The Balkans' Quarrel.

New York Times 100 years ago today, July 25, 1913:
Admiral Mahan Thinks Dispute Is Not Wholly of Greed.
To the Editor of The New York Times:
    In editorial article of July 22 The Times remarks, with reference to the present civil war — it is essentially that — in the Balkans, that "the hands of the clock cannot be set back so far now as to permit the Turk to regain his lost possessions."
    The immense disappointment felt by many who have, in the recent war, sympathized deeply with the former victims of Turkish misrule, may tend to a violent reaction of opinion. It seems, therefore, useful to quote a very recent statement by an eminent English lawyer, now and for forty years past resident in Constantinople, where he is President of the European bar. Sir Edwin Pears, in the Contemporary Review for June, 1913, writes:
    Twelve years ago I concluded a historical study with a sentence, with which I venture to close also this article: "Wherever the dead weight of Turkish misrule has been removed, the young Christian States have been fairly started on the path of civilization, and justify the reasonable expectation of the statesmen, the historians, and the scholars, who sympathized with, and aided them in, their aspirations for freedom." I still hold the same opinion.
    Shameful and distressing as is the present internecine strife between those who lately fought side by side, it is fully permissible to believe that it is but an interruption, to which will succeed the law of progress noted by Sir Edwin Pears. The issues in dispute are not wholly those of mere greed. They are very intricate and involve national interests and racial sympathies, resembling family quarrels, very difficult for an outsider to appreciate. Nor should we forget the centuries of bondage, retarding development of healthy national character.
        A. T. MAHAN.
        Quogue, L.I., July 23, 1913.