CONTINUATION OF THE STATE OF SIEGE. {From Bell's Messenger, Sept. 9.]

New Zealand Spectator and Cook's Strait Guardian, Volume V, Issue 367, 7 February 1849, Page 3

CONTINUATION OF THE STATE OF SIEGE. {From Bell's Messenger, Sept. 9.]

On Saturday the National Assembly-pro-nounced upon, a grave question, raised at the instance of the Committee of Justice, whether the state of siege ought not to be raised during the discussion of the constitution. M. Leichtenberger and M.i-Cremieux were commissioned to sustain the affirmative, but the real champion of the cause was M. Ledru Rollin. A constitution, he said, was of that nature that it could not be sustained by force,- and unless it was produced by the full assent of the nation, freely expressed/ it would want at its birth that vital energy which can alone, be derived from moral support. He contended, moreover, that the mischief caused by the suppression of newspapers was not counterbalanced by any advantages whatever, for the reason that a .paper suppressed had, only to change its name and come out undeu ' some other title. He asked them to consider what Europe would think of a constitution elaborated under' the idgime of the sabre, and he told, them that this was no vain question, for they knew already >wbat . value Europe let upon those Spanish constitutions that had been dictated in a similar- way. Why had their own constitution of 1814 been despised ? . It was because- it was looked upon as tainted by foreign influence. And' why was' the charter of 1830 not valued?. .Because all-parties cried out that it was a charter concocted in a few minutes. It was on-all these, accounts that he desired to see the- constitution of the Republic rescued from the fatal wound they were about, ] tojnflict upon it^ . As soon, as the, constitution^had been carried, .the press would be de-

dared free ; and ihen the presr Would turn round and protest that the constitution htd not been freely criticised by 'the Toice of the ]>üb'Kc, and win tied the public sanction.' J The press' would then be. again stricken i apd.thus they would" fall under a dictatorial' and* exceptional Government. He was not the man ttt persist against what could be proved to him tfr be an imperious necessity — but, where was the necessity ? Would they by 'raisitig the siege have a soldier the less in Patis? Their'mi--litary tribunals were established, and could not now be deprived of the authority conferred on them. ' ' % * ' General Cavaiguac commenced 1 by remind* ing the Assembly; that, the question was in their own hands, and that there^wis nothings imposed? or attempted to he imposed upon them ? and then lie said, " I declare that it would Widangerous for the country, dangerous for the Republic, and dahgsK/ns for "the constitution, to raise the state of siege';" those dangerous consequences were as '"evident to them as they were to the Government, so that in coming 'to- a decision they would act 61 their own knowledge : ati'd 'reiponsibilityi J '■ It was idle to say that the state of siege exercised any restraint upon the Assembly. As to the example of Spain, it did not apply, for the state of siege in that country was pronounced by a monarchial . power -against the Assembly themselves., The oexample!tif'Republican constitutions passed in their own country had been -cited ; to that he answered " My lather sat- in the Convention— 'lain happy' to be the son of such a man, atrtl let me tell you it was not the state of siege that then existed, but the reign of terror." This was hailed with cries of assent from all partsL Recalling to' mind how much the provocations of a portion of the press had to do with the June insurrection,- • he proceeded to say :—: — " The Assembly 'has placed us in difficult circumstances ; we have accepted them with' resolution and devote'dness, and we hope to come out of them with honour ; for Ido declare that the post we hold is one - that blight not' to be quitted except with the honours of victory or the pain of a defeat ; as to desertion 1 , -we are incapable of it." The whole question : was therefore in their own hands. Let nothing be yielded even to their personal opinion. -IPthe state of siege was to be raised, it should be the result of the Assembly's own conviction,' and nothing else. Proceeding 1 then to the question of the journals^' he dwelt' at length on discussions affecting the members of the Government- and attack* on the^Republic. To the first he wduld reply-6y:im-proved conduct, or by disdainful silence if unjust ; but the latter- he would not tolerate. He knew, he said, that there were parties whowere speculating on the miseries of the people and trying to excite them- to '■' Overthrow' the Republic. He did not seek to put down philosophical <6n-'t'Bodial nehangesou the one hand, nor to interfere: with the feelings of those who felt an attachment to an old order of things ; but when these speculations or these sentiments took the form of ' acts and %w deeds, and were tending to armed insurrection,'? they became of that character which could f ndT be overlooked in nh'e'-'preseitt state of the Republic. This declaration produced effect, which M. Victor Hugo tried in vain to remove, for upon=a*'division there appeared,, for maintaining the state of siege, 529 ; against it, 140. ' * - . ,: