FRANCE AND ENGLAND.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 4, Issue 174, 19 January 1860, Page 3

FRANCE AND ENGLAND.

LA PRESSE ” AND DE MORNY. VVk are indebted to the Times for the following full translation of M. A. Peyrat’s article in La Presse :—■

“ Let us examine the reproaches which M. de Moray addresses to the orators, ministers, and journals of England. France and England, he says, are in a state of reciprocal susceptibility ; the two countries are incited against each other, vague mistrust is excited, and this is so cleverly managed that on a given day an incident of no consequence, or a misunderstanding which might easily be remedied when on friendly terms, may become a serious complication. M. de Moray exaggerates. That there may be or may have been a strong acrimonious feeling between the French and English Governments; that the alliance may have been at least once, within the last two years, seriously compromised, is not to be questioned. “Is it equally true that the irritation of the two Governments lias, spread to the two nations, and that sensible men have been pained to see revived either at Paris or Loudon the prejudices of a past age, the passions of Trafalgar and. Waterloo ? Certainly not, and hereupon we appeal to the feelings of all our readers. But it matters not. Let us admit that the nations are as much disposed to find fault with each, other as M. de. Moray states. Whose bruit is it ? “ jffhe fault of the English, says M. de Moray, who excite national susceptibilities, who flatter * some popular instincts to increase their reputation as a journal, their popularity as political speakers.’ “ We do not mean to say that M. de Moray is deficient in justice, but he assuredly is wanting in memory. To convince him of it we merely oppose to his assertions an authority which he will not reject. He:e are the terms in which the Emperor of the French expressed himself on opening the session of the Legislative Corps on the 7th of February last: —‘ As to the alliance of France and England, I have used all my perseverance in consolidating it; and I have found on the other side of the Channel a happy reciprocity of sentiments on the part of the Queen of Great Britain as on that of statesmen of all opinions.’ “It is true the feeling now' is not the same. The English Government, stirred up by the newspapers and the House of Commons, mans the fleet, fortifies the ports, and calls out the militia.

“ This, says M. de Moray, is the result of chimerical fears, and he lays it at the door of the speakers who frighten the nation to ■.increase their popularity. “ M. de Mcrny forgets that these orators are in general, the most important members of Parliament, by their position, their character, and their influence. He forgets that at their head stands Lord Lyndhnrst, the Nestor of the House of Lords, the great jurisconsult, the great orator, and renowned above all, even at the period when he was most actively engaged in political strife, for his good sense, his impartiality, and the imperturbable calm of his reason. When such a man, more than octogenarie , comes forth from the retreat where he has been encircled by tlie respect o£ all parties for the last fifteen years in order to. conjure his country to be on her guard, to be watchful of her secury, her independence, and her honour, will any one say that he docs so to increase his popularity ! “ M. de Moray cannot explain to himself the emotion of England, and the explosion of susceptibility produced by the articles of the newspapers and the speeches in Parliament! M. de Moray forgets the insulting evidence of that portion of tho French press which, nineteen "mouths ago, accused the English people of complicity in the attentat of the 14th January! Let him take up the Moniteur of that date, and with his own speech (which perhaps he also forgets) he will find the addresses in which the colonels solicited for their regiments the honour of marching as the advanced guard of the army charged with ‘ demanding an account of that land of impunity which is. the den of the monsters that seek shelter beneath her laws.’ The Government did its duty, it disavowed those imprudent menaces; but the impression was produced, and it is not yet effaced. Strictly speaking, those deplorable provocations could bo then explained by the first and irresistible burst of indignation, and would thus lose much of their importance; but only fifteen days back a member of the Legislative Corps (Granier de Cassagnac), with calculated solemnity, announced in the Journal de VEmpire (Pays) and in the Constilutionnel , that France could henceforth, at her own pleasure, and choosing her own time, ‘ suddenly throw ’ from 50,000 to 60,000 men on any point it pleased of an enemy’s territory. Now, why was this menace i so cooly uttered, and without apparent motive ? ] England thought that the warning was direct- ' ed to her, and we have nowhero seen that ; means have been taken to undeceive her. 1 Will it, then, he said that she i 3 wrong to be < moved by it. { “M. do Moray is of opinion that ‘ the 1 straight-forwardness and pacific intentions of ' the Emperor, ought to reassure England. J Here again, we are sorry not to share his opinion, and we submit our reason to his judgment. In. His speech of the 7th oi 1 February to the Legislative body, the Emperor of the French, after having said that be aid ieverytbing iu his power to consolidate the 1 affiance between France and England; added,

• There lore, to r attain’this end, so important to the peace of the world. I have on every occasion passed over ‘ the irritating remembrances of the past, the attacks of .calumny, even the national prejudices of my country/ And the Conslituticmiel of yesterday, naturally more explicit, says,—-If, in-tend of putting a curb upon the national animosity, he had excited it, thinking only upon an ephemeral popularity, who can say that France, ar. his voice,wou’d not have risen like one man?’ " /That! there is, we are told, so strong an animosity, such national prejudices among us that if the head of the State excited thorn instead of holding them in, France would rise like one man, and then, people are astonished that England should take a serious view'of the matter? The Emperor of the French is master of liis own sentiments, but. is he equally master of the future ? Who can affirm that events may not on a future day lead him to excite and exalt tho pretended animosity and these prejudices which he now takes no notice of? He himself lias anticipated this formidable extremity, ‘lt would then become impossible for me to calm the passions which I !should have let loosed

i “ //ml, moreover, these cmsideratlons are not necessary,, however ieriou* enough they may be, to “c-xp’aiu the arguments of England. Europe l , only three nlonths ago, was on the eve of a general war, and it is this fact which explains the sudden and unexpected peace of VilhuVanea. Will it be alhgnl that in a war of the kind England had no part, to perform ? And to perform that part hud she no preparation to make! The people who were the soul of the four greatest coalitions which the world has witnessed since the close of the 15th century —who struggled victoriously against Louis XIV,—-who arrested Gustavus Adolphus in Isis enterprise against; Denmark, and Catherine- ag.tinst: 7'urkcywho maintained against tie French Republic ami against the French Empire a struggle without an example in history—who have peopled the United States, British America, India, and Australia, and wife have planted on every point of the globe colonies of which some are great and powerful States—such a. people cannot remain simple, spectators of events capable of changing the face of EuropeAbove all, such a people cannot expose thema selves to again behold 7’romps amhßuyters ascend the Thames to .London Bridge. It is alleged, it is true, that such things may be repeated, since steam has changed all the conditions of maritime warfare. We are incompetent to judge the value of this assertion, repeated so often for rovne time past, and which wants the s.mctiou of experience. It. ;eems to us, however, that England is still situated so as to render very difficult, if. not impossible, the only thing which could, seriously menace her, namely-—-the combination of all the fleets of Europe. She cuts off the communication of tho north with the south ; and wc do not sec how the Baltic fleets could join those of the Atlantic, and still ll\-s those of the Mcditcrrauean. These notions ■jf maritime coalitions are. no longc-r of our time, and besides, history teaches us that they are almost always powerless. Iu the American war the French and Spanish fleets could not come together after the battle of the 12th of //pril, 1782; and at a latter •Jute they met at Ferrol and Trafalgar. “ What is jeertaiu iu every case is, that, to attack and vanquish on so many pci its so proud and strong a Po\ve.r, France would be condemned to immense efforts, which would produce catastrophes without compensation.. Louis XIV. was. convinced that any attempt at a landing would only increase the defensive power of England; and Napoleon, at tho very moment he was preparing t-he most fotv midable attack that ever threatened England, said, that the going there was less embarrassing tiian the coming back in the face of a nation. that would rise to a man. What, was truo then holds good to-day, and this- is-what renders so impolitic the passions of those who rave about an invasion of England. What do they want ? To destroy her manufactories, to burn down her capital ? Assuredly not; such acta of barbarity would be an anaohronisra—thoy. are no longer possible. But, then, why invade England ? France also has been invaded, not by a single army, but by the whole of Europe. Is she now less strong, ies3 great, less -feared ? “ England, a great maritime Power, is. not, and- never will be, a great nrlitary Power. But in place of an army of soldiers she has her legions of working men, who constitute her glory and her fortune, and who secure to her the only preponderance to which she can, ought, and desires to pretend. It is against this army that wo ought to combat; and on this point' wc are perfectly agreed with 31. da Moray, and we borrow, unhesitatingly, his o,wn words:—

‘ This is the sort of war which we must wage with England ; let us complete resolutely all our means of transport and locomotion; let us place them in communication with our coal mines; let U 3 reduce the duties on raw mater'a! and on manufactured goods; let us imitate the English people in everything iu which we are wanting ; let us seek our streugth in the spirit of joint companies without always appealing to the Government for aid; let us learn how to turn credit to account; let ub endeavour to acquire and preserve, by a prudent use of it, that liberty which makes a man the absolute master of l.is own property, and which i 3 only limited, by'wrongfully acting towards others. Yes, let U 3 wage against England a commercial and industrial war, a, fight of progress and civilisation, frauk, straight forward, tending to the benefit of all parties.’ “ 7'inVis the true language of a politician. : If certain journals and certain personages iu France had never held auy other languagemud never expressed other sentiments.. M. do-

Moray would not have to complain of articles of English newspapers nor of speeches in Parliament. Those speeches and those articles would have been without motive, without c.use, and, at any rate, without echo. France and England have nothing to gain ; on the contrary, they. have to lose immensely by weakening each other. Their security, their grandeui’,: and their influence command reciprocal protection and mutual aid. in their.liberty anil the promotion of their welfare. They will thus substitute an enlarged, humane, and glorious policy, for that narrow, anti-social policy which has so long inflicted evil on Europe. Routine and prejudice may murmur and protest, but reason and good sense will applaud, and that is sufficient.”

[From tbe “ Times” Sept. 2.] Under one instigation or another the truth always comes out There is never wanted a candid Englishman to warn his country of her foibles; and we have contributed ourselves as much in the way of honest advice as any other journal. Even tbe amour pr opr e of France is .not so engrossing a passion as to preclude an occasional confession, and even homily, from some side of her own people. The article in Je Pi 'esse, of which wo yesterday gave a full trauslation, is so truthful and'plain-spoken, that had it first appeared in these columns it would certainly have exposed us to the charge of offering nei dless provocation to our susceptible neighbours. Indeed, we arc not aware of anything that has been said here on the subject of our mutual jealousies that is not to be found in the article before us. It is true that it has been elicited by an .exceedingly reckless tirade addressed by M. de Moray to the organs and mouthpieces of public opinion in this country. Yet, though a Frenchman may feel on this subject that the truth is not to be told at all times, the truth is told here, and cannot be seriously disputed. We all of us, including M. de Moray and the Presse, agree in the admission that there is ‘ vague mistrust’ and a revived antagonism between the two countries. There is a mutual comparison of armaments, and an apparent determination in each country not to be behind the other. This is, unfortunately, common ground between us. The question is, bow has this been provoked, and what is the precise character of the excitement on each side. It is •this question that M. de Moray has slurred over, or prejudged with the assumption that the feelings of England and of France, of the British public and the French nation, are all the same; only that England took the lead, gave the provocation, and has been more insolent in the expression of her hostility. As this assumption, that England feels towards France as France does towards England, and that the antagonism is simply as that of two animals .lighting to be chief of the herd, only the one more irritable and menacing than the other, appears to be tbe main sophism in M. de Mor * tty’s remarks, we will deal with it forthwith. The British people have not the least wish to inflict any injury on the power, the prosperity, the honor, or the feelings of France. We have more sentiments and ideas in common with her than with any other country of Europe. We value her alliance, and think it both an honour and a support. We should gladly see France advancing pari passu in the same path of industrial, commercial, and colonial progress as ourselves. Of course we would rather she had the same political institutions as ourselves, hut we see this cannot be. There is, then, no malice, not even rivalry in our sentiment towards her. The very idea of our invading France, attempting to dictate her constitution, or molesting her commerce, is simply ridiculous. France, therefore, has nothing to fear from us, unless, indeed, in tbe case of a general European war, which would create new passions of its own, and range states according to the feelings and conveniences of the hour. It is not true, then, that there has been revived, in London at all events, the prejudices of a past age—the passions of Trafalgar and Waterloo. We do not believe it to be true, and there is no reason for the allega tion, that any journal, orator, or politician of any kind has said a word to excite the susceptibilities of France, or create alarm, for the selfish reason assigned by M. de Murny—viz. :for the sake of popularity. The only feeling of the British people is a simple apprehension of finding'themselves some day the object of attack by an ambitious, fickle,'and excitable neighbour, and a consequent determination to be prepared for the emergency. With us this is entirely a matter of self-preservation. We do not wish to take from I ranee one acre, one town, one ship, one man ; but neither do we wish to lose one. We are painfully aware that now for several generations it has been the natural instinct of France to perform a grand part in European politics, and compose her internal troubles, under a military dictator, or an absolutist dynasty. It is a feeling not wholly independent of this oi that man, this or that family, and nobody here dreams that we should find France a safer neighbour under tbe temporary check of an experimental Constitution. But a nation which; has made up its mind to be governed by a military chief, which emphatically seizes that refuge from internal disorders and that instrument of national glory, must ever inspire just apprehensions in a neighbour as emphatically resolved against this course. Were .England now to find such a Government established in London as it sees in Paris, we should expect to see half the middle and upper classes of this country following the example of the Pilgrim Fathers in a similar emergency. A Great Eastern a week for ten years would hardly suffice for the exodus of everything that is really British in these isles. Whence this overpowering feeling of our nafures ? It is the habitual resolution to be our own-masters. We will not de-

pend upon tbe caprice, the folly, or even the wisdom of any one man. If such be our feeliug with regard to our own institutions, the occupant of our palaces, and the head of our own army, our own civil and ecclesiastical establishments, it is not extraordinary that we will not depend on the mercy or the sanity of the man, whoever he may he, occupying the Tuillerxes. There is no mincing the matter, and w r e say it with all respect, we have just seen in Italy a specimen of what such a man may do, without any preparation, and with the ordinary peace establishments of France. As the Presse reminds us, France is now* aware, and was told a fortnight ago by a member of her Corps Legislatif, that “ henceforth, at her own pleasure, and choosing her own time, she can suddenly throw from 50,000 to GO,OOO men on any point she pleases of an enemy’s territory.” So, even if feelings be put out of the question—even if it happened that through some common pursuit England and France were at this moment in a state of more than common accord, still we should make a point of being prepared for a change in her feeling or policy. This would be nothing more than a logical sequence from the. jealousy we show in our domestic institutions. We will not be at the mercy of an Englishman, much less, therefore, of a foreigner. This is the only sentiment which is allowed to show itself, and to influence the conduct of England. No doubt there are people here, as there are everywhere, who crave for the excitement of war it matters not with whom. But this is not the ruling sentiment, nor the sentiment of any but a very small minority. England only consults her own safety. “ The Nestor of the House of Lords,” as the Presse calls him, could have no wish to leave a legacy of strife to his countrymen; he couhl only warn us for peace and security. In like manner, none of the additions lately made to our “ defences,” as we justly style them, conld be construed into a menace. We wish the same could be said of tbe immense military and naval armaments of France. For what are the latter intended ? Certainly not for the protection of France against this country. But, as the Presse observes, it is too evident there is permitted to show itself in France a deep, a widespread, a downright hostility to this country, one of a nature to find vent even in actual invasion. It broke out into outrageous, expression on the occasion of the at entat. It is avowed by M. de Moray, who only wishes to represent it as the common sin of the two countries. It has been repeatedly assumed by the Emperor, who claims credit for repressing it, and bids us beware of it, should circumstances render repression no longer possible Indeed, with an army of half a million, every officer of which has a direct interest in war, it is scarcely possible that the hope of “glory” and conquest should not be a national appetite. History proves too well how armies react on their chiefs, how little able a great empire may be to defend itself from its own defenders. We are bound to contemplate with the utmost respect, the near presence of half-a-million armed men and a fleet almost equal to ours. As to the further question of the chances of success, that is a point on which \ye must judge for ourselves and allow no doubt. The Presse thinks the idea chimerical; it recalls our great feats of defence and the weight of our interference in European war. It laughs at the thought of a maritime coalition against a Power so great and so situated as we are; it denounces the sheer folly of an invasion, whatever mischief it might perpetrate for the hour. We cannot let these things he a matter of risk. It is much more to the purpose that the Presse, adopting the language of M. de Moray himself, urges France to a generous rivalry in the pursuits of peace, as the right way to forget the passions that drive men to war. It is here that France has to make up for lost time, and win her proper position among the great nations of the earth. To do this we have assisted her, and shall assist her again. This is a glory which is not won by the defeat of others, and a wav by which one may be greater without another being less. Let France take to this, and she would find us confiding friends as well as faithful allies.