The Sun.
London, England, 1871-01-04 00:00:00

INVASION OF ENGLAND.

Some of the Times' correspondents with the Ger-
man armies, not being allowed to say much about
what they see, fill up with accounts of the enlight-
ened conversations they hear. It seems the German
officers are especially fond of discussing the prospects
of an invasion of England, and the Times' correspon-
dents have Jenkins enough in their composition to
retail this rubbish. Dr. Russell, at Versailles, sent
the first specimen of fleas at German headquarters
and the correspondent with Prince Frederick Charles
sends the second :—" What will people think at
home of no less gigantic an idea than a bridge of
boats from Calais to Dover or thereabouts ; not,
of course, as the means for a first landing, but
to pass over the reinforcements to a small
army landed first, and protected by field
works ? The channel would thus be treated as a
huge river, and it is considered that an army once
across could live uncommonly well by requisitions."
The qu(s!ion really is, "What will people at home
think of" the writer and the editor who allow such
stuff to be put in print ? The German fleet has
never yet shewn itself at sea since the beginning of
the war. No naval engagement has taken place,
except a brush between two little steamers at
Havana. Everybody knows that if the German
fleet had risked a battle, it would have
gone to the bottom. Yet the German
officers manage to persuade their visitors
that a stronger navy than that of France could be
overcome, and that a bridge of boats could be main-
tained across the Channel!

THE NRIV YORK PRESS ON GENERAL SCHENCK.

The New York Tribune says the appointment of
General Schenck as Minister to England was
accepted by the whole country as an assurance that
a settlement of the Alabama claims was to be in-
sisted upon. It is understood that General
Schenck is instructed to • demand payment
of the claims of American shipowners for
vessels lost, with interest added, reimburse-
ment to the American Government for expenses
incurred in consequence of the depredations of
the English Confederate cruisers, and public recog-
nition of the principles of neutrality insisted on by
the American Government. Such is the pleasant
programme of the Tribune. The New York Times,
always more moderate, and happily more influential,
claims for the Alabama question an earnest and un-
biassed consideration in the States, though it admits
the exact position of the discussion at the present
time to be most unsatisfactory. Ater tracing the
history of the dispute, the New York Times declares
the ill feeling and apparent indisposition of the
Americans to treat is the result of the English policy
throughout the civil war, and especially of the tone
of the English press. It warns the people, however,
that they must now dec;de whether they want to go
to war on the question or not. "We must
admit," adds the ?bites "that there is at present
a real dange • ~f our drifting into war. Next spring
will, in all probability, see Great Britain plungeci. in
a tremendous struggle with Russia, and such a war
would almost inevitably draw us in were the
Alabama claims unsettled." And it asks what
greater calamity could befall civilisation than such a
struggle between the two leading Christian Powers ?