And there is, we think, a fair chance that Mr.
Gladstone in- tends to protest strongly against the avowed German purpose of annexingsreluctant populations on the plea of military necessity.' His reply to the working-men's deputation ou Tuesday was, as we have elsewhere shown, both misleading and incorrect in con- nection with the precedent set by Lord Palmerston in acknowledg- ing the unconstitutional Government of the coup d'aut in 1851. But on the subject of the proposed annexations, his tone came very near to that of Mr. Bruce. And in relation to the general use of English influence, there was no sign of timidity or over- caution, only a decent ministerial reserve. The first thing to be done, he said, was to bring the contending parties face to face, for the purpose of negotiation, and this England had already done once and would seize every proper opportunity of effecting again. " When England, in conjunction with the other neutral powers, sees the opportunity of mediating with effect, I have no doubt but her influence will be felt and acknowledged by both parties." Before she could effect anything useful, she must first " ascertain what were the precise forms of peace she was called upon to support and recommend. When that is ascer- tained, and when the opportunity occurs, I have no doubt the efforts of England will be treated with respect, and will have their proper influence on the contending parties." One of the deputation bad hinted that the Queen had interposed to favour the German side of the dispute, in reference to which Mr. Glad- stone said, " I entirely and indignantly repudiate the idea that any dynastic influence has been brought to bear on the Government on this question." On the whole, Mr. Gladstone's tone on behalf of England, though studiously reserved, was confident and firm.
Previous page
