The Sun.
London, England, 1846-10-17 00:00:00

dispatched a memorial to Lord JoHN RUFSELL on
this absorbing topic. It is powerfully drawn up.
They express their gratitude for the measures of
relief lately granted by Parliament, and the confident
hope they entertained of reaching without material
injury the end of the three years, during which duties
were to be leviable upon foreign corn. It is then
solemnly observed, that " the dispensations of DIVINE
PROVIDENCE have, however, interposed, and, in the
opinion of your memorialists, have thrown upon the
Government further awful responsibilities." The
following cutting expose of the " conflicting and cruel
anomalies" of our system cannot fail of its due im-
pression :

"Prayers are directed to be offered up in our churches
to have those evils averted, and yet one of our laws
enacts, that whatever may be the price of wheat, the
smallest duty to be paid upon the in:port of it shall be
4s. per quarter ; another law decrees that food brought
into the country by certain vessels shall not be eaten at
all by our people ; whilst a third declares that nothing
shall be used in our distilleries but that which would
serve as food."
The Town Council of Sheffield have followed the ex-
ample of Manchester, Dundee, and other places, and
actually (which was not strictly legal) suspended a
standing order, with the view of losing no time
in memorialising her MAJESTY in Council to
favour immediate free trade in corn. 'We
trust these philanthropical demonstrations will
have their due weight. From no man more
than the present Premier have we a right to
anticipate that the prayers of these influential peti-
tions will be readily acceded to. His position is un-
doubtedly a responsible one, and we quite concede
that nothing short of an imperious necessity could
justify any deviation from the terms of the great
settlement effected by Parliament in relation to the
corn-laws. But that dread necessity has arisen, and
it is now too late, such is the national urgency
of the question, to summon the Legislature to take
the initiative in relaxing their recent law. Lord
JOHN RUSSELL, as well as Mr. COBDEN, deprecated
the " rag of protection " which Sir R. PEEL offered
the obdurate landed proprietors, and only offered, as
we believe, not from a conviction of its being free from
objection, but simply with the object of enhancing,
the chances of passing his great measure into law ; and
now that "the dispensations of DIVINE PROVIDENCE
have interposed," to expose its futility in point of wis-
dom, and its excessive cruelty towards the helpless
poor, we trust that our Prime Minister, who pre-
dicted these things, will not hesitate to apply the
needful remedy. Only yesterday we mentioned that
" famine and crime were haunting us on all sides,"
and this morning brings us the sad intelligence of
four deaths from starvation in Ireland. Two have
fallen victims to famine at Castlehaven, one in
Macroom, and another in Skibbereen. Deplorable
facts, these, to go forth to the world, that within the
far-famed British dominions people have suffered the
excruciating and fatal pangs of hunger, and which
might never have been their miserable end had not
selfish laws precluded them from participating in the
enlarged bounties of nature so prodigally scattered
over the various quarters of the earth. It seems almost
a mockery to offer up our prayers in churches, that
we be shielded from the aggravated calamities by
which we are surrounded, till we have first squared
our laws with the true principles of universal charity.
If we would deserve to be emancipated from the
cumulative horrors of pestilence, famine, and death,
we must draw close the bonds of civilisation with
every country, keep wide open our harbours to the
shipping of every clime, and not presume by con-
ceited laws of prohibitions to disturb the reciprocal
interchange between enlightened and enterprising
countries of the different bounties with which Pnovx-
DENCE has severally blessed them.

The convention of the noblesse of Livonia, at pre-
sent assembled at Riga, has been engaged for ten
days in discussing the new constitution for the
peasantry, proposed in the spring by the special corn-
mittee at St. Petersburgh. '

The POPE on the 7th visited the towns of Albano
and Castelgandolfos, and returned to Rome in the
evening. His progress both going and returning was
a perfect triumph.
A letter from Rome of the Bth states, that in con-
sequence of the systematic hostility manifested by
the Congregation of Cardinals to the reforms pro-
posed by Cardinal Gizzi, the POPE had replaced that
body by a Consulta di Stab°, formed of the Under-
Secretaries of State, of the prelates occupying at
Rome the highest administrative fuections, and
several distinguished lay members. A weekly paper,
called the Contemporaneo, was on the point of ap-
pearing under the auspices of Cardinal Gizzr. M.
BALIIITI had been appointed Bishop of IMOLA, the
see lately filled by the PorE.

1 Madrid papers of the 10th have arrived. They are
filled with details of the preparations for the royal
nuptials, which were celebrated at ten o'clock on the
night of that day. Mr., BULWER, who had been in-
vited to attend the ceremony of the signature of the
marriage contracts, had formally declined to attend.
"It is proper, however, to state," says the corre-
spondent of the Journal des Debats, " that Mr. Buz,-
wax excused himself with the greatest possible polite-
ness on the ground of the particular circumstances
which impose upon him the reserve to which he has I
confided himself, at the same time declaring his re-
spectful devotedness to the KING of the FEENCII and
the Royal Family of France."

On the evening before there was a grand dinner
given at the French Ambassador's. In the published
list of the guests we do not observe the name of the
Duke of VALENCIA (Narvaez). Before the dinner,
the Duke DE bIONTPENSIER presented to M.
IsTuarrz,'in the name of the KING, the grand cordon
of the Legion of Honour, and the cross of grand
officer to the, Duke D'OssuNA and M. DE PEZUELA,
Captain-General of New Castille.
The Clamor Public° states that on the 9th Mr.
BULWEN returned from Aranjuez, and that before he
left Madrid for that place he presented to the Spanish
Government a new protest against the consequences
of the marriage of the INFANTA with the Duke DE
MONTPENSIER. In this note, adds the Clamor, the
displeasure with which the British Government be-
holds the marriage is strongly set forth. The same
journal, on the authority of letters from Valencia and
Saragossa, states that a Carlist band has made its
appearance in the Muestrazgo.
The 10th being the fete day of the QUEEN, the '
Boise was closed.

We have received the Paris papers of Thursday.
The Journal des Dads, in a very temperately
written article on the subject of the Genevese revolu-
tion, denies that it has, ever manifested any sympathy
for the Jesuits. It expresses its regret at the revolu-
tion, but from the tone adopted it would appear that
it is not the intention of the French Ministry to inter-
fere actively in the affairs of Switzerland.
On the subject of the Montpensier marriage we
find the following reply given by the National to the
assertions of the Court organ, the Presses—.

_ -
" The Presse has noted our declaration that if the
English Government had conducted itself with bad faith
in the negotiations relative to the marriage, we shOuld
have been eager and happy to accuse it, as we have
always done. Neither the National or the Presse
have certainly been consulted upon these negotiations,
but the Prase has received and published a version,
which we believe to be entirely incorrect both in
facts and dates. We beg that it will answer the
following questions:—ls it true, that at the first
interview at Eu, which took place in 1842, there was
no mention of the marriage of the Infanta, but only of
that of the Queen ? Is it true, that, far from presenting
the sons of Don Francisco de Paula as candidates, M.
Guizot named only Trapani and Montemolin, and that
Lord Aberdeen brought forward the two Infantes ? Is it
true that this first conversation was resumed in England,
with this concession, that it would not cramp the in-
fluence of France to promote the preference of Trapani,
provided Spain retained her freedom of action ? If the
first point is certain, it has been wrongfully stated, first,
that the French Government wished to be adopted as
the best of all plans, the union of the two Infantas
with their cousins ; and, secondly, that' Lord Aber-
deen was completely in accord with M. Guizot on
this point. The second interview at Eu took place
in October, 1845. Then it was that the question of
the marriage between the Infanta and the Duke de
Montpensier was first raised. Was it proposed that this
marriage should be consummated at the same time as
that of the Queen ? Did not Lord Aberdeen conclude
his opinions with the following phrase This mar-,
riage would be attended with fewer objections if the suc-
cession to the Queen were assured by her giving birth
to one or two children ? Did not M. Guizot take the
indirect assent with these conditions and in these terms?

if this be certain, it is, consequently untrue to say that
he combination which is now effected had the consent of
.he late English Cabinet, since the marriages are simul--
Aneous, and Queen Isabella is without a direct heir to
throne of Spain. The Presse has since stated that

M. Guizot communicated to Lord Palmerston the
verbal conventions of which wo have just spoken, trad
asked whether he accepted them. These communi-
cations, it says, were made as far back as the month
of May last. This is a singular date, for the Whig
Ministry did not enter upon its functions until the be-
ginning of July, and the marriage was concluded on
August 28. What passed during these six weeks ?
What guarantee were the communications of M. Guizot
attended with ? Was the marriage of the Infanta men-
tioned in the letters to M. Jarnac, or that of the Queen
only ? Was it not towards the end of July that this
first letter was sent ? It has been said that Lord Pal-
merston gave no answer to this letter, nor to a second,
which reached him a few days afterwards. Is this cer-
tain ? Had not Lord Normanby an interview, on this
occasion, with M. Guizot in the name of the British
Ministry ? Was he not charged to declare that the
affair of the marriage required more reflection ;
that the choice of the Count de Trapani as a candi-
date having been unfortunate, Spain should be con-
suited on that of Don Francisco ; that, as the Cortes
was about to be renewed according to the terms
of the constitution, it appeared to be more proper that
their meeting should be waited for ; that it might be in-
ferred from what had been said by M. Isturitz to Mr.
Bulwer, that there was a certain mistrust of the new
candidate proposed ; that, in fine, the Infante Don
Henry appeared to be more likely to insure the happi-
ness of the Queen of Spin ? We cannot warrant the
correctness of these particulars; but was there not in fact
an answer from Lord Palmerston ? It would be, there-
fore, wrong to assert that from his silence an intrigue
was inferred. In fine, are we to be told what is the
date of the last letter from M. Guizot, announcing that
if England did not explain herself clearly and distinctly
on what was agreed upon with the preceding Cabinet,
France would act as she thought best for her own in-
terests? Was not this letter of August dated the 24th,
while the of eir was concluded at Madrid in the night of
the 28th ? Thus, as bile M. Guizot was calling upon
Lord Palmerston to explain himself, he was playing his
cards at Madrid in such a way as to trick Lord Palmer-
ston, and bring about the marriage. This certainly was
very cleverly done ; but if our facts and dates are cor-
rect, however much M. Guizot may boast of his address,
can he at the same time boast of having been honest,
sincere, and without reproach, AS the Presse has de-
clared ? We affirm nothing. We do not nor can we
know if what has been related to us has really taken
place. If we hare been deceived so much the better, and
we shall be able to resume with the deeper conviction
the confidence which will make us happy in combatting
with the utmost energy that British perfidy, against
which we preserve the most lively, the most immortal
animosity."
The Constitutionnel thus comments on the utter
selfishness manifested by the Guizot Administration
throughout their whole proceedings :
" A difference remains to be settled between the,Eng •
lish and French Governments. Will England permit,
without saying another word, the final accomplishment
of the marriage which she has endeavoured to prevent?
Evidently not. If our information from England is
exact, it is probable that the indirect offer made by our
Government of the renunciation of the Duke de Mont-
pensier for himself and his descendants to the throne of
France will not be accepted. It is also probable that the
renunciation of the Infanta to the crown of Spain will
not be insisted" upon, for that would be immediate
war. But our readers must expect to see a
note addressed direct to France by the Eng-
lish Government, to repeat all the reservations
made in that already transmitted to the Spa-
nish Government. These reservations, it is well known,
refer principally to the hypothesis of Queen Isabella
happening to die without children, and the Duchess de
Montpensier being in consequence called on to ascend
the throne of Spain, and to transmit to her descendants
the inheritance of that Crown. England will declare
herself beforehand to be fully determined to oppose any
such succession. Even should the English Ministry
confine itself to this protest and these reservations, it
would be a serious matter, even for the present. It
throws on the politics of Europe a permanent doubt,
which cannot cease except when the Queen of Spain
shall have had several children. Until that time our
relations with England, the probability of peace or
of war, and the safety of the Spanish monarchy will
undergo all the variations attendant on the health of
a young woman and of her first child. Suppose that
one year—two years, should pass ever without the
Queen of Spain having any hope of an heir, during
that time mutual distrust must increase between
England and France, peace becomes problematical, and
the prolonged incertitude places in peril interests which
require that the future should be reckoned on with cer
tainty. Is the perpetuity of a difference, the solution of
which is entrusted to chance, a good situation to exist
between two nations? Free nations hare secured them-
selves by their very constitution from the most objec-
tionable chances of the monarchical succession ; they
have resolved to enjoy as much as possible only its ad-
vantages. And behold how, for a petty interest, family
discords, family intrigues, family arrangements, have ren-
dered subordinate, precisely as was the case one or two
centuries back, the political relations of three constitu-
tional countries—France, England, and Spain—to
the birth, the health, and the physical condi-
tion of a child yet to be born ! Meantime our
ministers and our ambassadors have obtained, as
the clear and. possible result of their great triumph,
a very cool reception for the Princes in Spain, the
irritation of a part of the Spanish nation, and the rup-
ture of the English alliance, with all the reciprocal
ill-
humour which may burst forth in all points of the globe.
Persons who for the last six years have been grovelling
before England considered us too patriotic because we
defended with some energy their own policy in Syria ;
they got annoyed because we blamed them for throwing
themselves, immediately after a humiliation, into the
arms of their late adversaries; they preferred disavowing
three French officers, and paying an indemnity to the
murderer of our soldiers, rather than supporting the
coolness of England; and at present they become all mix
ieti for a marriage and a dowry! Here we behold them
all in a ferment about a matrimonial alliance which they,
however, declare, ought not to chaugeanything in the po-
litical state of things; and they were cold and trembling
when the interests and honour of their country were at
stake! France was neither in Syria, nor in Texas, nor at
Otaheite, nor with M. Dupetit-Thouars or M.Bruat; but
she is altogether at the feet of a little Spanish Princess.
The entente cordials was then the supreme, the only in-
terest of the country ; and at present, what signifies the
entente cordiale compared with this marriage prize ! For
si
them into inveterate patriots Foolish
people as they are, not to perceive to what a degree of
Court affair
aaff
puerility and paltriness they lower their political conduct
by the language which they use at present ! The public
aitrhetyurwns were
e proud 'to be English, and now a
in France is observant of their deplorable inconsistency.
It compares what they say and do at present with their
words and acts of the past time ; it looks with pity on
their court patriotism ; and it judges with an equal se-
verity both the unworthy sacrifices which they have im-
posed on France during six years in the name of the
entente cordiale, aid the sacrifice which they make to-
day of the entente cordiale so dearly purchased."
It is said that M. Guizot will seek an intimate
alliance with the Northern and Absolutist Powers, as a
substitute for the entente cordiale, and that he has
succeeded in obtaining from Prince METTERNICLI an
expression of approval of the Montpensier marriage.
Austria will, it is presumed, bring with her Russia
and Prussia, and the Russian alliance has always
been an object of desire with Louts PUILIPPE.
On this subject the Courrier Francais observes
that, some months since, even before the appearance
of the Grand Duke CONSTANTINE on the coast of
France, it pointed out the obvious desire entertained
by the Cabinet of the Tuileries, and that of St.
Petersburgh, to approach each other.
"Russia," adds the Courtier Francais, "has never
remained indifferent, particularly since 1830, to the poli-
tical events passing in the south of Europe. In Spain,
for example, it formerly supported the pretensions of
Don Carlos, and the Emperor furnished him with consi-
derable sums of money, so long as he believed that he
might succeed. At present, on the contrary, when the
son of the same Don Carlos likewise pretends to the
throne of Charles the Fifth, the Russian Government will
neither afford a moral support nor advance a rouble.
Whence has arisen such an alteration with regard to the
Spanish Carlists? Is it not an evident proof that Russian
policy must have changed with regard to the French Go-
vernment? If the Cabinet of St. Petersburgh, no mat-
ter whether from cunning or necessity, would not
connect itself with us, would it not at present favour
the views of the Count de Montemolin ? Is there
any one, in fine, who believed that the treaty of
commerce lately concluded between France and Rus-
sia was possible ? Is there a further proof required in
support of our assertions ? The following is one which
any person at all acquainted with the character of
the Czar will not refuse to acknowledge. The Baron
de Rayneval, our representative at St. Petersburgb,
is at present on the best terms with the Russian Court
and diplomatists, and the Czar invites him to his family
dinners. It
may be said, in reply, that M. de Barante
likewise enjoyed a certain consideration at St. Peters-
burgh. Yes, no doubt, but that consideration was
purely personal, and when the op portunit ypresented
itself; the Autocrat failed
not to insult, not M. de
Earante, but the representative of the French Govern-
ment. On what conditions has M. Guizot obtained
these results? Whatever they be, we believe them to be
radically incompatible with the principles in the name
of which we repel that alliance which will be quite as
factitious, quite as false, and quite as disgraceful as the
famous cordial understanding, and which, moreover,
will be immoral. Ro • rejoices at seeing the ' cor-
dial understanding'
between France and England
dissolved by the events of the Peninsula. The Rus-
sian. diplomatists have on this occasion indulged in
ob-
streperous joy ; but let us not deceive ourselves ; it is a
joy full of peril for France. Russia would desire the annihi-
lation of theßritish power, and it is under the empire of
that hatred that it will ally itself for a certain time with
France; but if it be imagined that for that reason the
Emperor will
sympathise more with France, or the
liberal spirit of which she is the true representative in
the world, it would be to-fall into a gross illusion, and at
a future occasion we should inevitably endure bitter de-
ceptions. This is the reason why, after ever having
'combatted the:Cordial understanding, we shall as ener-
getically repel the French-Russian alliance as long as
Russia shall not have entered into the course which Pro-
vidence cannot fail to open for her in spite of her Czars.
We ought not to seek our alliance either in Russia or in
England. Germany in a state of progress is there,
and Prussia at its head ; let us turn our eyes in that di-
rection. If great political problems have often arisen at
the extremities of Europe, it is almost always at the
centre that they have been resolved. Charlemagne,
Charles V., Frederick, and Napoleon, have experienced
it sometimes in their triumphs, at other times in their