Unless, indeed, it were Sir Charles Dilke's, at Chelsea, on
Tuesday,—far more- elaborate and exhaustive, but less popular -and pithy. We have referred to it at some length elsewhere, but may say here that for its instructive review of the negotia- tions and the war, for its admirable exposure of the assertion that Turkey would have defied all Europe, had all Europe been reallyin earnest ; for its brilliant parallel between the events of 1828-9 and the events of 1877-8; for its masterly apology for the policy of strengthening and extending Greece, and its wise protest against the creation of fresh tributary States, States sure to become the centres of new European quarrels whenever they quarrel with their Suzerain, as all tributary States must -quarrel with the Porte,—and for its bold exposition of the duty whioh we owe to the wretched subjects of the Khedive,—the speech was one which deserves to live, as a most valuable con- tribution to the history of this struggle, and of the foreign policy of this country. Sir Charles Dilke cannot quite get over his Ritssophobia, which is deeply implanted in his nature. But his political sagacity is greater than his Russophobia, and keeps it in reasonable control. He masters the passion which he cannot -entirely subdue.
Previous page
