The Sun.
London, England, 1856-04-26 00:00:00

SIR PETER LAURIE AND THE PEACE,

(Front the. Morning Advertiser.)
When Queen, Caroline, wife :of George the
Fourth, came to England to claim her rights, her
Majesty who, _though a very injured woman, was
very far from a virtuous one, was the heroine of
the mobs that paraded London, and forced all to
shout and light up for her. One of these mobs, if
our memory serves us, collected in Hanover-square,
in front of the Earl of.Harewood's. His lordship
was summoned to the balcony to.give three cheers
for her Majesty. His lordship complied with the
best possible grace, took off his hat, bowed to the
people, and cried at the very top of his voice,
Hurrah, my boys, the Queen for ever, and may
all your wives be like her !"
Sir Peter Laurie has suggested to our recollec-
tion this little historical incident,, having lately
been calling, at a Common Hall, in a most uncom-
mon manner, for cheers for the French Emperor.
The occasion for this manifesto or manifestatio❑
from Sir Peter, was, strange to say, a meeting held
in the City to oppose what the Cabinet have the
'face to call their Corporation .Eteform Bill. That
occasion, of all others, was seized by Sir Peter for
declaring that he was delighted with the peace, and
very, much obliged to the Emperor of the French
for having imposed it on us !
To Sir Peter's unbounded satisfaction at the
peace we have nothing whatever to say. If Sir
Peter is pleased that our men and millions have
been lavished to damage the prestige of England,
and patch up a truce for Russia, he is at liberty to
do so. There is no accounting for tastes, and Sir
P. Laurie's has, at all events, the merit of singu-
larity. But, setting aside his pacific gusto, Sir
Peter's enthusiasm for the Emperor of the French'
seems as much out of place as season.
Why was Sir Peter at the meeting t Was it not
to fight tooth and nail against the Corporation Re-
form Bill ? Was it not to denounce with all his
strength the pernicious principle of centralisation ?
Was it not to uphold, as the palladium of our
liberties, municipal rights and privileges ? We
rather fancy it was.
.;\ ow, the Cabinet of Lords, and Lord Palnierston
especially, are, as well as Sir Peter Laurie, admirers
of his Imperial Majesty. Nay, they not only ad-
mire, but they serve him, and they imitate him—
when they can.
His Imperial Majesty is the very incarnation of
the principle of centralisation, and Lord Palmer-
ston's Government clutches every opportunity for
pushing centralisation in England. The base of his
Imperial Majesty's system is his secret police and
gendarmerie, and Lord Palmerston is trying to foist
his police and gendarnierie upon the country. In
his Corporation Reform Bill, Lord Palmerston
again obsequiously apes his Majesty ; the Emperor
distrusting and detesting Corporations, and putting
.them down iu France. He has taken from them
the election of their mayors, and elects those mayors
himself. He has forced his Court of Cassation to
deeide that only such - Municipal Councillors
as his Prefects choose shall be voted for. And, if
his Majesty is happily spared to reign many years
ill France, he will certainly have nominated every
member of every municipal body in it. The Bri-
tish Government, therefore, which Sir Peter Laurie
opposes with all his might and main, is applying to
London the system of the Emperor whom Sir
Peter so cordially applauds.
But, perhaps, Sir Peter Laurie will say that the
Imperial regime is good enough for the French,
though not good enough for the English. If Sir
Peter will not say so, probably he thinks so, and
a very great number do say so. This,, though a
compliment to the French Emperor, is marvellously
like a downright insult to the whole French people.
It declares to Frenchmen, in so mai)), words,—
" We are vastly superior to you ; we can govern
ourselves—you cannot ; you are not fit for liberty ;
you are' slaves and wear wooden shoes.'"
Those who think and talk in this way talk also
dile "French Alliance." They are nervous be
pond measure at the bare idea of endangering " the'
happy union." But what is that alliance, and
what are the securities for the." happy 'union" in
question ? Is the alliance of England with one man
or with thirty-five millions ? With a great race
and a great land, great in name and fact for cen-
turies, or the accident of a day, or rather of a
night, that got possession of power by conspiracy,
and only retains it by force ? The French Empe-
ror is not the French people, and the servile adu-,
lation of the Emperor in England is felt by the
people as an insult. It is that which endangers
the alliance. A " happy union" must be one of
affection as well as of common interest ; and no
union cau be happy or lasting with France which
is based on contempt for the French. They have
been free before, and they will be free again, and
there are strong proofs that they resent now, and
may seek to avenge then, the gross affront expres-
, sed, or implied, that they are not fit for freedom.