The Speech from the Throne

* Turin, 21 February. The traitor Charles Albert has committed the third betrayal of the Italian cause. He will intervene in Tuscany and Rome.
The Tuscan General Laugier, appointed by the Grand Duke as commander-in-chief of all troops, is stationed near Lucca with two reactionary regiments. All the reactionaries are hurrying there.
The Grand Duke has been picked up by a Sardinian steamer from Porto Santo Stefano and will likewise come there. Three miles away is the camp of the Sardinian intervention army near Sarzana.
In Turin the situation is as follows: On the 19th Gioberti proposed to the Council of Ministers intervention in Tuscany. After long debates, in which only Ratazzi, Minister of the Interior, sided with Gioberti, the ministers gave in on condition that Piedmont simultaneously recognise the Roman Republic. This Gioberti formally refused.
Yesterday, the 20th, he and Ratazzi tendered their resignations. But in the evening the nobility and the bourgeoisie called out the lumpenproletariat, organised a demonstration for Gioberti and demanded that he remain at the helm and dissolve the “republican-communist” Chamber.
Today the entire ministry has tendered its resignation. Gioberti is entrusted with forming a new cabinet. The intervention is therefore decided.
What will the people of Turin and Genoa say to that?

French Republic. Paris, 26 February. Certainly! the Italians are right when they say that the Ultramontanes are now no longer in Italy, but in France, in Paris, in the very midst of the Chamber, in the very midst of the Ministry.
The protest of Pius IX is obviously a copy of the doctrine put forward in the Chamber, in the reactionary journals, etc., concerning the connection between the temporal power and the spiritual power. Pius IX has evidently consulted M. Falloux and M. Thiers, or at least the leading articles in the Constitutionnel, unless M. Thiers and M. Falloux previously held a council with the Pope. According to these gentlemen, the tiara must therefore be inseparable from the sceptre, the spiritual power from the temporal rule over the Papal States, because the tiara, because the spiritual power belongs not to the Romans alone, but to 300 million Catholics. Thus the sovereign lord of the Papal States is the Pope; but he is sovereign lord only as long as the sovereign people transfers this sovereignty to him. The sovereign people itself resumes sovereignty; a constituent assembly declares the Pope forfeited of temporal sovereignty, without wishing in the least to impair the spiritual sovereignty. But now the whole reactionary party rises up and says: Spiritual sovereignty is inseparable from temporal sovereignty; the spiritual power, in order to be freely exercised, must be domiciled somewhere; the Holy See must have a seat, must attach itself to a possession, must have its fixed place in a state. The Pope cannot be Pope without land; the Pope must not repeat the ridiculous spectacle of the Imperial Regent. If, however, the foreign powers, the 300 million Catholics, are so immensely interested that the Holy See should have a seat in a state of its own, why do they not cede to it a piece, some corner or other, of their own states? How can they demand that the Romans, for the sake of the 300 million Catholics, should again surrender the sovereignty they have reconquered?
The Pope, as a temporal prince, invokes the support of the other princes, while Thiers, presenting the Pope as an ecclesiastical prince, calls upon the faith of the 300 million Catholics for help. The Pope says: I have possessed the Papal States for centuries; I have a temporal right to them. Now although this right is indeed nothing but a feudal right, it is just as sacred as the right of the other princes. M. Thiers, who does not think much of feudal rights, goes further than the Pope; instead of justice, he appeals to religion, not the religion of the Romans, but the religion of the French. Whether the Romans were in the right or in the wrong is not the question; it is merely a matter of presenting a spiritual bond between right and wrong; of having the feudal rule of the Pope sanctioned in a religious manner by the other nations, after they have first re-established it by force of arms. On behalf of the prince of Christendom, he claims an armed crusade against the Romans. We see, the Romans are right: the Ultramontanes sit in France, in Paris; they find their expression in Falloux and Thiers – Montalembert we need not mention – and the Pope is merely the mere echo of these men.

Paris, 26 Febr. Beltrami, Rome’s new envoy, has arrived in Paris. Canuti, the Pope’s previous plenipotentiary, has accordingly ceased his official functions.
– The Moniteur contains nothing of interest. Its report yesterday on the celebration of the revolution in the Madeleine church is false. It claimed, among other things, that the entire diplomatic corps attended it. In fact, only the American envoy and a few clerks of the Belgian legation were present at the ceremony.
Thus even the Moniteur lies!
The National asks M. Drouin de Lhuys whether he too had forgotten to invite the diplomatic corps, as recently happened with the clerks and vice-presidents of the National Assembly for the last court ball at the Élysée Bourbon?
– The Courrier français, which previously still had one leg in the red republic, today makes, through the mouth of its new obscure editor-in-chief, E. de Reims, the naive declaration that it is going over, bag and baggage, into the camp of M. Faucher, and that from now on it no longer has even the slightest connection with socialism. It swears allegiance to the flag of the elect of 10 December.
– In the Liberté the full-blooded imperialists today launch their election manifesto. It reads:
“Toiling, without respite, to march forward into the unknown, France believes herself at the end of her political explorations and recoils with horror from the idea of a new revolution. After the great social reform at the end of the last and the beginning of the present century, France has tried and rejected two systems of government: divine right despite its souvenirs; constitutional monarchy despite its material results. The empire alone did not fall before the people, but before the foreigner.” (There follows an almost word-for-word repetition of Louis Napoleon’s programme of 10 December, with the conclusion: Long live Louis Napoleon Bonaparte!)
Signed, this remarkable document, by Generals Bachelü, Hulot d’Osery, Remond, Sourd, Lamarre, Petit, etc., etc.
– In Lyon the celebration of the revolution of 24 February took place in the church of St Jean. Bugeaud attended with his entire general staff. Lyon remained calm.
– With a view to the possible annihilation of the red republicans, the Ministry of War is busy creating two new engineer regiments, whose exclusive task will be to fight street or barricade warfare. Half a regiment would be garrisoned in Paris, half in Vincennes, a quarter in Rouen, a quarter in Limoges, a quarter in Lyon, and a quarter in St. Etienne. As if socialism did not have quite different weapons than paving stones at its disposal!
– The Journal des Débats devotes ell-long reflections to the opening of the Prussian Chambers. “Will the Prussian Parliament, divided into two Chambers, be calmer in 1849 than the National Assembly of 1848?” it asks with quiet concern. “Notwithstanding the views which have somewhat improved in recent days, we feel by no means certain of this. There are too many pending questions, too great passions which seek to fight one another, and the forces of the parties are too evenly matched for it to be supposed that one or the other would quit the arena without striking a blow.” The writer now wants to embark on a long description of the parties, in the course of which he says of the court in Potsdam: “Malheureusement on a toujours le tort à Potsdam de se mettre en route trop tard pour arriver à propos.” After further fearing that the Pomeranian nobility might make common cause with the extreme Left, because to the one section the December Constitution is too liberal-minded, to the other it is too much imposed, he gives, after a fairly piquant description of the parties, in which particularly the democrats O’Ester and Co. come off fairly leniently, the following paternal advice: “In the face of these dangers, the consequences of which cannot be calculated, all those who love neither adventures nor excesses have only one policy to follow: the policy of unity!” Under Guizot the Journal des Débats would have spoken exactly the same language.
– (People’s Bank report of 24 Febr.)
1,549 detached shares	7,748 fr. – –
3,127 share coupons	1,563 fr. 50 cts.
2,363 share subscriptions	11,815 fr. – –
	Total FR. 21,123 50 cts.
Adhesions rose to	FR. 4,095. –
Non-adhering shareholders	FR. 340. –

We note with surprise that the number of adherents is growing more significantly among the trading petty bourgeoisie than among the workers. This fact is evidently due to the workers’ hesitation to subscribe before they can pay something. We therefore declare that the management of the People’s Bank attaches far more weight to the mere adhesion of the workers than to their payments.
Paris, 25 February 1849.
Proudhon & Co.

– National Assembly. Sitting of 26 Febr. Begun at 1 1/4 o’clock. President Marrast. The benches are still very empty, because many deputies are still lingering in the committee rooms, where today the fifteen members were elected to examine the motion of Lieutenant-Colonel Charras:
“In future the services for which the Order of the Legion of Honour was granted shall be indicated in the Moniteur and the Bulletin of Laws.”
The commission to examine this attack, directed straight against Bonaparte, has, as is easy to imagine, turned out in an oppositional sense.
De Georges, after the reading of the minutes, presents a pile of petitions from the department of Pas de Calais demanding the repayment of the 45 centime tax. (Sensation.)
The Assembly resumes its agenda, the electoral law debate, in which on Friday it had advanced to the third sentence of Article 78, which dealt with the officials who may not be simultaneously representatives of the people and officials.
Vineau asks whether those resigners who give up their post to accept the people’s mandate can return to their office.
Charlemagne, member of the electoral law committee, answers in the affirmative. This, at least, was the guiding thought of the committee.

Cavaignac moves the addition to Art. 78:
“A special law shall determine the position of those members of the land and sea forces who have been elected as representatives of the people. Until then, they remain subject to the availability law of 19 May 1834.”
The ex-dictator develops this addition at very great length, without taking up the Assembly’s attention for too long.
Victor Lefranc opposes it, on behalf of the committee on the electoral law. These subsections descend too much into detail. He therefore rejects them.
Baraguay d’Hilliers wishes to add to the above addition:
“Nevertheless, officers elected as representatives of the people shall be regarded as on a mission outside the cadre (hors cadre), non-commissioned officers and privates as on temporary leave.”
Billault is neither for nor against this extension. The committee is divided.
Cavaignac explains his addition once again and associates himself with Baraguay’s motion.
The motion is adopted.
Coquerel deposits his report on the assistance law.
Oudinot moves in respect of Art. 80:
“Those officers who have been elected to courts-martial and as members of the Admiralty Council may be elected as representatives of the people without resigning their post.”
After a short debate, Oudinot withdraws the motion.
Philibert moves:
“In the event that such court-martial or other military missions last longer than 6 months, the representative of the people concerned is to be regarded as having resigned.”
Rejected after two votes.
Art. 81:
“The incompatibility extends not only for the duration of the legislature, but for the six months following its close or personal resignation.”
Lacave moves the deletion of the last clause.
Carried. The clause accordingly deleted. The incompatibilities are concluded.
Art. 82:
General provisions. “Each department shall elect the number of representatives that fall to it according to the appended table. This table is to be renewed every five years.”
Adopted.
Art. 83:
“In the event of double elections, deaths, resignations, etc., the electoral district concerned shall proceed to a new election within 40 days.”
Here the Navy Minister De Tracy interrupts the debate by tabling some local draft laws.
Aftouin takes advantage of this pause to have his motions put forward six months ago regarding the proletariat disposed of. (Order of the day! Order of the day!)
Articles 84, 85, and 86 (relating to the colonies) are still adopted.
The sitting is closed at 6 o’clock.
Great Britain. * Dublin, 24 February. According to the “Clonmel Chronicle,” it is by no means improbable that Duffy will be put before the Tipperary jury, whose sessions begin on 10 March. The witnesses who were used during the last extraordinary assizes at Clonmel cost £1,575 (10,500 thalers), which sum was initially to be charged to the county, but now, by the ruling of the Dublin court, must be paid by the government.
Portugal. * Lisbon, 19 Feb. The ministry is enjoying life once more. The joy stems from its having succeeded, after all, in concluding the contract with the Bank of Portugal for the new loan so ardently desired. The bank will therefore advance a sum of 621 contos, reduced to metallic money, in six instalments at 5 per cent, and will receive back 675 contos plus 37 1/2 contos interest, so that on this neat little transaction it makes a profit of about 93 contos, i.e. it earns some 12 per cent. And this takes no account of all kinds of scraps and incidental earnings. This is how a country’s finances are brought into bloom. ‒ According to letters from Gibraltar of the 16th inst., the dispute between England and Morocco has been amicably settled, the latter having paid the sum of 10,000 dollars in compensation awarded to the Englishman Redman.
Redakteur en chef: Karl Marx.
Protest. The state of siege imposed on Erfurt on 24 November, the threats made against me by a certain Captain von Witzleben and the destructive fury practised by his men upon my property ‒ were sufficient cause for me to keep out of the way of my political opponents for as long as right and the law were ruled by the force of bayonets.
My absence from Erfurt, however, has been seized upon as a pretext ‒ favourable to certain ends ‒ for I have just now learned that the Royal Prussian Inquisitorate in Erfurt, on account of an article contained in No. 161 of the journal published by me, “Der Telegraph,” in which a seditious tendency was thought to have been found, has imposed the initiation of a criminal investigation against me, and, in order to obtain my person, has had me pursued by a warrant and is having a search made for me.
The crime with which I am charged allegedly consists in my having incited the inhabitants of the province of Saxony to insurrection against the authorities, and the proof of this accusation is found, quite particularly, in the words:
“passive resistance must have active resistance as its foundation, ‒ it almost resembles the calf’s struggling against its butcher” *)
The erroneousness of this presupposition and the contradiction in the warrant need not first be demonstrated here, since this statement merely sets forth the assertion that the resolution of tax refusal ‒ the legal admissibility of which it was not for me to decide ‒ must be joined by the act of tax refusal if it is not to be a bell without a clapper, whereas tax refusal itself is no crime and is punished not as such, but simply results in judicial distraint.
Least of all does the article contain an incitement to rebellion, and consequently no crime exists on account of which I could be pursued by warrant or my immediate arrest and extradition demanded from foreign authorities; rather, by its nature it must be classed among press offences, as emerges from the warrant itself; ‒ but a search is being made for me solely in order, perhaps, to put me in chains and fetters, for persons who have dared, with courage and perseverance, to oppose the liberty-hating strivings of a certain party can lay claim to forbearance least of all in Erfurt, where, through the imposition of the state of siege, all the safeguards of the constitution have been suspended.
Before impartial judges who are not my personal opponents and persecutors, before a jury trial, I will gladly answer for my statements, but I protest against the proceedings initiated against me by the Prussian Inquisitorate in Erfurt, and I hold those officials responsible who have lent themselves to such an unwarranted persecution against me.
Leipzig, 14 February 1849.
Franz Loes, bookseller and publisher of the “Telegraphen” from Erfurt
Meteorological Observations. _ Commercial News. _ Fruit and Oil Prices. _ Shipping Notice.
Cologne, 27 Feb. 1849.
Loading.
For Ruhrort to Emmerich: W. Pesch; for Düsseldorf to Mühlheim an der Ruhr: A. Meyer; for Andernach and Neuwied: Pet. Gies & H. Schumacher; for Koblenz, the Moselle, the Saar & Luxembourg: Jak. Tillmann; for the Moselle, the Saar & Trier: Joh. Castor; for Mainz: J. Hirschmann; for the Lower Main: Fr. Schulz; for the Middle & Upper Main: Seb. Seelig; for Heilbronn: H. Müssig; for Kannstadt and Stuttgart: H. Klee; for Worms and Mannheim: S. Dunk.
Furthermore: for Rotterdam Capt. Willemsen, Cologne, No. 6
Furthermore: for Amsterdam Capt. Scholten, Cologne No. 8.
Rhine level: 13′ 1″. Cologne. Gauge.
Civil Status of the City of Cologne.
18 and 19 February. 1849.
Births.
Clara, d. of Casp. Stammel, day-labourer, Spinnmühlengasse. ‒ Anna Maria, d. of Ludw. Wilms, sugar-worker, Thieboldsgasse. ‒ Joh. Christ., s. of Christ. Horn, joiner, Severinstrasse. ‒ Heinr., s. of Math. Pütz, gunsmith, Kattenbug. ‒ Christ., s. of Karl Dierkes, tailor, Perlengässchen. ‒ Maria Anna Joseph., d. of Casp. Jos. Schumacher, without occupation, Cäcilienstrasse. ‒ Cathar., d. of Heinr. Stang, cooper, Röhrergasse. ‒ Maria Gertr., d. of Peter Stupp, joiner, Gel_ . ‒ Gerh., s. of Math. Seidenberg, mason, Gereonswall. ‒ Joh. Herm., s. of Herm. Schulze, sugar-worker, Unter Kranenbäumen. ‒ Phil., s. of Christ. Jos. Breuer, shoemaker, Weisenhausgasse.
Franz Jos., s. of Casp. Mirbach, mason, Maximinenstrasse. ‒ Peter Jos., s. of Win. Jos. Lauven, butcher, Maximinenstrasse. ‒ Margar., d. of Math. Schaefer, carter, Rinkenpfuhl. ‒ Maria Agnes, d. of Hub. Cabolet, gunsmith, St. Apernstrasse. ‒ Cathar., d. of Franz Reuter, journeyman roofer, Schlemmergasse. ‒ Apol., d. of Rud. Engels, day-labourer, Thieboldsgasse. ‒ Agnes, d. of Heinr. Breuer, stone-cutter, Kleine Spitzengasse. ‒ Joh., s. of Joh. Jos. Bürgel, tallow-chandler, Enggasse. ‒ Jacob Hub., s. of Ludw. Schötter, tobacco-spinner, Hahnenwall. ‒ Wilh. Ludw., s. of Ernst Süper, coachman, Blaubach. ‒ Wilh. and Cathar., twins of Joh. Jacob Cosmann, glazier and painter, Kranenbäumenhof. ‒ One illegitimate boy and two girls.
Deaths.
Anton Hub. Con. Deus, 4 months old, Mühlenbach.
Cathar. Mortmüller, 2 yrs 4 months old, Mariengartengasse. ‒ Peter Jos. Hohn, 13 months old, Elstergasse. ‒ Heinr. Wirtz, 2 yrs 7 months old, Weiherstrasse. ‒ Gerh. von Effelt, 2 yrs 4 months old, Ehrenstrasse. ‒ Heinr. Masson, 11 months old, Krebsgasse. ‒ Jos. Fetten, without occupation, formerly master carpenter, 82 yrs old, widower, Cäcilienstrasse. ‒ Clara Weber, 2 yrs old, Tempelstrasse. ‒ Jos. Schloßmacher, 8 yrs old, Lintgasse.