EUROPE’S DESPOTS

Greymouth Evening Star, 9 December 1939, Page 9

EUROPE’S DESPOTS

BRITAIN HAS FOUGHT THEM ALL

Enemies of England from century tj century have tried to persuade the world that there is no consistency in her policy. Philip of Spain and the Kaiser, Napoleon and Bismarck complained and blustered, as Herr Hitler does now. that English statesmen would not be grateful to their real friends, but continually changed their course, making fresh allies and .meddling with what was never expected to be their concern, wrote H. C. Bailey in the London “Daily Telegraph.” None are so blind as those who do not choose to see. It is the most obvious fact of the history of Europe through the last, four hundred years that British power has in the great crises of the destiny of civilisation been exerted to the utmost against ’the rulers of State with which we had been, and sometimes came again to be, in firm and cordial alliance. But not less clear is it, if the reasons are examined, that in every one of these major conflicts we were fighting for the same cause and on the same side.

The guiding principle of British policy was the same when the Spanish Armada was launched against us as it is now when the independence of Poland has to be'maintained. It was well defined a hundred years ago by one of the' most characteristically English of all our statesmen, Palmerston. ‘ “We ought,” said he in 1844, “to teach the weaker Powers to hope that they will receive the support of this country in their time of danger. Powerful countries should be taught to fear that they will be resisted by England in any unjust act either towards ourselves or towards those who are bound in ties of amity with us.” ,

These truths were discovered by the rulers of England as soon as modern States began to be, in the 16th century. Philip 11. of Spain then dominated Europe, ruling over not only the whole of the Iberian peninsula but most of Italy, a great province of what is flow France and all the Low Countries, and supporting his arms by the newly-discovered wealth of Mexico and Peru.

He did his best to keep England subservient to him. But England defied him, and the defeat of the Armada pot only saved England, it made Holland free, it re-established France as one of the Great Powers, it made an end of Philip’s claim to world empire.

Yet the policy and the cause for which Elizabethan England fought were precisely the same as when, more than 200 years later, British arms restored Spain’s independence. In the 17th century Spanish power no longer menaced aggression. The threat came from the French monarchy. Louis XlV’s ambition was hardly checked from conquering the Low Countries. When he endeavoured to secure all the possessions' of the Spanish throne as an appandage of his own dynasty he, in his turn, claim td to be master of Europe and its colonies.

Then the war of the Spanish Succession saw a European coalition, with ’British troops and fleets and British resources its strongest element, arrayed against the aggressor. The genius of Marlborough brought victory, and the 'treaty settlement made Europe safe from any danger of Bourbon domination.

What our country under William 111. and Marlborough then fought for was summed up by the omniscient' Acton more than 31) years ago in words wliiQh have the very ring of our resolution to-day. They strove, he wrote, “against wilful attack and the reign of force. That good cause defeated, the security of national rights and international conventions was at an end.” The Prime Minister might have used the same words in any speech of the last weeks. Less than a hundred years after Louis XIV. had tried and failed, came Napoleon’s effort to make himself master of Europe. When to France he had added Belgium and the Rhineland and Piedmont, though our sea power remained triumphant, there followed a short uneasy peace. What brought it to an end was not this or that minor issue but the instructions of the British Government to oui’ Ambassador that our Sovereign would “never forgo: his right of interfering in the affairs of the Continent on any occasion in which the interests of his own dominions or. those of Europe in general may appear to him to require l it.”. Here is the guiding British principle, the abomination of ambitious autocrats from age to age, affirmed once again. Action upon it roused Napoleon to fury. “Fifteen milions of people must give way to forty millions,” he stormed. Such population figures have a fascination for despots. Before his genius and the vast resources which he commanded the “dynasts” of the Continent went down, though not their peoples. After Austerlitz, Pitt, with the shadow of death already on his brow, predicted that Napoleon would meet with a check whenever he encountered a national resistance, that Spain was the place for it and that then England would intervene. A young officer, fresh from India, Arthur Wellesley, heard tho prophecy. Years afterwards he related it in Paris, having seen it fulfilled, having led the Bri tish army which delivered Spain and destroyed, as Napoleon himself admitted, the Napoleonic domination. Some half-century later a British Government was working heartily with France and Napoleon’s nephew to free Italy from Austrian rule and pettv alien despots and establish it as a national State. Palmerston saw Cavour and told him “that he might say to the Emperor (Napoleon III.) that for every step he might be ready to take in Italian affairs he would probably find us ready to take one and a-half.” Italy had no cause to complain of the way in which the promise was kept. Palmerston resolutely declined to recognise that Austria had any right to govern the Italian people or Prussia to “interfere in the affair.” So by the help of France and Britain, Italy was liberated. There followed the age of Bismarck and tho rise of that German Empire which !i<- built up with blood and iron iill fix Hu- same means it fell. The ;.iia< i< • n Denmark. Hie overthrow of A;: tri;i. lhe defeat of France in 1871' v, ■ ■ . ■■ n.ti.lic<l without anxiety by musi of ou.'- statesmen. At Court and in the country al large. sympathy with Germany was strong. A revulsion came in 1875 when Bisx marck made it plain, by methods with which we are only too familiar now. . mobilisation of the German Press <ml dip!' matic threats, that he meant to attack France again and crush her. i.i.K'MARCE AND KAISER “Bismarck is really another clfl 1 Bonaparte again and he must be

bridled,” Disraeli wrote. Queen Victoria, in spite of her good will to Geimanv and her family ties with its Imperial Court, was of the same ujmd and told him that “every means should be used to prevent such a monstrous iniquity as a. war. blie sent a vigorous letter to the Emperor of Russia and Some of the plainest sneaking to her daughter, Hie- German Crown Princess. In face ol the energy of Russia and Britain, Bismarck and his master, the old Emperor v. illiam 1., protested that they had never for a moment intended to march on France. Perhaps the Emperor spoke the truth. Forty years later the direction ot German policy had fallen to weakei and more violent hands. We need not distribute responsibility for the. war into which Europe was plunged, between lhe Kaiser and his councillors. It is enough to recall that the cau.,e for which they plunged into war was the destruction of a small State. Serbia, and the method which they chose to effect their purpose was the invasion and ruin of another, Belgium. These outrages seemed trivial in Berlin. The real ’object of those who directed German policy was far greatfi- —the overthrow of Russia and >1 Fiance, the supremacy of Germany ever all Europe. “Weltmauhl,” world domination.ii was the old recurring challenge: ji was met with the old r-nirit. German statesmen used then the arguments which their successors have been using again and again in Hie period preceding the present war. Ever since he had been Ulianeellor. s -, :d Betlimaim-flollwca, it liad he'"-’-Lhe 01-iect ol his noli' - ' I' ‘“'’J'' an mid*.,l’Mending LnFi'’' 1 ..h<,u!<l n f not agree <'• mm-H >u ” trali’v v.hile Germany did alim f av. (~■>:<! v jtli Serbia and Belgium airl Fram: r German; ■= vit!*i riot t H-.e a

yard of French territory, though she might have to help herself to the French colonies. It would be a disgrace for us -, to make a bargain at the expense;,f France, Grey replied, a disgrace from which the good name of Britain would never i’ecover. So the Germans battered' their way into Belgium. When Asquith the first Vote of Credit for the war, he gave in marmoreal sentences a declaration of policy. We were fighting. he said, to fulfil a solemn international obligation, which between private pers. ns would have been ;au chligatimi net only of law. but of honour.' We were lighting to vindicate the principle "Gial y-innll natiemditie.’ are not Io be crushed in d<>lian<'e •uf international good I'aiih. b.\ the aibitiarv will of a strong and overiium- ■‘ , dmih Il ge BriHsli ,;cm »ou '-anil , ‘- ir . iiov-' l er man> ye??--' ; ', ~ . hall.- is -hung arm- ' J ’ -r. im ible knights of old.” ,lit.W that the stark test b’j- roi.m- our country will be found "7 mit’-'mk for th r cause of men.”