The Sun.
London, England, 1847-07-08 00:00:00

The measure has been too recently in operation for us
to be able to report on its effects, except that in the
North Dublin Union, by energetic proceedings and with
the advantage of the resources of this city, some seeds
were speedily prepared, and patients in fever, for whom
there was no previous provision, were at once treated,
and several discharged cured.
We annex a variety of returns and the circular orders
which have been issued since the last report.
We have the honour to be, my Lords,
Your Lordships' most obedient humble servants,
J. F. BURGOYNE.
T. N. REDINGTON.
B. I. ROUTH.
HARRY D. JONES.
E. T. B. TWISLETON.
D. M'GREGOR.
The Right Hon. the Lords Commissioners
of her Majesty's Treasury, &c. &c. &c.

THE REPORT OF THE FRENCH
COURT OF PEERS ON THE AFFAIR OF
GENERAL CUBIERES.

This report, which in its entire state would make a
good sized printed volume, has just been made public. It
begins with a printed notice of the origin of the prosecu-
tion of General Cubieres. Our readers are already
aware that, in a suit between the General and M. Par-
meatier, respecting a dispute about a salt mine, M. Par-
mentier published some letters of the General for the
purpose of making it appear that he had obtained a large
portion of the shares on pretence of using them as a
bribe to persons in authority to promote the interests
of the company, but had converted them to his own
use. These letters excited public attention, and, the
affair being noticed in the Chamber of Deputies,
the Government resolved upon an investigation.
The Chamber of Peers formed itself into a judicial
court, and General Cubires, who is himself a peer and
an ex-minister, was called upon to answer two charges
—one of having, by false representations, obtained
possession of property, to be employed, as he said, in
the corruption of public functionaries ; the other, of
having employed, or attempted to employ. the means of
corruption. M. Parmentier was included in this second
charge. •As the investigation proceeded facts transpired
which induced the commission appointed by the Court
to report upon the affair to include in the prosecution M.
Pellaprat, an ex-Reeeis ar-General, as a party to the
corruption, or the attempt: to corrupt, and Baron Teste,
ex-Minister of Public Works, on the charge of having
accepted a bribe to induce him to favour the scheme in
which the other three defendants were engaged. A
large portion of the report is devoted to an account of
the;mining affair in question, and to the pecuniary
interest taken in it by General Cubieres, who is
stated to have had in the first instance only a hundredth
part, but to have obtained subsequently by purchase
six other hundredths, making altogether seven, at a
total price of 159,000 f. In order to make this spe-
culation complete, it was necessary to obtain certain
concessions of grants from the Government, and accord-
ing to the report the negotiations were intrusted to Ge-
neral Cubieres, who informed the other shareholders
that nothing was to be obtained without bribery, and
induced them to set apart a number of shares, valued at
about 25,000 F. each, which were, he said, to be given to
the high functionaries, in whom the power of concession
was vested either in a direct or indirect way. The re-
port, which is nut a very clear document, is, however,
divided into periods for the purpose, as it states, of ren-
dering the matter more clear than it would otherwise

be. In the first period, the history of the case is related
from the 24th of April, 1841, to the sth of February,
1842. General Cubieres and M. Parmentier :are stated
to have made their arrangements for bribing the Minis-
ters of Public Works and Finances, and long extracts
are given from their correspondence, and their answers
to the interrogatories of the commission of the Court
of Peers to show that they were really engaged in
the attempt to corrupt these Ministers and the
public functionaries whose reports were necessary for
the obtaining the concession. The letters of Gen. Cubi-
eres, in which he urges the mining company to set aside
funds for the purpose of corruption are quoted at great
length. The second division, or period of the report,
comprises what took place from the sth of February,
1842, to the 18th of June in the same year. The
shareholders of the mine of Gouhenans had, it is stated,
yielded to the suggestions of General Cub eres and M,
Parmentier, and set aside twenty-five shares for the
purpose stated by them. These persons are spoken of
as having been actively engaged in the prosecution of
their illegal object, and M. Pellapra is alluded to as
an accomplice called in to aid the efforts of M. Cu-
Wses, it being supposed that he had an influence with
M. Teste. In this part of the report, we find strong
allusions to the accusation of M. Parmentier against
General Cub:e -es of having been guilty of fraud in
obtaining possession of shares on the pretext of employ-
ing them for the service of the company, but in reality
ippropriatini them to his own use. All this is denied
by General Cubieres, who declares that he never offered
M. Teste a bribe, and expresses regret that in his
correspondence he should thoughtlessly have compro-
mised the honour of that Minister. The report states
that in the papers of General Cubieres, which have been
laid before the commission, there were various proj:cts
of divisions of the forty shares, which were considered
necessary to be used as bribes, and that in one, twenty-
five of them were entered in the name of M. C—, and
in another ten are put down to C—, and fifteen to P.C.
These papers were acknowledged by Gen. CuUres to
be in his own hand-writing. An extract is given from
the answer of Parmentier to the interrogatories which
were put to him. When asked by the commission what
he understood from the letters addressed to him by the
General, he replied, three things, viz., the necessity of
corruption, the power of corruptine, and the will to
corrupt; but he said: he did not believe the General ;
and if ho did not tell him so, it was because he
would not mako him the enemy of the company,
as he might in such a case have acted secretly against
it. General Cubieres is stated to have replied
to the question as to whom he meant to designate by the
initial P., that it was M. Pellapra, but he denied that the
shares set against him were to be given to him for the
purpose of bribery. He was, he said, to purchase them
of the company at a price to be discussed. M. Pellapra,
when interrogated, says the report, energetically pro•
tested against the deduction to be drawn from the paper
"of General Cubieres. The report now arrives at the
name of M. Teste. All the accused, all the witnesses,"
Tsseysstethferom thereport, ~ were unanimous in exculpating M.
accusation or suspicion of corruption.
All declared that an equivocal word had never come from
his lips, and that no proposition of bribery had reached
his ear." But this tardy reserve of the authors
of the letters, which would be laid before the
Court, is declared by the commission to be in
disaccord with the gravity of the imputations
contained in their correspondence. Amongst the
letters mentioned, and from which extracts are given, is
one from General Cubieres, in which he alludes to an
observation said to have been made by M. Teste, that
another competitor for the concession was in the field, '
and he suggests that this might be a mere trick to
compel the company to yield more readily to extortion.
M. Teste, when called upon to explain the meaning of
General Cubieres, replied, "General Cubieres only can
a'doiontwdeu oref ine to take an interest
in the affair of Crouhenans, and that my inflexible rule
e
say what he meant. All that I can aay is that never
paerpsroonp,osition or over-
directly or in-
directly,dtui dr
having e Nic e
mea
forulcb its Cubieres
i
raree
object or
et nh3'
to h
of conduct has alwaYs been, never to take part, not
merely in any affair connected with my ministry, but
in any other affair." M. Parmentier, on the other
hand, declared that M. Cubeses had positively men-
tioned M. Taste to him as be fines the person whom
he intended to bribe. The third division or period
of the report comprises the proceedings from the 18th of
June, 1842, to the 3d of January, 1843, the date of the
ordinance of concession for the mine. M. Pellapra, who is
described as a very rich capitalist, having, it was sup-
posed, peculiar influence with M. Taste, is much spoken
of in this part of the report ; but we do not find any
direct evidence against him. It is by deduction from
that correspondence that he is chiefly implicated.
Large extracts are made from the letters of General
Cubieres to Ai. Parmentier, in which the General
speaks of the exertions that he has made, and insinu-
ates that he meets with obstructions which he attributes
to the determination of the persons in authority, with
whom he had to deal, to extort as much as they
could. From what is stated by the commission, M.
Pellapra had been iu close relation with M. Teste on
the subject of the concession, and had communi-
cated to the company some information obtained from
the Minister ; but M. Pellapra, when interrogated, de-
clared that he had not sought to influence the mind
of the Minister improperly, and that what M. Teste had
said and done was in a friendly but disinterested spirit.
I. Pellapra had, it appears, up to this time, been heard
by the commission as a witness, but some supposed
prevarication in his evidence had induced the commis-
sion to inform him that he would in future be heard,
not as a witness but as a person accused. M. Teste,
when pressed with questions on this subject, replied as
he had before done, that if he had given information to
the parties who applied to him, it was chiefly with a
view of pointing out the difficulties in the way of the
concession, and that he had acted towards them
in the same friendly and open spirit as he would
have done towards tany body else. A letter from
General Cubiezes, in which he speaks of M.
Pellapra as having discovered through M. Teste
that there were difficulties opposed by the Minister
of Finances, and that, in consequence of the informa-
tion thus received, he had been able to change his tac-
tics, is quoted at great length. This letter being laid
before M. Teste, he said there was some truth and some
falsehood in it. It was very possible, he said, that he
might have talked to General Cubeses of difficulties
arising from the attributions of the two Ministers, but he
denied that he had said anything to lead General Cu-
bieres to suppose that the Minister of Finances had inter-
posed obstacles, and had pointed out how they were to be
overcome. The result of the interrogations of the accused
parties, and of the examination of the correspondence, is
stated to have been that the commission felt it right to
change the character in which M. Teste had appeared—
viz., that of witness, and to announce to him that he
would in future be heard only as a party accused. M.
Teste replied that he was thankful for this notice, as it
would enable him to get rid of the passive character of
a mere witness and to stand fully upon his defence. The
fourth and fifth periods or divisions of the report are
filled with the correspondence of General Cubieres, M.
Parmentier, and M. Pellapra, before and after the resti-
tution
of the 25 shares set aside for the supposed pur-
pose of corruption, and with an account of the action at
law brought by M. Parmentier against General Cu-
bieres„of which we have already given a report. In the
resume of
the Commission it is statod that the most po-
sitive proof of the different public functionaries whose
names had been involved, had resulted from the labours
of the commission, with the exception that there was
something as regard to M. Teste yet to be eeplained.
With respect to the other defendents, the commission
leaves it to the Court to declare the view that it takes of
the factz which hue been adduced.