Some of the French papers keep up the boiling cf
their own rage about the Queen's visits by dint of constant stirring. They have indeed standing invectives against Great Britain, the occasion being left blank ; and of course these visits are too notable not to be used while they last for filling-in the said blanks. The National declares that the Queen of England has insulted France, because, not having been to Paris, she has been to Brussels The Radical papers of France said that if Queen VICTORIA went to Paris, the National Guard or some other persons were prepared to insult her. The assertion was, doubtless, an extravagant invention, but they said so. Now one of them takes this position—that as Queen VICTORIA did not go to the French capital, where an insult was brewing, and did go to the Belgic capital, where no insult was ad- vertised, the French capital is insulted. The National says, that the act is a new box on the ear after the half shake of the hand that Sir ROBERT PEEL offered to the French Government ; and that the distinction between Brussels and Paris announces to the European Powers that the unlucky treaty of 1840 still subsists; also, that the distinction signifies to the aforesaid Powers, that although the British Government will treat with the Government of France, it will not treat with the Revolution of July. This is a bright idea of things to be recognized. Imagine a treaty com- mencing, " It is agreed between her Britannic Majesty on the one part and the Revolution of July on the other part," and so forth. Besides, in England we recognize the maxim " Qui facit per alium, facit per se "; so, as LOUIS PHILIPPE was appointed by the Re- volution of July, all that he does is the work of his author; and thus, if the French Radicals please, Queen VICTORIA has not only- treated with the Revolution of July, but has been treated by the Revoligion of July, and, what is more, has been kissed by the Re- volution of July ! Happily there are other opinions in France, and the able and dis- creet Journal des Debuts antagonizes the National. Whereas the National believes the " distinction" to mean what is set forth above, the Journal believes the visit to Eu to mean that the treaty of the 15th July 1840 subsists no longer. And as to the recogni- tion of the Revolution of 1830, the Journal asks, what people first, spontaneously and cordially, recognized it, but the English ; what Government, but the Tory Government of the Duke of WEL- LINGTON; what alliance has kept in check the hostility, more or less disguised, of another part of Europe, but the English alliance; what nation helped France to establish constitutional governments in Spain, Portugal, and Belgium, but England ? Which is all very true, and probably much to the purpose with the frowning politi-. cians of Paris.
Yet there is something ludicrous to us of England in thus as- cribing such awfully deep meaning to every movement of youthful and gay Princes. The effect of new experiences on the Princes themselves, and thus through them on their country, may be great ; but the oddity is the notion that their every act has, not only the ordinary motives, but some mystic signification besides. The French seem to have devised a novel use for royal personages, analogous to the hands of a telegraph or the signal-flags of the Navy. They imagine that diplomatists, instead of sending notes, according to the old fashion, have adopted a plan of pushing about Kings and Queens ; not, as in chess, directly to. further their game, but merely as signals to Europe. Thus the Jour• nal sees the Queen and Prince ALBERT at Eu, and thinks that Lord ABERDEEN stuck them there, for the purpose of signalling to Europe—" Le traits du 15 Juillet 1840 ne subsiste plus": thn National sees them at Brussels, and reads Lord ABERDEEN'S signal. thus—" Le traits du 15 Juillet 1840 subsiste toujours." If Lord ABERDEEN has been guilty of that inconsistency, he is highly cul- pable ; but we doubt whether this system of signals is yet in use here—whether Queen VICTORIA has become a mere hieroglyphic in the hands of the Foreign Office. Certainly we may venture to guess, that no one here thought at all about the treaty of July, ex- cept perhaps Lord PALMERSTON; and what he thought about it at
any given moment, we will not take upon us to explain. That England felt friendly to France, and therefore Queen VICTORIA felt free to go there—that England feels more friendly because she had a pleasant time of it—such we believe is the long and short of the whole matter : and is not that, a crowning act of conciliation between two great countries that were in danger of estrangement,
enough ? But that the journey to Eu and not to Paris, and then to Ostend and to Brussels, was a great plot of state --I Some statesman is said to have been so Macchiavellian that he could only dine by stratagem : the French politicians not only be- lieve in such stratagems, but think them dangerous to the nations I
