was Lord Beaconsfield

123

reprimand to the gallant captain of a British man-of-war who, seeing a crowd of women and children running down to the shore with cries for help as they were being pursued by armed Turks, took them on board under protection of his guns. Thus a golden opportunity was thrown away for settling the Eastern question on somewhat of a permanent footing. Lord Salisbury was not a member of that Government.

I have quoted Lord Derby because it is his name as Foreign Secretary that occupies the chief place in this change of policy. And yet the policy could hardly have been Lord Derby's own. For in a speech at King's Lynn in 1864 he recommended a totally different policy, as the following extract will show :

I believe the question of the breaking up of the Turkish Empire to be only a question of time, probably not a very long time. The Turks have played their part in history; they have had their day, and that day is over. I do not understand, except it be from the influence of diplomatic traditions, the determination of the elder statesmen to stand by the Turkish rule, whether right or wrong [this is not accurate]. I think we are making for ourselves enemies of races which will very soon become in Eastern Europe dominant races; and I think we are keeping back countries by whose improvement we, as the great traders of the world, should be the greatest gainers; and that we are doing this for no earthly advantage, either present or prospective.

The policy was of course Lord Beaconsfield's,

124

Lord Derby's Defects

and Lord Derby was an apt pupil as long as the policy promised to keep things quiet all round and avert war. With all his ability and clearness of judgment within a limited range, Lord Derby lacked imagination and sentiment. Having surveyed the political situation in 1876, he came to the conclusion that war was impossible; France, Italy, Germany, England, did not want war; and as for Austria and Russia, her Slav soldiers would prevent the former from fighting Russia, while the condition of Russian finance' would restrain the latter. Lord Derby's unemotional and unimaginative nature made it impossible for him to realise either the unspeakable misery of the Christians of Turkey, or the wave of uncontrollable pity and indignation which roused the Russian people to such a pitch of enthusiasm that no Government could have held them back from going to the rescue of their kin in faith and race.

But what was Lord Beaconsfield's motive in reversing the traditional policy of England? I am anxious to say nothing which can vex any of his admirers. I, too, can admire his splendid pluck; his devotion to his race, regardless of self-interest; his indomitable perseverance in the face of what to most men might well seem insurmountable difficulties; his domestic virtues. But he had in abundance what Lord Derby lacked a glowing Oriental imagination and lively emotions concealed under an impassive

Lord Beaconsfield's Ideals

125

exterior. That he aimed at the glory of England I have no doubt. But he was with us rather than of us. It was in the East that his ideals lay and his strongest affections. He was a believer in the primacy of certain races; and probably thought that by rolling back Russia for many a decade,' as Mr. Greenwood says, he would give a new lease of life to Turkey, and bring the Arabs, whom he regarded as cousins, to the front.* He admired the English for their rough strength and courage, but despised them a little for their lack of ideality and pure blood, which placed them, as he expressed it, under the ban of that law of extermination which is fatal to curs.' He firmly believed in the resuscitation of the long-slumbering East; the idea pervades all his writings, and he probably imagined that he was himself predestined to set in motion the forces which would in course of time fulfil his dreams. For, with all his shrewdness and worldly wisdom, there was a strong vein of mysticism in Lord Beaconsfield's nature. It is thus that I interpret his reversal of

For nearly five hundred years the true Oriental mind has been enthralled. Arabia alone has remained free and faithful to the divine tradition. From its bosom we shall go forth and sweep away the Tataric system; and thus, when the East has resumed its indigenous intelligence, when angels and prophets again mingle with humanity, the sacred quarter of the globe will recover its prominent and divine supremacy; it will act upon the modern empires, and the faint-hearted faith of Europe, which is but the shadow of a shade, will become as vigorous as befits men who are in sustained communication with the Creator.'-Tancred, page 428.

126

Lord Beaconsfield's Ideals

England's traditional policy on the Eastern question; and it is no small tribute to his genius that he succeeded, and that the present Oriental complication is so largely due to the reveries of an extraordinary and complex genius, whose cast of mind was more Oriental than English.

127

CHAPTER XI.

POLICY OF TSAR NICHOLAS.

Ir is really painful,' said Prince Gortchakoff in the midst of the crisis of 1877, 'to see two great States, which together might regulate European questions for their mutual advantage and the benefit of all, excite themselves and the world by an antagonism founded on prejudice or misunderstanding.' In another despatch the

same year he said-to Prince Bismarck's fierce indignation-that if only Great Britain and Russia would come to a friendly understanding, 'not a cannon could be fired in Europe without their consent.' It is England, not Russia, which has always put obstacles in the way of such understanding. A cordial understanding with this country on all questions, both in Europe and in Asia, was an article in the political creed of the Emperor Nicholas, which he held with almost the fervour of a religious dogma. He had witnessed the horrors of the Napoleonic wars, culminating, for him, in the patriotic immolation of Moscow, and he believed that the best security

Turkey, No. 2 [1877], p. 736.