A LETTER FROM PARIS.

[At a meeting of the Conservative Club, held on the 1st of January this year, the following resolution- was passed unanimously--Moved by Lord STUART DE Romsay, late Ambassador at Paris, seconded by Lord HEYTESBURY, late Ambassador at Petersburg: That the able and in- teresting Report on French Politics just read be printed for the use of members.] A copy of the report or letter in question has fallen into our hands. If not able and interesting. as described-above, it is, at least, very entertaining; being written without di$,Ittise by a thoroughgoing. Tory. We shall therefore insert it, in parts, as we may find room, for the amusement of our readers.

TO THE SECIIETARY OF THE CONSERVATIVE CLUB, LONDON.

Paris, Christmas-Day 1832.

Sin—At length I am able to comply with the wish of our Club, by submitting to them a report of my observations on the state of French politics. But first, let me own that I came to Paris with mistaken opinions concerning the July Revolution and its probable results. Those notions were put into my head by the letters of 0. P. Q. in the Chronicle and of PETER HOGG in John Bull. Your attention being called to the subject, you may now observe with surprise that Repub- lican 0. P. Q. and Conservative PETER Honcinvite their readers to the same conclusion,—namely, that the present French Government is unpopular, weak, and sure to be succeeded ere long by pure Demo- craey : but your wonder will cease when you learn that the letters of PETER Bonn and 0. P. Q. are written with the same hand. I have a motive for alluding to this -curiosity in newspaper literature. One person, being, the writer of these .Tory. and Radical letters, a mere back who has no opinions of his own, why should he place his subject in the very same light before two adverse classes of readers ? I explain it thus. The antagonist readers of John Bull and the Chronicle agree on one point,—that is, in disliking the present French Government'; and the sole object of this writer for pay is to please his readers'. If LEWIS Pinup were overthrown, either by' HENRY the Fifth or LA- FA.YETTE, this scribe would paint the new Gevernment in black for_one class of his customers and in white forthe other; but the existing Juste Wen being equally hateful to the Destructive; and Conservatives of ngland, PEi ER HOGG agrees with 0. P. Q. or if you like, 0. P. Q. rues with PETER Bono, in describing it as abominable, unstable, on he verge of destruction. You may ask, however : " As English Con-

evatives wish for any thing rather than Democracy in France,—as they

ong for the triumph of HENRY the Fift13,—why does PETER Hoou, vriting to please them, foretel the triumph of LaravErre?" Because, answer again, it is the business of John Bull's correspondent at Paris

o heap abuse on the existing Government of France. To describe

hat Government as tending to legitimacy, would be to praise it in our ease ; and this would offend the readers of John Bull, who will not ear a word in favour of LEWIS PHILIP. PETER HOGG knows that,

ith our Club, the greatest demerit, the most detestable quality, whe- her in a man or an institution, is Democratic tendency: therefore he preSents.LEWICPHILIP and his " Charter a truth" as tending to De- nocraey. Besides, however anxious to please the dear Duke* and the lub, he !mist be guided a little by facts ; 't would be flying in the

face of facts to assert that the triumph of HE the Fifth was possi-

ble even, unless preceded by a reign of ten r The prostitute does .evidently pay some regard to facts ; for if he ot, if truth and false • hood were all one to him, he would, as 0. P. ., to please his Radical

readers, show LEWIS PHILIP as tending to L macy,—that is, fright-

ful in Radical eyes ; whereas, I repeat, his res for our Club and

!the Political Unions are very like each otherit:':';

' Such a writer, you may think, is beneath nottce ; but wait a moment. Too many Conservatives turn a deaf ear to every statement that does not square with their own predilections : now I want to make the whole Club understand, that my object in this report is, not to flatter

anybody, but to tell the plain truth, whether it be pleasant or disagree- -able to those whom I address. Self-delusion is the prevailing sin of aaur Party. Are not we out, and a laughing-stock ? Why, I should like to know, considering that the roots of our power run Ilider every louse in England? Why, indeed, but because the dear Duke's para.. itites made him believe, such a belief being pleasant to him, that Eng . land still wished Birmingham to be virtually represented by the Mem- 1)er for East Retford. If, at the critical moment when HUSKISSON 4urned Whig, the state of popular feeling as to the House of Commons 'had been truly described to the dear Duke, our party might have been :saved by the sacrifice of half-a-dozen boroughs. I did my best, in the Querterly, to open the dear Duke's eyes ; showing the necessity of some Reform, long before the cursed. Bill was thought of. But our

Jeaders would be blind, and therefore we slipped ; I will not say fell, ii'or though out, I have discovered in France a way by which we may . Tget in again. Wilful blindness, however, may yet prove our destruc- ' tion. Even now, in so far as the politics of England depend on those -of France, our party is groping through darkness to perdition, turning .bbstinately from the light. Do I despair of the Conservative cause ?— Quite the reverse ; but, in the name of all that is worth preserving, I say, let us for once, amongst ourselves afIeast, take an impartial and complete view of our situation, instead of looking always at that side

- of it only which at the moment of Observation offers the most agree- able prospect. Our newspapers vowed that this election would give A1S a majority spite of the Reform Bill, and that England would not

:Perrnit a Whig Ministry to attack her ancient ally. What stuff and .nonSente ! Yet we believed it all as gospel truth. To please us, our -newspapers deceived us. Because we hope that the state of France is such that it must be worse before it is better, the Tory correspondent

=cf./aka Bull at Paris swears that a reign of terror is approaching. Let the Radicals believe 0.P. Q., and be hanged; but oh, Conservatives ! beware of flattering tales invented to sell Tory newspapers! From. me you shall hear nothing but the truth. Learn, "Sir, nevertheless, that I have observed and that I write with It strong bias. My principles are decided and unchangeable. I am an '8nglishman all over, and care nought for French politics except as they infblence the Government of our country. Bred; born, and educated -a Tory, I could not live under despotism I hate Democracy and4ove Aristocracy. Above all things, I admire despotism, English Constitutioh; as ttled in 1688, and worked until Lord LIVERPOOL'S death. May this rofession of faith convince tbe Club of my devotion to our cause, not- vithstanding that I have been led to form opinions concerning LEWIS HILIP and his Charter very different from those which are taught by he Parisian correspondents of Tory newspapers. With a view to preserving untouched the aristocratic constitution of ngland, it has always appeared to me desirable that France and Spain ad Germany, the whole Continent of Europe in short, should be verned despotically. There are some good Tories, I know, who ink otherwise, supposing that the establishment in other countries f constitutions like our own would promote the stability of our con- titntion. They found this belief on the imitative or rather common nature man ; saying, if aristocratic government were Universal, the English ould never think of becoming singular by turning either to despotism r democracy. Yet, in spite of this principle of sameness, the English ve stuck for a hundred and forty years to a Most singular mode of overnment. Our friends, who would set up constitutional govern- meta throughout Europe, cannot have observed the usefulness of con- trast between the evils of despotism and the glorious privileges of ,a broad open oligarchy like that of England. or near a century and a half, the constitution of England has been "the envy and admiration of Surrounding nations." If surrounding nations had been governed constitutionally, each by a numerous privileged body, consisting of nobility, clergy, and gentry, with what face could the rulers of England have told the English people that their government was the envy and adnhiration of other countries? - The saying was true, because Eu- rope was governed despotically : being true, it made a profound im- pression; fixed in the mind of the - English people a belief that their government was superior, unique, inestimable; confounded the few who dared to talk of mending the government ; was in fact the palla- dium of our constitution. But, lest you should still doubt the advant- age; of being able to draw comparisons highly-favourable to-our consti- tution, I would remind you of what happened in England When the • Country clergymen and other Conservatives who dp not frequent the Club, are in- formed that to distinguished Conservatives, Princess Lizvin and Lady JERbET.always Airpeek of his Grace`the Duke of WELLINGTON as " the dear Duke ;" and that the term se now generally used in the Club. French tried a republic. Did not -the people of England ral y ound their constitution ? Did not the very mob shout Church and Ring?

By contrasting our government with despotism, we tickled the national vanity; by contrasting it with the reign of terror, we created a national panic; drawing from both sentiments attachment to things as they

were. I do not deny that the principle of sameness might be worked with good effect; but I prefer beyond measure the principle of contrast ; and every admirer of poor CASTLEREAGH will agree with me : ask my . Lord HEYTESBURY, better known abroad as Sir WILLIAM .A'COURT.

For my part, therefore, I would have the government of France either despotic or democratic; though, of the two extremes, I should choose a democracy, provided (mark the condition) it were fierce, bloody, destructive, worked so as to frighten the people of England. I deeply regret the break-down of POLIGNAC, who intended to restore " strumpetocracy," and still more the fall of NAPOLEON, whose high police set our constitution in its best possible light ; I have grieved over the moderation of the Parisian rabble during their Three Days; I wish that little Godgiven were King of France without a constitu- tion, or that France were subject to a reign of terror. But, my friends, of what avail are wishes? I came hither not to enjoy pleasant day- dreams, but to learn the truth, however painful.

The truth, as I shall establish by and by, is that the state of France affords not the slightest prospect either of despotism or of democracy. Constitutional government, the Charter a truth, is firmly established. You shall not wait long for proofs. No sooner was I convinced of this disagreable truth, than I said to myself: Well, to know the worst, is a great point gained, since it is the Way to make the best of ever so bad a business. This consideration led- me to inquire whether, after all, the Charter a truth was so very bad a business for our cause. Mind, having a choice, I should prefer the men of Ham at the head of affairs, or a new ROBESPIERRE; but there is no choice. Whom, then? The next best thing, as it strikes me, for our cause I mean, is a good strong aristocratic government in France, a system of rule as much as may be like that which we hope to preserve in England. The principle of eon- trast failing, the principle of sameness comes into play. There are despotisms enough in Europe to set off the beauties of aristocracy. -Supposing the government of France to resemble that of England in Lord LIVERPOOL'S time, though we could no longer say that our con- stitution was the envy, &c., still we could preach that many nations envied and admired the constitutions of France and England ; adding (mark this), that the French, after trying all sorts of governments, had ended by copying our perfect constitution. Though our constitution should be no longer inimitable, it would appear more and more worthy of imitation. 'Moreover (I beseech your attention), it does not follow that because a republic was tried there would be a reign of terror; and where should we be, having one without the other? Nay, if a democracy were tried, I verily believe that it would not be attended with any such useful horrors as marked the experiment of 1792. The materials for a reign of terror are wanting. I shall dwell further on this point here- after; my object in just noticing it here being to show our friends, that, provided the Charter a truth suit our purposes, we have a deep interest in its preservation. French affairs might be in a better state for us, as they might be in a Worse; but will the present system serve our turn ? this is the question. LEWIS Pnrr.te's Charter is not, I grant, the best possible thing for us ; but it may be, for us, the best thing possible. All depends upon how that Charter works ; and this I am - about to describe to you. You are now, I hope, prepared for the drift of my report. I shall en- deavour to convince you, first, that the Carlists are mad ; secondly, that the Republicans are contemptible ; thirdly, that LEWIS PHILIP is a King such as we ought to cherish, forming part of a system of govern- ment which deserves the affection of our Club. Finally, I shall pro- pose to the Club a plan of conduct for restoring our party to its ancient supremacy ; a profound scheme of policy, which has been suggested to me by observing how nine tenths of the. Conservatives here, though pitched headlong downwards by the July Revolution, have managed to light upon their legs.