The Sun.
London, England, 1834-01-11 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

The debate on the. address in the French
Chamber has assumed a character of great in-
terest. It presents to us at once not words, but
things. M. Bignon (and we mean no dispa-
ragement to M. de Broglie), the highest autho-
rity among French statesmen after M. do
Talleyrand, on all questions of foreion policy,
delivered a speech in the course of T u esd
wherein he explained, with little or no reserve,
the views of the commission of which he was
spokesman, respecting the state of Poland,
Turkey, Germany, and Italy, the barbarous and
ignominious tyranny which, in open defiance of
the treaties of 1815, had been inflicted on the
first-mentioned country, and the baneful projects
of spoliation and oppression with which all the
others are threatened. It is needless to say that
the aggressors aimed at throughout the whole
fM. Bignon's speech are Russia, Austria,
and, in what regards the freedom of the minor
states of Germany, the Prussian Government,
as a party to the Austrian schemes. Poland,
nevertheless, and Turkey, constitute the prin-
cipal topics, upon each of which enough is
said by M. Bignon, and explicitly adhered to
by the Foreign Minister, M. de Broglie, to
prove that France will no longer be trifled with
by the Holy Alliance, and that in what she feels
and speaks England frankly concurs with her.
In adverting to Poland M. Bignon lays down
broadly that principle, without the recognition
and enforcement of which it would be foolish to
make treaties, because it would be impossible to
rely upon them—namely, that when one state
has been a party with others to any compact,
none of the others can pretend to the right of
destroying or altering that compact without her
consent. This proposition M. Bignon applied
to the conduct manifested by the Czar of Russia
towards the Polish nation, and to the injury as
well as indignity of which it gave France a just
title to complain. He further confirmed his
own view of this proceeding by a reference
to the manly speech of Lord Palmerston
last session, when the English Foreign
Secretary, in reply to Mr. Fergusson,
declared that " the King's Ministers had
done more than the motion called for, since
not only had they refused to sanction the
domination established in Poland by the Russian
Government, but they had even frequently pro-
tested against the injustice of the meastireswllieh
Russia had no right to take." M. Bignon re-
curred to a passage in the Moniteur, comment-
ing on an acrimonious article in the St. Peters-
burgh Gazette against: the British Government
—a passage in which the Moniteur had an-
nounced, on the part of France, a determination
to demand from Russia a full explanation of the
manner in which the provisions of the above
treaties had been observed, and to act as it might
judge proper upon the receipt of such explana-
tions. It follows, then, according to M. Bignon,
that the present state of Poland is nothing more
than " a material fact," unsanctioned by law,
and unrecognized by France or England. Can
anything, then, let us ask, be more unsettled—
any condition of things more precarious, than
one which those two great Powers have not only
refused to recognize, but to which they have
recorded the strongest hostility, short of a direct
appeal to arms? M. Bignon's sentiments with re-
gard to the species ofrule now exercised over Poland
by the Czar of Muscovy are generous and reassur-
ing to every friend of law and international justice.
He pronounces the actual say of Russia to be a
rank usurpation, and affirms that until the day
on which Poland shall break her chains, and on
which " other nations shall emancipate them,"—.
not until that day shall " right resume its
empire." This is as it should be,—this is
speaking out ; the open adhesion of M. do
Broglie to this language is a pledge, in the face
of God and man, that Poland shall not always
be trampled on and degraded. In passing to
the subject of Turkey, on which M. Bignon
did not affect to conceal the distrust entertained
of Russian ambition and dishonesty, he stated
the remarkable fact of the Emperor Alexander
having so long ago as the year 1808 urged Na-
poleon to agree to a transfer of Turkey to Rus-
sia, specifying Constantinople and the Darda-
nelles. Here is the grand no secret of Tartar
policy let out in a manner the least questionable ;
here is the proof, so honourable to that " mag-
nanimous" coxcomb and hypocrite Alexander,
that he would have overturned what was left of
the balance of Europe, and that its preservation
was due—to whom, think you ?—to Napoleon
Bonaparte, who felt the proposal of that solemn
conservative Alexander to be so monstrous, so
ruinous, so awfully preposterous and disgusting,
that though bribed by the offer of all Spain, all
Italy, the political dominion of Germany, and
the full possession of Bosnia, Albania, the
Greek Islands, and the Morea, had actually too
much conscience and honour to listen to the
lawless Autocrat. France or England needed
not, perhaps, this evidence to the profligate
rapacity of Russia ; but there stands the re-
cord, and see what light such a transaction
throws on the fraudulent encroachments now
in full activity before us. Russia has, by a
treaty signed, under duress, constituted hersslf
Protectress of the Turkish empire. What is
protection ? It means supreme sovereignty,
and nothing else. Protectors, from Cromwell
downwards, have been kings. Napoleon, Pro-
tector of the Confederation of the Rhine, treated
its nominal chiefs and princes as his vassals.
The Protectorate of the lonian Islands was from
the first confessedly and honestly their dominion.
The Protectorate of Turkey is the sovereign
away of Turkey. Let England and France,
then, as M. Bignon counsels them, look danger
in the face, and meet it as it approaches, not
absurdly wait for it, and talk about it until it
arrives. M. Bignon alludes significantly and
forcibly to the designs of Austria against what
remains of Italian independence, and to the
joint conspiracy of Austria and Prussia against
the constitutional liberties of the German
States of secondary order. M. Bignon inti-
mates with sufficient clearness, that France will
not permit this brave and virtuous people to be
robbed of that which the peace of 1813 bestowed
upon them, nor, we trust, will England. We
notice but to ridicule a report io some of the
papers, that Austria had signed a treaty guaran-
teeing the stability of the Turkish empire, but
shutting out Mehemet Ali from the sovereignty
should the present Ottoman race be extinct. The
"Turkish empire does exist in name—no Power
threatens it but one of those who are alleged to
be contracting parties to the supposed treaty,
which we suspect would be rather an awkward
and embarrassing instrument to the Czar. Upon
the whole, this exposition of M. Bignon and ad-
hesion of the Minister contains striking dis-
closures of the existing relations of Europe.
They demonstrate that France is prepared for all
contingencies, and, with England by her side,
we suppose that the cause of liberty and justice