and serious that has ever taken place in the Assembly. The question raised by the legitimists was this: "By striking down the Union, and thus reaching Count de Chambord himself, did the government intend to deny the legitimists the right of restoring the monarchy?" In a clear, energetic, and, at times, eloquent speech, M. de Fourtou declared that such was the intention of the government. The septennate, he said in substance, is above all parties, and we will no more allow the legitimists than the republicans and Bonapartists to question its principle or its duration.

The situation being thus clearly stated, the votes were taken, first on the "order of the day," proposed by the legitimists, which, excluding from the debate the law of the 20th of November, 1873, (instituting the septennate,) blamed the suspension of the Union. This was rejected by an overwhelming majority of three hundred and seventy-nine votes. Then was considered another "order of the day," introduced by M. Paris, and accepted by the government, affirming the duration of President MacMahon's powers for seven years, but reserving constitutional questions. All parties in the Assembly who did not acquiesce in the sentiments expressed by M. de Fourtou touching the septennate, voted against this order of the day, and the ministry was defeated by a majority of thirty votes. But before the end of the sitting a proposition of the "order of the day pure and simple," (laying the whole subject on the table,) was introduced and adopted. The real meaning of this whole action was this, that the assembly opposed the government when it opposed the legitimists, and blamed it when it set up the septennate as irrevocable.

MESSAGE OF PRESIDENT MACMAHON.

After that memorable sitting, where the right had unwittingly served all the other parties. the ministers felt bound to tender their resignations, but the President refused to accept them, and sent to the Assembly a very plain message, in which, after declaring his powers irrevocable, he declared that he would use in their defense such means as the law had placed at bis disposal. He reminded the deputies of the obligations which they had assumed to give him constitutional laws, adding that he would instruct his ministers to specify such as were necessary. This emphatic message plainly indicated that the President had no leanings in favor of the republic. A fortnight later the government openly declared against it in the discussion of the bill of M. Casimir Perier.

RESIGNATION OF MESSRS. MAGNE AND DE FOURTOU.

Meanwhile a new modification of the ministry had taken place. M. Magne, defeated on a question concerning the budget, resigned on the 15th of July, and M. de Fourtou, having vainly endeavored to have his colleagues select another Bonapartist in place of his retired colleague, resigned, in his turn, July 20, 1874. The two vacancies were filled by the appointment of General de Chabaud-Latour, an avowed Orleanist, to the interior, and Matthieu Bodet, not belonging to any of the divi sions of the assembly, but an Orleanist at heart, to the ministry of finance. Adding these two names to that of the Duke Decazes, the Orleanist princes have now a large influence in the MacMahon govern

ment.

REJECTION OF M. PERIER'S BILL.

A few days after July 23, the bill introduced by M. Casimir Perier was discussed, the urgency of which had been voted by the Assembly

on the 15th of June. This bill declared that the republic was the definitive government of France, but at the same time provided that it might be revised. Had the cabinet declared in favor of the proposition, it would have been carried immediately, but at the beginning of the sitting in which it was to be discussed General de Cissey, speaking in the name of the government, read a declaration opposing it, and demanding instead thereof that laws should be made to more thoroughly organize the septennate, and especially that a second chamber should be created, and that the President should have the right to dissolve the lower assembly. In the discussion which followed the Duke de Broglie supported the government. His speech was able, bitter, and energetic, appealing skillfully to all the prejudices that could be evoked against a republic and republicanism. The bill was lost by a majority of fortyone votes. This result, which showed once more how utterly unable the Assembly was to organize anything, induced Mr. Leon Maleville to bring forward a motion for the dissolution of the Assembly. This motion was rejected on the 29th of July, by a vote of three hundred and seventy-five against three hundred and thirty-two. Devoting a few days most diligently to closing up the annual budget, on the 5th of August the Assembly adjourned over until November 30, 1874. This vacation has been well earned. Whatever political faults may be charged against the members, they cannot be reproached with any neglect of official duty, for they have addressed themselves diligently and intelligently to the practical legislation demanded by the country. There are other matters I intended to allude to in this dispatch-the complaint of Spain against France in regard to supplies of war-material sent to the Carlists over the French border; the recognition of the Spanish republic by the European powers, Germany taking the lead here, but all following in the lead of the United States; and the result of the recent election in the Calvados. But this dispatch has already extended to such extreme length that I know you will be glad to have me postpone the discussion of these matters to some future time.

SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch, No. 1004, of the 24th July last, requesting to be informed in regard to the dissatisfaction which the Journal Officiel states exists in Philadelphia and elsewhere in the United States among French emigrants.

In reply, I transmit copy of a letter from the mayor of Philadelphia in answer to an inquiry from this Department as to the truth of the reports in question.

I have, &c.,

HAMILTON FISH.

[Inclosure.]

Mr. Stokley to Mr. Fish.

MAYOR'S OFFICE OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA,

August 31, 1874. DEAR SIR: Your communication of 19th instant was received, inquiring as to dissatisfaction existing among French emigrants in this city.

No complaint of any kind has been made to this department in relation thereto. Since receipt of yours I have been informed the trouble grows out of misrepresentations made by the agents who induce the parties to emigrate, they being unable to procure work upon their arrival in this country, and not possessing means to return. W. S. STOKLEY,

No. 502.]

GERMANY.

No. 242.

Mr. Bancroft to Mr. Fish.

AMERICAN LEGATION,

Berlin, July 23, 1873. (Received August 16.)

SIR: Frequent inquiries are addressed to the legation on the part of the authorities and the courts of justice here, as well as by individuals, respecting the genuineness of diplomas issued by the so-called "Ameri can University of Philadelphia."

One of the latest of these inquirers incloses the accompanying circular, which had been sent him. This paper, it will be observed, is stated to be "for private circulation." It offers to confer degrees and issue diplo mas in all the branches of learning to persons in Europe, without requiring their presence, and indicates an agent in Jersey, England, as the person to whom application is to be made. I am informed that the price asked for the highest degree is $150.

I cannot think that any reputable institution in the United States would thus, underhand, offer to peddle its honors indiscriminately to any who would pay for them, and am led to hope that the enterprise may emanate altogether from England.

As much importance is attached to university degrees in Germany, and they are conferred with scrupulous care, their sale either by, or ostensibly on behalf of, a university with us, tends to bring our institutions of learning into disrepute, and is a detriment to the cause of letters every where.

I have thought it proper, therefore, to bring the matter to your attention, with a view to such measures being taken to expose and correct this abuse as may seem to you judicious.

I am, &c.,

No. 603.]

No. 243.

Mr. Davis to Mr. Bancroft.

GEO. BANCROFT.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, August 18, 1873.

SIR Referring to your No. 502, requesting information concerning the so-called American University of Philadelphia, and especially in regard

to the proceedings of one Dr. P. F. A. Vander Vyver, of the island of Jersey, who offers for sale certain diplomas of the above-mentioned institution, I inclose herewith for your information a copy of a communication from the executive department of Pennsylvania, and of its inclosures, in answer to inquiries made at the instance of the consular agent of the United States at Königsberg, concerning the subject in question.

I am, &c.,

[Inclosure 1 in No. 603.]

Mr. Norris to Mr. Fish.

J. C. B. DAVIS,
Acting Secretary.

EXECUTIVE CHAMBER, HARRISBURGH, PA.,
March 7, 1873. (Received March 10.)

SIR: In reply to your letter of the 3d instant, making inquiry "whether the Philadel phia University of Medicine and Surgery have authority to grant a diploma of Doctor of Philosophy to a person who has not been a regular student of the university or who has not graduated in its course of study," by direction of the governor I have the honor to transmit herewith a communication, with an accompanying circular from the secretary and treasurer of the board of trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, which doubtless convey the information desired.

I am, &c.,

Hon. HAMILTON FISH,
Secretary of State.

A. WILSON NORRIS,
Private Secretary.

[Inclosure 2 in inclosure in No. 603,]
Mr. Biddle to Governor Hartranft.

PHILADELPHIA, 208 SOUTH FOURTH STREET,
March 6, 1-73.

DEAR SIR: The letter from the Hon. Mr. Fish, with your indorsement, was this morning received.

An institution entitled the Philadelphia University of Medicine and Surgery did exist in Philadelphia, with power to confer degrees, but at the last session of the legislature its charter was repealed. Dr. William Paine was the dean of this institution. An elaborate report was at that time made by a committee, appointed by the legislature, which recommended the repeal of several charters. The report was adopted, and a bill passed.

It is reported that by an oversight the bill then passed did not repeal the charter of one of the institutions it was designed to reach.

The title of the Philadelphia University of Medicine and Surgery caused it to be confounded with the University of Pennsylvania, causing much very serious annoyance to the authorities of the latter, with which I am connected as secretary and treasurer.

I remain, &c.,

His Excellency Governor HARTRANFT.

CADWALADER BIDDLE.

[Inclosure 2 in inclosure No. 603.]
[Circular.]

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Philadelphia, September, 1871.

Frequent applications are made to the authorities of this university by gentlemen who desire to obtain honorary degrees. As these applications are made in evident ignorance of the rules which govern the university in conferring these degrees, as well as of the law of the State of Pennsylvania on the subject, it has been thought best to reprint the existing regulations.

Extract from the statutes of the university.

"Of honorary degrees in divinity, law, arts, and medicine:

"1. These may be conferred either at the instance of the faculty or in pursuance of a resolution of the board of trustees; but no such degree shall be conferred unless the mandamus ordering the same be signed by two-thirds of the whole number of trustees, nor unless the candidate shall have been nominated at the board three months previously to taking the question on conferring the degree.

"2. The question on conferring an honorary degree shall always be decided by ballot, and the candidate must receive a unanimous vote.

"AN ACT to prohibit the sale of academic degrees.

"SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the senate and house of representatives of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania in general assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That it shall not be lawful for any university, college, or other institution incorporated under the laws of this State, with power to grant academic degrees, honorary or otherwise, to confer the same upon any person or persons upon the payment, or promise of payment, by any person, in consideration thereof; and any person knowingly signing a diploma or other instrument of writing purporting to confer an асаdemic degree when such consideration has been paid, or promised to be paid, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars and to undergo an imprisonment not exceeding six months, or both, or either, at the discretion of the court. "Approved May 19, 1871."

No. 527.]

No. 244.

Mr. Bancroft to Mr. Fish.

AMERICAN LEGATION,

Berlin, October 6, 1873. (Received October 30.) SIR: While perfect freedom remains to all Germans that wish to emigrate to the United States, the governments of the several states are becoming impatient at the presence within their limits of agents of emigration, and in two or three instances such agents have been summarily directed to quit the state in which they prosecuted their business. Perhaps not every one of the agents has conducted himself discreetly, and, as far as I have been able to observe, they have brought to the United States no increase of desirable emigration. In some cases the agent is a naturalized German-American citizen again established in Germany, apparently without an intention to return to the United States, and, therefore, feeling no kind of responsibility to our Government. Of the motives to emigration, the most influential is the low price paid in Germany for agricultural labor, which has led many of the country people to flock to the towns and cities and many to cross the Atlantic.

I have thought it incumbent on me to do what I could to restrain the arbitrary procedures of the local governments, and the only measure I could adopt is to ask that in every instance of expulsion there be notice given, with assignment of the reasons.

The books of Heffter and Bluntschli both authorize, and even recommend, this procedure, but both maintain the right of expulsion.

In two cases emigration agents have appealed to the legation. In one case it had been proved that the emigration agent had assisted afraudulent bankrupt in escaping to America. The agent, in his conver sation with me, did not so much deny the fact as insist on his own in nocence, founded on his ignorance and good intention.

A second case is that of a commissioner of immigration from the State of Michigan, of whose personal character I have received the best accounts. I have, therefore, selected his case for a more formal statement to the government, of which I inclose a copy.