Mr. Baring And M. Sartori...
It is rather curious tat =hese tw-o gentlemen should have so misunderstood -each other on a topic about which they have both tliought so much'; and still more curious that they should have chosen to entertain the public with their misunderstanding. We gave the other day an account of their proceedtings and correspondence, so far as they had' then apneared; and we left Mr. Baring in possession of the field of battle, with every apparent right to raise the trophy. M. Sartoris has since returned to the charge, and has endea- voured to show that his antagonist, to secitre success, had changed the ground of dispute. He denies that he made any communication to the Commission of the Chamuber of Peers as sich, or that he had commiunicated at all in the name of the three united contractors, declaring that he enly spoke to an isolated member of that commission, and gave onily the isolated name of Mr. Baring as his authority. Such an explanation certainly renders the formner statement of M. Sartoris more probable, and removes in a great part the objecticns which we raised acainst its correctness, especially -when coupled with the aclditional-fact, that the two bankers had discussed the plan-had modified some parts and altered others-and that eachi took a copy of it; the one proposing to carry it to the Minister, and the other to the Member of the Peers' Comnmission, with whom hbe was in communication. MIr. Baring, we think, must reply to the rejoinder, which, if correct, goes far to exonerate M. Sartoris in the steps which he took, and shows at least a mistake or misapprehension on the part of Mr. Baring, for which probably an imperfect command of thelanguage used in Parisian conversaton may account. MR. BARRIX AAD Al. SAR2ORIS.