The Express.
London, England, 1860-05-07 00:00:00

FRANCS AND SW
-..--

It is clear that K Thouvenel is bent upon tiring
out the diplomatic world by the number and
length of his diplomatic notes. Two fresh circulars
have lately been published relative to the Swiss
question and to the neutralised provinces of Savoy.
Their prolixity does not render them forcible. It
would indeed be scarcely possible to string together
a longer list of fallacies and errors than these docu-
ments contain. To refute them all would be a hope-
less task. One or two salient points may be
selected from the net.

The ground upon which K Thouvenel relies in
his note of the 7th of April is, that the neutrality
of the provinces of Chablais and Faucigny was
established solely in the interest of Sardinia, and
as a compensation to that country for the territory
ceded to the Canton of Geneva.

Without relying upon the treaty of 1564, which
M. Thouvenel, on his own authority, declares to
have been duly abolished, it may be observed that
the terms of this treaty are peculiarly applicable to
present circumstances. "None of the parties," it

. •
says, " shall be at liberty to alienate, by sale, ex-
change, or in any other way, the towns, fortresses,
country and people to another prince, lord, town,
country, or district whatsoever ; in order that the
one party may 'secure the other from all foreign,
importunate, or burthensome neighbourhood, and
that each may in turn be similarly secured."
Surely M. Thouvenel is not serious when he
attempts to prove that it was in consequence of the
abandonment of the treaty of 1564 that the Swiss
abstained from protesting against the French inva-
sion of 1792 and 1798, the result of which was the
annihilation of the kingdom of Sardinia, and the
temporary occupation of Switzerland.

But to come to more recent times, one authority
may be cited, the validity of which M. Thouvenel
cannot contest, since he appeals to it himself, viz.,
the Congress of Vienna. During the very first
sittings of that Congress—that is to say, in October,
1814—a question was raised of giving to Switzerland
frontiers on the northern side of Savoy, such as
would enable her to defend her neutrality, which
was considered as a matter of European importance.
This is proved by the protocols, and they bear evi-
dence that if the district of Gex was not reunited to
Switzerland, it was out of consideration to France,
and at the instance of Talleyrand. Similar motives,
in addition to the circumstance that Switzerland
did not wish for any considerable increase of terri-
tory, also prevented the annexation to Switzerland
of Chablais and Faucigny ; and it was at the sug-
gestion of Genevese delegates, at the Congress of
Vienna, that, in the absence of any means of obtain-
ing a good military frontier, the neutralisation of

the provinces in question was proposed to the
assembled Powers of Europe.
A special note of the Swiss deputation brings
into prominent view this necessity, whether for the
purpose of covering Geneva, or to provide for the
defence of the passes of Valarsine and of Meillerie,
which command the road to the Simplon.
The Swiss plenipotentiaries, no doubt, ob-
served that the King of Sardinia could
not but find this advantageous to him,
especially at a time when the greater part of
Southern Savoy was French ; and accordingly
in the following month, on the 26th of March,
1815, M. de St. Marian, the Sardinian plenipo-
tentiary, lays down officially, as one of the condi-
tions which Sardinia required for the cession of a
small increase of territory to Geneva, the neutrali-
sation of Chablais and Fancigny ; but the most im-
portant condition, and that which constituted the
consideration of the cession, is that the imperial
fiefs which had been united to the Republic of
Genoa, and which were provisionally administered
by the King of Sardinia, were to be finally united
to the Sardinian States, in the same way as the rest
of the states of Genoa. Such is the true account of
the cession of a little bit of territory made by Sar-
dinia to Switzerland, and of the compensation
given for it.
Again, it was Switzerland who, on the oocasion
of the second peace of Paris, commissioned her
plenipotentiary, M. Pietet de Rochemont, to ask
for an extension of the neutral line to certain por-
tions of the province of Genevois, which France
restored to Sardinia. This neutrality, however,
was no longer a matter of importance to Sardinia,
when once the whole of Savoy belonged to her, and
was rather a hindrance to her than otherwise ;
and it was evidently imposed on her for the sake
of the neutrality of Switzerland, and in the in-
terest of Europe. Accordingly, on the 20th of
November, 1815, the great Powers formally record
by a solemn act that "the neutrality and inviola-
bility of Switzerland, and her independence of all
foreign influence, are in the true interests of the
whole of Europe„ (Que la neutraliti et l'incioiebi-
de la Suisse et son independence de took influ-
ence itrangere sont dans les rrais isiterlts de PEurope
entitre).

And now what is to be said for M. Thouvenel's
second note, in which he endeavours to prove that
Europe, in establishing the perpetual neutrality
of Switzerland, never dreamt that she would be
called upon to defend it, and only granted it to
please her powerful neighbours 1 If so, how could
this neutrality be in the interest of Europe 1 Why
did Europe attach so much importance to Switzer-
land possessing the passes which lead to Italy, and
above all that of the Simplon 1 Surely it was not
that France or Austria might make use of them
when either of them thought fit. We appeal from
H. Thouvenel of the ith and of the 14th April to
M. Thouvenel of the 4th of February, who
concludes his note of the last-mentioned date,
addressed to the Swiss minister at Paris,
with these words : " The Emperor has directed
me to tell you that, if the annexation should take
place, he will have great pleasure, out of sympathy
for Switzerland, for which he continues to feel a
lively interest, to make over to Switzerland as its
own territory, and as • part of the Helvetic
Confederation, the provinces of Chablais and
Faucigny."
If Europe, by tacit consent, or out of base com-
pliance, should sanction M. Thouvenel's views,
Switzerland would have but one of two courses to
follow. She must either abandon her military
system, which she has organised with so much care
for the last fifty years, and for which she has made
such great sacrifices ; or she must keep watch and
ward, her arms in her hand, until the day comes,
and it cannot be far distant, when she will have to
show that in accepting her neutrality as a benefit,
she has also understood that it entails upon her the
obligation of endeavouring that it should be re-
spected by something else besides protocols. Her
choice cannot be doubtful. In the meantime let us
hope that Europe will protest, as Switzerland has
protested, against the str►nge doctrines of M.
Thouvenel, which are but the forerunner of future
attempts to overturn the established order of things
in Europe.

The Prince do Joinville sailed in the Royal Mail
steamer Europa, for Boston, oe Saturday, under the name
of Franoole d'Arr. He appeared to be in ex, Aleut healtk,
and we (Lirerpoot A(bion) hear he ia on his 'ray to the
Brazils.

it•or
le.

EXPRESS FROM PARIS.

(now oua owl!

PARIS, SUNDAY EVl2ll2to._

The legitimist journals continue to doubt the
authenticity of the submission of Count de Monte-
molin. They publish a despatch from Trieste, dated
only yesterday, affirming that the Countess de
Montemolin knows nothing of the kind. This
might not go for much, but then they ask—and
certainly with a good deal of point—how does it
happen that, if the Count signed so long ago as
April 23 the document reported by the Corte-
spondencia, he should remain all this while in pri-
son ? why slid not the Madrid Gazette publish such
an important letter the moment it was received ?
These pertinent queries receive no answer whatever
from the evening papers.
The Pays gives, as the latest news from Turin,
two facts of importance. Ist, That Garibaldi has
resigned his rank as a general in the Sardinian
army, from which it is to be inferred that he
wishes to hold himself free to aid the cause of
Italian unity in Sicily ; and 2nd, That the Prince
of Syracuse has been banished for his letter to the
King, which first appeared in the Daily News.
The Pays, however, gives this important inteWgenoe
" under all reserve."

The Charivari, replying to the Pays and other
government prints which call Garibaldi a filibuster,
on account of his presumed intention to draw his
sword in Sicily, calls upon them to distinguish his
ease from that of General de Lamericiere. If it
be true that Garibaldi has no business in Sicily,
what business has Lamoricibre in Rome T Again,
what distinction is there in principle between the
subscription for Garibaldi's muskets and that for
St. Peter's pence ? The Charivari only sem this
difference, that the one subscription is destined to
succour the oppressed, the other to maintain
tyranny and oppression ; the one is altogether
optional, while the other is to a great extent im-
posed by those numerous religious societies which
form in France an imperious in istperio.
The Constitutionnel gives a positive denial to a

story told by " a foreign journal " to the effect
that the imperial prince having been a naughty
boy and very impertinent towards his mother, the
Emperor had stripped him of his rank of corporal
in the guards and had had the stripes torn off his
uniform in the presence of a body of soldiers with
all the ceremonies used in the case of an ordinary
military degradation. The object of this libel, the
Corwtitutionnet says, is to inculcate the belief that
the infant prince (four years old) is naturally of
such a bad disposition that he can only be cor-
rected by measures of extreme severity, whereas
the Constitutiorine/ would very frequently have
recorded anecdotes showing the extreme goodness
of heart and sweet disposition of the child had it
not feared to be accused of flattery and of inventing
infantile sayings such as were formerly put in the
mouths of the King of Rome and the Duke of Bor-
deaux. The legal question whether by the law of
France an action lies for a libel on the memory of an
ancestor, which was lately resolved in the negative
by the Imperial Court, on grounds which I ventured
to commend as consonant with sound law and right
reason, is to be solemnly re-argued before the
Court of Cessation. M. Procureur-General Dupin,
a high authority I admit, when his judgment is not
warped by political considertitions, is dissatisfied
with the decision, and proposes to maintain in
person, before the tribunal of the last resort, that
the present Bishop of Orleans ought to be fined
and imprisoned for having expressed in writing a
severe judgment upon the character of Bishop
Rousseau, his predecessor in the see, who was
gathered to his fathers half a century ago.
The Nord says that M. Berryer is going to Lon-
don to plead a great cause in an English court, and
that the judges have consented to hear him in
French. I cannot believe this story. It is most
unlikely thaM•any English court would relax in
favour of a French advocate the rule that only par-
ties or their counsel—by counsel being meant mem-
bers of the English bar—sre entitled to be heard.
There are very few English judges, and certainly
no court composed of three or four members, who
could follow a speech in French ; and the chances
are indeed very much indeed against the advocate
on the other side being able to answer it. The
thing could of course only be done by consent of all
parties, and on that condition I am far from saying
that, under special circumstances, it would be
objectionable. Indeed it has often struck
me as one of the possible consequences of increased
intercourse between the two nations, that in suite
involving questions of international law French
advocates might plead in English and English
advocates in French courts. But Ido not think
we have come to this as yet.
Countess Lobau, the widow of the marshal of
that name, died on Thursday in Paris.