The Sun.
London, England, 1834-11-03 00:00:00

lace of St. James's, as heretofore in the Palace of West-
minster. In the Palace of St. James's, which wants
nothing but seats and tables to fit it for immediate use,
rather than in the unroofed, unfloored, windowless, and

tottering walls of the Palace of Westminster. We are ac-
quainted with the general localities of the Palace of St.
James's, and can venture to say that it fortunately affords
not merely the possibility, but very convenient facilities,
for such a destination ; the lofty banquetting room
would accommodate the Commons—the great saloon
the Lords, or vice versa : lobbies, corridors, com-
mittee rooms, are ready at hand ; even the Speaker's
house is ready provided in any of the there untenanted
Royal apartments. What, then, is the objection to
adopting this plain, cheap, easy, and most convenient
plan ? We can discover none ; but we have heard a
surmise that the King is averse to giving up St.
James's ; this, surely, must be a mistake. The King
graciously offered Buckingham Palace, in which he is
about to take up his residence—how could be refuse
the use of St. James's, which he is about to leave ?
The rumour is in itself ridiculous. We only notice it
because it is the single objection which we have ever
heard to the temporary location of the Houses in the
Palace of St. James's.— Tinzes.

However estimable may be the public and private
character of Marshal Gerard, we fear that his rise or
fall is not of that importance which makes it imperative
on the journalist to write his eulogium or his epitaph.
Whatever change his accessien or retirement may pro-
duce, it is of a nature to be felt more in the peculiar
department over which he presided, than in the general
march of the Administration. The amnesty, which
he insisted on, was certainly a generous and noble
thought ; but, in practice, such a measure would have
been attended with far more difficulties to those who
had been long in office, than to a Minister newly ap-
pointed. When it is considered that not one of the
insurgents of Lyons or of Paris, if they are brought
up before the Chamber of Peers, will be condemned
to death, and few to captivity, a general amnesty
does not seem in their case an act of such crying
necessity. And however expedient it might be,
in order to rid the prisons of their surplus
population, and the Courts of their excess of judi-
cial labour, still it is to be remembered, that
the amnesty, so much in favour with the press of
Paris, is by no means equally popular in the pro-
vinces. The Lyons manufacturers deprecate it, and
the electors in general are by no means prepared to
consider clemency as synonymous with impunity. It
is said even that M. Dupin having been made con-
scious of this during his residence amongst his country
constituents of the department of the Nievre, was
thence induced to take the singular step of going to
the King, and declaring at least his half-disapproval
of the amnesty. As to a partial amnesty, that indeed
is imperative. We remember being in Paris not
twelve months after the Revolution of July, 1830,
and taking the opportunity to visit the scene of chain-
ing the galley-slaves previous to their departure for
Toulon. Amongst the hardened children of shame,
whom we saw riveted, there was a fine and open-
countenanced Norman rustic, beneath whose manly
breast the heart seemed to burst with indignation and
despair. On looking over the roll, he was found
to have been condemned for seven years to the
galleys, for "-resistance to the public force in the
streets of Ronan." In a short time after the great
days of July, this poor man had sought to emu-
late the heroism of the Parisians. Their zeal
was ,well-timed, and his inopportune ; this was all
the difference. Yet he was a galley-slave—they, the
medalled, pensioned heroes. Need there be one more
argument to support the necessity of amnesty for all
those guilty of political crimes in the first year or the
first eighteen months subsequent to July, 1830 ? The
insurgents of June, except the very leaders (the rest
were all boys), might share the same indulgence.
The press ought to have not only amnesty, but re-
pose. If the King's popularity have declined (and
that it has most lamentably declined, is not to be de-
nied), this is owing, in a great measure, to the perse-
cution of the press—to the conduct of M. Persil and
the crown-lawyers, who have, on so many occasions,
lowered Majesty itself to almost a personal conflict
with the writers of the daily press. No doubt one
powerful argument with M. Persil against the amnesty
is, that he holds M. Carrel at present under the bolts
and bars of St. Pelagic, and that such a measure
would let him loose. But this ought not to weigh in
higher places. If M. Persil were left to follow his
inclinations, he would soon succeed in rendering M.
Carrel as powerful in France as Mr. O'Connell
has been rendered in Ireland, by the misrule and per-
sonal enmity blended of men in power. The advent
of any man, or of any change that would put an end
to this state of things, would be hailed with joy by
every friend of constitutional liberty, even by every en-
lightened friend of the Orleans dynasty. Our Paris
correspondent, whose information or talent we are not
inclined 'to question, seems to rely for this happy
change upon the accession of the Tiers-Partz to
power, Assuredly M. Dupin, as Chancellor or Mi-
nister of Justice, would be a joyful exchange for M.
Persil, of which all France would reap the benefits.
Headlong and.znaladroit as M. Dupin may be at times,
his veneration for legality would be an immense im-
provement upon the present spirit of the French Ca-
binet. The internal administration of France could
not but gain from being conducted in the honest eco-
nomical spirit of the Tiers-Parti. But, allowing
all this, there are other considerations connected
with this party, which should make an English
writer hesitate, ere he placed too much faith in
it—or build high hopes upon it, ere it be
tried. There arc, for instance, its opinions
upon foreign politics. Those of M. Dupin him-
self are not to be mistrusted, seeing that he has no
opinions on the subject. But can the same be affirmed
of M. Mole, who is announced as the Minister for
Foreign Affairs of the Tiers-Parti? In the last dis-
solution and re-organization of the French Ministry,
it was reported, andc' more than reported, that M. Mole
was strongly pushed forward by M. Pozzo. The Rus-
sian Court and emissaries have of late made use of
unwonted efforts and condescension to captivate the
goodwill, or rather the obsequiousness, of the Court of
the Tuileries. And never was there a moment in which
the ;:aid Court had more at heart to fascinate and neu-
tralize the power of France, than at present. An even-
ing contempoi-Ary, well informed in Continental politics,
seems to argue that the present French Ministry are
enemies to the English Alliance, to freedom of trade, and
to an international commercial treaty. Certainly, the
veritable Doctrinnaires and their organ, the Debats,
are sufficiently bigoted on commercial questions ; but
the same cannot be said of M. Duchatel, who is,
perhaps, as forward to meet us, as the majority of tlia,
Chamber, and of those who elect it, will permit. But
would the Tiers Parti be more liberal in this respect,
as is hinted ? We fear not ; for it is still more iden-
tified, than M. Duchatel, with the majority of the
Chamber, and with the existing system of monopoly.
Do we then uphold the Doctrinnazres? By no means.
Their internal system of government, their braving of
unpopularity, their persecution of the press, are the
objects of our constant censure. But, nevertheless, let
us not be too certain that the party
.which sets-itself
up, and which, indeed, seeps destined one day to
succeed them in power, will operate in all respects an
improvement. The press of this latter opinion speaks
fair indeed ; but how little the promises of the press
are to be depended on may be seen in the late crisis,
where, whilst the journalists clamoured for the amnesty,
the leader of the Tiers Parti himself went to the
Chateau, and precipitated a decision against it.—
Morning Chronicle.
Nothing can be more satisfactory to that great Con-
servative party which, in truth, constitutes the nation,
than the present state and rapid progress of the public
mind in sound and enlightened opinions. The mania
of the Reform Bill has now, we thankfully acknow-
ledge, pretty well passed away, and the public have
opened their eyes upon the frauds by which that mea-
sure was carried, and upon the fearful'ealamitieS which
the unchecked ascendancy of its principles would
inevitably have brought upon the country. Those
principles, however, received a most opportune check
by the determined stand which the Conservatives, sup-
ported by the House of Lords, made at one of the
most critical periods of British history, and hence
only is it that revolution has been stayed in its course,
and that the elements of prosperity have again been