on Thursday night in reply to Mr. Sullivan, we should
be as satisfied as the Times is with his answer. Certainly it is not for the English people to treat with anything but supreme indifference the somewhat unusual liberty taken by the Ger- man Ambassador in venturing to advise us, as he did, in a speech public enough to be reported, however little public its eceasicat may have been, not to be too late in adopting in Ireland that policy of curbing the Roman Catholic priesthood which is producing such delightful results in Prussia. Mr. Disraeli was, indeed, quite right in saying that while Count Munster's speech was not in accordance with diplomatic custom, it was a kind of speech which he had no particular wish to discourage ; and perhaps he might even have added that if other foreign Governments would but follow our example of complete indif- ference to the opinions publicly expressed by our neigh- bours about us, it would be better for the peace of Europe. But though it was right and wise to intimate that we shall be indifferent, however much Count Munster lectures us on the mistaken character of our policy, we are not sure that it would do for Mr. Disraeli to be indifferent to similar escapades in our own Ambassadors. We should be sorry to hear of Lord Odo Russell's giving his frank opinion at any Berlin Club's dinner of the wisdom of the nick laws, and we doubt if it would be prudent for the Due Decazes to feel any emotion approaching to indifference, were the French Ambassador at Berlin to take a similar liberty with the German ecclesiastical Policy
Thetruth is, that Count Munster not only committed a grievous breach of official etiquette, but one which, considering the won- derful sensitiveness now shown at Berlin as to the language of even a foreign Bishop, was a very remarkable illustration of the inability of German statesmen to criticise their own actions with the sort of severity with which they criticise everybody else's ; and it would not have been amiss for Mr. Disraeli to have implied as much, which he could easily have done without saying anything that was not even cordial in its spirit to the German Government. A power which goes on lamenting bitterly in all keys that its policy and legislation are hampered by the criticisms of foreigners, deserves a gentle lesson on occasion of one of the strangest disregards of official reserve which Europe has lately witnessed. But it is not of this part of Mr. Disraeli's reply that we have the slightest com- plaint to make. Though he might, we think, have contrived to point the rebuke better, the sentence, " I think it would hardly become an English Ministry to discourage free speech under any circumstances," was itself a rebuke to the excessive sensitiveness of the German Foreign Office, even though the great Chancellor may not perceive its sting. But in the last sentence of his reply, we think Mr. Disraeli fell quite as much beneath the dignity of the occasion as when he publicly disclaimed having intended to convey any criticism on the Arnim case in those words of his to which he had no dignified motive for subsequently assigning any official interpretation at all, and which unfortunately failed of all their aptness when emptied of the meaning first attributed to them. He said on Thursday of Count Munster's remark that we should, if we were wise, be ready for action against the Romish Church in Ireland,— "With reference to these particular observations, I should say that his Excellency may perhaps pay a visit to Ireland in the course of the autumn,—that then he will find that there is no analogy whatever between the circumstances of the Roman Catholic subjects of the Emperor of Germany and those of the Roman Catholic subjects of the Queen." The Times interprets this as a hint that it is not repressive legislation, but even- handed justice, which secures loyalty. If such a hint there be in the words,—and certainly it ought to have been there,—it is so carefully hidden, that the words admit of a quite opposite interpretation ; indeed, their most obvious significance would be that Count Monster in visiting Ireland would see for himself that the Roman Catholics there do not need the same repressive legislation which the Roman Catholics of Germany need ; and it was unworthy of Mr. Disraeli to leave his reply open to such an interpretation, easy as it was in such a connec- tion to intimate, without even a word of direct reference to Ger- many, that it is to the repeal of all repressive legislation that we owe the religious tranquillity of Ireland, while we have never owed anything but confusion and animosity to its exist- ence. There seems to us a want of spirit, especially on such an occasion as the present,—when a regular German Ambassador had undoubtedly been acting in the very way which the Govern- ment of Berlin thinks so outrageous in a Belgian bishop,—in the omission of the Minister to assert emphatically that the reason we are not anxious about the religious state of Ireland is just because we have put an end for ever to the system in whieh Count Munster wishes us to entangle ourselves once more. Fortunately for us, our English thick-skinnedness is such that no "breach of international amity" is ever likely to arise from the freest expressions of a German or any other ambassador's views on the deficiencies of British legislation. But certainly at a moment when Germany cries out whenever any public man, official, semi-official, or unofficial, so much as looks over the hedge with any equivocal expressions on his face at what is going on in Germany, we do think an English Minister might have availed himself of the occasion of this very unusual exercise of liberty of speech by a German diplomatist, to convey his sense of the deep national pride which England feels in her religious freedom, while Germany is wheedling or hectoring half the States of Europe into restricting it as mischievously as she has restricted it herself. We have never been admirers of Mr. Disraeli, but we confess we did look to him to hold his head somewhat higher as English Prime Minister than he does. In this case a temperate rebuke was almost called for, but cer- tainly it was not forthcoming when the natural opportunity arose.
Previous page
