ournal _La Reforme_ upon the Prussian
Cabinet Order. _La Reforme_ considers that "the fears and the
religious feeling of the King" are the source of the Cabinet Order. It
even finds in this document a foreshadowing of the great reforms which
are in prospect for bourgeois society. "Prussian" instructs _La
Reforme_ as follows:

"The King and German society have not reached the stage of
foreshadowing their reform, and even the Silesian and Bohemian revolts
have not created this state of mind. It is impossible to regard the
partial distress of the factory districts as a general question for
an unpolitical country like Germany, let alone as a blot upon the
whole civilized world. For the Germans the incident has the same
significance as any local drought or famine. Consequently the King
regards it in the light of a defect of administration or a lack of
charity. For the same reason, and because a few soldiers settled
accounts with the weak weavers, the destruction of factories and
machines caused no fears to the King and the authorities. Even
religious feeling did not dictate the Cabinet Order, which is a very
sober expression of Christian statecraft, and a doctrine which puts no
obstacle in the way of the acceptance of its medicine: the good
feeling of Christian hearts. Poverty and crime are two great evils;
who can remedy them? The State and the authorities? No, but the union
of all Christian hearts."

The so-called Prussian denies the existence of the King's "fears" on
the ground, amongst others, that a few soldiers settled accounts with
the weak weavers.

In a country then where festivals accompanied by liberal toasts and
liberal champagne froth--the Dusseldorf festival will be recalled in
this connection--provoke a Royal Cabinet Order, not a single soldier
being required, for the purpose of crushing the longing of the whole
liberal bourgeoisie for the freedom of the Press and a constitution;
in a country where passive obedience is the order of the day; in such
a country would the compulsory use of armed force against weak weavers
be no event and no startling event? And the weak weavers triumphed at
the first encounter. They were suppressed by a subsequently reinforced
body of troops. Is the revolt of a crowd of workers less dangerous
because it needs no army to suppress it? If the wise Prussian compares
the Silesian weavers' revolt with the English labour revolts, the
Silesian weavers will appear to him to be strong w