DIPLOMATISTS.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."] SIR,—I have received so many kindnesses from British diplomatists in different parts of the world that I hope you will kindly give me space to explain my careless reference to them in my first letter. All I meant, and partly said, though' badly, was that all professions, my own included, are apt to have their judgment obscured on particular subjects by traditional prejudices. Against such prejudices intellectual ability, knowledge, and integrity are no safeguard. In all profes- sions there are men who rise superior to such prejudices and view all questions that come before them with an un- clouded view. But they are generally the minority. Ever since the Crimean War, the "antiquated superstition "—as Lord Salisbury called it—of Russophobia has been, in my humble opinion, the bane of our diplomacy. " Emeritus " is, I believe, not one of its victims. But how many men are there, not only in our Diplomatic Service, but in our public life also, who do not believe that the one consuming desire of Russia is to invade and annex India ? How many of our Russophobists have ever paused to ask themselves the question whether Russia would accept India as a free gift if it were offered to her,? I am sure that she would not. I am afraid the time will come when the possession of India may prove one of the most serious problems of our statesmanship. I was much struck by a speech made by Lord Lansdowne soon after his return from India, in which he said that during his Viceroyalty he and Lord Wenlock made a census of British India alone, and the increase of population during the previous decade was thirty-three millions. Famines are threatening already to become chronic in India. How will it be at the end of another generation, at the present rate of increase of population ? And yet some men, and on all other subjects very able men, believe that Russia would take the risks of a great war for the possession of a country which her statesmen are far-seeing enough to see might eventually be a burden to her. Already Russia has more territory, sparsely peopled and full of virgin wealth, than she can develop for many years to come. She has therefore no temptation to run such a tremendous risk as the invasion of India would involve. Apart from the question of population, Russia, if she took India, would be separated from it by ranges of most formidable mountains, and populations which would require a huge army to control. It was this which I had in my mind when I made that reference to diplomacy of which " Emeritus " has justly complained. I hope he will now see that what I said about diplomatists is just as applicable to other professions,—to my own not least. I admit that I exposed myself to the interpre- tation which he has put upon my language, and I am sorry for it. I assure him that I had no intention to attempt any- thing so impertinent as to "prove the ignorance of diplo- matists."—I am, Sir, &c., MA_LCOLNI MACCOLL. [We eannot publish any more letters on this subject.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
