The Sun.
London, England, 1832-09-13 00:00:00

which requires consideration, is that which relates
to the fabrication and issue of notes. That a
few individuals should have been permitted to
create near 30,000,0001. value of notes on their
own basis merely, and issue them at an interest
of five per cent. per annum, as was the case in
1815, and that the Government itself should have
borrowed largely of those notes at that rate Of in-
terest, is a stigma alike on the capacity and integrity
both of the Government and Legislature. If any
advantage is to be derived from a coinage or crea-
tion of notes, the Government alone should create
them, and receive for them the value which they
represent) minas such consideration only as
would defray the expense of pitting them into
circulation. Then all tanks equally might cir-
culate them ; but, instead of reducing the ques-
tion to this simple propositioniit has been mixed
up with criminations and recriminations of the
past conduct of the Bank and the Government
towards each other, and with speculations on
the relative merits of a metallic and a paper cir-
culating medium, and the effects of the conduct
of the Bank, in the enlargement or contraction
of their issues, on the balance of trade and ex-
changes with foreign countries, as well as on the
internal interests of the country at large. It is
our purpose, as soon as we have had an oppor-
tunity of going through the whole of the evi-
dence, to see if any new idea can be deduced
from it to expose the numerous fallacies which
we have already found mixed up in it in regard
to all the various subjects here adverted to, and
to place the whole in such points of view as will
enable our readers to see the relation which they
bear to each other, and to draw just conclusions
respecting them.—Morning Herald.

The conduct of the Government of Louis
Philip, for a long time past, is not to be ex-
plained on any principle of policy favourable to
the rights and liberties of France. When
Laffitte was in office we thought some of the
acts of that Minister very weak and very incon-
sistent with his previous opinions, which had
earned for him so much popularity. We could
not account for much that took place under his
Government but by referring it to the corrupting
influence which the enjoyment of power has
upon all public men, who are not of that first
order of noble minds that consider no accession
of power or riches an equivalent for deviating
from the direct course of stern, uncompromising
virtue. It is now clear, from other circum-
stances, as well as from the exposure of Cabinet
intrigues made in the work of M. Sarrans, that
Louis Philip himself controlled his Prime Mi•
nister ; and that the latter was to blame, not for
bad intentions, but for the weakness—and very
discreditable weakness it was—of retaining for
some time the responsible office of pilot of the
vessel of the State, while an irresponsible hand
held the helm, and steered her again in the di-
rection of those shoals and quicksands where she
had so lately, almost by a miracle, escaped
total shipwreck. But Laffitte at length
awakened from his stupor to a sense of his
awkward and dangerous position—a position in
which he could reap no honour, but must incur all
the disgrace. If he resigned in consequence of
the despatches of Marshal Maison, communica-
ting the intention of the Austrian Government

to control the States of Italy by force of arms,
being concealed from his knowledge by the King
and Sebastiani, until he learned the fact by acci-
dent, he had certainly good cause for withdraw-
ing from a situation in which his Sovereign so
grossly deceived him. Though we did not
know at the time the intrigue by which Casimir
Perier became President of the Council, we
formed a correct notion of that Minister's politi-
cal character from the earliest development of
his line of policy. We always described him as
playing the game of the despots, who hated the
revolution of France, and were preparing to
crush it, when the Polish insurrection inter-
rupted the design. In this line of policy Ca-
simir Perier was but the servile tool of Louis
Philip, who, starting as a revolUtionary King,
got half way to despotism by proclaiming the
doctrine of quasi•legitimacy, and wishes to make
the whole journey, if possible, provided the des-
pots of the Holy Alliance will receive him into

their company, for which he does all in his power
to qualify himself. The crafty politicians of the
" Divine right" will accept his services as long
as they think convenient, though they will find
it a difficult matter to forget that the flimsy
covering of quasi-legitimacy only veils a title
derived from the' barricades." He has already
made the experiment of establishing absolute
power in France, by putting Paris, contrary to
all law, in a stale of siege. The experiment
failed, to be sure—but that was not his fault :
yet, should he prove himself as zealous a cham-
pion of the genuine principles of the House of
Bourbon as Charles X. himself, the " legiti-
mates," whom he courts, will always consider
him an intruder in the place which he occupies.
Should he even succeed in extinguishing every
spark of liberty in France, the birth of Henry
V. will be a merit in the eyes of legitimacy
which he cannot rival. It was soon after his
accession that Louis Philip gave indications
of desiring to get into another track than that of
the revolution, by commencing his systematic
and persevering war against the Press ; but it
was not until the accession of Casimir Perier
to the Ministry that the hostility to the freedom
of the Press hilly developed itself, and became
like a war of extermination. Most fiercely have
those papers been persecuted by his Government
which had most contributed by their patriotic
energy to the overthrow of his predecessor's
throne. Yet those papers continued to be of the
same principles which they had advocated at
the revolution. It was only his principles
which had changed ; and the newspapers were
assailed incessantly by the arm of penal law,
because they did not desert their principles
along with him. Much is said of the avarice of
Louis Philip, and one of our Paris Correspon-
dents expresses his regret that the King does
not seem to understand how seriously his par-
simony injures his popularity. If the people
derived any advantage from his frugality of liv-
ing by his being content with a moderate Civil
List, it would be well ; but it is a serious
charge against the Citizen-King, that he should
live in a style of sordid economy, while he bur-
dens the country with a most extravagant Civil
List, and altogether the expenses of his Go-
vernment considerably exceed those of Charles
X. To be prodigal in draining the nation,
and parsimonious in his expenditure, are a bad
combination of qualities in a King. Under
such circumstances it cannot be said with rea-
son that the state of France is such as to pro-
mise a long continuance of its internal tranquillity.
The civic struggle between free and despotic
principles is still going on there ; and it is not
easy to say what change it may produce, or
what effect that change may have on the peace
of Europe. But whatever may be the result,
the disturbers of the present system are those
who falsified their promises to the people.—
Morning Herald.