The Sun.
London, England, 1865-01-26 00:00:00

The Bishop of Orleans' Pamphlet•

The first portion of the Bishop of Orleans'
pamphlet relates, as we have already mentioned,
to the Convention of Sept. 15. Subjoined is the
commencement of that portion of the Right Rev.
Prelate's observations : _

- _
" I shall begin by giving :my opinion upon the Conven-
tion by which France has engaged herself towards King
Victor Emmanuel to leave Rome in two years. I shall
not be accused this time of having spoken too soon. I

had two serious motives for waiting.
"Nothing can be more unpleasant than the role of a
prophet of evil. However, whenever it has become neces-
sary I have fulfilled it without hesitation, and from the
commencement of this unhappy question I foresaw its
termination. I have followed every step which Piedmont
has been permitted to take in the direction of Rome, and
what M. de Falloux has termed 'the itinerary from Turi*
to Roine.' Then I have remarked the grand inspiration of
France, as shown in that memorable vote of the National
Assembly during the Republic, as shown in the Words of
General Cavaignac when he cried, We must fly to the
rescue of the Holy Father,' as shown in the first noble acts
of our present Emperor ; I have seen, I say, that grand
inspiration grow weaker and weaker; I have seen a
solemn guarantee become a provisional protection,
provisional protection dwindle down to a body guard,
the guard to a simple escort, the escort to a
sentinel, until it appeared to me that the musket
became too heavy for the arm which carried it. I have fol-
lowed the days, marked the degrees, counted the hours ;
uneasy as a Catholic, humilated as a citizen, I was not
willing to add another act of accusation to those already
presented. God and posterity will pass sentence on the whole.
" I had another motive for delay. Not wishing to doubt
the sincerity of the French Government, represented, in the
negotiation which preceded the Convention, by M. Drouyn
de Lhuys, I desired to wait, to listen, to reflect, before
declaring that my country, so often deceived by Piedmont
in the affairs of Italy, had been again misled, and had made
another step towards the complete abandonment of the
Pontifical power. At present, after the interpretation
given by Piedmont to the Convention, all doubt is removed.
" I know no pain whatever to be compared to that which
follows such a declaration, and it is still more painful to
feel that one has been led up to this sad conclusion through
long hours of darkness, uncertainty, hesitation, mistakes,
and agony—darkness in no way dissipated by the embar-
rassed and superfluous explanations of a Minister, making
sincere but vain efforts to persuade himself that he had not
been taken in a snare.
" How were we bishops made aware of this Convention,
which interests both the person and the rights of the Head
of the Church ? How was the Minister informed of it him-
self ? By the incomplete indiscretion of a few journals to
which the secret was half confided. One day we learned that
two foreigners had passed through Paris. When they had
fulfilled their commission they departed like travellers in a
hurry, carrying away with them a leaf of our national his-
tory—a treaty which concerned France, but of which
France was ignorant. It is true that this treaty had received
the signature of the Emperor, who, by repeated promises,
had most solemnly engaged himself to maintain the Pope,
and likewise the signature of the Minister of Foreign
Affairs, who had re-accepted office upon that condition.
That ought to have been a sufficient reason for confidence,
but not for comprehending that change of policy. In fact,
one could not comprehend what interest France was obey-
ing in changing her action so suddenly.
" I do not speak here of the part which was played by
France under Charlemagne. But nevertheless I say to my-
self with pain : Is it then to be understood that we are no
longer to dream of that magnanimous course of conduct ?
I speak no longer of the conduct of France in 1849, or on
the different occasions during the 1,000 years which sepa-
rate those two epochs.
"But there was another course less grand, it is true, but
yet honourable and accepted for several years past. In hold-
ing Rome, and in maintaining in the Pontifical States, so vio-
lently diminished, a restricted occupation, the Emperor still
realised four advantages ; he owed to this occupation the
esteem of Catholic Europe—the holding in respect of revo-
lutionary Italy—the gratitude of the French clergy—and
lastly, an important political and strategical position.
What will France gain by losing this position ? I cannot
explain that to myself, but then, as a bishop, it is no affair
of mine. I had persuaded myself that France when quitting
Rome would not forsake the Pope, and that warned by the
persistent ambition and the past violences of Piedmont, she
would at least have required serious guarantees. It was
stated that such were to be found in the treaty. Several
counselled me confidence or at least resignation. They
said, when the treaty was imperfectly known, What can
you do ? What is lost is lost. The most important matter
is to preserve what remains. If Victor Emmanuel defini-
tively renounces Rome ; if France positively guarantees to
the Holy Father his stable possession—if the Holy Father,
supported by his own troops and sufficient resources, is
placed in a condition to continue freely at the Vatican, and
without enemies, the course of his divine ministry and his
royal sacerdotal functions, what more do you require ?
Without healing all wounds, without satisfying all claims,
would not this state, so unjustifiably reduced but so peace-
able, be preferable to what exists at present ?" Let us
wait,' I replied, and see the text of the treaty and facts.'
Well ! the texts and the facts have spoken, and now I
' know what part to take, and I deem it right to make known
all I think—to examine the question thoroughly."
.eir

HUMAN NATURE.—Ferocious Mistress--Cook,
this is the third time you have sent up the joint raw this
week, and your master is much displeased ! I must really
entreat of you, in future, to—to---. (Awful pause.)
Cook—Ah ! I see ! You've been vexed in the parlour, and
so you comes and wents it on in the kitchen.—Punch.