THF FRENCH PAPERS ON THE PRESS LAWS.

Colonist, Volume IV, Issue 355, 19 March 1861, Page 4

THF FRENCH PAPERS ON THE PRESS LAWS.

The circular by Count de Persian}', recently published, is variously commented on by the Parisian journals. The Debuts hastens to acknowledge the importance of the declarations contained in the circular winch it contrasts favorably with other interpretations of the decree of the 94t1? of jtfovember, but; must be permitted to I remark that these guarautees are purely personal :— ' The laws which regulate the press in Eug* i land are very rigorous, as we know; but laws. however severe they may be, are laws after all, and we do not think that a fair comparison can be possib'y established between a system founded upon a law, however Draconian its character, and a system founded, as M. de Persigny himself admits, upon a diseerefionary power. When press offences are provided for and defined by a law, writers have a guarantee in the tribunals entrusted wJ'th the administration of the law. Can they expect to meet with such a guarantee at the hands of government ?' The Siecle criticises the circular very vigorously :— 'In our opinion (says M. Havin) the comparison established between England and France is not a fair one. Nothing oan be more widely different than England in the 17th and 18th centuries and- France in 1860. It may be conceded that the penalties by the decree of 1852 do not include whipping at the cart's tail, the pillory, or cutting off the ears of the offender; but in a material sense they are just as vigorous, perhaps more so, than any ever inflicted by law in England. Civilisation in France iv 1860 is in a more forward state than it was in England in 1688; parties in France at the present day are very different from the Papists and Jacobites in England 200 years since; no Pretender has invaded our territory with an army, and we have no Charles Edward or Culloden to anticipate.' The Independence Beige complains that the new changes contain little geuuiue improvement;. 'According to the new circular, all the severity of the law will be reserved for attacks against the State and the Crown. This distinction is a progress, no doubt; but it has already been made by M. Billault on bis last taking office, and we regret not to find anything in M de Pc siguy'g circu ar that announces his intention to do away the arbitrary code of avertissements and their consequences, even as regards those points which the Minister now tells us may ba freely discussed.' The Pays and Constitutionnel alone express satisfaction with the new document. The latter paper writes: — '" Bear in mind," says M. de Persigny," that it is iv the interest of the State, and not of the Administration that this power has been delagated to my Ministry." As a journalist and as a devoted defender of the Government and of the State, we loudly applaud these words. The application of the law just regulated changes the law itself. It is not that constant hreat against us of which we have before spoken ; it is a real protection of the State and of the national institutions. It is nut caprice, it is reason ; it is not arbitrary power, it is equity.'