The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-04-28


scrupulously abstained from taking sides in
the quarrels of other nations. There is not
even a temptation to depart from this wise
policy now; but now, as heretofore,
while our government fulfils its neu-
trail obligations orr people will freely
express their sympathies. The people
of this country are too intelligent,
are too keen observers of important
contemporary events, to look on with cold
apathy when there is mighty conflict OF
arms in any quarter of the globe. We do
not refer here to the interest excited by COM
mercinl advantages. AS trading and neu-
trail nation we may expect to profit largely
by the present conflict; but the American
people have always shown themselves capa-
BILE of taking a lively, intelligent interest
in the struggles of other nations on simple
grounds of justice, freedom and civilization,
quite apart from any prospective material adj
vantage. When, half century ago, Greece
revolted against the Turk in that noble
contest for independence in which Byron
sacrificed his life, American sympathy was
strongly enlisted on the side of Greek free
dom against Turkish tyranny, and our enthu-
siasm was heightened by the halo of classical
recollections that surround Greece as the
renowned cradle of liberty, civilization,
literature and art In the struggle Of the
South American colonies against the mother
country our sympathies were expressed
with equal freedom, although our govern
ment maintained strict neutrality, just
as our good wishes are given to the
Cubans at present. although the gov
eminent abstains from every form of
interference In the struggle of the Hun
garians against Austria the whole tide of
popular sympathy in this country was on
the side of Kossuth and his compatriots.
So in the Crimean war we gave our good
wishes to Russia, although on very different
grounds. In the cases of the Spanish col
onies. of Greece, of Hungary, We were i'm
PEELED by sympathetic zeal for freedom;
but the favor with which we regarded Russia
during the Crimean war, and the American
good wishes which are likely to attend
her now, require different explanation.
Among the existing States of Christendom
lutism as the United States are of democ-
racy. They are at the opposite poles of
the political world, and the good under
standing they have SO long maintained de-
ponds on quite other causes than sympathy
with each Others institutions
How, then, does it happen that the two
great nations which are the extreme types of
opposite political systems-that the nation
which is the most powerful representative
of despotism and the nation which is the
most powerful representative of democracy
maintain cordial relations with each other
whenever either gets embroiled in foreign
difficulty? During our civil war the
neutrality Of Russia was not only sincere,
but benevolent, as ours was toward her in
the Crimean war, when we sent Mr.. Cramp-
ton, the British Minister, out of the country
for encouraging people to go from this coun-
try to Canada to enlist in the English army.
We repudiate her political system as heartily
as she repudiates ours; but neither disputes
that the system of the other may be best
suited to its internal condition and to its
mission as a nation. Russia is in immediat
contact with the Standardization of Western
Asia, and her potency as civiliz-
ing agent would be diminished if
she should adopt republican institu-
tons, which are impossible in her domestic
condition. The United States, on the other
hand, stand guard on the Western Continent
against attempts to introduce here the effete
institutions of the Old World. The political
mission of the United States, so far as we
have mission outside of our own bounda-
ries, is expressed in the "Monroe doctrine"
Of non-interference by Europe. Russia
made graceful concession to our policy
when she consented to part with Alaska and
renounce all selfish interest in the affairs of
this continent. We have just as little in
terest in what Russia may think
fit to do in extending her influence
and civilization in the East. There are
accordingly no points of conflict between the
external policy of Russia and the external
policy of the United States. In the absence
of any collision of interests there is no
ground of jealousy. But these negative con-
siderations would lead to indifference on the
part of each to what is done by the other,
whereas there is in fact, very active SYM
pathy between the two nations. How shnll
this sympathy be accounted for between ma
tions so distant by geographical situation and
so totally unlike in political institutions?
The explanation is not difficult. The
United States and Russia are the two rising
Powers Of the world Each is an infant
Hercules. Other Powers, like Germany in
recent years, may grow by mere accrction,
but the United States and Russia grow by
natural development. Germany, for exam.
ple. rose to the rank Of formidable first
class Power in 1901 by consolidating the