The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-17 00:00:00

ister of Foreign Affairs can keep silence by pretending
to be the depository of State secrets, but the Govern-
ment ought not so to act, for it had commenced the at-
tack itself, in accusing an officer of misconduct. Let the
reports sent in two months back be laid on the table,
so that they may be compared with those now pre-
sented. In fine, this matter ought to be brought to
an end. If the Admiral has acted improperly, there
are articles in the penal code of the navy to punish
him.—(A loud burst of disapprobation from the
Centre, and cries oft That is not the question.') Why
not allow the officer who has just arrived to be in-
terrogated ?—(Loud cries of t Hear, hear,' from the
Left.) You keep him to yourselves. No person
but yourselves has seen him !—(Fresh cries oft Hear,'
and marks of disapprobation from the Centre.) The
termination of this matter must be either a judgment
according to the articles of war, blaming the Admiral,
or a decision of the Chamber, throwing blame on the
Ministry. It is because we want to come to this
point that we demand to have all the papers laid before
us, in order to fix our opinion, and they are now re-
fused without any serious motive."
M. GUIZOT replied to these remarks with great
firmness, though frequently interrupted, and refused
to furnish all the papers transmitted to Govern.
ment. "We cannot," he said, "make communica-
tions beforehand, as you seem to demand, without
knowing at what point of information you aim.
To make those communications in the general and
confused manner that you require is impossible.
We do not inform you beforehand in an absolute
manner, that we shall communicate to you every;
thing ; nor, on the other hand, do we tell you before-
hand in an absolute manner, that we will refuse all.
When you shall have read the report, you can ask
what questions you may deem requisite, and we shall
know what we ought to do. Until then we ought to up-
hold our rights and the true principles of Government."
These replies were received with very general ap-
plause. M. ODILON BARROT admitted the right and
the power of the Government to refuse the docu-
ments, but the question was one not of principle, but
of honour and of good faith. However, as the Mi-
nister for Foreign Affairs refused to furnish more
than one dispatch, they would examine that carefully
in order, if possible, to arrive at the real facts, and
afford some consolation to the country. M. GUIZOT
made some further remarks for the purpose of showing
that Members would have a full opportunity of con-
sidering the question, and that the Government were
ready to meet them in debate. The discussion would
have ended here quietly kut for that singular per-
sonage, of repeal notoriety, M. LEDRU ROLLIN, who
thus showed his correct knowledge of Parliamentary
procedure in England. " The Minister is always
quoting England," said he. " Why does it not follow
its example in this matter? In such a case the bus,
of Commons would appoint a Committee to receive
the communications of the Minister.—(Cries oft No,
no.') The country will judge you, for it is now evi •
dent to every one that at the moment the Ministry
was compromising a brave officer, by a meanv
before unheard of, in order not to displease England,
t concealed from the knowledge of the country m-
portant facts which justified the commander of our
squadron. I declare, not to employ circumlocution,
that you (turning to the Ministerial bench) show
neither sincerity nor honour in your intercourse with
the Chamber."

This was followed by loud cries of " Order,'
when the PRESIDENT told M. LEDRE-ROLLIN that
such language was not parliamentary, and called
him to order. "If they are not parliamentary they
are nevertheless true," he replied; and upon this the
SPEAKER put an end to the discussion, as there was
no question before the Chamber. _