The Sun.
London, England, 1849-01-10 00:00:00

THE FRENCH REPUBLIC

We have received the Paris papers of yesterday.
In the sitting of the National Assembly of the pre-
vious day, after M. DE LAMARTINE had spoken (as
we stated in The Sun of yesterday) in defence of the
foreign policy of the Provisional Government—
M. Ledru Rollin ascended the tribune. He also de-
clared that peace had been the great thought of the
Provisional Government. The case so often alluded to
of Risquons- Tout was nothing but a fabrication. The
present Cabinet appeared to follow a monarchical ten-
dency, as would be proved by an examination of the
manner in which it acted in every country of Europe.
The Hon. Gentleman then referred to the situation of
the jltoman States. The Pope had fled, and placed
himself under the protection of the King of Naples.
The Austrian troops were now marching on the Le-
gations.—(Movement.) He had heard that, just at
the end of the last year, a Cabinet Council was
held, at which it was resolved to allow that
course to be pursued ; that Austria should bring back
by !force the Pope to his capital.—(M. Passy here
made a mark of denial.) At the reception of the Pre-
sident, at the beginning of the year, that high func-
tionary addressed, in the most marked manner, the
Pope's Nuncio, and expressed a hope that his Sovereign
would be quickly replaced at Rome.—(Oh, oh.) That
address was most significant. What protest did the
French Government make against the reactionary move-
ment which was thus manifested?—(Great agitation.)
None whatever. It allowed Austria to interfere, Russia
to threaten—and did nothing! It had been said that
the conduct of the Provisional Government was respon-
sible for the movement at Rome, and that it had been
the cause of the state in which the Pope was now—a
wanderer from his States. If that were meant in an
evil sense, he denied it. The Revolution of February
was a revolution which was to lead to peace, and who-
ever said the contrary were retrograde and aristocratic.
—(Movement.) If the Pope had quitted his States,
it was because he had been prompted to do so by evil
counsels. There was no necessity for such act,
as the movement at Rome was not against his
spiritual authority, but his temporal power. The
honourable gentleman then adverted to the order which
existed in Rome, as a proof that anarchy had not been
one of the means employed or reckoned on to bring
about the late changes in that city. Yet, when the
people there wished to base its conduct on the course
pursued in France, France held back, and gave no aid
or encouragement. In place of acting, France, the Go-
vernment stated, was negotiating. Was this a time to
negotiate ? The state of events in every country proved
the contrary. Again, look at the Conference that was
to be held at Brussels. Had not Austria protested that
she would not consent to such a mediation ? Of what
use, then, was it to proceed with the threatened confe-
rence ? Was not Russia ready to act ? Were not
80,000 men of Prussia ready to march, if required ;
and at a late banquet at Berlin, had not a toast been
given to the high military officers present, "To our
next meeting on the banks of the Rhine ?" England,
too, had lately sent one of her ablest diplomatic agents
to Brussels, and he, finding that his presence was use-
less there, bad at once gone on t&Paris. He main-
tained that to speak of negotiations in such circumstances
was worse than idle ; it was to betray the interests of
the country.—(Applause on the Left.)
The Minister of Foreign Affairs expressed his opinion
that the negotiations would arrive at a favourable ter-
mination by patience and energy.—(lnterruption). He
could not enter into explanations.
M. de Larochejaquelin declared that he conceived that
explanatiens ought to be given by the Cabinet on the
statements made by M. Ledru Rollin. Those statements
were important, and ought to be replied to.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs declared that the
statements made were inexact. No such Cabinet Council
was held as he had stated. The troops of Prussia, in
place of having been increased, in order to go to the
Rhine, had been diminished, No arrangement had been
made between France, Austria, and Naples, to restore
the Pope. As to the 80,000 men of Prussia or Russia, the
best answer was the state of the army of France, con-
sisting of 500,000 men.—(Hear, hear.)
M. Ledru Rollin repeated his former assertions, and
in the course of his remarks declared that M. Laroche-
jaquelin had, after the revolution of February, demanded
to be sent as Ambassador to Constantinople. (This
declaration produced a tremendous effect.)
M. de Larochejaquelin explained at some length, and
declared that he had been offered the place by M. de
Lamartine, and that he had refused. He would appeal
to that gentleman to say if that were not the case.
M. de Lamartine would refuse to lower tho debate by
personal matter. All he would say was, that M. de
Larochejacquelin always carried in his high character his
best defence.

After some further explanations from the Minister of
Foreign Affairs, the Assembly passed to the order of the
day.

The interpellations on the snbject of the foreign
policy of the Government being ended,
The President said—The tribune is to M. J. Favre

for other interpellations.—(Marks of surprise, mingled
with disapprobation.)
M. Jules Favre—The question I am about to address
is in no way hostile to the Ministry, but the facts on
which it is founded having appeared to me to seriously
engage the responsibility of the Government, and the
Government having for the last thirty-six hours been
silent on the subject, I consider it my duty to ask for
explanations. It relates to the publicity given in seve-
ral journals to a letter addressed by the President of the
Republic to a Minister.—(lnterruption.)
Several Voices—The order of the day.
M. Jules Favre—l consider that the publication in
question tends to bring one of the great powers of the
State into disrepute; I think that it is attended with
great danger, and that such publications would render all
government impossible. Ido not besides believe that a
letter could be published without the authorisation of the
writer. lin no way incriminate the Hon. M. de Malle-
ville, but I have heard that that letter was communi-
cated to some of our colleagues; I am ignorant by whom
that was done, for I repeat I in no way incriminate M.
de Malleville, who came to this tribune to make an
honourable statement relative to the secrecy to be
preserved concerning administrative documents.—
(Laughter.) I demand how it has happened that the
letter has been published in a journal whose political
tendencies are well known (Legitimist), and in a depart-
ment ,1
where its publication might have a disastrous
effect. It is only, therefore, by a guilty breach of con-
fidence that the letter in question has been published; and
I ask whether the Government has ordered any inquiry
into the affair ?—(Renewed cries of" Order of tne day.")
M. Odilon Barrot replied that he did not think it
necessary to give a direct answer to this question. He
declared the publication of the letter to be a disgraceful
act, but he at the same time complained of the abuse
which had arisen from the practice, so often indulged
in by the members of the Assembly, of putting frivolous
or inopportune questions, of raising daily scenes, and of
provoking irritating and personal debates, for no other
apparent purpose but that of injuring the Government,

.. . . . _
The debate on the Labour in Prisons Bill was
then resumed, and after two short speeches was again
adjourned.

The following communicated article, which may
be regarded as official, appears in the Patrie :
" The Reforme announced some time ago that in a
council of Ministers held at the Palace of the Elysee
114;10141 Qathe 224 ult., * Judy olliazoe bosweeu ditiogio,