The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-22 00:00:00

FRANCE AND ENGLAND.

(From the Journal des _Debuts)

Because political alliances become now and then
overclouded we do not necessarily consider them
compromised. There may be moments of disagree-
ment or coolness in the best conducted households
without coming to a divorce. Loyalty, moderation,
patience, and especially politeness in the forms of
intercourse end by appeasing these vexatious irri-
tations, and we then regret having abandoned our-
selves too easily to the unreflecting passions of the
present hour, for which the day after there is no
cause. •

The peace and its consequences being already
known we are now at liberty to return without
passion to what has occurred during the last three
months both in Germany and England respecting
the Italian question and the policy of France.
Germany will excuse us for concerning ourselves
with England first; we need not explain the rea-
sons for it. We are not suspected of not liking
peace ; we have even been reproached with liking
it too much. We have never looked upon this re-
proach as an insult, because we have been and
always are ready to repeat that we do like peace,
provided France does not suffer from it in her
honour or in her rightful share of influence, or in
her legitili,ate interests. On these conditions we
certainly do like peace.
Neither are we suspected of not being partisans
of the English alliance. Have we not at times been
reproached with being too much so ? If we were
not offended at it, that was because we were always
able to say why, how, and in what measure we de-
sired (and still desire) the English alliance. It can
only be on certain conditions that it appears to us
seasonable to remind our neighbours of it at this
moment.

As we have often said, we regard the intimate
union of France and England to be indispensable for
the repose of the world, and the progress of humanity
in its entirety is a progress that can only gain
sure ground when sheltered by the twofold power,
the moral and material power, resulting from this
union. As a moral power, we find in the genius
of the two nations allied for what is good that
which, separately, one or the other may want, and
which makes their united ascendancy irresistible.
As a material power, without presumption and
disdain for any one, this alliance appears to us to
represent now, and for a long time yet to come,
the greatest combined force by land and sea that
can be produced, for the purpose of doing good
or preventing evil. The Anglo-French alliance,
therefore, is for the most general interest of Europe
and the world, as it is also for the special interests
of the two nations. This is, in a few words, the
reasons why we like it. But let us hasten to say
it, it cannot live and last save on the condition of
being sincere, reciprocal, confiding—in one word,
truly cordial. Is this, then, impossible ? We do
not think so ; for if we see very clearly all the ex-
cellent motives for peace and good accord between
the English and ourselves, we are still more struck,
if possible, with the inconveniences and dangers
that spring up immediately on the diminution or
cooling down of these good relatio:is. We believe
in this; we express the opinion of the majority of
statesmen in this country, to whatever party they
may belong, the opinion of the most enlightened
part of the nation—of those who have so often
triumphed over old prejudices, and silenced old
rancours.

Is it not the same in England ? After what has
just passed in the highest regions of public influ-
ence it is impossible to doubt it. It seems to us,
indeed, that in these recent times the good sense of
the English nation has preserved the alliLnce with
France against the adverse efforts made by her
iratesmen. Without seeking for proof of this in
the diplomatic acts already obsolete, we may find
it, and even more to the purpose, in the recent dis-
cussions in both Houses of Parliament. We do not
recognise in them the customary reserve of the
great party which is an honour to the sound judg-
ment of England.
We know, indeed, that it is a tradition on the
other side of the Channel, when the naval and
military estimates are brought forward, to evoke
before the eyes of the country the invasion of Old
England, to show them through a magnifying glass
Cherbourg, Brest, and Toulon, prepared to launch
their squadrons filled with soldiers on all the neigh-
bouring seas, converted into French lakes, to-mor-
row at all events, if not to-day. We know that
this spectacle invariably recurs, and the pounds
sterling are voted. But hitherto the principal part
in that rather stale manceuvre has been performed
by some eccentric personage, and we have attached
but small importance to it. The circumstances,
however, under which the same scenes are repeated,
the political importance of the new actors, the
issues towards which they may tend, in spite even
of themselves, forbid our passing over unnoticed a
danger we should mot have attempted to conjure up.
If by one of those veerings about, which are pos-
sible any day in Parliamentary Governments, a
decision by a majority of a few votes more or less
should bring back to power to-morrow the party
overthrown yesterday would its programme be
traced out in the speeches delivered by the opposi-
tion in the House ofLords ? That would be serious.
Distrust, menace, almost insult with regard to
France, this is what we find in these manifestos of
the Tory party ; distrust, although the Government
of the Emperor does not cease by its words and
acts to reassure Europe respecting its intentions ;
menace, although France abstains scrupulously
from all provocation, although she has made no
armed preparations beyond the requirements of the
Italian war; lastly, almost insult, ill-dissembled
beneath this strange appeal to superannuated
passions. These are bad proceedings towards
anyone, dangerous towards us. England may
have believed it her duty to remain neutral, and
forgetting her liberal policy, she may not have
wished to attempt with France to free Italy. We
are not going to examine after the peace whether
she was wrong or right before the war ; but that
her neutrality should be ostensibly armed against
us, this is what we do not understand, because
nothing explains or justifies it.
France does not put forth the pretension to domi-
nate anywhere. On the seas as on the continent
she only desires her legitimate share of liberty and
action. Is it to be said that she ought to acknow-
ledge and submit to this domination on the part of
another power ? Like England, France has rich
and populous coasts, colonies near and far, a great
maritime commerce, religious, political, industrial