The Sun.
London, England, 1870-10-01 00:00:00

OUR COTEMPORARIE

Morning

ENGLAND AND THE WAR.

The Times teniarks that the Ministers of the Crown(
have met, and have separated with the conviction that
they have done all they could up to
.this moment, and th it
the time has not yet come to abandon the policy of obser-
vant neutrality. The conditions of one week are not those of
the last; for instance, the Germans, in possession of Toil
and Strasburg have a different base for negotiations front
that on Which Count Bismarck and M. Jules Fevre dis-
cusssed the arreistice, Should the Germans capture tvrecon-
tignous forts outside Paris, there would again be a change ire
the relative position of the combatants; while a single defeat
of the investing army by the French would more than
compensate for the capture of Toni and Strasburg.
The question for our Government, says the Times,
19 whether at any moment the prospects and temper
of the belligerents are such as to encourage the hope:
that negotiation will be successful. If so, it mai
tender its good offices; but to do so prematurely ertaa
only weaken its own influence. On this subject it
may be said that, according to all appearances, the
Germans are resolved not to negotiate until • they
are .fully in possession of the frontier district they
desire to annex. They believe—and, no doubt, with
justice—that no French Government would cede Metz sot
long es it was held by a French army, unconquered though
imprisoned. 1 hey believe also—and probably with ecnialt
justice—that Marshal Bazalne, so long as he has a:
barrel of flour, will reject with contempt an order
from the Provisional Government to evacuate the
place. Should his 'firmness frtistrate the designs of the
enemy and keep Metz permanently. for France, there
iv-ill be nothing he cannot claim. The Germans, therefore,
insist that the principal question connected with
the restoration of peace has not yet been placed by
events in a fit state for discussion. The state of affairs
et Paris is analogous to that at Metz, and diplomacy
equally awaits the prior arbitrament of war.
The Daily News asks it readers not to believe that the
holding of a Cabinet Council so early in the year means
that the Ministry contemplates some grand stroke
of diplomatic intervention, and remarks •---We
must not repeat the calamitous mistake which
was cominitted when Lord Palmerston anti
Earl Russell made, by implication, promises§ to
Denmark which that brave little State took as the
pledges of England, but which England firmly and justi.y
refused to endorse. We must not even expose ourselves to
the fruitless humiliation of another rebuff such as that
which we received when we called on Russia to kt Poland
alone, and were contemptuously bidden to mired our O«11
hisitiess. Any one who takes the trouble to read AL
Jules FaVie's recent Report will be a sanguine person in-
deed if he can extract from it one gleam of hope for pre-
sent diplomatic intermediation. It is a melancholy docu-
ment for more reasons than one. Every heart must
sympathise with the manly and patriotic Frenchmanborne
down with grief for the suffering which has fallen upon
his country, and ready to sacrifice every personal feeling
and partisan interest to save or serve her. But it is
impossible not to see that Jules Favre himself is stilt
possessed, with the conviction that when France got rid
of the Emperor she had done all that ought to be
asked of her as a condition of peace. He seems to forget
altogether that France dethroned the Emperor, not
because he invaded Germany, but because he did not
invade her ; not because he attacked Germany, but
because he attacked her unsuccessfully; not be-
cause he claimed her Rhenish Provinces, but
because he failed in grasping them. • It would be im-
possible for any German, when M- Favre appeals to the
fact that France- has overthrown the Empire, not to
remember that the, Empire was overthrown only because
it did not succeed in humiliating and dismembering Ger-
many. The very arzument M. Favre employs to save'
the Republic from loss of territory must be in German
eyes the strongest possible argument to show the neces-
sity of territorial security. " Spare us," pleads
M. Fevre, "we did not make the war." Admit
the principle, and why should not some other French
Government say hereafter to Germany, " Don't talk to us
of engagements; we did not make the peace." M. Favre's
mind is yet full of illusions, most of them generous and
honourable, but illusions still.