Daily National Intelligencer

FROM THE NATIONAL ADVOCATE

THE WAR IN EUROPE.

After many revolutions, appears at last to have reverted to the original ground upon which it was waged to destroy Jacobinism, and to defend religion and legitimate government. But, "the child and champion of Jacobinism," has destroyed his parent, re-edified the altars of religion, and established a government as legitimate as an hereditary throne and an order of nobility can make it. At another time, the war was continued to prevent France from acquiring "ships, colonies, and commerce." Again it was persevered in to prevent the Bonapartian dynasty from reigning in Spain. But at length the old pretext is revived; the Bourbons are to be restored; and then the lion and the lamb are to lay down together, and the nations learn war no more.

As one half of the national debt of England was contracted in opposing the inordinate ambition of the house of Bourbon, so the other half has been accumulated in endeavoring to reinstate them in the throne of their ancestors.

To this end the Count de Lisle, styling himself Louis the Eighteenth, has been persuaded to issue a proclamation to the people of France, soliciting them to let him come and rule over them. We understand that with a view to a developement of this plan, the French princes have been lately brought forward in England, and treated with more respect and attention than they had been for a long time past. As the English nation now understand what they are fighting for--as the other pretexts for continuing the war are but subordinate and secondary to this ultimate and more comprehensive object--they can now have an opportunity of determining whether it be expedient for them to continue the war for its attainment.

Let this question be resolved by the English people as it may, another, not less important, presents itself to the French. Will they consent to the restoration of their ancient dynasty, and to accept a king of English choosing? In order to answer this question, it is only necessary to look into history, and see what the English themselves have done in a parallel case. Although infinitely diversified in manners, customs, and laws, nations are pretty much alike in their great features. Now, it is well known, that when, at the revolution of 1688, the English and Scottish nations thought proper to change their king (the Irish were not consulted in the business) and elevated William, of Orange, to the throne: Louis the Fourteenth waged war after war with them, for the purpose of restoring James the Second. To this end, rebellions were stirred up in the British isles; and the French government did not desist from this attempt to force a king upon them until the year 1745. During all this period the British resisted the attempt at an immense expense of blood and treasure. Why did they do this? Because they knew that if the Pretender succeeded, he would be a mere vice-roy for the French king--that their country would be reduced to a mere province of France--and their national renown sunk in the superior lustre of their rival. For the very same reasons, the French people will not now consent to the restoration of the Count de Lisle.

But this is not all. In this proclamation, issued at Hartwell, on the first of February last, it is stated, that "on the subject of property, the king, who has already announced his intentions to employ the most proper means for conciliating the interests of all, perceives, in the numerous settlements which have taken place between the old and new land-holders, the means of rendering those cases almost superfluous. He engages, however, to interdict all proceedings by the tribunals contrary to such settlements; to encourage voluntary arrangements; and, on the part of himself and his family, to set the example of all those sacrifices which may contribute to the repose of France, and the sincere union of Frenchmen." Our readers cannot be ignorant that more than two-thirds of the landed property of France has shifted owners by the revolution. All the estates of the crown, of the church, and nearly all those of the nobility, were confiscated and sold. Of course, the titles of the present proprietors are precisely the same with the title of the present government, and strictly bind those proprietors to oppose a counter-revolution. The founder of the new dynasty has dexterously availed himself of this circumstance; and it forms a part of the coronation oath of the French emperor, that he will protect and defend the title and right of property of the holders of the national domains. It may easily be conceived what an important interest is thus set to the support of the new government.

How is it that the Count de Lisle is taught to attempt to detach this, and to conciliate in favor of the pretensions of himself and his family? Not by unequivocally confirming the titles of the new proprietors, but by declaring that he will encourage settlements with the former proprietors, that is, if the present holders will buy their lands over again, their property shall not be disturbed. Poor prince, his pretensions are too humble for such a declaration to avail him any thing. This unexampled change in the landed property of the country would prove a bar to the hopes even of a more able pretender to the throne. But when Napoleon throws his sword into the other scale, it kicks the beam.

We therefore think that this object, for which the coalesced powers in Europe are continuing the war, is an impractical one.

If, then, Britain cannot hope to accomplish her design of crushing France as a rival commercial and manufacturing nation--if she cannot prevent her having ships, colonies, and commerce--the real, true, unchangeable object of the war on the part of the British government:--is the ostensible object of the Russian court, the restoration of the balance of power in Europe, more likely to be realized?

We will not now inquire whether this balance of power ever had a real existence--whether it was not a mere chimera in the brain of the statesmen of the old school. This much is certain, that it was never effectual to preserve peace in Europe for any considerable period--nor could it prevent the partition of Poland, or the destruction of the liberties of Holland by the Prussian bayonets; nor has it had any real existence upon the ocean since the battle of La Hogue. The present question is, can Russia, whose people are not yet civilized, whose court is intoxicated with the most insatiable ambition, though the personal character of the Sovereign is confessedly amiable; whether this power would, if she could, or could if she would, restore things to their former condition--restore Poland, whom she had herself robbed and devastated, resuscitate Prussia, whom she despises, or raise up Austria, whom she hates and fears? We confess, that viewing things with impartiality & indifference, without a regard to the interests of our own country, we see no grounds for hoping that any better order of things can arise in Europe from the present struggle---that any good can result to the world from the late successes of Britian and her allies. Look at the spirit with which they make war in Europe, in Asia, in America! Consider that they have all the colonies, and nearly all the commerce of the world! that they boast of civilization: of arts; of letters; of science; of religion! And then see how immoderate is their ambition; how insatiable their avarice: how barbarous, cruel, and treacherous their enmity. By the red glare of the conflagrated hamlets in the western wilderness, their human sacrifices are consummated. The ocean casts from its heaving billows the reflected light of burning towns, once the seat of comfort and domestic felicity. Conquest is not their object--it is plunder and massacre which glut their infernal fury-- But thank God! the spirit of a free people is not to be thus quelled. The nation is rising in arms, and these insolent invaders will not long be permitted to exult in their fancied invincibility.