FOREIGN POLICY OF GREAT 13121TAI N.

LETTER ADDRESSED TI) THE LORI) VISCOUNT PALMERSTON, MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, lIY O. P. Q. Paris, 30th April 1834. My Lonn—It is no! renege' even fez. a Secretary of Foreign Affairs in Eng- land, to be the beet dancer at Almaeles—to have the beet-made coat in the House of Commons—to be the best-dressed matt at the Queen's Drawing-room —to write a Site bold hand, between round text and small copy—to " hem " and " ha " to perfection at least six or seven times, before, during, and after the shortest possible speech—to shake the head with winning grace, and smile over the right shoulder, and through groves of whiskers, with matchless witchtay and surprising exactitude : it is not enough to lounge into the House with a bending foot and swinging attitude, between the fieetedity of it minuet and the life of :t galop—to have a clear voice, a well-made collar, a cravat without a plait, and a boot without a crease—though all of these lie rare and admitted qualifications. You remember what SA 1.131sT said of one who was too fine a dancer to be a virtuous woman—.

0 Sultan. elegantius Team nereSSe (St prWyr."

Nor is it enough, to have applauded CANNING, when he exhetisted all his ill.timed mirth iii ridiculing and goading linorcita ot ; nor to have corre- sponded with the Duke of ORLEANS during the reigns of Lours the Eighteenth and CH A as ES the Tenth, and have belonged at that time to his party ; nor to have " always taken in French newspapers ; " nor to have visited the Place Vendome every two or three years ; nor to have been the most obsequious admirer of the Duke of Weeretteceros, and yet the fiercest nominal opponent of his political system ; nor to have belongeel to an Adniinistration which was com- pelled to grant Reform after having ever voted against that Reform on every Parliamentary division ; nor to have come in for Cambridge on Tory interests, and remained Secretary of Foreign Affairs on Whig principles ; nor to be able to cast accounts, make up balance-sheets, and, finding- that the profits of Downing Street always greatly exceed its losses, to hold on a consistent course of 'form indifference to the true interests of the human race,—leaving chance, or events, to form British foreign policy without any regard to fixed principles, except that of the fixed receipt, every three months, of a large fixed salary. The times are coming, yea now are come, my Lord, when these qualifications of a British Secretary' of the Foreign Department will be adequately appre- ciated, and when public opinion will demand a change in the direction as well of its foreign as its domestic affairs. To assist public opinion—to aid that exami- nation which must and will be made—is the object of this letter : and I am about to convict your Lordship of a long and continuous course t f total igno- rance of the state and wants of Europe and the interests of Great Britain, and of a lamentable indifference to the cause of rational and well-regulated liberty over the whole world.

Never since the period of the first movements of the French peophe at the close of the eighteenth century—and never before that period, in the history of Great Britain—had a Minister of Foreign Affairs a more commanding and impottant retie to fill—more sublime or immense interests and destinies committed to his hands—or a wider scope for generous and lofty efforts than Lone, Viscouter Pe herellsrox, Minister of Foreign Affairs to WILMA M the Fourth, King of Great Britain ; and never, on the other hand, was a policy more short-sighted and petty—more ungenerous and little—more speculating. and tricky—inote opposed to all the vast movements of human society, and to all those aspirings after emancipation and happiness, which were so universally felt and expressed after the French Revolution of 1830. All that is animal, mercenary, avaricious, cowardly, intriguing, and petty—all that is personally tyran- nical and dynastically . despicable in the conduct of certain Courts and Monarchs—has been encouraged at the Foreign Office in London ; where the Ex-Bishop of ACV.; N has ruled over the British Foreign Secretary, and Las succeeded in assuring the adoption of the worst possible system of foreign di- plomacy and foreign policy. I do net judge of this policy from its failure— though its non-success is, to a certain extent, an argument agaimt its selection; for I protested against this system from the first sweep:it you: Lordship was named Foreign Secretary ; and all the results I anticipated from a perseverance in that line of policy have, with but one exception, been realized. That excep- tion is a "general war." But there is a " peace " which is not only more igno- minious, but also more onerous than even war ; and there is a state ef sham peace and affected harmony, which is any thing but the prelude to permanent

sunhat or real alliance. You have failed in Beecz ; you have failed in Po-

al) ; you have failed in Russia ; you have failed in GERMANY ; you have failed in TURKEY; you have failed in FettaxcE; and you have failed in Ira LY ; you have failed in SPAIN; you have failed in PORTUGAL. I shall not think of closing this letter, until I have substantiated these charges of failure, by. most undoubted facts: and asyour journal, the GI, ,4c, has thought fit to attack what it terms the 0. P. Q. school, we will see who has the right to laugh the loudest, and we know beforehand who will laugh the Lest. But mere failure is no crime. It is a great fault on the part of men who have vast re- sources at their disposal, and agents in their power: but it is 110 ab- solute crime ; and I can just imagine the case of a Foreign Secretary who, though his policy should be generous, national, civilizing, and leiniane—free, enlightening, and just—should be compelled by slope] ior fur: es to submit to, though not acquiesce its, another line of policy to that which he pretCrred, in order eventually to gaits greater good and more lasting support from those who for the moment, out of self-defence, would be compelled, if not to oppose, at least to decline to support him. I say, I can just imagine siee. a else as this, where the flow ant jeure would for the moment stamp the foreign policy of a Alinister with the mark of "failure " upon it, and yet where the fault would not be attributed to the Minister himself. But this my Lord, is not your case. The.system you have preferred and followed out was your own choice ; and the consequences should not excite any surprise, since they are most natural and in- evitable. You have " preferred darkness, rather than light "—preferred the des- potism of the Holy Alliance, to the frank and generous union of the people—pre- ferred the triumpli of a sordid, a gold-amassing policy, to a geneapes and noble sys- tem of action—preferred the old and beaten paths of a routine of diplomatic servility to old-established Governments, to an independent march and a lofty and national line of action ; and, route qui route, you have aided in preserving a momen- tary semblance of peace, listening to assurances which you were bound to disbelieve, and placing faith in protestations which it was your duty to reject. The failure of your system is not, then, the crime, but the consequences of your guilt ; and although your own followers—those who have urged you on in the course you have pursued, and cheeredyou on your way, are unjust to you when they re- proach you with your utter failure—for they had no right to anticipate success —the Radical party—the "0. P. Q. school," as you term us, in France and in England—have the right to examine your system, to reproach you not merely for your failure, but fur your original crime, and have the right to say, as we do say, that a worse Foreign Secretary never, in the history of the British dominions, was called on to preside over the high foreign relationships of a powerful and great people. Suffer me, my Lord, to substantiate my assertions. I could fill volumes with facts, documents, despatches, protocols, and decrees, in corrobora- tion of my allegations ; but I will present an analysis, which shall not be less convincing fur being less detailed.

1st. There is not a real, durable, honest, frank, and well .based, well-argued, and well-regulated alliance between France and England.

The alliance which exists between the two Governments is not a discussed,

digeeted, and sincere alliance. Nothing has been settled about BELGIC NI an I the Southern provinces, which are Frence. Nothing has been settle41 about ALGIERS am l the course to be taken for its coloeization. Nothing has been settled about a Treaty of Commerce between the two countries, uur relative to the Custom-Laws of the two nations. Nothing has been settled with France as

to the line of conduct to be pursued in the Turkish, German, Swiss, Polish, and Spaniel' questions. And this quadruple alhance, so nub boasted of, is but another " myetification ;" for though the alliance is made a great matter, it is net a defintel, positive, or active alliance. It is useless to talk to practical men —to men who have means of information quite equal to your own, and com- munications nearly, if not quite as ftequent, and even more rapid, with every quarter of the world, of the " moral " efthct produced by your new sestem of mere " nominal alliances." We who mix up with the actors in this world's drama, and form portions of those actors ourselves, are not to be deceived with

the specious assurances of the vast " moral effect " which the mere signing of a piece of paper, called a treaty, which is never to be more than signed—and ne- ver more than a treaty—is to produce on Europe. The 44 alliance" between France and England is known by every attucla, at every Embassy on the Con- tinent to be a mere nominal alliance. The real alliance desired by the people of

):nth countries has not been made—has not been signed or ratified—and cannot be, till great acts of mutual concession, and mutual allowances shall have been made—and that openly and honestly, in the face of heaven and the world. It

is downright nicking to talk of au "alliaare," an " intimate and most close alliance," between France and England. Such an alliance does not exi,t. The French (lesite it, and the English wide it : but the little petty transactions, quibbles, and clwatings, of both their Governineuts impede a frank and an limiest bond fide understanding. And this is the precise character of your Foreign policy. You have agreed with the Prinee TALLEY:IAND to play the same game for the end of each month—to meet obstacles as they arise, as well as you

can—sometinue4 to assert one opiuion and sometimes another—sometemes to meintain the necessity of non-interventien, and at other times to intervene— 'sometimes to appear to threaten the Northern Conine, but never to 'novae them to 'attack you—sometimes to appear to be resolved on marching with the people, but afterwards to qualify the effects which might follow from such appearances, by obeying the orders of the Kings—and sometimes to toss up "head" or

" tail," trusting to your good luck or accident to decide which course is best for you to pursue. This is the character of your system ; and therefore there is no real alliance between France and England.

2nd. The British Government has made no manifesto on any of the vast points of European policy and general importance.

Why is this ? Why do you flatter the I'tussian Government—conjure the Cabinet of St. Petersburg to believe in your sincerity—coact with Austria on - the best means of putting down the spirit of liberty in the German States—and yet espouse, at least nominally, the cause of Donna elenre and the Queen Regent

in Portugal and Spain ? For this obvious reason—that, in all matters of foreign policy, you have no fixed principles. In one part of Europe, you are a pa ty (at Vienna) to the measures taking against the German Constitutions; and at another part of Europe (Portugal), you are encouraging the Portuguese

to demand and obtain a Constitution, which afterwanls you will not support. In Seers., you ate favourable to the Movement party, whilst France has been

opposed to it ; and yet whetever " turns up " is adopted, and even approved, as

far as the world can see, by both parties. In Powrenee, you are discouraging the Movement party and attacking CAILVA1.110; whilst in Seain, after having stuppon tea and c nmeelled Zee, you were the first to rejoice at his downfall. There is nothing reid, or durable, or dignified, or great, in such a shuffling., uncertain system f o this : and the consequence is, that the very last alliance

which is courted at the present moment is a British Government alliance. Neither Kings nor people, neither lelinisters nor Ambassadors, have, or can, or ought to have, confidence in such fickleness and want of principle: and the

Paces at this moment ( I proclaim a great truth tvlice I say this) have more confidence in the Court of St. Petersburg. notwithstanding all its deepotism and cruelty, than in the resnisfirtints policy of Lott! PA NI ERST( x. ad. The British Government has most materially injured the hopes and expec- tations of the Liberal party, not only in France, but all over Emce:.

To a vet tain extent, my Lord, your antecedents have correspowled with your eubsequent conduct ; and you have the right to ask, 44 When dill I advocate the

cum of freedom ? when did I espouse the cause of the people'.' and when did I

give any token of my attachment to the cause of civil liberty ?" I answer, all this is true: but the simple fact of your accepting eflice under Lord G nsv, who came in and retained place because supported and confided in fur a certain

time by the people, was to Europe at least an evidence that the treaties of 1815 Were nut in future to be ['melded's Political Bible, and that a more lite:: al end

enlightened policy was by her to be pursued. But the reverse of all ihie has

been the case. Not one generous effort has been made, net one bwei fide act Las been accomplished in behalf of the people of Europe, by the British overu-

vent. I may point to GERMANY in a special manner, where, through lanover, a vast deal might have been eeheted for the liberty of the press and of the Chamber of Repreeentatives, and yet where nothing has been done either by

Lind PA LnERstoN or the Ilaneecrian Minister. I may point to Poe.. lee,

where unheard-of cruelties contil fle vibe par:hated, a:el little she t of a war of cxtennination is cattied one I may point to the Poteso lteruer es, driven

about, or rather hunted down like will 'waste, by orders of the Cz ir, whilst

England lucks me and asks 44 What can I do." So far " removed from the scene of action ?" By joining in the senseless hue and cry against the Liberal

party in France, the British Goverieuent has encouraged the Callinets of the

North of Europe, and di:emir:ger! the people ; whilst by its preeraethettien and timidity, it has canned thoueands of vietiles to eider and the in Spain and Portugal, who seenild never have perished hail Eughind at once shown her resolution to espouse the cause of rational and at least of Constitutional freedom. ZEA lips been encouraged iii his Manifesto, Bee cos in his resistance, and

now 'Me wriN s:z DE LA HOS% ill his concessions to the people: and in a little

time, a new resistance, a new counter-revolution, will be either got up or approved by Britigh diplomaey at Madrid. At one time, Doe Peoeo has

been supported,—at another tune, opposed ; at one time, urged to go on,—at another, to come to terms: and not wore variable are the winds at the Equator than is your Lordship in your Foreign despatches. This is a notorieus and admitted fact.

The mere fact of the existence of a WHIG MINISTRY with such men as GREY, BROUGIAM, and ALTHORP, at its head, naturally and justly excited the hopes and raised the expectations of all those who in other lands had for fifteen years been subjected to the oppression and injustice of the treaties of Vienna. The people were out to be blamed for those hopes. The letters, the promises, the engagements, written and made by all those statesmen whose names I have just cited when out of office, to distinguished Poles, Spaniards, Portuguese, Germans, Italians, and Frenchmen, had not been, and would not be forgotten. They 11:141 become in many eases historical documents, and were known to all the enlightened and leading portion of the Movement party on the Contineut. Besides these intestinal and even private engagements, the Whigs had also been pledged publicly before the whole world, in fifteen sessions of Parliament, to aid the people in the destruction of the principles and the measures of the Holy Alliance ; and yet not one of those promises have by you or your coadjutors been redeemed. Before you consented to form part of a GREY and Whig Cabinet, you slenild have known, my Lord, that the people of Europe, though they expected little from your Lordship personally (and who could be sottish enough to expect much ?) amic'pated a vast deal from term with whom you associated ; and you shuttle have well uuderstoel, and well meditated on the implied and tacit as well as express and written or verbal engagements, entered into by the Whigs with the leaders of the eloveineut party—with the Revolutionary party in other countries—before you consented to join them : and having joined them, it was your duty to fulfil not only those engagements, but even those expectations which the names of Gary, BROUGIIA al, and ALTHORP, at the period (though not now) could not fail to excite. By acting otherwise—by pursuing a narrow, selfish, mercenary, and short-sighted policy—you have compromised the cause of the people, in no way advanced the cause of civilization and liberty, and discouraged the generous and the enter- prising in those attempts and sacrifices which the Whigs for fifteen years before you joined them, had pledged themselves personally and by their iniuciples to support.

Leseev, your policy, your negotiations, your plans of settling European

affairs, have not only been injurious, but have also been uNSUCCESSFU I.. I have reserved this charge to the last, became the non• success of a measure is to me no evidence of its character, or even its aeaetation. But in your ease, as by your foreign policy, foreign agents, and foreign despatches and intrigues, treaties, and protocols, you have sacrified a frank :mil national alliance, which might have been made with France—have, in order to please the holy Alliance (1 speak advisedly), neglected to make any manifesto of fiweign policy on the part of the English Government—and have, in order to iesure a momentary peace, and an appareut though not real hammy among the 9onernors—sAcri- tired the cause of the people everywhere, and the interests of the yocernal—at least you should have succeeded, and at least the objects you have in view should have been gained. Well, then, the reverse of all this has beeti the ease. You have granted all, and received nothing. You have made thousands of sacrifices of British, French, and the People's interests, everywhere; and nowhere are you repaid by even civility or common politeness. Not one benefit have you se- cured in exchange fur the numberless insults, degradations, and injuries to which you as Minister of Foreign Affairs in England have been compelled to submit. And not only as Minister of Foreign Alleirs in England, but as Minister of one of the two countries (the other being France) which, by their national and re- volutionary movements, as well as by the long-professed and avowed characters of the men called at last to govern them, had naturally excited amongst other nations corresponding resolves and high determinations of national independence. Nor is it any suit of excuse to you, my- Lord, or to your coadjutors, that you have merely followed out plans concerted by the Tories, and negotiations com- menced by them. in the first place, in some cases this has not been the fact ; and in the second place, in the cases where it has been so, it is no excuse to say that nothing has been changed in the foreign policy of England, but the names of its diplomatists. But I accuse you of FAILURE. And I do so, 1st, in the case of Russet and T uRIC EY. You undertook a mediation too late; your mediation was not backed by ananny and fleet ; your despatches to Constantinople were uncertain and vague ; the agents to whom you confided the negotiations were inadequate to the vast task they undertook ; and by Russia you have been dead beaten. There is no use mincing words in such grave matters as this—you have been dead beaten.

And 1 accuse you of failure, tad, in the affairs of ToRKEY and Enver. You in- terfered in that dispute too late; Austrian and Russian influence supplanted you. The voice of the British Minister was not even heard. The Paella and his sort peel no attention to any but Russian and Austrian counsellors and in Egypt you have failed as signally as you have in Turkey. Nothing there is settled. Turkey is left to expire of consumption' and whilst Russia preys on the caducre, Egypt is hoarding up her resources and extending her influence, preparing for new conflicts—awl 1 hope and trust, new triumphs. The success of Egypt should have been assured against Russian intrigues, when Turkey was succoured too late to be relieved from both her enemies. But now, Turkey is to be given up imperceptibly to Russia ; and yet Egypt is not to be fortified, but discouraged. And faccuee you of failure, 3d, in the affairs of BELGIUM and HOLLAND. I say, a total and a signal failure. Nothing is settled as to the question of the Pays Ras. The Belgian territory, after four years of negotiation, is not even yet chalked out. Armed bands enter the supposed Belgian territory, and take away even governors of provinces, incarcerate and insult them, and arc not even punished for so doing. Dutch men-of-war guard the mouth of the Scheldt. Belgian commerce with Germany and the Colonies is destroyed. The workmen at GIILNT are kept in order by Two 3IILLIONS OF FRANCS distributed amongst them. The Southern Provinces cry aloud for a reunion to France. No treaty is signed between ilollaind and Belgium. Both countries are keeping up im- mense standing armies, the expense of which is more injurious to the latter than to the tinnier people ; and the King of Holland has more partisans in Bel- gium than the French and English puppet, King Leoroen. 4th, You have failed, signally failed, in the PoesrUGUESE question. Lord WI! LIAM 11 CSSELL'S mission failed. The intrigues against Don Peneo have failed. Tile intrigues for the Juste Milieu party id that country have failed. Your attempts to make a sort of sham British Constitution, and a docile Government of foolish complianms, and timid, nervous, unsuitable policy, have failed. Multitudes, thousands of victims, have perished whilst you have doubted, lissitated, and ' hemmett!"—and indeed whilst you have fiddled or danced, Oporto and Lisbon have blazed. This sort of " Open your mouth and shut your eyes, and see what God will send you " policy, may be very sentimental at Al- mark's, and very popular in " the Park ;" but men of sense and men of feeling all over the world condemn it, as cowardly, undecided, and unworthy. Aud I tell you candidly, my Lord, that no one has any sort of confidence in any results to be obtained from this 44 Quadruple treaty," so much talked of, between \Vie- ws' the Fourth, Locus Plume, Donna Mettles, and Donna Is ABELLA.

5th, You have failed in Spain, in Italy, and iu Switzerland. In SPAIN, you have failed to maintain 'LEA—to prevent revolution—to put down the Carlists- to put an end to civil war—to prevent Catalonia from moving—to satisfy the Not thorn Courts—and to place the Peninsula on a footing of large and liberal

institutions. After all the concessions, and all the prayers and tears made and shed, you have failed. The last.naincil treaty is mere deception. In Ireev, you have failed to convince the Pope that he should grant institutions to the people, and to compel the King of Naples to listen to the voices of those who demand a Constitution. And in Sverrzetreeen, yon have failed in your en- deavours to prevent the derangement of the political system established by the treaties of Vienna ;—for the king of Prussia, is about to separate Neufchatel front the Swiss Confederation, and thus introduce into the South of Europe Prussian and monarchical influences.

And finally, you have failed as to POLAND! Lord DURHAM'S mission to Russia was unavailing. Your subsequent requests have all been rejected; and the Poles arc to be driven from Europe to Algiers or to America, or are to languish in French prisons, and die of disappointment and want. The case of Poland is the worst of all—the very worst—nothing can be so bad. English interests, French policy, the balance of Europe, the cry of Liberty, and the voice of humanity, all demand Polish nationality and Polish independence. But, alas! alas! Lord PALMER.STON is Secretary of the Foreign Department. Russia sneers at such negotiators !

I have done—not for ever, but for the moment. On an early occasion I shall returu to the subject ; but in the mean time subscribe myself, my Lord,