The Sun.
London, England, 1856-08-30 00:00:00

Audi alteram partem. The maxim is too Eng-
lish not to meet with acceptance from The Sun
and its readers. So giving the -- his due, let
us listen to the defence of Louis NAPOLEON
against the allegations preferred against him in
the letter of LOUIS BLANC, published in The Sun
of Monday.
Before we do so, however, it must be premised
that the defence in question bears no stamp of
authority upon it, and may without difficulty be
repudiated, should such a course be deemed neces-
sary. Not that we would have it inferred it is
not the defence of the French Government, nor
the best the tools of Louis NAPOLEON have at
present to offer. On the contrary, the presump-
tion is exceedingly strong that it is the defence
of that Government, and the best it could impro-
vise. Nevertheless, we have it from an indirect
and somewhat shadowy source. It is from a
nameless correspondent of the Times, who has
obtained it from equally nameless French officials.
The public are, therefore, entitled to attach what
degree of credibility they please to whatever ex-
tenuating, we will not say exculpatory, allegations
it contains, uulese aupported by reliable authority.

In the first instance it is said—the political
offenders condemned by courts-martial, or mixed
commissions, were assembled on the Isle du
Diable (it did not get the name, be assured, with-
out reason), where they lived at liberty, subject
to surveillance. Secondly, in consequence of
attempts at escape and disturbance, and plans of
revolt—(charges easily made)—which were
discovered, their place of residence was
changed to the continent, and by a decree
published in August, 1855, they were ordered
to work, and subjected to military discipline,
which was employed in its mildest form. Thirdly,
The decree of amnesty on the birth of the Impe-
rial PRINCE reached French Guiana in March
last. The exiles were offered to make their sub-
mission to the EMPEROR, which a number of them
did, and a great number of requests for pardon
were forwarded to France. Until the replies
could be received the work continued, and the
regulations were enforced as before ; but 30 or 40
of the prisoners refused to work, and their names
were transmitted to the Minister of Marine, and
are identical with those appended to the letter of
Louis BLANC. Fourthly, AU these men were
arraigned before courts-martial, or mixed com-
missions, by which they were regularly tried and
sentenced. Fifthly, As a means of estimating
the characters of the men for whom Louis BLANC
claims sympathy, it is stated seven of these indi-
viduals had previously undergone punishments to
which they had been sentenced by ordinary
criminal tribunals. PELLETIER, CAYET, and
PADOUANI are liberated galley slaves ; DES-
SALLE, DORE, PRIOL, and AILIIAUD, are repris
de justice, men who have been punished for
offences against the laws, and not of a political
nature. Sixthly, The cruelties alleged to have
been practised on the prisoners ; the chains with
a cannon-ball attached, which they were compelled
to drag ; the floggings at the stake, &c., are de-
nied, the only punishments inflicted being im-
prisonment and stoppage of their wine, or some
other portion of their rations.
The reader is now in possession of this precious
defence. Let him turn to another column, and
he will find a reply by Louis BLANC. At the
outset he very justly remarks the alleged atroci-
ties " have taken place in a very remote country,
whither no man is likely to go for the express
purpose of verifying them. The French Go-
vernment , is perfectly aware of the fact, and
this is the reason why it screens so confidently
behind a bold denial of some of the statements
held forth the moral responsibility it has incurred."
In the face of this denial, to what can he have
recourse? "Fortunately, the question is one of
Common sense. Is it conceivable," he demands,
" that 38 men, living at the mercy of their ene
miss, in a piece so far distant, with no pros-
pect of material assistance, should bo mad
enough to sign a letter falsely stating as
practised upon them such cruelties as these—
the chains with a cannon ball attached, the
floggings at the stake, the blows and brutal out-
rages ? Is it credible that, while their most
obvious interest is to soothe the feelings of those
on whom they so entirely depend, they should as
much as run the risk of inflaming into frenzy by
signed calumnies the anger of their gaolers ?"
Not in vain does he add for to the
British mind the conclusion is inevitable—that
" the very fact of so many persons having, under
such circumstances, appended their names to a
letter expressly intended for publicity, is a decisive
proof that their denunciations are not only true,
but have been forced out of them by the agony
of despair."
The vraisemblance of these denunciations is fur-
ther enhanced,. he proceeds to urge, by the fact
that "there is no discrepancy to be found concern-
' ing the cruelties in question in the various reports