The Sun.
London, England, 1851-10-23 00:00:00

THE MINISTFRIAL CRISIS IN
FRANCE.
SPIRIT OF THE PARISIAN' PRESS.

The Assemblie Nationale says :
" When M. Louis Napoleon was placed at the head
of the Executive Government, the Monarchical party,
in its two shades of opinion, afforded him honest sup-
port and powerful assistance. It was necessary to
combat the revolution, to drive it back, and to wrest
society from its fatal embraces ; and all, Legitimatists
and Orleanists, lent their efforts. But it happened
that this co-operation was singularly understood by
the President of the Republic. He appeared to be-
lieve and to hope that those who gave it would
abdicate in his hands their past, their souve-
nirs, their right, and their cause. That was de-
ceiving himself strangely. The Monarchical parties
cannot have any other ides, any other object than the
re-establishment of a veritable monarchy. They
will not make themselves the instrument of an Em-
pire, or of a Consulate for life. They will not abdi-
cate. Is it because he bas been deceived in this
hope, that the President of the Republic now de-
mands forces from the revolutionary party? Already
may the reception his advances have met with cause
Lain to reflect. The more he engages in this fatal
path, the more his disappointments will become
embittered. It is thus that, in giving himselp to
an exclusively personal amhition, he has b f uecome
isolated, and lessened in importance. If he had
shown himself impassible and disinterested in the
midst of parties, he would perhaps hive been
pressed to keep a little longer an impartial and
moderating power. The President has not had this
prudence. There is henceforth between him and the
majority, not only distrust, lzheta question of honour
anddigni,y. This new scission has rendered the
ground more unsafe. We cannot in these agitated
times guarantee the future, but whatever may hap-
pen, the majority will prove its existence by re-
maining the couregeous guardian of order, of the
laws, and of society. The gravity of circumstances
is extreme ; in some parts anarchy has already com-
mitted acts of savage fury; the faults of the Execu-
tive Government have caused trouble and disquietude
in public opinion. Bat the evil would be still
greater ; it would be irreparable if we could not say,
with reason, and in spite of the sophisms by which
it is endeavoured to misrepresent facts, that there is
a rn.:l7ty, and that it will know how to give proof
of e-ilErgy and power."
The.ilebats says :—" The Ministerial crisis has ad-
vanced but little, but we cannot say that it has gone
back. A journal of the Left had announced that M.
Billault has definitively failed in the mission which he
had received to form a Cabinet. According to reports,
which were afterwards in circulation, that journal
was ill-informed; M. Billault continued his measures,
and had not lost all hopes of success. Now, there is
no longer any talk of M. Billault, who, it is said, has
already set off on his return to Nantes, and the
names of General Le Pays de Bourjolly as Minister
of Foreign Affairs ; General Leroy de St. Arnault as
Minister of War; M. Giraud (d'Angers) as Minister
of the Interior; M. Bineau as Minister of Finances ;
M. Ducos as Minister of the 'Marine.; and of M.
Hippolyte Fortoul as Minister of Public Instruction,
have been brought forward. We confine ourselves to
mentioning these reports under all reserve. The only
thing which can he positively stated is, that up to the
present time nothing has been definitively decided on,
and that apparently nothing will be decided on until
the President of the Republic shall have completed
the drawing up of, his Message. The public waits for
the denouement of, the crisis with a calmness which is
not the least singular trait of the present state of affairs.
At the Salle des Conf6rences, as at the Bourse, the
physiognomy is the same ; every one seems agreed to
allow tl:e President of the Republic to be at his ease. It
is not the country, it is not the Assembly, it is not the
Permanent Committee, which has created the present
crisis; it is not parliamentary exigencies and annoy ances
which have driven the President into the strait in
which he is so painfully placed. It is from his own
full and free will that Ai. Louis Napoleon undertakes
to solve such a difficult problem as that of repealing
the law of May 31 without openly breaking with the
majority, who regard that law as the basis and the
corner stone of its policy. It is, therefore, for M.
Louis B )naparte alone to seek art issue from
thin strait. In remaining an impassable and
cool spectator, the country understand and keeps
its character. When we say that the problem
is difficult, we forget that other writers have
found the means of simplifying it. To set aside
the obstacle which the resolution of the President is
to meet with in the majority of the Assembly, these
writers, who are known to be fertile in expedients,
have suggested the plan of suppressing the majority.
There is no lorger a majority. This expression gets
rid of the difficulty. Such a puerile remark does not
merit to he seriou4ly discussed. We are aware that
the Parliamentary majority is composed of several
parties, which, on a capital but reserved question,
have contrary views and hopes and engagements ; we
kno s that it has amongst it Legitimatists, and Orlean-
ists, and Fusionists. Bat wnat we also know is, that
beyond these reserved questions, on all others which
affect the general safety, and which interest in common
the great party of order, the majority has never been
divi led. What we have not forgotten ie, that it gave
433 votes to this law of May 31, which it is now pro-
posed to repeal. We, for our parts, hope that the majority
will not show itself less united in the defence and
maintenance of that law than it was sixteen months
ago in adopting it. Do those who say that there is
no longer a majority understand themselves what they
say? For, in fact, if there be not a majority to de-
fend the law of May 31, how can there be one for its
repeal ? This is an enigma.
On the other side, M. de Girardin in the Presse

says—
" On the 30th May, 1850, 433 representatives of
the people voted for The suppression of universal suf..
frage. On the 19th Jul;, 1851, 446 representatives
voted for the revision of the Constitution. Such
is the double knot of a situation which cannot be
untied but by obtaining from those who voted for the
law of May 31 to vote against it, and that those who
voted against the revision should vote for it. If
the 278 representatives who voted on the
19th July, 1851, voted against the revision of the
Constitution persist in that vote, the 433 representa-
tives who voted on the 30th of May, 1851, for the
suppression of universal suffrage, will also persist in
voting f,:r it. Toe 433 will justify their refusal of
re-establishing universal suffrage by the refusal of the
278 to vote the revision of the Constitution. The
278, in their turn, will justify their refusal to vote
the revision of the Constitution by the refusal of the
433 to vote the re-estaiiiis'ament of universal suf-
frage. Does not the evidence of the state of things
and the imminence of this danger strike every eye
that is not blinded by party spirit ? The 433 per-
sisted in the feeling which on the 30th of May, 1850,
made them vote the suppression of universal suf-
frage ; the 279, persisted in the opinion which made
them, on the 19th of July, 1851, vote the rejection of
the revision, to what will this pertinacity and this
emulation in blindness lead ? They lead, I admit, to
maintain the non-eligibility of the actual holder of
the presidency, but on one fatal condition—the con-
dition of civil wa. Who can foresee what will be
the result of this civil war ? What I know is the,
either the traditional monarchy, or the constitutional
monarchy, or the consulate, or the empire, have only
this chance of return. Let those, therefore, who
logically push for ward to this civil war accept the
political responsibilityof it
and before history!"
We read in t'nks Pays
There •is one consideration which should induce
the President of the Republic not separate the
revision of the Constitution from the to
s
and inrepeal of the
law of 31st May, in the drawing up of h
the composition of his newMinistr
y.
consideration is this—lt may be believed that, in
e
proposing the pure and simple re-establishment of
universal suffrage, Louis Napoleon Bonaparte hopes
for and excites a coup d &at of the people by a move-
ment of gratitude, or by the glare of popularity. But
if at the same time he proposes the revision, it is not
only his re•election which he endeavours to secure,
but, before all, the will of France, which he wishes to
consult, and the Government which he wishes to
strengthen and consolidate. How much better will
his situation be before the Assembly with this object
of public safety. It will not be a personal interest
which will be at stake, but a social one. Legitima-
"ts, Orleanists, Republicans, majority and minority,
all will
.will be dominated. They must either yield or
insurrection,: not against a man, but against
the country. Th
They will yield The will yield—let us not doubt it.
order to set aside from them an
immense renpou;io
to maintain public They will ield also in order
ballot-box the inl• ern.Peace, and toy remove from the
Constitution by inetlt peril of a violation of the
the President of thethe people themselves, renominating
thisc atorship.
magistracy into (I.:ti"ie,
and transforming a
charged to support The Ministry
perils, to crush civil war, to P°43,, to set aside these
right and of the law, to assure the respect of
France the plenitude of heer-041",,„.0f ,the Assembly fur
of revision, and the repeal ''cleu—reigntY by the -vote
difficult to form. It suffices to have
Ministry is not
Their probity and their patriotism honest men.
render them illuatrious, if they alfsem will quickly!
They will find in this trial, whate,;ernot eo already,
issue of it, the most lasting and moat glorious be the
illus-
tration. that of public gratitude and of the esteem of
posterity."