Page:American Historical Review, Volume 12.djvu/268

258 p. Mantoux defects in the texts generally used. Their shape is that of analytical reports, rather long and full, though usually shorter than the copious reports of the magazines. Nearly all of them are written in French, but there are a few English ones, which we have come across toward the beginning of the series.' III. It is an important and interesting question, how these analytical reports of debates were drawn up. They must be either copies of minutes taken during the debates — which would make them very valuable documents indeed — or translated abridgments of the re- ports published in the papers and magazines — which would make them hardly worth mentioning. There can be no doubt about the origin of the " feuilles- journales ". We can guess where they come from, owing to several passages of the correspondence. They are but abstracts of the official journals, which were communicated to strangers by the clerks of Parliament. We read in a letter dated February 11, 1751 : The journal of the sitting held on Friday 5 inst., which I sent along with my letter of the 8th, No. 9, is inaccurate concerning the motion on the number of seamen for the present year, through the fault of the clerk of the House of Commons, who in his minutes mistook the different motions for each other, attributing to the government the motion for keeping 10,000 men, which on the contrary had been made by the opposition. The mistake, which has since been found out and set right, had caused all those who usually procure the minutes of the parlia- mentary sittings from the same man to fall into the same error.' We read also in the margin of a " Journal du Parlement "', dated December 14, 1768 : " The resolutions concerning America are so lengthy that the clerks have not been able to give them this morning, but we shall get them next Tuesday." ^ This undoubtedly means the communication of official documents by authentic copies. Such a communication was by no means made in violation of the orders given by both Houses concerning the publication of their debates ; it was not their motions and votes they wished to keep secret, but only the detail of the discussions, and' the opinions expressed by members. The clerks were consequently allowed to deliver copies of the journals, which the French ambassador procured at a small expense, alluded to in one of the above-quoted letters. ' Debate in the House of Commons, on March 16/27, 1/33. on the excise bill; in the House of Lords, on May 13/24, 1733, on the South Sea Company; on January 23/February 3, 1735, on the address; on March 6/17, 1735, on Lord Chesterfield's motion concerning Polish affairs. Reports dated April 27, 1733. May 26, 1733, February 12 and March 12, 1735, vol. 380, ff. 128, 233; vol. 390, ff. 182, 356. i^ Letter from Levis-Mirepoix to the French court, vol. 431, f. 117.