M. de Villèle, beset on one side by the Royalist Liberal Opposition, plagued on the other by the requirements of the bishops, misled by the prefects consulted, who were themselves misled[312], determined to dissolve the Electoral Chamber, despite the three hundred who remained faithful to him. The dissolution was preceded by the revival of the censorship[313]. I attacked more vigorously than ever[314]; the different sections of the Opposition joined hands; the elections of the small colleges all went against the ministry[315]; in Paris, the Left triumphed; seven colleges returned M. Royer-Collard[316], and the two colleges before which M. de Peyronnet[317], a minister, presented himself rejected him. Paris illuminated again; there were scenes of bloodshed; barricades were thrown up[318], and the troops sent to establish order were obliged to fire: thus the way was prepared for the last and fatal days. In the meantime, the news arrived of the Battle of Navarino[319], a success in which I could claim my share. The great misfortunes of the Restoration have been announced by victories; they had difficulty in detaching themselves from the heirs of Louis the Great. [Sidenote: The Chambers.] The Chamber of Peers enjoyed the public favour, thanks to its resistance to the oppressive laws; but it did not know how to defend itself: it allowed itself to be gorged with batches[320] against which I was almost the only one to protest. I prophesied to it that those nominations would vitiate its principle and cause it, in the long run, to lose all its strength in public opinion: was I mistaken? Those batches, introduced with the object of breaking up a majority, have not only destroyed the aristocracy in France, but have become the means which will be employed against the English aristocracy; the latter will be stifled under a multitudinous fabrication of togas and will end by losing its hereditary right, even as the distorted peerage has lost it in France.