The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1900-01-04
THURSDAY, JANUARY i. 1900.
SOME EUROPEAN DISCUSSIONS.

Elsewhere t4,is morning we reproduce
the substance Of a very interesting and I'M
portant communication from the Faris
correspondent of the Rossyia. a ST. Pc
tcrsburg JOURNAL in which la gives re-
port of a conversation he has had with NJ.
Delcasse, the French Minister for For
egn Affairs, in which that functionary.
evidcntly that 1t was to be put out to the
world, stated the position of France to-
wards England. The interview has SO
,nany indications OF truth that we cannot
doubt it is genuine. and given out FOR a
purpose.
II was perfectly natural for M. Del
cassc 10 say that the Foreign Minister Of
a country. our Secretary Of State for in
stance is citizen Of his own country, first.
and above all things else There may be
alliances and understandings with other
nations. but the Foreign Minister of
France knows nothing but the interests
OF France. NJ. Delcasse. therefore. very
properly says in answer to the charges
Of England's enemies. that he is an AN
elonane, that he knows nothing but the
interests of France whom he deals with
England. as well as when he deals with
Russia. and though there IS an alliance
between France and Russia, yet France
is a party to that alliance because she
thinks II to her interest to be SUCH and
that he vii! not allow her to be placed
in the position of an enemy to England,
because all her interests call for amty
with England rather than hostility with
her
and il is fortunate for France that she
has u citizen so enlightened as NJ. Del
casse in charge of her Foreign Affairs
at this time.
The intimation by NJ pelcasse that
England might fee herself compelled to
90 10 war with France to destroy her
navy before the navies~ of Europe be-
came so strong that in unison they might
crush her own. is not, we think. entitled
10 a moments consideration. 1t would
he a task full of peril for England to I'M
dertakc such a thing. even if it were
within the possible purviews Of the Eng
fish people, which we do not believe it
&c be. She would probably fail wholly in
the effort. for the reason suggested by
NJ Delcasse, that the French ships would
keep within their fortified harbors In
deed we do not consider the case a sup
posah BILE one.
An interesting supplement to this in
1erview comes from ST. Petersburg in The
way of a discussion Of the subject In the
Moscow Gazette. That paper says:
Had England been victorious in South
Africa IL would no, have had much effect
IN Europe. but her final defeat may be
followed by a vast universal policy IN
which Russia would take leading part.
As matters stand to-day, that movement
can scarcely be far off. All those points
OF the world where English and Russian
interests are in conflict and which are
no, accessible TO the British fleet will
fall into Russia's hands. Russia has a
free hand TO execute her plans III Asia.
which are of more Importance to her than
anything else. Events in South Africa
will no, fan 10 stimulate Russ.a's spirit
OF enterprise in the Far East
This raises shadows which we upon this
s:de Of tlR water have got TO look at. 1t
means, II ii means anything. that if
England should fail in the Transvaal
there is 10 he a movement, with Russia
at Its head. TO disme;nber her empire and
?e1yc her Great I,rifain atonS
II that should happen. there would be
an end 10 democratic institutions abroad.
Can any true American calmly contem-
plate such a calamity?