The Sun.
London, England, 1856-11-08 00:00:00

THE "MONITBC,‘" AND TEE
66 CONSTITUTIONNEL".

(From. the Tinto.)
The position of a Government which, besides an
ordinary control over all the supposed organs of
üblic opinion, has also certain channels of its own
for statements of a more or less official character,
if not absolutely unfortunate, has at least great
inconveniences. Since we last ventured to com-
ment on the threats of the llfoniteur, and the in-
sults of the less official though not less controlled
portion of the French press there have appeared
two new articles that too plainlyreveal the peculiar
difficulties of Imperial and Ministerial editors. The
former of these is in the Constitutionnel and the
latter in the Moniteur, and they stand rather in
the relation of the sharp and brief rebuke with
which a, master corrects the noisy impertinence of
his servants. We expected that rebuke, and there-
fore we refrained from noticing the absurdities of
the Constitutionnel until that menial had received
its well-merited castigation at the hands of its Lord.
We have now to consider them together. It was
only a few days ago that the Moniteur appealed to
the !English people against the English press.
Since that, on the sth inst., the Constitutionnel—
an Ultra-Ministerial print, well known to receive
frequent inspirations from the Foreign-office—ap-
pealed to the English people against the English
Government. In an article, which we are informed
was much modified from the original draught, the
English Ministry were accused of wishing to tear in
pieces the Treaty of Paris, with " the view of satis-
fying an ambition momentarily disguised." This
journal was accused " of thinking fit to distinguish
the Sovereign from his Government—the„ policy of
the Emperor from that of his Ministers
and we
are told that " such, very poor subtleties need no
refutation." Many of our contemporaries believed,
or pretended to believe, that the original paragraph
in the Moniteur was inserted without the know-
ledge of his Majesty the Emperor. We never
shared the impression. But, while we regarded the
brief declaration in the Moniteur as little else than
an Imperial manifesto, we felt also that the longer,
more angry, and rambling commentary of the
Constitutionnel, seriously compromised the whole
of the Government, from Ministers to the chief, if
it should be allowed to pass without censure.
That censure, such was our confidence in the
good intentions of our Imperial ally, we were
ready to invoke by a direct appeal. We were pre-
paring to ask whether the Emperor wished to put
an end to the alliance and unity of action which
had so long existed between France and England ?
It was his undoubted right to take such a step it
he deemed it for his own advantage and the good
of the people whom he governed. Did he wish to
give
back to Russia what he had so gloriously con-
quered from her, and to exchange our friendship
for hers ! It was in his sovereign will and plea-
sure. We might have urged somewhat against the
policy, somewhat against the honour, of such a
step; but, if this resolution had been taken and ir-
revocable, as we had been united in ail honour, we
should have asked, at any rate, to part with cour-
tesy and dignity. This great alliance, of which his-
tory will have so much to tell, was not to be frit-
tered away by the licensed intemperance of a press
which is nothing more than the mouthpiece of the
Government. If there was between the Cabinet of
the Tuileries and that of St. James's an irreconcil-
able difference, fatal to the continuance of our pre-
sent intimate relations, it was fit we should pert,
as beseems great Powers, without petulance and
wrangling and with a due sense of the vast respon-
sibility which attaches to so momentous a step. If
an irreconcileable difference of views forbade us to
be intimate friends, let us, at any rate, do nothing
which might have a tendency to widen the breach
to enmity. We should have made this appeal in
all confidence that it would not he misunderstood,
hoping that means might yet be found to avert the
calamity with which we were threatened, and pro-
testing with all our power against the method which
seemed to be adopted for the purpose of bringing
it about.
Happily, the appeal is now unnecessary. As we
have already said, it has been anticipated by a
second declaration in the Moniteur, which not
only repudiates the Constitutionnel, but, what is of
far greater importance, indicates a very different
temper from that which the Moniteur itself had
betrayed in the previous manifesto. Besides con-
tradicting the Constitutionnel it contradicts itself,
and thus vindicates the line taken by us and our
more respectable contemporaries. Besides disown-
ing altogether and in the strongest terms the in-
temperate language of the Constitution nel, it speaks
of the English alliance no longer as in momentary
peril, but securely resting on the good sense and
good faith of the two counteles. Of the difficulty
itself which has created these discussions, and which
t
the Moniteur states to be of a very minor import-
ance, we shall proceed to speak more at length.
But before we do so we beg to congratulate the
country on the very timely and emphatic declara-
tion made by Lord Palmerston at Manchester on
Thursday. When a British Minister uses words
like these he touches a chord which vibrates with
applause in the heart of every true lover of his
country. We are proud of a Statesman who can
address a British audience with so much public
spirit. The Premier's words receive additional
import from the circumstance that the French Am-
bassador had just carried befgre to his master the
assurance that our Government was not disposed to
submit to any trifling in the matter, and that it
would be seen bysLord Palmerston's reception at
the populous cities of Manchester and Liverpool
whether England and its Government were united
or not. M. de Persigny is much too honest a man
and too good a friend to his master and to the
alliance not to do full justice to the intentions of
the British Government and the feelings of the
people. It is then, while the French Ambassador
is for a day or two at his own Court that Lord
Palmerston speaks :—" The duration of peace must
depend upon the honour and fidelity with which
its conditions are fulfilled. I trust that that Power
which brought upon itself the hostility, eitlhlr ac-
tive or moral, of all Europe by a forgetfulness of
international rights and duties,—l trust that that
Power, having concluded a treaty, Will observe
that treaty with faithfulness, and then, no doubt.
peace will be of lent; duration." Memorable
words—well weighed, an-1 gravely uttered,—words
honourable to the Minister who speaks them, and
sure to be supported by the unanimous concur-
rence, and, if necessary, by the equally unanimous
action, oF the nation to which they are virtually
addressed.

Our position with regard to Russia is sharply
and well defined. We have entered into a treaty
with her in which, from a sincere desire for
peace and amity, and a strong consciousness of our
strength and her weakness, we exaCted the very
least Fiat in justice to the cause for which we took
upsrms could be demanded. These conditions,
80just and so reasonable, Ithssia has, from the very
moment that the treaty was signed, sought every
opportunity of evading The period during which
the 'Russian part of the treaty was to be performed
• has elapsed, and she is still wrangling about
mattersSnfinitely too plain to admit ofdispute
. between parties actuated by the slightest amount
of good faith. She claims to substitute for the
possession of town of Belgrad a hamlet of the same name, the
which would give her free access to
the Danube, the very
reat thing which it was one of
the main objects of the treaty of Paris to prevent.
This question she is Wi n
lli -
to submit to a re-
of meeting g
of the Congress, but clahns in the
meanwhile that we should withdraw our naval
forces from the Black Sea, and Austria her
laud forces from the Principalities, thus leaving
once more Turkey alone in the presence of the•
Power
the end and aim of which are her destruc-
tion. Nothing can be simpler than our answer
to such prepositions. We do not trust Russia.
•
We should be inexcusably weak if we relied blindly
on the word of
a Power " which has," as Lord
Palmerston says, forgotten international rights
and duties," and is now seeking to evade obliga-
at a Constress of the I
tions solemnly undertaken .
„,
Therefore we will not abandon
Powers of Europe.
Turkey in her .
hour of need, nor withdraw one
while'its presence is necessary
ship from the Eu rine
to sSert a cause for
which we fought and con-
st
queVed. Any real
difficulty, any honest and bona
tide dispute as to the meaning
object to refer .to
treaty of Paris, we can hover o(y of the terms of the
arbitration; but we will not refer it back to any
. _
tribunal in the world to decide
tWhether Russia ishe Baltic is closed
to perform in the winter, when
conditions
which she
am the Crimea evacuated, cond
gladly accepted in the spring, with lti
the prospect of
a long land and navel campaignbefore lver. If
hear no
Russia, means to observe the treaty le. us
f
more of this paltry quibbling between
Boy"rad the
hamlet and Bolgrad the town. Let her w•lthdraw.
her miserable force from the Isle of Serpents, and
let her not dare to propose that even one
of her
ships shall pass from the Mediterranean to the
Black Sea. If she means, in spite of the treaty, to
retain her communication with the Danube, the
alternative is not an European congress, but- an
European war. "The duration of peace," as Lord
Palmerston truly says, "depends
on her;"—let
her decide. Neither she nor her hireling foreign
friends will succeed in separating France and
England. The two nations are still
agreed, except
upon a very minor point, and, united, we may
defy all the machinations of the common foe.

At the Vie:.ora-park Cemetery, closely adjoining one
of the most densely populated districts of London, it is
reported that 130 bodies are interred every Sunday.
cemetery is surrounded by the habitations of wee.
rs.