E UROPE has heard with a sense of relief that the
separation between Sweden and Norway is to be accomplished without what would' have been in the circumstances very like civil war.. The trepidation was ,.perhaps a little foolish, for the two nations are not , Southerners, and no man in the peninsula with a Northern head could fail to perceive that a war between them must be a ruinous proceeding. Neither nation could hope to conquer the other. Whether united or separate, they have to live side by side, the independence of both is • threatened by. dangerous foes, and neither possesses the wealth which an ineffective, but probably protracted, cam- paign would not seriously impair. Still, the trepidation was not inexplicable, for the quality described as common- sense, and which is generally a mixture of sound reason and selfishness, is not the distinctive quality of nations. " Peoples " are crowds after all, and you never quite know what a crowd even of sensible and civilised men will when excited do. There was not much reason, to begin with, in the separation itself, for all that can be gained by it could have been gained by a little sacrifice of pride on one side or the other; while the things which will be sacrificed by it are only too patent. The two countries are bound by their common interest to hold together against any external foe, and the separation will make their holding together a matter of most delicate management. They will tend to form very different alliances, even if one is not a Republic and the other a Monarchy ; they will have different apprehensions, for it is not Russia only who desires predominant influence in Scandinavia ; and they will have to spend on fortifica- tions, fleets, and the like sums which if they had remained ,united might have been saved. Seeing that none of these reasons move them against separation, it was not unnatural to fear that they might not move them against a civil war. Those who did not know their .history were made appre- hensive by the talk in the papers ; and those who did know it realised that, although Sweden and Norway are not divided either by race or religion, they are divided by a social difference, which in nations, as among individuals, is often capable of producing keen dislike. A proud Swede holds the Norwegians to be boors, while a self- respecting Norwegian often thinks of his kinsmen as finicking fine gentlemen. Moreover, though the world probably grows wiser, its development in wisdom as regards international relations is lamentably slow. We all thought when the States of Italy became united, and those of Germany federated, that the general tendency was towards aggregation, and therefore towards peace ; but it is very doubtful whether the centrifugal is not as powerful as the centripetal impulse. The combination of States which makes up the Austrian Empire has lasted for many hundred years, and guarantees to each of those Statee safety from external conquest. Yet there is scarcely a State in the whole dominion of the house of Hapsburg which would not, if it could, face its dangers standing alone. Some overpowering jealousy of race, of ideal, or of historic pride seems to master the judgment of each separate population. It is not only Hungary which would like to try the experiment of doing without the Hapsburgs, but Bohemia, Croatia, and even smaller States. The one hope of ultimate independence for the States of the Balkan, again, is to federate themselves under a common Commander-in-Chief, and their usual practice whenever they are armed is to fly at each other's throats. The same impulse is visible in the fringe provinces of Russia ; and though that may be an easily explicable one because of their intolerable internal government, they would all, if they realised their dreams, be exposed to the risk of invasion by irresistible force. Even the Caucasus might be crushed by a rush of the Ottoman Pashas. True security, which includes exemption from panic, is only possible under modern conditions to little States which are not islands through aggregation or through alliances, in which the predominant partner is apt to make heavy claims.
We write without prejudice, for we think that the argu- ments for and against small States and great aggregations are very nearly equal. The aggregation allows of a nobler existence, produces, or has a chance of producing, greater men, and benefits by a security which ought in the end to cure the disease of militarism. The place of a great Empire in the world makes its outlook larger, and a large outlook is essential to sound statesmanship. One may have a great respect for Mr. Seddon without comparing him to Sir Robert Peel. We incline to believe, too, that the mixture of races which always occurs in great aggregations may in the end produce a higher people than a little State has usually the strength to develop. The world is said, and said justly, to owe great things to two of the smallest of its States ; but one would hardly prefer either Jews or Greeks to the great peoples of modern Europe, and both Jews and Greeks were enslaved. On the other hand, a little State may work for its own happiness very carefully and with great success, may make experiments impossible to great masses of men, and may develop a patriotism more intense, because more concen- trated, than is usually found in Empires. We take it that the Dutch, the Swiss, and the Danes are as happy as any peoples in the world, while it is impossible to deny special progress in thought to the people either of Hellas or of Judea. We may doubt if small States can survive, for the whole trend of " progress " is making armaments more and more costly, and even a whole nation its the field cannot now, if it is small, be sure of maintaining its independence ; but each little State that disappears may be fairly a subject of the historian's regret. The petty States of Germany and Italy, at which the world used to express ridicule or pity, have done more for the development of thought than either the Empire or the Kingdom ; and though we may hope that this is but a passing phase, still the historian cannot forget that on the Roman Empire, after its first outburst of mental energy, there fell an intellectual blight which produced centuries of sterility. If Norway retains her freedom, as we hope she will, we shall see what her peasants will do in the ages to come for the intellectual enfranchisement of mankind, and how far they will reconcile the happiness of their whole people with that high civilisation which has as yet made of that happiness, so far as the mass of toilers are concerned, only an inspiriting object of desire.
Previous page
