the existing throne; these two corresponding at the time in relative rank and power to our Whigs and Democrats. But besides these, there was a third party, the small band of republicans, represented in the legislature by a few persons only, but strong in principles and purposes, which in February, 1848, prevailed over both the others. On t
so must parties change or multiply. This is so strongly the conclusion of reason and philosophy, that it could not be doubted, even if there were no examples of such change and multiplication. But we need only turn to the recent history of France and England, the two countries where opinion has had the freest scope to find such examples. Thus, for instance, in France—and I dwell on this point because I have observed myself, in conversation, that it is of practical importance —under Louis Philippe, anterior to the late Republic, there was the party of Legitimists, supporters of the old branch of Bourbons; the party of Orleanists, supporters of the existing throne; these two corresponding at the time in relative rank and power to our Whigs and Democrats. But besides these, there was a third party, the small band of republicans, represented in the legislature by a few persons only, but strong in principles and purposes, which in February, 1848, prevailed over both the others. On t