The Sun.
London, England, 1828-07-02 00:00:00

- • .
.that that province formed part of Prance previous
to 1792. At that iper;nd of his intercourse with
' the Commissioner; the main question appeared to
be the question of nationality. Though that ques-
tion had been, as any reasonable man would conceive,
sufficiently answert'd before, yet he obtained upon it
a-legal opinion—that of Sir Samuel Romilly—and
that distingnished lawyer was clear in the opinion
that the Baron de Bode was a natural born subject
of Great Britain and entitled to all the rights of
a man born of English parents. It was then natural
to suppose that he would be placed upon the list of
claimants ;- but in 1818 the scene was changed, and
it was alleged that the sum to meet his claim was
• altogether insufficient. A sum of 60,000,000 of
francs was inscribed in the Great Book of France as
a debt due to England, and out of this the claims of
the emigrants were to be paid. • There, therefore,
was an obvious interest •in creating as large a sur-
plus as possible. In 1619 the question of na-
was again raised, and although the• Law
tionality
Offieers of the Crown gave an opinion in favour of
his claim; yet it would still seem to be postponed
without any ground apparently stronger. The claim
-of the Baron was also 'resisted by the French, Go-
vernment, and they took the ground that he was an
English subject, and that account could not claim
as a French emigrant. . Several statements- had
been made by the Commissioners, and if those
statements were true, they most certainly convicted
themsehTs of conduct utterly illegal, and rendered
their own Acts null and void, but he (Mr. Stanley)
would not be satisfied with leaving them in that
dilemma; he would prove that they had asserted
that which was not the fact. They • stated that the
Baron's case had not been registered in sufficient
time. Now it appeared that out of 2,270 registered
cases, his stood number 1;130, yet, how was that
consistent with the statement that no-registry had
been made by the Baron for three years after the
proper opportunity for registration had passed away,
With the French Government, 'as he had already
stated, the success of the Baron was not better than
at home.- In•reply to his claims, urged to them, he
was told that he was a British sulject, but as it was
well known that his father had possessed the property,
and that he, .under the old law, would have been
justly entitled to it, the difficulty of his being a Bri-
fists. subject might easily have been gotten over, had
he not completely destroyed .his claim against the
French Government, by first preferring it as a sub.
ject of Great Britain to the Commissioners ap-
pointed by the Government of this country. France
could not .be expected to pay the- same debt twice.
The sum of 60,000,000 of francs this country took
as a composition for claims ; we profited by it, and
should, therefore, deal liberally and fairly, with those.
for whose compensation it was intended. Suddenly,
then, the conduct of the Commissioners appeared to
undergo-a change ; they called on the Baron to bring
forward all the proofs he possessed, and he was ins
formed that if they were not brought forward before
three months, his name would be struck off the list.
With difficulty he obtained an extension of the time
from August, 1821 to January, 1822. The Baron
then, reduced from affluence to distress, had to travel
1,200 miles, had to collect evidence in a country
which had been twice .the theatre of war; he had in
such a country to make surveys of several Lordships,
to obtain proofs, not of the value of woods and
mines, and other property, at the present time, but
what their value was in 1793. He now held in his
hand an affidavit sworn before Baron Hullock, in,
which the deponent stated that he had accompanied
a gentleman named Braekenbury, the agent of the
petitioner, and, after the latter had had an inter-
view with the Commissioners, he stated that the
only condition upon which they would grant the
Baron additional time was, that of his making a con-
siderable reduction in the amount of .his
(Hear,- hear, bear.)—On the Ist of April, Mr.
-Brackenbury sent- sixteen documents to the Com-
missioners, which he informed them were duplicates,
the.origifials of which the Baron de Bode was then
Oinging-with- him •from France, together with other
documents of a like nature, with a view to the ad-
vancement of his claims. Upon that•the Commis-
sioners-write. in reply, that they desired to know
what were those other documents which the Baron
intended to bring forward, and made it a condition
of their being received that their nature should then
be•stated. The House would see the utter impossi-
bility of %Tr. B.'s stating the contents of alocuments
which had not yet come into his possession. Still
the CeinMissioners on that ground any fur-
ther extension of time, until, at- the earnest entreaty
of Mr. Brackenbury, they "evoked that refusal and
granted additional time. For what length did the
House suppose ? Till the following 'Wednesday.
They told. Mr. Bmckenbnry that they were tinder
the necessity of coming to an immediate decision—
they could, they said, delay no longer, for they knew
that delay would be prejudicial to the decison they
intended to make: . On finding that he had no
Chance of a fair hearing, the petitioner intimated his
intention of appealing to the Privy Council. There-
upon a letter was written- to him,, 'stating that he
would not be at liberty to adduce any further cvi-
dence on the hearing of his appeal; and that any at-
tempt on his part to infringe the terms of the Act of
Parliament, would be resisted to the utmost. Thus
a man claiming nothing more than naked justice, was
not only denied that, but threatened for attempting
to obtain it.;—(Hear, hear.)—That was a stretch of
arbitrary power, which be sincerely trusted the House
would not sanction by its vote.• On the imperfect
evidence which he then pos;essed, his case came on
to be heard before the Privy . Council,-and though
that tribunal decided against him, yet Lord Stowell
did hold out to him some hopes that he might ob-
tain a rehearing. Though ultimately heard and decided
by the Privy Council, the case was delayed for a most
unreasonable length of time, and postponed many
times. The chance of rehearing held ont to him proved
of little value, for the terms of the Act of Parliament
were so express, that he could not adduce any new
evidence in support of his claim; he, therefore, then
had no hope of justice except what was derived
from an appeal to that House. There was one
other objection made to the claim of the petitioner,
to which he would advert, namely, that the pro-
perty in questiOn could not be French, because it
was a German fief. And it was to be observed,
that they made this assertion all the while that they
were contending that in consequence of the aboli-
tion of feudal rights in France, in 1793, the Baron
was not entitled to compensation for the loss of
those rights. In this they displayed the most corn,
plete ignorance of the Preach law, and of the pe-
culiar circumstances of .Lower Alsace at the period
alluded to. The Hon. MeMber.then entered into a
history of the Circumstances under which Alsace
became a part of France, and Called the attention of
the House to the fact overlooked by the Commis-
sioners, that - from the general- abolition of feudal
rights, which took place in 1789, that province was
excepted,
,those-rights having been there specifically
guarded by the faith of treaties. As a further proof
of the difficulties which the Commissioners sub-
jected the present claimant to, he instanced the fact
of their having required him 'to produce the least,
°ranted to his tenants no leases are ever granted
in
such lordships as his—they are called inn for re-
ceipts for r epnrs—s e
bduuctairaheit'llltt of course
.ctohl!rse person, not.
being in his 9
who paid the rent. :All, however, Altai' either the
leases the receipts eould shew, had been pre-
viously proved by his steward, but that did not sa-'
tisfy the Commissioners. They called-on him .also
to shev whether the French Cuthoritie's had ever
regarded him as possessing the title he laid claim to;
and likewise to shew on what account they had de-
prived him of his property ; thus demanding froM
him not only the opinions of the Trench authorities,
but their inOtiVes of action. The 'Hon. Gentleman
then entered into a variety of 'similar details,
amongst which he noticed-another ground on which
the• Commissioners resisted the claims of the Baton;
it was, that the cession to hint by his father was not
a:bona fide cession, and called on him-to shew, that
hythe law of Alsace he received such a cession,
being then only fourteen years -of age. This was
nuisr gratuitous; for' such-a cession could be made
by the law 'of England—(Hear, hear, hear)—and