The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-12-20
The Great Debates in the Corps LegIslatif
on Rome.

bers at the present time is far greater than at I
any previous period of Napoleon's reign. All |
great matters of policy, foreign and domestic,
all questions of State and legislation, are open |
to the discussion Of the representatives of the |
French people-with one exception. That ex-
ception is the throne itself and its authority, |
which cannot be called in question, or put in
peril, by anybody in the empire. But within |
the last year we have had really great debates
on points Of internal policy and public free
dom on the German dispute, the Mexican ex
peditioD, the Papal difficulty, and so forth.
The system OF "interpelation" gives the Gov
eminent the power OF limiting the subject of
debate, and fixing the ime for it, while the
presiding officer possesses authority to bring
members up short whenever they attempt to
traDsgress the bounds which the Emperor has
set to their liberties. Yet withal, great lati-
tude is accorded at present to the Corps L6gis-
latif; and though neither the American Con-
gress nor the British Parliament would suffer
the restraints to which it is still liable, its
liberties are wide enough to enable all parties
to express themselves boldly and plainly.
The great debate of the present session is
that which was opened on the ID instant, by
NJ. Jules Favre for the opposition, and was
continued on subsequent days by Messrs.
Moustier and Rouher for the Government, and
by M. Theirs for philosophical and narrow
minded Bourbonism. The question was that
which agitates all the governments and peoples
of Europe at this time, and in which France
has a special and immediate interest-ROme.
The immensity of the theme called out the
best powers of the disputants, and the emf
nence of the orators gave lustre to the debate.
The brilliant and epigrammatic Jules Favre the
experienced learned, and philosophical Theirs,
and the sklful, bold and very able Rouher-
who had a special advantage in that his words
were authority and his sentences policy-pre-
pared themselves for contest which they knew
would attract the attention of Europe, and
which bore an important relation to current
and future European history. The last
mail brought us the three pro-Papal
speeches of Rouher, Moustier aud Theirs.
The previously-deliVered Opposition or
anti-Papal speech by Jules Favre had as
sailed the Emperor's policy with the greatest
vigor and audacity, and demanded the evacua-
tion of Rome, the 'expropriation" of the Pope,
and the unifcatiOn of ltaly-had denied the
right of France to interfere as she has done,
and had declared it out of her power to continue
in her present course in regard to the Papacy.
All these points, as will be seen, are fearlessly
met by his opponents, and in regard to none
of them is there any desire to shirk the con-
test. Nj. Theirs, however, takes way of de-
Tending the Pope and assailing Italy as illogical
as it is retrogressive. He scouts with contempt
the favorite Napoleonic principle of accepting
accomplished facts, - and can see no safety but
in a return to the old Europe and the old ideas
of which he was representative quarter of a
| century ago. He evidently believes in nothing
| that has taken place since Louis Philippe was
| King and Theirs was lis Minister. Everything
has gone wrong ever since then. France ought
| to have prevented the downfall of the Italian
! princes, the changes in Germany, the losses of
| Austria, the successes of Victor Emanuel, the
| schemes of Bismark; and, carrying out the
| arna rorinniDln Eranaa uyhf nOuv 70 ~
| the attempts of Italy to seize the territories of
the Pope. We peruse M. Theirs speech with
the greatest interest, and admire it as pro-
duction of an able statesman but it is not
worth while to discuss its positions at this
date of the worlds history.
NJ Rouher it is who is the authoritative and
contemporary defender of Napoleon's Italian
policy. This able debater assumes no half
way ground, accepts no traditiOnary argu-
ments, fears no modern ideas; but planting
himself ON the imperial platform, with the
past behind him and the present and future
before him, he vindioates the action of France,
and proclaims the purposes of his august mas
ter. He informs Italy and Jules Favre the
Catholic world and the Holy Father, that the
Emperor will not permit the Italian Govern
ment to interfere with the Pope, and will
secure him in the possession of Rome as long
as his right is called in question. He is utterly
uncompromising in regard to the temporal
power, anu, WllIe u0 lS BudIuou III IAN
! guage about Italy, he assails the revolu-
tiOnary 'demagogues" with heat which
rises somewhat beyond the dignity OF oratori-
cal passion.
1t was this speech of NJ. Rouher which, as
we are informed by cable, made the
assembage of the Conference on Rome impOs-
sible. 1t showed that the French Government
had come to a fixed decision on the very ques
tion which the Conference was to discuss. 1t
left no ground for any settlement that could
be considered settlement, and proclaimed
policy to which it could not be expected that
either Italy, England, Prussia, or Russia would
assent.
The interest of the debate ends with NJ
ROuhers speech; for though the subject was
open to further discussion, and was probably
resumed by members from the Liberal side
the whole ground has been gone over, and the
practical conclusion reached. The "ROman
question:" however remains. That canno
be settled while the tiara and crown remain OF
the same head.
st. Thomas.
From the N. Y Tribune.
When Mr.. Jefferson bought OF France fo
$4,000 900 the vast region then known a
Louisiana-a mighty empire of the most fer
tile land under the sun-he frankly avoweC
that he had no authority for so doing-that h
had utterly transcended his constitutions
power. He declared that Congress might dis
avow his act, and leave him to brave the con
sequences. He held that the Constitution
should be amended in order to legalze hi
purchase, which must otherwise remain
| I had toll in