New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-04-05
GREAT BRITATN'S RESPONSIBILIIf.
MR. GLADsTONE's OMISSION TO VIEW CERTAIN
HISTORICAL FACTS PRESENTED BY


To the Editor of The Tribune.
Sir: Gladstone's open letter. addressed 10 the
Duke of Westminster on the occasion OF the Cream
troubles has created sensation, as most OF his
utterances usually do. He is admired and praised
everywhere for this ringing message for unfortu-
nate Crete Gladstone is a noted statesman. and
there are many who admire him so much that they
would not hesitate TO consider dissener from his
views a wicked person. Gladstone is the only Eng
lish statesman who is respected and admired even
I'm countries where people not inclined TO think
We'll of the English. To the world at largo he Is
Gladstone the advocate Of the oppressed, not tho
English statesman. That he is man of extraordi-
nary ability there is question: and all praise
confirming this fact Is worthy Of him. But. fear,
We should not so so far in our enthusiastic admira-
ton as to forget that Gladstone is an English
statesman after all. However. let us hope, Cor
Gladstone's sake that he always speaks his pure
convictions and speaks as man. and not as an
English statesman. seeking the well-beng OF man.
kind and not the interests of the British Govern
ment
But canno. fail TO note that in his words is
manifested the English statesman. He does not
seem 10 see-and let us hope It is because he does
rot see-that the British Government more than
any other Power is responsible for the iamentable
state OF affairs in the Turkish Empire In his letter
10 the Duke of Westminster Gladstone lays the
blame OF this international nuisance wholly upon
1.-TWO young men," namely. the Car and the Kaiser
He regards England innocent. good Power
perverted by the guiles of these two young men,
These Powers" he says. referring to Germany
and Russia 80 far their sentiments are known
have been using their power in the concert to fight
steadily against freedom" And vehemently he pro-
tests: But why are 10 have our Government
mined TO their aprons?" LAT the heels of this
cert" he complains. I'VE have plodded patiently
for two years
Are these the sober facts? I doubt If they are
Did the English Government earnestly desire TO
bring about the permanent termination or the blood
shed and horrors in the Turkish Empire. and was
II hindered by these two young sovereigns? is
England good and are the others wicked? Has
England beer the friend OF the oppressed, and have
the others been friends of the oppressor? Is Eng
land neutralized by the opposition Of these two
young men in her alleged desire 10 save the Ar
meaians and the Cretans? And where was this
good and noble England when the two wicked
young sovereigns were yet in their cradles? Eng
land ploddng patiently the heels OF these wick ID
two for two years What pitiful sight.
Was il not England that fought Russia in 1854 In
defence of the Turkish tyranny? Was 1t not
England that introduced the unspeakable Turk
into the family of European nations when Russia
wanted to hang him? Was not Er gland the author
Of that rent and ragged catchword'-in Mr.. Glad
stones own words-"the integrity OF the Ottoman
Empire''? Was it not England herself who got the
to pledge themselves in the Treaty OF Paris 10
WnnId there have existed Turkish Government
~ commit the unspeakabe atrocities Of the recent
Years had not a British feet assumed TO defend
Inc butchers of Bulgaria against the Russian
srnv which was about to capture Constantinople
and nut a termination TO the bloody career Of the
ana rp Pm IN fs7s? Does not the Turkish tyranny
, exisence since that date TO the sustaining hand
~ The British Government in the persons Of Benja-
min Disraen and Lord salisbury! W as IL not
England that murdered the Treaty Of San Stefano,
which amply guaranteed reforms In Armenia undeT
oo affer that enter into league with the Porte
20 defend it against Russia II the latter shouti
70 Nv, -. In the future come to the rescue OF the
atre nIpian in case OF emergency she had done
n NJ rsee Of Bulgaria? Does not England now
IN lhe ~ ca" ieand of Cyprus advance payment
for this assistance which she has engaged herself
" CIV Urder obligations by virtue or the cyprus
Convention which was solicited by herself TO dG
go ~ Turk against Russia? Has she at any
i ita ,renudiated this criminal obligation? Did
England do all these things because she was was
plinnca ~ Germany and Russia? or because she
was poddng patiently at the hee OF o3d ogd