The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-08-11

Prussia against their requiring any engagement. as 10 the
protection OF the German population Of North Sohsswix
the nth article OF the Treaty Of Prague and whether
the English government had offered any opinion on the
Lord Stanley replied that Communications had pas,ed
between the Of Prussia and France the
subject referred TO- He did think himself justified
muncaons inasmuch a. all the information which had
reached him on she subject Of official character
Her hsjssys government had offered no opinion what
xNGIIsH OPINION
From the London Star, July 90
The ofhcial and semi official journals OF Bsr-
lin declare that such despatch was received in that
city, and was read to the Of State In the
absence Of Count Won Bismarck The Aonitemr Of Paris
naty amrms that no such note either read or deiiv
cred. Who TO say whore the truth lissf Who ID to
reconcile this apparently rreconcabe contradiction
night in the House Of Commons that the French govern
mont did make some such communication; and We be-
hevs that statement was exactly what every one
expected. We have not met with or read Of anybody
who docs not seem TO think that the Berlin papers and
Lord Stanley are giving the correct version Of the
In the Aonitesw ? There is just this way Of
suggesting possible explanation The Aomiteur
nys no such note was delivered or read. But
II does not say that no note or despatch was sent
Perhaps when the Montur received the contradiction
the despatch had not been read perhaps the French
had resolved to counermand the reading Of
IT. perhaps the counermand reached Berlin too late
the Ambassador mistook his instructions Certainly,
the only way Of avoiding absolute and rreconcable
laying stress on the fact that the Aoniter does not
deny that such document was sent
But II this be the explanation, how can we DO ex-
peced to attach any importance to the statement made
in yesterdays Aoniteur, especially when with such
strange forgofuness or such studied purpose Il en-
tirey omits to say word about Prussiaf II an
evasion is made to serve in the former declaration.
what may we not suspect in thisa we for ourselves
are never anxious to DO ranked among the aarmists
We do not believe there is one single rational
or excasable ground for war between France
and Prussia. We equally convinced that
Prussia does not desire such She has interest
whatever to serve by IT, She wants keep what she
has No matter what her motives her merits, il is
obvious that her great object must be TO hold what she
has gained, military prestige and all. As things stand,
she is wholly winner. But France may as human
ture goes feel aggeved by the sudden prom
nence Of new rival for the foremost place among the
military Powers OF Europe or course, human being
supposes that France would make for the sake OF
Denmark's claims to a mile more less OF North
Scheswg; but the support of such claim might per-
haps be made to form the plausible and imposing ex-
cuse for policy predetermined by wholly different
tives. II Is therefore, to France that people naturally
look at present for the removal Of their fears and
cannot that yesterdays explanation seemed quite
calculated to dIspel all anxiety Indeed, we doubt
whether 1t Ia likely to awaken new fears than
to send old ones to sleep.