, 1865-06-13
From the London Times, May 49,
DENMARK AND GERMANY.


the dismemberment Of Denmark. A phi
losopher may explain it in one way and a
t%heologian in another, but certain it is
that ill-gotten gain seldom beings happl-
ness to nations or to individuals. The
legacy won by mean tricks Of l%attery,
the fortune amassed by u~nscrupulons
trading, or the province annexed by the
strong hand on some fimsy pretext Of
right, almost always proves, like Naboth's
vineyard, an unenvlable possession. There
We're those who predicted that the same
fatal inheritance of wrong would attach
to the conquest of SchIesWig-IIolstein.
No one out of Germany, we should think,
believe for one moment that Prussia had
gone to war for an idea. The history
and traditions of that acquiSitiye nation
were such as to render this theory not
only improbable but ludicrous. The as
tute and daring Minister whom the PruS-
sian Liberals were simple enough to des-
pise hardly cared to Disguise the real mo-
tives Of his intervention. The sacred
cause Of Legitimacy, the sacred rights of
nationaIities, and the sacred ideal of Ger
man unity were invoked with more or less
sincerity or consistency by professors
hIlu pau IONS III AllC llliOL 0thItSj DQt M
Won BIsmark could afford to smile at them.
With an implicit trust in a Providence
which favours the strongest battalions, he
was content to leave all these questions
open, of course occupying the Duchies in
the meantime. Great was the indigna-
ton of the professors and patriots when a
modest doubt was expressed in this coun-
try whether Prussia, once in occupation,
might not keep them for herself. Such a
mlsgiving was treason against the good
faith of a German Power, treason against
the august ~prerogatlvCS OF the German
Confederation, treason against the high
destinies Of the FatherIand. 1t was not
denied that Prussia had been d little TOO
forward in the good work of pIundering
Denmark, but 10 suppose that she had no
other than selfish ends in yieW-Why, it
was equivalent to disparing Of an united
Germany. VIZ cannotsay that these reasons
appeared t3 US conclusive at the time, but
experience alone could refute them. IIav-
ing failed to understand why people so
careless Of their own liberties should be
so Jealous for those of their neighbours,
and yet being unable to deny the fact, we
suspended our judgment till the logic OF
events should show whether the German
States really had any other common OBJ
ject than that of despoiling q weaker
neighbour.
We regret to state chat the sequel has
exactly correspondent to our original ex-
pectations, and confirms that view of the
Danish war which is least favorable to
Germany. The %victors are still quarreIl-
ing over the booty, and it is now perfect
ly clear that no agreement can have been
made beforehand with respect to it. About
a month ago a fierce conflict arose in the
Diet of Frankfort on the resolution of
Saxony and Bavaria that the Prince of
A~ugustenburg should be enthroned in
Holstein and allowed to send a represent
tative to the Diet. Some Of our readers
may remember that an eminent Professor,
iusiifying the conduct of his countrymen
in our columns, rested his whole case on
the Princes right of succession, and ri
diculed the notion that Kiel, already a
German harbour, could be coveted by the
Germans as a naval station. Unfortu-