The Sun.
London, England, 1870-08-04 00:00:00

PUBLIC FEELING IN DENMARK.

The Standard hears on good authority that the Govern-
ment are doing everything in their power to maintain a
strict neutrality. But it is greatly feared that the popu-
lar feeling will be too powerful. The King himself is
already incurring great unpopularity from the attitude
which he has taken up, and nothing short of an active co-
operation with France is likely to satisfy the people of
Copenhagen, who represent in this case the wishes of the
Danish nation.

GERMAN FEELING TOWARDS ENGLAND.
BERLIN, MONDAY.

A first glance at the German papers leaves it almost a
matter of uncertainty whether this people is at war with
England or France. The former State seems to fall in for
quite as hard measure as the latter. The columns of the
newspapers bristle with angry and c.ntemptuous terms—
treachery, ingratitude, bad relationship, and all that
kind of thing. Either the Germans are on very badterms
with the English, or they are endeavouring to persuade
us that they are. Articles, full of the strongest condem-
nation of England's attitude, appear in all the leading
papers day by day. The ostensible point of attack is the
method of enforcing her neutrality which England has
adopted. Germans coavyn that English neutrality
is favourable wholly to fiance, and thoroughly disadvan-
tageous to Prussia. France has the command of the seas,
and is, therefore, able to procure English coal, horses, &c.,
which are all denied to Germany. Here we have a speci-
men of the difficulties which beset States that
endeavour to maintain an attitude of impar-
tiality without sympathising with either. Coal
and horses are contraband of war when they are supplied
clearly for the use of a belligerent; and it would seem
that the English Government will prevent the furnishing
of coal to the French vessels. But horses can be
prevented from going over to one side or another
only by totally prohibiting their exportation. Is it
fair that the English trader should thus be
deprived of the chance of getting the best market for the
article he has to sell ? If horses be thus dealt with, why
should not provisions, &c., share the same fate ? The
Germans, in fact, would have England share the burden of
a war for which she is not answerable, and which she
strongly condemns. On what principle are the British to
be subjected to such a loss ? In every war the nation
which can command the sea gains thereby a decided ad-
vantage over the other, and it is not for neutrii peoples
to make good the deficiency. Indeed by urging
the justice of the German case and similar
pleas, the papers here clearly express the view that Eng-
lond ought to openly sympathise with Prussia, and, by
exceptional measures, deprive France of the advantage
which she enjoys as a naval power. They would like the
neutrality to be converted into a Prussian alliance.
The Cologne Gazette is the worst offender with
this discreditable writing. The other day that
usually respectable journal published a most abusive
article, comparing England to an " army of lions led by
hares." To-day it comes out with a similar production.
" On all sides it is stated that Prussia has laid an official
complaint against the development in favour of France
which British neutrality is taking. England, it appears,
will enrich international law by a new theory of neutrality
in time of war. The English supply the French with
coal, horses, and pilots, and yet they set themselves up as
neutrals, and when the Nortlr German Ambassador made
representations to Earl Granville he took refuge in empty
platitudes, of which he, was not sparing in the
Upper House when the question was put to him.