The Sun.
London, England, 1833-01-09 00:00:00

shall never be mine, and I say so designedly. Do you
know, moreover, any question that could be raised by
the trial of the Duchess of Berry ? Do you think
the question to he ascertained would he whether
she has been in Vendee? But that she has her-

proclaimed. Or whether she has conspired ?
that she has done in the face of France. Or whe-

they she is retained a prisoner at Blaye ? But her identity
is not disputed. No, Gentlemen, such would not be the
questions that would be then raised and discussed ; hut
the question that would be raised would be, to know whe-
ther Madame had the right to do that which she has done
—the right of insurrection against the Government of
the Revolution.—(lnterruption.) Yes, Gentlemen, that
is the question that would then be raised. —(The ❑oise is
renewed.)
A voice on the left—Away ; go; you pervert the
question.
The Minister—This is the question.—(Renewed inter-
ruption )
The President—Stay, M. Minister, I desire you would
not speak till order be restored. The matter is too serious
not to require general silence.
The Minister—This is the question which will be
brought and pleaded tdere, and the only one.
Voices in the centre—True,—well,—very well.
The President—You interrupt as much by approving
as reproving —(A laugh.)
The Minister—lt is for you to consider if it becomes
you to suffer this question to be brought before judges ap-
pointed by chance, before any tribunal. For our own
parts, Gentlemen, we are of those who think this ques-
tion has been decided since the 7th of August; we are
of those who think that a Government which respects it-

s-lf does not allow itself to b, compromi-ed by any one.—
(Numerous voicea,—,, Very right, very right.") Beware,
Gentlemen, of suff ring such questions to be carried before
a tribunal—think of the discussions which take place—of
the auditory that will throng around it. With the liberty
of speech we now enjoy, the enemies of Government will
fly from the utmost limits of the kingdom ; it is not by
hundreds or thousands we must reckon, but by hundreds
of thousands.—(Great interruption.)
A voice on the left—You do much honour to the Go-
vernment of which you are a member.
The Minister—Think, Gentlemen, of the language of
the counsel for the accused—of that of the accused her-
self. Think of the expression of popular fury which it
cannot fail to excite. Do you imagine that the whole
power at the disposal of the Government coald protect the
judges on one side, the accused on the other? You have
seen the disorders of Lyons—the scenes of the month of
June.—(Agitation.)
The President again interposed.
31. de Broglie (Minister of Foreign Affairs)—lf there
is any one who thinks he has a right to provoke such
disorders, it is none of us; we are bound to say that the
tranquillity of a country ought never to be played with.
In regard to the other reproach—that this is but an act
of the Government, and that the Govern .Went ought not
to devolve the tesponsibility on the Chamber—let the
matter be understood. What responsibility is meant ? Is
it the responsibility to come? That of the conquered party,
if he should be victorious? We accept this responsibility.
But there is another responsibility for Ministers, which
they cannot reject—that of conforming to the wishes of
the majority of the Chamber. The Committee has pro-
mulged its opinion that the Duchess of Berry ought not
to be brought to trial. The Committee has further de-
clared that she ought to remain prisoner in a fortress so
long as the public tranquillity requires, and has left the
Government to determine the duration of the detention.

If you are willing to adopt the Committee's conclusions,
the Government ask no more; if, on the contrary, you
wish to go more fully into the question, and to regulate
the conditions yourselves, we are ready to conform to the
measures you have a right to prescribe. if you leave us
free to act according to our discretion, we are far from
declining the responsibility of our acts.—(Approbation
from the inner sections.)
M. de Ludre intimated that he should proceed to ex-
amine the question put in the conclusion of the report,
namely, whether the Princess Caroline shall be detained
administratively, or shall be sent before the judges assigned
by law to foreigners as well as natives of France guilty of
a political offence.
The reporter observed that there was not a single word
in the report of what he stated. The Committee has merely
refused to submit the Princess to the judicial power.
M. de Ludre—lf the Committee has not decided the
principle that the Duchess ought to be tried, the Minister
of Foreign Affairs has, and I am about to reply to him.
The speaker, declared that, in his opinion, such detention
was an act of tyranny, and voted for sending back the
petition with this cl ruse—" To cause the laws of the
kingdom to be executed."
M. de Briquevile cited the expressions of M. Guizot
on the 29th of December, 1830, against extra-constitu-
tional power, and the remark of M. de Broglie before the
Chamber of Peers, that " the penal code might be in-
voked against the Bourbons." He supported M. de Ludre.
M. Cabet observed that it was not a comedy they wished
to be acted before the country in asking that the laws
should be executed. The charter was in question, whether it
be real or an illusion ; the question was,whether there were
laws in France—whether there was one justice, one equality
for all. The revolution of July was merciful, was generous
enough to claim now the right of enforcing the execution
of the laws. We may say, however, he observed to the
Government, that if it has made such a number of ene-
mies as to be justified in the fears expressed by the Minis
ter, the Government must take the consequences. If it
had not been bent on stifling patriotism, incarcerating the
conquerors of July, humiliating France in the eyes of fo-
reigners, and crushing the press with prosecutions, these
dangers would not have been apprehended.
M. Berryer came forward amidst strong indications of
curiosity. I appear, be observed, in support of the con-
clusions of your Committee—(darks of astonishment)—
in so so far as their object is to have the order of the day
pronounced on the petitions the analysis of which has
been presented to you. Gentlemen, you cannot doubt
that I have been sensibly impressed with the reflection
which most of the petitions yeu have heard read are cal-
culated to inspire. The captivity of the Duchess of
Berry, the present condition of that captivity, the extra-
legal state in which she is, in a state-prison in the bosom
of France, cut off ft om external intercourse, are considera-
tions which have awakened all my solicitude. I should
have felt myself compelled to beseech the Chamber to invite
the Ministry to put an end to such an intolerable state of
things ; but considerations not less serious induce me to
feel the necessity of adopting the opinion of the Commit-
tee. I now think, justified as lam in that opinion by the
speech of the Minister, that there cannot be a discussion
on such a topic; and if it were possible, I should demand
the previous question.—(lnterruption.) The matter is
a serious one. My personal affections attach themselves
to it: my political conviction.—(Renewed cries.)
A voice on the left—He has at least the courage to

avow it.
M. Berryer—The love, the ardent love I bear my
country, has alone inspired me, and alone supports my
conviction—

A voice—And your oath!
M. Berryer—lt this allusion to the oath is a personal
attack, I am ready to explain myself.
The President—Go on, Sir, do not reply to inter-
ruptions.
M. Berryer—l would say, then, that since I have been
present at this discussion, I have heard the speech of the
Minister ; a sudden resolution has unexpectedly made me
change my ideas, and it is in order to develop them to my
colleagues that I need the utmost freedom of mind.—
(Silence.) The first act of the revolution of July was a
violation of the charter and of all existing laws. This
violation, the Minister says, we were forced to by the
greatest, most imperative, most absolute, and I add, most
perilous of necessities. The second act was to decide in
the Chamber that the House of Bourbon was excluded
from the throne for ever. In spite of the principles of
Royal irresponsibility, a sentence of condemnation was
pronounced against Charles X. The third act was the
trial of the Ministers ; the Chamber of Peers itself made
the law it applied, thus constituting itself an assembly of
legislators and judges. Ira the present case the question is
❑ot a personal one. The Duchess of Berry is here a
principle ; she is exclusive of what has taken place
since the 7th of August. The position in which you are
placed with respect to her does not allow of any dignity
existing in deliberation. There can be no deliberation
on the part of those who made the law of the 7th of
August. You cannot deliberate ; pass, then, to the
order of the day. What advantage is there i❑ a refe-
rence to the Ministry? None whatever. It is evident,
on the one hand, that no trial can take place, and on
the other, that the Ministers, better advised, would not
now present a law to make the Chamber legislate on
the fate of the Duchess of Berry. When I oppose a
reference to the Ministers, I stand upon fundamental
principles, and I say, in order that there should be a trial,
there must be law and jurisdiction ; there must be law
and an applicable law, and the law is applicable no longer
than it is obligatory on the person to whom it is applied,
aed then it has had the consent, in some way, and mutual
engagement of the party. I maintain that the Chamber
cannot interfere in such a question without being in some
sort judge and party, and therefore, I demand the Order
of the Day.
M. Thiers supported the Order of the Day. The Mi-