The Express.
London, England, 1847-01-15 00:00:00

N

in a contemplated emission of bons royaux to the
amount of between 210 and 213 millions of francs.
The only weak point in this statement is the ,
slurred-over increase of expenditure fur Algeria and
the attempt to insinuate that the increasednaval expen-
diture is mainly, if not solely, owing to arrangements
on the West Coast of Africa. We remarked some
weeks ego that the steamers' stations on the West
Coast of Africa appeared to have been selected by
the French government more with a view to the
general increase of its naval strength than to the
suppression of the slave-trade. The casual incidental
notice of increased military and naval expendi-
ture, combined with tho insinuation (not assertion)
that it arises solely from operations in Algeria and
for the suppression of the slave-trade, indicates a de-
sire silently to increase the available military means of
the country. Something of the same kind may be
detected in the arrangements respecting the p••((clar-
meric which are noticed as among the causes of the
increased estimates of 1817. These two indications,
coupled with the gloating proetn of the ministerial
speech in praise of "sacrifices to assert the rank
due" to the nation, may have no sinister me ining.
but at present they cannot altogether be passed over
in silence.
With regard to the estimates for the public ser-
vices of the year 1817, it is remarkable that, with the
single exception of the department of the interior,
they are in excess of the original estimates in every
department of government. The most remarkable of
these augmentations is that rendered necessary in the
war department and serriee des cult's. It would
seem that the conservative policy of the French
cabinet is simaltaneoutfly to augment without noise
the force of their army, and conciliate the priests.
But the most important Oasis of these augmenta-
tions is the determination evinced to increase official
expenditure concurrently with general economical
pressure in tile state. It is true that the present
aspect of affairs in France is only a "temporary
stoppage, not a retrograde movement in that march
of prosperity" witnessed in France of late years : but
it is not the less true that ministers seem disposed to
try the real substantial character of national resources
by a pretty severe test. Their estimates of income
for the year 1847 give an increase of 23 millions.
Their estimates of income and expenditure for 1818
show a surplus of income to the amount of 3 millions ;
but the rate at which they are increasing their expen-
diture may soon absorb these and even larger sums.
These are the remarks suggested by the ex parte
statements of the French finance minister : we will
hear what the opposition have to say to them.

Our Paris express of Wednesday hrts arrived. The
journals are occupied with eomments on the proceed-
ings in the Chambers on Tuesday. The Journal des
Dhbats and La Presse give the diplomatic correspon-
dence which we printed yesterday, and continue to-
day.
The presidents of all the bureaux in the Chamber of
Deputies have been elected from the Conservative

14117-
The National affirms, on the authority of a private
letter from Cracow, dated sth January, that General
Rudiger, with a corps of 10,030 Russians, occupied
the frontiers of that ancient republic and Galicia.
Austrian troops had also been ordered to the frontiers.
It was Gen. Rudiger who, in the month of March
last, commanded the Russians that occupied the city
of Cracow, and forbid his officers to fmteniise with the
Austrians.
Letters from Vienna of the sth inst. say that on the
thil Prince Metternich was taken suddenly indisposed
during his dinner, and had since been confined to bed.
His illness, however, was not considered serious.
A meeting of forty deputies was held on Tuesday
at the house of M. Billault to organise anew party in
the Chamber of Deputies. M. Dufaure was present,
and declared himself in accordance with M. Billault.
Both these deputies stated their political views.
They said that without separating themselves from i
the *Opposition, there were several points on which
they did not share its opinion they protested against
all concurrence with the ministry, or with the old
Conservative party. What they desired was to form
a true party of the Left Centre, inviting to join it the
independent deputies. Among the deputies who
attended this meeting were MM. de Toequeville,
Boudet, former Under Secretary of State in the
ministry of M. Thies, and M. Ferd. Barrot, brother
of 0. Barrot.
It was said at the meeting that several members of
the Left would vote for the paragraph relative to the
Spanish marriages. The ministry expects that the
ph will be unanimously adopted in the Cham-
LarrafirPeers, and supported by 350 voices in the
Chamber of Deputies. This is the answer that M.
Guizot desires to give to Lord Palmerston, and the proof
which he will offer that, in this question, he is sup-
ported by the national scmpathie,.
A general meeting of the Council of the Bank of
France is to be held to-morrow, to decide on the mea-
sures it may be most advisable to take in the present
crisis. As we anticipated in our former correspondence,
it is expected that the rate of discount, hitherto per-
manent, of 4 per cent., will not be disturbed. It is
probable, however, that bills will he discountable
only at 60 and 45 days instead of 90 and 60 as
hitherto. In addition to this, the Bank will make a
sacrifice to relieve the present commercial pressure,
by obtaining specie through its own resources.
The funds and public securities on Wednesday did
not recover from the fall they had previously suffered.
The Three per Cents. fluctuated between 79.40 and
79.15, closing at 79.30. The Five per Cents. and the
Northern shares remained as yesterday.

The Madrid mails, with letters and journals of the
ith. were received in Paris on Wednesday.
The addresses of the Marquis de Viluma and M.
Castro de Oroaco to the Queen and King-Consort, on
Twelfth Day, occupied the journals.
The Bourse was feeble, and little business trans-
acted.

THE SPANISH MARRIAGES.
We continue our translations from the official docu-
ments which have pared between the two courts,
respecting the Spanish marriage‘:

Y. Gl:IZOT TO TOO cotvr JAILNAC.
(Official.)
PARIS, Ocr. 5, I,l4s.—Monsieur le Comte.—The English
ambassador, acme days since, on the 25th of September,
communicated to me a despatch, which has been addressed
to him by Lord Palmerston, on the 'abject of the marriage
of the Queen of Spain with the infant Don Francois
d'Asaise, and of the infanta Donna Luisa Fernando with
the Duke de Montpensier. You will find a copy of it an-
nexed to this. I made the king acquainted with it in
council, and I address to you the answer of the government
of the king to that communication, charging you to lay it
before the Principal Secretary of State of her Brilamb
Majesty. Lord Palmerston says, in concluding Ids
despatch, "that her Britannic Majesty's government
has wished to give to the complete and authentle
expression of its sentiments upon the question the most
amicable form." 'You will say to Lord Palmerston
that the goverment of the king also entertains towards
England and her government,sentiments of the most sincere
friendship, while at the same time it maintains the rights
and the interests of France against the complaints and repre-
sentations which appear to it to have no foundation: I wish
nevertheless to remove a reproach that Lord Palmerston ad-
dresses, at the outset, to the government of the king, and
which has caused me, I contest', some surprise. He recalls
to mind that we proposed not long since to the English
government to listen to us and tout in concert to give advice
to the court of Madrid on the marriage of the Queen
Isabella. That proposal does not agree, he says, with
the plans we are forming individually in Sonia, for,
according to him, are shoo'd have at the same time
ordered Count Bremen to use all his exertions to bring about
the marriage of the queen with a particular suitor, the
Infant Don Francois d'Assias; offering at the same time in
!Auden to deliberate upon a question already solved by our
instructions at Madrid. Th- facts recalled with certainty
will put in evidence the grave ere..r of that reproach. I, in
fact, proposed in the month of July last to the cabinet of
London to listen to ns, and to act in concert at Madrid to
forward, especially as candidates for the bend of Queen Isa-
bella, the two infants, sons of Don Francois do Paula. As
being descendaits of Philip V., these two princes had our
connexion. As Spanish princes, they had that of England.
The disposition of the court of Madrid teemed to be favour-
able to them. I proposed at that time to the English
uphold them in common with ns, and I
• - that for our port we had no
e princes, and that either of
s Spain and to her queen, would
which I said at London I said
'treason has always received in•
o infants, and to say beforehand
to the choice which the queen
them. The ambassador of the
out his instructions. What will
month after ray proposal of joint
sons of Don Francois de Paula,
forwards me his answer. He did
overture, such as it had been
us to join him in forwarding
the Talent Don Enrique,
the despatch of the 22nd
Normonby communicated to

me on the 23th, to become the Queen'so hushand.
to
I
expressed to Lord Normanby, and I beg y to express
Lord Palmerston my astonishment at this exclusive choice,
and the impossibility on our put of acting together, for we
have always said, and we persist in saying, that the two in-
fanta were agreeable to us ; that it rested with the Queen of
Spain to r °flounce between them ; and that we were ready
to acquiesce in her choice, whatever it might he. That oar
adhesion to the two infants has been particularly useful to
the elder of the two, to Den Frenenis d'Assive who was, in
Spain, in an upright and loyal position, and maintaining
towards the queen, her government, and the qui en-mother
most respectful behaviour, no one can be astonished at.
The Infant Don Enrique had not taken a method so
fitting for arriving at his object. The kin; himself, when
that prince paced through Paris, gave him the advice
of a father, reminding hem where was his position, his
duty, his chances of success, offering his services at Madrid
with is view to recovering them for him. The infant did not
/Wow the advice of the king. No influence was sufficient
to surmount the inconvenienees of the situriun in which this
young prince was placed. list in truth, there is not any-
thing in the course of affairs which it is easy to foresee.
There was no need of particular instructions ti Count Bres-
nan, inasmuch as the candidateshirof Iton Francois d'Assise
prevailed at Madrid over that of Don Enrique. And to to
the reproach of having exclusively forwarded the views of
ooe of the infante, anti of having wished to force one of the
two upon the choice of the Queen Isabella, to whom can it
he legitimately addressed? Have not we on our side in this
circumstance ohs, reed the respect due to the dignity of the
queen, to the liberty of her MINI choice, and to the decorum
which ought to preside? The Infant lion Enrique has had
the misfortune to full under the influence of the meat pas-
4ontec and blind division of the Spanish progreuista-party.
This party wished to make use of the name, the aituatioe,
the matrimonial chances of this prince for s own re-esta-
blishment in power. It had resolved on and prepared, for
the attainment of its object, intrigues of every kind, which
were to rekindle in Spain insurrection and civil war. The
omens of the party have ele trly manifested its designs.
What can be more natural than that such deeds should have
produced the resolution which the Spanish government took
to put a speedy end to that question of the marriage of the
queen on which all parties were founding their 'peculation'
and their hopes? Other reasons, no less legitimate, have con-
tributed also to this result From the origin of the question,
the king, 11. Lord Palmerston mentions in his despatch, has
made known of his own accord, that he did not pretend for
either of t. is sons to the hand oftheQueen of Spain. He expressed
I at the same time a firm hope that the crown of Spain would
never go out of the house of Bourbon, and that the queen
would choose her husband from among the deseendauts of
Philip V. The government of the king has declared openly
and on every flee /i10:1 that such wan its line of policy. It
wished that the motives which should in ease of need direct
1 its actions should be well known beforehand to the whole of
Europe and especially to Spain and England, its allies.
Nothing in that language brought the least infraction on
the independence of Spain, her qumn and government. We
deeply respect that independence. In instructing the court
of Madrid from the first moment with our every thought,
we gave it, on the contrary, a mark of the high price we
attach to its own, as well as of our loyal friendship.
The cabinet at London, at this epoch, was struck by
the motives which presided over our behaviour, and
gave us to understand that it would be actuated by the
same motives in its counsel to the court of Madrid.
Although the combinations pees, nteel for the marriage of
the Queen Isabella did not at all place in danger our well-
known policy. wo occupied ourselves in nothing else than in
seconding such of these combinations u seemed to have a
chance of success. From the time that we saw seriously
combinations which made us fear that the husband of the
queen would not he chosen from among the descendants
of Philip V., and that the throne of Spain would go out of
the house of Bourbon, we gave them to underw and, both at
London and Madrid, the 27th of last February, that, if these
combinations should take consistency, we should consider
ourselves free front every engagement, and at liberty to de-
mand the hand either of the queen or the infanta
for the Duke de klontpensier. We wished at that
time, as at the opening of the question, to say openly
and beforehand, how we should act. In the month of
May last, we were informed with certain'y that
the Spanish government was going to address to the
reigning Duke of Saxe Coburg, then on a visit to the court
at Lisbon, a meuage to the effect that he should negotiate •
merriest* between Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg and
Queen Isabella. We learnt at the same time, and with the
same certainty, that this message bad been previously com-
municated to the English minister at Madrid, Mr. Buiwer,
and had received his approbation. The government of the
king made known immediately, both at London and Ma-
drid, its surprise and uneasiness. It received from Lord
Aberdeen assurances which proved its entire loyalty. But a
short time afterwards Lord Aberdeen quitted office, and our
information dams net permit us to doubt that the labour un-
dertaken for the marriage of Queen Isabella with Prince
Leopold of Coburg was actively pursued. It was in
the midst of this eituafion, and the anxiety which
it gave us, that I received by you, Count, a
despatch of the 19th of July, addressed by Lord Palmer-
ston to Mr. Bulwer, and which you were charged to commu-
nicate to me confidentially. Ido not think, to reply to a re-
proach indicated by Lord Palmerston, that the confidential
character of that communication could or ought to hinder
me from giving a knowledge of it, confidentially, also, to the
ambassador of the king at Madrid. to whom that knowledge
was indispensable for his thoroughly understanding the new
situation in which this despatch placed us ; and who, be-
side", did not mare, as he should have done, any public or
official use of it. " The candidates for the hand of the
Queen of Spain," say these instructions, addressed 19th
July, by Lord Palmerston to Mr. Buiwer, " are reduced to
three ; namely, Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg and the two
sons of Don Fmneoin de Paula. I omit the Count de Tra-
pani and the Count de Montemolin, as they seem to have
no chance of the choice felling upon either of them."
According to the despatch of the 224 September, which was
communicated to me, Lord Palmerston, in piecing thus
Prince Leopold of Sate Coburg at the head of the three
candidates, or alone remaining according to him for the hand
of the queen, has only, he says " pointed nut the prince so
one of these who had been spoken of in public as a possible
hue nand for the Queen of Sp tin, without that implying that
he was placed in advance and recommended by the British
government." But in the despatch of the 19th July, imme-
diately after the paraeraph w'ilich I have cited above, occurs
the followine paraerreph " Between the three candidates
below mentioned (Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg and the
two sons of Don Frangois de Paula) her Majesty's govern-
ment has only to express its sincere desire that her choice
shall fall upon that one who can best assure the
happiness of the queen, and develop the prosperity of the
Spanish nation." Certainly, if one can say that the first of
the paragraphs quoted mentions simply &fart, the candidate-
ship of Prince Leopold of Coburg, a fact which had not at
all up to that time been officially announced and proclaimed,
nue could not deny that by the second paragraph this candi-
datethip is accepted in the same manner and to the same de-
cree as that of the infant", eons of Don Frangois de Paula,
that any objection can be raised against the one more than
against the others, and that thus, for the first time, all the
three are mingled together in the same proper appro-
bation. It may be permuted, perhaps, to say that there
was there a Wu re.commendation, a manner of attaining
indirectly the end which one did not wish to follow up
openly. "Good faith," says Lord Palmerston, in
his despatch of the 22nd of September. " requires
that one should not reek to seize back again on
the one side that which hen been abandoned on
the other." The government of the King adheres fully
te this principle. In admitting that Lord Palmerston
bed no intention of placing Prince Leopold of Coburg in
advance, or of recommending him, he will recognise car-
tend
tainly himself that he said absolut nohing whic
srh could
to reject, him, or to discourageely
thet Spanish overn-
mint. What would have happened if the court of Madrid,
treating to the language which, after the despatch of the
19th July, Mr. Buiwer would certainly not have failed to
hold, had persisted in the offer which it had meted to be
inside to the prince ? One would have said that it was free
choice, the will of the Queen of Spain and of her govern-
ment, one would have hem able to call to mind, in the
terms of the despatch of the 19th July, that the English
government, who did not seek this choice, had nevertheless
announced beforehand, that it had no objection to do so ; and
without direct support, without active co-operation, by a
soirtwedact of permission the deed would have been amens- I
. The government of the King could not be mistaken
yen that situation. To prevent the comeanences of it, it
leek the most direct end legitimate means at Madrid : it
appealed to the free choice, to the independent will of
Queen Isabella and her government. At the side of • com-
bination which pursued itself evidently against its policy, it
placed, it offered a different combination. It could do so, for it
had openly and positively reserved to itself the right. It
=for the hypothesis for which it had made that reserve,
filch it had foreseen in its instructions at Madrid
en well as its its declarations at London, became more and
more probable. The Queen of Spain and her nimmt ats-
eeptedthat combination. The Cettessravebsgenneed-
mese approval . The double marriage of the Queen limbeillaerillt
dm Duke de Cadiz, and that of the Infante Donna Bair
Ternanda with the Duke de Montpeturier, was preprandial
concluded with the most entire liberty, and by the meat me-
gent motives. I fulfil, also, Count, an imperious duty in
rejecting energetically, and still more energetically in my
soul than in my words, that strange accusation of moral ate
ercion exercised, says Lord Palmerston in his despatch, by
the ambassador of the king at Madrid, in compliance with
his instructions to force the Queen of Spain to accept the
Duke of Cadiz for a husband. I could limit myself to a very
short and very simple answer, and one that the entire
world would receive. Nowhere, in any court, in any family,
!WC the rights of the liberty of marriage and domestic life
better known, and more scrupulously respected, than at the
court of the Tuileries, and in the bosom of our royal family.
The sentiments which animate and govern the king at Pans
in the midst of his children, animate and govern him equally
in his connexion with the court of Madrid and his royal
nieces. And the government of the king makes a point of
assuring everywhere and on all occasions, for the ties of do-
mestic life, the same respect of which it receives so high an
I example. Bat I will recall a fact. How can one direct
against us the reproach of moral coercion when a month ago
they demanded of us to forward, exclusively, with the Queen
Ip earin ec
el 1 ae,,iadnednta.4as tuhne only
tumfi
;ewe
ht no c
andmi herin ihnu
intimacnd, a
y
with with the meet spirited adversaries of her government. In
perfect liberty has Queen Isabella chosen the Duke de
Cadiz for her husband. It was in full freedom, and after a
discussion as free as solemn, that the Corter unanimously
voted their adhesion to the choice of the queen. And the
public tranquillity ham been as complete during this great
deliberation as the liberty in the interior of the palace
of the king and in the assemblies of the country.
Neither commotion nor occasions for troubles were wanes
at that moment in Spain. All pretensions, all ambitions, al
conspiracies put themselves in motion to arouse now insur-
reciaon and civil was. Isolated. or combined, they have not
been able to summed up to this time to commence their de-

signs. What most clear peoofs of the sentiments of the
great majority of the Spaiii-h people, and of its free adhe-
sion to the choice of the queen and the vote of its repre-
sentatives! " The government of her Britannic blajesty,"
says Lord Palmerston, in his despatch of the 22nd Septem-
ber, " felicitates itaelf in having taken no part in the
amangementof this marriage." The government of the king
MS for Spain, for her allies, for Europe, on the contrary,
only reasons to be glad of it. The Duke of Cadiz ia at the
*arm time • prince descended from Philip V. and a
Spanish prince in birth and arntiments. He has always
showed himself full of respect for constitutional rule, and
for the principles of monarchy. Spain and Europe, the
liberties of the peninsula, and the interests of the European
order, fled, inn union with Queen Isabella, all the guaran-
tees a foreseeing policy can desire. In spite of the disappro-
bation clearly expressed at the marriage of Queen Isabella
with the Duke of Cadiz, it is principally the marriage of the
Dime do Montpensier with the Infanta, which, according to
the despatch of the 22d September, bas rendered necessary
to the eyes of the English government the communication
which it has made to us, and has determined it to ad-
dress to us its representations and protestations. The go-
vernment of the king makes it always a duty to collect and
discuss, in a spirit of sincere equity, the representations
that another government, and to: • stronger reason, a
friendly government, thinks it right to address in the name
of its tomtits end policy. But protestations should be
founded in rights. Due ought not to protest against an
action front the simple motive that it is nut agreeable.
Every protestation ought to attach itself to an anterior right.
Alm the English government brings forward, as the foun-
dation of its protest, the treaty of Utrecht, and the rules
which it instituted for the succession to the crown of Spain,
In the interests of the country and the equilibrium of
Europe. The government of the King thinks that the
treaty of Utresht authorises in no manner such a preten-
sion. After the long and bloody war for the succession,
and to re-catabl‘h the peace of Europe, the double end
thoroughly recognised and proclaimed in this treaty was:-
Ist. To assure the crown of Spain to Philip V. and his
descendants. 2nd. To prevent the union of the crowns of
France and Spain upon the same head was always possible.
It suffices to call to mind the negotiations which brought on
the treaty of Utrecht, and to read the same text (article 6) to
rest convinced that such are really its sentiments and
sense. By the marriage of the Infanta with the Duks
de Montpensier, the crown of Spain is sure not to
quit the family of the Bourbons and the descendants
of Philip V., and, at the same time, the hindrances
established against all possible union of the two
orowns of France and Spain remain in full force. The
double intention of the treaty of Utrecht is thus always
accomplished. It would be strange that one should pretend
to invoke against us those dispositions of the treaty which
tend to hinder the union of the two crowns; and that one
should remove those which assure the crown of Spain to
Philip V. and his descendants. Such, however, would be
the result of the interpretation of the treaty which Lord
Palmerston would give in hie despatch tf September V.
Never was ouch an interpretation to this day--I will
not say admitted, but only conceived and presented.
The facts reject it as strongly as the text. Never has the
treaty of Utrecht been considered or invoked so making an
obstacle to marry between different branches of the house of
the Bourbons of France and of the house of the Bourbons of
Spain. Elamites of these marriages abound. I will only
cite at this moment three, most near that very time when
the treaty of Utrecht was concluded. 1. Louis 1., King of
Spain, eldest son of Philip V., married, on 20th January,
1721, Louisa Elizabeth d'Orleans. Mademoiselle e.e Mont-
pensier, fourth daughter of the reigning Duke of Orleans.
2. The Infant Don Philippe, Duke de Parme, son
of Philip V., married, 25th August, 1739, Louisa
Elizabeth of France, eldest daughter of Louis XV.
3rd. The Dauphin, son of Louis X V., married, Feb. 23,1745,
Maria Theresa Antoinette, Infanta of Spain, daughter of
Philip V. The last example is very remarkable, for it was
the immediate heir to the French crown who married one o
the heirs of the crown of Spain. And they cannot say that
the law proclaimed in 1713 by Philip V., to change in Spain
the order of succession to the throne, would have deprived
the Infanta, Maria Thereat Antoinette, of her eventual
rights, for this law is only a half-salic law, which does not
admit, it is true, the succession of women, except after the
fsilure of male heirs, but which admits plainly in this case.
The I nfantas,then, in the marriages 1 have cited,and Ps all other
analogous marriages, bear an eventual right, but a positive
one, to the crown of Spain. Nobody in Europe thought of
making an objection against these in-:Triages, or of demand.
ing that new stipulations should be added to the treaty of
Utrecht, to guard against the consequences of them. There is
not now, ti propos of the marriage of the Infanta Donna
Luisa Fernanda with the Duke de Montpensier, absolutely
any reason to think or act otherwise, and the stipulations of
the treaty of Utrecht may suffice, for the future, for the in-
terests of the people and the just balance of Europe,
as they have been sufficient up to the present time.
One cannot, then, rightly found upon that treaty
neither on the text or the consequences, or its interpretation,
according to facts, any legitimate protest. In support of
these representations, Lord Pim:eaten does not confine
himself to invoking the treaty of Utrecht. The marriage of
the Duke de Montpensier with the Infanta tends, according
to him, to bind, for the foreign affairs of both nations, the
policy of Spain to that of France in a manner dangerous to
the independence of Spain, for the equilibrium of Europe,
and for the interests of other states. Spain has proved that
it knew how to preserve its independence, and to play its
part in the cause of European equilibrium. There is,
perhaps, some want of memory and of justice to say
to her that she knows not how to do it this day.
She will do it much better now that she has in her posses-
sion a free and constitutional government; a government
little favorable to the spirit of aggression and conquest, but
very favorable to maintain the independence of nations even
to the annulling foreign influences. The government of the
king nn its mat has proved that nothing was further from its
thoughts than to wish to infringe on the independence of
Spain, and to meddle in Me affairs. The facts which have
manifested on this point our firm resolution, are recent and
brilliant; and there ts perhaps some want of memory and
justice to render no account of it. But at the
same time, and we hesitate not to declare it, the
government of the king desires and seeks a true
and soli:1 friendship between France and Spain. The
geographical position of the two countries, their traditions,
their manners, religion, all their essential interests, moral
and material, render this friendship natural and necessary:
necessarily, by no means in • political sense of aggression
and extension, either of the ore or the two states at the
expense of another; either of the two together against
other states, but in a policy of safety and peace to the
advantage of both and of the whole of Europe. The
marriage of the Duke of Montpensier with the Infante,
placed by the side of the marriage of Queen Isabella with
the Duke of Cadiz, is at once a testimony of the'
disposition of the two countries to strengthen the
ties of that friendship, and is a guarantee for its
duration. It will alter neither the independence
of Spain and her government, nor the mist and just condi-
dons of the equilibrium of Europe; but it will contribute
to guarantee between France and Spain those good and inti-
mate relationships which will work for the good of both na-
tions, and for the repose of Europe. It appears to us that
everywhere a policy elevated and enlightened ought to greet
us with this result. The government of the king does not
find any grave and legitimate foundation in the represents.
dons addressed to it by the British government. It cannot
admit them, nor take them as a rule of conduct. But called
upon necessarily to decide and to act, we have done. with
the free concurrence of the Spanish government, that which
was conformable to our rights, our legitimate intermits, to
the natural and peaceable policy of our country ; we
have done nothing which brings a stain upon our rights, le-
gitimate interests, or the peace", of the other states. We
are convinced that France thinks on this subject as the go-
vernment. Everything attests that the great majority •f
the Spaniel people entertain like sentiments. We trust that
the sound judgment and the spirit of equity in the British
government and nation, will bring them to see that the
powerful end generous motives which have been so happily
estalsliahed between Frence, England, tnd Spain, the good
intelligence and friendship, will raise them above this parti-
cular disagreement, and ought to receive no alteration. I
invite you to send a copy of this despatch to Lord Palmer-
ston, after having read it to him—Receive, &e.
LORD PALMEILSToN TO To MARQUis Or NORMANDY.
(Text.)
FOREIGN OFFICE, OCT. 31st, 1846. —My Lord,—Her
Majesty's government would willingly have allowed the
communications between the twO nowernmenta on the Spanish
marriages, to close with M. Oudot'e despatch of the 6th
inst., a copy of which was transmitted to me by Count
Jarnaconthe Bth, if it were not that there tiresome statements
and some arguments in that despatch, which it is impossible
for her Majesty's government to leave entirely without a
reply. M. Guizot's despatch, like that from me to your ex-
cellency, to which it wit an answer, treats of two subjects,
the of the Queen of Spain. and the marriage of the
infanta With regard to the first ,I have little to say, except
so far as I may have to touch upon it in treating of the
second, and except to express the sincere and earnest
wish of her Majesty's government that it may con-
duce tothe happiness of the queen, and to the welfare
of the Spanish nation. Her Msjesty's government, indeed,
in gnawer to repeated applications from the gov, rnment of
again on the subject of the queen's marriage, had instructed
bass Majesty's minister at Madrid to recommend a different
arrangement, and bad invited the French government to
nin that recommendation. But the recommendation of
bar Majesty's government was not given to the government
rt ti in the spirit of dictation, as M. Guizot's despatch
telmE emea to imply ; nor didher Majesty'sgovernment either
mk oe meet that the government of France should exclu-
sively recommend the candidate whom her Majesty's govern-
went thought the best. We knew perfectly well, that if
that candidate were not accepted by the Spanish court, the
French government would recommend another; and I dis-
tinctly stated to Count Jarnac, in answer to a question which
be put to me, that her Majesty's government, having given
Its opinion, would, in the event of that opinion not prevail-
/If , take no part either for or against the other, a candidate
whom the French government would afterwards propose.
Entwhat I adverted to in awhile, to this matter in my former
spat& is this that ate e
latter end of
Count Jarnac was holding out to me,
V. Quint to your excellency, the expectation
that Count Breeson would be instructed to co-operate with
Mr. Bulwer in recommending the candidate whom the
British government wished to point out, provided that, in
the event of that candidate being rejected, Mr. Bulger
would be instructed not to oppose Count Brenson in recom-
mending the other ; Count Breseon was at that very time
already deciding the matter at Madrid against that firstcandi-
date, in pursuance of instructions previously sent tohira from
Paris; and her Majesty's government think that the French
government might as well have made those instructions known
to them, instead of continuing to discuss the condition of •
joint action which those instructions had put entirely out of
the question. And, in regard to these matters with respect
to which the French government professed, at the time, a
desire for a full mutual understanding, and now seams to

imply that a similar rlioposition was net equally felt by her
,nti,leety's government, it is to be Owned that her
:ilajesty's government twice communicated to the French
government the inatruetious which had bees sent to
Mr. Butane ; the first time in eztenso, and the
second time in substance ; whereas nosimilar communication
was ever made to her Majesty's government of the instruc-
tions sent to Count Benson. But not only was the confidence
thus shown by her Majesty's government tower is the govern-
ment of France not reciprocated, but it wee turned to pun
;ewes at verimice with the spirit in which it was made ; and
though M. Guizot declares that my iustructions of the 19th
July to Mr. Bulwer, of which a copy was com-
municated in confidence to M. Genet, and was
sent immediately by him to M. Bresson, was
not used by M. Bresson in any public or offi-
cial manner ; yet he does not deny that it was used by
Count Benson in a manner unauthorised by her Majesty's
government, to whom, and to whom alone, it belonged to
determine what use abonlel he made at Madrid of its own
instruction to her Majesty's minister at that court. M.
Guizot reverts to the earlier period* of these transac-
tions, and admits that from the outset the King of
the French spontaneously made, known that he did
not pretend to obtain the hand of the Queen of
Spain for any of his sons, and that he wished the
Queen of Spain to choose her consort from among
the descendants of Philip V., a category which, as
the French government pointed out at the time, epecifically
exelieled all the members of the royal family of Francs.'.
Bot surely. these declarations had reference to a principle,
and net simply to a person. The objection, of which Lis
Majesty the King of the French by such declarations ad-
mitted the validity, was not that one of his sons should be
the husband of Isabella of Bourbon, but that one of Lie
sons should be the husband of the Queen of Spain;
and the principle of that objection is, therefore,
not confined in its application to the marriage of
one of his sone with the reigning envereign, but 'vides*/
applies else to marriage with the immediate helms le die
crown. And is this the doctrine of her Majesty's rem-
ment alone ? And is it only now for the first time adnneed ?
Far otherwise. It is a doctrine admitted virtually by his
Majesty the King of the French himself, and at an antece-
dent period. For M. Guizot alludes in his despatch to cer-
tain engagements from which the French government
intf-
mated, on the 27th February, 1846, that they should. in •
specified contingency, consider themselves freed and released.
And what were those engagements They were, first, the
engagement originally sud spontaneously made by hie Ma-
jesty the King of the French, that no son of his should marry
the Queen of Spain ; and secondly, the engagement also
spontaneously taken by hie Majesty, and by his minister, in
September, 1845, at Eu, that in no cow should the Duke of
Mentpensier marry the infants, until the Queen of Spain
shoad bane married, and until, by her having had children,
the prospect of • direct succession to the Spanish crown
should have been assured. Does not the second of these
engagements prove that the first was understood by those
who made it exactly in the sense which I have given to it,
and that the objection of which the King of the French ac-
knowledged the force and justice, was not that one of his sons
should marry a particular princess of the house of Bourbon,
hut that any of hie sons should be the consort of the Queen
of Spain ? And his Majesty's feeling and admitting the
force of that objection proposed of his own accord that the
marriage which he wished to take place between his son
end the infanta should be postponed until the birth of
children to the queen, should in some degree have divested
that marriage of the appearance of an attempt to take the
chance of obtaining by indirect means, in one way, that
which hue been relinquished, directly, in another. This
last-mentioned engagement at Eu was obviously not suffi-
cient to remove the objection of the British government to
the proposed marriage of the Duke of Montpensier to the
infants. But that engagement, such as it was, ought to
have been kept ; time would have been allowed to the two
governments to disease with deliberation the various ques-
tions connected with the matter; and they might have
endeavoured to have arrived at some amicable arrangement
of their mutual views and interests with regard to it. But
the object of the French government on this occasion seems
to have been so to precipitate the matter as to render all an
raneement and mutual nnderstandine imnoesible. This
engagement, spontaneously made by the French eovernment,
has been broken; and upon what plea? M. Genet, in his
despatch, assigns two grounds of excuse for its viola-
tion. The one a circumstance which happened during
the administration of her Majesty's late government; the
other, some circumstances which are said to have happened
since her Majesty's present government came into office.
M. Genet alludes to a communication which wee made to
her Majesty's late gevernuient on the 27th February of the
present year; the purport of which was that the King of
the French would hold himself free (ram the engagements
he had taken as to the marriage of the queen and of
the infanta, and would deem himself at liberty
to ask the hand either of the one or of the other
for the Duke of Mootpcnsier, in a certain contingency.
That contingency M. Genet states in his despatch to have
been defined to be, " if any combinations should acquire
consistency which should make the French government fear
that the consort of the Queen of Spain would be taken not
from among the descendents of Philip V." This communication
of the 27th February, 1846, upon which so much stress is laid,
as affording a justification of the course which the French
government has taken, was verbal and unofficial. There is no
record of it in the Foreign-office. There is nothing to show that
it was ever acquiesced in by her Majesty's late government,
and the pretensions put forward and the intentions an-
nounced in it are at variance with the principles laid down,
and with the opinions declared by her Mnii sty's late as well
as by her Majesty's present administration. I never heard
of this memorandum till lately. It was never even men-
tinned to me by Count Jarnite until otter the event had
happened for which it is now quoted as a justification. It is
said to have been a timely warning, the neglect of which justi-
fies the double knowledge; and its existence was made
known to me for the first time by Count Jarnac, after the
news of the double marriage had been received. About the
middle of September Count Jarnac showed me an unsigned
memorandum, which he said was the record of the commu-
nication in question. But, although I remember that the
passage quoted by M. Guizot was in that memorandum, yet the
specific contingency stated therein as the one which would re-
lease the French government from its engagements was the case
M there being at any time animminent danger of a marriage
either of the Queen of Spain or of the infanta with Priin
Leopold of Saxe Coburg, or with any other foreign prince,
not being a Bourbon and not being a descendant of Philip
V. of Spain ;" and it will in such a case that the memoran-
dum declared that 11. M. the King of the French 'would con-
sider himself free to ask for the Duke of liloutpensier the
hand either of the queen or of the infanta. It is to be
remarked that the memorandum 'thus places both
the marriage of the queen and that of the heiren
presumptive to the throne in the same political category ;
but if there was between those two marriages, in the opinion
of the French government, this identity of political charac-
ter, why did that government, while it felt the propriety of
endeavouring to come to an understanding with her Ma-
jesty's government about the one marriage, consider itself free
to make a secret and surreptitious re ttlement of the other. The
memorandum further assumes that each of the two princesses
ought to marry a descendant of Philip V.; and that, come-
quently,neither of them should marry the Duke of Moetpensier,
except in the case of imminent danger of one or the other of
them being married out of the house of Bourbon. What,
then, were the circumstances which arc mentioned as having
made such an event imminent? The first circumstance hap-
reed, as I have observed, during the time of the Late
pavement. M. Guizot says that, "in May of the
present year, the French government was informed with
certainty, that the Spanish government had addreased
to the reigning Duke of Sazo Coburg, then on a
visit to the court of Lisbon, a message for the purpose of
neontiating the marriage of Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg
with the Queen Isabella, and that the French government
had learned at the same time, and with the same certainty,
that this message had been previously communicated to Mr.
Bulwer, the British minister at Madrid, and bad received
his approval ; that the French government immediately ex-
pressed, both at London and at Madrid, its surprise and
uneasiness; and that it received from Lord Aberdeen
assurances which demonstrated his entire good faith."
Now what is the impression which this statement is calcu-
lated to produce as to the course of the transaction to which
it relates ? Why, evidently that the French government
having, from its own sources of information, obtained a
knowledge that a letter had been written by the Spanish
court to the Duke of Saxe Coburg, and that it bad been seen
by Mr. Bulwer before it was sent off, expressed to Lord
Aberdeen its surprise and uneasiness, and received from
Lord Aberdeen in reply satisfactory assurances. But the
real transaction was exactly the reverse of this, as re-
gard.' the communication between the two governments.
The first knowledge which the French government received
of the letter having been written by Queen Christina, was
from Lord Aberdeen himself. The first knowledge which
thee had that this letter had been seen by Mr. Bulwer, was
equally given to them by Lord Aberdeen. The surprise
which they expressed, was surprise at whatthey learned from
Lord Aberdeen ; and the first expression of that surprise is
said to have been accompanied, noted much by uneasiuessaby
alleged incredulity. The French government seemed unwilling
to believe that much a letter could have been written, and
that they should have received the first intimation of it from
any other person than their own minister at Madrid. N.
Guizot says that Lord Aberdeen, in reply to the communica-
tion of the French government, gave assurances which de-
monetrated his good faith. M. Guizot oueht rather to haie
said that Lord Aberdeen demonstrated his good faith by
spontaneously communicating to Comte St. Aulaire a fact,
of which the French government represented themselves as
uninformed. Lord Aberdeen thought himself bound tomake
known to the French government that such a letter had been
written, because he found that the letter had been shown to
the British minister at Madrid, before it was sent off; and
an Lord Aberdeen had said to the French government that
her Majesty's government meant to take no active part In
favour of the Prince of Coburg, he thought it right to inform
them of what had passed, lest the bare knowledge which
her Msjesty's minister at Madrid had acquired of this step,
might expose her Majesty's government to the suspicion of
having changed their policy, in this respect, secretly, sad
without previously informing the French government that
they intended to do so. It must be confessed that, as regards
Lord Aberdeen, it may be said of the statement made of
this transaction in M. Guizot's despatch, that " then
is in it, perhaps, some want of memory or of justice."
At all event., this entinp'e of scrupulous good faith on the
part of Lord Aberdeen, cannot be (meted as constituting a
reason why the French government should be released from
the engagements which it had spontaneously taken towards
the government of Great Britain. The second circumstance
upon which M. Gullet's despatch founds the defence of the
French government in this matter, took place, as I have
said, since her Majesty's present administratem came into
office. M. Guizot says that soon after the above-mentioned
rnmmunicetion between Lord Abe nleen sod the French
government had taken place, Lord Aberdeen retired from
office: and the information received by the French govern-
ment no longer permitted hint to doubt that the efforts

which had been undertaken for the marriage of the Queen
of Spain with Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg were
actively pursued, no doubt that information was
correct; and it was not difficult for the French
government to acquire it. Those efforts were actively
pursued; but where. and to overcome what ohstarles ?
Why, if her Majesty's government have notheen much misin-
formed, those efforts were making, especially at Part., by the
Minquis of Miraflores. who had been sent lay the Spenish
ooust on a particular mission to the King of the French, to
endeavour to prevail upon his Majesty to withdraw the op-
pea tion which he hod made to a match which was stated by
the marquis to be anxiously desired by the court of Madrid.
But that mission, at least, the vary foundation of which scan
the assumption that the Coburg marriage could not take place
without the assent of the King of the French, afforded no ex-
ewe for a departure from the above-mentioned engagement.
" But then," M. Guizot says, " in the midst of this state of
thinr, and is the anxiety with which it inspired the French
government," he received from. Count Jarnac my despatch
of the 19. h of July to Mr. Bulwer. This despatch, he sag,
enumerated for the first time Prince Leopold an one of the
three remaining candidates for the queen's hand ; and that
prince's name was the first mentioned in the enumeration.
No preference, indeed, as M. Guizot admit', was expressed
in that despatch in favour of Prince Leopold ; but, on the
other band, it wan said that no objection was urged naninst
him: and the passage in that despatch which stated that
" Her Majesty's government have only to express thi it
sincere wish that the choice may fall upon the
candidate who may be most likely to secure the
happiness of the queen, and to insure the welfare of
the Spanish nation," wee, in the opinion of the French
government, such a plain. though indirect recommendation
of the prince of Coburg, that this despatch with calculated by
a mere act of Zainer oiler to bring about that marriage with.
out any direct support or active co-operation of the British
government. And it is argued that this despatch justified
the French government in taking its own measures in regard
to the two marriages. Now, in the first place, it is to be
observed that if the knowledge of the despatch of the 19th of
July, by the Spanish court, was calculated to render the
Coburg marriage probable, that knowledge was afforded
to them by Couot Bresson, who shoved them the despatch,
and not by Mr. Bulwer, who was told in it that her
Majesty's government did not instruct hint to take
any steps thereupon. In as far, therefore, as a knowledge
by the Spanish court of the sentiment" expressed in that
despatch constituted, in the opinion of the French govern-
ment, a danger, that danger was created by their own agent,
and cannot be pleaded in their own defence. With respect
to the assertion that Prince Leopold had never before been
officially mentioned as one of the candidates for the queen's I
hand, and that his being so mentioned in thin despatch gave
him some advantage which hedid not pewee before, I would
only observe that, considering that almostevery newspaper in
EftaohucuaarontndtPlidedlomatende,tmlhoboenruangr agodwuumomnpalltireoikofean:tv.hyotegoot no2lheivhntotiehroaciFeaho.,e,brlts'. ,e"lBl6d,eriwnogs
nwasorikenioco"nstioderibi-
ing also that the known wishes of the Spanish court in regard
to hint had later in the spring of this year been the sulejectot
an official and threatening intimation given from M. Bream
to the Spanish government, deemed it necessary to make as
official communication to the government of England,
which communication Lord Aberdeen made, on the 25th of
Jan'. an official reply; and considering, moreover, that
at the very moment when my despatch of July
was written there was a Spanish envoy at Paris, sent
expressly to negotiate with the French government about
the marriage of Prince Leopold to the Queen of Spain ; it is
not easy to see how the mere mention of the name of that
prince, in a despatch not intended to be mode public, and
meant only for the personal information of her Majesty's
minister at Madrid, could in any way alter the position of
Prince Leopold with reference to the marriage question.
But its said that the dispatch of the 19th of July expressed
no objection to Prince Leopold. Undoubtedly it did not.
Her Majesty's present government, in this matter ad.
hered strictly to the judicious course pursued by their pre-
decessors. They have been of opinion that no
foreign government bad any right to object to
any prince as • candidate for the hand of the
Queen of Spain, unless for those political reasons
connected with the maintenance of the balance of
power which were stated in my despatch of the 19th of
July to Mr. Bulwer; and those reasons did not apply t'
Prince Leopold of Coburg. Neither the lath government. nor
the present, new any ground for objecting to Prince Leopold at
a candidate for the hand of the Queen of Spain. But that
despatch distinctly stated that her Majesty's present govern-
ment were not prepared to give any active support to any of
the candidates therein mentioned. Moreover, it referred
Mr. Bulwer to the instructions which he had received on the
marriage question from my predecessor in office; and among
those instructions was the communication to him of a
copy of the note addressed nn the 25th of June,
1846, by Lord Aberdeen to the Duke of Sotomayor,
in which Lord Aberdeen stated that " when an
alliance of the Queen of Spain with Count Trapani
had manifestly become odious to the Spanish nation, the
British government had ventured, although without any
English candidate or English preference, to point out the
Infant 1)on Enrique as the prince who appeared to them to
be the most eligible, because the met likely le peeve accept-
able to the people of Spain." And yet the French govern-
ment endeavour to represent that a despatch which contained
the passage first above quoted, and which referred Mr. Bul-
l/CT to thighs/it-mentioned exposition of the sentiments of the
late British government, as having been adopted by the pre-
sent government, was to be cor.oidered as an indirect en-
couragement of an alliance of the Queen of Spain
with Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg. M. Guinn ad-
mits that good faith requires that what is not
attempted directly, should not be aimed at indi-
rectly; and her Majesty's government cannot refrain front
expressing some surprise at the groundless insinuation con-
tained in the passage on which i have been remarking. see-
ing that M. Guizot, in the paragraph immediately following,
directly admits that her Majesty's government had no inten-
tion to put forward or to recommend Prince Leopold of Saxe
Coburg. 'That admission is an acknowledgment of the exact
truth. The British government has at no time put forward
or recommended that prince as a candidate for the hand of
the Queen of Spain, and has at no time taken any steps to
promote his alliance with that sovereign. If that prince.
being the object of the choice of the court of Madrid, had
also been wished for by the great majority of the people of
Spain, and if his union with the queen would have crested
for Spain no emberrassments in her foreign relations, the
British Government would cheerfully have taken any
steps which it might have been competent to take,
in order to facilitate such an arrangement. But
being led to dnubt, by what bad passed in regard to Count
Tearani, whether any foreign prince would be acceptable to
the Spanish natien, and geeing that the objections expressed
by the King of the French to Prince Leopold, however un-
reasonable, unjust, and, in public law, untenable they might '
he, might, nevertheless, in the event of that prince becoming
the cousin of the queen, injuriously affect the relations of
Spain with France, the British government, front the mo-
ment when the Trapani match was abandoned, steadfastly
and constantly maintained the opinion that it was desirable
for the interests of Spain that the queen's choice should fall
upon a Spanish prince. It is true that when her Majesty's
present ministers came into office great efforts were mails by
the Spanish court to obtain from them some tepees-
, eion of opinion in favour of Prince Leopold ; and
not only were those efforts made at Madrid, but the Duke
of Sotomayor came aver from France, where he was residing
on leave of absence, to urge, personally, the same request.
The British government dealt with these applications as con-
sidering them made in good earnest, and as understanding
them to express the real wishes of the Spanish court, and as
' sash with no object in view than that which was professed.
My despatch of the 22nd August to Mr. Bulwer conveyed
as tamer to the Spanish court ; and on the 15th August, I
gave an answer to the Duke of Sotomayor, by stating to him
that which I bad before more than once said to Court
Jarnac, namely, that the British government had no candi-
date of its own ; that, considering all the difficulties con-
nected with the selection of Prince Leopold, that selectiim
did not seem to us to be the hest; that it would he most
desirable, on the whole, that a Spanish prince should become
the consort of the queen; and that amongst Spanish
princes Don Enrique seemed to us to be the fittest.
These answers, no doubt disappointed the expectations
with which those overtures bad been pressed upon her Ma-
jesty's government; but what was there in all this, which
could justify the French government in departing from its
voluntary engagement at Eu ? Even admitting for the
sake of argument that her Majesty's present government
were to be held bound by the memorandum of the 27th
February, which the French government had never either
mentioned Cr communicated to them.
But M. Guizot's despatch goes on to say that " the
French government was unable to deceive itself as to the
state of things, and saw that there was on the part of the
Spanish court se strong a desire for the Coburg alliance
that if the B • h government 'liquid make no active op-
position to it, and should remain only passive in the matter,
that marriage would certainly be concluded ; and that
consequently the French government resorted at Madrid to
the most direct and legitimate means, and appealed to the
free choice and independent will or the queen and of her
government, to Ming about a different arrangement "By
the aide of a combination, which was being pursued evidently
in opposition to the policy of the French government, that
governmens, says M. Guizot, offered a different thimbina-
lion ; and this latter one was accepted by the queen and her
government." The contradictions between the opposite
statements contained in these passages are too obvious to re-
quire to be pointed out. If the Spanish court had so strong
a desire for the Coburg marriage that nothing but the active
and decided opposition of the British government could have
prevented that marriage, how did it happen that in the
absence, as M. Guizot alleges, of any such opposition, the
mere and simple offer of a different arrangement by the
French government sufficed to procure the immediate whip-
tion of that different arrangement ? And if, as M.
Guizot states, the Spanish court acted in this
matter with the most entire freedom, what was the
reason of so sudden a transition from what is represented
to hove been an almost uncontrollable determination for
one arrangement, to a spontaneous and equally decided
adoption of another one ? M. Guint says that this result
was brought about by the most urgent motives. What'
those motives were he does not explain. May it be inferred
that one at least among those urgent motives was furnished
by the urgency with which Count Bresson pressed the
arrangement which he thus proposed to the Spanish court i
And might ant another of these urgent motives have been
afforded by the conviction then already obtained by the
Spanish court, that the British government did not recom-
mend the Prince of Coburg, but thought that under all the
circumstances of the case, a Spanish prince would be the
fittest consort for the queen. If that conviction was felt at
Madrid, and her Majesty's government have good ground
for asserting that it was there felt, what becomes of the
excuse put forward for the precipitate and secret settlement
of the marriage of the Duke de Montpensier to the infanta,
upon the plea that the engagements of Eu had been rendered
void by the happening of the case of imminent danger Ted-

go;errtntent to uphold them
declared at the same time I
objection to either of these
them who seemed fitting to Si
be received by us. That wh,
equally to Madrid. Count Br
struetions to support the two in
/ ithat we shall adhere fully to
should make between them
' king has faithfully carried out
happen, when more than a m
measures in favour of the son
Lord Palmerston at last forwl
not adhere at all to the or
made. He demanded of u
exclusively at Madrid tl
the only fit person., said
et lkagost, which Lord I
-.Nob •