The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-05-04

4
Our London special indicates the excite
ment over the resolutions Of which MIR.
Gladstone has given notice in the House OF
Commons. There is no country in the world
where the standard Of political morality in
regard to loyalty to the nation is SO high as
in England. Party differences, party pas
sions, party theories Of what is expedient,
just or desirable for any reason whatever,
may be INDUCED to any possible extent
short of the point at which the interest or
welfare or pride of England against the rest
of the world is found to be on the other side.
There they must stop. No man must prefer
his own party to his country, nor his own
theories to the general opinion of what is
for the national advantage. This is an Eng
lish Virtue of the sterling kind In some
other free countries it is otherwise. In
France, for instance, there is no extreme
republican, no thoroughgoing legitimist
and no Bonapartist who would not pre-
fer to see the nation fall into the
hands of the enemy rather than into the
hands Of his party opponents. Any party
would rejoice at invasion if it resulted in
giving them power Opponents Of Bona
partisan in that country, with all the pas
sion they may feel against the German
invasion, relent perceptibly when they re-
member that it overthrow the Empire. In
our own country Northern men rejoiced
during the war, for party reasons, in the
defeat of Northern armies, and men dared de-
clare from public platforms that they would
rather see the nation perish than slavery
survive. Any declaration equivalent to that
in reference to English politics could not be
safely made in public place in England,
and especially not in time of excitement.
Mr. Gladstone's resolutions touching the
Eastern war seem likely to come into COLI
sion with this intense national sentiment.
Not that Mr.. Gladstone is less an English
man than other men in public life, or man
likely to oppose his theories to the welfare
of his country. But there are differences of
or honor in this crisis, and Mr.. Gladstone is
not of the same opinion on the subject with
many distinguished leaders. As we have
hitherto shown, we believe that Mr.. Glad
stone takes larger and more statesmanlike
view of the relations of England to Turkey
than is taken by the government He does
not believe it is expedient in point of pres
tige for England to stand aside and see others
do all toward the Christianization of Europe.
He does not believe, economically, that
it is wise for England to continue to support
policy in Constantinople that destroys by
butchery the producing classes of the Otto
man Empire. He believes it is demoraliz-
ing that England should believe in freedom
at home and support a barbarous tyranny
at the other extremity of Europe. But the
common opinion on the subject is framed
around old prejudices with regard to the
relation to Russia, and the tory party is far
nearer to the net result of those prejudices
than Mr.. Gladstone is. His associates of
the liberal party, if they even sympathize
with his views, will not venture to brave
public opinion, though they know it to be
ill informed and ignorant. They will not
venture to seem for moment against what
the many regard as the real policy of Eng
land. They will, therefore, oppose his
resolutions. In this the liberals will simply
recognize that as party they have no policy
on this subject. They will refuse to take
ground on it now, and their course will be
esteemed patriotic.