The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-05-08
The War I'm the East-English elm
nueuce,'-Is It q Myths

,
fuence" of England. The London news
papers discuss the war. its course and its
causes, as though it had its origin in Eng
lish diplomacy. and could only terminate in
obedience to English wishes. This theme
is dwelt upon with so much emphasis by
the London press and the speakers in Par
Lament that sentiment has arisen, not
to the effect that unless Russia fights her
campaign as the London Cabinet wishes
England will at once interfere and give vic
tory to the Turks. The English are patri-
otto people and have their share OF self
esteem, and newspaper proprietors know
the value of encouraging that feeling. A
newspaper finds comfort in telling its
readers every morning at breakfast that in
order to rule the world they have only to
lay down their knives and forks and 60 out
and command the nations. People gen.
orally have this self-esteem, md England
seems especially eager to indulge it. There
fore, in looking at the Eastern problem,
which threatens to be the absorbing ques-
ton of the world, it may be we'll to look at
this problem Of English ''infuence" and sec
upon what it rests and how far it may be
depended upon to sway events on the Bos-
phorus and in Asia Minor.
England is a great nation and her
statesmen have built up what Lord Bca-
consfeld calls ian unexampled empire.
She has vast resources. Her money market
governs the finances of the world. Her flag
dominates every sea. She has possessions
in every continent. She watches Spain
from Gibraltar, Germany from Heligoland,
and the Mediterranean from Malta. She
has ten colonies in Africa alone, one of them
almost as large as France. In Asia she has
the ancient and glorious Empire of India,
while from Alden she keeps her eye on
Egypt, and at Hong Kong she stands guard
over China. In Australasia she has con-
tinents that must one day be the seats of
empires. Although in America her terri
tories are not what they were before the
Revolution she has vast and rich dominions.
She holds Jamaica in the West Indies. She
menaces our Southern coasts from the Ber-
mudas and Bahamas, and compelled US to pay
millions moro than would have been needed
to suppress the rebellion by reason Of her
holding these islands as base of supplies
for the Confederacy. 1t is really can unex-
ampled empire" and we have enough Of
English blood in our veins to share some
thing of the triumph of the Englishman
when he feels, to recall the majestic smile of
Webster, that the morning drum-beat of Eng
lish garrisons follows the rising of the sun
around the world.
The masters of such an empire have a
right to speak when the peace of the world
is at stake. No nation has more interest in
peace than England. But is not this en-
pire rs much a source Of weakness as of
strength? England has built it up by play
ing upon the rivalries of other nations.
1t is an empire that rests upon
money-an empire Of subsidies and
alliances. We hear of English valor, which
all the world is supposed to dread. But
what does history show of English valor?
If we except Crecy and Agincourt and some
of the battles during Cromwell's time and
the wars of the Roses, where is the history
of England standing alone as Germany
stood against France, as France against all
Europe, as Russia against the combined
empires of Turkey, France and England?
The wars against Napoleon in "Englands
great days" as Kinglake calls them, were
generally money wars. Pitt spent money
in coalitions and sent small army to take
part in the fighting. 1t was so in Marlbor-
ough's campaigns. England fought Louis
XIV. by an alliance with Swedes, Ger
mans and Hollanders. She fought the
French in North America by the
aid of her American contingents. She
fought the rulers of India by arnying
one Indian race against the other. When
she strove to suppress the rebellion in
America it was with the aid of Hessians.
When she made war on Napoleon she had
all Europe with her. But for the aid of the
Spanish she would have been driven out of
Spain. But for the arrival of Butcher and
his Prussian troops Waterloo would have
been not alone the defeat but the destruc-
ton of the English army. When she fought
Russia it was ms the ally of France and
Turkey, and one of the reasons why she is
not now in arms is because she can find no
country but Turkey to help her against the
Car.
The truth is that England, with
all of her power, is weak nation.
She is strong in her navy; but
within the last forty years France and
Germany and Russia, and even Turkey and
Italy, have been strengthening their navies.
England might be match for any one ma
suppose nm antagonistic alliance on the
same scale rs the hundred alliances she has
planned against other nations. Could her
navy do more than hold its own against that
of the Northern Powers? And do not the
results of modern war show that the power
- L.