[Untitled], March 3, 1866

[Untitled]

Legislative chambers, session of Friday, March 2, 1866, Count Walewski presiding.

President Walewski. I will read paragraph 3 of the address:

“Our Mexican expedition is drawing to a close, and the country is pleased with the prospect. Forced to undertake the expedition for the protection of our citizens against violence, and to demand satisfaction for real injuries, our soldiers and sailors have gallantly achieved the task. Your Majesty trusted to their devotion. This expedition is another proof of the power of France in distant countries. The people of the United States, who have long known the loyalty of our policy, and have always had our sympathy, ought not to be offended at the appearance of our troops on Mexican soil. To recall them at the instance of the United States would be to yield our rights and tarnish our honor. You, sire, have the care of them, and the legislative assembly knows you will preserve them with a solicitude worthy of France and of your name.”

The minister of state takes the floor:

Rouher. The Mexican question is seen from two points of view—from France and the United States, and from France and Mexico, and they cannot be separated; if they could, then the Mexico-United States question could be easily discussed. All the despatches relating to it have been published, and everything is known; the house can soon form its opinion. As regards Mexico especially, the French government has sent communications to the government of Maximilian; but the great distance has not yet permitted a reply. For that reason I mentioned in the pamphlet of diplomatic despatches distributed to the assembly that the Mexican correspondence would be published hereafter. It is not necessary for me then to dwell on the impossibility of publishing despatches that have not yet been received. [Good. ]

It is the wish of the government then that the house do not take up the Mexican question at present; it will naturally come up in the course of the session. The government is as anxious as the house or the people are to take it up, but it wishes it to be done thoroughly and at a proper time. That time has not yet come, and I think the house will agree with me when I ask that the paragraph be adopted without debate.

Many Voices. Yes, yes! Put it to the vote.

Picard. I ask permission to make a few remarks.

President Walewski. Mr. Picard has the floor.

Ernest Picard. As the interest of the country is concerned in this question, I will consent to the postponement of its discussion, and I hope the house will approve of it.

Perhaps the minister of state will think proper to fix a day for the discussion of the question as soon as the Mexican correspondence shall be received, before the debate on the appropriations. [Noise in several parts of the house.]

Belmontet. The question may come up when the contingent expenses are discussed.

Ernest Picard. We presented an amendment; another was offered by the majority.

President Walewski, It has been withdrawn.

Ernest Picard. Our amendment is in order; we maintain it, but are willing to defer the discussion.

Several Members. It cannot be! The address must be put to the vote.

President Walewski. I do not understand Mr. Picard. The amendment is either maintained or withdrawn; if it is maintained, it must be discussed and put to vote.

Several Members. This is right and logical.

President Walewski. You cannot defer an amendment to the address, when it is to be voted on finally. [That is evident.] You must do one of two things; either withdraw the amendment or let it be discussed; take your choice.

Ernest Picard. The president will permit me to say that he has not properly stated the question. I do not think it becomes the dignity of the house to settle the great Mexican question definitely, as the president proposes, without discussing it. The paragraph of the address therefore ought to be expunged. [No, no! ] I insist that it be expunged, as it does not express the voice of the house; and I cannot believe it will retain an opinion on the most serious of all the questions in the address, without a profound discussion of its merits.

President Walewski. You mean then that you want your amendment debated?

Ernest Picard. Allow me to explain. It is evident that both the house and the government wish the address to express the truth of facts, and as this cannot be reached, the discussion should be deferred; and if we retained the paragraph in the address without its discussion, we would not be understood abroad.

President Walewski. Then you will vote against the paragraph?

Ernest Picard. Certainly we will vote against the paragraph; but we cannot withdraw our amendment. And, as I said at first, we will not insist on its discussion now if it is against the interest of the country, as they tell us.

President Walewski. You do not withdraw your amendment, therefore I must propose its discussion.

Ernest Picard. It must be referred to the committee.

Segris. I ask to be heard on the question.

President Walewski. You may speak.

Segris. I have but a single remark to make. This question, gentlemen, seems to me of the greatest moment. Our discussions are heard by all of Europe. Well, what is the present situation? We have just been told that “the Mexican question is in such a condition that its discussion at this time would be seriously improper; that despatches have been sent, but it is not known if they reached their destination. To discuss that question now would only cause confusion, and perhaps render its solution more difficult. We request, therefore, that the discussion be deferred, to be taken up at a later day, either before the discussion of the budget or at that time.” That is what the minister of state said in the name of the government. Now I ask him how he can reconcile a proposal so just and reasonable with an immediate vote upon a paragraph to which two amendments have been proposed, and which is of such great importance. If all wish the discussion to be deferred———[Interposition.]

President Walewski. You don’t wish the paragraph to be voted on then?

Segris. Excuse me, Mr. President. I would like an explanation from the orators of the government. I believe the minister of state intended simply to say: As this question cannot be properly discussed at present, it had better be postponed, and I therefore propose its postponement. Now I ask you, is voting on the paragraph equivalent to postponing it?

Many Voices. Refer it to the committee.

Rouher, minister of state. Gentlemen, I do not deny the impropriety of voting upon a question without previous discussion. It is the usual custom in legislative assemblies to discuss every question thoroughly before it is put to the vote; but this is no common question, and a vote on the address will not prevent a full discussion, at a proper time, of all questions relating to Mexico.

A Member. We must have an opinion or we cannot vote.

President Walewski. No interruption!

The Minister of State. In questions of this kind, explanations interchanged between the government and the house are the safeguard and dignity of each. Now, what do we say to the house? A debate on the policy of the government towards Mexico, and on its recent proposals to the government of the emperor Maximilian, not yet heard from, seems to me to be entirely premature.

We ask the house to postpone it; and, to facilitate its complete development, the government will submit the despatches since the last session, not in the Yellow Book, to the consideration of the legislative assembly.

But the discourse of the Throne has expressed a thought that the expedition was drawing to a close, and that thought is common to the government and the legislative assembly; in fact, it is the thought of public opinion, and so it is expressed in the address.

Under these circumstances, where is the inexpediency of the expression of opinion by the legislative assembly? As to its result, and its connection with affairs of the United States, let those questions be discussed hereafter. Leave no blank at present in the address, that you are going to present to the Crown; but let it be understood by everybody interested in our debates that our respective sentiments are reserved, and that the dignity of no person is compromised [Good! Let the vote be taken.]

Ernest Picard. One word, if you please, Mr. President. [The vote! the vote!]

Buffet. I would like to ask the minister of state a simple question. He has just told you that it is improper to discuss the Mexican question at this time, because all the documents are not yet on hand. Now, I wish to ask him if a collective opinion can be formed upon it in the house when it does come up, so as to incorporate it with the address. If there is any likelihood of that, then I have no objection to vote on it now.

Rouher, minister of state. The answer to the gentleman’s question is easy. The Mexican question will be thoroughly discussed in due time; that is, when the budget for 1866 is brought up. It can then be analyzed and presented to the house; and, as acts of the government are more properly investigated at that time, the house can then give a final opinion.

What we most need is information, truth, and harmony between the great powers, and the government will do all it can to attain this, and thereby promote public interest and prosperity. [Good! good! Let us take the vote.]

Ernest Picard. I hope a proposition will not be voted on till it is maturely considered. This resolution is twofold. First. How is it to be considered hereafter? Second. It is a question that belongs solely to the house, and not to the minister of state and his colleagues. According to the constitution and the rules of the house there is but one time when we can discuss it, and that is during the debate on the address, and there will be no time when we can discuss it as fully as now. If the house wishes to put the question to a vote, it has only to say so. [Vote! vote!]

President Walewski. Do you withdraw your amendment?

Ernest Picard and other members. No, no!

President Walewski. I will now put to the vote the amendment proposed by Bethmont, Garnier-Pages, Julius Favre, Pelletan, Duke Marmier, Picard, Glais-Bizoin, Javal, and others. Here is the amendment:

“We condemned the Mexican expedition from its beginning on account of the difficulties and sacrifices it would cause France.

“The return of our soldiers was solemnly announced last year, and we regret it has been delayed to the detriment of French interests.

“The country has not forgotten the first declarations of the government concerning the causes of the expedition, and it wonders to see our army still sacrificed to the defence of a foreign throne.”

The amendment was put to the vote and rejected by a large majority.

The President. I will now put paragraph 3, which has been read, to the vote. [Vote! vote!]

Paragraph 3 is put to vote and adopted.

President Walewski. I now propose to the house that the remainder of the discussion be postponed till to-morrow. [Yes, yes!]

At ten o’clock to-morrow the discussion of the address will be resumed.

House adjourned at quarter past five.