The Sun.
London, England, 1844-01-30 00:00:00

FRANCE.

CHAMBER OF DEPUTIES.—CITZING
OF JAN. 25.
M. Sauzet, the President took the chair at two o'clock,
when the Chamber resumed tile adjourned debate on the
seventh paragraph of the address, relative to PubliC in-
struction.

M. de Tracy, the first speaker, contended that the
69th article, which proclaimed the freedom of instruc-
tion, ought to held as sicred as any other articls of the
fundam ntal compict. He reminded his colleagues of
the circumstance of the foundation of the University.
The man whose Ludacity, genius, and astonishing tri-
umphs had dazzled the world could say, " the youth of
France shall have no ides, no sentiment, no passion, ex-
cept those that I may be pleased to inculcate ;" but he
(M. de Tracy) did not suppose that there existed now-
a-days a man or a p«,wer sufficiently bold or rash to
claim the inheritance of Napoleon. M. de Tracy, how-
ever, was of opinion that the question would be more
properly discussed %hen the promised law on public in-
struction should be presented.
M. Nisard spoke at some length; amidst the marked
inattention of the Chamber, in favour of the University,
of which he is one of the professors.
M. St. Priest addressed the Chamber in opposition to
the paragraph. Ile stated that he should withdraw his
own amendment and support that of M. de Came, pre-
sented the day before.

M. Dupin remarked that the attacks against the Uni-
versity ought not to excite surprise, as at all times eats-
blishtnents at the head of education had shared the same
fate. He mentioned Port Royal as a proof of this, which,
moral as it was, had also been violently attacked. He,
however, thought that it was useless to go back on the
former condition of the University. The present state
of the country, and the necessity of the times, ought
alone to guide them. He referred to the claims of the
clergy, and opposed them as ill-founded. They might
be allowed to have the regulation of certain schools for
the education of young men destined for the priesthood,
as there were military schools fur lads intended for the
army, and naval establishments for those destined for
the navy, but nothing more. Congregations, he pro-
ceeded to observe, were dangerous, under whatever name
they existed ; and he thought that the State ought to
look narrowly at their aims and actions. He consi-
dered the attempts now made against the authority of
the University to be of a retrograde nature, and such
as ought to be opposed by every legal means. The
Hon. Gentleman then spoke with great force against
the Jesuits, describing them as a most dangerous set
of men, paying bnt little regard to oaths, and interfering,
whether at home or abroad, in all affairs in which they
could obtain an entrance. The article 69 of the charter
promised a law on secondary instruction. He con-
sidered that the Government should be allowed to bring
it in without being shackled by any vote of the.,Chamber:
They must suppose that this Bill would not take away
anything from the liberty promised by the charter to
public instruction. It was more than probable that it
would secure to fathers of families, that if they in-
tended their suns for officers, or lawyers, or merchants,
their minds should not be so influenced as that they
might desire to become priests. France never would:
submit to the yoke of the priesthood, and he therefore
called on the Chamber to allow the paragraph to re-
main as it was, relying on the Ministry to bring in their
Bill with a proper regard to the interest of the charter.
M. 0. Barrot thought that the Hon. Gentlemen who
had proposed amendments were proceeding against the
very object they desired to carry. It was dangerous to
interfere in the arrangements of the University, when
there might be some risk of its liberty being injured by
the change, if effected without prudence. He considered
that in place of making attacks on the University, they
ought to have it more firmly constituted, and therefore
he should recommend the Hon. Deputies who had pro-
posed amendments to withdraw them, and allow the Go-
vernment to bring in their Bill on their own responsi-
bility.—(Hear, hear.)
M. Bouillard, who was one of the members that had
presented amendments, signified his intention of comply-
ing with the recommendation of 11. 0. Barrot. He
should, however, like to hear some explanation relative
to the conduct of the Bishops and clergy.
M. Martin (du Nord), the Minister of Justice, entered
into a history of the late dispute, and stated that it had
burst forth with so much virulence during the last year,
because the Ministry had, in 1840, insisted on the ordon-
nances of 1828, against the Jesuits and other secret
societies, being carried into effect most strictly. A cir-
cular had been sent to all the Bishops in 1840, to the
effect that as it had not been acted on with sufficient
alacrity, the Government had again, last year, insisted
on the law being observed. Hence arose the hostility of
the Bishops and clergy.
N. Isambert rose, and was left speaking.