The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-12-16

II hIlOAADy w uDA EkJDh
disfavor Lord Stanley has recently declared
that non-interference must more and more be-
come the policy of the future 'sNo foreign
alliance" he says, ''no European guarantee
can protect government against financial
collapse or against rebellion in its own pro-
vinces. In those matters every country must
be left to work out its own destiny" These
sentiments of the late Foreign Secretary of
Great Britain are valuable, not merely because
they are the sentiments of an able and far-see-
ing statesman, but because they are the senti-
ments Of one who is singularly fortunate in
selling and giving expression to the growing
thought of the day. Lord Stanley knows, and,
what is better, he has the courage to avow it,
that the history of the policy Of Intervention
has been history Of sin and folly. A glance
at some Of the more prominent cases in recent
years will prove this.
The last grand example Of Intervention OF
| foreign nations in the affairs of another
on this Continent was the French occu-
patton of Mexico. The last grand inter-
vention of foreign nations in the affairs OF
another on the European Continent was the
interference Of France in the affairs of Italy.
The latter was comparative success; the
former was an egregious failure. 1t is not to
be denied that the results Of both those
cases of Intervention have, to large
| extent, been instrumental in convincing
| diplomatists and international politicians
| generally that on the whole it is, perhaps,
better to allow oil nationalities and all govern
ments to settle their own affairs. Interference
has always been expensive, invariably annoy
| ing, and in its results seldom satisfactory. If
we 60 back to date the memory of which is
not altogether lost to the living world we can
point to the case of Poland. Russia, Prussia,
Austria iniquitously partitioned that fine
country and broke the spirit of that brave
and high-minded people. What was the
result of that policy9 Poland unquestionably,
to all intents and purposes was ruined but
the undying, the invincible spirit of the Poles,
was one of the principal agencies which
made the First Napoleon for time the
master of Europe. Interventions of a similar
kind have taken place more than once since
Napoleon deceived and since Napoleon fell;
but, in spite of all opposition, Polish ma
tionality is, perhaps, as much question of
the present as it ever was a question Of the
past Take the case of Hungary. Hungary
in 1848 gave every evidence that she was
a match, and more than match, for Austria.
Russia, however, unfortunately for her now
promising future and her wiser policy, lent a
too powerful help to crush out the hopes of q
brave and deserving people. In this case the
results Of interference have been quite As
unsatisfactory as they are in the case of
Poland. Poland, though bound, is still
spirited and hopeful; but Hungary has
acquired something better than freedom-she
has made herself the centre Of the Austrian
empire. Take the case of the Netherlands.
How few are prepared to say that the estab-
lishment Of the kingdom of Holland and the
kingdom of Belgium, although for time
serviceable, has been at all satisfactory or
conclusive arrangement. The establishment
Of the kingdom of Greece and, later, the union
Of Moldavia and Wallachia have been equally
unsatisfactory as results of international diplo-
macy. Italy, as we have said before, is one of
the latest as well as one Of the most hopeful
results Of the policy of interference But that
1t would have been better for Italy had she
been left alone to work out her destiny few
who are acquainted with the facts will
hesitate to admit. The experience, in
short, of the European Powers for the last
hundred years has. but one lesson, and that
lesson is almost, if not entirely, conclu-
sive Of the folly Of forcibly interfering in
the settlement Of the affairs Of any nation or
of any government Almost all the live and
troublous questions of the day have histori-
cal connection with former unnecessary, II not
unjust meddling on the part of those who
might have been better employed in Winding
their own affairs.
1t is not wonderful, therefore, although facts
in this particular direction have been some
what slow to teach, that change has begun
to pass over the dreams of diplomatists
Let us hope that Lord Stanley in the shades of
opposition will pursue this policy as actively
as If he were in power. Let us hope that
Napoleon will lend to it the sanction Of his
great name and the aid of his mighty influence.
The United States, pursuing their ancient
policy, will not refuse their help. Those three
Powers are strong enough to make the policy
Of non-intervention the policy Of the future
In all matters of internal policy let every
nation settle its own affairs. In no other way
can nation be just to nation.
P0nfal nh