Austrian Attitude Bitterly Attacked.

New York Times 100 years ago today, November 24, 1912:
London Paper Asks by What Right Servia Is to be Robbed of the Fruits of Victory.
WOLF PLEADS FOR ALBANIANS
Says Ambitions of Both Servia and Austria Are Inadmissible — Albanians as Much a Nation as Serbs.
Special Correspondence The New York Times.
    LONDON, Nov. 16.— In a letter addressed to "His Imperial and Apostolic Majesty" the Emperor of Austria, The Bystander expresses what many Englishmen feel about the international crisis, but expresses it in words more forcible than have so far been employed by other publications here. The letter reads in part:
    So you intend that Servia shall not enjoy the fruits of her victory. Over her desire to install herself in the Adriatic you place your imperial finger, and, should she persist, you threaten her with your Apostolic boot.
    Who, by the way, are you that you should thus arrogate to yourself the right to refuse Servia the enjoyment of what she has won by force of arms from the Turks? That, personally, you are an admirable personage, possessing high public virtues, the bystander is aware, and for the races over which you rule (such of them whose names we can recall) we have the friendliest feelings. But what is Austria that she claims to rob Servia of what is hers by the right of conquest?
    Servia, you say, shall not settle on the Adriatic.
    Why not? Because of "Austrian interests"! How, in the name of the Apostles, of whom you are the avowed successor, can Servia injure you by having an outlet to the sea? Are you afraid of Servian dreadnoughts at Trieste? But Servia has a population of 3,000,000 against the 51,000,000 odd of your august monarchy. On the Adriatic she would be to you what Holland, Belgium, or Denmark are to us, that and no more.
    Why do you refuse her her place on the sea?
    Because it has been a settled decree of Austrian policy that, whenever the Turk went from Albania, if Austria did not take his place nobody else should! If Servia goes to the Adriatic you fear that it will be but the prelude to a Russification of your highway to the Mediterranean. You would go then yourself, as you could, but your ally, Italy, loves you far too much to desire you to be her vis-a-vis for the whole length of the Adriatic.
    Because you and your Italian ally are too jealous for the one to allow Albania to be occupied by the other, you both agree that nobody else shall go there. So you have decided to use Albania as a cemetery for the dead bones of the status quo, and as for Servian aims and aspirations, the Serbs can go and hang themselves.
    Imperial and Apostolic Majesty! Tempora mutantur! The glorious success of the nations of the Balkan League has established a new fact — that is, that the legitimate desires of free peoples be no longer throttled to make a diplomatic formula. The fear of the powers of each other shall no longer succeed in stifling the sentiment of nationality. The Serbs are determined to pay no heed to "Austrian interests." They are going to the Adriatic.
    The situation from a different point of view is discussed by Lucien Wolf in The Graphic. In an article headed "The Crisis" he takes, up the cudgels for the Albanians, who are being rather overlooked in the consideration of the ambitions and claims of Servia. Mr. Wolf says in the course of his article:
    If the Adriatic ambitions of Servia are anathema because they conflict with the ambitions of Austria and Italy, they are doubly and trebly inadmissible because they take no account of the National rights of the Albanians, They even go further than this, for, by way of anticipating the reproach that they are denying to the Albanians the liberty and National unity by which they have justified their own struggles against Turkey, they boldly contest the capacity of the Albanians for self-government, and advocate the partition of their country. I cannot believe that the liberal powers of the West, who have no selfish axes to grind, will be parties to this deplorable scheme. The Albanians are just as much a nation as the Serbs, and quite as capable of self-government as the Montenegrins. The race which has produced men like Skanderberg, Mehemed Ali and Ali Tebelenli, not to mention scores of distinguished Ottoman Viziers and Generals, does not stand in need of the civilizing monitions of Belgrade. The emancipation of the Balkans would not be complete if Albania did not share in it. It would be irretrievably dishonored if its first consequence was the extinction of Albanian nationality.
    The case for the Albanians was admirably argued by Lord Goschen and Lord Fitzmaurice thirty-two years ago, when the Eastern Rumelia Commission was engaged in elaborating the various schemes of reforms called for by Article XXIII. of the Berlin Treaty. At that time Great Britain stood for the integrity of a Great Albania, including not only Scutari and Yanina, but also Kassove and Monastir.