The Sun.
London, England, 1840-09-15 00:00:00

plied to, and France might, for aught we see,
have interfered, if it had been so inclined,
to procure an enlargement of the territory ceded to
him. But France has not so interfered, nor has
France, that we have heard, complained of the
terms offered by the SULTAN to MEHEMET ALI.
On the contrary, the French Consul and French
agents, according to the tumours of the day, have
admitted that the terms were as favourable to ME-
HEMET ALI as could be expected, and have re-
commended him to accept them. If the PACHA
have no right to complain of them, if France have
not complained of them, there can be no other pos-
sible subject of complaint on the part of either
France or the PACHA, but the manner in which
the Allies, at the requelst of the SULTAN, have
proceeded to carry the treaty into effect.
Let it be remembered, then, that when
the treaty was concluded, the Syrians were
in arms against the PACHA, and that part of the
treaty was no doubt franA with a view to meet that

contingency, not as it was supposed to exist, as the
Tory Journals have said, by Lord PONSONBY and
Lord PALMERSTON, but as it was represented to
be, by the Ministers and servants of the SULTAN.
The fact that the Syrians had revolted against the
PACHA justified the Four Powers in immediately
interfering to prevent the PACHA conquering this
part of the SULTAN'S dominions, and justified the
second article of the treaty. If then, there is no-
thing in the manner in which the treaty is to be ex-
cuted, and nothing in the treaty itself, which can by
any possibility justly give offence to France, sanc-
tion her preparations for war, and sanction the
violent language used by the Paris journals, the
English Ministers cannot in any way be held re-
sponsible for the apprehension and alarm which
those preparations and that bluster have generated.
Their conduct appears to have been straightforward
and honourable, and they are no more to be blamed
for the excitement which exists in Paris, than the
people of England are to be blamed when they de-
mand the repeal of the Corn-laws for the alarm
winch that excites in the aristocracy.

That the French Government is not to blame
for exciting the alarm by its preparations, and for
the tone taken by the Paris Ministerial press, we
will not assert. Though the treaty is now only
published, every word of its contents have no doubt
been known to France from the day it was drawn
up. France does not complain of having been
kept in the dark. The French Monarch, the French
Minister, and the French Ambassador here, have
been, we believe, for some weeks acquainted with
the forms of the treaty. They must have known
for that time that it contained nothing inimical to
France. For what purpose, then, has the
war passion been excited in France ? Why
has the Paris press, particularly the Ministerial
Journals, which are regularly salaried by the Go-
vernment, why have they been allowed and encou-
raged to stir up all the unsocial and anti-English
feelings of the French ? Why have they been allowed,
when a word from the French Government could
have directed their columns to another point, to
kindle passions which even that Government may
be unable to control, and which may involve all
Europe in war? Was it for the paltry purpose of
procuring the assent of the Parisians to fortify
Paris against the people, so that the Government
may more certainly enslave them ? We cannot
answer ; but now that we have seen the treaty
and know its objects, as they must for some time
have been known to the French Government, we
cannot acquit that Government of having, for some
unworthy purpose of its own, excited the passions,
and played on the patriotic and generous leelinizs of
the French people.

Both LOUIS PHILIPPE and M. TRIERS are
more clever than honest, and we can believe that
they are capable of lending themselves to a
scheme of this kind for the purpose of securing
their power. We maintain that the conduct
of the Four Powers in concluding the treaty,
does not afford the shadow of a justification for
the warlike preparations of the French Govern-
ment ; and ail Europe, including France, ought to
hold the French KING and his Ministers responsi-
ble for all the apprehension, and all the alarm, and
all the pecuniary loss which those preparations have
caused. From the first the English Ministers and
the English press have discountenanced the notion
that war was likely or possible, and the whole guilt,
therefore, of causing a general alarm belongs to the
Government and the press of France.

Different persons read public documents diffe-
rently. The Morning Chronicle agrees with us
that Commodore NAPIER did " not exceed his
duty in acting on the treaty, without waiting
for the expiration of the time allowed to AIEnEMET
ALI to determine whether he would accept the
conditions offered to him." The person, however,
who writes politics for the Morning Herald, from
the Royal Exchange, says :—" It is now suffi-
ciently evident, from a review of the articles,
that there is nothing whatever to justify
the course taken by Commodore NAPIER in
attempting to stir up a revolt in Syria." We
think it goes even that length. The SULTAN
claims Syria, the Four Powers agree to assist in
restoring it to him, and the Treaty declares that
they will immediately give orders to that effect to
the Commanders of their naval forces. Such or-
ders were no doubt given, and consistently with
them Commodore NAPIER might call on the Sy-
rians, and promise then help, to return under the
SULTAN'S Government. Whether these stipula-
tions of the Treaty be wise or not w e give no
opinion, because we have not at present the means
of judging, but Commodore NAPIER, we are quite
convinced, has only acted in conformity with them.
The Morning Post also says, going further than
the Herald—
The Treat• does not contain any justification or apo-
logy for the seizure of the Egyptian vessels by Com-
modore Napier, and the excitement of the Pacha's
troops to revolt, before the expiration of the term al.
lowed him to accept or reject the proposals of the Sultan.
How any person could make the first of these as-
sertions, after having read the Treaty, we can-
' not comprehend. The Treaty itself may not be
justifiable, but it contains a complete justification

of Commodore NAPIER for preventing all inter-
course between Syria and Egypt by sea. We know
nothing of the orders he has received, but he has
acted strictly in accordance with the spirit of the
treats. If that be an improper document letthose who
have framed it be visited with indignation ; but let
not the gallant men whose duty it is to obey orders,
be censured for the faults of their employers. To
condemn the conduct of our defenders in a heated
spirit of political partisanship, is to disgust them,
and expose the country to danger.

We learn from an advertisement in another part
of our paper, that the Anti-Corn-law League is
about to excite an electoral movement in opposition
to the bread-tax in every const►tuency in the king-
dom. Too soon and too earnestly that movement
cannot be begun, in order to convince the public
that the League is faithful to the high duty it has
taken on itself. If judiciously set about, as we
have no doubt it will be, we are inclined to believe,
from what we have heard from sonic parts of the
south of England, that many farmers, who will this
Year be much troubled to pay Corn-law rents, will
make common cause with OP repealers. We may
take the opportunity of adding that Mr, c041)&11