The Sun.
London, England, 1866-06-07 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—The events which have attended the
abandonment of the Conference show that the pro-
spects of its success would have been faint indeed.
Though Austria alone proclaimed her reservations
beforehand, and so disposed of the attempt, yet it
seems almost evident that not only Italy, but Prus-
sia too, entertained similar resolutions of foregoing
nothing. Unless, indeed, the Government of Berlin
were determined to keep the Danish Duchies at all
hazards, it would have no ground of complaint against
the present proceedings of Austria in referring that
question to the decision of the Germanic Bund,
inasmuch as that, beyond all doubt, is the tribunal
to which the jurisdiction pertains. It is true that as
the case stands at present Austria is under a private
engagement with Prussia to reject the authority of
the Bund, and settle the question by special arrange-
ment, and that is the weak point of the Austrian
cause. Still, however, the Convention of Gastein,
by which this understanding was established, repre-
sented only a provisional or temporary agreement,
and left the ultimate settlement of the question still
in suspense. The termination of the understanding
even if it had not been provoked by the insolent de-
monstrations of Prussia in the Duchies, could hardly
be equivalent to the violation of a treaty. It would
merely place the contracting parties in the positions
occupied before the convention, and that, indeed, is
the view on which the Prussian Government imme-
diately acted. Before the Convention of Gastein,
Austria and Prussia jointly occupied both Duchies.
After the agreement, Austria alone occupied Hol-
stein, and Prussia Schleswig ; and as the agreement
was terminated by the resolution of Austria to dis-
solve her private partnership with Prussia and refer
the whole case to the Bund, Prussia now claims the
right to share the occupation of Holstein as before.
This in itself is not unreasonable, but itmerely shifts
the difficulty from one point to another. The pre-
sent policy of Austria is just as irreconcilable with
the joint occupation of the Duchies as with their par-
tition, and the title of Prussia to occupy the Duchies
at all forms the new question before Germany.
It is as well to remember at this conjuncture how
the conflicting claims arose and were constituted.
The Germanic Bund, or Confederation of German
States, decrees " execution" against the King of
Denmark as Duke of Holstein, and marched a
Federal army into his Duchy. Had the operations
which ensued been conducted by these forces only,
and under this authority, the whole affair would
have borne a legal aspect according to European
law. We might have doubted whether the Duke
of Holstein had really provoked such treatment, or
whether the Confederation had been honest in its
pretensions, but the Diet or Federal Assembly was
undoubtedly competent to coerce or chastise a re-
fractory member of the body, such as the Duke of
Holstein was assumed to be. If, therefore, the
Federal troops, directed by Federal authority, had
first occupied Holstein and then directed the right
of succession in that Duchy, there would have been
no overt illegality in the proceeding. But such a
proceeding did not suit the views of Prussia. She
anticipated, with good reason, that the Diet would
assign to some independent Prince—probably the
Duke of Augustenburg the Principality torn
from Denmark, whereas she had long coveted the
territory for herself. She therefore thrust herself
rudely between the combatants, ejected the Federal
army, and took the work of " execution" into her
own hands. Austria, jealous of her pretensions,
and apprehensive of the consequences, demanded to
share in the expedition, and the Duchies--Schles-
wig as well as Holstein—were conquered by the
combined armies of these two great Powers.
The conquest was followed, first by the joint
occupation of the whole territory, and then, in
pursuance of the arrangement at Gastein, by the
allotment of Holstein to Austria and. Schleswig to
Prussia till a final settlement could be agreed upon.
These proceedings, however, were all in defiance
of German law. The combined expedition of Aus-
tria and Prussia into the Duchies was wrong ; the
joint occupation of the Duchies was wrong ; the
private Convention of Gastein between the wrong-
doers was wrong ; and it is only now, in forsaking
that Convention, that Austria is right. Austria
now, in acting with the Confederation for Federal
purposes, is in her proper path, and Prussia is just
as liable to a decree of Federal " execution" as Den-
mark was some time ago. She has not, indeed, a
single claim to advance, and it will have been seen
that she kas confined her complaints to the " arma-
ments" of other Powers,and her pretensions to vague
and obscure assertions of " legitimate" interests and
expectations. But these pretensions have no foun-
dation whatever. They only mean, plainly inter-
preted, that the Duchies were wrested from Den-
mark mainly by Prussian arms and at the cost of
Prussian blood ; that the actual position of Prussia
in Northern Germany points her out as the proper
successor to Denmark ; and that the Prussian Go-
vernment intends to support by might the small
amount of right which could thus be constituted.
But the Prussian army had never any business in
the Duchies at all. If any Power whatever had any
grievance against Denmark, it was not Prussia, but
the Germanic Confederation. The Prussian inva-
sion of Denmark was actually in violation of law' and
no lawful claims can be founded on its results. The
aggrandizement, again, of Prussia on the coasts of
the Baltic is a proposal to which Austria and the
other German States may fairly take exception.
Austria thinks her rival strong enough already ; the
others have found her insolent enough and domi-
neering enough, and have no desire to see
her territory extended or her power increased.
It is instructive to see how the great tempest is
rolling round to this point—the point where the
first wrong was done. It is all for Holstein that
Silesia is menaced. The armies of Austria were
drawn into Bohemia by the proceedings of Prussia
in Holstein, and by nothing else. The Middle Sttes
of Germany are collecting their forces to aid in
settling the Holstein question. Prussia knew all
this perfectly while she was complaining of gratui-
tous and offensive armaments. She herself had not
armed, but she was not, therefore, innocent. She
treated the Duchies, both in word and deed, as her
own, and it seems as if she would now have to fight
for them at last. But it is terrible to think how this
storm may spread. Italy, though not declining to
attend the Conference, made no secret of her designs
upon Venetia, to be asserted in any event and at all
hazards. But in the rear of Italy stands France,
and in the rear of Austria stands Russia, already
committed, in common opinion, to some interest in
the fray. It is even said that the designs of Italy
against the Adriatic provinces of Austria have sug-
gested some political concert between the Emperor
and the Sultan ; nor dees anybody seem to doubt,
indeed, that the war which begins upon the Baltic
may extend to the Black Sea. All this is for terri
tory. If the Austrian condition of forbidding, in
any case, the territorial aggrandizement of any
litigant Power had been admitted, the Conference
would simply have been superfluous, for on that
presumption there would have been nothing for
either Prussia or Italy to fight about. The neutral
Powers, of course, discerned the inevitable conclu-
sion. If Prussia would forego her intentions of
annexing the Duchies, and Italy her hopes of
acquiring Venetia, there would be no need for
States to meet in Conference. If Austria would not
allow of the annexation or give up her Italian pro-
vince, the Conference could make no approach to
an arrangement. So the appeal is left either to pri-
vate negotiation or to the sword.
DAILY NEWS.—The condition of the freedmen in.
the Southern States is the subject of much discus-
sion and of great divergences of opinion in the
American press. Mixed up as the question is with
the political quarrels of the hour, it is almost im-
possible to arrive at definite and trustworthy infor-
mation about it. On the one hand, the President
and his friends try to represent it in the most favour-
able light, and to prove that Congress, in its care
for their welfare, is doing more harm than good.
On the other hand, the advocates of negro suffrage
—among whom we may reckon many of the old and
honoured names of the anti-slavery party—repre-
sent it in the darkest colours, and ask for stronger
measures of protection than the constitution em-
powers Congress to provide. Each of the parties
has its theory, and interprets the facts in accordance
with it. The President's theory is that the South is
the true friend of the negro, and that the true wis-
dom is to leave his status to be determined and his
condition to be fixed by his former masters. His
policy proceeds on the assumption that a people
who went to war for slavery, who tried to build a
new social and political fabric with negro slavery as
its chief corner stone, are not only ready to accept
their disappointment and defeat, but to do justice
to the race they had thus hoped to wrong. The
theory of Congress is that they who have freed the
negro are bound to protect him, and that having
given him the rights of manhood, they should secure
those rights against infringement. The policy which
this theory suggests is that which is represented by
the present Freedmen's Bureau, by the Civil Rights
Bill, and by the proposed Constitutional Amendment.
It proceeds on the conviction that the best friends of
the negro are those who have given him his liberty
and elevate him from the condition of a chattel to
the status of a man, and that to leave him unpro-
tected and helpless in the hands of his former masters
would be to give him back to as much of the reality
of slavery as is consistent with the semblance of
freedom. Looked at in the light of those irrecon-
cileable theories, the most indisputable facts are
read in opposite ways. The President and his
friends charge the violence which so frequently
happens to the account of the very measure which
Congress has taken to provide against it. It is the
injudicious interference of the Freedmen's Bureau,
we are told, which excites the anger of the Southern

population against its wards, and leads to so many
outrages against their freedom, their property, and
even their persons. Let them alone, and they
would be gentle enough. On the other hand, every
act of high-handed violence that is attempted con-
firms Congress and the Northern majority in their
conviction of the need of protective measures. While
one side quotes the many favourable reports to
show the friendly tone of Southern society,. the
other quotes them to prove the excellent disposition
of the freedmen towards their work, and the ad-
mirable working of the Freedmen's Bureau. Mean-
while it is hardly possible to discover what is the
real disposition of the mass of Southern people, or
the actual condition of the great body of the freed-
men. We are, however, promised an inquiry into
this. The President has had a commission hostile
to the Freedmen's Bureau inquiring into its work-
ing, and exposing some irregularities in its ad-
ministration ; and now a joint committee of Con-
gress is likely to be appointed to take evidence
on it, and to report in full at a future day.
It is not in the least to be expected that the
two races will adjust their new relations without
difficulty on the one side and suffering on the
other. All the world knows what the ‘‘ mean
whites "of the South are. Constituting, as
they do, a majority of the Southern population, and
coming, as they now must, into direct contact, and
even competition, with the freedmen, it is abso-
lutely certain that they will not at once lay down
their pride of race, or learn to tolerate with dignity
the equality of the negro with them. The least
civilised part of the American population, celebrated
alike for their pride and their poverty, their violence
and their idleness, they are not likely to allow the
despised race of former slaves to stand on any equa-
lity with them without the protests characteristic of
them. We cannot bnt think that General Grant's
desire for the increase of the permanent Federal
army arises in part from the conviction that it will
not be safe for a long time • yet to leave the freedmen
unprotected. They have publicly complained that
they are frequently told, " When the Yankees
leave you had better leave with them, or you- will
wish you had." And one of the latest reports from
the South mentions that in the State of Virginia, a
freedman who was merely importuning a whiteman
for wages due to him was shot by the man on the
spot, and that on his trial by a white jury the mur-
derer was acquitted. But all this tendency to vio-
lence is miserably increased by the present state of
politics. The Southerners feel that they have n
friend in the President, and that he may possibly
succeed in thwarting the efforts of Congress to tie
their hands. A lingering hope still exists that some
substitute for slavery is even yet possible. Already
efforts are often made'to enforce " vagrant laws,
which are mere relics of slave legislation ; and wer.e,
the Freedmen's Bureau withdrawn, and the Civil
Rights Bill declared unconstitutional (as a Southern
judge has already ventured to declare it), such laws
would be at once in action as would make the freed-
man only free in name. This is the real issue be-
tween Congress and the President. Mr. Johnson's
policy is responsible in great degree for the unsettle-
ment of the relations of the two classes in the South.
It fosters illusive hopes on one side, and renders
beneficent legislation almost impossible on the other.
And if the great work of emancipatiOn should re-
ceive a serious check, and its completion be delayed,
history will hold President Johnson responsible for
the calamity.

COUNTRY MARKETS.