The Sun.
London, England, 1851-12-12 00:00:00

N°. 18,478.]

[PRICE SD.

. -
fip, • a r 2it 0„,,„?
0,...114A0
A 157
PI 1•4 9.,
/eV'
I
• • ~. 'AA A' *Z. , 4 • ',SAO:, A' , • r #l-- `," ,
fS i• • .1; DIES • - )
Di .1,01 T!,

jEIENTICITY OF OUR PAR'S COR-
RESPONDENCE.
(r Okt OUR PARIS CORREIIPORDZNT.)
PARIS, W2D2rEsDAY, Dec. 10.
With ref ence to some false runaoars and false
statements, which I am ashamed to see circulated in
English journals, to the effect that the Paris coorre-
spondence of the English press had been, since the
late coup d'etat, under the control of the French
police, allow use to make the following simple stay._
meat of a few facts.
The Paris correspondence is sent in three ways-
-Ist, by post to London ; 2ily, by post to Calais or
Dover, and thence by electric telegraph to London;
and, 3dly, by telegraph from Paris.
Since the 2d of December the French Government
has exercised no more supervision over the Paris cor-
respondence than it assumed previously. Before, as
since that date, it has always reserved to itself the
right of refusing to transmit by telegraph front Paris
to London any intelligence which it may not deem
exact. But it never bas ventured in the least to
tamper with or pervert any information forwarded
through its channel. My dispatches by electric
telegraph from Paris to London always, I find, ap-
peared in the Morning Post as I sent them from Paris
seeing
during the crisis.
For a day or two they were not permitted to be
sent without the initials of the Minister being affixed
to them, as a proof that he had done his duty by
telegraph is
instance did thegAl
not in contradiction to truth.
. I believe
that the news which is sent by a Government
bave •
omitted
electric telegraph by the quickest possible
to forward means, and I be
that there is not a single fact which I
distinctlyto state that in but one
.
!nister put his pen through any
phrase in any dispatch
I said in my of mine. .
December, " b nom re de tu'barricades con-
siderable." This es sur lea
was stopped on file ground that no
one yet knew how me h .
a a that
dispatch of the 4th
ny ad been kills , au
the word " consider bl "
ever,
meno other.
re
rn2veeasrhyo tn"ejlomil:
a e would probably excite. too
great apprehensions. The
one morning,
babarricade,"
r i
clod:
soubawanhdenfOua7teenngst, I stated in another
electric telegraph dispatch, thititters Gaston Dous-
not the least objection was
a fact.made to it because it was
False statements, or alarming con'a
that the French Government refusesteoctures, are all
its telegraph. As far as my gwn transmit by
repeat, that as I have only sent absoluteperi efnce goes, I
never found the least difficulty in their tranasernts'sl have
The Times states that the correspondentsioVen.
Morning Chronicle and Globe have been sent awl
from Paris for having written the truth. It is not
sap"
Both gentlemen are here, and live not received the
notice to quit with which they were threatened liv
the Patrie. The displeasure of the French Govern":
ment was excited against the Chronicle and Globe,
because those journals published what purported to be
an electric telegraphic dispatch from Paris, which
stated that Itheitha, Strasbourg, and Rouen, had
risen—that General N ieumayer ( who is quietly
living in Paris) was marching to attack Paris, as
was also General Castellane, the commander of the
Lyons division—that this was denied by Government
—that the fidelity of General Maginan, the commander-
in-chief of Paris, could not be depended on—and
that Paris itself was in a most terrible state. This
was enough to make any Government angry, who
was occupied in repressing an armed insurrection,
and who bad placarded on the walls severe warnings
to bearers of false news, that they would be regarded
as accomplices in the insurrection, and be liable to
the punishments inflicted on insurgents.
The Times, however, lauds the statement as being
the truth. Have everts proved it? or was it an in-
vention of the enemy ? Aye! of the enemy in London.
The French Government, finding that in such cri-
tical circumstances, English journals liable to the
imputation of being colporteurs defausses nauvelles,
and thus accomplices in the insurrection, stopped
them last Sunday in the Post-office. After examina-
tion they were delivered later than usual. But since
Sunday they have all been delivered as formealy.
Far from excluding papers that tell the truth, the
Government has not forbidden the Times to enter,
many of the statements of whose leaders are more
perniciously false than the statement inserted (may
we hope) by some error of judgment in the Chronicle
and the Globe.

I have the right to assert that the Times' speahs
falsely, for lam here on the spot; and I do assert that
most of the statements of the Times' " leaders" are not
in accordance with facts, nor with the accounts of them
given in its own or any other dispatches of the Parisian
correspondents of the London papers.
But this journal, not content with distorting events
to suit its own purposes, dares to calumniate English-
men, and actually countenances a statement that the
Paris correspondence is now conducted subject to the
control of the French police. The glaring absurdity
of this assertion I need not point out. But I merely
state, that the correspondents of the London papers
have been in no manner of way interfered with by the
police. Thus all the stories about our being carried
off to the Prefecture, writing our correspondence
thence, &.c , &c., are a tissue of Ronsense, and that
none ut the Times would be so careless of the cha-
racter of Englishmen as to pretend that any of us
would su.bmit to the dictation of a foreign police.
I should also mention that it is absurd to state ,that
we have no means of knowing the real state of the
departments, ( xcept by meats of GovE-rnment papers.
'Then, of what use is pen and ink? Does the Times
imagine that constituents never write to their repre-
sentatives, merchants to their connexions, friends to
friends ; and does it imagine that the Government
could, even if it would, keep the true state of the
departments from olsing out. No! However much
we may desire the re-establishment of the freedom of
the press, still we are by no means ignorant of all
that is going on in the departments, as well as in
Paris, though journalism be for the present suppressed.
—Morning Post.

LOUIS NAPOLEON and his COUP D'ETAT.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES.
Sir—As in the leading article of the Times of yes-
terday (the Bth inst.) you say that the English press
(with one base exception) utters with i's united voice
abhorrence of the daring blow lately struck by Louis
Napoleon, I feel confiiently that, with the impartial
justice which distioguikhes your journal, you will
allow me, through its columns, to submit to the sober
judgment of the country, in his defence, a few words,
founded on observations I have lately bad an oppor-
tunity of making in the French metropolis.
In quotations from other newspapses Prince Louis
Napoleon is described, in your paper of yesterday, as
" a thief in the night who has stolen the liberties of
the nation"—" an imposter who has played an atro-
cious game"—" a usurper who has outraged and in-
sulted the nation"—" a low-minded adventurer who
has perpetrated high treason in its grossest and most
criminal form."

Now, the result of my late inquiries and personal
übst.rvation induce me to believe him to be a mild,
benevolent, just, bold, honest, high-minded statesman,
animated by personal ambition to win for himself, at
any risk, the glory of tranquillizing France, of main-
taining the peace of the world, and of living and
dying in good fellowship with the British people.
From data I was enabled to collect, I ata induced
to believe, and without hesitation I foretelrl,theaht
Rt hee
..
bold steps he has lately taken will, by an overwhelm.
lug majority, be approved by the array in France,
by the army in Algeria, by the citizens in Paris, and
by the inhabitants of the whole of the Fen
public.

- I may be wrong in my opinion of the man,
and in
my confident prediction of the verdict of the French
nation ; in the meanwhile, however, surely tke
English press, in justice to its high character, ought
not to condemn General Changarnier, his fallow-pri-
soners at Ham, or Prince Louis Napoleon, until the
public are in possession of the whole of the evidence
substantiating either the guilt of the imprisoned or the
imprisoner.

ou
Louisnt
al debt oe
Napolurgeeonhas against General Changarnier,
to maint • friendly intohissupoppower
maintain relations with Great Britain, and
because. General Changarnier lately volunteered, at
the head of a French force which he named, to invade
edEonnegelivsehrytphirensgs
England for the purpose of forcing upon its inhabi-
tants a Republic. On the other hand, I submit to
the good sense of the country that it is ungrateful,
unnatural, and unjust for the press of England to pre-
judge the important question in dispute, by blindly
condemning our ally, and by supporting the man who
proposed to invade us.
Before the teeth of the French army, Prince Lti •
Napoleon has, by his solitary mandate thrown Louis
' -
prison its most popular Generals. Before the
teeth of
the nation he has scattered to the winds
or imprisoned
the whole of their representatives.
Prima facie, it is to be inferred that
man would not have dared to take an unmilitary
two such steps,
unless in his conscience he knew that,
his country, he would be enabled
conduct. As bystanders let, therefore, the British
nation, with their accustomed dignity and justice,
await the production cf the
before, public
re, through the
press, they pronounce their
verdict.--I am, sir, your obedient servant,
Oxendon, Dec. 9. F. 13. Ilium