Star.
London, England, 1830-06-07 00:00:00

LONDON.

MONDAY, JUNE 7.

THE KING.

We have little doubt that this day's Bulletin, though
by no means so satisfactory as could be wished, will
agreeably surprise many of our readers, as it has our-
selves ; for the reports in circulation yesterday were of a
nature to excite the most gloomy apprehensions. While
we rejoice to perceive these are not realized, it would be
idle to conceal that a crisis, in the condition of the Royal
Patient, is at hand.

“ WINDSOR CASTLE, Jums 7, 1830.

" The KING continues nearly in the same state. His
MAJESTY passed last night under considerable embar-

(Signed) " HENRY HALFORD.
" MATTHEW J. TIERNEY."

Despatches were this day received at the Foreign-
office from Lord STUART DE ROTHSAY, our Ambassador
at Paris, and from Sir CHARLES BAGOT, our Ambas-
sador at the Hague. —

What, with the frequent allusions made to the Protocol
of March t 2, 1829, and its intrinsic importance, as deve-
loping the views entertained by each of the parties to the
Treaty of Intervention, we have determined to lay it
before our readers. The documents relating to an ex-
tended boundary line, will, therefore, be found in our first
' page, and we invite the attention of our readers to them.
The note of the French Plenipotentiary, in which he not
merely points out the inconveniences of the present line,
but shows a becoming solicitude for a people who had
fought and bled in the cause of freedom, does infinite
honour to the writer. Two other documents remain—
s despatch from Count NESIELTIODZ, the Russian Prime
Minister, to Prince Liavax, and the memorandum of the
British Plenipotentiary, wherein the narrow policy and
ungenerous views which have influenced us throughout

this important negociation, are amply betrayed. We
regret that want of space prevents the publication of these
in our paper to-day. Whenever they appear, those cen-
sures, which a sense of duty drew from us on Saturday
last, will not be considered either ill-timed or exaggerated.

There are few among our readers who do not recollect
the feelings excited, some years ago, on the publication
of M. PILLET's absurd calumnies against the habits and
character of this country. While we lamented that so
many persons in naive .houid Lave been found to lend
a ready ear to the uts):l:.trons assertions of FILLET, we
had hoped that the time had gone by for indulging
in prejudices, which the knowledge acquired by fifteen
years continued intercourse with our neighbours, ought
to have exploded. It seems, however, that there are
still some men in England who delight in marching
behind their age. Among others, a writer in the last
number of the Quarterly Review has favoured the public
with a diatribe, which is characterised as the " most
absurd, servile, and odious, hitherto on record," by the
Repri'sentant, in which a speedy reply to the reviewer has
appeved. Judging from the extravagance and inac-
curacy of the assertions put forth in the Quarterly,
we do not remember to have witnessed a castigation
more richly merited, or better executed, than that of
the French writer. After having proved that M.
Colin, the individual whose ravings have furnished,
the ground-work of the offensive article, is, from his
apostacy and general character, utterly unworthy of
credit, the writer of the Reprisentant proceeds to vin-
dicate the honour of his country, calling to his aid
the united evidence of history and passing events to
prove, that the people of France have quite as much claim
to morality, and are as well prepared to receive the
blessings of freedom, as any other nation of Europe, not
excepting ourselves. Several of the French writer's
remarks are well worthy of being transferred to our
columns. In reply to that portion of the article in
the Quarterly, which accuses France of being im-
moral, he says, that an examination of the parish re-
gisters, police reports, and trials in the courts of law,
will enable the impartial to draw a comparison on this
point. " France is not religious," says the Quarterly.
What is the French writer's reply? "Those who make
this reproach have, till within one short year, pertina-
ciously excluded the Catholics from their civil rights ;
whereas forty years have elapsed since men of every
faith have been eligible for all public employments in
France." To the question, whether the law of primoge-
niture is a constitutional necessity among our neighbours ?
—the writer says, " France has not sufficient intelli-
gence to understand it. Under the natural, as well as
moral point of view, she rejects this necessity in prin-
ciple ; as well, from the consequences it entails, as from
considerations of political economy, which the simplest
tyro must comprehend." The above assertion is thus
illustrated : " Suppose the soil of France to be divided
between one hundred thousand aristocrats, each portion
passing to the eldest son, whatever the increase of popu-
lation may be, the number of proprietors would never
augment. They would, on the contrary, be continually
diminished; because marriages would unite property.
Thus, according to this system, the more population
increases, the greater the diminution in men of wealth ;
while the poor, the unhappy and discontented, are con-
stantly adding to their numbers. This is what a con-
stitutional monarchy requires. Such is the lean ideal
suggested by the vast intelligence, and grand political
genius, of the Quarterly Review !"
We could wish to extract more largely from the article
of the Reprisentant, which contains some very good les-
sons, both for our Statesmen and public writers. We
have only room for two short paragraphs. The writer
very properly infers from experience, that no new politi-
cal convulsion can take place in France, without involving
the rest of Europe. To that part of the reviewer's com-
ments which revives the system of interference, which
cost us so dearly during the revolutionary war, the
French article thus replies :—" In spite of all her pa-
tience—notwithstanding all her efforts to reconcile the
restoration of the Sr ETA rre with civil and religious li-
berty—England was forced to break every compact with
that family, and to expel them for ever. France finds her-
self precisely in the same position. During fifteen years
she has seen the BOURBONS break their promises, violate
their engagements, and forget their oaths. They are mak-
ing a last effort to re-establish arbitrary power, and the'
reign of their " good pleasure." France is worn out ; she
wants order and repose, in freedom and equality of rights
She cannot have them with the Bourbons,
We forbear to conclude the sentence. The warning is
terrible, and ought not to be lost on Ministers or Princes!
We recommend the concluding portion of this excellent
article to the serious meditation of public men.

The gradual depression of the French funds is attri-
buted to the measures adopted by the Court and Mini '
sters, for obtaining a majority in the approaching elec-
tions. These are thus detailed in the Private Corres-
pondence of the Represextant :—" The ultra-royalists
announce positively that they will make no concessions ;
but if the new Chamber refuses its adhesion and sup-
port, they will dissolve it ; and take the necessary steps
for causing the Royal authority to be respected—no matter
what the consequences may be. The Kt no himself
repeats these menaces, in a tone which proves that he
has made up his mind. The moderate partisans of the
monarchy are uneasy ; commerce is at a stand, and the
holders of the public funds have taken the alarm. In
order to obtain the votes of the electors, the latter have
been told that if the revolutionists carry the day, they will
cease to pay the interest of the public debt, sad espe-
cially of the Three per Cents. which belong to the
emigration. Instead of gaining any votes by these
manoeuvres, they have only tended to awaken the
attention of sensible men." Of the Algiers expedition
it is said :—" the horrible weather that has prevailed for
some time, adds to all these motives of inquietude. The
speculations on the fate of our fleet and army, are far from