The Sun.
London, England, 1866-03-14 00:00:00

Lyons and Mediterranean.

Southern
Western
Eastern
Sardinian
Austrian
Lombard
North of Spain
Saragossa
Ditto to Barcelona
Roman

The Interest of France in the Right of

Search.

TO TIIE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,—You have this day given to the former
member for Stafford a hearing on a subject in which
he is particularly qualified to speak. The Right of
Search can be thoroughly understood only by one
who, like him, has had the opportunity of combining
the knowledge of the lawyer, sailor, and diplomatist.
Besides, no one can understand a thing after it has
happened unless he understood it before •it hap-
pened. Now what Mr. Urquhart says in your
columns to-day is only what he published in a
pamphlet in 1855 ; that is, a year before the Decla-
ration of Paris.

In private conversation everybody is now saying,
"We must get rid of the Declaration of Paris,"
but nobody has the courage to say so pub-
licly. But why do not people speak
out what they think on this matter ?
This reticence arises from the fear of France.
People believe that France is anxious to maintain
the Declaration of Paris. The Lord Advocate
actually declared on Friday week, in the House of
Commons, that by the French law neutral goods
in enemies' bottoms were liable to capture, while
enemies' goods in neutral bottoms were free. The
very words of the French Declaration of War
show the contrary to be the truth. " His
Majesty will waive a portion of his rights. He
will not seize enemies' goods in neutral vessels."
A very little reflection will show that the De-
claration of Paris is as inconsistent with the wishes
and feelings of France as with her laws. France
can desire to cripple maritime power in general
only for the sake of crippling it in England. But
France has nothing to fear from England. If, in-
deed, she wished to invade her, the Declaration of
Paris would assist her in the project. But
she has no such intention, or she would have
availed herself of the tempting opportunity offered.
With any other view it can be of no benefit to
France that England has given up her maritime
power. France, too,- has given up her maritime
power, and with it half her strength ; which means,
in certain cases, all her strength. Allied as she
now is with England against Russia, her alliance
is barren. The joint intervention in favour of
Poland had no result but to embitter the
sufferings of the Poles. England and France were
powerless against Russia in 1863 as they were in
1855 ; but in 1801 England alone prevailed over
Russia, though Russia had for allies France, Den-
mark, and Sweden. Russia wasthen beaten solely by
the English cruisers taking her goods wherever she
could find them. In 1855 and 1863 England had
France for an ally, but she had lost the right of
search, and Russia did not even need to
send out ships against her. England and
France, too, were opposed to Prussia in her
conduct respecting Schleswig Holstein ; but
here again their affiance was useless. England and
France being deprived of their maritime power,
there is no one but Austria left to resist the con-
tinuous encroachment of Prussia.

Let us now suppose France allied with Russia
against England. There is nothing for France to
gain from Russia. Russia may invite her to con-
quest in India, which is now open, as she has done
in Algiers and Mexico, but she will only lead her
into a financial abyss, from which she will af-
ford her no means of extrication. If there is
one country more than auother whose Govern-
ment is openly subservient to Russia it is
the United States, but Russia has not used her in-
fluence over the United States to give up the right
of search so as to make things pleasant_to France.
On the contrary, they hold it over the head of
France, and shake her power in Mexico without
striking a blow.
France cannot be independent without the right
of search. Like England, she is unable to do any-
thing except at the bidding of Russia. She has,
indeed, a European Congress assembled within her
capital. It is even said that she is to nominate a
Polish Prince for the Danubian Principalities, and
that Russia is to oppose her choice. No doubt she
may succeed, but will this be opposing Russia?
Russia can get Prince Czartoryski into the Princi-
palities only by having him put forward as her
antagonist.
France, then, can have no motive for maintaining
the intaining
the Declaration of Paris. If she proposed it in 1856,
it was because she, like England, was, to use the
words of Sidney Herbert, " agreed with her enemy,
but not with her ally." Thus, these Powers con-
cluded a war undertaken in defence of. Turkey by
laying down a new international code first promul-
gated by Russia.
From the Congress now sitting in Paris nobody
knows what new and fatal proposition may emanate.
It is called to consider the state of the Danubian
Principalities, but it is quite as competent as
was the Congress of 1856 to destroy the Law
of Nations. May we not hope, then, that
some patriotic Frenchman may protest against the
competency of Congresses to alter that which is in
its nature immutable, and may put that protest in
a practical shape by demanding the abrogation of
that Declaration which has made France as well
as England a nullity in Europe. England will not
venture on such a proposition, alarmed as may be
her Ministers, through her fear of France. It is,
then, for France to take the step.
March 12. DIPLOMATICUS,