21 SEPTEMBER 1844, Page 11

TOPICS OF THE

THE WOES OF THE WAR-FACTIONS.

THERE is to be no war at this bout. The bombardment of Tan- gier, the bombardment and blockade of fvfogador, and the victory- on the Isly, have brought the Emperor of Morocco to his senses ; and France, flushed with victory, has granted him the same terms which she offered before hostilities commenced. France has honour- ably kept her word with neutral nations, as well as observed mode- ration towards the Emperor: orders have already been despatched for the French troops to evacuate the little island of Mogador.

France has taught the Emperor of Morocco and his turbulent subjects to feel her power. To deprive France of any pretext for renewing hostilities, they have only to respect the neutrality of the frontier. The lesson has been short though sharp ; and the Moors have shown great quickness of apprehension in taking it up. Had England interfered by an attempt to arrest the progress of the French arms, it would only have complicated the affair, encouraged the Moors to prolong an unavailing resistance, and involved herself in a quarrel in which she had no earthly interest. The speedy termination of hostilities and the moderation of France have vin- dicated the noniuterfering policy of the English Cabinet—have shown that French honour or French caution, or both, sufficed to keep the French Government within the bounds of justice. English prudence in abstaining from interference, and French prudence in using success with moderation, have preserved the peace of the world.

The disconsolate mood in which the English War-faction has re- ceived the news would be ludicrous but for the mischievous spirit it evinces. All its predictions of French usurpation and encroach- ment have been falsified : the French have not retained an inch of ground in Morocco ; they have not availed themselves of victory to obtain one exclusive or invidious privilege there. All that England could honestly desire has been gained by observing a fair neutrality. Yet the Chronicle of this week is inconsolable, not for the result, but because it has not been obtained by other means ; and darkly hints that all is not yet secure. What those other means are, is not very clearly explained—" The first policy of the British Go- vernment ought to have been, to prevent this war and those expe- ditions altogether." How was this to be effected ? And the vati- cinations of future broils and humiliations are oracular in the ex- treme — " Millions will not purchase the prestige which Lord Aberdeen and Sir Robert Peel have thrown away, and which might have been preserved, we thoroughly believe, without war." " It will soon be seen whether the present Ministry, with its blow- hot and blow-cold organs, have adopted the best mode of getting honourably and pacifically through such frequently-recurring crises." What would have been " the best mode," is not explained, unless perhaps by the honourable and manly suggestion, that "it would have been wisest to feign acquiescence in what we could not prevent."

All this is sheer silliness—the " maunderings" of a man convinced against his will—the discontent of the tempestuous father in Paul Pry, who storms though he has got his way, because he has not had it in the way he likes. But when the same journal proclaims that " the Restoration left France under a cloud "—that M. GuizoT has restored to France the "independence" of which she had only a " show " under the elder BOURBONS—and makes this an article of impeachment against the British Ministers—it does its best to persuade the French nation that the diatribes of the War-faction at Paris are truths, for that England seeks by fraud or force to hold France in a subordinate and degraded position. A more false re- presentation of the feelings of England towards France cannot be imagined—nor a more mischievous, for it is calculated to excite a natural and justifiable hatred towards England on the part of France.

There is a curious similarity in the language of the French and English War-factions. The spleen of both on finding themselves balked of a war finds vent in railings at their respective Ministers. The National, raving because M. GUIZOT has prostrated the honour of France beneath the imperious tread of England, and the Morn- ing Chronicle, swelling with turgid pathos because Lord ABER- DEEN has dishonourably quailed before France, are exact counter- parts to each other. They are the Colonel Bath and Sir Lucius Q'Trigger of politics consoling themselves for failure in an attempt to set two sensible men by the ears for nothing, by each reviling his principal as a scandalous poltroon. So long as the makebates of France continue to accuse M. Gni- zov of having sacrificed the honour of France, and the English makebates to accuse Lord ABERDEEN of having sacrificed the ho- nour of England, reasonable men will come to the conclusion that each statesman has acted exactly as he ought to have done. They will judge that the cause of quarrel which presents such a different aspect to opposing factions must be nearly as important as the gol- den and silver sides of the shield, about which, as the old tale tells us, two knights once did battle to the death. And they will thank Heaven that France and England have not been permitted to dis- turb the peace of the world by a war about such nothings as the independence of the nominal Sovereign of Morocco, or the reputa- tion of Captain D'AUBIGNY and Consul PRITCHARD for soundjudg- meat and moderation.