The Express.
London, England, 1850-06-10 00:00:00

vanished. Jkiliberal amendment was proposed to the
Bloaters' Law, to be retracted with an abject apology,
while not a member of the party from which it
emanated'had the spirit to Mee their down-trampled
colours. Weakness of this sort cannot be excused by
the abomination entertained of an alliance with the
'Moneta& A enneamish repudiation of socialist pup-
pet will not save the republic. While a third of the
Min* serve against conscience the royalist policy
d their seventeen taskmasters, from au exagge-
I sated apprehension of the danger of principles
. .are condemned by . cunuen sense, France
asanot pasibly settle into a stable equilibrium,
bat will roll and pitch from side to side,
swayed by the fickle Matte of that middle party
which should serve as ballast and trim the vessel. Ac-
cording to the votes yesterday in the bureaux there
warn a majority of 79 &Oust the law. Tne greater
pert of those who abstained, so far from being favour-
able to the proposition, did so to avoid en open rup-
ture with their majority, and several, in order not to
vote against their convictioe, threw blank tickets into
the urn. It is at this moment imossicle to calcu-
late to what extent the flexibility of the Cen're may
be wrought upon by the representations which will
doubtless be made of the evils of a collision between
the President atd the National Assembly. The pre-
liminary discussion in the bureaux was characterised
by great animation and indecision, and refheted the
agitation caused by the presentation of the bill. In
general more objections were raised against the un-
seasonableness than against the substance of the pro-
position. The greatest division of opinions prevailed
among the members of the majority. The supporters
of the bill, particularly MM. Mathieu Bodet, de
Crotteeilhes, Dabeaux, Baraguay d'Hilliers, Heunesy,
Fonquier d'Herouel, &c., dwelt on the impolicy of
throwing it out. The rejection of the bill would not
only detract from the consideration of the executive
power, which ought to be surrounded by as mach
prestige as possible, but weaken the union which
reigned between the majority of the Assembly and
the executive power, and which was indispensable to
defeat the seditious attempts of the socialist party.
France, all republican as she was, exacted from those
who represented her a ctrtain splendour. Benefi-
cence was one of the most imperative duties of power,
and a host of unfortunate persons addresed them-
selves for relief to the head of the state. M. Andre
declared that in his opinion there was no constitu-
tional question at title in the presentation of the
bill, and that the position made for the President by
the six millions of votes which set him at the head of
the state, rendered indispensable an augmentation of
his allowance. M. Mitnerel said that the bill was well
received in the depertmer.ts, particularly in those of
the North, the Somme, Seine-et-Marne, Seiee-et-Oise,
&e., whose opinion was known. MM. Male, de
Growhy, and Wolowski emphatically repelled the
malicious insinuations rased in various bureaux of
the connexion between the bill and the Electoral Lew.
The members of the legitimist party, who deviated on
this occasion from their usual course in supprting the
government, expressed themselves with moderation
and reserve. They recommend.d a careful examina-
tion to the committee, and opposed the notion of the
new bill having the character of a permanent dota-
lion. They seem to be of opinion that it would be
expedient to relieve the financial embarrassments of
the President, without creating for him a sort of civil
list. Such was the language held by MA. de La-
rochejacquelin, de Lablulie, de Clarenci y, Fame%
de Kerdrel, Dufougerais, Flandia, arid Chapot. Tne
last five are members of tha committee. M. B,uhier
de l'Beluse regarded the bill as tending to (stab-
rectly a quasi-m ,narchy, and thought that
the President of the Republic ought to content
himself with a more modest style. Several members
of the majority, and eeprciaily M.I. do 3loreay and
Creton, also opposed the law. Tne latter expressed
his fear that it was but the first step towards a pro-
longati at of the President's powers. The members of
the Left and of the extreme Let opposed the bill as
inopportune, unconstitutional, and deeply impolitic.
In their r pinion the dignity o the authority would not
be promoted by the measure, while great discontent
would be roused in the country, which demanded
economies. These were the arguments used by MM.
Michel de Bourace, Pascal Dupree., Charms, Lagarde,
Chauffeur, Sain, Huguenin, de Flotte, Sevestre, &c.
M. Reptalin observed that the governm-nt, if it
thought the President's allowance insufficient, ought
to have stated that opinion to the Assembly on the
presentation of the budget of 1830. It was the
prince, and not the president, they wished to endow.
General Sub:Al-Le reminded members that the
allowance of the first consul in 1;99 was only halt a
million of francs. Tue consula'e had lasted four
years, without any one dreaming of demanding an
augmentation of salary. Yet the first consul lived at
the Tuileries, and cut a sufficiently good figure upon
that allowance. Some members, particularly MM.
de Fiotte end Huguenin, dwelt strongly upon the
breach this law would ne.ke in the consideration of

the President. A!1 the ministers present stood up
with energy for the bill, and declared they would
accept no modification. The minister of justice de-
veloped the motives which Led determined the ga-
vernment to bring forward the measure. His
colleagues and himself had acquired the conviction
that the present allowance of the President was insuf-
ficient. They deem( d it theil- duty not to leave at
his personal charge liabilities which were the cone-
(pence of the elevated position to which he had been
ratted by the confidence of the pe.)ple. The new
credit demanded from the Assembly was not destined
to swell the actual expenditure, bet only to continue
it without being obliged to have re:centre.) to his
private means.
BOURSE.