The Express.
London, England, 1851-07-01 00:00:00

LN FRANCE.

(From Ur Deily Nu..)

" LET us adhere to our own policy and our tradi-
tions," exclaimed M. Thetis, at the close of his
harangue in favour o (the manufacturing monopolies
of France; and his admirers crowded to congratulate
him as he descended from the tribune. What is the
policy, what are the traditions, to which the fluent
advocate would fain have his countrymen adhere?
Without entering into the interminable contro-
versy about figures, it is beyond dispute that the
system which M. THIERS extols is one which has
failed to render one of the most inventive and indus-
trious of nations either productive or commercial in
proportion to their natural capabilities or persevering
pains. No people in Europe have so much originality
vematility in the arts of design. No government
in Christendom has for successive generations striven
more anxiously and with more profuse expenditure
of means to establish a marine worthy of the fame,
and suitable to the wants of the country. No com-
munity has been more indefatigable in the life of
labour necessary to eminent success ; no state more
ambitious to rival its neighbours in the splendid
achievements of foreign enterprise and domestic
skilL Yet confessedly France has never hitherto
realised her own ideal .of industrial renown. A few
great fortnueshave been made from time to time in the
protected trades, that is at the expense of the rest of the
community. But the commercialciasses, as they exist in
England, in Holland, in Belgium, or in America, arc
still wanting There is no great alternative occupa-
tion to the culture of the soil—no balance of employ-
ments for labour.

What is most marvellous is that neither the en-
thusiasts in behalf of the rights of labour, nor those
in favour of the better security of property, have as
yet discovered that in the expansion of trade is to be
found the surest means of satisfying the desires of
both. The working population extorted in February,
1848, political equality. But constant employment
they could not enforce, for the best of all possible rea-
sons, that then France did not contain the capital
or credit buffieient to employ them. Every branch
of manufactures had been reared in a fiscal hot-house.
The bloom was often fine, and in some instances un-
rivalled ; but all flourished under legal glass ; and
its extent was limited accordingly. The multitude,
willing to work and only understanding that those
who were in the pay of 'these manufacturing conser-
vatories lived well, while they (the mass) were
hungry and idle, resolved unanimously to break in
and have a share of the fattening hive. We
know the result. Property thus defenceless,
from its artificiality of dependence and nar-
rowness of extent, was in absolute danger of
extinction ; and with what fearful sacrifices
it was rescued from its undiscerning foes needs not to
be'recalled. Yet M. TIIIERS and the most eager
friends of property, of investment, of enterprise, and
of accumulation, seem to have learned nothing from
its still
recent perils. They still believe that produc-
tive industry is to be made safe only by the patrols
of customs and excise. In the self-defensive energy
of the thing itself they have literally no faith what-
ever. They flatter its charms in rhetorical sentences,
but they do not believe in its power to maintain
itself in being.
In time of peace, argues M. TRIERS, it is worth
the while of a great country to make some sacrifice
in the price paid by the consumer for home manu-
factures in order that it may be independent of
foreign supply in time of war. Agriculture and
trade are in this respect objects of similar care; and
"woe to England if with a large.import of corn she
should ever be engaged in war r One would really
suppose that the apologist of the monopolists had
never taken into consideration the necessity which
every country, France herself included, has for
customers in war time as well as in peace.
In the same breath that the orator hugs the
consolation of a home market's superiority to
that of the world around, he boasts that
under a system of protection the exports of his own
country have greatly increased. But how t' By
inducing foreigners, visitors amongst the number,
largely to buy of the inventive Franks. But buy-
ing implies selling. War may render the process of
barter more hazardous and less profitable to both;
but manifestly it can only do harm to us in propor-
tion as it does harm to our good neighbours. If we
have both to pay five shillings in the pound
for war taxes, we shall clearly have only the
remaining fifteen wherewith to buy llulhausen fa-
brics and Bordeaux wine. So much the worse for
Mulhaasen and Bordeaux. Small satisfaction to them
that the price of their goods having fallen fur want
of the usual market here, the wool growers of Pi-
cardy, and the cotton spinners of ltouen may lay in
stocks of each, great bargains. Unhappily these
latter will probably be just in the same predicament.
The mischief and misery of war is generally univer-
sal ; and, thank Heaven, it is seldom permitted to
any nation to inflict great injury on its fellow with-
out doing prodigious harm directly or indirectly to
itself.

A more difficult portion of the subject involved
in the late discussion in the National Assembly is
that relative to taxation. M. DE Sr. WINE., by
whom the debate was commenced, sought to deve-
lop large and complicated views of finance as well
as free trade. A great portion of the revenue of the
republic is derived from customs duties, and these
M. DE ST. BEtiT undertook to show might be re-
placed to a great extent by direct taxation. The
comparison drawn by his adroit antagonist between
the proportion of the public burdens levied by direct
imposts in England and in France was sufficiently
striking • and we arc far from going the length of
saying that the same amount of taxes which French-
men now pay could be permanently raised
by a simpler and more direct mode of
assessment. The odium of such burdens
would soon become intolerable, and either the
indirect method must be once more resorted to, or
the gross amount to be annually levied must be re-
duced. This, however, like the argument about war,
cuts both ways. Putting aside the considerations to
which such topics give rise, it is easy to perceive
that the true progress in commercial reform must be
looked for in the gradual and experimental reduction
of duties to the point where the principle of expan-
sion ceases to act. The abolition of protective duties
does not necessarily imply the desertion of the cus-
toms as a source of revenue : protective duties are
imposed to prevent importation—that is to destroy
revenue.

FATAL OCCURRENCE IN ROTTEN-ROW.—Yeater-
day afternoon, Mr. Bedford held an inquest at St. George's
Hospital, on view of the body of Mrs. Sophia Martin, aged
66, the wife of a retired publican, who died in that institu-
tion.—William Brown, a butler, living in Brown-street,
Grosvenor-square, deposed that on the evening of the 6th
of June he saw the deceased, in Hyde-park, attempting to
cross Rotten-row, but, having just got off the footpath, she
stopped on seeing the approach of a lady and gentleman on
horseback. The lady was looking sideways in the contrary
direction to deceased, whom, on nearing, her horse having
its bridle loose and going at a smart canter, veered towards
her, and, before she could recede, knocked her down sense-
less. Witness raising her up, and at the same time calling
after the lady, the latter, and the gentleman who accom-
paaied her, came back, when, without making any
remark, they turned their hones' heads, and rode off.
Witness, thinking that probably some limb was broken,
placed bar in a cab and brought her to the hospital. The
lady and gentleman alluded to were strangers to him, but
while they were viewing what had happened, a gentleman
rode up, who made his obeisance to them, which they re-
turned, and that gentleman he recognised to be Mr. W.
Reid, dale firm of Reid and Co.'s, the brewers. Mr. Mur-
ray, house snrn of the hospital, said that on deceased's
admission she had a fracture of the right ankle, which
after a few days was followed by severe inflammation, end-
ing in gangrene, under which she smik and died On Friday
last. A friend of the deceased's said he had written by that
afternoon's NM to Mr. Reid, with a view to ascertain who
the lady and 4entkmen were; as he thought it cruel of
them, after seeing what had happened, to ride away, with-
out giving their cards or names. The curoner and jury
thought such an act unexplained disgusting and uakeling,
and the only question being whether there was any crimi-
nality attached to the lady, to endeavour to procure her
personal attendance, as well as obtain other testimony, the
Inquiry was adjourned for a week.