The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-12 00:00:00

o§uu.

LONDON:
MONDAY, JULY 12, 184].

Two of the Tory journal's., the Quartertf Re-
view and the London Standard,..have, within a
short period, expressed the unmitigated hostility
and hatred which the Tories continue to nourish
against the manufacturing and commercial popu-
lation. On Saturday, the Morning Post, follow-
ing their example, though snore cautious in its
language, evinced a similar aristocratic contempt
cf the townspeople. On the nomination for the
West Riding of Yorkshire, Lord MORPETH used
linguage to this effect
:
Hostility is deprecated with America. I echo Crom
my heart that philanthropic prayer, But to de-
vise new and additional guarantees for the harmony of
nations : we have enough of fancied and trivial causes for
war. Give rest and solemn motives for keeping peace.
I fear that peace will never he long secured by the argu-
ments of philosophers, or by the reasonings of political
economists, or by the praises of poets ; or Oven, I fear,
as the world goes now, by the precepts of divines. We
can't make the liOn lie down with the lamb, but We may
create a profitable trade between the woollens of LeeilS
and the sugars of the tropics. We can't make mankind.
beat their spears into ploughshares, but we can exchange'
the steel of Sheffield forteh harvests of Poland and the
flour of America. I believe statesmen will never be so
safe as when they act on general andt comprehensive
principles. I believe that the
whichm os effectualw way of
putting down the slave-trade,charged
.be proving to. the slave-owner
with encouraging, will
that the labour of slaves is dearer the. labour of
freemen. I believe that the best mode of banailslhing from
each, other's
the world the scourge of war, is to makeb countries
wish for each other's good, and . gain by
welfare. Commerce, which. made'sometnm2s sub-
ject of a sneer, is not in itself civilization—is not in itself
Christianity ; but I believe it is destined, in a great de-
gree, to be the channel and pioneer of both.
On this the Morning Post observed—
Now,. that we can exchange our manufa:otures for the
produce of. slave labour in America, or of serf labour
in Poland, although asserted so confidently, is a mere
assumption. It is a begging, of a conAderable part of
the question in controversy. But sup-posing it true, are
we to. consider alone these matters 'ol` barter, and to omit
altogether the high moral aul, national considerations
therewith connected ? Is this worthy of a statesman ?
Is it fit that a man of high station should seek an op-
portunity to sneer at phi!rysophy and poetry, and even
" the precepts of divines: ' in order to enhance by com-
parison the possible Pdva,ntages of traffic in woollens
and in steel ? We v,rant the advantages of such traffic,
and no doubt thr,y will find sufficient advocates. But
when a NoblentLan and a Minister speaks to the people,
we :nay well expect that while allowing to traffic its fair
share • of importance, he should not be the mouthpiece
of vulg7r and degrading sneers against the very noblest
which occupy the minds of men, and without which
auttior:ty loses all its dignity, and subordinatiwi all its
virtue.

Our Contemporary, thea, considers the contra-
dictory verbiage which goes under the name of
philosophy, the pretty prattle which youths lisp
and call it poetry, and the polemical sermons
which the ecclesiastical drum-thumpers shout
forth on Sundays, and at Exeter Hall meetings,
as the very noblest things which occupy the
minds of men, and compared to which the daily
tasks of clothing and feeding mankind, and ce-
menting peace between tbreign nations by com-
merce, are insignificant and worthless.

That sentiment, or a sentiment like it, fills the
minds of most of most of the writers for the
Tory press. They are the toadies of the aris-
tocracy. They sit just below the salt at the
social feast, and are always pandering to the illi-
beral sentiments and vices of the so-called great,
that they may share their factitious honours.
They are themselves quasi-poets and quasi-phi-

. _

losophers, and naturally praise their- own par..
suits, however worthless to the *brld, as the
noblest of all human aspirings.
Not a few of them areiiivines, or have been
educited by divines, and therefore they commit
the mistake of supposing that what, divines say,
however little consonant to reason, however
alloyed with superstition, and however ineffica-
cious in improving or restraining statesmen, is
the highest human wisdom.
We cordially agree with Lord IVIoRPETH, that
the " precepts of divines, as the world goes
now," are very little likely to influence the rela-
tions of States. In fact, divines are here the
servants of the State, and our statesmen never
consult them or their precepts on any question
of peace or war. But statesmen are the servants
of the industrious classes, the Government
is established in authority to protect the rights
of the people, and the proudest of our rulers
must, and do continually consult the commercial
relations of the country whenever a great ques-
tion of war or peace arises.
Moreover, those commercial relations have al-
ready done more to knit together foreign people
in the bonds of peace, and extinguish national
hostility, than all the precepts of all the so-called
" divines," from GREGORY THE GREAT to the
Archbishop of CANTERBURY, that ever lived.
Lord MORPETH is, therefore, correct in looking
to the extension of commerce as the means of
providing " additional guarantees of the har-
mony of nations;" and the Post only evinces the
thorough contempt and disdain it, and all its
pal ty, entertain for manufactures and commerce
and for all their beneficial effects, more nume-
rous than we can recount, when it condemns
the Noble Lord, and exalts philosophy and
the precepts of divines into far higher import-
ance than " the traffic in wool and in steel."

Sentiments of hostility to trade are common
to the whole Tory party. They are equally
manifest in the contempt of the Post and in the
fierce hatred of the Quarterly Review and the
Standard. Too many commercial and manu-
facturing communities, such as Leeds and Liver-
pool, have, however, justified the hatred and
contempt of the Tories by electing Tories to re-
present them. If by their means manufactures
should go still more to decay, and commerce
should fail to increase, they may reflect, with
some self-reproach, that they have lent their
sanction to the doctrine that commerce, and
manufactures may. be despised and sacrificed by
statesmen, if they only encourage philosopV,,
pcetry, and priestcraft.

Lord STANLEY declared a short time 13,fore
the Parliament was „dissolved, that he and Sir
ROBERT PEEL had for some time past freely
communicated all their views to each other, and
that they cordially agreed on all points. The
Noble Lord's speech at Lancaster was carefully
modelled, apparently, on Sir ROBERT PEEL'S
speech at Tamworth, and is to be considered of
additional importance as an index to the pdlicy.
which these political twins are to pursue. We
have their united authority for asserting that
they are bound firmly together, and though the
world thinks that difference of birth, of natural
inclination, and of bringing up, make them drag
different ways, they are now running down their
game in common.
All writers of any note on political economy,
and all persons who have reflected on the subject,
are of (minion that trade should be perfectly
free ; and scientific men will learn with astonish-
ment and dismay, that, under the Tory Govern-
ment, according to Lord STANLEY, free trade will'
be considered. only " a clap-trap." Political
sciefic6 Wilt weep to find that her noble preceptsic
the most pleasing of all her deductions, are to be
laughed at in the Tory Parlianient as mere clap-
traps, like the scenes of a theatre, to catch the
applause of an audience. ..

Lord STANLEY, after he had ridiculed free

trade as a clap-trap, ridiculed the small reduc-
don prcposed in the Sugar duties. He did not
promise to make the reduction greater when he
is Colonial Secretary, but he would withhold it
altogether, because it is so very trifling. At
the same time that he describes the reduction as
a saving of a fraction of a penny in a pound of
sugar, he also describes it as transferring the
entire trade in this article to foreigners, and
stopping the cultivation of sugar in our colonies.
The two conflicting statements are made to suit
separate purposes, and the Noble Lord is too

much carried away by the stream of his own
vituperation to attempt a reconciliation between
them. When he wishes to heap ridicule on the
Ministers, he asserts that the reduction is only
the fraction of a penny; when he wishes to
terrify his auditors, he describes the paltriest of
all changes as plunging in ruin our flourishing
colonies. He is one of the'greatest masters of
assertion that ever spoke.
The Noble Lord having so satisfactorily to
himself disposed of the Sugar question, and de-
monstrated. that the Tories will not lower the
discriminating duty, proceeded to attack the
Corn-law abolitionists: Here are some of :his
words:—

ou are told that you are to get the same quantity
of bread for a shilling for which you now pay 18d.,
that you will purchase the 41b. loaf for 6d. for which
you now pay 9d., and that this will be affected by the
reduction in the price of corn. Now, the price of corn
is by no means the single element in the price of bread.
I don't suppose that the miller will Ivor-1(41'0r less than
he did before—(Hear that the baker' will work for
less than he did before, or that the shopkeeper will
content himself with a smaller profit. All these items
remain the same as before, and they constitute one-third
of the entire amount. Suppose four quarters of corn
at 60s. a quarter, cost 12/., they will cost something
more than 181. when made into bread. As, then, the
whole reduction must' be effected' in the price of the
corn in the first instance, or in the 121. item, if they
reduce,
.the price of bread one-third, it follows as a ne-
necessary consequence, that it must be effected by a re-
ductiOn of fully one-half in 'the price of corn, or a re-
duction from 60s. to 30s. per quarter.—(Loud cries of
" near.") Suppose the farmer and landlord to have
this commodity, so reduced in price, produce an income.
reduced by one-half, without anv alteration in the quan-
tity of land under cultivation, hOw can the predictions of
these " free trade" prophets be fulfilled,—" 50 per cent.
reduction in the price of corn, and neither landlord nor
farmer injured l"—(Hear.)

Of course, all Lord STANLEY'S hearers laughed
and roared prodigiously at this fluent wit. A
more candid man would hare guarded,them from
anoerroneous coneusion, by adding, that as the
price of corn fell less capital would be required
by the miller and the baker to carry on their
business, and that a less sum of profit, though
not a.al9yyey rate, would' tome out of every loaf.
At the same time, both the miller and the baker
would gain on the whole by carrying on a much
larger business with the same capital. Strange
as it may seem
LfooorddoSiTtnimo•.EV's party optics,
it is true that if tt
influences the priceofmmunity, which
many
other things, be ob-
tained at a less cost,
whether that arise from irn-
proved methods of Cultivation, or from bringing
fbod from more fertile countries, the price may
be reduced, even as much as 50 per cent., and
both the landlord and farmer, far from suffering,
isSeinoucentr7,l4.so,
ptle7er
m a
eye boefn efoflit)dbyh-
asth efarlieednu citnio nth.
price
cent. in spite of the law that was made to keep
up wheat to 80s. per quarter. With that fall
cultivation has been much extended, and both
landlords and farmers have benefited by the
reduction. The obvious reason is, that the food
is obtained at a less cost, which is a benefit to the
whole nation. It is quite plain that there are
many more things in a Corn-law than ever were
dreamed of by Lord STANLEY. But listen again
to the Noble Lord :

Suppose the rent paid for a farm to be 100/. a-year, and
the produce 500/. The produce becomes reduced to 250!.
by the proposed change. The landlord may lose 501. out
of his rent—nay, he may lose 75/. ; but who is it that
must lose the difference in the value of the produce, re-
duced from 500/. to 2.50/.?—(Enthusiastic cheering.)
Who is to make up this loss of positive value in fixed ca-
pital embarked by the farmer?—(Hear, bear.)
Who indeed? What fixed capital does the farmer
invest in the land? He invests only the labour he
extorts from the half-starved labourer, against'
whom, by having the supply of food, he has a
monopoly. But suppose that all the farmer's ex-
penses be lowered in the same ratio as the fall
in the price of produce, suppose that the 2.50/.
Ivill buy as much as the 500/., will the situation

of the farmer be deteriorated': Now, it is ac,

;•emy to make one assertion as the! other, and we
assert, on very good authority, that, by the re-
duction of expense for seed-corn, feed of working
cattle, &c. &c., the farmer will gain more by the
reduction of the cost of producing food, of which
he is, by himself and by his servants, a great con-
sumer, than he will lose by the fall in the selling
price of that part of his produce which he carries
to market. We beg, then, to inform this really
very ignorant, but really very vivacious and
blustering Lord, that the fixed capital embarked
by the farmer in the soil will obtain its due re•
muneration after the abolition of the Corn-laws,
as well as at present.

Lord STANLEY goes on to assert, " as an un-
doubted fact, that as the price of corn falls the
land will go out of tillage." He had not studied
the Tamworth oration with care when he said
that, because one of Sir R. PEEL'S arguments was
that cultivation was much extended, though the
price of corn has fallen. But on what ground
does Lord STANLEY make the assertion? The
fact is that as the price of corn fhlls the farmer,
whose liabilities remain the same, is induced to
extend his cultivation, to be able to meet them.
If, with the fall of price, manufactures extend,
and the demand for food increases, the farmer
extends his cultivation; and we must again telt
Lord STANLEY that he utters the merest, most
ignorant, and common-place twaddle, with a
grave face, as if it were divine truth collected
and sifted by the sages who have devoted
nights and days to political science.

On what ground Lord STANLEY, the Quarterly
Reviewer, and a host of other equally competent
persons, conclude that " whole districts," or
" 2,000,000 acres," will at once be thrown out
of cultivation by the abolition of the Corn-laws,
even if that were total and immediate, we can-
not conceive. The authority generally referred
to by them; is a statement by some Lord RUSSELL
to the. farmers of•Bedtbrdshire. We have a great
respect for the name, but we were not aware that
his Lordship is a great authority in political eco-
nomy, and we day the assumption. The sup-
position is, that- a quarter of English-grown
corn will be thrown out of the market for every
quarter of foreign. corn imported. But every
quarter of foreign corn must be paid for, and the
permission to impart it, now so unjustly with-
held, would of neceS.sity set the manufacturers
at work to pay for it. It is probable they would,
in the first instance; produce too much, or set
too many hands to Work ; but the permission to
[import corn, would infallibly make them pro-
duce more manufactitres than at present. Now,
the whole number of fresh hands they set to
work, would generate an additional demand-for
food,, over and above the present demand. As
this additional demand exceeded, as it might, the
quantity of corn imported, equalled it, or fell
short of it, more land might be cultivated
at home. No alteration might be made in
the extent of the cultivation, or some land
might be thrown 6ut of cultivation. We
beg leave to inform Lord STANLEY, who is really
most ignorant of what he is most assured, that
his assumption of Nthole districts to be thrown
out of cultivation, by lowering the cost of culti-
vating them, is as arrant nonsense as ever entered
the head even of an arrogant, self-willed Lord.
A few years ago Lord STANLEY harrassed the
poor tithe-payers of Ireland by sending flying ar-
tillery, or the waggon train, to carry off their
crops. The same Noble Lord had no "repugnance
to coerce the whole 'lrish people to obedience to
his own arrogant opinions. And that same unre-
lenting Lord, in defence of the starvation law,
which he acknowledged puts money into his
pocket, had the impudence—we can give his un-
blushing assurance no other name—to say that
free traders never take into account the cruelty
of breaking through all the old. habits, the hard-
ship of outraging all the long-cherished feelings
of'the people.-- Cruelty indeed, to rescue the
landlOi•ds'.s,erfs,- and the landlords' tax gatherers,
from a degrading dependence ! But the free
traders do not, desire any such thing. They de-
sire justice, they demand that industry should
not be interfered with, and if from obtaining justice
the evil consequences which Lord STANLEY sup-
poses would follow, the blame be on those who
like him commit the wrong, not on those who
seek its redress. In one point Lord STANLEY'S
speech coincides marvellously with Sir RO-
BERT PEEL'S. Both labour to defend the
injustice; both bring forward all possible argu-
ments to support the Corn-laws, and both, there-
fore, convince us that the Tory Administration
is to be formed on the principle of combining all
the monopolists to rob and plunder the people
by means of the law. When the Tories have
made the law an object of universal abhorrence,
how will they enforce obedience? That is a very
important question, which they ought to answer
before they take office on the principle•of corn.
bitting to maintain a great system of lega
plunder.

The second part of she correspondence rela•
_ _

Live to the affairs of the Levant has just been
published, with a view to its being laid before
Parliament. It embraces the official corre-
spondence of the Ministers and agents of the
Great Powers on the Eastern Question from the
15th of July, 1840, when the Treaty of London
was signed, till the 2d of November, being three
days posterior to the date of the downfall of the
Tx lERS Cabinet. This correspondence will es-
tablish some facts very mortifying to some of our
Ministerial Contemporaries, and not a little
galling to the Tory traducers of the Govern-
ment. To begin with the Ministerialists. The
Morning chronicle has at this moment a corre-
spondent at Constantinople who repeatedly as-
serted that everything we stated of the enmity
borne by Lord PONSONBY to the Pasha of EGYPT
was false, and the Editor of that Journal has
more than once in a general way repeated that
assertion. We were not then at lib2rty to quote our
authority for the opinion we expressed, but we knew it
to be too good to allow us to pay any attention to the
contradictions of the Chronicle, though worded in such
a way as to appear to emanate from the Foreign-office.
From the correspondence before us, it appears that on
the sth of September, 1840, MEHEMET ALt, alarmed at

the success of the Allies on the coast of Syria, informed
the Consuls of the Four Powers at Alexandria, through
SAKI BEY, that "he had accepted • the inheritance of
Egypt out of deference to the decisions of the Four Powers,
and to the orders of his benefactor the SULTAN ; but with
regard to Syria his non-acceptance not 'being a refusal,
his Highness considering his numerous services to the
Ottoman Empire, is desirous of submitting a request on
this. Subject, as well to his lawful Sovereign as to the
Four Powers • and he flatters himself that his Excellency.
RIFATI3.Ev (the Turkish Envoy) as well as the Consuls
of the Four Powers, will have the goodness to communi-:
cate it to their respective COurts." As the fleet was not;
giVen up, and the surrender unconditional, the Consuls
refused to receive this_communication, and only five days
later we find Lord PONSONBY writing in the following
furious strain to Lord PALMERSTON :

We received on the 7th the accounts of what has taken place
at Alexandria between Mehemet Ali Rifat Bey. and the Con.
suls of the Four Powers. Your LordshipC has all this matter
before you, and I have only to state that Rechid Pacha un-
derstands the reply of Mehemet Ali to be a refusal. His Ex-
cellency sent his private secretary, Nedim Effendi, to me this
morning, to make known the contents of a copy of a letter
from Mehemet Ali to the Grand Vizier, the letter itself not
having been sent from Alexandria. The contents are a mere
repetition of the old story—application for the possession of
alt Syria, and boastings of services rendered to the Sublime
Porte, and the often-repeated declarations of undeviating
loyalty and devotion of Mehemet Ali to the Sultan.
Nedim talked of affairs, and told me Rechid Pacha desired
to depose Mehemet Ali. I desired him to assure Rechid Pacha
that I thought the measure not only advisable but necessary,
and that I wes in correspondence with my colleagues on the
subject.

Last night 1 had a long conversation with the Internuncio,
and after examining the question with me, his Excellency
seemed to concur in my view of the necessity for depriving
Mehemet Ali of his post of Governor of Egypt; and his Ex-
cellency had the goodness to undertake to communicate with
our colleagues this day, if I would write a note to his Ex-
cetlency stating my opinion, and referring to the conversa-
tion we had then been engaged in. I have done so this day.
and will report the result if 1 learn it in time for the estafette.
I observed to the Internuncio (and I had previously held
similar language to Al. de Titow and Count t‘onigsmarek),
that unless Mehemet Ali be deprived of the post he holds. by
the authority of the Sultan, there must be incongruity and
confusion in the state of affairs. Mehemet Ali, being the
legal Governor of Egypt, has the right to issue orders to the
Egyptians, who, on their part, have no right to examine into
the tendency of those orders, and. they may be, and will be,
directed against the Sultan's authority, so that the authority
of the Sultan is to be employed against the authority of the
Sultan, and the obedience of the subject is to be called for to sup-
port disobedience to that Power which they (the subjects) are
ordered-to obey.
The deposition of Mehemet Ali is necevary to place a block-
ade upon as proper footing. It will be something worse than
absurd for the Sultan to order a blockade of his own port, that
port wing continued by the Sultan under the Government of

the man whose conduct is the real or establishing the
blockade. And there ma) possibly arises.2l Of difficulty with
foreign nations from the strange tiature and novelty of the
blockade.

The Übnvention provides for the present suppression by force
of the transporting by sea, troops and illilitarY.,stbrO from
Egypt into Syria, and that verk hat b*eik peif6rmed. Mehe-
met Ali, in Egypt, 14.6 Icingier anything to fear from the
Allies, acid. ntc.Y rest quiet there, exempt from the pressure of a
Weltade which would probably ruin him. The Sultan alone
can order a blockade, and I have shown that he cannot order
one consistently with common srnse or with his Own. dignity,
unless he shall depose Illehterillt
There are etMr and various reasons why the deposition should
take place, and one very powerful, which is, the vast importance
attached by the Turkish nation to a solemn act of the sort done
by the Sultan. This was shown the other day in the ease of
the deposition of the Pachas of Syria, which wat held to be
almost a decision of that question, because people are accus-
tomed to believe that such a formal exercise of the Sultan's
power implies a confidence on his part in his possession of the
means as well as the right to execute the law.
The refusal of Mehemet Ali to accept the Convention is not
expressed in words alone. His acts have declared it, for he has
not delivered the fleet to the Sultan's envoy ; he has not given
orders to restore Syria, both having been made in the Conven-
tion nominatively conditions to be observed by Mehemet Ali
within tile period of time therein specified.
The Turks will in a very few days have 10,000 regular troops
ready to be sent to reinforce the 5,600 men already gone to
Cyprus. The bubble of Mehemet Alt's threats to march lbra•
him's army to the gates of Constantinople has burst • and it is
evident that Ibrahim and Solyman have enough to do to main-
tain themselves in security in Syria.
The Porte ought to take away the chance upon which Me-
hemet Ali relies for his escape from his present petit. The
Porte has nothing to fear, and It is not exposed any longer even
to a threat of attack ; and there is no sort of domestic danger,
for all people have either sided with it, or have abandoned in
despair the active support of Mehemet Ali. But this state of
domestic affairs may be altered if the Porte exhibits signs of
fear, and this is another motive for the immediate deposition of
Mehemet Ali.

Tho intrigues of Lord PONSoNEY Welt so Par success-
ful that the rierketttict of MEHEMET ALI was solemnly
pronounced by the SULTAN, and read in the Mosque of
San Sophia by the SHEIK-UL-ISLAM. His Lordship ap-
pears to have felt satisfied that he had completely ex-
tinguished the PACHA. But he was not sutiered to re-
main long under such a delusion: Ott the 15th of Oc-
tober Lord PALIkIERISTON addressed the following de-.
spatch to Lord PONSONBY, in which his Lordship is
quietly informed that he must sot about undoing all that
he had done against the PACHA*I—•
Her Majesty's Government having taken into consideration
the act by which the Sultan deprived Mthemet Ali of the Pa-
ehalic of Egypt ; the bearings of that act upon the present
state of pending questions, and the course which it may be ex-
pedient to take thereupon, have invi'ed the Representatives of
Austria, Prussia, and Russia, at this Court, to ribmit to their
respective Governments, that, undoubtedly, there is much
force in the reasons which, according to your Excellmey's
reports, induced the Sultan to take this step ; and that while,
• n the one hand, this measure in no degree prevents the Sul-
tan from reinstating Mehemet Ali, if he should sreedity make
his submission to his Sovereign ; on the other hand, it may
operate as a powerful instrument of a moral coercion upon
Mehemet Ali, by making him aware, that if the contest be-
tween him and his Sovereign should be prolonged, and if the
issue of that contest should be untavourable to him, he might
lose all by his too obstinate resistance.
That in this view, and in order to make the recent exerese
of the sovereign authority of the Sultan useful towards effecting
an early and satisfactory settlement of pending questions, it is
the opinion of her Majesty's Government, filet it would be ex-
pedient that the Representatives of the Four Powers at Con-
stantinople should be instructed to proceed to the Turki.h Mi-
nister, and to state to him that their respective Governments,
in pursuance of the stipulations of the 7th Article of the &pa-
rate Act annexed to the treaty of 15th of July, beg strongly to
recommend to the Sultan, that if Mehemet Ali should at an
early period make his submission to the Sultan, and shou'd
agree to restore the Turkish fleet, and to withdraw his troops
from the whole of Syria, from Adana, Candia, and the Holy
Cities, the Sultan should not only reinstate Mehemet Ali as
Paella of Egypt, but should also give him an hereditary tenure
in that Pachatic, according to the conditions sprcifled in the
Treaty of July, but liable, of course, to forfeiture by any infrac-
tion of those conditions on the part of Mehemet Ali or his suc-
cessors.

Her Majesty's Government have reason to hope that this
suggestion wit' meet the concurrence of the Governments of
Austria, Prussia, and Russia, and your Excellency will accord-
ingly take the steps pointed out in this despatch, as soon as
your colleagues shall have received corresponding instructions.
If the Sultan should, as her Majesty's Government cannot
doubt, consent to act upon this advice when tendered to him
by his Four Allies, it would be expedient that he • hould take
immediate steps for making his gracious intentions, in this re-
spect, known to Mehemet Ali; and your Excellency and Sir
Robert Stopford should afford the Turkish Government any
facilities which it may require for this purpose.
This, we think, for ever settles the question as to the
personal hostility of Lord PONSONBY to the PAcHA.
Henceforth the readers •of the Chronicle, and of the
Globe,' which repeated the statements of the Chronicle,
will know what value to set upon their semi-official con-
tradictions of the statements of better-informed journals.
Tile portion of this correspondence which will annoy
the Tories, relates to the contradiction which it gives
to the pompous war preparations of France, and the
inferiority of our naval strength. Early in October
Count WALEWSKI, M. TRIERS'S friend, who had been
sent to bully the Porte, had some of his gasconading
remarks reported to Lord PALMERSTON by Lord PON-
SONBY. The answer of the noble Foreign Secretary is
dated the 27th of that month, and contains the fol-
lowing passage. " I have to instruct your Excellency
to state to the Porte that the language of Count WA-
LEWSKI, reported in your note of the 7th of October,
was only meant to intimidate. France will offer no
armed support to MEIIEMET ALt, because, by so doing
she would place herself in collision with the Four
Powers ; and neither her army nor her navy are strong
enough for such a collision. By sea France is inferior
to England alone ' • but much more so to England and
Russia united. By land she has not, with all her recent
armaments, more than her full peace establishment
under arms, and out of that force she is obliged to keep
60,000 men in Algiers ; and therefore she has not, and
could not, for many months to come, have a disposable
force to undertake a war against all Germany and Russia.
But the retirement of M. TmEns and his colleagues from
office is a pledge to Europe that France is not going to
make war in defence of MEHECIET ALL All these con-
siderations; however, ought only to be additional mo-
tives with the Porte for making the best use of the time
present, and for employing every possible effort to bring
the war in Syria to a speedy and successful termination."
All comment upon this extract is unnecessary. It is,
now evident that Lord PALMERSTON early penetrated
the blustering character of M. TRIERS.

The Paris Journals of Thursday for the most part de-
vote their leading columns to the insurrectionary move-
ments now taking place in the different European pro-
vinces of the Ottoman Empire. The Republican Papers,
such as the National and the Siecle, are in favour of the
insurgents, but the Debats, and the organs of the
Government generally, regard them as rebels against
the authority of the Porte. As this question is one
of the gravest importance, we shall take an early oppor-
tunity of expressing at some length our opinions upon
it, for which space is wanting in our columns of to-day.
Whatever the advocates of Established Governments
may urge, we are prepared to prove that Turkey has
lost her hold upon Europe.
An express from Paris, of Friday's date, with the
latest continental news will be found in another column.
Subjoined are extracts from Thursday's papers :
Ws find the subjoined news from Aden in the Malta Times..
—" The intelligence from this place (3d inst.) is of a very
aatlsfactory nature. It was rapidly improving and increasing
in population ; the number of inhabitants, including the garri-
son, amounting to 12,000. The fortifications were progressing,
roads making, and many other improvements going on. In
less than five years it will be the largest town in Arabia, and
probably the richest. The Arabs, even since this last unsuc-
cessful attack in July, have remained perfectly quiet, and bring
plentiful supplies. The troops were exceedingly healthy, and
the Europeans more so than in any part of India where they
are stationed."

Our readers know that according to one of the clauses of
the Convention, concluded on the sth of April, 1640, between
France and the Grand Duchy of Baden, annual conferences
are to be held,, alternately at Strasburgh and Carlsruhe, be-
tween the engineers of the two States, for the purpose of com-
municating to each other the projects for regulating the limits
of the two countries. It is announced that the first meeting is
to take place this year in the month of October at Carlsruhe ;
the matters which are to be the subject of the conference is
already prepared. Another object of this meeting is to lay
down a general system for regulating the courses of the river.
Mbniteur.

The Toulonnais of the Bth of July publishes a private
letter from Algiers of the 28th of June, in which we find the
following passages :
" The troops departed again on the 25th, as we announced to
you. We has c received no news of them either directly or itt
directly. General Bugeaud, too, does not send us any infor.-
mation, and we do not know where he is. Be is, however,
expected very soon at Algiers, where certainly no triumphant
:reception wiil be offered him. Our population is very discon-
tented, and daily growing'poorer. Trade does not extend. he-
, yond the gates of the City ; in short, we are uneasy, and. un-
happy.
" Our hopes are incessantly turned to the future, which ap-
pears to us under gloomy colours. Thus we shall ecntinue to
vegetate, unless, as we are made to hope, a civil Government
shall soon take the place of that which is a heavy burden on
us. Some names are already mentioned, and that of M.
Remurat is at the head of the list."—Le Commerce.

4 4• - ,
ot
A o's ; "174 L
44
" • "1:,4 '