The liberal party., February 16, 1875

The liberal party.

The high pitch of excitement to which the press has arrived in these last days, occasioned by the provocations of the reactionary papers, causes us to give utterance to some views which appear to us opportune, and which with pleasure we submit to the judgment of our enlightened colleagues. In these provocations there is a studied purpose, which it is not difficult to discover upon a little reflection. The party which bears the name conservative has an inward consciousness of its own insignificance, and very well knows that, in itself alone, it is incapable of producing even a moderate disturbance; that, on the other hand, as it does not dispossess itself of its old mania for getting control of the supreme power, in order to disseminate its retroactive theories, it seeks outside itself these elements which it lacks, persuaded that any kind of disturbance whatsoever will favor in some measure its bastard views. Hence proceeds, without doubt, that persistent eagerness of casting upon the liberal party the most shameless insults. The Machiavelian artifice consists in irritating a powerful adversary, in driving it, if possible, to the extreme of committing violence, in compelling it to overstep the limits of moderation and prudence, in order to give itself afterward the airs of a victim to excite the compassion of the masses, to work, in this manner, upon the public feeling in order to conquer the sympathies, which, hereafter, may facilitate its accession to that power which it so much covets, as a commentary upon that sentiment, “My kingdom is not of this world.”

The liberal party ought, under these circumstances, to exercise self-control, to repress with a firm hand the anger provoked by insult and diatribe, to look with disregard upon these Jesuitical intrigues, and to find in its republican faith the inspiration of the conduct which it should observe. The liberal party, if it wishes to maintain itself at the height of its civilizing and patriotic mission, ought not to be taken in the net which is spread for it, nor to forget for a single instant the great principles which form its programme, in order to descend to the muddy ground to which it is invited. On the contrary, the more intemperate may be the clamor which is raised against it, the more to be condemned may be those measures which are brought forward to cause it to abandon calmness and moderation, the more the liberal party ought to sustain the dignity of its rôle, undisturbed by the insults of its rancorous enemies maintaining the noble and serene attitude which comports with strength and justice.

We are too far from the French Revolution to make it necessary for us to go to its ensanguined pages for our inspiration. In Mexico the revolution is an accomplished fact, all the reforms are consummated, all the elements of retrogression are dispersed. Here, we have no monarchy to destroy, no nobility to abolish, no rights to establish. The clergy, which has been the great enemy of liberty, has lost beyond remedy that great influence which it exercised in times not far remote; and to-day it struggles in vain to recover it. On the other hand, it is proved that the bloody excesses of the French Revolution only served to compromise liberty, because, impelled by a spirit of vengeance against everything that reminded it of the past, it was willing to violate conscience itself, penetrating into its sanctuary in order to substitute one tyranny for another.

We have done something better than to worship the goddess Reason; we have separated church from state, that is to say, we have erected an insuperable barrier against the intrusive hand of the priest being raised to wound liberty in its political principles; and against the power of the government doing likewise, by violating the conscience, the first of individual rights. Very near us is the example we ought to follow; the American democracy is the great beacon light toward which is directed the gaze of all those who see in the republic the saving institutions of the people, the protective, banner of their rights, the shield of all the guarantees which give security to life and property. Washington and Franklin, those fine types of republican honesty, of unsullied rectitude, of practical good sense, are the models that the liberal party ought to place before themselves, setting aside the sinister figures of Danton, Robespierre, and Marat.

Finally, the liberal party ought never to forget that its social and political mission is not one of vengeance, but of justice; that if the removal of the obstacles which obstruct its course imposes upon it the necessity of making use of measures which shall be destructive of such obstacles, this does not signify that destruction alone has a place in its programme, as the enemies of liberty every hour assert. On the contrary, the revolution has been and is the precursor of the reign of reason and morality; it follows no creed but guarantees all, limiting itself to opposing proper safeguards to the disturbers of order, who endeavor in their own interest to revive a dying fanaticism. Persecution would be the means best calculated to favor the Machiavelian tendencies of the clerical retroaction; meanwhile the severest punishment that can be inflicted upon it for its insolence is to leave it to devour its own wrath, applying to him who may make himself guilty by attacking the public tranquillity the law and nothing but the law. Such, in our opinion, is the course the liberal party ought to follow in the present crisis.