The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-25 00:00:00

After some further observations from M. Dupin, in
favour of annulling the election, the question was put
to the vote, when an immense majority decided that
the election of M. C. Laffitte should be annulled.
As soon as the tumult caused by this proceeding
had subsided,
Gentlemen,—The Honourable M. Billault said,
yesterday, in commencing his speech—" This is not
a question of Ministerial policy ; it is a question of
national policy that I wish to discuss with you." I
do not admit this distinction ; it is the honour as well
as the duty of the Administration to manage the
affairs of -the country; the Ministerial policy should
ever be a national policy. The hope of succeeding in
making it such is the sole, honest, and legitimate at-
traction of power. hour policy national, or is it not?
Such is the whole question. It is as being a national
one that we have adopted and pursued our policy;
it is in this respect, and this respect only, that I de-
fend it. What I admit is the frankness of the Hon.
M. Billault's attacks, and the explicitness with which
his amendment states the question. The speech from
the Throne tells you, regarding the serious events that
have occurred in Spain and in Greece, that the sincere
friendship which unites the King of the French and the
Queen of Great Britain, and the cordial under-
standing (entente cordiale) that exists between the
two Governments, confirms his Majesty in
the hope that those events will turn to
the advantage of two nations friendly to France.
Your projected address proposes your saying that you
are happy to hear of such facts through the medium of
the Crown. The Hon. M. Billault wishes you to
strike out all expressions denoting that you are satisfied
with those facts, and with the cordial understanding
established between France and England. The Hon.
M. Billault will not admit such facts; he does not be-
lieve them. As for us, who, since the accession of the
Cabinet, have constantly aimed at restoring a cordial
understanding between France and England, we be-
lieve that we have made great progress towards the
accomplishment of that object, and that we have
almost attained it. A good understanding and good
intercourse do exist between the two countries. The
Hon. M. Billault himself acknowledged it. It is not
a special alliance with England on this or that point
that is in question, but a good understanding on the
general affairs of Europe, and particularly on those of
reece and Spain. Two great questions have for
some years excited the attention of Europe ;
Spain and the East are the two theatres where-
upon France and England have of late been
in presence. What was the position of France
in Spain four years ago ? The defeat of the moderate
political party, the return of our ambassador to
France, and the retreat of Queen Christina; such are
the three facts which, in 1840, characterised the situ-
ation of France towards Spain. What is our situa-
tion now, in 1844 ? The moderate monarchic party
is now in power, the Ambassador of France is at his
post, and Queen Christina is recalled by Spain. Such
are the characteristic features of 1840 and 1844.
How have we passed from one of those situations to
the other? Firstly, in 1840, when the defect of our
situation exhibited itself, we assumed a quiet and
neutral attitude ; we sought not to triumph in Spain
by party struggles, and by creating difficulties
around the Spanish Government—no, we observed an
attitude of neutrality. We defended our interests
when there was occasion for it, such as at Madrid,
when M. de Salvandy was sent thither, and at Barce-
lona, when M. de Lesseps was subjected to attacks
and insults. But, in other respects, I repeat it, we
observed with the Regent's Government a perfectly
quiet attitude, without seeking to avail ourselves of
party struggles, which it is always easy to raise in
countries tormented with revolutions. 'When events
restored Spain to another and better situation,
what did we ? We did not revert to the rest of
parties—.we did not seek to retaliate, by pushing
those who were called our friends—our only
friends—to power. No; after a neutral came an
impartial attitude. Events had brought about in
Spain a rapprochement between men completely di-
vided ; we hastened to promote its transformation
into a regular Government, the moment that an ac-
tive and influential position was restored to us by the
natural course of things. We have given striking
proof of this. We would not leave the slightest pre-
text to the accusations of party feeling. It was that
motive which induced us to advise the King not to
send back to Madrid M. de Salvandy. He had, dur-
ing his first stay in that capital, faithfully complied
with his instructions ; it was not he who had raised
the question so much talked of ; it had been raised
against him. Whilst defending the monarchic interests
and honour of France, he had proposed adopting every
means of conciliation. Yet, he had judged correctly
of the prospects of the party which then governed
Spain, and events have justified him. Nevertheless,
when circumstances changed, I did not propose to
the King the sending back of that Honourable Am-
bassador, for I feared that his return would be taken
in Spain for a retaliation, for a song of triumph, and
that it would obstruct the march of the moderate
party. Such was the reason that I advised the King
to transfer him to the Turin Embassy. Our first
thought, then, was to see whether it were not pos-
sible to calm Spain. We addressed ourselves to the
English Cabinet—we appealed to its good faith and
political honesty.—(Murmurs on the Left.) Ido
not understand those murmurs. What ! shall not
Governments, which respect one another, be per-
mitted to speak of the good faith of their rivals ?
As for myself, Gentlemen, if a contrary thought were
manifested by a foreign overnment, I should repel
it for the honour of my country. We, therefore,
appealed to the English Cabinet, and it was mutually
agreed that it was necessary to contribute in common
to the re-establishment of order in Spain. We wished
to approach questions closer, and to see what conduct
the two Governments ought to hold at Madrid, if
they were really obliged to have at Madrid two
different, and, as it were, hostile policies. We
found that the contrary was possible ; that the two
Governments, had, in reality, but one interest of
the first order, namely, the establishment of
regular order in Spain, and that the development
of a constitutional government suited England
as well as France. We handled questions more dis-
tinct, and more delicate, such, for instance, as that
of a marriage. Well, we found that France had two
great interests in that question—the one, that no in-
fluence hostile to France, or naturally foreign to her,
be established in Spain ; the other, that France be not
deeply, intimately, and necessarily engaged, and com-
promised in the affairs of Spain ; in short, that we
should not have there one of those powerful interests
and ties which lead away nations, and impose obli-
gations on them. A solid and safe Government in
Spain, and at the same time a Government for which
France should have on all occasions to answer for,
such is what, in the marriage question, presided over
our resolutions. The Chamber will be sensible that
I cannot enter hero into questions of persons; I
only mention our rules and maxims, and add that
they were understood by the English Cabinet. We
therefore found ourselves on that question, as well
as regards general policy, in the state of cordial
understanding expressed in the Speech from the
Throne. There remained the commercial question ; in
that respect, likewise, we retained our complete in-
dependence. We are determined never to make
questions of material interest serve as odd money
(appoint) solely to political questions. We are there-
fore enabled and resolved to maintain those interests
in all our rapprocheinew with Spain, and to maintain
them in all their force. Real and efficient equivalents
in industrial matters—such are the only terms we
could be satisfied with, and we shall follow up our
own affairs with full independence. We have, I repeat it,
in that respect, no engagements. I now ask you,
Gentlemen, whether there be not, in what I have just
stated, a considerable change in our intercourse with
. Spain ? Compare 140 and 1844. Has not the situ-