The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-15 00:00:00

M. GUIZOT TO COUNT JARNAC.

Paris, Nov. `22, 1846.
Monsieur le Cornate,—l send you herewith a copy of
the dispatch from. Lord Palmerston, dated the 31st of
October last, which Lord Nornaanby communicated to
me on the 4th of the present month. Having answered
already most of the allegations repeated in this docu-
ment, I shall confute mysef to correcting the more seri
ous of the errors -which it contains, and to reiterating,
conformably with the truth, the more important of the
facts to which it relates. The only effect of lengthened
controversy is to throw obscurity on the controverted
matter, and to raise animosity between the parties to the
dispute. Whilst it asserts the rights and the interests of
France, the Kings Government is earnestly dearous of
maintaining the m ost friendly relations with the Govern-
ment of her Brita snic Majesty,
.and to this sentiment I
shall remain faithaEul.
Lord Palmersto n endeavours to make out that the
King's Government has not kept the engagements re-
lating to the Spitaksh marriages which it entered into
into in September. 1845, at the Palace of Eu ; and
that it has broken the Treaty of Utrecht, with the ob-
ligations which that treaty imposes upon it. Such are
the terms of his dispatch ; and the more unmeasured
these terms are, %he more anxious I am to reproduce
them without attenufation, that I may give theca an unre-
served answer.

Lord Palmerston.. declared, in his dispalch of the 22d
of September last, that he had not found in the Foreign.
office any conventioi i or arrangement betw,en the French
and English Govern menta relating to the Spanish mar-
riages. He insists, in his dispatch of the 31st of October
last, on the ongagesnents relating to the same matter,
which, as he says, were-entered into by the hint T's Go-
vernment at the j niece of Eu, affirming, at the same
time, that there is :not in the Foreign• office any trace of
the memorandum w ritten by me on the 27th of February
last, and communi co ted to Lord Aberdeen on the 4th of
March following.
I might ask, in Dry turn, whether there exists in the
Foreign-office any trace Of the engagements contracted
at the Palace of lam? I might, moreover, urge (with
some surprise at the inconsistency) that, while he affects
a perfect knowledge of engagements not attested by the
faintest official evidence, he disputes facts and documents
which it would n.xt be convenient to admit, on the
ground that there iia% no official trace of their existence.
This (might it not be said ?) is a striking contradiction,
and evinces an ext roma partiality for his own view of
the question.

I shall, however, Flo nothing of the sort. I shall not
dispute the engage ments contracted at Eu, because no
record of them has; been found by Lord Palmerston in
the Foreign-office. Where Governments are connected
by mutual confidence• and respect, public business is not
unfreqwently transacted without official documents.
There are even ciircumstance in which this course is
dictated to theta by propriety, and in which, therefore,
they are bouHd to pursue it. Such was the case in re-
spect to the Spanish marriages. As the question related
substantially to the domestic concerns of Spain, it in-
volved consideration is which regarded her independence
and dignity. Lord, Aberdeen and myself (who were de-
sirous of acting in concert throughout the affair) did not
think it fitting to Yam ke the question the subject of an
official correspond ensce. Out of respect towards Spain,
and considering our own position relatively to her, He
thought that we should act with More propriety by con-
fining our correspondence to those less fotmal com-
munications which were rendered haturarand easy by
' our mutual confidentce.
It is for this refasuu that Lord Palmerston has not
found in the Foreilm-office any trace of the negotia-
tions or arrangetneiva which. in his dispatch of the 22d
of September, he styles a bargain. But the engage-
ments contracted at...Eu, with the declarations in the
memorandum of the• 27th of February, are not, on that
account, the 16ss reeor serious; and, so far urn I fro
disputing theft), that I am anxious to aclitio‘Nktige
their existence, ana:.•to • assert their true and serious
character.

It is, hourbver, my Iduty, whilst milking this aeknow-
lodgment, to' re-stabs them correctly and completely.
Now, in referring to tl le engagements contracted at
Eu.
Lor Palmerston for; its, or omits to say, that these en-
gagements were Matt at and conditional. Whenever we
have adverted to ther.a, we have coupled them with two
reservations : first, ;that the Queen of Spain should
choose her consort amongst the descendants of Philip
V. secondly; that the English Government, in concert
with us, and accordipg to the measure of its moans,
should help us to secare the accomplishment of that
object.
We could not, indek d (without the most culpable im-
prudence), have refill icted our liberty of action in a
matter of such serious importance, unless we had limited
our engagements by oonditions demanded from us by the
interests and dignity of Prance.
I have openly, and. on every occasion, announced our
line of policy in rest sect to the matter in question. I have
frequently conversed' pa the subject with the English