The Sun.
London, England, 1863-01-17 00:00:00

TER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS.

" Turin, Dec. 29.
"M. le Ministre,—Assailed by the extreme party for
having adopted an expectant policy on the Roman ques-
tion, the new Ministers have left to be explained, through
some journals,theatt itude which they rely upon maintaining,
and which is summed up in these words by the Opimone of
the 21st, Between France,which denies Rome to the Italians
and Italy, which it irrele eably desires,there noun derst and
ing possible.' Although this declaration, in supposing that
it was on behalf of the Ministry, did not in any way pledge
it towards the Government of the Emperor, as up to
a certain point it pledged it towards the country, I believed
it my duty incidentally to consult M. Pasolini upon the
sense which might be attributed to it. The Minister of Fe •
reign Affairs began by declaring that there was no journal
in the country which had the right to speak in the name of
the Government, or to say that it was inspired by the Go-
vernment. lie made no difficulty in recognising that—
after the declaration which had been made, the Roman
question must be for the hour put on one side—it was infi-
nitely too much spoken of in the Chamber and in the press ;
but, at the same time, he admitted that his colleagues and
he himself shared the opinion of the country, that Rome
was the natural capital of Italy. He added that it was an
inheritance from M. do Cavour which every Italian Minis-
try must accept; that General Durand° had reaffirmed it;
that when he proposed to the Government of the Emperor
to negotiate, it was on the basis of Rome for the Italians ;
and that the only difference between the programme of the
present Cabinet and that of the former one was the absten-
tion from new overtures to the Government of the Emperor,
the latter believing that it could not accept a negotiation
upon that basis. ' But,' I said to M. Fasolini, it is a
veritable non possumus that you pronounce, while we in-
vite you to consult with the Court of Rome upon theground
of conciliation. Do you not think it impolitic to tio your
hands beforehand without knowing whether events will
not give rise to combinations by which it would be useful
to profit for opening new negntiation. 2' M. Pasolini ex-
claimed against the interpremtion, much too absolute,
according to him, which I gava to his language, and he
explained to me that the present Ministers would continue
to follow the march of events with the liveliest interest,
and that when they believed it possible to resume this ne-
gotiation with the Government f the Empe or, they
would hasten to do so. AI. Pasolini reproduced to me
various considerations, amongst others, that which would
consist in leaving the Romans, by the withdrawal of our
troops, liberty to vote for the sovereign that pleased them,
as had been done in France, Greece, &c. I heard M. Paso-
lini without interrupting him much. I could not, however,
refrain from observing, with regard to this last argument,
that if the new code of the rights of peoples allowed the fill-
ing, by their voice, of a throne which had become vacant, it
did not, nevertheless, admit the possibility of voting with
respect to a throne legally occupied, and that Europe would
have reason to be astonished if a monarchical country like
Italy should calmly propose the disposs asion of a sovereign
for the sake of public 'vilify.
'• The Minister of Foreign Affairs listened with attention
to the remarks which, in a friendly spirit, I was led to make
to him upon the dangers to the Italian Government of a
policy which, by declarations too absolute, would embarrass
its future action towards the Government of the Emperor.
M. Pasolini opposed himself to the supposition that the pre-
sent Cabinet could ever show itself ungrateful to France;
and he insisted in his own name and in that of his col.
leagues upon their perfect determination to proceed in har-
mony with the Government of the Emperor and to rely
upon him. The language of M. Farini, who came to see
me after this interview, was of a nature rather to confirm
the friendly assurances of M. Pasolini. One fact remains
gained--it is the pause which is officially produced in the
Roman question by the accession of the new Cabinet.

" SARTIGES."

THE DANISH QUESTION.

The following is
a translation of the despatch
addressed, under date Copenhagen, Jan. 5, 1863,
by the Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs to the
Danish Envoy in London :--
Sir,—Lord Ruissall's despatch of Nov. 20, last year, has
been submitted to the King, and his Majesty has been
pleased at the last meeting of the Privy Council to give me
his orders as to the reply.
" In respect to Holstein the Government of the King has
declared itself ready to concede to that province the posi-
tion claimed for it by the Germanic Confederation, but
under the conditions expressed in my despatch of October 15
—to wit, that by this concession the entire monarchy be
not reduced to a continual dependence on Germany, and
that by this sacrifice eur relations with the Confederatioa
be placed on a durable b this. The King's Government has
found with satisfaction in the despatch of Lord Russell
of the 10th of November a cordial approbation of these
indispensable conditions for the maintenance of the Danish
Monarchy. The object of the negotiations which, at the
invitation of Lord Russell, we opened with the
Courts of Berlin and Vienna, was to find the means of con-
ciliating the requirements of the Confederation with these
legitimate conditions. In taking note of the complete ad-
hesion given to them by Lord Russell, we indulge the hope
that if some day there should be a question of maintaining
them against the Confederation, his lordship would as little
hesitate then as now in his appreciation of their necessity.
" But if there be, as to the definitive object, conformity
between the views of Lord Russell and the resolutions rela-
tive to Holstein which the King's Government has declared
itself ready, if need be, to take, I regret that I cannot say as
much in respect to the signification which must be ascribed
to such a step. Lord Russell seems to regard as a simple
act of duty on the part of the King's Government, what in
reality is an important sacrifice extorted by the force of
circumstances.

"In oppesition to this strange opinion, I must be per-
mitted to remind his Lordship that the fundamental Act of
Confederation expresslyclescribes its members as ' sovereign
Princes,' as also that the final Act of Vienna describes iu so
many words the Confederation as composed of ' sovereign
and reciprocally independent' States, the union of which
had precisely for object ' to guarantee the sovereign rights
of each.' By joining this system the members of the Con-
federation undertook certain obligations defined in the Acts,
but they never transferred their sovereignty to the Diet of
Frankfort. The King of Denmark is bound to fulfil faith-
fully his federal obligations; but ho has not surrendered to
any one his right to regulate the internal aff Airs of Holstein,
as little as the other members of the Confederation have
done so for their States. It would, indeed, be a strange
misconception of the public law of Europe to assert, as a
principle, that the members of the Confederation owed ab-
solute obedience to the decrees of the Liet, whatever might
be their nature or object.

"With Denmark the observation of the limits assigned to
the
on petency
becoming part
nt. the Diet is the 'Lore necessary as Hol-
stein of the Confederation did not cease to
become a province of the Danish Monarchy. In assuming to
be the supreme arbitrer
as to the internal affairs of Holstein,
e competency
the Diet not only encroaches on the sovereign rights of the
King in respect to that province, but infringes on the consti-
tutional relati ns existing between Holstein and the rest of
the State, and even on the independence of the Danish Mo-
narchy itself. It is evident that, whatever be the
opinion entertained as to the competency of the Diet
in respect to the affairs of Holstein—all the other
questions belong exclusively to the domain of
international law. In their respect there can,
of course, be no question about federal decrees or federal
execution, but simply of transactions between one Power
and another Power, and in the last res rt of international
means of coercion. What is now done against Denmark on
account of Holstein may be done against the Netherlands
in regard to Limburg, even against Prussia and Austria
themselves in respect to their German provinces, which far
more than Holstein are embraced in a close centralization
with other provinces that are not federal. It is true that
material power is an argument that does not admit of being
set aside with the same impunity as a just claim.
" Lord Russell adds to his views about federal law this
observation—that, generally speaking, ho does not find any-
thing unreasonable in the demand that no law and no tax
should be enforced in Holstein without having been ap-
proved by the Provincial Estates. It is sufficient for mo to
remark in this respect that the Provincial Estates cl Hol-
stein are already invested with a deliberative vote in regard
to every new tax and every provincial law. As for the
common affairs of the Monarchy, it is notorious that the
Constitutional system is not only recognized, but—what is
nofamleoarge
eirmapiot importance—loyally
hantcee—loyally practised. If the Holsteiners
"Rigsraad" to exercise there their
legitimate share in the legislative rights, it is sufficiently
known that the fault is not due to the King's Government.
But that which requires to be proved is that a province can
claim the enjoyment of its Constitutional rights in such a
manner as to exercise them separately, and that foreign
States, and particularly the Diet of Frankfort, have a right
to constrain the King of Denmark to yield to such a demand.
" Having exhausted every means of defending his right,
and finding himself placed in the alternative of either weak-
ening the bonds which connect the province of Holstein
with the Monarchy, or of reducing the entire Monarchy to
a vassalage of the Confederation, the King's Government
has no choice left it. But, When yielding
cessive and so ill•founded, the Government thinks
Welt* entitled to expect that the great European Powers,
to a claim so ex-
who, by inserting in the Act of the Congress of Vienna
the fundamental principles of the Germanic Confederation,
,
acquired the right of controlling their observance, will at
its sacrifice. Thee° powers have pro-
cl el
aa
ismt
egdi vtehiet
pc
rr
adei for
ple
of the integrity of the Monarchy. It
seems, therefore, but just that they should at least guarantee
gthen againsteTMaopnhairecahiyhtaits of the Confederation against every fur-
ther attempt to, undermine the foundation of the State.
every
encroachment going beyond the
" Lord Russell next occupies himself with Schleswig, and
he takes as staring point for his remarks the agreement
which, according to him,
as to the question of right;