The Express.
London, England, 1851-07-21 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, MONDAY EVENING, JULY 21, 1851.

chief. A sonorous voice, unaffected vigour of phrase,
and a singularly effective elocution, are gifts which
I fin► of the republican party lar claim to in the
Assembly ; and the contrast supplied by M. lifultsz
with the inartistic and graceless vehemence of his
associates contributed doubtless in no small degree
to his &loom As a counter-weight the legitimists
looked, not without reason, to the practised skill of
BERRYER. There was little novel or striking
however, in what fell from the forensic advocate of
monarchy. It was but a reprodu,ction in somewhat
more cautious. and, therefore, less exciting language,
of the views developed by M. DE FALLOVI.

MINISTERS have met with little opposition
hitherto in their efforts to accelerate the close of the
session : they
.will meet with none now. "G. F.
YOUNG is coming," is a threat sufficient to make the
most sturdy reformer stint in his talk, in order that
the sessional business may be wound up, and the
new member for Scarborough deprived of opportu-
nity to inflict his tediousness on the house. The cir-
cumstance of Mr. YOUNG'S return for Scarborough
will inspire members of parliament with unbounded
gratitude—in the first place for the approaching ter-
mination of the session, in the second place for the
probability of an approaching dissolution. There
are good grounds for hope that their new colleague
may not be long enough among them to bore them
to death.
One important lesson is taught by the result of the
Scarborough election to the party which was repre-
sented in that contest by Lord MULGRAVE • that no-
thing is to be gained by playing fast and loose with
principle in order to conciliate antagonists. Lord
Metotisve, professing all the while to be a stanch
free-trader, claimed the votes of the Scarborough
electors on the ground of his opposition to the repeal
of the navigation laws. " He voted against the repeal
lof the navigation laws in all eases except one and
then he paired off with a member who would one
voted for their repeal." After such a declaration of
inconsistency, Lord .NIULGRAVE had no right to count
upon the support of intelligent and sincere free-
traders; and as for the protectionists, they must have
been fools indeed to give their votes to the candidate
who was against them on every point but one, in-
stead of the candidate who was, or professed to be,
with them on all points.
The lesson, we say, is for Lord Mui.Glisve's
party. They have ever been addicted to holding with
the hounds and running with the hare. Not to go
back further than the present session, have we not
seen them introduce a clause into the QuEEN's
speech, canting d la RICHMOND about agricultural
distress, and heard them in the debate on the address,
in reply to that speech, labouring to prove that
there was no agricultural distress ? Have we not
witnessed them successfully impl3ring !cry tit!
throw out Mr. LOCKE KING'S bill for extending the
10/. franchise to counties? If the Whigs would not
have Lord NIULGRAVES defeat ominous of the defeat
of their whole party, they must adopt a more honest
and straightforward course; they must either be for
the people or against them. The great law of nature,
they will find, " immutably survives"—the law which
decrees that " between two stools the backside
comes to the ground."
As for Mr. G. F. YOUNG, his career draws near its
close. The parliamentary touchstone has ever
proved fatal to reputations like his. Ile is of that
class of agitators who contrive to persuade some
people that they are fit for parliament until they are
tried. lie will find his level there like many who
have gone before him; he will first be silenced; then
forgotten ; and lastly relegated to his old sphere of
after-dinner specchilying..
Mr. G. F. YOUNG begins to hedge already. He
knows his out-of-door hyperboles will not stand the
test of parliamentary debate. Already he is prepar-
ing to argue, ri la DusitaEtt, that lie is a free-trader,
after some peculiar fashion of his own. After some
declamation about the Mercantile Marine Bill, he
suddenly appealed to the crowd before the hustings
at Scar borough—" Now was he a free-trader or was
his noble opponent ?" Of a verity they are, as the
old adage has it, " six and half-a-dozen. Lord 'Mu.-
ORATE is a free-trader who would retain the navi-
gation laws; and Mr. G. F. YOUNG prOtcmSCS to advo-
cate protection only that free-trade may flourish
under it.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG waxed indignant on the Scar-
borough ,1
hustings at the imputation of his being'
friendly to the old corn law. " The protectionists
did not want to return to the old corn law : it was
a foul libel on them to say so." How long have the
protectionists deemed it a foul libel on them to have
it said that they supported the old corn law? They
certainl never offered any compromise before it was
repealed: they fought for it tooth and nail to the
last. Do they want a new corn law more stringent
than the old ? If the Duke of Iln:inmost) spoke his
mind frankly, probably he would answer " aye.'
But Mr. G. F. YOUNG has quite a differeut
game in view : he is preparing to declare
with Lord STANLEY, that protection must be given
up if the party isdefeatedat the next general election;
with Mr. litsiivett, that it is not the re-enactment
of protection, but some compensation for the loss of
it, he wants. In short, agricultural protection is a
weapon of assault which Mr. G. F. YOUNG holds
loosely in his hand, ready to throw it away the mo-
ment he finds it useless or cumbersome.
In so far as principle is concerned, the two candidates
at Scarborough appear to have been about matched.
Their claims on the constituency appear in other re-
spects also to have been pretty equal. Lord Mut-
GRAVE, the electors were told, has lust got an ap-
pointment at court, and Mr. YOUNG s father, they
were informed, had a sword given him for his naval
services. With two such candidates before them, no
wonder that the electors felt considerable difficulty
In making up their minds, and that the election was a
close run. It is not easy to choose between 71ceedle-
dam and Ttccalk-dre.

M. Raspail, in defence of the insurrections of
May and June,for which he was subjected to the cen-
sure, M. Bataille was admitted to take his seat for I
the Haute-Vienne. The tribune was then occupied
by M. Odilon Barret, who began by saying, that yes-
terday an orator had expressed surprise that the real ,
question, namely, that of the merits or demerits of
the constitution, had not yet been put. He shared
this surprise, and notwithstanding his admiration for
the fine speeches which they had heard, he thought
that instead of trenching neon the ground of the
future constituent, it would be expedient to limit
their present debate as much as possible to
the examination of the defects and advan-
tages of the constitution. lie regretted that
the signal for this deviation should have been
given from the quarter whence it had emanated, and
that opinion should have been expressed there, which
led to no possible solution, because the sentence did
not lie with this Assembly. It was not their busi-
ness to fan political passions, but to consider whe-
ther the greater danger lay in revising the constita-
. tion, or in refusing to allow its revision. He ac-
knowledged with M. Dufaure that the constituent was
, perfectly free when it voted the constitution, and
, that the committee was selected with a certain
degree of impartiality. But M. Dutliure, himself,
admitted that the committee acted under the in-
fluences of a certain current of ideas which then pre-
vailed ; how often did he say to us upon certain
questions, "Yes, you are right, but at a fu-
ture time, not now." This moral pressure was
I inevitable, for constitutions are always made the day
I after revolutions. Republican ideas had not then been
long enough subjected to discussion, and the republic
, came forth ready armed, as it were, from the brains
of certain honourable men, who had long imagined a
republic in their closets. Good constitutions are not
made in a day ; they arc the work of time and
experience. This cannot be said of the constitution
lof 1S P 4. Many of us dreaded the notion of placing
two powers of co-equal origin face to face, with no
mediator between them in the event of a conflict.
It was tilt that to act thus was to start two engines
with all the steam on one against the other. It was
innocently said that no conflict was possible, be-
cause the legislative power made the laws, and the
executive applied them. To talk thus was
to despise the lessons of experience which teach
us that those two powers are always in contact at a
multitude of points. It is true the constitution sur-
rounds the President with ministers alike respon-
sible with himself, but who can do nothing unless it
is to hinder him front doing something. That, as M.
de Tocqueville said, is an unprecedented novelty. M.
Barrot then proceeded to attack the permanence of
the Assembly, which altered the fundamental con-
dition of a representative government. He then
blamed the institution of a Committee of Per-1
!!'lnfSZ IY:treen the
alternatives of ringing the tocsin too soon or
too late. He proceeded to find fault with
the system of a single chamber, the excessive cen-
tralisation, the frequent change of foreign ministers,
and unsteadiness of various institutions, which placed
France in an inferior position to those powers which
maintained tradition, sequence and consistency in
affairs, while at home the country was deprived of
all the guarantees of stability and security. In ex-
amining the question of opportuneness in the revi-
sion, he said that if the detCets of the constitution
had been of a secondary order, there might be some
colour for the objection against entering immediately
upon the task of amendment. But the vices
of the constitution were fundamental, and called
for reform without delay. M. Barret took occasion
to make a flattering acknowledgment of the merits
of General Changarnicr, and to express sincere
regret at his dismissal from office. He then pro-
ceeded to pass in review the objections of M. Do-
than., and confessed that he could not find in them
sufficient weight to determine him to oppose revi-
sion. Ile declared that he was not alarmed either
for liberty, or for public order, or fur society. He
was surprised that auy one could discover an objec-
tion to revision in the chance of the President's re-
election. _

M. de Rcmusat demanded hereupon, with em-
phasis, leave to speak.
The speech of M. Barrot would probably termi-
nate the sitting,
The loan of 50 millions of francs voted by the
Municipal Committee of Paris is to be effected by
bonds of I,ooof. each, bearing interest at 5 per cent.,
payable every six weeks. Besides the interest a sum
of 168,000 f. is to be distributed every six weeks in
premiums upon a certain number of bonds. The re-
payment will begin in 1859, and finish iu 1870, and
according to the custom of the munieipalitv, lots will
be drawn every six weeks to ascertain which bonds
are to be paid off.
The ..Wsitcur pubishes a comparative table of the
receipts of the customs for the months of June,lBlo,
is" and 1851. The amount received last month
was 9,156,512 f., being a decrease of 1,257,861 f. as
compared with the corresponding month of 1850,
and of 1,267,320 f. as compared with 1849. The
amount fur the first six months of 1851 was
54,053,161 f. ; 1830, 37,501,643 f. ; and 1849,
59,944,150 f.
To-day there was a considerable cheek in the re-
cent improvement of the funds. The Fives closed at
94.85, with a fall of 45c. The Threes fell 30c., and
closed at 56.75.
P.B.—After the speech of M. Odilon Barrot, the
general debate was closed. The Assembly then pro-
ceeded to divide. The result will not be known in
time for the post.

THE I►IVISION,
REJECTION OF THE REVISION.
PARIS, SUNDAY MOILNINO.

In the National Assembly, yesterday, after post
hour, M. Charamaule withdrew an amendment he
had proposed, and the Assembly proceeded to vote
lon the proposition in favour of the revision of the
constitution.

The total number of votes was 724.
The votes in favour of the revision were 416;
against it, 278.
Majority in favour of revision, 168.
Nevertheless, the votes in favour not amounting
to three-fourths of the whole, or 513, the proposition
was pronounced rejected.

By an error, for which, we presume, the autho-
rities at Dover arc answerable, the mail-bag contain-
ing our Paris letter of last evening was sent up by
the mail train to the London Post-office this morn-
' ing. A messenger sent to the Post-office for our
de'patches was informed that they had been returned
to Dover by the next train. We are consequently
without our usual letter.

GERMANY.

AUSTRIA.7-TIIE. NEW LOAN.

The ne;.lustrian loan, of which so much has been
said of late, has been taken by Baron James Roths-
child. The particulars have not as vet been made
public; but the issue of the loan will be preceded by
a new system of sinking fund, and other financial
measures.

FRANKFORT-ON-THE-'MAINE, Juts 19.
In the last bitting of the Diet on Thursday, the
answer to the English and French protests against the
legality of the incorporation of the l'olish provinces of
Prussia, was drawn up and agreed to, and was on the same
day forwarded to the English and French ambassadors by
Count Thun, the president of the Diet. Its tenor is the
same as that of the reply given by by the Prussian govern-
meat. The Diet declares the measure against which the
protest is directed to lxlong to the internal arrangements
of the confederation, and therefore denies to the English
and French governments the right of interfering in any
way. The next step of the protesting governments will, I
suppose, be a reference to the treaties of Vienna, and a
legal exposition of those portions on which they found
their claims to interfere. What England will do is of
I course doubtful. The question is not very important, and
German politics do not take high rank in Downing-street.
But the French ambassador to the Diet, M. de Tallenay, is
understood to attach great importance to the protest, and
to be somewhat annoyed at the answer he has received.
The following is the protest presented to the Diet by the
Duke of Augustenburg against tho accusation of the Danish
government, that he was a party to an insurrection
ag!i" it
Ills majesty the fling of Denmark, in a royal patent,
dated Christiansburg, Mao' 10, 18.51, has published an ae-
ciliation against me for having taken part in an insurrection,
or having been active in promoting it. This accusation,
which is utterly unfounded, but which assumes the appear-
Sue, of truth from the mere assertion, demands from me a
frau= contradiction.