The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-27 00:00:00

THE WIN, LONTION, MONDAY EVENING, MARCH 27, 1854.

LINES LEASED AT FIXED RENTALS.

THE PRINCE OP GONZAGA.

auxiliary army of France in 1812-13-14, and in several
places since. I also had many other testimonials from
different countries at different epochs, and many living
French witnesses declared that they had known me dur-
ing forty years.
I must remark, in passing, that ten days before the
trial the agents went to the judges that were to judge
me, and hence this visit, and also to some witnesses
who wished to come to the trial to give me their
testimony, telling them not to interfere for it was
useless. They condemned me on a frivolous pretext, for
an infraction of the law of strangers for cheating, which,
said the sentence, consisted in having persuaded others
that I was the Prince of Gonzaga, and in having received
sums of money for the order of the cross which I had
distributed. In my position as Grand Master of the
Order, I have distributed more than 2,500 crosses to the
most illustrious persons of different countries, the cost
of which, from 60,000 to 70,000 francs, was sustained
entirely by me, and because five or six French persons
to whom I had given it in Italy had been willing to pay
the attendant expenses, the tribunal of Paris called it
cheating, and condemned me to three years' imprison-
ment and 3,000 francs fine. The sentence of the tribunal
called me " the " self-styled Prince of Gonzaga," but
they could not find me another name, though they tried
by every means to do so. Since then I made an appeal
to the Court of Paris. I pleaded by my advocate that
as it was a question of civil law that the civil jurisdiction
was alone competent to examine my claims, declaring
at the outset that I entered a protest. The Court
of Paris, after two days' discussion, under the pre-
sidence of M. Lamy, disclaimed this protest, re-
fused delay, openly outraged the law of their country,
and condemned me not only to three years but to five
years' imprisonment, and this when I had not defended
myself or uttered a single word. After this I had re-
course to the Court of Cassation, and my advocate, M.
Badet, made a remarkable statement, in which he at-
tacked my unjust arrest, and in which he clearly shows
that the Court of Paris had made a false application of
the law, and had exceeded their power. This advocate
stated in his memorial, " that all the offence consisted in
the exhibition of the decorations, but if they examined
his proofs of identity they might discover that not only
had he the right to give the decorations and receive the
expenses but even if he wished to found new institu-
tions." He also adds, " that the tribunal of Paris has
not examined, that it had not even the right to examine
the claims of the Prince to give this order. All the trial
consists in discovering if the title of Prince of Gonzaga
really belongs to him. The proper method of discover-
ing this would bet. to bring him before the civil tri-
bunals. It is this which he demanded in the terms
of the Articles 326 and 327 of the Civil Code." This
`exposition of the advocate from which I have quoted
showed clearly to the Court of Cassation the in-
justice of the arrest, and the necessity of cancelling it.
But it was precisely because my proofs were so clear and
triumphant that they were afraid to see me establish be-
fore a civil court my right to give the decorations of my
house, fearing that I might at the same time establish
my hereditary rights to my possessions in Italy and
France. These last, as I have said before, are the estates
of Arche and Charleville, which were actually possessed
by the Duke d'Aumale. The two following passages are
not without interest, from the Reply to the protest of
the executors of Louis Philippe to the decree of 1852 :
"A rich increase came to augment the possessions of
Orleans when at the death of the Prince of Conde one
of the princes of that house received a heritage of nearly
fifty millions." And again it is mentioned—" Can it rea-
sonably be permitted to this family to preserve on the
soil of France a fortune that puts at its service an army
of dependents from the lowest to the highest ? Thence
arises the scandal of having seen the President of the
Assemblee National, M. Dupin, and a President of
the Court of Cassation, M. Laplagne, figuring amid the
salaried agents of the Orleans family." From this
it is easy to see from whence arises my persecution
since the death of the Prince of Conde and of my mother.
It is the salaried agents of Orleans that pursue me step
by step with their calumnies and intrigues. The
Austrian policy profits by these circumstances, and joins
with their cabals.

Shr. Paid. RAILWAYS. Lomeapsing. Clicratrar3irces Business
Company.
50 all Bedford and London &
Bletehley.... N. West
St. 100 Buckghamsh. L.&N.W
50 all ClydesdaleJc. Caledon 48 50
St. 100 . Lincolngr.
6 per cent. Gt.Nrthn. 130 140
25 all Glas. Barr. & Caldonian.
Neils. Direct ••• ..•
25. all Do. New... Do
25 all Glstr.d/Dn.Fr Gt. West') 28 30
100 all Hrtlpl. Dk. & irk. New.
Railway & Berw.
50 all Hull & Selby Y. &NAld 100 102
25 all Do. Shares. Do 5O 52
122 all Do. Shares. Do 25 —26
13 .all Lon.&Greenw S. Eastern 13 —13 i
20 all Do. Preference Do 212 252
20 100 Lowestoft gr.
4 per cent. Norfolk —
20 100 Do. 6 per ct.
52 all Manch. Bxtn. L.&N.W.
and Matlock & Midld. 2i 2ixd 22 ax d
50 all Middlesbro' & Stckton &
R,edcar
100 all Yfidld•Bradfd Midland.. 92 91
50 all Northern and
Easternsp.c. E. Count. 54 56
50 4. Do. 6 par ct. Do
50 all Do. Fixedsp eDo —
25 all Prest. &Wyre L. &N.W
&Lu&Yk xd
12i 12 Do. Shares. Do — xd
St. 100 Roystn.&Hit. GtNorthn
St. 100 Do.Shepth.St Do —
25 18a Shef.Roth.and Lancash&
Gooleg.s p.c. Yorksh. . .
12 9i S. Staffordsh. H.MClean 3 2dis
50 all WearValleygr Stockt. &
6 per cent... Darlingt. .
25 all Do Do. 2.9
St. 100 Wilts&Somrst dtWestn. 93 95

To return to my trial. Notwithstanding the sufficient
proofs that my advocate gave, and the necessity shown
of cancelling the decree, the Court of Caseation, under
the presidence of M. Laplagne Barris, agent of the
family of Orleans, followed the example of the injustice
of the previous courts, and, after four hours secret deli-
beration, rejected my appeal. Never, perhaps, was
greater injustice shown. But what can be expected from
the agents of a family who keep my heritage ?
Finally, I saw it was impossible to obtain justice from
the Paris tribunals. I had therefore recourse to the
Emperor Napoleon 111., and addressed to him a letter
in last November, in which I specified all my career,
military and private, with the witnesses in my favour. I
told him of the orders of my family, of the persecution I
had endured of the infringement of the law ; and, above
all, of the irregularities of the Paris tribunals. The
Princess Marie Elise, my courageous wife, wrote also
to the Emperor, giving him the details of my life and the
persecution I had suffered, entreating his Imperial
Highness to render me the justice the tribunal had de-
nied. On receiving these two letters, the Emperor Na-
poleon 111. immediately ordered that I should be set at
liberty, which was done on January 1, 1854. After 5
days sojourn in Paris I came to London, where I re-
main under the protection of the English laws.
It is a principal part of justice that the Emperor has
rendered me, but since I have been attacked, it remains
for me to let the world know what has been the false-
hood, the injustice, and the baseness that certain men
have exercimltimigt reAnyct to me J—l have the honour
PRINCE ALEXANDRE, of Gonzaga, Mantua.
London, March, 1854.