Untitled

Evening Star, Issue 14037, 19 April 1909, Page 4

The Empire lias learned to respect and to admire Mr Asquith since his Mr Asquith succession to the Premierand ship. Ho is one of those the Navy, rare statesmen whose utterances, even when dissented from, are. accepted as those of a patriot and of one who is as politically honest as he is intellectually able. His Glasgow speech on Saturday is an instance in point, lie does not seek to avoid the naval issue raised by critics of the Government, but simplifies it by sweeping aside all extraneous and confusing matter, and narrowing it down to the crucial question Shall we build now or later? There is here no thought of departing from his previouslydeclared faith in the necessity for maintaining the two-Power standard. On the contrary, he acecpts that as a principle beyond dispute. The ouly doubtful point with Mr Asquith is Shall wo build now or later? There are many eminent sailors and designers who will answer “Later.” Mr Asquith says: “We may be on the eve of a new development in naval construction.” Why, then, commit the country to a programme that in a few years’ time may be largely useless? ‘The Times’s’ naval" expert recently wrote : “ The probability is that in a good deal less than seven years’ time not only the Majesties but several succeeding batches of battleships will have ceased to be classed as capital ships” ; and Sir William While, late Director of Naval Construction, has stated that “it would be foolish to plunge into costly competition with the German programme and to construct large numbers of Dreadnoughts without further inquiry.” Therefore Mr Asquith would appear to be on safe ground. What is of importance, and a cause for congratulation, is that from the clamor of faction there has emerged the recognition on the part of both Motherland "and Oversea Dominions of their mutual dependence and responsibilities, not, to quote Lord Milner, a shifting of burdens but the creation of fresh centres of strength. How far this mutual acceptance of future joint action has travelled may in part he gathered from Mr Asquith’s welcome suggestion of a conference between Great Britain and her colonics to consider the whole question of naval policy. Recent news from Turkey, though it does not make the situation an! The Crisis the original causes wholly in Turkey, clear, straightens out some misunderetandings and fills up some gaps in the narrative. The actual origin of the military revolt is still shrouded in mystery. Whether the rising was, as is suggested, hatched and engineered from the Yildiz Kiosk, or whether the troops acted upon their own initiative, is not certain. But it is not improbable that the remnants of the palace gang, the bribers and corrupters and spies who now find their occupations gone, may have worked upon the fears of the Sultan, or of their own will determined to make one bold bid for reaction by stirring up revolt. The time was opportune. The dismissal of Kiamil Pasha had disgusted many friends of the Committee of Union and Progress, and it would not be hard in Turkey, by the judicious giving of backsheesh and an appeal to the spirit of religious fanaticism, to promote either mutiny or mob law. Whether this be eo or not, there were hopes, in the first flush of revolt, that the power of the Committee of Union and Progress had been broken. The Ministry they had created was forced to resign, and their own leaders were said to have fled. It was the provinces that saved the Committee and the Constitution. Outside Constantinople the forces that make for freedom from tyranny are hotter, surer, and more stable. Balonica stood by the Committee and Parliament, and from other towns came the cry “On to Constantinople.” And to the capital they marched, where they received refreshments and assurances of "the safety of the Constitution. The crisis does not lack opera-bouffe elements, but it might easily bo changed to far-reaching tragedy. M. Lotjpkhin, formerly director of the Russian Police, and now Russian Spy under arrest on a charge System. of treason, is to be tried in secret. That is to say, the outside world is not to be enlightened as to the inner history of Russian police methods; the veil will remain unlifted. The story leading up to M. Loupkhin’s imprisonment is both sordid and sensational. A Government agent named Azeff suddenly disappeared, though whether by flight or the, knife of the assassin is not certain. His absence from his wonted haunts gave rise to all sorts of surmises and conjectures, the chief of which wore that ho had been playing a double part, and had played each party fake. He was thought by the Government to be their faithful spy, a man who by his daring and cunning had, according to M. Stolypin, the Premier, saved Russia from the shame of many foul murders. By the Revolutionary party he was accepted as cue of themselves. He was, it is said, for five years the actual head of the fighting organisations—in other words, the section of the party which planned and executed all political assassinations. His death or disappearance was due to M. Loupkhin. That official is asserted to have exposed Azeff’s double life to the Revolutionaries, and the, authorities, who continue steadfast to their belief in Azeff’s bona tides.

promptly arrested the Director of Police' on a charge of trosEon. The details of this repuSiya episode may bo filled in almost at will with narratives of murder, torture, exile,, and shams. Tlieeo are inevitable in nations where spying is officially recognised, encouraged, paid for, and defended. All countries have eome form of eeCTet-service police, including the United states and Groat Britain, but the peculiar and special internal situation of Rufeia has given birth to a system that is hombly repulsive to all classes. Yet it must go on. “I draw tKe ead but inevitable conclusion that' as long as the revolutionary terror lasts the polios spy system must also continue.” Such are the words of Stolypin in the course of his defence of Azeff before the Duma. The Melba season, that was all too short, . , brings into prominence' the Triumphant far-reaching eSect that Vocalists, must follow from the fact that Australia during the past years has been able to send to Jvurope three lady vocalists who have won the approval of the critics and the musickmng public in those parts of the civilised world that can best gauge and appreciate the highest_ development in art. Those who were privileged to hear Madame Melba m the mad scene from Ambrose Thomas’s Hamlet could not but acquiesce in the estimate of tne experts who place that artist at the very pinnacle of her glorious profession If there ever was anv truth in the statement that the diva was"cold in her de.meation of passion cr emotion, there was no trace of that little rift within the jute while the scena was in prom-ess here, ihe dramatic expression and the vocalisation were both perfect. In Madame Ada trossley Australia lias produced another unmistakaoiy great singer, witli a voice of faultless meiody and a soul filled wit h emotion that glorifies all the compositions she interprets. Miss Amy Castles, the third of the Australian musical Graces has according to the latest reports from London, reached so high a pinnacle in her profession as to be regarded as the sucto Jenny Lind. The mere fact that one oi the Australian States has the honor oi c aiming to ho the birthplace of such V. gdted vocalists, who are crowned with bays in the metropolis of the world gives a hall mark to this part of His Majesty s dominions that proves ihe potenualnies of the Antipodean race. It, is not a little thing to beacme recognised as the growers of the finest wheat, wool, and meat m a country that but a few generations “filing more than a geographical d„ta.l on the map of the world; but the marvel of our progress is increased onormously by the production of native-born artists who_ challenge comparison with Old World geniuses, are acclaimed preeminent. 1