Philippe rose again from his seat, gaining the permission to go ahead after giving a brief nod to the honourable M. Desmarais ”Messieurs,
We must grant M. Deflandre’s proposal all the merit which it deserves. In terms of political acumen, how very grand it is. In terms of the calmness of mind, integrity of spirit and desire for cooperation, how very scant it is. This very Ministry proposed by M. Deflandre is designed, with great care from M. Deflandre, for the very aim of being rejected by the Assembly at large so that he and his allies may claim unreasonable behavior on the part of every other man than their own persons.
The inclusions of persons such as M. Gillet and M. Clement is of itself a divisive proposal, for M. Deflandre knows very well that at least I, and I believe many others, could never agree or support such a proposal. For what is this experienced governance of these two vital Ministries, but the very crashing of the Bourse, with another crash seeming imminent and half a billion Francs in deficit, which we have seen this last half year. To propose these two men, is the very sign of a desire for division, as he knows many here could never agree or condone them in a government which M. Deflandre seeks to ensure them in.
Had M. Deflandre truly wished for the very cooperation, calmness of mind and integrity of spirit he so proclaims. Then neither M. Gillet nor M. Clement would be asked to take seats, neither would he seek to ensure the majority of the new Interim government would not reflect the beliefs of the majority of this Assembly, which he so ably has done. The proposed Ministry of M. Deflandre neither reflects the wishes of the French people, or that of this Assembly.
No, the very purpose of M. Deflandre’s proposal is to cause nothing less than division, distress and conflict in this very Republic. It serves no other purpose than an attempt for M. Deflandre to call foul, to paint any man not of his leanings as unreasonable, uncompromising. When in truth, M. Deflandre seeks to be the most divisive man of all. A weak attempt to justify such complaints, as nothing in the proposal by M. Deflandre seeks compromise.
That desires of such low degree and base, be what rules this Assembly can only be described as a shame. Which is why I sought to propose a moderate Interim Government led by respected men, while also ensuring the inclusion of notable individuals such M. Saint-Estephe, a man whom I on many issue do not see eye to eye.
Merci.”
"Messieurs,
"I have found in my life that those guilty of given charges are the most likely to deflect. Witness here the attempt of Monsieur de la Marche to hide his own malfeasance underneath the outright rejection of a ministry far more fair than his own. Rather than simply recognize the fact that he has endorsed a proposal which seeks to outright deny representation to this Assembly's large minority, he insists that he is being fair and righteous. I will aim to be brief, messieurs, although my friends and I have been presented with so many unsubstantiated accusations that I will need to respond with a great length than I would normally prefer.
"It is a fact that while Monsieur de la Marche may speak all he likes of some supposed conspiracy on my own part, I have never been motivated by any spirit other than what is best for the Republic. Why I would supposedly intend to delegitimize a body which I was personally active in organizing is beyond understanding. The government which I have proposed would assemble many of our most qualified individuals from a much wider variety of ideals than is suggested by Monsieur de la Marche. Indeed, men from his own caucus would be the largest segment of the ministry which I favor, despite his own alliance's seeming unwillingness to cooperate in forming such a government.
"Messieurs Clement and Gillet would both be valuable additions to a ministry and have been responsible for substantial advances for the French Republic. Monsieur Clement, for instance, was dedicated completely to the prospect of ensuring a democratic election for this very body, the preservation of basic liberties, and the reorganization of the National Guard. To reject outright a man such as him, who now possesses infinitely more ministerial experience than Monsieur de la Marche, would be to reject all of his ideological principles. The same could largely be said for Monsieur Gillet, who proved to be a fair and just member of the Provisional Government, the only negative consequence of his role as Minister of Finance being a tax increase which would have been made regardless of his holding that post. Indeed, if prior governments had not left France in five billion francs of debt, we would have produced a clear surplus under Monsieur Gillet.
"If Monsieur de la Marche genuinely took objection with those who I find supremely qualified to serve in the interim government, then he would he would have been better served by proposing an amendment to my proposal, rather than coming out with a completely humiliating one, as he did. That his response was not one of cooperation, but one of outright silencing this Assembly's minority, is evidence enough that his proposal was never intended to be fair and compromising. If he had sought to limit division, as he accuses me of conjuring, then perhaps he should have responded with a fairer nomination than one which would lend no voice to hundreds of delegates.
"I have said my piece previously, so I shall refrain from doing so again. However, the reality is that France must be served by a fair government. Monsieur de la Marche has outright rejected a proposal which would give a strong plurality to his own caucus. Instead he acts with political greed, aiming not for participation in a fair and independent-minded government, but for the domination of such an institution by his allies. It is my only hope that, in the future, we will see a form of conservatism more willing to cooperate and form a ministry which represents all the interests of the French people.
"Merci."
HENRI DEFLANDRE
Delegate for Ourthe