bstantial
than was that of the Left. So long as the Radicals occupied the
position of opponents of the Government they were able, indeed, to
present a seemingly solid front. But when it fell to them to organize
ministries, to frame and enact measures, and to conduct the
administration, the fact appeared instantly that they had neither a
constructive programme nor a unified leadership. The upshot was that
upon its advent to power the Left promptly fell apart into the several
groups of which it was composed, and never thereafter was there
substantial co-operation among these groups, save at rare intervals
when co-operation was necessary to prevent the return to office of the
Conservatives.

*433. The Depretis Ministries, 1876-1887.*--That portion of the party
which first acquired ascendancy was the more moderate, under the
leadership of Depretis. Its programme may be said to have embraced the
extension of the franchise, the enforcement of the rights of the state
in relation to the Church, the incompatibility of a parliamentary
mandate with the holding of public office, the maintenance of the
military and naval policy instituted by the Conservatives, and,
eventually, fiscal reform, though the amelioration of taxation was
given no such prominence as the nation had been led to expect. (p. 393)
Save for the brief intervals occupied by the two Cairoli ministries of
1878 and 1879-1881, Depretis continued in the office of premier from
1876 until his death, in the summer of 1887. Again and again during
this period the personnel of the ministry was changed. Ministers who
made themselves unpopular were replaced by new ones,[572] and so
complete became the lack of dividing principles between the parties
that in 1883 there was established a Depretis cabinet which
represented a coalition of the moderate Left and the Right.[573] The
coalition, however, proved ill-advised, and when, July 27, 1887,
Depretis died he left behind him a government which represented rather
a fusion of the moderate and radical wings of the Left. By reason of
the disintegrated condition of parties Depretis had been able to
override habitually the fundamental principles of parliamentarism and
to maintain through many years a government which lived from hand to
mouth on petty manoeuvers. The franchise, it is true, had been
broadened by the law of 1882, and some of the more odious taxes, e.g.,
the much complained of grist tax, had been abolished. But electora