The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-01 00:00:00

years have abstained from coming forward their de-
-1 sire to vote for them. Believe me, when the moment
shall have come, the abstention of today will be-
come for the Royalists an additional claim and re-
commendation to their fellow-citizens.
• Moreover, is there nothing else except holding
office ? Is there no other useful service to be ren-
dered, or useful patronage to exercise ? When,
like many other men devoted to our doctrines, wo
can place at the service of the population our for-
tune, enlightenment, and leisure, it is always pos-
sible thus to contribute to the public welfare in a
measure which, while satisfying the conscience, as-
sures a deserved ascendancy and responds to the
legitimate interests of policy.
• Circumstances may change, consequently ap-
preciations also. After the decree of the 24th of
November, I sought for every possible information :
I consulted the most enlightened minds, and, in ac-
cordance with their opinion, I concluded that the
position of things was not essentially changed. The
modifications operated in the duties of the first two
bodies of the Imperial establishment were doubt-
less serious, but they did not touch upon
the nature of the Government—an abso-
lute power engrafted upon the revolution, and
indissolubly bounel up with it. The little tempo-
rary freedom that was restored to discussion re-
mained limited, and swayed by the admission of the
direful principle from which the regime emanates,
and which it has made it its task to impose by force
upon the public right of Europe. Administrative
omnipotence lost nothing of its arbitrary power, of
its thousand means of intimidation and fraud. The
press remained shackled; the honesty of elections
continued to be an empty word.
" A struggle therefore in the interest of monarchi-
cal doctrines remained as impossible as heretofore.
The decree of Nov. 24 did not, as some have asserted,
inaugurate a new era; it was an act of political ex-
pediency. The hour of final resolutions seemed to be
approaching. This time responsibility was feared.
An attempt was made to make others share it.
" I now come to the last communications sent in
my name to my friends, and which replied to various
letters addressed to me. A detestable speech had
aroused the indignation of all honest men. Public
opinion was strongly moved. The secondary ques-
tions gave place to the great question which had
occupied the debates on the Address. The only
question looked at was the independence of the Holy
See, respect for its sovereignty, for Catholicism, and
for Christian civilisation, which was endangered.
" In the name of the dangers which threatened the
Church I was called upon to act upon the Royalists,
that the Church might might be defended at the elec-
tions by those who were attached to it, as all those
who hated it, or with whom it simply interfered, had
allied themselves for its destruction. It was added
that our political and party interest would find pre-
cious and undoubted advantages by the union, on
the same ground, of the Royalists and of men ex-
clusively religious, who made the appeal to them,
and would be justly astonished at finding that appeal
not responded to. In all these considerations my
attention was turned alone to the perils and inte-
rests of the Church. It is not -yell imprudently
to mix up religion and politics ; it is detrimental to
religion and detrimental also to policy. Nothing
is by nature more delicate to deal with than
the concurrence of political parties it defence of the
Church. The fear that Catholicism should be turned
to account to further political views—a fear in its
turn shamefully abused—has long existed in the
country, and has for a long time made many pure
and generous hearts feel hesitation and mistrust.
More than any one I have admired the eloquent
voices which, during the debate on the Address, so
energetically upheld the rights of tie Holy See,
But, in reality, what constituted the chief force of
the defenders of the Church in the two tribunes is
that they spoke against their political opinions,
under the sole inspiration of their consciences. Thus
they were above suspicion—thus fell to the ground
the old thesis of a political manceeere under the
mask of religion. But are prejudices for ever ex-
tinguished ? Have they vanished never to return ?
No; they would start into life again at the very
first pretext given them.
" ' Consulted by my friends on the best line of
policy to be followed, I replied,—" As, despite the
unequal and dangerous conditions in which they
have been artificially placed, men devoted like you
to the interests of religion wish to attempt the
struggle, do not decline taking part in such a
struggle, which I think it would have been wiser to
avoid. Where you think there are reasonable
chances of success, there bring your votes to bear if
requisite; but carefully avoid compromising the flag
of your opinions ; enter in without arriere pensees
and select the men devoted to the sole interest
which guides you, without, however, accepting as
candidates adversaries to your political principles.
In the interests of religion, as well as in those of
our own cause, do not produce your candidates—
that is the advice I have to give you."
" Reflect, gentlemen, and I think you will find
that this advice which I gave you responded to the
necessities of the present situation and guarded the
future. It must not be said that we exclude our
friends to go and seek our adversaries; we exclude
our adversaries and ourselves to give our support,
when we deem them worthy of such mission, to
pure-minded men, representatives of the in-
terests which are now to be defended, and
which appealed to us. Believe me that it grieves
me to turn aside for a time the Royalists from elec-
tive functions and public service. I understand
that it is often a painful sacrifice ; activity and ex-
pansion suit their nature. I know, moreover (and
I say so with great pride), how much zeal, courage,
enlightment, and self-denial the Royalists can place
at the service of the country. But lam convinced
that incessant protestation by abstention from
taking part in politics is the true calling of the
Royalists under a regime such as we now suffer
under—a monstrous system which seems to counter-
act the wants and instincts of France at its good
pleasure, which substitutes cynicism for moral sen-
timents, electoral intimidation and servility of
votes for liberty, the shams of a lying constitu-
tionalism for the fruitful realities of a representa-
tative:government. I do not pretend to be infallible ;
I may be wrong, but certainly not from a precon-
ceived idea or determination, or from lack of seek-
ing enlightment. When I have come. to a conclu-
sion and my friends ask me for guidances I am
bound to give it, as their natural and necessary
chief ; I owe it to them as the representative. and.
guardian of their principles; I owe it to them in
exchange for the unshaken fidelity and indefatig-
able devotion of which they never cease to give.'" me
" HENRI
roofs.