The Sun.
London, England, 1849-08-28 00:00:00

clause. Art. 4. It is understood that the present ar-
rangement is to be submitted to the ratification of the
French Republic.' Art. 5. 'ln no case can the effects
111
of the present arrangement cease until a fortnight after
the official communication of the non-ratification.'
This delay, in adding to it the time necessary for the
reply of the French Government, prolonged about a
month the inactivity of our army. It was accorded at
the moment when our army was about to be exposed to
the heats of a burning summer, when Bologna was
taken, Ancona menaced, and when the foreign inter-
vention, of which M. de Lesseps was charged to prevent
the development, could receive a new activity from the
treaty on which the French Government was about to
be called to pronounce. The Council of State cannot
qualify too severely these conventions. Their smallest
defect is to have been signed by M. de Lesseps against
his instructions, against the opposition of all those whose
co-operation was imposed on him. Interrogated as to
the motives which had induced him to conclude them,
M. de Lesseps replied that his only ottject was to prevent
General Oudinot from attacking R ,me; that he wished
to have time to learn the definitive resolutions of the
French Government, which always had a right not to
ratify. M. de Lesseps thinks too lightly of a signature
brought by a representative of France at the bottom of a
treaty. Without doubt, the Government has always the
right to refuse its ratification, but such a refusal is a
resolution which may be attended with grave conse-
quences. The agent who signs a treaty, with the pro-
vision that the ratification will be refused, commits a
fault ; he recognises implicitly in advance that his in-
structions on the policy of the Government do not au-
thorise him. Simply authorised to act with discretion,
he places himself in opposition to the body from which
he holds his mandate ; he creates difficulties for the
Government which he exposes to the reproach of
weakness or timidity, if the convention calls forth dis-
content out of doors. Such, Monsieur le President, is
the result of the examination of the Council of State.
Two principal facts have been proved by this examina-
tion— L The absolute opposition between the instruc-
tions of M. de Lesseps, and the application which he
made of them. 2. The signature of a convention the
stipulations of which were contrary to the interests of
France and to her dignity. The Council of State ad-
mits that M. de Lesseps may, in extenuation, bring for-
ward the difficulty of circumstances, the gravity of the
question to be resolved, the devotedness which made
him accept a mission for which he was not prepared and
all the complications of which he had not leisure to
study, and, finally, his good faith, which nothing in the
affair has put in doubt. But in making this allowance for
personal considerations, the Council of State would fail
in its mission, if, in the name of the Government, of
which it is the depository and guardian, it did not pro-
claim aloud the strict duty which is imposed upon all the
servants of the State, to confine themselves to the powers
iwnistthr uwc thi which
hs
theythey are
receive,inv e t eadn,d tt oh
eo
sbeeryi scrupulouslyous responsibility
incurred by those who, representing France abroad,dare
to engage her word against her known will, in arrange-
ments which may compromise her honour and the peace
of the world.
(Signed) " VIVIEN, Reporter.
BOULAY DE LA MEURTHE, Vice-
President of th, republic."