The Sun.
London, England, 1824-03-31 00:00:00

PARIS PAPERS.

CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES.
BITTISG sumer! 27.
(In THE SUN of yesterday we gave, from the
Etoile, the commencement of the proceedings of
the day.)
M. B. Cowsranr, after some preliminary observations,
proceeded to say :—All that 114. Dudon has stated as to the
consequences of the Ordonnance of the 4th of June, 1314, is
perfectly just. If I did not descend from a fugitive on account
of religion, all the employments filled by me under the Go-
vernments anterior to the Restoration would be of no effect for
the possession of political rights.
The possession of a status before the Restoration is null
but the posSession of a status consecrated since the Restoration
by my inscription on the lists, and admission to the Chamber.,
can a status so sanctioned be taken from me
But the. solution of this question is not even necessary, and
I accept all that has been said respecting the Ordonnance of
1814.
M. Dudon has recognised that the descendants of the fugi-
tive Religionists were not affected by this Ordonnance. Am
I then a descendant from them ? end am I entitled in this
quality to the plenitude of the rights of a Frenchman ?
Why, Gentlemen, is there this difference between the fugi-
tives on account of religion, and the-other persons born out of
France ? It is because the Ordonnance was published at a time
when departments which had been united to France were se-
parated from it, and when the inhabitants of those depart-
ments followed the fate of their territory ; but the fugitive
religionists returning to their ancient country, and bringing to
it their fortune, remained within that country. They were
not foreigners who were admitted, but children who were
called back to the great family, and all the Legislations have
recognized that difference.
The Restoration has consecrated this principle. The case of
General Massena has been cited. He was of Nice. When
Nice was sepaes.ed from France, he would have,followed the
fate of his old country, if he had not obtained letters of natti I
ralization. General Dumont, now a Peer of France, was a
Swim: officer, but descending from fugitives on account of re-
ligion, he was made Peer of Frence without letters Of matte,
ralization.
The 22c1 Article of the Law of the 15th of DeceMber 1720 is conceived in these terms:--
" All persons who, born in foreign countries, descend, what-
ever the degree, from a Frenchman or Frenchwoman, expa-
triated on account of religion, are declared natives of France,
and shall enjoy the rights attached to their quality, if they re-
turn to France,' there fix their domicile, and take the civic
oath."
My father claimed the benefit of this law the 9th November,
• 1791. The following is an extract from the, deliberations of
the Municipal Council of the Commune of Dole, dated thet
day :
" Juste-Louis-Constant Rebecque, of Aire, in A rtols, hav-
ing entered the Council, said, that he presented himself, to
claim in his favour the benefit of the law of the Ist article of
the 2d title of the French Constitution (it is, as you shall be
shown, the repeal of the law of the 15th December, 1790),
granted to those whose ancestors expatriated themselves on ac-
count of religion, demanding to take the civic oath to acquire
the quality of active citizen ;
,on which Rebecque having jus-
tified his origin, there was given to hint the act of his presenta-
tion and demand, and he instantaneously took the said oath."_
Signed in the Register—" Terrier; and Brunet, Notary."
Be so .good as remark, Gentlemen, these words, " having
justified his origin," and remark also, that it is not to a vil-
lage before a few ignorant men who might he deceived, that
my father passed, in order to justify furtively his origin.
I blush, Gentlemen, to be forced to justify in his coffin, a
man whom eighty-six years of beneficence and virtues ought
to have secured from such a suspicion, and I reproach my-
self with being the innocent cause of the insult offered to
his memory ; but I am forced to do so. My father proyed
his origin before the Moire de Dole, M. Terrier de Mon-
triel, afterwards Minister of Louis 16th, and celebrated for
his Proclamation against the crimes of June 20th. Is it
possible, Gentlemen, that such a Magistrate would have lent
himself to any thing disgraceful, or that he could have con-
founded experiation on account of religion with the crime
of high treason ? He lives yet ; I believe he is at Paris, and I
appeal to him. It is quite false that my father remained only
a short time in France, and then returned to Geneva. I have
' the certificates to chew he lived six years in France, and I
affirm that he spent the rest of his days at Brevaus, near Dole,
where be had acquired a property. To prove this, I produce
an extract of his death.- Here then are two facts proved—the
re-establishment of my father in his rights as a citizen of
France, and his continued residence in France for 22 years after
that period. The Petition 1 presented to the Council of Five
Hundred was not to obtain the rights of citizenship, but for a
very different purpose. There was a law which declared every
man who had lived seven years, out of France, without it was
in the service of the State, a foreigner. It was on this account
that I presented that Petition, which was not neglected, as is.
alleged, but the consideration of it was adjourned, and the Di-
rectory, recognising their error, afterwards bestowed employ-
ments on • one which no one but a Frenchman could enjoy,__
What I said of a project of a Republic has' een misrepresented
to mean that mesancestor was banished France for wishing to
form a Republic, and this is made another source of accusation
against me. But there is not one word of truth in this accusa-
-1 tion. I spoke of a vague project which was common at that
time to many persons, and I ask what connection there is be-
tween such a matter and being galley of a crime which would
have cost him his life ? The law of 1790 is not confined to
those who were banished by the edict of Nantes, but it em-
braces persons banished at every epoch, and every Frenchman
or Frenchwoman banished on account of religion. Accordingly
the present Government demanded my papers, and on seein,g
them placed, on the list of elisibles, without making any diffi-
dulty. The question now revived was decided in the person of
my father 23 years ago, and can the Chamber rejudge what has
been so long decided ? I have enjoyed these rights continuously
for 30 years, and under the decision of several different Go-
vernments, and I now place myself in the hands of the Cham-
ber. You know all the merits of the case--decide as your jus-
tice may direct."—M. B. Constant was heard with profound
silence, and after lie had done, M. Dudon again spoke, and re-
newed his accusations, bringing forward some fresh matter.—
General Foy replied to M. Dudon, and finally it was decided
that the examination of the quality of M. Benjamin Constant
should be decided after the definitive organisation of the
Chamber. • •