John A. Dix to William H. Seward, January 22, 1867

Mr. Dix to Mr. Seward

Sir: I have the honor to enclose herewith a copy of the Moniteur of Sunday, the 20th instant, announcing changes in the ministry, and still more important changes in the administration of the government of France.

The answer to the speech from the head of the government, still continued in England, but discontinued long ago in the United States, is abolished by the imperial decree of the 19th instant, a translation of which is annexed, and the right to interrogate the government substituted for it, the ministers being required under certain regulations to appear, as in England, on the floor of the legislative houses to answer inquiries.

A more important measure is the proposed liberation of the press from executive control, and the reference to the judicial tribunals of all questions of the abuse of its freedom.

I send, annexed hereto, a translation of the Emperor’s letter to the minister of state announcing these changes; a copy of Galignani of yesterday (the 21st) containing extracts from several of the Paris journals commenting upon them; a translation of the leading editorial in the Moniteur, a list of the new ministry, a translation of the leading editorial in the Constitutionel, and a translation of the leading article from the editorial columns of La Liberté, M. Emile de Girandin’s paper.

Yesterday’s number of La Liberté, while withdrawing nothing it said in commendation of the measures announced by the Emperor, has a discouraging article founded upon the retention of some of the ministers, who are opposed to them.

It is not easy to exaggerate the importance of these measures, and although the legitimists disapprove them as dangerous concessions, and the ultra republicans treat them as concessions only in name, they have gained for the Emperor great credit with the true friends of constitutional liberty, and are considered, as I have no doubt they will prove, an era in political progress in Continental Europe,

I am, with great respect, your obedient servant,

[Untitled]

A few words will suffice to explain the spirit and scope of the decree given above. That of the 24th November, 1860, in introducing into the French institutions the annual vote of an address, has for its object to associate the great bodies of state more directly with the policy of the government. That measure, which anticipated public opinion, was received as a new and striking testimony of the sovereign’s liberal initiative and of his wish to found representative government on solid bases. There could be no question of weakening the important position of the Chambers, but, on the contrary, to render it more practical and more efficacious in freeing it from the imperfections which six years’ experience has manifested. The debates in the Chambers are incontestably of a nature to exercise a legitimate and salutary influence on the march of events, when they have for result to bring to light public feeling in a real and present interest. But every one was struck with the fact that the discussions in the address tend more and more to depart from the line traced by the speech from the throne to which it was to reply. Wanting, therefore, a precise basis and clearly-defined subject, they run the risk sometimes of wandering into the region of vague theories and abstract ideas; at other times of losing themselves in the minutest details of the administration. Under these conditions they are liable to be indefinitely prolonged, and tend rather to heat men’s minds than to elucidate questions, and rather to favor verbiage than business, which they deprive of valuable time. Already their duration has assumed proportions which could not have been foreseen, and which, from the experience of the past in France and that of other countries, could not have been expected.

As the discussion of the bills never commences before the vote on the address, the following shows the time occupied in its preparation and debate since 1861:

Opening of the session, February 4, 1861; vote on the address, March 22, 1861—one month and eighteen days.

Opening of the session, January 27, 1862; vote on the address, March 20, 1862—one month and twenty-three days.

Opening of the session, January 12, 1863; vote on the address, February 12, 1863—one month.

Opening of the session, November 5, 1864; vote on the address, January 2, 1864—two months and twenty-four days.

Opening of the session, February 13, 1865; vote on the address, April 15, 1865—two months.

Opening of the session, January 22, 1866; vote on the address, March 1, 1866—two months and twenty-eight days.

This state of things has led to complaints which the government could not but take into consideration. The decree proposes to set aside these inconveniences, whilst maintaining in tact the participation of the Chambers and strengthening by defining it. What the debate could gain in sincerity and in full utility, when they are based on a circumscribed question known beforehand, bearing on a serious and precise Interest, is so evident that there is no necessity to enlarge on it; such is the advantage of interpellations. The decree, faithful to the spirit which inspires it, decides that the majority of the bureaus is not necessary to authorize such demands. The favorable opinion of two out of five in the senate, and four out of nine in the legislative body, suffices to authorize them. That is a guarantee that the tribune will be open to every cause really worthy of an exceptional debate. The Chamber can express its opinion in two ways: by the order of the day pure and simple if it finds the interpellation groundless, and by reference to the government if the question merits particular attention. The government is thus placed in a position to know the sentiments of the Chamber, and to pay the attention to them required by public interest and its own responsibility. To go further would be to run the risk of altering the harmony of the powers, such as they are regulated by the constitution, and to exceed the range of a simple decree. The cases in which the legislative body and the senate can express a direct and absolute judgment, terminating in a vote of adoption or refusal, are rigorously defined in the fundamental compact. Independently of special laws, those of the contingent of the army, supplementary credits, and the budget furnish every year numerous occasions for the deputies to regularly exercise their control over public affairs. The substitution of interpellations for the address has, as a necessary consequence, the provision which concerns the ministers, and which gives a greater latitude to the sovereign in the designation of the organs charged to speak in his name, and, in certain cases, more authority to the explanations furnished. But it was requisite that the terms of the constitution should not be exceeded which provide that the ministers shall only be dependent on the chief of the state; that they are only responsible each in what concerns himself for the acts of the government; that there is no solidarity among them, and that they cannot be members of the legislative body. The decree does not, nor could it make any change in the prescriptions, and therefore the ministers only present themselves before the Chambers as delegates from the chief of the state, on the occasions of which he will remain the only judge—the council of state, however, preserving its constitutional rôle. What the country requires above everything is that truth, justice, and the general interest may triumphantly issue from the public discussions. In that point of view this day’s decree will be considered by all impartial minds as realizing a notable progress.

[From Le Constitutionnel of January 21, 1867.—Translation.]

The Emperor Las acquired a new claim to the gratitude of the country. After having brought us security and order, those essential conditions of every society, Napoleon HI continues to-day the liberal work commenced by the decree of the 24th November, 1860.

In his wise foresight, and imbued with the feeling of his high responsibility, the Emperor has judged that the time has come to enlarge the area of public liberty.

The empire has already given to France fifteen years of profound, quiet, prosperity and glory. The ground appears now to the Emperor so firm that these precious results cannot in any way be compromised by the new concessions contained in the decree of the 19th January, and announced by the letter to the minister of state. Napoleon III will thus have the twofold glory of being, as we have often said, the restorer of order and the founder of liberty in France.

The nation will receive with confidence and greet with joy the liberal act which marks a new era in the history of a great reign.

[From La Liberté of the 21st January, 1867.—Translation.]

REFORM.

Last year, on the occasion of the Emperor’s speech, we expressed our views upon the necessity of finishing the work of the 24th of November, 1860. We did so with such firmness that we drew down upon ourselves the displeasure of the government. Not having hesitated to speak the truth, we do not now hesitate to give commendation, and we say sincerely that the letter of the Emperor to the minister of state appears to us instinct with the true spirit of liberalism.

We can the more readily render a loyal homage to the high initiative of the sovereign, since, if the measures announced are in accordance with the ideas which we advocate, they do not, nevertheless, come up to the realization of our programme, so that our politics resting apart, we are in the condition of independent spectators.

Even in regard to the details of the reform, discussion may show differences of opinion, but at the moment it becomes us only to regard in its entirety the great fact which is developed.

It is a great fact in our country, where blind resistance is the point of honor with governments, to see the head of the state choose spontaneously and resolutely the path of liberal concessions.

Even a partial restoration of our liberty is a great fact before Europe at the moment when France is said to be irritated, jealous and enfeebled. It is a great example to Europe, and France is not in the habit of giving examples which are not followed.

After having rendered this legitimate homage to the sovereign, it would be ungrateful if we did not call to mind the firm but moderate conduct of the forty-six deputies who voted last year an amendment favorable to “the extension of public liberties. The deputies who, in spite of the exhortation of the Hon. Mr. Rouher, voted in accordance with the speeches of Messrs. the Marquis of Talhouèt, Ollivier. and Buffety have an unquestionable share in the actual measures, and they can congratulate themselves in having done their duty with respectful firmness.

All the ministers have resigned, as they should have done, and their retirement was the only course which could comport with the dignity of Mr. Rouher and his colleagues.

How could the Hon. Mr. Rouher have presented himself before the legislative corps, after his reiterated declarations of last year, to defend a policy which he declared almost factious? It would have been reducing himself to the humble proportions of a political advocate at the very moment when, without any diminution of the responsibility of the chief of the state, the moral responsibility of the ministers would have been more conspicuous.

The talent and character of the statesman who signed the treaty of commerce destine him to a more important position hereafter. The minister of state has therefore wisely consigned himself to a momentary retirement, from which events will draw him without doubt.

The very natural retirement of Mr. Rouher carried with it that of the minister of the interior and the other ministers. It was becoming, at the moment when the Emperor entered resolutely upon the path which they had not advised, that they should leave to the head of the government his full liberty of action. If the ministers had remained after having first spoken of retiring, it would have been said that they expected to regain in detail in practice that which the Emperor had abandoned in principle. It was worthy of the character of the ministers to avoid such suspicion, unjust as it might have been. Like the talent of Mr. Rouher, their self-sacrifice will have its reward.

NEW MINISTERS.

M. Rouher, minister of state and minister of the finance: Marshal Niel, minister of war; Admiral Rigault de Gemouilly, minister of marine; M. de Forcade de la Roquette, minister of agriculture, commerce, and public works.

The ministers remaining are: M. Baroche, keeper of the seals, minister of justice, &c. Marshal Vaillant, minister of the house of the Emperor, &c.; M. Douny, minister of public instruction; M.Vovitry, minister president of the council, Marquis; de la Valette, minister of the interior; Marquis de Moustier, minister of foreign affairs.