The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-11-02
ABUSE OF ENGLAND By THE BELLI-
GERENTS.
rom the London Saturdav Repielo.

column, under the title "D1fhcult1es OF Neu-
trality, two abusive letters respectively ex-
pressing the irritation of France and of Ger
many at the neutrality of England. Any
Englishman who desires further to study the
spiteful remarks which may be made against
his country may crafty his morbid curiosity
with the aid of almost any file of American
papers. The New York Times, justly regarded
as one of the ablest and most respectable of
the daily journals, has once or twice a week
since the commencement of the war devoted
an elaborate article to the denunciation of the
egotism, the meanness, and the weakness of
English neutrality. 1t is true that interven-
tion on either side would have been censured
with equal bitterness, and that for more than
ninety years the conduct of England in
peace and in war has been with uninterrupted
consistency condemned by American critics;
but in this instance, although the unfriendly
feeling is generated at home, the charges aud
the arguments are imported from Germany
and from France. There is no doubt that in
both countries England IS at present regarded
with an angry contempt, unconsciously tine
tured with envy. The satisfaction with
which the epicurean poet regarded from the
shore the laoors of the sea-tossed sailor is
naturally not reciprocal. At present the
Complacent contrast is not so much felt by
the spectator as it is imputed to him by the
irritated fancy of the sufferer. "Why," he
may be supposed to ask, did not that COM
Portable idler prevent me from putting to
sea IN bad weather? and at least he
might run out the ffe-boat."
The most plausible of the German COM
plants is that the English Government ne
elected the opportunity of preventing the
war by the menace OF taking part against the
aggressor. Lord Granville it is said, almost
seemed to sanction the original demand of
the French Governments and when, in defe-
renee to his remonstrances, the Hohenzollern
csndidature was withdrawn, he ought to have
given notice to the Emperor Napoleon that
IN prosecuting the quarrel further he would
find England on the side of Germany. 1t is
not improbable that such representation
would have been effectual; and later expe-
rience has shown that, if the threat had been
followed by rupture with France, England
would have reaped any advantage which
might have accrued to the ally of the stronger
beligerent.
Forty or fifty years ago such course
might probably have been adopted, because
it was understood that every great power,
and especially England, was bound at all
times to guarantee the peace of Europe and
the balance of power The progress of
opinion has greatly facilitated the outbreak
of war, by practically securing aggressors
against the intervention of impartial bystand-
ers. Prussia profited by the modern doctrine
or practice in 1864; and assuredly no German
statesman expected the aid of England ia the
present war. If governments were exclu-
sively influenced by sense of justice, the
nnion of the community of nations against
every wrongdoer would discourage war. In
two conspicuous modern instances the ag-
gressor has been wantonly and undeniably in
the wrong; and yet England has abstajned
from joining Prussia in 1870, as Prussia had
abstained from joining England IN 1851.
Nicholas l would even more GER
tainly have yielded to a European coali-
tion than Napoleon III to an alliance of
England with North Germany. 1t is we'll to
remember that all pretexts for war are not as
frivolous and one-slded as the pretended
squabbles about the Holy Sepulchre or Ho-
henzollern; and it may have been better for
North Germany to fight out its quarrel single.
handed than to invite every power in Europe
to join the side which its real or supposed
interests might induce it to prefer. Sweden
and Denmark avowedly sympathized with
France; and Austria perhaps regrets her
adoption of benevolent neutrality. Those
who hold that England was bound in August
last to declare war against France are COM
mitted to the opinion that the Governments
of the eighteenth century were in the right
when they made neutrality rare exception
o their habitual policy.
If England had attacked France, with the
certainty of reviving during many genera
ions an enmity which was becoming obso-
etc, the fortune of war at sea would proba-
bly, have been the same on land. Hsvre
might have shared the fate of Strasburg, and
Cherbourg might have been exposed to ieo-
pardy as well as Paris. At this point of the
struggle, if not sooner, the wishes of the
allies would have begun to diverge, for neither
would England have desired aggrandizeme mt
for herself, nor would she have been pre-
pared to aid in the ACKNOWLEDGMENT of
French territory for the benefit of Germany.
A peace concluded under pressure from the
English Government would have been fol-
lowed by a deeper resentment than that
which now leads to the use of contumelious
language. In the probable contingency of a
separate prosecution of the war by Germany
after the withdrawal of England, an amino
sity would have been provoked which
might not impossibly have ended in an open
rupture. 1t is true that all the conditions of
the discussion would have been changed if
England had been great military power, or
if, as in former wars, a deficiency of troops
had been supplied by subsidies. Strength
affords the only real security against inter-
national unfriendliness and injustice. II is
because England is unarmed in the presence
of the vast military establishments of the
Continent that in diplomatic controversies,
in the talk of foreign barracks ald clubs,
and in the columns of newspapers, her per-
fdy, her selhshness, and her cowardice are
popular topics The abuse which is lavished
on the Government for its neutrality is only
rendered possible by the assumption that
England is no longer entitled to adopt an in
dependent policy. The neutrality and the
silence of Russia are regarded with COMPARE
tiverespect, because the force of the army, aud
the number and quality of the artillery, are not
prscisely known. Englishmen are conscious
g Cfxnfa ofa1r hokh fo,. 4