The Sun.
London, England, 1815-05-19 00:00:00

was any correspondence at that time, we can
scarcely believe that, it cook have been. in any
other tone than that of these letters.

The next question that' occurs is, why is the
ilioniteur so very anxious to cast a doubt on the
authenticity of thest; letters ? Is it sought to prove
that MuRAT acted faithfully to the Allies and
Aithlessty to BUONAPARTE ? Why, truly, this is a
strange quarter for such matter to 'come from,—
Why should the Master of the. Noniteut feel so
strong an interest in demonstrating the innocency
of the Man who desertekl his Brother in distresS,..
and shelving that he was really faithful to engage-'
ments which proved him a monster of ingratitude to
BUONAPARTE, who gave him his crown ? This is
being indeed excessively just and liberal—a con-
iincing proof of the Tyrant's altered nature ! !
A more absolute blunder than the whole course
endeavoured to be maintained by the Aloniteur in
this case we clinnot well conceive. Mortrr is

avowedly at this moment in close alliance w

BUONAPARTE and the usurping Government, so
that :t laboured argument from those he deceived
to prove his faithlessness towards them, is rather
mal-a-propos ; it can only have been hazarded to
serve some indirect purpose.
The conclusion that we draw from the whole
matter is, that it is a cl::msy—indeed a most
clumsy and contemptible attempt to follow up

the pacific schemes of the distracted Usurper,,by
•inculcating that neither MURAT nor himself are
utterly faithtess—convicted thOugh they be of the
foulest treacheries, and guilty as they arc in the,
eyes of the world of crimes and usurpations that
have placed them entirely without the protection
of Public' law.

A few words more and we are dope. The Let
tors from BLIONAPARTE (which are the only par
of the documents laid before Parliament notice(

in the Moniteur) formed a very small part of the
strong case against MuttAT. Those of BUONA-
PARTE'S SiSICIS, of FOUCITE, and of the French

Consul at Ancona, were -the most pithy of the
Letters produced by the Noble Lord, and the au-

thentieity of these the Moniteur tacitly admits.
Of the letter said to be written by Lord WEL

LINGTON, granting it authentic, we take no no-
tice—it is quite inconclusive and irrelevant. The
papers mentioned in it are not specified—and be-
sides, it contains sentence of damnation against
Alutz.vr from the ►roofs afforded' by the letters to
which it alludes.

Yesterday morning at 2 o'clock a Cabinet Cmtn.
cif was held at the Foreign ()thee, whiCh sat til
past- 4.

- Yesterday .morning tbeDuke of ORLEANS visited
the PRINCE REGENT at Cariton-Honse.
Yesterday the Duke of Yokux and the Duchess
of ANGOULEME visited her MAJESTY at the Queen's
Inthett7Celalirillfon-h ouse to dine with the
her MAJESTY and thePRIN-
CPEace.
Went slasEs
PitiNgE• REGENT, where they were met by the
Princess CHARLOTTE of WALES,. the Duke of
CLARENCE, and a select party. •
The Earl of -AIut.GRAvE had an .audience of
the PRINCE REGENT
Carl-
ton liouse.
--yeiterday morning at
Yeterday morning the Princess CHARLOTTE
took an airing in an open carriage,- attended by
the Countess of ILCHESTER and COI, ADDER-
BROKE, in the Parks, &c.
The Pritleess of WALES'S steward arrived In
frmaltuly two months ago,- which has
probably given rise to the statement iv some Jour-
nals of the approaching return of her Royal High.'
yess.

shreds from ohrletters, to form the warp for his
fabrications. But it.is quite extravagant to pre-
tend, that 'if he did borrow from old letters, lie
would have chosen the insignificant phrases said
to be taken from the letters of 1813 and 1811 ;
such as, " I shall say nothing of my dissatisfac-
tion at your conduct,' &c. and " Your hus-
band is a very brave man," for these are all that
lie is accused of having pilfered. Surely, an ar-
gument on. such ground is quite untenable.---IThus
much fez the proofs of forgery ; which we tako
to be just enough to show that there Is no proof
at all.

Now as to the probability cif BUONAPARTE hav-
ing written such letters as those produced by Lord
CASTLEREAGH, at,the time when they purport. to
be written, prima facie, these letters have the
stamp of truth. Mu RAT.S conduct at that time
was likely to call forth reproaches from BuoNA-
PAnTE, and these letters are in a very reproch-
fill tone. This is strong Inesmnption in favour of
their authenticity.

On a view Of the whole question there is not the
shadow of proof to support the charge in the No-
niteur, and the reasons to believe the authenticity
of the letters of 1814, are strong indeed.
It would have been an easy matter to prove a
forgery if one had been committed. First, by stat-
ing whether or not. there was any correspondence
between IIooNAPARTE and MURAT at the time
when these letters seem to have-been written :

and secondly, if them. Was any correspondence, to
prove that it was different from that now produc-
ed. The burden of this ptoOf lay On .13uoNA-
PARTE, because as we have au eady said, if there