The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-07 00:00:00

LONDON, TUESDAY, JULY 7, 1857,

The Elections at Paris for the 3d, 4th, and 7th
districts have terminated, and in every instance
unfavourably to the Government candidates.
Those results may be regarded as emphatic protests
against the unconstitutional interference with the
freedom of elections, and the attempt to suppress
discussion, and prevent the unqualified expression
of opinion in political matters. It is true that
the number of opposition deputies returned con-
stitute but a small proportion of the Chamber,
and that the Government has what in this coun-
try would be deemed an overwhelming majority.
But the persons chosen, the places for which they
were selected, and the circumstances connected
with the contests, bear a very significant aspect,
and give ample ground for serious consideration
to the EMPEROR and his advisers.
It is no trivial matter to find General CAVAIGNAC
who at oneperiod was virtuallydictator of France,
who claimed the suffrages of the French people
for the post of President against LOUIS NAPOLEON
himself, and who is the recognised leader of the
old republican party, returned by so influential a
constituency, and despite the energetic efforts to
oust him from the position to which he aspired.
It will be remembered that although the General
headed the poll a fortnight since, it was considered
a void election from his not having obtained the
absolute majority required by the electoral laws of
France. The total number of registered electors
in the third circumscription is 34,863. At the
former struggle he received 10,345 votes, and
M. THIBAUT, the Government candidate,
10,108. On the present General CATAIGNAC
had 10,950, and M. Tkirsa-crT only 9,952 votes !
And this, as we have stated, notwithstanding the
most gigantic efforts on the part of officials, wl.o
brought almost every possible influence into
operation against the man who had been the great
rival and competitor of the EMPEROR himself.
In the fourth district the registered voters are
35,385 ; of whom 9,632 supported M. VARIN,
the Government candidate, while only 6,741 gave
their suffrages in favour of M. OLLIVIER, the chief
candidate of the Opposition. That same M.
OLLIVIER has DOW polled 11,005, while M. VARIN
only received 10,006 ! the former having ob-
tained 4,234 additional supporters, the latter only
363 more than on the previous occasion. Nor
were the events in the 7th district lass striking.
The number of electors there were 36,249, of whom
10,609 voted for M. LANQUETIN, the Government
candidate, and 6,825 for M. DARISION, of La
Fresse. The tables have, however, been com-
pletely turned, and M. DARIMON has been elected
by 12,078 against 11,038 ! This divides the
representatives of the metropolis equally between
the Government and the Opposition, there being
five on each side—an ominous number when the
influence which Paris is known to exercise over

the provinces is taken into consideration
It would be well for Louis NAPOLEON to profit
by this painful but salutary lesson, which may
be regarded as the first serious defeat sustained
during big career. He should make up his mind
to co-operate with a real, independent Parliament,
exercising its legitimate influence, and not to con- '
trol a body of political cyphers, only seeking to
register his decrees. He should be prepared to
tolerate free discussion in the Chamber and in
the public journals, and thus, by affording the
People legitimate means of giving expression to
their views and opinions, prevent the dangerous
excesses to which they may resort whenever a
favourable opportunity may arise.
In this country a strong opposition in Parlia-
ment, and a flee Preis, are justly regarded as the
safeguards of the throne. They would prove the
same in France, if the experiment was fairly
tried. Here we are contented with a change of
Ministry. The Sovereign submits to the voice
of public opinion, clearly and intelligibly ex-
pressed. And her popularity is never for a mc-
Dna diminished by any Ministerial crisis. There

the same causes might produce a change of
dynasty and a complete revolution in all the
national institutions. It requires but little argu-
ment to show which course is safest and best, not
oily- for the cause of order and tranquillity, but
also for that of the ruler and of his family.

Tile melancholy annual tale of The Civil L;st
Pensions 1 1,2001. a-year for the encouragement
of Art, Science, and Literature—and of this dole
but an indifferent proportion, after all, given to
any one at all connected with Art, or &Ilene-, or
Literature. Wti have illustrated this remarkable
fact again and again before now—yet we will do
so even here once more from the catalogue but
just now published. It is a catalogue of all the
pensions granted between the 20th day of June,
1856, and the 20th day of June, 1857. A cata-
logue presenting to view an attenuated list of no
less than seventeen recipients. Here, again, is
the old initial blunder reiterated ! A paltry total
rendered yet more paltry in its application by
being so frivolously divided and subdivided !
Naturally, enough in consequence of this excessive
subdivision, we find the aggregate of 1,2007.,
when distributed into seventeen instalment; frit-
tered down in some instances to very mean driblets
indeed !—to 70/. !—to 50/. l—evfn to 301.
actually, in two instance;, to 25/. ! This last-
mentioned "amount" (if we may venture to
give it so very grand-sounding a designation)
being absolutely one that for wages would
be
pooh-poohed by a respectable butler, and
taken,
as a matter-of-course, by a ()Alit
Scubion ! However, there is the unmis-
takeable, undeniable " fact"—that, in consequence
of this most absurd system of dividing 1,200/.
among no less than seventeen separate individuals
(in reality, we find one petty instalment of 501.
divided between two sisters !) we fritter away the
whole of this restricted fund in a manner the most
ungraceful and the; most unsatisfactory. - That is
a very egregious blunder to begin with. But
there are others, also, in regard to the distribution
of this Fund still more indefensible. It might,
perhaps, just within the limits of possibility, re-
main a matter of doubt, if submitted to the con-
sideration of a conscientious jury, whether the
minimum, pension on the list ought to be restricted
to 801. or 100/., and the 'maximum to 2501.
or 3001. But it could not, by auy chance what-
ever, remain a question for two seconds in the
lidgiaient of any twelve right-winded Englishmen