example, the recent announcement in the speech from the throne, that Roumania was prepared in the present and future for every sacrifice which it might be necessary to make to ensure in all respects absolute facility of navigation of the Danube, appears to an outsider to have been an error in judgment, if the government were not prepared to hear with equanimity of the threatened departure of the ambassador of a neighbouring State which had put the cap upon its head, and against whose unwarrantable pretensions the remark was directed.  But it is easy to be wise after the event, and we admit that it is presumptuous for anyone to criticise hastily any matter that is being tossed about on the troubled sea of Oriental politics.  Living as we do on a seagirt isle which is practically unapproachable to an external foe, and having for centuries enjoyed the blessings of freedom, we can have no conception of the difficult cards which Roumanian statesmen have to play in the political game in which they are often compelled, much against their desire, to participate.  From time to time they hear great international theories propounded for the benefit of their powerful neighbours, to which they are compelled to close their ears, however nearly those principles may apply to their own condition.  Suppose, for example, some European Power claims new territory on the ground of geographical position.  Why, ask the Roumanians, should we be hemmed in as we are on every side?  Why should not the plains on both sides of the Danube guarded by the Balkans and the Carpathians constitute a strong realm, one and indivisible, with the great river flowing as an artery through its centre?  The answer is, Russia!  If an v of the Great Powers had insisted upon such a readjustment in the East, she would have opposed it, for is not Bulgaria her last stepping-stone to Constantinople?  ‘Skobeleff the First, King of Bulgaria’ would suit her aims far better.  This reminds one of ‘Panslavism.’  Who will deny the right of adjacent branches of the same race to live under one government?  Admitted; but then why not also Panroumanism?  In that case considerable portions of Austro-Hungary, Bessarabia, Bulgaria, Servia, would have to be added to the present dominions of King Charles of Roumania; for there are almost as many Roumanians in those countries as there are within the present boundaries of the kingdom.[200]

But if Roumanian statesmen are permitted to enjoy their reflections on these interesting political topics, they know that it would be unsafe to publish them, for, as we have seen, if they venture even, to cry too loudly ‘Roumania for the Roumanians,’ some hectoring neighbour instantly takes the alarm and threatens to withdraw its ambassador; and in case of a fracas between any two such neighbouring States, even the rights which she at present enjoys would hardly be respected.  Her policy is therefore tolerably well defined, and it was ably set forth in the royal speech which contained that dangerous reference