The Sun.
London, England, 1870-10-26 00:00:00

IHE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1870.

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1870.

LONGFELLOW, in his noble poem of "The Saga of
King Olaf" puts in the mouth of the war-god Trion,
among other cries of exultation, these—

The light thou beholdest
Stream through the heavens,
In flashes of crimson,
Is but my red beard
Blown by the night-wind,
Affrighting the nations I
MAUPERTUIS, writing in the earlier half of the
eighteenth century, and describing the Northern
Lights he himself had often witnessed,
during his Norwegian travels, spoke of them thus—
" Sometimes," he says, " they line a part of the
sky with scarlet. On the 18th of December I saw
a phenomenon of this kind that in the midst of the
wonders to which I was every day accustomed ex-
cited my admiration. To the south a great part of
the sky appeared tinged with so lively a red that
the whole constellation of Orion looked as if it had
been steeped in blood. The moon shone brightly,
but did not in the least efface it.
In this country where there are lights
of so many:different colours, I never saw more than
two that were red, and such are taken for presages of
some gnat misfortune. After all," adds the great
French philosopher, with a generous readiness to
palliate the extravagances to which popular supersti-
tions often run, " when people gaze at these phe-
nomena with an unphilosophic eye, it is not sur-
prising if they discover in them armies
engaged, fiery chariots, and a thousand other pro-
digies." Supposing, for example, there had streamed
across the night-sky, more or less all over England,
seven or eight weeks ago, instead of late on the 24th

of October, the magnificent spectacle witnessed here
by multitudes on Monday evening—the red beard of
the old Scandinavian war-god blown across the
heavens, in flashes of crimson and carmine
and scarlet, would have seemed more to harmonize
with the horrible slaughter then deluging the earth
with blood at Sedan and, before Sedan, upon the
other earlier fields of carnage. News of the nego-
tiations opened by England, with the assent,
if not the actual concurrence of the other
great neutral powers, had only just become
known amongst us, when this portent
in the sky became visible. Strangely enough, how-
ever, while the heavens were aflame with the
northern lights—when the shy was blood-red from
the zenith to the eastern and western horizon
(appearances described a hundred and fifty years ago
by the French philosopher MAIIPERTUIB as
" taken for presages of some great misfortune")
the news was hastening to us that these last auspi-
cious suggestions of an armistice had come to nothing,
by reason of Prussia peremptorily requiring that
France should consent, on principle, to a cession of
territory ! Surely, to all Europe, a great and
grievous misfortune indeed ! A misfortune almost
terrible enough to be presaged by those crimson
flashes across the heavens.

THE announcement made by the Berlin correspon-
dent of the Times will take no one by surprise. Tele-
graphing on Monday evening, he says, " The latest
suggestions concerning an armistice come to nothing,
in consequence of Prussia demanding that France
should consent, on principle, to a cession of terri-
tory." This "principle "it seemed too probable
that France would not concede, and it was for
this reason that the Times seemed to us to be in
error when it vehemently called upon Government
to do something. It may be that even now a
favourable change will take place, but this does not
at the time we are writing, seem probable. The
fact is France is now, as Mr. GREG has said in his
second letter to the Pall Mall Gazette, the victim of
the "Nemesis of Falsehood." When, after the
battles of the first week in August, the French
Government ceased to tell the truth, and
whether Imperial 'or Republican, published
a succession of lying despatches, the authorities
tried an experiment which is always danger-
ous, and 'which is not seldom fatal. Even
when the newly-established Government of National
Defence did for a few hours speak the truth, and
announced to Paris the capitulation of MACMAHON
and the imprisonment of NAPOLEON, the effect
which a knowledge of the truth should have pro-
duced did not follow, The French nation did not
see that it had been beaten. It saw only in the rout
of September Ist the overthrow of a dynasty and the
removal of that obstacle which alone prevented France
from becoming ultimately victorious. Eight weeks
have passed since then, weeks full of disasters :
fortresses have surrended (Schlestadt is now added
to the list), great cities have been entered. Metz
itself we may hear at any moment has fallen.
The war is no longer confined to Cham-
pagne, it has rolled westwards and north-
wards and southwards into Normandy, Picardy, and
the valley of the Loire. The long list of disasters
and defeats has not been redeemed by a single
decisive victory. The condition of France is abso-
lutely desperate. There is no part of the country
which can reckon upon immunity. The Germans
are übiquitous, irresistible. There is absolutely no
reason why they should not take the western
naval ports of Brest and Cherbourg, attacking them
from the land, and thus covering the whole country from
Alsace to Bretagne. The Capital has been so
strictly invested for six weeks that the inhabitants
know nothing of what is going on outside, but
flatter themselves with cheating hopes of groat ar-
mies that are marching to their aid. This invincible
ignorance prevents all efforts at peace on the part of
the Ministers who are outside the Capital. They
dare not, without the consent of Paris,
make such a peace as the Germans would
accept, and Paris will not give her assent, because
she does not know how hopeless is the condition of
the whole country beyond her own walls, how
powerless the departments are to help her, and,
therefore, how desperate her own position
is. So long as this ignorance continues,
we see no chance of any good result
attending an armistice. When the one
party insists upon a condition which he is strong
enough to enforce, and the other refuses to yield it
though too weak to offer an effectual resistance,
what common ground have they, and where is there
room for the most earnest of mediators ?

Even if BISMARCK had not insisted upon the
recognition by France of the principle of a cession of
territory, we do not see how the negotiations for an
armistice could have been brought to a satisfactory
conclusion. The object of the armistice was to let
the elections to the convention come off. But
BISMARCK would most assuredly never have suffered
"Elsass " and " Lothringen " to take part in
them. He claims them as German terri-
tory. He declares sarcastically that it is only
in those provinces of France that there is any
settled Government ; ha means to retain them when
the war is over. How, then, could he have per-
mitted these ELsatians and Lothringers to perform an
act which would have established their continuous
union with France ? Another lesser difficulty presents
itself. If there was to have been an armistice
how would the belligerents have arranged with
regard to supplying the besieged places ? If
Paris had been allowed to take in a fresh supply of
provisions this would have been equivalent to the
receipt of a reinforcement, and would have been
detrimental to the German interests. If that con-
cession had been denied, then, as the consumption of
food would have been going on while the armistice
lasted, the Germans would largely have benefited by
it at the expense of the Parisians. The same
difficulty would have arisen with regard to the other
beleaguered places, especially Metz, where famine has
been making fearful havoc. Perhaps the diffi-
culty would have proved more theoretical than
practical. If the Germans had signified their
willingness to allow the besieged cities to
replenish, some of them, at all events, would not
have taken advantage of it, for the sufficient reason
that there is no food left in the surrounding dis-
tricts. However that may be, the other objection
would, we imagine, have p roved almost insurmount-
able.

What, then, aro the neutral Powers to do ?
There is nothing that they can do—nothing even
which Professor MAX MuLLEn has recommended in
the able letter bearing his initials published
by the Times—which they have not been doing
already ;—endeavouring to persuade the French that
they are uselessly prolonging the war, and must grant
the conditions demanded of them by their conquerors,
and endeavouring to persuade the victors to be merci-
ful in this their triumphal hour. If further representa-
tions are likely to be of any service then, in heaven's
name let them be made, and let no fear of a rebuff
divert us from the blessed part of peacemakers. But
we sadly fear that all such representations are in vain.
This last refusal of the French to yield the one con-
dition which the Germans declare essential will only
exasperate the Germans and make them resolved to
prove to the French that they must yield what is
asked of them. Every unsuccessful attempt at
mediation will only embitter the conflict, and harden

the victors, because they are once more disappointed
of the hope of peace. In proportion to their disap-
pointment will be the firmness of their resolve that
they will make such a peace as shall ensure them
against all future attack. We cannot find it in
our consciences to say that they are wrong. We can
only hope and strive to falsify our own anticipation
that the time for successful mediation is not yet.
No one would rejoice more than ourselves if swifter
electricity should outstep slower penmanship, and
if our telegraphic intelligence should contradict the
fears which we have expressed in our leading
columns.