working classes, but whether that is so in fact is highly debatable.'
Having paused to light a cigarette, he went on. 'The main plank in the Liberal platform has for long been Free Trade, and with it they have won the votes of the masses in the towns because, on the face of it, their policy means cheap living. But go a little deeper into the matter and you will find that it has another altogether different aspect. The great strength of the Liberal party lies in the industrial north, and the money to finance industry comes from the rich manufacturers and the old Whig families who have invested their wealth in commerce. They are very shrewd people, and they know that if they can bring the cost of living down they will then be able to force down wages and derive bigger profits from their factories.'
'Do you suggest, then, that the Liberal policy is nothing but an infamous plot?' she asked indignantly.
'Not altogether,' he smiled, 'and the Liberals have introduced many excellent reforms. But if you go deeply into the matter you will find that Tory governments have proved better protectors of the interests of the ordinary people. It was they who first introduced free education, it was they who put a stop to women working in the mines, it was they who passed the first factory acts and legislated to prevent little children being forced to labour as though they were slaves. But to revert to the question of Britain continuing to give asylum to political firebrands from all over Europe, the last thing the Liberals must want is for such people to spread discontent in the industrial areas; so they are just as likely to put up a bar to their entering the country as would be the Tories, who in your sense of the word are more genuinely Liberal-minded.'
On another occasion they were talking about his early years spent in Russia when she said, 'The condition of the peasants and the poorer people must be quite appalling. One cannot wonder that last year Father Gapon led a revolution there. I know it was put down with ferocious brutality by the Tsar's Cossacks; but now that the people have shown their teeth it seems unlikely that will be the end of the matter. What do you think of their prospects of gaining their freedom?'
'It all depends what you mean by freedom,' he smiled. 'If they succeed in overthrowing the monarchy they certainly would not get it. That could only lead to a blood-bath, after which they would soon find themselves at the mercy of a committee of mob-leaders. All revolutions develop in much the same way, and you have only to recall how in the French Revolution the whole nation was held in subjection by Robespierre and his Committee of Public Safety.'
'But it worked out in the end,' she objected. 'The Terror did not last for very long, and after it was over new laws secured to every Frenchman his rights as an individual.'
He shrugged. 'Perhaps; but at what a price to the nation. A million people died in the French Revolution, and that million represented nearly all that was best in integrity, brains and leadership that had been built up through many generations.'
'Some of the nobles may have been clever, but many were stupid, and the great majority of them were parasites battening on the labour of the people.'
'I was not referring to the nobility. Most of them escaped abroad. The people who were murdered were the solid
'Nevertheless there was plenty of leadership shown by Frenchmen in the Napoleonic wars.'
'You mean that there were plenty of brave men prepared blindly to give their lives in battle, because when the wars started they believed their country about to be invaded and overrun. Napoleon everyone admits to have been a genius; but he was an evil one and, remember, a product of the revolution. As a dictator he forced a tyranny on the people far worse than they had suffered under their Kings, and he bled France white in wars with no other object than to achieve his own ambition to become the arbiter of Europe. It was he who took such a terrible toll of the male youth of France that he undermined the stamina of the race for generations. But it was during the Revolution that the worst damage was done. Except for self-seekers and the irresponsible the upper middle-class was virtually wiped out, and France has never recovered. She has since had two Emperors, a Directory, a Bourbon restoration, a Commune, a Constitutional Monarchy and three Republics: all within a hundred years. The strength given to a people by continuity and tradition has been lost, and for a long time now she has been at the mercy of governments formed from little groups of unscrupulous intriguers who barter the votes they control for a share of power.'
'You know too much about France for me to challenge you on what you say,' she shrugged. 'But unless the Russian people dethrone the Tsar, how can they ever hope to better their lot?'
'It is being bettered, although that is probably not apparent to people who don't know very much about Russia. In recent years a lot more power has been given to the Zemstovs - that is, the provincial assemblies. They are local parliaments that have authority to pass laws for their own areas; and after the uprising last year they combined to press the Tsar to give Russia a National Assembly as well. His Imperial Majesty consented and the first Duma met in the autumn. Nearly all its members are men of high principles and broad views; so given a little time many sound reforms should emerge from it.'
Gulia nodded. 'Yes, I read about that. But the Zemstovs can legislate only on matters concerning their own Provinces; and this new National Parliament has been given no power at all. It is only a consultative body.'
'That is more or less true,' de Quesnoy admitted. 'At the root of the trouble are, of course, the Tsar and Tsarina. They shut themselves away with a little clique of hangers-on; so they are hopelessly ill-informed and hear only opinions which lead them to believe that they are still beloved by the great majority of their subjects. Unfortunately the Tsar is ill-educated, stupid and as weak as water; while the Tsarina, who dominates him, is a convinced autocrat, both bigoted and superstitious. It is a tragedy that the throne is not occupied by the Grand Duke Nicholas, or some other Prince who is more in touch with realities.'
'About that you must be right. Anyhow, if they can keep the lid on the pot only by continuing to send thousands of people every year to exile in Siberia, sooner or later it is bound to blow off.'
He gave her a smile. 'In that, my dear Dona Gulia, you are arguing from false premises. It is only when governments show weakness that revolutions succeed. That in France might easily have been held in check had it not been that Louis XVI was too great a fool and sentimentalist to accept the advice of his courageous Queen, and would not allow his loyal troops to suppress the first revolts against his authority. What happened in England during the same period is a fair example of the results of the opposite policy.'
She shook her head. 'I fear I am not sufficiently well up in English history to know to what you are referring.'
'To the effect of the French Revolution on England. At first all classes there welcomed the changes that were taking place on the other side of the Channel, because they believed in constitutional government. It was only when the moderates were overthrown and the Royal Family imprisoned that they began to realize the mfenace to life, property, justice and true freedom that the revolution had become. By then the virus had spread among their own masses. Agitators started riots in all their principal cities, a mob of fifteen thousand people gathered in north London and at a great mass meeting voted for a Republic. King George III was stoned in his coach on the way to open Parliament. Fortunately for England, in the younger Pitt he had a Minister who would not allow his humanity to deter him from his duty. Pitt brought the garrisons from outlying towns into the suburbs of London, suspended Habeas Corpus, forbade gatherings of more than five persons, and made it a transportable offence to talk treason. A number of hot-heads and would-be demagogues suffered, of course; but by his firmness he saved England from a similar Terror to that which took place in France, and the great bulk of her people from years of misery.'
'Am I to understand, then, that you consider the Tsar's Government is justified in sending all those poor people to slave for life in the salt mines of Siberia, simply because they demand better conditions for the masses?'
Gulia's voice held an angry note, and de Quesnoy sought to calm her by saying quietly, 'Let us get this straight. Persons found guilty of political agitation are never sent to the salt mines. They are exiled only to some city on the far side of the Urals, to keep them from making further mischief in St. Petersburg or Moscow. While living in exile few restraints are placed upon them; they can send for their families, choose their own residence, own property, practise their trade or profession, and enjoy all reasonable freedom. It is only real criminals and people convicted of having participated in nihilist plots who are sent to the salt mines. By ridding European Russia, as far as possible, of agitators, the Government is at least keeping control of the situation. The longer it can continue to do that the better chance there is of the leaders of the Zemstovs, and of the Liberal nobility, persuading the Tsar to agree to allow the new Duma a real voice in the Government. Better conditions for the masses can only be secured by reforms brought about by legal means. I am convinced of that. We can only pray that those already advocated by
