, 1880-03-27

IUueHuite COIupcHtiOu III UcliIScftHt pftpd-
rations which has now been so long going
on, and TO break the vicious circle of
mutual terrorism. We have no reason to
suppose that the present Government has
listened to these Establishments, even if
they have been tried upon them. But we
DO Soow what Que young Liberal statesman
THINKS OF the wisdom of yielding to them.
1.-The chief International object Of Eng
Ianc's policy was" said LUrd Edmond
tItznaurlce or "Wednesday, " the MAIN
tenaEce of peace, the sufost protection of
her own interests anu possessions. There
was only one Power on the face of the
earth with which England had the sill htest
fisk OF coming into collision, namely, Res.
STA. England, therefore, should cultivate
o finn and friendly understanding with
Germany, which Power had now drawn
AusIro-H Hungary withiO the sphere Of her
Influence. These Powers would, if pro-
perry supported, control Russia. They
were the ancient and natural allies OF Eng
land. II was absurd to talk Of Austria as
tho 'gaoler' of other nationalities, and to
ignore the liberal legislation in that co4u-
try since 1866. Such o policy did not
involve any hostility towards France; but
ii it prevented France from hving at the
throat of Germany, England would thereby
be rendering to France the greatest service
which one country could do to another,
and also supporting the liberty OF Belgium
aud Holland, which in the event of another
Franco-German struggle, would be expos
ed to imminent danger" The suggestion
referred TO is understood to be that England
should renew her guarantee Of Belgium;
give q real guarantee for the neutrality or
Luxembourg, another to Switzerland, and,
besides all this, guarantee the neutrality
OF the North Sea aud the Baltic, Which, Ia
case q War he ween Russia ADD Germany
or between France aud Germany, would.
OF course, be-, go fax as it went, an advan.
tage to Germany. And this, or something
like this, is, ii We understand LORD Edmond
Fitzmaurice rightly, an Arrangement which
he thinks that it would be good policy for
Eng,aud to accept.
Now, in the fret place, it is q policy
which, call it what you will, could and
would be understood in no light whatever
but thGt Of an attempt to hamper France.
Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice virtually admits
that when he calls it a policy which would
render it impossible for France, under auy
eventualities to attack Germany. Now.
you may possibly be doing a service to q
pqguacious man if you cripple his fighting
arm, but it is at least a sort of service
which he is very apt to repay, SO soon as
he RECEIVERS that fighting arm, by a rather
energetic use OF il against you. Right or
wrong,-which is quite another question.
such a policy would be a policy to give
offence to Francei With Metz in her
hands, Germany does not need to violate
the neutrality OF Luxembourg or Switzer.
land, 10 order TO attack France. With
Metz against her, France might find some
such Getoar the only Chance of getting at
Germany. Whatever colour there might
he put on it, urquestionably such an
extension 10 other countries of the guarau.
tee which we have always given to Bel.
GUM wonld be regarded, and probably
rightly regarded, By France Us an unfrfehd-
~ demonstration against her. And as for
making the North Sea and the Baltic per-
manently neutraI,-that would be q vast
sacrifice of English power, if il were to
hold.good against ourselves, and q most
open threat at France and Russis,Dif s it
Were to hold good only against them.
The first point to notice, then: is that,
explain it as you might, this arrangement