Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

will be the beginning of the entente. It is ever obtain or maintain for itself any excluthe first step which costs.

Here is another reflection. The day on which Great Britain and the United States sign a convention specifying their common purpose in the Far East will be the day of the salvation of China. We shall have saved a nation from destruction. England alone will not be able to do this certainly not under her present government. No force short of the determination of all who speak English would be great enough to stop the impending deluge. Now, to save a nation is a righteous thing.

66

sive control over the said ship-canal "? Or
that, in order that this common policy might
be reached, Great Britain, in the words of a
distinguished American historian, ex-assistant
Secretary of State, freely resigned
an im-
portant military, naval, and political position
on the Isthmus at a time when the relative
strength of the two Powers was very different
from what it is now"? The repudiation of
one treaty would be but a poor basis upon
which to base negotiations for another.

The truth is that a foreign alliance has hitherto been so remote from American policy One understanding will lead to another. that the whole question of alliance has not The question of open markets will not be yet been fully grasped by many people in this limited to China. It may well arise in Africa country. When Mr. Chamberlain made his before long. Peace is "the greatest of speech the other day, a leading New York British interests," but it is the greatest newspaper dismissed it with the remark that of American interests also; and our two Mr. Chamberlain's intention was obviouscountries may decide to join hands in making he desired to conclude an alliance with the war more difficult and less profitable. The United States in order that American men Nicaragua Canal means either a formal and ships might help England to fight France agreement or a quarre!. I am somewhat for West Africa. And the writer appended alarmed by the airy tone taken by the serious to this sagacious observation some highly American press in discussing this matter. edifying moral comments. Until I saw this The New York "Tribune," for example, I would not have believed that any respon"for reasons as follows concerning the ClaytonBulwer treaty:

"That treaty has long been more honored in the

breach than in the observance. Both governments have repeatedly expressed a wish to be rid of it. And it has long been tacitly agreed that dual building of the canal is impracticable, and that this Nation shall be free to do the job alone just as soon as it can summon up enough enterprise and energy. Use of it in time of war would naturally be granted to Great Britain, just as the use of the Suez Canal is granted to

us.

Of course we should not leave it open to any Power hostile to us, and, of course, Great Britain will not be hostile to us. And it is by no means inconceivable that our interests and those of Great Britain would be so nearly identical that we should be constrained to close it to any power hostile to her. For a war waged against Great Britain in American waters could scarcely avoid concerning us very deeply, and that in a manner that would lead us to sympathize with

Great Britain and to make common cause with her."

I quote this, not because I have any intention or opportunity of discussing the whole matter here, but simply as a proof that the seriousness of this question is not fully appreciated by American writers. Who would imagine, for instance, after reading this passage from the "Tribune," that there exists a treaty of the most solemn and binding character between the United States and Great Britain, dated April 19, 1850, Article I. of which says that "the Governments of the United States and Great Britain hereby declare that neither the one nor the other will

sible writer could have been so pyramidally ignorant. The editorial writer in question evidently had not the slightest notion of the principles upon which great nations arrive at common understandings. Apart from the fact that there was quite certainly going to be no war about West Africa, since France would not rush upon destruction by trying to fight England single-handed, no nation dreams of either asking or conceding treaty promises such as this writer imagined. The offensive treaty is obsolete. A complete alliance might be signed, sealed, and delivered between America and England, yet England might fight twenty wars without America being concerned in the least. I was asked the other day whether an Anglo-American treaty would bind the United States to help England if Russia invaded India. You might as well ask if a life-insurance implies a marriage contract. I replied: "In the first place, England is abundantly able to take care of herself if Russia invades India; and if she is not, then she has ceased to be a first-rate Power, and has no right to invite you to make a treaty upon equal terms."

Treaties between great nations are made ad hoc-with reference to specific existing interests. Here, for example, would almost certainly be the first article of any AngloAmerican treaty: England binds herself under no circumstances to seek or obtain

any extension of territory upon the two and common patriotism alike dictate a comAmerican continents or the adjacent islands, mon understanding, similarly remote in its except by amicable agreement with the application, but equally real. What AmeriUnited States; the United States binds can or British principle would be modified, itself I fear to be thought to exhibit po- what interest endangered, what needless litical sympathies if I am grammatical and danger incurred, even what legitimate quarsay ** themselves") to allow Great Britain rel affected, by an agreement that if either the undisturbed possession of all American nation were the object of an unprovoked atterritory she occupies at the present time. tack by two or more Powers simultaneously, This is the Monroe doctrine, of course; both the other should make common cause with nations accept it, and would, I presume, sign her? Such an agreement would definitively such an article instantly. Other articles bar either Power from the aid of the other for might settle the relations of the two coun- any war of offense, or even from help if tries regarding the Nicaragua Canal; ar- attacked without provocation by a single range for the arbitration of all disputes; Power. Single enemies have no terrors for and lay down a common policy with respect either of us. The deepest interests of to China, to be enforced, if necessary, by liberty and civilization demand that each common naval and military action. Even nation shall be able to go about its work then the great point of all would not have been touched.

in the world, secure that the forces of darkness cannot prevail against it. The All the people who speak English have one Governor of Washington State recently devital and predominant interest: that the clared that he was against any alliance principles of their own civilization-the "except with the omnipotent God." Uncivilization which they alone of the nations less our Anglo-Saxon religious conceptions possess, namely, the principles of the rights and convictions are all wrong, such an agreeof the individual man, freedom of speech, ment, for such an end, would be one upon thought, and action; their common heritage which He would smile. There is not, I am of law and government should not perish confident, an American-there is not, I am from the earth. One little fact will show certain, an Englishman, who does not believe the trend of events in Continental Europe: that neither nation would allow the other to the first act of the new German parliament, be crushed by a hostile combination. This if the elections go as everybody anticipates, being so, why on earth should we not bring will probably be to disfranchise a consider to the relations of all nations that stability able proportion of the German voters. In and that peace which would flow from the other words, an extension of autocracy. A announcement of the greatest and most coalition of Powers to destroy England would righteous compact that the world has ever be formed if its hopes of success were but a known? little brighter. And do Americans realize that the foreign ministers of Germany and Austria, speaking officially from their seats in parliament, have both alluded in terms of warning to the possible necessity of a Continental European league against the growing danger of American influence and American commerce? Americans know, of course, that only the action of England prevented a united European demand that the United States should localize the war with Spain. By the ruling classes of Russia and Germany the principles of American and British government are hated and feared, and these two Powers drag the rest of Europe after them. France is a free republic in nothing but name. The "Temps," the most serious French newspaper, sneered the other day at what it called the "acute fit of AngloSaxonism." The danger to Anglo-Saxon ideals may be remote, but it exists beyond a shadow of doubt. Common sense, therefore,

The time is not yet ripe, that is clear. Other Powers will exert themselves to the utmost to prevent it, that is certain. England is ready; it is only American opinion which has to mature. And America, if I may say so without offense, should realize that England is to-day the greatest of the world Powers; that there is not a nation in Europe that would not jump at an alliance with her for common ends; that she is hated precisely because she will not enter into any such compact; that her sympathy with America has intensified this hatred; that she will not come suing for anything; that she can offer as much as anybody can give her; and that she does not wish America to take one step that is not dictated, first, by American interests, and second, by a desire to promote the interests of mankind.

These are the thoughts suggested by
America revisited in war time.
Washington, June 1, 1898.

CHANT OF THE NEW UNION.

BY EDMUND RUSSELL.

BLOOD of the North

To the Blood of the South

Are we the same blood?

Though in strife parted-born of one mother;
Now, as the forge-fires flame o'er the land,
Wake in a new love-brother to brother;

Lift we a loving-cup, hand clasped in hand.
Draining the same draught, though it be red;
Shouting the same cry, wherever led,

Drink to our Union!

Yes

Now the same blood!

Heart of the North

To the Heart of the South

Beat we the same heart?

In thirst and hunger, at the same altar,

Knead we the bread, to break with our wine.
Kneel we together, chanting our psalter;
Rise we together, freedom our sign.

All of our heroes look down from heaven,
Where our blood runs their blessing is given.

Sons of the Union!

Yes

Now the same heart!

Sword of the North

To the Sword of the South

Lift we the same sword?

Thrust in our hands for the vengeance of God.
Clasp we its hafts in the battles of Right,
Where Murder and Famine and Rapine have trod,
We lift to annihilate-righteous our might.

Wave we on high, heaven kissing the brand

That its gleam may be seen in a faint, stricken land. Strike for our Union!

Yes

Now the same sword!

[subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic]
[blocks in formation]
[graphic]

ALBANY.

POSNER BROS., BALTIMORE.

SHEPARD, NORWELL & Co.,
BOSTON.

DE MUTH & Co., CHICAGO.
N. O. STONE & Co.,

CLEVELAND.

JOHN J. FONTIUS, DENVER.

ELLET SHOE Co..

KANSAS CITY.

NEW HAVEN.

STERN BROS., NEW YORK.

W. B. LOVELESS & Co.,

PITTSBURG.

S. W. NETTLETON, TOLEDO.
WOODWARD & LOTHROP,
WASHINGTON.

DENHOLM & MCKAY Co.,

WORCESTER.

And hundreds of others whose names are given in our catalogue, which is sent free on application.

« AnteriorContinuar »