The Sun.
London, England, 1863-03-21 00:00:00

The Debate on Poland in the French Senate.

M. Billault, Minister without portfolio, replied
on Thursday to the speech of Prince Napoleon
delivered on the previous day.
M. Billault commenced his speech by a reference to an
observation made by an English statesman in the House of
Lords, that the cause of Poland had nothing to gain by
Parliamentary discussions. He (M. Billault) thought the
remark had been justified by the character of the sitting of
the day before. Rash words had been pronounced--words
which, for the sake of Poland herself, had better not have
been spoken. The duty of the Government was to diminish
the inconvenience of this circumstance by placing facts in
their true light.
The sympathy of France for Poland was not of recent
date ; it was based on great historic recollections, on im-
mense services to Christendom, and on the memory of com-
mon glory and misfortune. These sympathies were shared
in by the Emperor. They were shared in by all Europe.
But there was more than sympathy in the case; the great
interest of the peace of Europe was to be considered. It
was undeniable that for nearly a century the situation in
which Poland had been placed had given rise to a succession
of convulsions, having no other result than immense suffer-
ing, bloodshed, and continual fear for a renewal of out-
breaks. The insurrections of Poland, born, not of the en-
couragement given to Poland by liberal governments, but
of the force of nature, constitute a lesson to the world. M.
Billault, to show that the Emperor had never stimulated
the feelings of the Poles, here read a short official paragraph
from the .Moniteur, of 27th April, 1861, in which it was said
that great as was the traditional sympathy of France for
Poland, the Emperor would not awaken hopes which he
could not satisfy; and in which the good intentions of
Alexander 11. were referred to as the source of ameliora-
tions for Poland. This was in substance what M. Billault
had said when this new insurrection broke out. No liberal
government could forget Poland, no new insurrection, no
great outpouring of blood, was necessary to bring that na-
tion to remembrance, nor could they help to resolve the
Polish question. The French government desired that the
generous blood of Poland should be reserved, and not wasted
in dangerous and compromising affrays. (Very good, very
good.) No doubt what seemed one day a mere affray,
might soon put on the character of a great and perilous na-
tional manifestation, and it would be the duty of France and
Europe to watch its development. Poland could neither
live in its present situation, nor die ; it was evident some-
wt
ith wmi
suds
ot
mb e,
fdoorn
seo. m
eT
ohfe
tdhieffigrcuelatyt e
smt ui
ns ttebree
sctosnofrfotnhtee dw,
obrul
dt
were in question, and the line of conduct to be followed
amhd ight
desirelea of
F lead to
France
gravest consequences.
Europe,
and hoT
wheouilndtearlessot
say of Russia, was the pacification of Poland, a result
which could not be accomplished without the satisfaction of
legitimate interests. Since 1815 various plans bad been
tried in Poland. The constitution given by Alexander I.
led to the revolution of 1831. The violent and oppressive
system of Nicholas could neither daunt nor extinguish the
national resistance. The benevolence, the humanity, the
conciliate.y dispositions of Alexander IL had just led to a
new insurrection. It was doubtful whether the treaties of
1815 provided a remedy for the situation. True, they pro-
smtThehine s
test (ty
bte
politicali
let
oahl
nunee
clause
Peghi
suotshtlehenaastdelhlene
furnished
rih*
think
institutions and a national repro-
nnwi
oikeshrhi were
tee
dat to
ht suitablehb oen f"accordingthnend us
GovernmentsefGovernments
l t to thegini v
temciotuohedesmt
whichi
on
with a reply as often as they were appealed to. If Russia
should give little to the Poles, they would consider them-
selves oppressed ; if it gave much they would use its con-
cessions to get what was still wanting. Since 1830, England
and France had repeatedly addressed Russia in favour of
Poland, referring to the treaties of 1815. The House of
Orleans was not on good terms with Russia, and was, there-
fore, at a disadvantage, but England was on the best terms
with Russia. But the observations made by the English
ambassador at St. Petersburg at the time of the insurrection
of 1830 and 1831 led to no result, When the insurrection

was put down England repeated her representations and
elicited from Count Nesselrodo a despatch, in which it was
intimated that the Russian Government knew its own
business best, and hoped that England would
not interfere again. In a similar manner, at
the date of the incorporation of the republic of Cra-
cow with Austria, appeals to the treaties" of 1815 were
made :in vain, Austria, Russia, and Prussia declaring that
their interests alone were concerned in the matter. Such
had been the result of diplomatic action. At each of these
periods there were ardent speeches made in Parliament and
noisy demonstrati,ns of sympathy, but this policy of many
words and no deeds only had the effect of stimulating the
unhappy people, and irritating their master. The Emperor's
Government has no desire to repeat this practice. It did
not follow from what had been said that nothing was to be
done, but at all events, in order to see what should be at-
tempted, France must see who was in front of her, who at
her side, who in her rear. M. Billault then referred to the
several powers. The Emperor had just exchanged reci-
procal declarations of loyalty and esteem with the Emperor
Alexander. That monarch had befriended Franco during
the Italian campaign, and had taken an attitude which pre-
vented any annoyance to the empire on the Rhine. He had
also frowned upon the attempt afterwards made by some
other European powers to prevent France from recovering
its natutal frontier of Savoy. In the play of human inte-
rests it was valuable to have some counterpoise, and it
would be folly, from mere gaiete de cceur, to throw bitter
words, difficult to forget, in the face of a great sove-
reign who has been your friend. (Loud applause.) Alex-
ander had, moreover, begun a great work of civilisation
in his dominions by calling millions of serfs to the enjoy-
ment of liberty, and when once liberty penetrates into a
country it does not stop until ft has extended its influence
over all affairs. Poland might found most legitimate hopes
on the great revolution which is taking place in Russia.
Prussia, too, was closely allied with Russia, and it would
not be well for France to alienate the sentiments of that
nation. Prussia too was liberal, and from its wise and fair
treatment of Poland much might be hoped. Austria, again,
was opening its portals to the influences of liberty, and
seeking amidst embarrassments of all kinds, resulting from
the diversity of races, to consolidate an empire in which
constitutional principles predominate. The Emperor
Francis Joseph's liberal treatment of his Polish subjects
had led to confidence and tranquillity, of which his govern-
ment was reaping the fruits. Austria had understood
sooner and more clearly than her neighbours that the Polish
question could not remain in its present irritating state, and
that her interests were concerned in its pacification. But
it would be unwise of France to alarm the Austrian Go-
vernment by making an appeal to revolutionary passion, at
the risk of driving it away from the liberal resolutions which
it might otherwise take.
Finally there was England, whose language was that of
absolute liberalism, but whose conduct exhibited a circum-
spection quite as absolute. (Cheers and laughter.) He
recalled the words of Earl Russell, spoken on the 26th of
March, 1862--" Let it be observed that whilst Poland has
from her first partition always met with the sympathy of
this country, yet no statesman who has held the office
which I have the honour to fill, no prime minister of this
country, has at any time held out the prospect of material
assistance to the Poles. No minister has ever thought it his
duty to interfere except by the expression of opliiions."
Lord Palmerston has in like manner just observed, that if
the treaties of 1815 give a right to intervene, he has no in-
tention of using it. England, then, would doubtless follow
with its good wishes any attempt in favour of Poland, but
is that a solid basis for great adventures ? (No, no.) M.
Billault here referred to the report of the committee of the
Senate, to notice an allusion contained in it, that England
seemed to want to push France into a war in which it did
not mean to follow her. This was not correct. The Eng-
lish Government had not sought to engage France to go to
war. Such was the situation, and such the conduct of the
various powers. He would state what the French Govern-
ment had done. As soon as the national character of the in-
surrectionhad become apparent, as early as Feb. 17, it ad-
dressed the Russian Government in terms conformable to
the friendly relations which existed between the two
powers, pointing out the difficulties, dangers, and distresses
of the existing state of things. It received a friendly reply
containing the assurance, first, that no concession already
made should be withdrawn, and that perhaps some others
would be made; and, secondly, that an amnesty should be
granted. When the Prussian convention became known,
the French Government proposed to that of England to
send simultaneous notes to Berlin and St. Petersburg. The
English Government preferred separate action. The Prus-
sian Parliament also opposed the convention, and it became
a dead letter. What could the Government have done more ?
Here M. Billault digreseerk to-speak of the situation of
France among the Powers of Europe. France was no longer
the object of Holy Alliances—no longer powerless, isolated,
suspected. Separating the wheat from the chaff, the Em-
peror had exalted liberty and everywhere put down revo-
lutionary turbulence. "The glorious and calm liberty
which the Emperor has established no longer dis juiets the
world; it is an example for one part of the world, and an
encouragement for the other.?' Further, in order to de-
stroy the fear of French military ambition, which haunted
Europe, the Emperor had taken care to associate in hi 3
warlike enterprises nations having interests in com-
mon with those of France. He bad done so in the
Crimea, China, and Cochin China, and, as far as depended
on him, in Mexico. Was a policy which had made France
great and respected to be abandoned for this Polish ques-
tion, the very one which might most easily reconstitute
the Holy Alliance against her ? (No, no.) The Polish ques-
tion, said M. Billault, is eminently a European question. It
concerns other great powers as much as it concerns us;
they owe it to themselves, if they are animated by senti-
ments of justice, rectitude, and civilisation, to join us in the
practical peaceable policy of endeavouring to open the eyes
of Russia and Prussia to their true interests. This is how
we look at the question ; and the views of England are
perhaps not very different. At least we know that in view
of the necessity of doing something she has made an ap-
peal to all the powers which signed the treaty of Vienna.
I refrain from speculating on the consequences of that
appeal. It is at any rate the beginning of a diplomatic
process which it would be imprudent and premature to
judge. You now know what are the aspirations of the
Emperor; what means he intends to employ. You also
know his sympathies. And I call on you now to place
confidence in his policy.
On a division the motion which M. Billault supported was
carried by a majority of 109 to 17 votes.