New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1905-04-29


1t is not always safe experiment to exhume
and reprint the fugitive writings of great
mans early years. In the case Of Lord Sails
bury il was not only safe but commendable
More than that, it was a service of duty, both to
the fame of one of the greatest British states
men Of his day and to those principles and
ideals Of craftsmanship and Of patriotism Of
which he was the chief exponent. 1t is within
bounds to say that Lord Salisbury's place in the
history of philosophic statesmen would have
been less accurately appreciated, if not less
justly fixed. and the principles and practices of
British and, indeed, Of European diplomacy
would have been less perfectly understood, had
these essays Of Lord Robert CeciPs not been re-
covered from the past For, apart from other
intrinsic qualities Of high value. they possess
the interest Of unconscious subjectiveness. Again
and again, on almost every page, Lord Robert
seems 10 be standing before the mirror and
sketching what he sees within it-or propheti-
caIly thus sketching himself as the great marquis
Of our days
The first essay, in the first volume, for ex-
ample is devoted TO Castlereagh. We need not
here consider the success Of his effort to re-
habilitate the historical standing of that grossly
lbelIed statesman. There is scarcely another
man Of equal eminence in British history who
has been so persistently misrepresented. We do
CeciPs powerful vindication of him will serve
materially to correct the rooted errors of
century though it should do so, and we may add
that if it does not there is little hope that any
thing else ever will Macaulay's essay on Barere
has long been esteemed a masterpiece of enectlVe
condemnation Making all due allowance Tor
disparity in style though Lord Roberts is Ad-
mirable and highly engaging, it must be con-
Guided that if this equally veracious and authorl-
tative vindication of Castlereagh has been and is
less effective, ii is largely because the world too
often listens less sympathetcaIy to champion
ship than TO invective. There is a character
stic bit of audacity in Lord Roberts treatment
Of Castlereagh's Irish policy, picturesquely
prophetic of the manner in which the marquis
in later years was wont to "blurt out" startling
opinions and facts, such his famous remark
about dying nations'-things which many
others had thought, but which nobody else
would venture to say aloud, or things Whlch
might be reproved on sentimental or moral
grounds but which were perfectly impeccable
on legal or technical grounds. He realizes that
Castlereagh's Irish policy was the one chapter
in his career which has been perhaps most mis-
understood and which has certainly been the
subject of most brutal vituperation. He does
not Of course, attempt to deny that Castereagh,
in obedience to the instructions of that purest
Of statesmen, Pitt, resorted to the expedient Of
"bribing knaves into honesty and fools into
common sense"-to quote the authors own racy
phrase. Why not? he daringly demands.
In the supreme struggle of social order against
anarchy we cannot deny TO the champions OF civ
ilized society the moral LATITUDE which Is py com
their country against a foreign foe. II is no re-
prOach 10 d general active duty that he has used
either brides spies in furtherance OF his opera
tons against the enemy. There are emergencies
in which the conspirator at home IS more danger
to all that society holds dear than any enemy
so that the weapon which is lawful for the soldier
shall be forbidden TO the statesman.
That may sound quite shocking to ears OF
morality and sentiment. Indeed, it's author him
self hastens TO add that ''such employments are
more inevitable than honorable" But, logically,
it is flawless and unanswerable. Its morals, in
deed. are more austere than some may suppose
from hasty reading, for it is more excuse
for corruption in politics than it is an arraign-
ment of trickery IN war. We hear much of the
high standard OF honor which prevails in the
chivalrous profession of arms and Of the moral
elevation which war effects. Who, then, shall
condemn the application Of the warriors knight
ly standard of honor to the statesman's strife?
1t is Lord Robert Cecil, prophetically sounding
the keynote of his own later utterances, who
propounds the question. We may leave it to
his-and to Castlereagh's and Pitts-critics to
answer it.
1t is however. to Castlereagh's career as For
eign Minister that our author most addresses
himself, partly because that the most i'm
portant phase Of his career and partly because
it was the phase with which the essayist him
self naturally most in sympathy. There
was. indeed. a certain suggestive parallel be-
tween the careers of the two, in that each was
intimately associated with a concert Of the
powers" and that each was for that reason
the object Of much undeserved censure. There
is also another striking suggestion or provoca-
ton of inquiry. We not inclined to ques-
ton the justice Of Lord Roberts portrayal Of
Castlereaghs character as a Foreign Minister.
glowing as some Of his eulogies are. and con-
trary as they are to much of the mythical
mist" O1is phrase) which has obscured or
distorted that distinguished figure When we
read that Lord Castlereagh was not the man
TO jeopardize the meanest English interest for
the sake Of refuting some calumniator OF his
own good NAME" we are quite willing to ac-
cept II true. Yet we cannot repress the in
voluntary exclamation. Why. that is the mar
quis himself" We cannot help wondering to
what extent, in writing that sentence. Lord
Robert Cecil was unconsciously adumbrating
the Marquis Of Salisbury. For IN that sentence
substitute Salisbury" for "Castlereagh" and
you have Lord Salisbury TO the life.
Nor we pass without something OF the
same reflection the fne touches Of philosophic
consideration which the essayist bestows upon
the statesman's career, at once Illuminating
his pages and fOrecasting the practical expert
ences and observations OF his own later life.
Such is his reference TO the just Nemesis
which generally DEGREES that pertisans shall be
forced 70 do In once precisely that which they
most loudly dscried in opposition" There could
scarcely be q more felcitOus expression OF one
Of the most impressive facts in the partisan his