The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-02-27
SPEECH OF M. BERRYER.

We have already quoted largely from the debate
in the French chambers. We add to-day to the
reports which we have given Of the speeches of
Guizot and Theirs, the following account of thai,
of Nj. Berryer the most renowned French orator
of the day-the champion and the leader Of the le-
gi,imst party in France. II 10 remarkable that all
the parties in the French na,ion-save only the gov
eminent party-have spoken out strongly in the
present crisis, in favor Of ansrca The fate OF the
amendment to the address moved by M. Berger,
we have no, yet learned. A previous amendment,
understood to be offered in the same view, was lost
in the chamber by maj ority of 25 This number,
only about one-third of the regular ministerial ma
jority, as shown in the vote for president Of the
chamber was expected to be still further diminished
as the debate on the address progressed. At all
events, the American prediction Of the French
people has been made manifest enough.
CHAMBER OF DEPUrIEs-sITrNG OF JAN. 81.
The President took the chair at two o'clock.
The order of the day was the adjourned discus
sion on the address,
M, BERaYER proposed to introduce after para
graph ive relating to assurances of peace from for
eien powers, the following: "Sheud peace happen
to be troubled from the pretensons of two great ma
tions France herself TO watch that no in
jury be offered to the principles ofpubllc right which
protect the the liberty and dignity of inter-
national relations"
| The honorable deputy, in explanation of his
amendment, gave sketch of the differences which
have arisen between the United States and England
President Polk had, he observed complained Of the
| conduct Of France and her tendencies. The Queen
of England in her speech from the throne, had Gig
nifed that the dispute not yet finished, and that
England was not disposed TO make any concessions
but such as were compatible with her interests and
her honor. An arbitration had been proposed, but
it would appear that the United States were not dis
posed to accede to that course. To accept ,oouid
in fact be an infringement Of the rights Of properi,
,ehich thew a,rogaied TO themselves. They might con
sent 10 a concession, but they could not admit a,
arbitration. collision was, therefore, mminen
between these two great powers and the great ques
ton which interested the chamber was to decide
what was to be the conduct Of France in so grave
| coniuncture. The Minister Of Foreign Affairs hat
intimaed that il would be neutrality; but the ad
dress said nothing on the subject. There was evi
IDENTIFY very important omission in that document
and he considered it most necessary to fix, by
solemn act of the legislature, the line Of conduct tina
France should pursue. The honorable deputy ther
proceeded to argue that the French ministry, in th,
affair. inclined towards power which was no
naturally the ally Of France, whereas ancient tie'
ought TO have caused the United States to be tn,
power with which the alliance ought to have beer
| formed In his opinion 1t would have beer
more advantageous 10 france 10 nave 1Oneu I'M
United States against the naval power of her rival
The honorable deputy then examined the eonduo
of France in the annexation of Texas, and strong
ly blamed the conduct Of France on that occasion
being convinced, he said, that 1t was not sense o
French interests that actuated II. France had NJ
reason to dread the augmented power OF the Unite
States, and ought not TO have opposed the annexa
, ton Of Texas. The reasons assigned by M. Gu'
got for the conduct Of government appeared to hlr
quite without any sufficient value. The true mo
tive of the conduct Of the government was clearl
to please England. The dignity of France had bee
frequently compromised in the same way; but let th
chamber in the present instance endeavor to proeC
her interests. The honorable deputy then went o
to argue that France, by her conduct in the afiai
Of Texas, had Joined England in open oppositio
TO America, and had done so in consequences Of
r despatch sent by the former power. He declared
also that the French government had not acte
honorably towards the United States in the mattel
The honorable deputy then proceeded TO criticiz
9 the French policy with respect TO La Plata, Mad
. sgascsr, and elsewhere, and maintained that in al
concession to England was the dominant motive
y Reverting TO the declaration Of neutrality made b
, M. Guizot, the honorable deputy maintained thu