The Sun.
London, England, 1849-01-08 00:00:00

wish, in several journals, and that is the reason why
I wrote the letter which was published this morn-
ing, and which I shall read to you in its totality.
Here it is, as it appeared in the Liberte, —" In
an article in your journal, entitled 'La
Tribune et La Presse' (an article which I may say, en
passant, that I fully approve of), you express, relative
tome and M. Belmontet, an old friend of M. Louis Napo-
leon's, an opinion that we possess secret and important
information relative to the affair of Boulogne, still en-
veloped in mist. For my part, I waited with some im-
patience for the interpellations which were spoken of,
and then my voice would not have made default to the
truth; but I think that it belongs neither to M. Belmon-
tet nor to me, to open the breach of publicity, indepen-
dently of M. Louis Bonaparte, without being officially
called on to do so. In the same article you say that the
production of the judicial documents in their proper
place can take place. That ciroumstance I declare
to be completely erroneous. I affirm, See." (The
remainder has been already given in M. de Malleville's
speech.) Is there, continued the Honourable Gentle-
man, in all that a word against M. de Malleville?
Certainly not. My thoughts were never to attack him.
Now, I say, that it was the juge d'instruction, who
allowed a body of documents to be taken away, when
they ought to remain in their place at the Palais de Jus-
tice, and not elsewhere. I ask if it be not true that M.
Pinard, Procureur of the Republic, replied on Novem-
ber 16th last, to an avoue, who demanded certain papers
in the name of persons against whom the bill brought
was ignored, that there remained no trace of them?—
(Noise.) It is not now that these allegations, these
complaints were made for the first time; under Louis
Philippe the same was done, and then the answer given
was, that there were persons who had made default, and
that the documents could not be parted with. At pre-
sent, if' you wish to liberate from their sentence the per-
sons in default, you can do so; and if you wish to pro-
ceed against them, you can do it, for they are at Paris,
Why do you not act against them? I have in my pos-
session the letter of M. Pinard, declaring that there
is no trace of the documents, and I promise to lay it,
if required, before the Assembly.—(Agitation.)
That letter affirms that all the documents of
the trial of 1839 have disappeared. I ask how it
happens that such papers are not forthcoming.—(Re-
newed agitation.) You will be pleased to remember that
the question does not relate to attacks against the Pre-
sident of the Republic. as M. Louis Bonaparte was not
elected to his high office on Nov. 16. A new demand
has been made since then, and the Procureur who suc-
ceeded M. Pinard replied that the documents relating to
the Bonapartist conspiracy must have been transported
to the Chamber of Peers, and thence to the hotel of the
Ministry of the Interior. I can comprehend perfectly
well that the archives of the Chamber of Peers should
hare been transported to the Ministry of the Interior;
but I ask why the documents of the affair of 1839 have
disappeared? Can it be that in that affair were com-
promised certain persons, the most highly placed in the
social scale—an Emperor amongst the rest?—(Great
agitation.) This is not the first time that this allegation
has been brought forward. You may remember that it
was formerly put forth. How, then, is it that this affair
left no trace behind? I will tell you; because we were
betrayed; because the documents were sold.—(Agitation.)
Voices on the Left—Go on, go on.
M. G. Sarrut—Do you suppose that the President of
the Republic has not a right to learn what persons then
betrayed his confidence? Do you imagine that he is not
entitled to know what took place? After the decision
which ignored the bills, a new plot was prepared. We
believed—(lnterruption).
A Voice—Who is we?
Mr. G. Sarrut—We, the conspirators of 1839. We
believed, and we had good reason for doing so, that this
plot was not a bona fide one, and that the police guided
all the threads of it. We, on the one hand, wanted
with the name of Bonaparte to effect universal suffrage,
whilst others world not have the name of Bonaparte.
Six millions of votes have replied for us.—(Agitation.)
It is then that the members of the first plot split into
two camps. One considered the name of Bonaparte an
excellent rallying cry to overturn the Bourbons, and
with the Bourbons the throne. The other had a dif-
ferent object in view; they remained firm in the breach,
and the affair of Boulogne took place. Well, the
documents of 1840 have disappeared ; and I affirm that
both those, and the papers of 1839, ought to be found at
the Palais de Justice. M. de Malleville has told you
that such documents do not disappear, that they belong
to history; yet M. de Malleville must be aware that the
papers of the conspiracy of Grenoble disappeared, and
that those relative to the death of the Duke d'Enghein
shared the same tate. You perceive, therefore, that such
documents are not watched over with such warm affec-
tion; yet they are history, and, historical as they are,
they cannot now be found I The day on which M. de
Malleville quitted the Ministry, the President of the Re-
public wrote to him to demand the documents; the letter
tell into the hands of his successor. We have a right to
know what has become of those documents, which it has
been impossible to find—
Several voices—Who, you ?
M. G. Sarrut—We, again; the conspirators of 1839.
(Noise.) There is this difference between me and many
others—that I conspired with 114 others, and almost in
the open day.—(lnterruption.) This avowal is now mad(
because the President of the Republic has been pro
claimed. We figured at the Court of Assizes, and ever)
one could take note of us. I will not enter into more
explicit explanations, for reasons which every one can
divine ; but I want it to be clearly shown that the docu-
ments have disappeared, and that men have remained
from three to eleven months in prison, without any do-
cument remaining to prove it, beyoad the registry at the
gaol. And if the Minister of Justice, after the inquiry
which I demand from him, cannot find any trace of
these documents, is it not natural to suppose that their
disappearance is connected with the scheme set on foot,
and which terminated in the affair of Boulogne?—(Loud
interruption.) If we are wrong in our opinion, let the
documents be forthcoming; tea it be proved that the
affair of Boulogne was not got up by the police.—(Agita-
tion.) In conclusion, I have to repeat that I had no
intention whatever to include M. de Malleville in my
charge. The letter of M. Pinard declares that there is
no trace of the documents which we demand. I am
therefore correct in saying that if they have again ap-
peared, it can only be since M. de Malleville's with-

-irawal.
A Vo;ce on the Left—lt is evident.

M. G. Sarrut—What concerns me is, to denounce to
the Assembly, to the country, the disappearance of do-
cuments of importance. I have done nothing more or
less. I decline all other responsibility.—(Agitation.)
M. 0. Barrot (the President of the Council)—l can-
not comprehend the character nor bearing of the present
incident.—(Hear, hear.) I have listened with the
greatest attention to the Hon. Member who has just left
the tribune, and I cannot discover what is the political
sense of his charge. The time of a great Assembly like
this ought not to be taken up unless with serious mat
ters, invested with a political character. Well, then, I
ask, where is that interest, or where is it designed to go?
When a conspiracy is spoken of, I ask myself whether
there has not been a real one to bring into disconsidera-
tion all the great powers of this country.—(Approba-
tion.) For my part, I cannot see in the interest of what
opinion, of what party, such conspiracy could have been
got up.—(Hear.) It is pretended that certain documents
connected with law proceedings are no longer at the
Palais de Justice, where they ought to be; but Hon.
Gentlemen do not know if these documents, transported
to the Court of Peers, as connected with a trial brought
before it, have not been taken thence to the Ministry of
the Interior, where they now are, as is affirmed by the
Minister of the Interior who just left the Ministry, and
by his successor.—(lnterruption.) If any other Go-
vernment has taken on itself to remove judicial docu-
ments, in the puerile hope of disarming the judgment of
things, we cannot help it; but, as
ncerned, we shall never permit such an
The parties interested are entitled
fhaaci
rst t.
—oarsy(
wHoeenaan arr,
ee
hnceoar
andcertainly to withdraw the documents belonging to them,
but not until after a complete judgment has been given.
It is without doubt to that the Procureur of the Re-
public alluded in the reply spoken of. With respect to
the administrative portion of the documents, they have
a confidential character, which belongs to no party—no
o
e hasglance over them.—(Hear, hear.) Such is the principle
which we a
for
maintained, to ehme ovnet
them,
or cast an investigating
and which wo shall continue
to maintain,
interests, the honour, and the
nrti
security of every Government—touching, as it does,
every interest, public and private. I shall not go
further. The explanations which I have just given ap•
pear to me sufficient to satisfy whatever this incident pos-
sesses of regular circumstances, orconnected with positive
right. As to the desire to seek after I know not what
scandal—as to the affectation of rats illing to mind certain
remembrances—as to the pretensions of establishing a
certain joint responsibility—(Loud cheers)—l think that
it is neither proner, nor politic, nor patriotic, to attempt
to make the sli;:htest, or most indirect attack, on the
moral force of the power which has emanated from ,
uni-
versal suffrage.—(Cheers.) On ihe contrary, we all have
an interest to respect the halo with which the confidence
of the people has encircled it.—(Renewed cheers.)
M. G. Sarrut denied that he had any intention to
weaken the feeling alluded to. There were some men
who rejected the joint responsibility alluded to.—(Hear,
hear, on the Left) As to the documents, the Govern.
ment might, if it pleased, divide them; but if they put
aside those connected with the administrative side of the
matter, it could not those of a judicial character, andiof
which the fact of the bills being ignored authorised the
restitution.—(Numerous cries of "The order of the day.")
M. Dupont (de Bussac)—l was not one of the eonspi-
rotors of 1839, and consequently I do not come here to
speak of that matter. I come for the purpose of asking
permission to demand explanations on Monday next, re-
lative to the late Ministerial modification. (Great
agitation.)
M. Charamaule—And the order of the day which has
been called for ? _ _

The President—lt is elearly understood that the prin-
cipal incident is terminated.
The President of the Council--It does not belong to
me, certainly, to regulate the proceedings of the As-
sembly, but I have to beseech it, in the interest of the
country, to dispose of the matter forthwith.—(Loud cries
of " Yes ! yes " from all sides.)
M. Dupont (de Bussac)—lf the Ministry is ready to
reply I am ready to proceed.—(Hear, hear.) M. de
Malleville expressed his surprise just now that this dis-
cussion should have menaced him for seven or eight days
without being brought to the tribune, but he ought to
be aware that many things which pass in the interior of
a Cabinet are known only in the course of time.
—(Noise.) I desire to know what are the motives
of the Honourable Member's withdrawal from
the Cabinet
; was that act caused or not by
the sixteen cases just now spoken of ? According
to the reply that may be given, there will be an
occasion to examine if the President of the Re-
public has not a right to know all that passes in the
State.—(Marks of dissent.) Those sixteen cases have
been put under seal, not by M. de Malleville, but before
his arrival at the Ministry, by M. Panisse, whom he then
dismissed, avd replaced by
the Inlgt Wll9 was at the heed