The times., 1899-09-10

Of the absolutist government whose desire it was
TO check the progress Of liberal ideas. This high
handed attack by a strong state upon a weak one
called ioE something more than the drafting ot
notes and protocols; the outraged sentiment of
the West demanded a positive humiliation OF Rus
sia, and that, too, not for the purpose of pre-
serving the independence Of Turkey, of guar
anteeing her against further aggression. but for
the purpose cf weakening the power and humbling
the pride Of the autocrat OF the reactonary
policy
That is, in a nutshell, the beginning of
the antipathy between England and Russia,
at least the definite antipathy. The drama
in which these two nations are to take
part is not yet fully under way. The Cri-
mean war was the first act
But the war did other things besides
establish a settled bone of contention be-
tween the two great growing empires of
the world. 1t isolated these two as Prof.
Andrews points out, from most diplomatic
discussions in Europe for the next twenty
five or thirty years: Russia, because she
needed time 10 patch up her broken 1e-
sources: England because in insisting on
carrying on the war she had aroused
certain antagonism among Continental ma
tions. Austria was affected adversely: her
downfall led TO the unifcation of Italy and
the rise OF Prussia. 1t gave Cavour and
Bismarck the opportunities of their lives;
-hN ANAN Nb1ltS AL d tndPNSl Ol AuE duANs
of Italy.
The movement which made of Italy
nation was not only more picturesque but
in a sense more important than the unfit
cation movement in Germany. One was
patriotic the other polite undertaking.
Bismarck was a great statesman; Cavour
and GaTibaldi great patriots. The Italian
history was an epic; the German merely
a diplomatic incident. But there are other
reasons besides those of pure sentiment
why the federation of the Italian states
was momentous thing. These reasons
are thus summed up in Prof. Andrews
closing paragraph on the subject:
For the first time in the history of Europe the
principles of the inyiolability of treaties and of
hereditary sovereign rights were forced to give
way 10 the doctrine OF the rights OF a nation;
for the first time those supporting the narrow
and illiberal theories of the old system were
forced TO acknowledge themselves conquered by
those who were putting into practice the more
enlightened government and administration that
characterized the modern regime. In its
character and results the struggle in Italy was
essentially different from the movements that
had established the independence of Greece and
Belgium. The Italians had victory
Europe, whose traditions, maxims, and preiudices
were all against them; Austria and the
petty princes, who had sought by every means in
their power TO oppose them; over the Roman
Catholic Church whose fundamental doctrines re-
caFding the temporal power of the Pope were
hostile TO the they had at heart; over the,
revolutionary leaders, who in 1850. in 1919,
would gladly have snatched the fruits of success
from these whom they had called the moderatss,
ides; and finally, over Napoleon himself, who,
though he had aided the Italian cauze, had no in-
teniion. as Is evident from his brochure, 'Napo-
leon III et l'Itabe,'' and from the terms of the
treaty Of Zurich. Ct allowing Italy TO become any,
thing but union federatf But the victory was
also that OF their King, who had conquered him
self, his traditions and his prejudices- and had
sacrificed his daughter and his birthland for
Italy; and of Cavour, who by the sheer force OF
his genius had compelled Europe 10 r gnize
new international principle based tie affiuties
of peoples and had inaugEratod not only new
regime for Italy, but also new public law for
Europe.
IN short the history Of Italy during this
great movement illustrates the fact that
the triumph of the right now and then
takes place-if but advocated with patience
and skill-though all the forces Of church,
state, and destiny seem TO initiate against
il. Nobody at the start would have dared
prophesy that the patriotic party would
ever make Italy one country. But it did.
The history of the present century in Eu-
rope has been, in fact, rather full of sur
prises. In different way, the triumph of
Bismarck was as unexpected as that of
Cavour Nobody understood his peculiar
diplomatic system, which was practically
that of using no diplomacy He was as
single-minded a man as Cavour, but of an
entirely different type. The political world
of Europe puzzled its head for a decade
over his character as a diplomat, and only
when he had done what he intended TO do
did it discover that he was not a poll
tician, but a soldier in the garb of states
man. It is rather odd-one among the
paTadoxes Of a paradoxical century-that
the end of political and constitutional diff
culties. and of wars for political causes
should have been brought about by war
inaugurated through the supreme will of
the one statesman in Europe who never
was a politician or a man OF peace. Yet
this is what happended. In speaking of
the result Of the war of 1870, the histo-
rian says:
save for the Eastern question scarcely one of
the difficulties that since 1915 had vexed the
Statesmen Of the different countries remained to
be suTmoanted. In the new era the very atmos-
phere was to change; peace was to reign; the in
terests Of peoples and governments were 10 be
social. industrial, and commercial rather than
political, and in consequence movements making
for progress were 10 lie more deeply hidden and
the tendencies OF events 10 be moro difficult
10 discover In thus closing era aud in
sHgursting another. the war of 1870 stands as
the great dividing line between the Europe of
yesterday and the Europe of today.
The subsequent history Of Germany. of
Italy, and of Austro- Hungary is taken
up in successive chapters, and it is rather
remarkable to note that throughout the
book the historian devotes very little time
to England, seeming to count her prac-
tieslly out of all diplomatic relations The
truth is. Of course, that England's atten-
tion has been occupied by her outlying de-
tendencies all over the world, so that she
has not been occupied to any absorbing ex-
tent with Continental politics II has been
a generally recognized fact that whatever
took place on the Continent England
would not interfere. since war would be
to her serious disadvantage, and on the
other hand, that no one would interfere
with her, since her immense military and
naval force would almost certainly crush
any antagonist she might happen to have.
There remains, however, the possible con-
fiict between England and Russia, and the
last chapter in the book is devoted to THE
Russian Empire" In this chapter the prog
ress Of Russia since 1860 is briefly sketch
ed and the author expresses no opinion
as TO the possibilities which the future
holds for this great half-awakened nation.
There is much that is interesting. even
fascinating. in this work, and ii will be
valuable addition to the library of almost
any student. Although the purely histori-
cal part of il is detailed and clear, there
is no unnecessary prolixity. and the whole
work is well balanced and impartial (New
York: G. p. Putnam's Sons. $250)
A Man and n Horse