Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1855-01-24
LOUIS NAPOLEON AND THE LONDON
TIMEs-EUROPEAN DEMOCRACY AND


London Times upon Louis Napoleon's speech
before the Legislative body, have been very
much to his taste. However benevolent be the
construction placed upon them, it is neyerthe-
less evident that the whole tenor of the article
is calculated to destroy the effect of the com
pliment which that journal wants, officially, to
address to the French ruler, and it is difficult
to imagine, in the art of journalism, comb.
nation of words and sentiments containing,
aside of desire to ostentatious compliments,
more per6dious allusion, and more severe re-
buke. If the Times cannot find any other way
than this to express its love for its ally, we must
conclude thatits love resembles much more the
whip Of schoolmaster than the hearty grasp
of friend. Another article Of such force
and it may be said of the Times what great
men have often said of extra jealous fatterers-
God preserve me from my friends!
However, should this article be taken as
anguis IN herda-a snake in the grass-or in
terpreted in the sense af magis AMIGA reritas-
an homage to truth-its spirit will remain as the
confirmation Of the adverse opinion often ex-
pressed upon the acts and the person Of the
French ruler. The fact of such crude truths,
expressed by an English paper, in critical
moment, for England, and in the teeth Of him
who, in twinkling of the eye, can change the
destiny Of the world, is worth whole library
of pamphlets, and successfully confirms the ac-
cusations brought against Louis Napoleon by
his accusers-the exiled republicans.
But there is still more serious conclusion
to be drawn from the language held by the
London Times. The declaration that the Eng
lish are allied with the French nation, and not
with this or that form Of government, is tanta-
mount to recognition Of the French Republic,
or, in other language, of a government per-
fectly independent of that of Louis Napoleon,
having a will Of its own, and the means Of
making it obeyed when it chooses. Between
such an acknowledgment and the actual pre-
dominance of the democratic element in
France, there is scarcely any difference, for the
fact is evidently implied in the proposition.
We do not recollect to have seen anywhere
French Democracy so solemnly acknowledged
by the conservative party Of England, repre-
scented by the London Times, as in this in
stance. That acknowledgment is so much the
more to be noticed, that it comes from Jour
nal which is unsurpassed in point of informa-
tion, talent, and influence. Besides, if we
compare, as we ought, the deep political bear
ing of such language, with the means placed
at the disposal of that paper to know the true
state of European opinion, together with the
recent return of Lord Palmerston to London,
from Paris, We may, without mourning the re-
proach of being dreamer, infer from all these
circumstances that the moment is not far dis
tant when the government Of the nation will
supercede that of the man, and when the peo-
pie of France, coming into the exercise OF
their legitimate rights, viii resume their polit-
ical action and influence.
| Whatever be the influence Of such an event
upon the general policy of Europe, it would be
difficult to conceive how it would have the
effect of changing the opinion of European
Democracy concerning the system Of tyranny
accepted and followed with an alarming perse-
verence by the Russian government since the
days Of Peter the Great. 1t must be remem.
bered that, if it is an easy task to shape his
tory to the purpose of a temporary policy OF
party purpose, this does not destroy the facts
upon which history is based. The history OF
Europe is but the history of the alliance Of
/
Russia with all despotism, and its perpetual
antagonism with Democracy, even in the days
of her most liberal sovereign, Catharine the
Second, and Alexander. To admit, for an in
slant, that the republican governments Of Eu-
rope, may, when in power, forget the past, and
shut their eyes upon the present, is sim ply to
admit an absurdity.
Suppose, for moment the possibility Of
selfgovernment in France, England, and Ger
many, is it to say that they will borrow any Of
their ideas of government, or any Of their sys-
tenn of trade, tariff, internal improvements,
legislation, arts, sciences, literature, religion,
or philosophy, from Russia and IL they have
nothing of the kind to borrow, no idea to take
from that quarter, but only the armies of the
Gar, the constant supporter Of despotism to
meet and to fight, his hords Of serfs and bar.
barians to subdue, how, in the name of com
mon sense, can any agreement exist between
governments fighting one against the other,
the former in the name Of freedom, and the
latter in the name of tyranny?
The Democracy Of Europe cannot and
will never make an alliance with the gov.
eminent Of the Gar. A few crazy Socialists
or Hcgelians, like Feuerbach and Bruno
Bauer, and the school Of German atheists.
have had the sad courage to advocate such
an alliance. But their advocacy has been
ror ct preterea Mill. To-day single and
the same feeling pervades all the classes
and parties in France, England, and Ger
many respecting the Russian government, and
the baleful influence it exercises in keeping
the establishment Of free institutions back.