The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-20 00:00:00

longer of such importance the fortification of that
capital. Nay, it was rather a danger. It was evi-
dent that if it were so situated that the enemy could,
by means of his movable columns, prevent the pro-
visions, the commodities, the succours from without
entering it, then its position would become deplor-
able. Did the Austrians in order to defend Lom-
bardy fortify Milan ? No ; it was further in the rear
that they placed the basis of their defence. It was
at Verona. Verona could not be closed up. It was
defended by the Lake of Garda and the Adige ;
and it could communicate beyond it by the route
of the Tyrol and two railways. These were the
considerations which gave Verona the preference
as the basis of the defences of Lombardy. Bel-
gium was a broad and level country. Brussels
was not near its frontiers. If she were made the
central point ofdefence some movable columns might
seize its provisions, and a war might scarcely have
commenced when the campaign would be disastrous
to the country. He might be told that Paris,
although much more considerable, had been enabled
t? anticipate all its necessities ; but there was no
similitude between Paris and Brussels. Paris was
surrounded upon all sides with a natural or artifi-
cial frontier, very easy to defend, very difficult to
attack. Paris was not compelled to be provisioned
at all times. It could wait until the armies were
exhausted. It had besides a great river, which
afforded it every facility for defence as well as for
provisioning itself. Brussels had no such advan-
tages. Besides, it had not enough of drinkable
water within itself if the pipes recently laid down
were cut. The commission advised that if Brussels
were fortified it would still be necessary to fortify
Antwerp. Antwerp bad this advantage—it pre-
sented no aggressive demeanour to any Power.
Antwerp was covered by rivers which formed a
line of very favourable defences. Antwerp was not
assailable except in front. The entrenched camp
and the enceinte were completely protected by
water, and this water was in itself a great obstacle
to a blockade. Gen. Chazal, in conclusion, invited
the members of the Chamber to peruse the report
of the commission which recommended the pro-
posed defensive works at Antwerp.

THE AMNESTY AND THE FRENCH
PRESS.

Girardin had their paper. But in England the good
sense of the people renders this impossible. Here
such a paper cannot find readers. A paper which
represents an individual or a section is as destitute
of influence as the newsboy who calls it in the
street. Unhappily this has not been so in France.
The idea of a paper really independent, with views
of its own, and no interest except in its own suc-
cess, and that only based on the public welfare,
never seems to have occurred to a French jour-
nalist. In the days of their freedom they were
all pure partisans and all violent, as speakers and
writers who carry no great authority are apt to
be. Accordingly, when a man whom they had
fiercely opposed rose to power, nothing seemed
more natural than that he should suppress them.
One paper there is which has been to a consider-
able extent an exception to the remarks which in a
spirit of friendly warning we have just made. The
Debats has always been more upon the English
model of a newspaper than any other French jour-
nal. Accordingly, every Government since the
Consulate has respected it, and, although often
speaking under great restraint, it always com-
mands attention and its articles bear a certain in-
trinsic authority. When the days of freedom shall
come again,—and we hope they may be near,—will
the French Press and the French public remember
their past experiences and profit by the lesson ?
Times.

MIDDLESEX SESSIONS. Agcy. 19.