The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-21 00:00:00

had —eater :en root of the rano to in ee pro-
position, and there could be no doubt that they ought to be
checked in their growth, if net altogether eradicated. The
Hon. Deputy then referred to the example of England, which,
he said, could be cited as a model, not of a social institution,
but of a political one. He referred to the similitude
which existed between the revolutions of 1688 and 1830,
and showed that under William 111. and succeeding mo-
narchs, laws had been introduced to exclude Government
functionaries from the House of Commons, just as the pre-
sent proposition aimed at keeping them from the Chamber
of Deputies. He went on to argue that though a certain
number of functionaries were necessary in the Chamber, to
give information on special questions, yet that it did not
follow that because a man was not a functionary he might
not be perfectly well able to enlighten the Chamber. M. 0.
Barrot, he said, was no functionary, nor was the Duke de
Broglie, nor Count Mole, nor M. Guizot, and yet they were
men of great knowledge. He therefore merely meant to say,
that public functionaries, no doubt, had great information,
but they bad not a monopoly of it. The Chamber ought to
be a body representing all classes of society, but no one
would speak seriously of a majority representing advocates
alone, or manufacturers alone, nor ought it to represent
public functionaries alone. And vet the present one was
exclusively composed of public functionaries. There were
184 of these in the Chamber.
M. Liadieres-152.
M. Thiers—Yes, 152, if the Deputies composing part of
the King's household or Councillors of State in extraordi-
nary service, and such like employes, were excluded. But
of those 184 functionaries, 130 at least were Ministerial.
The number of Deputies usually voting was about 400. Of
these 225 sided with the Mnistry, and 175 for the Opposi-
tion, which gave an average majority of 50 to the Govern-
ment. But if 130 functionaries were found amongst the
225, could it be denied that the majority was eminentiv
that of the Government employes? Be it remarked, too,
that the number of public functionaries who voted with the
Opposition was yearly decreasing. In 1832, 1833, and 1834,
there were about 60 in the Opposition ranks, whereas at
present the number was not more than 40. Since last year
there had been twenty new elections, and in these, fourteen
of the successful candidates were public functionaries. The
evil was evidently increasing, and ought to be put down.
The conclusion that he drew from these facts was that, often
in that Chamber, political feelings were sacrificed to per-
sonal interests. Functionaries, perceiving that they often
had the existence of the Cabinet in their hands,
eagerly sought for seats in the Chamber. Such func-
tionaries as were possessed only by the spirit of
their duty remained tranquil, whilst others, impelled by
ambition, threw themselves into the Ministerial ranks in
order to arrive at some higher place. Whenever a
situation fell vacant in the Court of Accounts, the Court of
Caseation, in the Council of State, who was almost sure to
obtain it ? Without doubt a Deputy ; and this was so well
known, that it was sufficient to cause the employes, who were
not Deputies, to detest the Government for placing so many
Members of the Chamber over their heads. The Hon. Deputy
then examined the question in its details, which he considered
fully justified. He next alluded to an amendment of
M. barrot, which went even. further than that under dis-
cussion, and lie admitted thatelie-.(M. Thiers) so fully ap-
proved of what that Hon. Deputy had done, that he was
ready to assume the whole responsibility attached to it, and
should give it his warmest support. It was said that the
amendment not only attacked a number of .Hon. Deputies,
but even the august personage at the head of affairs. lie
had to reply to that objection, that in what was thus pro ••
posed nothing personal was ietended. How could it be
supposed that he and his friends could aim at attacking
royalty when they had supported It under such trying
circumstances? The Hon Deputy here again referred to the
great revolution at present being effected iu England, with
such regularity. from both the Ministry and the royal power
confining themselves strictly to the letter of the institutions.
There was never any such thing heard of in England," he
observed, "as any enmity to the Queen. No one ever said
there, the Queen will have this done or that done;' but
simply, ' Sir Robert Peel is doing so and so,' or ' Lord Joha
Russell is carrying out such and such a measure.' Did that
mean that England, who had expelled the Stuarts, was
willing to be subject to the son of a cotton-spinner? Cer-
tainly not. It merely meant that Sir Robert Peel was the
a ill of the country embodied in a single man. The Govern •
ment yielded to that will, not as to a riotous body, but as
enlightened reason obeyed a truth which it had discovered
and admitted.—( Loud applause on the left.) Sir R. Peel
was, then, the country-made man ! And could there be a
greater stability or a nobler attitude than that which was
exhibited? An immense revolution was effected and not a
cry against the Queen. She passed on with impunity in the
midst of all the agitation, respected and beloved ! Nay, even
her death, if it unfortunately should take place, would cause
an immense affliction in England, but would not produce
the slightest alarm."—(Sensation.) Such was the sight he
had desired to behold at the restoration. He was then un-
known, and, inhis deep obscurity, was acquainted with neither
the august occupant of the throne, nor him who was to suc-
ceed him. In 1829 he had written the phrase, " The King
reigns, but does not govern." He bad written that in 1829,
and he believed in 1846 that his maxim was perfectly pos-
sible. He firmly believed that a true representative Govern-
ment was possible in France. Were it otherwise, the coun-
try ought to have been told so in 1830.--(Sensation.) If the
representative Government was not possible in France, it
would have been better not to effect the revolution—if it was
not possible, what they had previously was far preferable.—
(Continued sensation.) He looked on the revolution of July
as a step in advance—as a progress, but he felt convinced
that there was much more to be done. Was it necessary to
say what connexion there was between all this and the
amendment? The amendment desired to have royalty
always placed out of debate, and to see Deputies vote fairly
according to their own opinions. But when representatives
were seen to vote day after day according to the ideas of
another—(Murmurs from the centre)—it was evident that
such a state of things was attended with grass inconve-
eience.—(" Hear, hear," from the left.) "We had rather,"
said the Hon. Deputy in conclusion, " sacrifice the King's
aides•de-camp than the King himself, and we regard that
as an advance in the career at the end of which we per-
ceive the truth of representative government. That truth
will be long in coming, it is said. Be it so; I shall not say
anything to the contrary ; but, in allowing the fact, I must
call to mind the words of a German author, who, in speak-
ing of causes that triumph slowly, multi—' I shall place my
vessel on the highest promontory of the bank, and shall
await the coming of the tide to set me afloat, and waft me
off ' In the same way Ido not think that 1 am placing my
vessel so high that it will be inaccessible."---(Loud applause
and agitation.)
The Minister of the Interior replied to the Hon. Deputy.
He maintained that the representative Government was fully
and honestly practised at present in France. The funda-
mental rule of such a Government was to hare it directed by
the will of the majority. That was what was demanded
under the restoration, and what was carried out in the pre-
sent day.—( Interruption and exclamations.) It was said
that the restoration had the majority. He denied it. It
was not when it had the majority that it fell, but when
.it
separated itself from the majority, and desirGedovteerngnolevnetrnh
n
a sense contrary to its will. The pre
ad
been for six years in power,?an#ooli.idani
and,
ever,present
he would ask,
therefore, the fun-
separated from the majorityG
&mental principle of the en ernmendt. had been satisfied.
The Hon. Minister then proeeede.d to iscuss the question on
its own merits, and argued that it was useless, inasmuch as it
would not attain its object, and would be attended with grave
inconveniences. Speaking of corruption used by the Govern-
ment, the Hon. Minister retorted the charge on M. Thiers'
Cabinet, denying that it was applicable in any way to the
present. He referred to the Deputies appointed since 1840,
and defied M. Thiers or any other Hon. Member to point
out those shameful fallings-off from opinions which had
been alluded to. He also called on them to examine the
returns of Government promotion.% and show any examples
of improper or illegitimate recompenses awarded for politi-
cal apostacy. The Hon. Minister also called in question the
calculations of M. Thiers with respect to the number of De-
puties holding Government situations. There were not, he
maintained, 184 of such Deputies in the Chamber, since
generals on half-pay, members invested with merely hono-
rary functions, and such like, ought not to be included under
the category just named. Besides, he argued, whatever they
were, they had been nominated by the electors. The mo-
tives put forward by the author and supporters of the propo-
sition the Hon. Deputy did not think were the real ones.
The Chamber had now existed for a period of five years, and
during that time the Conservative policy had triumphed.
The Opposition now, at the moment of the Chamber's dis-
solution, desired to see it pass on itself, just as it was about
to appear before the electors, a veritable act of discredit—it
wanted the mtvority to declare that for five years it had been
wanting in dignity and morality. This, he would venture
to say, the majority would not be induced to consent to. The
Hon. Minister concluded by alluding briefly to the amend-
ment. He declared that a proposition to exclude the func-
tionaries of the civil list from the Chamber came with so
much a worse grace from M. Thiers, that it was he who had,
in 1836, nominated Baron Fain, the intendant of the civil
list, a Member of the Chamber. He maintained, further-
more, that the certain effect of the amendment would be to
give to the enemies of the institutions of the country a
powerful weapon against royalty.—(Hear, hear.)
The sitting was brought to a close at half-past 6 o'clock.
MARCH 18.
At 2 o'clock M. Sauzet, the President, took the Chair, when
the discussion on M. Remusat's proposition relative to the
right of plaeemen to be Deputies was resumed.
M. Deelongrais, the first speaker, supportedthe proposition,
which he regarded as more advantageous to the majority
than to the Opposition. The deputation, he said, should ant