quently attacked the Brest mail, were captured and executed. They all declared that Lesurques was innocent. Lesurques was brought to trial with Curriol, Barnard, and Guenot. He produced a witness named Legrand, a goldsmith, to prove that on the day of the crime he had purchased a quantity of plate. The President asked to see the books of the goldsmith, and on examining them, he found that the date of the 8th Floreal, on which the crime was committed, had been altered from the 9th, the day on which the sale appeared to have been made. The witness explained that the sale was really made on the 8th, but it was not entered until the 9th, and that it became necessary to alter the "9" subsequently to an " 8." From this moment the President was so convinced of Lesurques's guilt that he treated the other witnesses for the defence so harshly that a young woman fainted. While the jury were in consultation, a brother of Curriol addressed the President and told him that he was about to condemn two innocent men-Lesurques and Guenot. The President replied that it was too late. Lesurques was convicted; Guenot, more fortunate, was acquitted. Curriol declared that Lesurques was innocent. Lesurques appealed to the Court of Cassation, and the Court declared that innocence is not a legal motive for appeal. Lesurques was executed. He ascended the scaffold, firmly declaring his innocence. Curriol, who was executed immediately after him, on ascending the scaffold exclaimed with a loud voice, "I am guilty, but Lesurques was innocent." In conclusion, the speaker added that, according to M. Viritry, there is a surplus to the credit of the Budget sufficient to reimburse the family of Lesurques for the pecuniary loss they had sustained.

M. O'Quin, Reporter on the Budget, said that years had passed since the conviction of the unfortunate Lesurques, and still the interest felt on the subject had not abated. Now that his innocence cannot be denied, public opinion had pronounced. Still, as there was a judgment existing, the Commission on the Budget did not think they could support the amendment.

M. Parien, Vice-president of the Council of State, approved the decision of the Commission in rejecting the amendment. He said that the revision of the trial was now impossible. It was asked for at various periods, and was always refused by every Govern

ment.

M. Jules Favre said that when Lesurques was convicted he protested his innocence, not in language insulting to the judges, but in calm and dignified language, which produced a profound impression, and, although the right of pardon did not then exist, the Minister of Justice applied to the Council of Five Hundred for a respite. M. Simeon, the reporter of the committee appointed to consider the demand, concluded by this very much to be regretted sentence: "We have no power and we feel no regret.' Lesurques proceeded to the place of execution, dressed in a white garment, and met his death like a martyr. He would remind the House of

Р

the facts, which proved that Lesurques was unjustly convicted. Although the punishment of confiscation does not exist in the French law, the entire fortune of Lesurques fell into the hands of the Minister of Justice. It consisted of 10,000f. in Rentes. His widow and his three children were stripped of all they possessed. His widow became insane, his son entered the army and perished in the snows of Russia, one of his daughters met the same fate as her mother, and the other, on learning that justice was refused to her father's memory, cast herself into the Seine. Those were the consequences which resulted from judicial errors. The unfortunate family was stripped of every thing. Besides their ready money a farm situate in the department of the North was seized. The produce was estimated at 10,000f. a year, and in fourteen years the Government received from it 140,000f. In the mean time they refused to contribute any thing to the unfortunate family, who were perishing of hunger. In 1824, under the Parliamentary régime which had been so much calumniated, and which, nevertheless, expressed the sentiments of the country, M. de Villèle ordered a restitution of 214,000f. It was not the value of the farm.

The result was that M. Laboulie's amendment was carried by a majority of 1, the numbers being 113 for and 112 against it. But the Government exerted themselves successfully to have this vote rescinded, and a few days afterwards the Chamber, by a majority of 168 to 47, adopted the first section of the Budget without the amendment'.

The Session of the Corps Législatif was closed at the end of May, but that of the Senate was prolonged for a few days longer, to enable it to give its sanction to the measures passed by the Corps Législatif.

In the month of August a trial took place in the Police Courts at Paris which involved a question of the utmost moment with respect to the degree of liberty permitted in France to electors in organizing committees for the purpose of securing the return of Liberal candidates. The Code prohibits in the most peremptory terms the formation of associations for any purpose whatever, where the members consist of more than twenty. M. Garnier Pagès and

1 The same kind of question has twice occurred within the last few years in this country. We allude to the cases of Mr. Barber and Mr. Bewicke. They both received the Queen's pardon, and both applied for compensation. Mr. Barber obtained a sum of money by a vote of the House of Commons. In the case of Mr. Bewicke the vote was refused, but the Government afterwards appointed a Special Committee on the subject, and on its report granted a sum of money to Mr. Bewicke, as compensation for the loss which he had sustained by the compulsory sale of his property upon conviction.

The following are the Articles of the Penal Code :

:

"Art. 291. No association of more than twenty persons, of which the object is to assemble every day, or on certain fixed days, to occupy themselves with religious, literary, political, or other subjects, can be formed except with the assent of the Government, and on the conditions which it shall please the Government to impose on the association. The persons dwelling in the house where the association assembles

twelve others, therefore thirteen in all, had constituted themselves into a Committee for Electioneering purposes, during the struggle that took place in France at the last general election. For this they were summoned before the Police Court, on the ground that they had committed a criminal offence. The Paris wits made themselves merry at the idea of the confused arithmetic which put thirteen men upon their trial for an offence which could only be perpetrated by twenty; but in reality there was no such mistake, for the ramifications of the committee comprehended many more than twenty, although only thirteen were accused. The great event of the trial was the noble speech of M. Jules Favre, one of the most eloquent advocates at the French Bar, who defended M. Garnier Pagès. His peroration was remarkably fine, and was received by the audience with a burst of applause.

"Having now reached the term of my pleading," said the orator, "I ask myself how such a charge as this could have originated. I ask myself how it comes to pass that men like my clients, whose last refuge is in the law, whose triumph is their only object, should be thus confounded with common malefactors. And if they are condemned, what is the lesson this fatal day shall offer to our young generation? What! in France, the France of universal suffrage, you may spread over its vast surface the light of your intellect, and this very evening the wires of your telegraph may transmit the condemnation of thirteen citizens, honourable among the honourable-victims of their respect for the law. You are to proclaim to all France that they who do not think as you think stand in a Police Court, and that it is from the benches of the Chamber to which they have been sent by the people they are dragged to be condemned as criminals! If such be the result of this trial, I might, indeed, despair of the salvation of our common country. But it shall not be so! I will not despair. I derive hope and comfort from those I see around me-from Berryer, the veteran of liberty, the greatest of orators and the noblest of hearts; from Marie, who has so well served his country; from Senard, the fearless President of the National Assembly, who exposed his life to the madness of insurgents;

are not comprised in the number of persons indicated by the present Article. Art. 292. Every association of the nature above mentioned which shall be formed without permission, or which, after having obtained permission, shall infringe the conditions imposed on it, shall be dissolved. The chiefs, directors, or administrators of the association shall, moreover, be punished by a fine of from 16f. to 200f."

The Articles of the law of the 11th of April, 1834, are these :

"Art. 1. The terms of the Art. 291 of the Penal Code are applicable to associations of more than twenty persons, even should these associations be divided into sections of a less number, and that they should not meet every day, or on fixed days. The permission given by the Government may at any time be withdrawn. Art. 2. Whoever forms part of an association not authorized shall be punished by imprisonment of from two months to one year, and a fine of from 50f. to 1000f. In case of a repetition of the offence the penalties shall be doubled. The individual convicted may in the latter case be placed under the supervision of the high police during a time which shall not exceed double the maximum of the penalty. Art. 463 of the Penal Code may be applied in every case."

from these two Ministers of the Government of July-Dufaure and Hebert-who have ever laboured for the triumph of the principles which are now under a cloud or abjured; and from the young generation who surround me, and who are the objects of my hope and my affection. When I look upon all these I cherish the consolatory hope that the great cause we are defending will triumph, not only over this which is but a political accident, but over all others; for liberty is imperishable. Its champions are too illustrious, its defenders too noble; and we may still look with an untroubled eye at the shadow that floats across it, for the sun of freedom will not be eclipsed for ever."

After a short silence M. Berryer, who was retained for another of the defendants, rose and said:

"During the suspension of the proceedings, the counsel for the accused, and the accused themselves, yielding to the profound and irresistible emotion caused by the magnificent harangue of our colleague, after the complete defence you have all heard, have requested me to inform the Court that it is impossible to add any thing to what has been said with such eloquence. We find nothing in our minds nor in our hearts that could add to the truth, the grandeur, and the nobleness of this defence. Brought up as we have all been in respect for the magistracy, we give up our right to speak, convinced as we are that after a speech, from the thrilling effect of which your bosoms are still throbbing, there is not a judge in the land who can condemn the accused."

But M. Berryer was mistaken. The Court condemned the accused to a fine of 500f. each, the expenses of the prosecutions, with contrainte par corps for six months, in case the fine was not paid.

They afterwards appealed from the sentence, but it was affirmed by the Superior Court.

CHAPTER II.

DENMARK.

Note addressed by the Danish Foreign Minister to the Foreign Ministers of the German Courts-Reply of the King of Prussia to the Address of the Chamber of Deputies-Close of the Session of the Prussian Chambers-Speech of the KingInstructions issued by the German Diet to the Federal Commissioners in Holstein -Earl Russell's despatch to the German Diet-Address of the Danish Rigsraad to the King-Entry of Saxon troops into Rendsburg-Joint proposal of Austria and Prussia to the German Diet-Deputation from Holstein to the Federal Diet in favour of the Duke of Augustenburg-Declaration of the Danish Prime Minister, Bishop Monrad- Description of the Dannewerke-Address of the Prussian General, Von Wrangel, to the army-Advance of the Austrian and Prussian troops-Conflicts between the Germans and Danes-The Dannewerke abandoned by the DanesAddress by the Rigsraad to the army-Umbrage taken by the smaller German States-Description of the island of Alsen-Close of the Session of the RigsraadSiege of Duppel-Capture of that place, and abandonment of Fredericia by the Danes-Entry of the Prussian troops into Jutland-Naval victory of the Danes off Heligoland.

A NOTE was addressed, on the 19th of December last year, by M. Hall, the Danish Foreign Minister, to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Prussia, Austria, Saxony, and Hanover, in which, after mentioning the decree of the Federal Diet, for giving effect to the "procedure of execution" in the Duchies which was passed on the 7th of December, he said, that it was deprived of all binding force, owing to the illegal exclusion of the Plenipotentiary of Denmark from the assembly. He then proceeded to argue against the validity of the motives which had been assigned for the Decree, on the following grounds:

"That the ordinance of March 30 of this year, against which the said decree was directed, has afterwards been formally repealed;

"That the mediation offered by the British Government with a view of reconciling the pending differences between Denmark and the Confederation, has been accepted by the Royal Government in the sitting of the 29th of October;

"That the King's Government in the same sitting declared itself ready to meet the Confederation in every point in which the independence or equality of rights claimed for the Federal provinces should not be considered as being sufficiently guaranteed at present.

"But the singular character of the pretended Federal execution has become still more perceptible since the Federal Assembly has