The Sun.
London, England, 1859-05-21 00:00:00

THE WAR IV IlAilr.

Last evening a public meeting upon the subject
of the war in Italy was held at the London Tavern, '
Bishopsgate-street. the large room of which was
completely filled some time before the hour an-
nounced for the commencement of the proceedings.
The Right Hon. the Lord Mayor occupied the chair,
and among those upon the platform were the Right
Hon. W. Cowper, M.P. Mr. C. Gilpin, M.P., Mr.
J. White (late M.P. for 'Plymouth), Professor New-
man, Mr. Nicolay, and M. Kossuth.
The LORD MAYOR, in opening the proceedings,
said that the first business which had that day
occupied the Common Council of the City of Lon-
don referred to the same matter that had called
that vast assembly together; and he had no doubt
that in its discussion both bodies would equally be
actuated by an unanimous desire to avoid the
horrors of war, to maintain this country in peace,
and to prevent the extension of the war and its long
duration. All must rejoice if the result of th
struggle should be to give to downtrodden Italy
her liberty, to restore her nationality, and to erect
another barrier for freedom against despotism.
(Cheers.) For such objects alone could war be jus-
tified, and our prayers must be offered to Providence
that the people should everywhere conquer, and
that tyrants should be taught more sternly than
ever that their honour, happiness, and long life,
and the well-being and prosperity of their subjects
were best promoted by the cultivation of peace, and
by avoiding the horrors of war. (Cheers.)
M. Kossurn, who was received with loud and
continuous cheering, said that the cloud which for
more than 40 years had been overcharged had now
begun to discharge the electric fluid. In this emer-
gency England ought to take a position of impar-
tial neutrality and strict non-intervention. (Ap-
plause.) If she by interfering did not divert the
natural course of events into the wrong channel, he
anticipated from the war which had just commenced
that advantage might arise to the nation with which
every aspiration of his heart was identified. These
anticipations did not arise from the excitement of
the moment, but were founded upon the incon-
trovertible axiom that the difficulties of the oppressor
might offera chance of deliverance to the oppressed.
Francis Joseph, the murderer, the lawless usurper
of his country, was engaged in a war, and, reflect-
ing upon the relative condition of the contending
parties, and upon the strategical necessities which
must develop themselves in the course of the war,
he came to the conclusion that at no distant time
emancipation might be within the reach of some of
those nationalities the oppression of which by Aus-
tria was the great European nuisance, without the
removal of which patchwork arrangements might
be devised calculated to disguise for a little while
longer the dry-rot of the political structure of
Europe, but both permanent peace and Vie settled
condition of the European community were impos-
sible. Her Majesty's Government had entered into
a public pledge that they would have nothing to do
with the war, directly or indirectly, but would
maintain a strict and impartial neutrality. So far
so good, but he made bold to say that if it was de-
sired that this principle of neutrality should assume
the character of a settled rule not subject to even-
tual modification, it was necessary that the expres-
sion of public opinion should be still more explicit
than hitherto, in order that there might be no doubt
as to the sense in which the people of these realms
desired that the principle of neutrality should be
understood, and as to the consistency with which
it should be acted upon. (Applause.) Neutrality
was a general expression, but it had a special mean-
ing, the bearing of which could not be fully
fathomed unless it was clearly understood with
which of the parties her Majesty's Government
would side in case they did not remain neutral.
Now, he did not remember to have read one official
or semi-official declaration which induced him to
think they would side by France, but he had read
many declarations which led forcibly to the infe-
rence that the alternative was neutrally or
support of Austria. (No, no.) It had been
said that England would remain neutral,
but that she would watch the turn which
events might take, and in the meantime arm,
in order to repel any aggression which might
be made upon her territories, colonies, or depen-
dencies. This had nothing to do with neutrality ;
for England would not be attacked unless she her-
self ran into war. (Applause.) It had also been
said that England would arm in order to be pre-
pared to protect her interests. So far so good.
But interest was a very vague word, and which
might mean anything or nothing. (Hear, hear.)
We had, however, been vouchsafed some foretaste
of what it might mean. We have been told that if
a French fleet entered the Adriatic, it might be the
interest of England to oppose it ; that if Trieste
were attacked, it might be the interest of England
to defend it ; and, by the Ministerial candidate for
the West Riding of Yorkshire, that if Venice were
assailed, it might be the interest of England to
protect it. To protect it from what ? From the
great misfortune of being emancipated from the
despotism of Austria. (Applause.) The alterna-
tive was either neutrality or support of Austria.
This should never be lost sight of, and therefore
much was left to be watched, controlled, and cleared
up by public opinion. The important question was,
what was the world to understand by the declara-
tion that her Majesty's Government were deter-
mined to take no part in the war ? Was this de-
claration attended by a proviso that the war should
be restricted to Ital, or was it meant that England
would remain neutral even though in the natural
course of events the war should extend to other
portions of the Austrian dominions ? There were
certain ideas or prejudices which,if not repudiated,
would be likely to drift England into war. These
turned mainly upon the erroneous interpretation of
the Italian question, the regard for the treaties of
1815, what diplomatists called the localization of
the war, and the greatest of all imaginable miscon-
ceptions' the opinion that the Austrian empire was
essential to the maintenance of the balance of
power. Each of these prejudices he would examine,
and endeavour to remove. The Italian question
was not one which arose from mal-administration
or misgovernment, and which might, therefore, be
put an end to by a seasonable concession, improve-
ment, or reform. It was a question of nationality,
and because it was so the first and foremost point
in its practical solution was the total and definitive
expulsion of the Austrians from Italy, in such a
manner that they should not be able to go back
again. (Applause.) This admitted of no compromise,
Either the Austrians must be finally ejected from
Italy, or the Italian question would recur again and
again. Nothing but the extermination of the Italians
could secure the rule of Austria over that peninsula,
and a nation of 26,000,000 of people could not be
exterminated. It was on account of this being a
question of nationality that in 1846 the inhabitants
of the Papal dominions declared that, however in-
supportable were their particular sufferings, their
questions of government were of secondary import-
ance. The principal interest was that of Italy, and
their objection to the Papal Government was that
it was the slave of Austria. For the same reason
the whole of Italy united in a crusade against Aus-
tria, and when the independence of Lombardy was
offered the Milanese refused to separate from their
Venetian brethren. They fought not for Lombardy,
but Italy. For the same reason the people of Pied-
mont, although contented with their own Govern-
anent, cheerfully submitted to the dangers, the suf-
feiiege, and sacrifices of a great war ; Republicans
rallied round a King who had inscribed " the inde-
penctailt^e of Italy" upon his banner, Tuscany had
thrown itself into the arms of the monarch of Sar-
dinia, and the French were received with rapturous
joy and enthusiasm. In all the transactions pre-
ceding the declaration of war by Austria there was
this shortcoming in the policy of the British Go-
vernment, that they did not view the Italian ques-
tion as one of nationality, but as one which might be
solved upon the basis of Austria retaining her pos-
sessions, provided she would pledge herself not to
interfere with the rest of Italy. lie would not then
enter into an argurnent,to showlhow impossible it was
that such a pledge should be observed ; but lie as-
serted that unless it was understood throughout-
Europe that the maintenance of Austria in her ill-
gotten possessions did not enter into the intents and
purposes of the British Government, England would
sooner or later be drifted into the war in conse-
quence of entangling alliances, for which it was
evident that mighty influences were at work.
(Hear, hear.) The excitement in Germany, attri-
butable to a false alarm, for it was absurd to sup-
pose that Franc; with one great war upon her
hands, would attack the Rhine—an attack directed,
not against Austria, but against Prussia—could not
be kept up unless it was supposed in that country
that the English Government sympathised with
I us!'ria, though she was entitled to retain her
Italian possessions, and were favourable to the idea
of maintaining the integrity of her dominions.
Austria had been stated to be kindred in race to
Anglo-Saxon England, but the Minister who made
that statement overlooked the fact that by the cen-
sus of 1851 she had only 7.000 000 of German sub-
jects out of a populationol'37,o'oo 000 To disabuse
Germany of the impression that existed'' there, that
in spite of the declaration of neutrality 'IF' land
would find some pretext for either directly. assisting
Austria or for assisting Germany
wihnileresistriov
France, it was highly important that
ing the proclaimed neutrality the public opinionapp of
the English nation should explicitly repudiate the
idea of, ander any circumstances, holding out a
helping hand to Austria. The next point was the
pretended inviolability of the treaties of 1815.
There could be no doubt that if England departed
from the 'principle of neutrality in favour of Aus-
tria it would be done on the ground or pretext of

that inviolability. The history of the last 44 years
was one continued protest against these treaties.
Every portion of them which was favourable to
liberty or to the rights of mankind had becn vio-
lated by the Sovereigns of Europe without any in-
tervention of England, and would this country now
take up arms to enforce their inviolability in favour
of that Austria which was good for nothing, except
to spread darkness and to perpetuate slavery ?
Let the people of England raise their mighty voice
and thunder forth the forbidding cry, " No, that I
shall not be." Let them give to the Government
the pillar of the freely expressed will of the nation
to lean upon. Let them remind them that they
were the Ministers of England, not of Austria—
(cheers)—and fortify their national position against
foreign interference. There was danger about.
They must not trust to appearances. A fleet had
been sent to the Mediterranean with sealed orders.
Might not this have something to do with the pre-
sence of the Orion in the port of Genoa, and the
refusal to remove her out of the way of the landing
of the French troops ? There might be a recur-
rence of petty annoyances such as to produce a col-
lision with the French, and, as the Times had pro-
perly warned us, we might go to bed one evening
believinc, ourselves at peace, and wake in the morn-
ing to find ourselves at war, for no better purpose
than the maintenance of the inviolability of the
precious treaties of 1815. Let the voice of the people
keep England out of war until Parliament met, and
Parliament would keep her safe when it assembled.
The hustings had given a guarantee for this ; but if
the people relaxed in watchfulness evil might hap-
pen, which even Parliament would find it difficult
to redress. (Applause.) The next prejudice with
which he had to deal was what diplomatists called
" the:localisation of the war." If this expression had
any meaning, it meant that the war should be fought
out upon Italian territory. It was, however, absurd
to say that if the Austrians retired behind the river
Tagliamento, which separated Lombardy from the
rest of her dominions, the French and Sardinians
should be for',idden to follow them, and that Aus-
tria while at war should enjoy all the privileges of
neutrality. Again, the strategical position of the
Austrian troops in the famous square. between the
Mincio and the Adige was not what it was in the
famous campaign of 1796, and France and Sardinia
must enjoy the right to take it either in flank or
rear, and to attack their enemy either by sea or
land. What was to be inferred from these consider-
ations ? It was idle to speculate upon what England
might be called upon to do if the French made a
dash at the Rhine and occupied Belgium, because it
was absurd to suppose that the Emperor of the French
would provoke Germany and England while he had
Austria upon his hands. The real question was, were
we prepared to guarantee to Austria with our blood
and with our money the privilege of neutrality in
her non-Italian territory—(no, no, let them fight it
out)—were we prepared to launch into the horrors
of war to defend her against such military opera-
tions as her antagonists might consistently with
the law of nations devise against her ? If not, we
ought :not to be satisfied with vague generalities,
but must let it be clearly understood by our Go-
vernment that whether the war were confined to the
Po or extended to other portions of the Austrian do-
minions, the people of England desired that Englan d
Should remain neutral and should take no part in it.
(Applause.) What was Austria to England that we
should hug her to the bosom of Britannia at the cost
of shedding blood in streams, spending money by
hundreds of millions, convulsing our commercial re-
lations, inflicting deep, perhaps incurable wounds
upon our prosperity, checking our progress and ar-
resting our peaceful reforms ? (Applause.) She was
called our ally, both faithful and true. She had been
the standing pensioner of England, the bottomless
sack into which millions wrung from the lifeblood of
our industrious people had been poured. During
the last war we paid her £17,000,000, but history
did not record what advantage we obtained for
it. Austria was our ally, both faithful and
true ; but in the Crimean war she did not
draw a sword on our behalf, and it was
she who sent our heroes to die in -rain on the
battle-field, while she stood by without firing a
shot. (Applause.) This question of the value of
Austria to. England brought him to the last point
which he had to notice—the assertion that the in-
tegrity of the Austrian Empire was essential to the
maintenance of the balance of power. Without
entering into discussion of that cabalistic abra-
cadabra " the balance of power," the Moloch to
which justice, political morality, and the freedom of
nations had so long bes.n sacrificed, he laid it down
as an axiom that artificial States, without either
organic cohesion or harmony, instead of constituting
a eek, were an incitement to wars. Against what
preponderance was the Austrian empire to create a
barrier ? Evidently against that either of Russia or
of France. She could form no barrier against
Russia, because the Czar might appeal to the na-
tionality of the 17 millions of the Sclavonic race
who were under her dominion, and rouse them
against her. She could form none against France,
because, as he stated at Glasgow last year, if the
Emperor of the French advanced towards the fron-
tiers of any of the nationalities whom Austria held in
bondage and said, " Here I am to assist you, rise and
shake off the detested yoke of Austria," the invitation
would be hailed with enthusiasm. If Austria did not
hold Italy in her grasp no Italian question could
exist. She was not a barrier, she was the sword of
Damocles, suspended over he peace, tranquillity,
and security of Europe. She was the cavern from
which the European volcano was felt. Let her
vanish into the gulf of eternal perdition which was
yawning for her—(applause) and, though we
might still hear of local revolutions, they would be
merely domestic affairs. European wars of ambition
would become impossible ; there would be no occa-
sion for large standing armies, the independence of
the smallest nation would find its guarantee in the
independence of all. The nations agglomerated into
the artificial mass called Austria contained very
considerable elements of power, but it was a mis-
take to suppose that therefore the Austrian empire
was powerful. If all these nations were allowed
to regain their nationality they would indeed con-
stitute bulwarks for the independence of Europe ;
but at the present moment Austria, instead of
being the barrier, was the vulnerable point of Euro-
pean peace and security. It was, however, said
that if the Italians or other nations acted alone,
England would not feel called upon to interfere,
but that the intervention of the French altered the
case. It was urged that the Emperor of the French
could not be actuated by other than ambitious views
—(hear, hear)—and that there would be no advan-
tage to the nationalities in exchanging one task-
master for another. (liear, hear.) His answer to
this was, that it was almost unprecedented for a
people to gain their liberty without assistance from
without. England herself was aided by the 15,000
Dutch grenadiers and the Dutch fleet of 500 sail
with which William of Orange came to her assist-
ance. There had constantly been interventions
against liberty ; but England had never drawn the
sword to resist them. Would she now engage in
hostilities on account of an intervention in favour
of freedom ? In this care, however, there was not
exactly an intervention, there was a war between
two nations. What might be the motives which led
the ruler of France to engage in this war he did
not pretend to know, but he knew what could not
be in his interest and therefore not in his intention.
It was not in his interest to enter upon a career of
conquest, because that would be absolute ruin to
him, as it was to Napoleon I. It was a disregard
of
the sentiment of nationality which sent Napoleon
I. to die in the island of St. Helena ; and Napoleon
111. was not the man to fall by the fault which had
ruined his uncle. There was als6 some guarantee
in the force, of circumstances. If in the course of
events arising out of this war his dear native land
should have a chance of ,gaining. her independence,
should he advise her to reject it merely because it
came fioni a Bonaparte ? Certainly not. (Cheers.)
liungary.was both too distant and too stronm to be
made a department of France. As to the Ita-
lians, if when enabled by French interposition to
organise and arm their nation, they could not pro-
tect themselves against their friends, they would
not deserve to be free. (Applause.) In conclusion,
M. Kossuth declared that the fate of nations was
trembling in the scale, and at such a moment every
man ought to be guided not by his own interests
but bythese of his country, and expressed the hope
that if there was a chance of emancipation for the
nationalities, England would not be backward in
encouraging the endeavour to free them by her ap-
probation, and cheering it with her sympathy.
(Loud and continuous applause.)
Mr. Deputy DAKIN moved (in the absence of Mr.
S. Morley)—
" That in the opinion of this media.. it is of the highest
importance to the honour and interests of Englandothat she
should observe strict impartiality between the contending
parties now waging war on the continent, and avoid all en-
tangling alliances or treaties which may lead to complica-
tions endangering that neutrality."

Professor NEWMAN, in seconding the resolution,
expressed a fear that while talking of peace the Go-
vernment were preparing for war, and declared
that, in his opinion, Parliament ought not to leave
in the hands of the Ministers the large force which
was now being raised without o, debate and a solemn
declaration as to the policy which was to be pur-
sued by them. (Cheers.)
Mr. P. A. TAYLOR rose to move an amendment,
to which a considerable portion of the audience ob-
jected, while others contended that it was a public
meeting, and every one ought to be heard. This
(rave rise to some confusion, and the Lord Mayor
(rave
that he was not well enough to remain, re-
signed the chair to Mr. White, and left the room.
Mr. P. A. TAYLOR then moved his amendment,
which he said was intended not to divide the spirit
of the meeting, but to give it the further character