The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-25 00:00:00

lie has no

ful of any promises he can make,
guarantees to give, which they can none,
we hope, which they will, accept. We await
therefore, with eagerness and with hope, the next
week or fortnight's news. We trust that the
Italians in Naples, as in the Duchies, will give
Louis NAPOLEON'S confederation scheme to the
winds—that Naples and the Roman States will
soon be united with the North of Italy—that the
Quadrangle will soon follow—that a united Italy
will laugh at all Dictators of the Tuileries—and
that the record of history for the year will be that
GARIBALDI, by his skill, single-mindedness, and
boldness, brought to nought the counsels of the
Imperial ACHITOPHEL.

Is the Empire weak or strong ? If " twenty
legions" are strength, the question is soon answered.
But if we ask what is the nature of the strength
which trembles before the fairest discussion, we
must hesitate for an answer. Perhaps we should
give two answers, according as the question referred
to foreign or domestic affairs. So long as France

can be made to consider it her chief glory to win

battles against old empires, and to fix her own
natural boundaries in defiance of European
settlements, the Empire is strong. A loan of

£20,000,000 can be raised, and the national
debt increased to any extent, if it all shall bring

glory to France. 'The Empire is strong if it can
find a series of pretexts for displaying in any way
the continental supremacy of France. Already she
boasts, as a stalwart garotter could do, that take
any power singly, and she could beat it ; that she
could only be beaten, as most rogues are beaten, by
a combination of the honest. Of course with an
army and navy so powerful for attack on its neigh•
bours, the Empire is strong if attacked by them.

The sum is, the Empire is strong if its resources are

required for defence, or for " glorious aggression."
But in the other view of the question " The Em-
pire" seems to be weakness itself. It has no confi-
dence in its policy or its measures. It can tolerate
scurrilous abuse, even, perhaps, evoke it intention-

ally, the effect being in France as elsewhere, that
the abused are the gainers in the sentiments, if
not in the deliberate judgment, of all respectable

persons. It can of course accept advocacy, the
only tike-off in Paris being that the flattery is apt
to be too transparent, and occasionally blundering.
What it cannot sustain is the criticism of inde-
pendent men, who respect themselves and their
cause too much to descend to scurrility, but who
are quite competent to pronounce a just judgment
on the general policy and the particular measures
of their Government. How can a Government be
called strong which dares not face the remarks of
such men. It may be able to fight the world, but
quails before its own subjects. It could laugh at,
could profit by threats from England or any Con-
tinental Power, but it cowers when an intelligeht

man of reputation says—l propose, in a journa
have purchased, to shew that you are right when
you are right, and that you are wrong when you
are wrong.
Our readers will at once see that we refer to the
remarkable affair which now forms the subject of
so much discussion in Paris, and which may yet
come before the French Courts of Law. There can
be no doubt that the French Minister of the In-
terior, M. BILLAULT, has committed the Empire to
a statement which will so little bear the light, that
the President of tha Council has publicly denied it,
on the ground that it was too " stupid" to be made
by a person of such intelligence as the Minister !
It is, however, the stupidity of truth. Two galling
facts are incontrovertible ; that M. BILLAULT did
hold the language with which he is charged ;
and that he did so because he had nothing
else to say. He could not face the
criticisms of the proposed journal, and yet he was
compelled to own that his fear was their moderate
and respectable character.
We may briefly recapitulate the principal facts.
The Courier de Paris was in the market. M.
GUERARD desired to sell it, for the very excellent
reason that he was losing money by it. M. LEY-
MARIE wished to purchase it, and did so, seemingly
thinking that by gathering together able writers
for it, he could make it pay. According to the law
of our enlightened neighbour country no one can
undertake the management or editorship of
a journal without the authorisation of the Go-
vernment. This M. LEYMARIE, in his simpli-
city, had taken to be a matter of course, as a
journal is valuable property, and he had in this
case paid a bona fide consideration for it. He
applied accordingly to the head of that depart-
ment. M. DE LA GUERONIERE, and, surprised at
the delay, sought a personal interview; but the
subordinate, after trying to evade by vague gene-
ralities, wished him to see the Minister of the

Interior.
He obtains an interview with his Excellency
M. BILLAULT. " SO, it is an Opposition paper you
wish to establish ?" M. LEY MARIE—" No ; if by
opposition you mean a determination to—l will
not say systematically—defame, but even to
criticise. Yes ; if opposition means examining
with independence the acts of Government."
M. BILLAULT—" I will explain myself, un-
mistakeably. Every citizen can legitimately express
through the press his thoughts on public affairs ;
but it is my business to see that the administration
is not disquieted, and that it is not embarrassed."
M. LEYMARIE—" The study of social and political
principles, carried on on principle, and without party
spirit, can by no means create any danger to the
State." M. BILLAULT—" No, not danger, but an

embarrassment. In my opinion, an opposition
paper conducted by men of note and respectability,
who combined, without distinction of party, talents
acknowledged and sanctioned by public favour,
would by that very fact acquire a disquieting
influence. The more a paper so conducted
was constitutional—the .more care it took not
to infringe the law—in a word, the more
moderate it was the greater would be the
inconvenience !" Two days afterwards M. LEY-
MARIE received from M. BILLAULT a curt reply,
without any reasons assigned, that " his demand
could not be granted !"
Next, M. D'HA.USSONVILLE, a shareholder, calls on
M. DE LA GITEIWNIERE, and gives the public his
account of the interview in a pamphlet, in which
all the details of the whole affair were made public.
He drives the Door subordinate to very close quarters
on the question of the power of the Minister of the
Interior to annihilate by two lines of writing without
a single reason, what, up to that time, was a valuable
property. Adopting the views of his chief, he was
compelled to maintain that " the Government must
have certain indispensable guarantees before allow-
ing persons whom the public would feel pleasure in
listening to, to discuss the general interests of the
country to address it." M. D'HAUSONVILLE could
not divine what securities were wanted. Modera-
tion was not doubted, but it was also the thing
feared; as to "friendship" to the Government, the
official was reminded of facts in 1852 which pro.
eluded the possibility of that ; and the conversation
closed with a promise that it should be communi-
cated by the subordinate to his chief, with an inti•
Illation that.M. D'HAUSSONVILLE was at the service
of the latter at any time.
Some days passed over ; and the strange state-