TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE EMPEROR OF AUSTRIA AND LORD SALISBURY.
THE great new fact of the situation is, that the Govern- ments of Austria and Great Britain are agreed, if not as to the policy to be pursued in Eastern Europe, at least as to the end to be attained there. The Emperor of Austria in his speech to the Delegations, and Lord Salisbury in his speech at Guild- hall, use, as is natural, very different words ; but the ideas they convey are so nearly identical, that no one can doubt the existence of a real, and probably an arranged, accord. Both of them regard recent events in Bulgaria, events entirely due to Russian action, with a feeling compounded of alarm and in- dignation. The Emperor of Austria, it is true, who has to beware of adding the smallest fuel to the flame ready to burst forth in the Hungarian Parliament, only calls these events "regrettable complications ;" but he admits that they have roused "serious apprehensions," and he only ventures to " trust " that in consequence of his efforts peace will be maintained. Lord Salis- bury is more frank, and speaks of the mutinous officers who seized Prince Alexander as men" debauched with foreign gold ;" of the "consternation of Europe when all the resources of diplomacy were used to save those men from the fate they merited ;" and of Russian action as involving "encroachment after encroachment upon the rights of a free and independent people, encroachments witnessed by Europe with the deepest regret and the most earnest reprobation." It was right that the English Premier should utter those words, grave and measured as if they were the voice of history, and right also, in view of Hungarian excitement, that the Emperor should abstain from them ; but both the speakers mean the same thing,—total condemnation of Russian action in Bulgaria. Both, again, insist that treaties must be kept; and both assert that the Bulgarian Question can be settled only by the decision of all Europe, no single Power having any monopoly in the matter. The Emperor says plainly, "The final settlement must be effected with the co-operation of the Powers," and Lord Salisbury makes that co-operation the very basis of his policy. Throughout his speech of Tuesday, his main idea is that the duty of protecting Bulgaria falls upon Europe ; that Europe, or at least "a large portion " of it, must act together ; and that England can and will do nothing in isolation. The initiative belongs to Austria ; but it is Europe, or a large portion of it, which must decide before a settlement is effected. And, finally, this settlement, in the opinion of both, ought to leave Bulgaria as at present,—a free State. The Emperor of Austria, besides speaking of the necessity of gratifying "all admissible wishes" of the Bulgarians—the non-admissible wish being, we fancy, the re-election of Prince Alexander—expressly stated that his efforts and those of the Powers must be directed to the restora- tion of a legal condition of affairs "in the autonomous Princi- pality," the word " autonomous " being obviously dragged in to avoid any possibility of mistake either in Sofia or in St. Petersburg. Lord Salisbury, who does not weigh phrases so carefully, calls Bulgaria "independent," which is less accurate than "autonomous," because of the position of East Roumelia ; but his carelessness only strengthens his words, and he trusts that the "infant liberties" of the State from which so much was hoped will not be even "injured," as they cer- tainly would be if the Russian compromise were accepted. In the minds of both statesmen, the strong desire is that Russian interference should cease, that "regrettable com- plications" or "encroachments "—that is to say, General Kaulbars's mission and its provocations—should end, and that Bulgaria should pursue her path in peace as a self-governing State.
So far, the entire country will sympathise with these declarations. There never was a subject upon which her people were more unanimous, or felt more keenly that there was but one termination of a difficult affair which could be tolerated with pleasure. Lord Salisbury speaks, of course, in the name of his whole party ; all Unionists are united in approving his object ; and Mr. Gladstone, with great generosity, has stepped from his retirement to assure the world that, on this subject at all events, the Liberal Party also is behind the Premier. The unanimity is perfect so far, and will not be without its weight in Russia, where statesmen know well how easily benevolent sympathy transmutes itself into active assistance ; but we are not quite sure that the unanimity as regards the action through which the common object is to be secured ia quite so complete. That England should not fight alone for any cause not directly her own is, of course, the decision of the whole people ; but what will be their resolve if they are asked to support, say, a single and powerful ally ? Lord Salisbury entertains no doubt, and, indeed, speaks as if some irresistible fate bound England to defend Turkey whenever she had an ally :—
" But for those who wish to know what the policy of England will. be, I will ask them to look at the past. I believe, in spite of occa- sional and transitory aberrations, the policy of England has been and will be continuous, and I will ask those who wish to know the policy of this country not to occupy their time in considering the proclivities of this or that Minister of the day. Let them ask what the English people have done in the past, and they will know what the English people will do in the future. Three times since this century began the Balkan peninsula has been invaded by the hosts of the North. The first time was under the Ministry of the Duke of Wellington, no an unwarlike man. But the invasion took place. England was alone ; she had no allies, and under the guidance of the Duke of Wellington she recognised that no isolated duty fell on her, that her interests. were not engaged, and she contented herself with a protest. The next invasion took place under the Ministry of Lord Aberdeen, who was well known for what may be called his pacific fanaticism. But at that time England had allies. France, Aastria, and, later on, Italy, as well as Turkey, ranged themselvea on our side in the European conflict, and under the guidance of the pacific Ministry of Lord Aberdeen, England performed her duty as a member of the European concert. The third time Lord Beaconsfield was Minister. He was not unduly averse to exertion or blind to the duties imposed upon England by her glorious past. But, again, England was without allies. He recognised that the invasion of the territories of the Balkan peninsula was not an interest of England, that she was nob bound to take any isolated action, and Lord Beaconsfield inspired and guided a policy of peace."
That is true enough as history; but circumstances have changed. England is now governed by a larger body of electors, one which knows little of foreign affairs, and which expresses, on every fit occasion, a singular dislike to war. It is possible that the householders may, as Americans always have done, follow their Government blindly, leaving to them all the responsibility of guidance ; but we are by no means so convinced as the Premier appears to be. The Liberals and Unionists certainly will not fight for Turkey ; and unless all Europe outside Russia agrees to the same policy, they will be slow to engage in war even for Bulgaria. Russia is hated, it is true ; but Austria is not trusted ; and the first preoccupation will be how to avoid a struggle with France if she adopts, as Prince Bismarck fully expects, the Russian side. Is it to be our function if the war breaks out, to coerce France into neutrality ? The people will not like that position, and great as is their sympathy with Bulgaria, they will require very clear evidence that they are bound to intervene in the very beginning of a struggle, which may rapidly develop into the most general and most exhausting war of this century, so fertile in great wars. They might find themselves fighting Russia and fighting France at the same time, or, what would be nearly as bad, supporting Germany in an effort for the final subjugation of the French people. They will obey, we feel certain, any call of duty, and it might be a duty to support a European award as to Bulgaria ; and they will preserve, when necessary, their honour—for example, they would fight France sooner than be ordered out of Egypt—but they will be slow to plunge, in the old fashion, into a world-wide struggle simply because they may by that vast effort help to prevent a wrong in which they have no share. At least, that is our judgment of their state of mind, so far as it can be ascertained. The judgment may turn out wrong, for opinion ripens fast, and Russian conduct galls even mere spectators, and, as we have admitted, the masses in America are docile on foreign affairs, and may be docile in England ; but for the present, we think Lord Salisbury was a trifle too bellicose in his deliverances. Fortunately, he is himself convinced that Russia will not proceed, in spite of many menaces, to actual occupation. At least, that is how we interpret his sanguine peroration, with its eloquent expression of confidence that there will be no war, no destruction of Bulgarian liber- ties, and no need for those "measures of precaution" which, were there need for them, the City would so readily sup- port. We trust he is right ; but we cannot blind ourselves to the facts that the accord of all Western Europe is nearly hopeless, that opinion in this country as to war is un- certain and obscure, and that peace really depends upon the decisions of one of the most imperious and intractable Sovereigns who ever held power in Europe. The Emperor Alexander, like the Emperor Nicholas, can make war by ringing a bell.
Previous page
