The Sun.
London, England, 1832-12-27 00:00:00

M. Victor Hugo then applied to the " Theatre
,npilee piece. .
to
Francais" for redress. He required the per-
formance ltr'shisth:veasa
ureests end
07 and
itr
n ,4r, of
;n the
r,
the
validity of such ttnconstitutionat injunctions,
issued by the Doctrinnaires and "Juste-milieu,"
brought his action against the French theatre
for damages, and the Theatre Francais brought
its action against the Minister of Public Works
for a guarantee against any loss or verdict which
might be pronounced against it, in consequende
of the order issued prohibiting the performance
of the piece.
This was the question which came on for
solemn hearing in the Tribunal de Commerce
last Wednesday ; and this is the question to be
decided by the Judges of that Court on that
day fortnight.
The trial attracted great attention, drew to-
gether a very large audience, and the talents of
M. Odillon Barrot and M. Hugo, on the one
hand, and of M. Chaix d'est Auge on the other
hand, rendered the 19th of December a memo-
rable day.
M. Chaix d'Est Ange, the Counsel for the
Crown, objected to the competence of the Judges,
and fumbled out of his pocket an old law, which
he says is not repealed, and which, bearing the
date of the 24th August, 1791, prohibits the
tribunals from judging the administrative acts of
the Government. This is on all occasions the
system of the Doctrinnaires ! It has ever been
so, and ever will be so ; they go back to the
old Monarchy, to the Revolution, to the Re-
public, to the Consulship, to the Empire, and
to the Restoration, for their laws, their forms,
and their precedents. When a law is not dis-
tinctly repealed by some legislative enactment, if
it suits their purpose, they say it is still " a
living law ;" but if their enemies make use of
the same weapons, and cite in their turn the
laws of the Republic, why, then, the Doctrin-
naires reply, " Oh, that is a dead •law—it has
fallen into disuse—and though the Charter has
not repealed it inform, yet, in fact, it is dead."
M. Odillon Barrot, who pleaded the cause of

the liberty of the Press, and the non-violation of
the Charter of 1830, was not to be thus cajoled,
and he entered broadly on the main question of
—whether, since the Revolution of July, the Mi-
nister of the Crown had the right of preventing
by his simple command, the performance of any
play. The Charter of 1830, declares in its

7th Article—" That the French have the
right of causing their opinion to be printed and
published, on conforming themselves to the laws;
and the Censorship can never again be esta-
blished."
This is the Constitutional Charter of France!
and the 59th Article of that Charter declared

that those laws which were opposed to the Char-
ter, should be considered as abolished, or, in
other words, that all should exist which were not
contrary to its spirit.
_ _

_ .
Now, then, what is the Censorship—if it be
not an arbitrary order, issuing from the bureau
of a Minister whose responsibility before the
tribunals is denied, under an old law of 1791,
commanding the non-publication of a work, or
drama, or poem, or writing in fact of any sort,
without having any other authority for such an
order than his own will, caprice, and pleasure ?
For as the publication of a poem is its printing and
circulation, so the publication of a play must
be its performance ; and as the Charter abo-
lished the Censorship entirely, it necessarily re-
pealed that of the Theatre. I will not reason
this question, for to deny it would be monstrous.
The Charter of 1830 says, that " the French
have the right of publishing and printing their
opinions, and that the Censorship cannot be
established." Well, then, M. Victor Hugo
published his opinions at the Theatre Francais,
by means of a theatrical representation, entitled
Le Roi s' Amuse, and he had the right of
doing so—a right consecrated by the Charter.
If M. Victor Hugo's piece was immoral or se-

_ .
ditious, calculated to excite bad feelings or dan-
gerous opinions, the Charter provided a remedy.
That remedy was to prosecute M. Hugo, to try
him before a Jury, to try him according to law ;
and if convicted by that Jury, then to inflict
on him the pains and penalties specified in the
code of laws on this subject.

The Counsel for the Government—for the
Doctrinnaires—for the system of raking up
musty old laws, and long since defunct Ordi-
nances, then produced, in defence of the Minis-
ter, a Decree of the Empire ! That Decree
is dated the 9th of June, 1806 ! ! And by vir-
tue of the 14th Article, M. d'Argout claimed
the right of interdicting the performance of L
Roi s' Anzuse, as dangerous to public morals !!
How pitiable is this !—a Decree of the Empire
—of a state of perfect absolutism—of the Go-
vernment of a single man—of the most decided
military despotism which the imagination of the
most inveterate lover of " divine right" could
possibly devise—a Decree of the Empire ;is
cited, by a Minister of Louis Philip after the
revolution of July, 1830, as his justification of
the violation of the most positive declaration of
the new Charter, that the " Censorship should
never be re-established r Yet this was the de-
fence of the Doctrinnaires, and for ten days
longer we have to wait to learn whether that de-
fence will or will not he available,
As the Minister was so ill advised as to cite
a Decree of the Empire for an arbitrary and
niatist read him a terrible lecture when he ad-
illegal proceeding in 1832, the poet and the dra-

dressed the Judges of the Tribunal de Com-
merce. lam fearful, I assure you, of weaken-