The Sun.
London, England, 1844-10-09 00:00:00

1844.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS.
FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.
GLOBE.—We do not mean to copy the pattern
set us by some of our esteemed Contemporaries, and
edify our readers with our views on the visit of the
King of the French. On such an occasion, our
foremost wish would, of course be to avoid all
offence, and to start nothing which should alloy
the reciprocal satisfaction of the French and English
public in the royal representation of good will
honourable to both. But we should find it very dif-
ficult to avoid offence, seeing that the sycophants of
the democracy of Paris are predetermined to take it.
We remember that a distinguished lady novelist of
our own country was so far influenced by the tone
which, we suppose, reigned around her in certain
Parisian circles, as to denounce the bad taste of John
Bull in receiving Marshal Soult with a hearty wel-
come, and in lavishing plaudits on him, which could
not but offend rather than please the French public.
We confess, when we heard the acclamations which
greeted our former enemy in Westminster Abbey on
the day of the Coronation, and observed their appa-
rent effect on his own feelings, the idea of bad taste
was not that which presented itself to our minds.
But our neighbours take things after a fashion
somewhat peculiar. They have not, with all their
high qualities, that John Bullish hardihood which
enjoys a boisterous welcome, but, whether wel-
colmed or not, does not care a buttsn. The Siecle,
a little time back, in stating that the King of
the French would decline an invitation of the
City, gave as a reason that his Majesty of course
would not expose himself; at a moment like the pre-
sent, to receive the plaudits of the people of London.
Now we almost despair of seeing any other sort of
moment than the present between England and
France ; and we heartily pray God, we may
never see worse. We quite despair of seeing any-
thing but misunderstandings perpetually renewed, so
long as the spirit of jealous rivalry, instead
of emulous achievement, prevails. One would
have thought the world was wide enough
for England and France to work in ; and that
their national genius was too different to give rise to
these constant clashings. But, if two nations, diffe-
rently constituted in natural powers, and natural
modes of greatness, cannot contrive to work, and let
work, in different fields—but must needs continue
to waste half their power in reciprocal counteraction
—we never shall see better times between France and
England : it will be strange if we see not worse.
French opinion is in the habit of imputing the lust
of boundless acquisition to this country. These de-
scriptions prove nothing, but lead to suspect some
"great original" nearer home. England covets every-
thing, according to France ; but we beg our neigh-
bours to take notice that, if England covets everything,
England does not grasp everything. England would
have kept the Sandwich Islands, but for fear of offend-
ing America and France ! If so, the fear is a very
wholesome fear, which restrains a great nation from
just offence. England has a wholesome fear, which
restrains her from striking in, with mere overbearing
brute force, amidst independent and beneficent ar-
rangements of the citizens of civilised States, whom
they find ruling the minds and converting the
hearts of remote simple communities. Suppose
the Jesuit establishments of Paraguay existed in
this age ; and that England had some pretext for
attacking them—such as extrusion of Protestant
missionaries —or some such most natural occur-
rence. 'Would England avail herself of such a
pretext? Would England affect that trumpery zeal
of ecclesiastical proselytism, affected so absurdly by
the agents of free-thinking and free-living France ?
We dare answer that England would hold back with
determined forbearance—that Exeter-hall might use
its myriad lungs up to no purpose whatsover. We
have proved, in the case of the Sandwich Islands, that
we won't meddle with independent civilisers—that we
won't abuse power anywhere to crush a thriving " vo-
luntary system"—that we won't allow even a good deal
of impertinence from rivals, land a bloodless fait ac-
compli by British officers, to lead us to usurp power,
and tyrannise over weakness, where in good sense, we
were not wanted. There was no immediate French
object, of the slightest importance, to serve by the series
of injuries inflicted onEuropeans and natives in Otaheite.
But there was England's colonising and commercial pro-
gress in those seas to thwart; there was vague hope of
supplanting her by violence in positions which she has
not obtained by violence ; and which are of no value to
States which have no better arts than those of violence
to improve them. We have acted tamely, feebly, con-
temptibly, in suffering all this violence to be enacted
amidst a community, insignificant as it might be in
numbers, but which trusted to English friendship, and
listened to English instructors. These poor people
were our friends. They had reason to be so. We had
reason, for the honour of England's name, to pro-
tect them from extortion and violence, solely brought
on them because they followed English in preference
to French guides. We should, by timely firmness,
have not less protected the fair fame of France than of
England. We should have protected it from the sad
committal made of it by objectionless fraud and vio-
lence. The one nation has disgraced itself by the ab-
sence of its force, and the hollowness of its friendship
—the other by the presence —and repulse—of force
devoted to tyrannous injustice.

STANDARD.—This day a ill be long remem-
bered as that upon which, for the first time in the
lapse of many centuries, a French monarch has
landed upon our shores, the first upon which a
French monarch ever visited this island in friend-
ship and in peace. The event is pregnant with con-
siderations of the deepest but most gratifying
interest—considerations which we may not pause
to contemplate, but which we can comprise in
one expression of sincere gratitude to Divine Provi-
dence, for the evidence afforded of the vast advance of
mankind in good sense and good feeling. Were the
visit of the King of the French a public visit—an
affair of state such as would justify the nation in tak-
ing part in his reception—there is little doubt
how the people of England would
,welcome their
great ally in guarding the peace of Europe,
in promoting the civilisation of mankind, and in teach-
ing to the whole world the great lesson, of which too
great a !portion of it still stands in need—the possi-
bility of reconciling perfect order with perfect free-
dom, and directing both to the attainment of the
highest degree of human happiness. Millions will re-
gret that we can give to the King of the French only
the silent and sincere welcome of our hearts. In
giving to his visit, however, a character of
privacy and simplicity, the King has acted with his
characteristic wisdom and care, for the good of man-
kind.
The time when royalty was rendered either more
powerful, more secure, or more useful, by the con-
stant burthen of external pomp, has long passed by.
In the infancy of society, as in the infancy of the
individual, unreasoning men must be acted upon
through the senses, to be governed with suc-
cess ; but when the age of reflection arrives, either
to the State or the man, a different process of per-
suasion must be resorted to. Kings must live like
their subjects, to be loved and trusted by their sub-
jects.
We feel that they are fellow-creatures, to be
met with respect and gratitude as beloved friends, if
they manifest a desire to promote our happiness, and
the more our friends the more they are familiar—not
certainly less to be disliked if they seek to conceal
enmity or contempt under a display of external pomp.
Such simplicity ought to characterise the intercourse
of constitutional sovereigns with their free subjects
in an age of advanced intelligence, and the same
simplicity as properly characterises the intercourse
of sovereigns with each other. We look to them for
our examples, and it is from them we hope for
that unaffected similarity of manners and opinions
which between independent and neighbouring
nations must ever constitute the real bond of peace.
What is it that constitutes the real tie among
subjects in a nation ? Is it not this similarity of
manners and opinions ? Unity of interest forms a
weak connection without this, as too many historical
testimonies prove • while this bond will hold States
together, though their interests may be different, or
even opposite. The interests of France and England
are, however, identical ; and all that is wanted to estab-
lish as complete and as permanent a union between the
two countries as can subsist between great independent
nations, is the assimilation of manners and opinions,
and the cultivation of reciprocal respect, of which the
simple friendly intercourse of our Sovereigns sets us
the happiest as well as the most graceful and dignified
example. These are considerations which would en-
sure to the King of the French a cordial welcome to
our island, where he no more than a commonly good
King, simply interchanging hospitalities with our
beloved Queen. •
Louis Philippe is the King of the French, and the
best King that ever governed France ; and from the
day of his accession to the present hour, France has
been constantly advancing in rank and honour, as
well as in prosperity and happiness. If the merits
of this truly great man are not appreciated .by
y
all, it is because some are incapable of apprecia trat.
and'
true greatness. The cunning and crafty, the w
le
dishonest,
exceptby
think
cunning
that eminentfaanlde
s. "honesty, the
best
success
taina b
craft.sbuyss is unNato-
proposition, however, is
evermis thore
obtainede only policy by which
in great affairs.paonleicyt
n" success in
all
things,is
permanent of nations can be moved only by one of two
rowers—overwhelming military force, the effects of
which are Lrarely of long duration, or consum-
mate wisdom, of which simplicity and truth are
ever inseparable companions. To consummate wis-
dom, however, Louis Philippe owes all his success.
Had he in his long life been detected in one unworthy
manoeuvre, lie would not now be King of France.
What he is we cannot better say than in the words
of Lord Bacon, describing one of
our best Kings, and
after Alfred and Edward the First, our greatest bene-
factor. " This King, to speak of him in terms equal
to his deserving, was one of the best sort of wonders
—a wonder to wise men. He had parts, both
in his virtues and his fortunes, not so fit
for a common place as for observation. He