The Sun.
London, England, 1840-10-16 00:00:00

THE FRENCII MANIFESTO.

SPIRIT OF THE FRENCH JOURNALS OF
WEDNESDAY.
(From Galignanes Messenger.)
The r
'fitiers to the Dote addressed by
Lord Palmerston of M
rston:n Mr. Bulwer on the Eastern (lin,.
tion is necessarily the leading subject of discussion in
the Parisian Journals. We shall endeavour,-as bri( fly
as possible, but without being so brief as to leave the
real tone and colour of their criticisms in doubt, to state
the views which are taken of this expose by the dif-
ferent organs of the Daily Press. •
The Constitution/a./ says—" Uprightness of conduct
stands forth in the luminous precision of this expose as
much as the conclusive demonstrations which are
founded upon argument." This Journal then analyzes
the reply of M. niers, and dwells on the prin-
cipal passages, for the purpose of showing that it
is a full refutation both of the fact and the argu-
ment of the expose of the English Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs. It is quite unnecessary,
however, for us to quote the observations of the Con-
stitutionnel, for so important a paper as that of M.
Thiers will be read with interest by all persons, whether
they be his adversaries or his partsans ; and certainty,
whatever may be the opinion of the reader as to amount
of refutation or the solidity of assertion contained in the
expose, it must ho generally admitted that the lan-
guage in which M. Thiers has clothed his facts and his
arguments has so little of political mystification about
it, that there is small need of newspaper commentaries
to explain what he meant to say,"
The Temps publishes the reply of M. Thiers with-
out comment.

'I he ,Siccle says—" After having read both mime.,
—ti at of Lord Palmerston, full of cquivoques, founding
its principal assertions upon conversations of which
there is no trace, and showing the Powers resolved on
pursuing a dangerous and absurd object by tortuous
paths ; and that of M. Thiers, reposing upon positive
facts, written documents, and official communications,
always tending to the same object, and that' which was
pointed out by good sense, via., the equity and interest
of nations—after having,we say, compared these two
documents, it is impossible not to acknowledge that
sincerity, as well as right, has always been on the side
of France."

The following is from the Courrier Francais:—

" Honest men of all nations, who will take the
trouble of examining and judging for themselves, will
find in the memorandum of France the most overwhelm-
ing refutation of the sophistry and the strange allegations,
to say the least, of Lord Palmerston. M. Thiers has
carried propriety and moderation' so far as even to pal-
liate the faults of his predecessors. On reading this
expose it would be supposed that the conduct of Mar-
sLal Soult had been a chef d'oeuvre of skill. We
will add, that the vacillating policy in which the Ca-
binet of the 12th of May then engaged France may
at least be avowed, for it was honest, whereas the
good faith of the Powers becomes very suspicious when
we look at facts. The details of this note admit of
controversy ; but what we may bestow unlimited praise
upon is the sentiment which inspired it. There is in it
a fine page on the grief which the world must feel
at the rupture of the alliance with England—an alliance
which has been sacrificed so lightly or so perfidiously.
But, at the same time, M. Thiers declares, with a firm-
ness which is truly noble and dignified, that we have
felt the offence which has been put upon us, and that it
no longer remains for us to forget it. France may be
humiliated, or at least insulted, for all that is required
for that is the foolish or brutal desire to act in that
manner ; but France cannot be made to accept insult
or humiliation. Peace is the most precious of all bene-
fits, but the honour of the nation is to be considered
before its interests."

The Debats and the Presse give the letter of M.
Thiers without comment. The Commerce is highly
dissatisfied with the moderation of the President of the
Council. It says—
" This document announces no resolution. It is
merely a speech addressed to the English Parliament.
M. Thiers enters the Ems of the opposition at the tail
of Mr. Hume. If M. Thiers had anything else to say,
why did he not say it whilst the Parliament was sitting ?
He proves that Lord Palmerston has lied ; this was not
very difficult now that the diplomatic documents are
known. Lord Palmerston ought to have been prevented
from lying by telling the truth before he had
an opportunity of speaking. Does it become the
Government of France to complain of an English
Minister before the British Parliament like a schoolboy ?
Is France unable to do herself herself justice ? If there
be a judge greater than herself, it is not the British
Parliament—this judge is Europe—it is the entire world. ,
M. Thiers has evidently only one object—to over- '
throw Lord Palmerston by a majority, as he overthrew
the Mole Ministry and that of the 12th of May. France
demanded from him a national manifesto ; he gives to
her a Parliamentary factum full of petty personalities.
All his warlike enthusiasm ends in a Parliamentary in-
trigue. The interests of France are not even men-
tioned in his expose." ' ,
' The National says—
" We did not hope to find the proud language worthy
of a man to whom the unhappy fate of France has
confided so important a post, but we did think that M.
Thiers, having been publicly and haughtily contradicted
by Lord Palmerston, would have found in wounded
pride some expressions to show that the heart of a
man is not rendered wholly callous by the portfolio
of a Minister. We were deceived. This long verbiage
is only the history a hundred times told and untold
of the negotiations of the treaty ; and from the two
official documents it results that diplomacy is a per-
petual falsehood. It is good enough to take note of
certain confessions made by M. Thiers. He admits
that he has been duped by England, and that if he had
been called upon to explain himself, he would not have
shown any great hesitation in joining the Four Powers.
He admits that the Treaty was signed e.v abrupt°,
without France being apprised of the intention of sign-
ing it, and therefore acknowledges that the Treaty was
a profound insult. He admits, also, that this new coa-
lition resembles those which for fifty years caused
the shedding of blood, and that the execution of this
Treaty weakens and endangers the Ottoman empire ;
and that France,
righysteoafdhoefr
poopwpoesrintgo
her yseleitothe shows
theoo us t
all onset with
this Treaty, has played the part of a Power which, being
powerless as to arms, seeks to calm her enemies by the
most degrading concessions."

Of the Capitole it is only necessary to state that it
takes the same view as the .National ; for, like the
National, it is furiously opposed to anything like mode-
ration. The Quotidienne makes no other remark upon
the expose than that " it does not justify in the slightest
degree the emphatic eulogium passed by M. Thicrs on
his own energy." The France merely gives an extract
from the document, and at the end of it says—" It is
not warlike ; it avows that the isolation of France is its
own act, but declares, in the name of France, that by
her threat to isolate herself she did not understand that
she condemned herself to inaction. After this declara-
tion," adds the France," what becomes of the reproach
against the parties who signed the Treaty of the 15th
of July, of having insulted and deceived France ?"