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

M. Guizot communicated to Lord Palmerston the
verbal conventions of which we have just spoken, ael
asked whether he accepted them. These coiemuni-
cations, it says, were made as far back as the month
of May last. This is a singular date, fer the Whig
Ministry did not enter upon its function; :tntil the be-
ginning of July, and the marriage was concluded on
August 23. What passed during thew six weeks ?
What guarantee were the comieunicatiors of M. Guizot
attended with ? Was the marriage of the Infanta men-
tioned in the letters to M. Jarnac, cr that of the Queen
only ? Was it not towards the end of Jnly 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 nsore rc flection ;
that the choice of the Count de Trapani as a candi-
date having been unfortunate, Spain should be con-
sulted on that of Don Francisco ; that, a 3 the Curios
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 likelyobfesmpaoinre?le cannot vto insure happi-
nesswarethrreantthe
ne
thes Queen s
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 affair was concluded at Madrid in the night of
the 28th ? Thus, while 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 entrustedhto chance, a good situation to exist
between two nations? Free nations have 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 allyoints of the globe.
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 anx-
iety 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 changeanything 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 cordiale 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
six years they were proud to be English, and now a
Court affair turns them into inveterate patriots 1 Foolish
people as they are, not to perceive to what a degree of
puerility and paltriness they lower their political conduct
by the language which they use at present I The public
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, and 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 METTERNICH 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 PuturrE.
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 Courrier Francais, "has never
remained indifferent, particularly since 1830, to the poli-
tical events passing in the south of Europe. In Spain,
eat
Nitr.
when
he thatentont
will
the
for example, it formerly supported the pretensions of
, thel
000 t renn tirgi a
likewisetunt hisaoosesr
achlnoev
advance
Government
pretends
Don Carlos, and the Emperor furnished him with consi-
n
deiirhurgtoaehhnolieltfeleresteohusfaecuhffccmas:hsaersamdadrr.oeliaefsseADmninthtoosoennurpiace:yhlciet,sa.staehrusnnl,pootaps
Intras
neither
th regard a rouble.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 Monteinolin ? 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
ay-1, our representative at St. Petersburgh,
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 Rneva
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 opportunity presented
itself; the Autocrat failed not to insult, not M. de
Baraute, 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 li
factitious, quite as false, and quite as disgraceful as the
famous cordial understanding, and which, moreover,
will be immoral. Russia rejoices at seeing the cor-
dial understanding' between France and England
dissolved by the events of the Peninsula. The Bus-
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 the British 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 rro-
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