The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-15 00:00:00

ENGLAND AND FRANCE.

(From the Journal des Debats.) 1
Scarcely a fortnight ago we pointed out in this
journal, in all sincerity, to our neighbours across
the Channel, the danger which the Anglo-French
alliance ran from unjust misgivings, useless threats,
and baseless fears. Armaments on too large and
demonstrative a scale were on the point of ceasirig
to be considered defensive and beginning to appear
provocative. Party speeches and newspaper vio-
lence were not calculated to weaken their import.
Irritation might cross the Channel and become
contagious. The storm was increasing.
While it was still time, we considered that we
ought to make a serious appeal to the eminently
just and practical good sense of the English people
and its true statesmen. That appeal might have
been better understood ; it has not, however, been
completely thrown away. The panic has very
nearly subsided—the nightmare of the invasion has
vanished ; but the distrust, and, to a certain extent,
the menace, appear to us to exist still, and to
retard the complete appeasement of the passions so
unhappily excited. We should be very glad, once
for all, to have done with these dangerous excite-
ments and these lamentable misunderstandings.
We believe that plain and frank explanations are
still the best means of arriving at that end.
No one can refuse to render to the French Go-
vernment this justice—that, far from having fur-
nished a motive or even a pretext for the alarms and
suspicions of its allies, it has not ceased to reassure
them by its calm and dignified attitude and the mo-
deration of its language. Without conceding any-
thing of the right of a sovereign state to proportion
its forces to its needs in time of peace as well as in
time of war, the Emperor has once more made a
conciliatory advance, by ordaining and causing to
be immediately executed, what might have taken
place quite naturally as a consequence of the peace,
viz., the reduction of our military and naval arma-
ments.
It is established, then, that France disarms. We
do not blame her for it. It is known we love peace
and the English alliance, in whom we see the only
safeguards of prosperity, of progress, and of liberty
for the world; but we have thought fit to say on
what conditions we love it, and we cannot help ex-
pressing our regret and our astonishment at seeing
England, when we are disarming, not only conti-
nuing to arm, but announcing, as she does, her in-
tention of continuing her armaments in any case.
Now, if ever, it seems to us, is the time for settling
the question which is at the bottom of this discus-
sion, the question of national independence and
dignity, which should not be raised uselessly. It
must not be that from the disarming of to-day there
may arise to-morrow a danger for our country.
Without reciprocity confidence would become im-
prudence. England and France should not wish
to deceive each other.

For the sake of their object, and to stir ap public
opinion among our neighbours, it is necessary to
represent France as much more threatening and
much less threatened than England. Plenty of
sums have been worked during the last fortnight,
plenty of vessels, sailing or steam, and cannon,
rifled or not rifled, have been counted ; but no one
has thought of seeking for more useful lessons
from geography or history. People might
have spared their arithmetic and their comparisons,
which have perhaps rather complicated than helped
to solve the question.
England is an island ; she is ever accustomed to
make much of being so, and not without some rea-
son. Thanks to that privilege she can do so with-
out keeping up a numerous and expensive perma-
nent army. Entrenched behind her wooden walls
—to use the favourite expression of our neighbours
—she frequently counsels the Continent to disarm,
to reduce its military expenditure, and willingly
treats with a certain disdain the onerous necessities
imposed on continental Europe, and from which
she is free. And yet, island as she is, England has
not ceased for some years to increase her regular
army, to create considerable warlike stores, to orga-
nise her militia on a wide basis, without at all re-
trenching in her naval estimates, but, on the con-
trary, applying to her steam navy on the greatest
scale the inexhaustible resources of her industry and
her capital. Are we saying that we are offended
that it should be so ? By no means. But we know
the English army and navy, and we hold them in
too high esteem not to reckon always with them.
We cannot forget that it is on the continent we
have met the English soldiers in front of us since
the commencement of this century, and not in their
island defended by the sea, on which fortune was so
long adverse to us. The insular position of England
has still this advantage, which she knows how to
make use of, that it permits her to isolate her policy,

. .
1 to prepare for action in neutrality, to bide her time,
and not to show herself on the field of battle or
of diplomacy, among the conquerors or the con-
quered, till the favourable moment, and then to
incline the balance to the side of her interests. We
do not blame her for it ; we merely state the fact.
History and geography do not contradict us.
Now let us look at France. France is not an
island, and she does not complain of that, but it
does not seem to us that she ought to congratulate
herself about it in the question now occupying us.
France is placed in an exceptional position ; washed
by three seas, she is more vulnerable than Eng-
land, upon coasts more extensive and remote from
the mutual aid of her fleets in the Channel, the
ocean, and the Mediterranean. Then again, she
has continental frontiers, which England has not.
France can be attacked by land and sea at the same
time. She might have several enemies at once. That
has been witnessed. This position of our country,
unique in the world, which constitutes her wealth
and her greatness, constitutes also her danger, and
imposes on her vigilance and strength for the sake
of her honour and security.
England and France have both of them calonies,
but England has many more than we have. With-
out coveting hers, can we not desire to preserve
our own ? Without entering into longer details,
we think that history and geography still show
that we are right.
If our misfortunes and still more our faults made
us succumb for too long a period on the seas, not
one of the governments that have succeeded each
other in France has ever accepted this fatal de-
cline of power as irreparable. England must accus-
tom herself in future to see without distrust and
jealousy France becoming once more what she
never ought to have ceased being—a real maritime
power. The equilibrium of strength between the
two great empires seems to us to be still one of the
surest guarantees for their good behaviour towards
each other.

With regard to material interest and leaving out
of sight for a moment every other consideration, we
remain convinced that if for the last 40 years,
amidst difficulties present to everybody's mind,
England and France have been able to avoid war
with each other, this happy result is owing in great
part to the mutual and just appreciation of their re-
spective strength and of the immense resources
which each of the two nations could have resorted
to in this deplorable contest. The certainty of dis-
asters and the uncertainty of the result have con-
tributed to the postponement of that contest. For
its indefinite postponement we prefer seeking for
better and nobler motives in moral considerations.
Europe at this moment has greater need than ever
of our pacific intervention. To find repose under
lasting conditions, the sincere and powerful accord
of England and France is requisite, because they
alone in their union are strongh enough to be able
to be just.
And if we cast our eyes still further, the whole
world invites us to peace and a good understand-
ing. Every day the west tends more and more to
expand towards the east. At the head of this move-
ment, henceforth irresistible, England and France
see boundless horizons opening before them. Let
us not fear to meet in these fields of the future, and
let us not retard each other by barren rivalries or
culpable contentions. The East Indies appear
to demand without delay, and for a long time per
haps, all the skill, experience, and exertions of
England. Why should she run the risk of estrang-
ing from herself the sympathies of France ? If we
must absolutely fight, let it be at least for the ad-
vantage of civilisation and humanity. Let us con-
tend for influence and generous initiatives, let us
cut through isthmuses, shorten distances, spread
everywhere in rivalry our language, religion, and
customs, the products of our arts and manufactures.
There is room in the sunshine, God be thanked, for
you, for us, and for others besides.
A truce then to rancorous feelings ; no more
phantoms, no more intimidations that do not intimi-
date, no more pretensions that cannot end in any-
thing. Let England sail in peace over the sea 3,
open to all flags with her protecting flag, of which
she is so justly proud. No one approves or admires
her more than we do in this part imposed on her
by her power and genius. Let her be neither
in neither
oi e jealous
same
duties,
oppressive
nor
nor uneasy.
ag g re l s
es i s and she will find us
hßutav e inth our turn,
sametur
rights,
that that we may also be abtl e without contest or con-
trol, to show boldly and freely, as beseems our
honour and legitimate interests, the colours of
France equally powerful, equally respected.
We Ve
longer demand, as Louis XIV.
Kings ships the honour of the
did of Holland, that ships of the united provinces
e wish to humiliate no
one, but we nthe equals of every one, and
if our courtesy
to salute first,
shouldwind
and r etdhe
claim
a toi salute.
m t
to be
Ke
InV
b
induces us willingly
we wish to be assured that always and everywhere
our salute will be returned,

RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE.