The Sun.
London, England, 1816-04-23 00:00:00

•
seithin
‘my knowledge; 1 prik7st agft'List
extracts withont date, a:id mangled from the hotly
of the letter : 1 repeat, that, as an Engli, shman, I
bad a right to communicate my political ,opinions
to my fellow•conutrymen, anti that I ant an enc-
to toy the system now established in Europe, so
dettimental to the interests, the honour, and the
constiitti of my country declare that do
not recollect the passages cited ; but these very
ppassages only announce what I think will still
bsppen in France ; the •.appeal is not to the
French people, but to all the people of Europe,
in support of the principles I have just an-
nounced.
Q. Why, if you have no desire to interfere in
the altairs of France, do you announce so ardent
a wish to introduce there, and to cause to .he
translated into Fi'ench, the political articles of the
Edinburgh Review P---A. r don't knew that fever
expressed this wish ; but the work being written
by the must enlightened men in England, kind
containing an abstract of all the books that are
published there, I may have desired to see its ch-
. culation in France,-at the request of many of my
friends.
Q. These articles contained political principles,
'which; according to your own admission, could
~:stot. be circulated except by. manuscript" copies,
which for this reason would not produce so notch
good as might have been hoped from their publi.
ration. - By these words, " so much good," did
you-not mean the agitation of men's minds, and
the circulation 'of ideas dangerous and subversive
of -goverimmut ?—A. First, England would not
permit the publication of a work which contained
dangerous
/principles ; secondly, the Edinburgli
Review is not confined to politics, and, besides,
'.appears only qua' terly ; thirdly, as an English-
man, I have heen brought up in the opinion that
political discussions produce no evil, and are the
. soul of tempered liberty and public good.
Q. Can you explain the nature of the extraor-
dinary events year announced we should
soon hear spoken of tu Germany The judi-
cial curiosity of France ought to coinfine itself
within thc limits of its own territories ; besides,
I cannot answer withoOt seeing the pieces trom
which these expressioni are taken : so far from
dreading, 1 even solicit publicity, provided it be of
.the whole that I may have said or wraten.
Ellie accused maintains that his answers eon-
fain the truth ; he perasts in them, and, Mt their
being read, has signed them with us and the clerk,
wind has also signed and inscribed with a Ise varie-.
tar the two letters which we have shown to him.

The minutes being thus signed—
WILSON, DUPUY, and DEROSTE.)

EIGHTH iNTEIIRQuATORY.-fr. 20.

•
Q Do you recognise, as having ,written them,
the three letters Itinow show to you—one
dated the 6th of last'December, the otbet tae
28th of the same mouth, and the third toe 6th
of last battery ; and do you consent to sign and
inscribe them with a ne vartetur P—A. Renewing
my first protest 'against this interrogation, and
my complaints against the crimes committed by
theGoverament tor the purpose of corrupting my
domestic, and violating the sacred secrecy of let-
addressed to trjemis, I do recognise the three
letters shown to the. being iwriiten a< 'he time
when the city or i'aris %vas occupied by :hc Allied
Armies, and principally by the English troops,
and containing the news and reports circulated in
diplomatic and military societies, not obtained in
any secret or unwarrantable manner, and only
written with the intention of giving my brother
anti Lord Grey interesting 'accounts, which they
would sooner or later have received by the News-
papers. I consent to sign and inscribe them with
ne varieiur,
9. It is no business of rnineto examine here
the merits, of the complainti that you think you
have a right to make'on the violation of the se-
crecy of correspondence, or to explain the means
by which your letters may have fallen into the,
hands of Government ; but I ask you, if a person
has any rig pt to complain of the neglect of ordi-
_nary rules,-when he uniy himself be saspected of
having broken through them ; if the Government
is bound to respect .t be correspondence, of a min,
when there is reason to believe he regards not the
repose of Government ; of a• man, whom it may
in some sort accuse of having violated the laws
of hospitality: I Would ask you, if, in such an
exigency, it has not the same right as every private
Individnal—the natural right of defence ; if it it,.
in fact, more to be blamed -that') one who, when
his life is attacked, employs in defence the same
Weapons as his aggressor, although such as are
prohibi .ed in ordinary cases ?—A. The Government
oirght at once to he the protector of law and them).
sport of ; but it cannot commit a greater ant-
rage on them than in suborning a domestic, anden-
.g,►giuk hitti,bybase reward to violate his dutytowards
Iris master. I4ut, in truth, the fruit of this crime
'lots been nothing more than the discovery of some
private letters, - written, perhaps, with tiOnle in-
discretion, inasmuch fts the news witieli they
'transmitted was not well ascertained ; but whist'
ought not to give umbrage to Govcrnmentl
they did not expose it to any danger, considering
that, there was no mention of any thing that was
not Ole subject of public conversation, and pro-
bably repeated,in all the letters addressed to Eng-
land. . .

Q. But did not you add to these public reports
your own private sentiments? Did not you even
tidier to appear a want of respect,tor the person of
the King, in saying, for example, I'. Lord Wel-
lington, seeing he could .no longer support the idol
lie had raised 1" &c. Do you not admit that this
expression could only have been employed in
degrading-sense, and in a sort of irony itnurions
to
his Majesty 1-7 A . Yirst,theliing of France is not my
seenntllY, lmay make use of the saute expres-
sions iu speaking of the King of England, wait-
uny offence or crime, supposing an ironical
.idea were attached to them ; thirdly, I will not
enter into any discussion on private letters inter-
cepted in the manner I have reprohateil. I-wrote
what I thought, not what I did. 1 cannot be
.prosecuted for my credulity ; but 1 may reproach
inyselt with having written anecdotes compro,
mising other per Sons on mere reports without
having ascertaiued their 'truth ; and 1 further re-
veat , that ihc letters were addressed Jo my brother
laid Lord Grey, whom I considered as my most
iutiwatt fritud, and the ulosciliscret of tuen.77