The Statesman.
London, England, 1815-10-21 00:00:00

VIM-4 - •
ware. in the present case, under the considerminu of
Chan :VT.
COl/111 Ihuar. M mots replied, first the recom-
menrtition evidently applied to persons accused, and
who %vole already under cogniz ince of the law, and
insisted nit the omission.
The Duke of Iticott.tro supported the motion,
and expressed a wish, if it should he thought proper
to retain the clause, that the recommendation of
ittstice should not apply to the punt, but only to the
blare.
Ti. D. ke of BROGLIE spoke to the same effect.
The Bishop of LANGRES opposcd the change. He
thought that Judges might, with propriety; recommend
the exercise of justice, provided they make no mention
of the criminals.
- Baron Slcutra, in support of this doctrine, re-
ferred to the celebrated affair of the Duke d'Aguillon,
in which the Parliament claimed its violated compe.
tense.
The Duke de Bnoct.rt observed, that the compe.
fence of the Chamber was not disputed.
M. de LALLY-TOLLEN D 4 L defended the new draft
of the Address with regard to the pa tin question. It
appeared to him to contain onto general expressions
and the most perfect moderation.
' The Duke de BROGLIE voted for the omission, pre.

ciselv on the ground of the cautious mistier in which
the chose appeared to be expressed. It is proper to
declare pfaittly what we mean. The phrase signifies
something or nothing; but what is deducted from it
in appearance is added to it in reality. If, as the
Duke of Richelieu understands it, only future offences
are referred to, let that be fratikly stared; if it he not,
the objection mutt remain, however much the hit-
gunge may he softened. It is to the substance of the
Idea the public will look, under whatever form ) ott
may present it to them. I more the suppression of
the whole paragraph after the words, tutelary throne
become the altar of the country.
Count CASTELLANE supported the Amendment for
inserting the words in future. Ile observed that the
Climber of Deputies, which did nut try the crime of
high treason, might pith less impropriety solicit from
the King, or recommend to him, the exercise of jut-

tire.
Count 11l orivtr.r.t declared. that he hi been serock
with the silence observed by A Majesty respecting the
acts of rigour which it was wished to recommend to
Tim ; and also respecting that purity of administration
which he did not understand, and of which the King
Lod said nothing. 1( you do not suppr vs the para.
giaph in question ) on will deteriorste, by the influ-
ence you are attempting to exercise, that independence
in ss hich the distinct powers of the Government ought
to exist.
Count MOLE, on the reading of the passage in the
.Address. which expresses an eulogium on the measure
adopted by the King for augmenting the national re-
presentation, proposed its omission, unless the same
motive which was assigned for the measure by his Ma-
jesty was added, namely, the imperious circumstances
in which the tin one is placed.
Count NONTESQUIOU 11191/Pd its total omission, as
a question of so much importance ought not be pre-
judged.
The Duke of ORLEANS proposed the Amendment,
whit h was finary ltloitted in the following terms:—
The Chamber tecognizcs the heneficPut intentions of
his 'Majesty in the mngmentation of the number of
Deputies.