262 



EASTERN QUESTION. 



letter of November 24, 1870, addressed to the 

 Italian ambassador at St. Petersburg, Marchese 

 0. di Bella Oaracciolo, stating that the friendly 

 relations existing between the Imperial Gov- 

 ment of Russia and the Government of the 

 King of Italy imposed upon him the duty of a 

 most minute examination of the contents of 

 the imperial message. But, said he, a single 

 perusal of the articles seven and fourteen of the 

 treaty concluded March 30, 1856, sufficed to 

 show that Italy could not arrogate to herself 

 the right of relieving Russia of the engage- 

 ments she had entered into with all t*he signers 

 of the stipulations in question. He denied 

 that the changes which had taken place in the 

 East since 1856, and upon which Prince Gorts- 

 chakoff had mainly rested his arguments in 

 defence of the deplorable proceeding of Russia, 

 had tended in any manner to impair the great 

 influence and the high position which belonged 

 to her. This was not the case, as all these 

 changes had been effected for the sole and ex- 

 clusive purpose of ameliorating the condition 

 of the Christians in the East, an object which 

 the policy of Russia herself had never lost 

 sight of. As proof of this he refers to a note 

 written by Prince Gortschakoff in November 

 21, 1866, to General Ignatieff, in regard to the 

 acknowledgment of Prince Charles of Hohen- 

 zollern, as sovereign of the united Danubian 

 Principalities, and cites the following passage : 

 "The Imperial Cabinet can only rejoice at an 

 event which is as much in harmony with the 

 traditional links of sympathy by which Russia 

 is united to her co-religionists, as it is in ac- 

 cordance with her constant desire that the 

 Ottoman Empire may consolidate itself through 

 concessions made to the wishes and legitimate 

 wants of all the Christians who inhabit it." 

 The modifications and reforms which had been 

 introduced in Servia had been of a similar 

 character, and had been followed by the same 

 beneficial results. Therefore, his Majesty, the 

 King of Italy, had come to the conclusion 

 that the spirit of the treaty stipulations of 

 1856 had outlived the partial modifications 

 which they had been subjected to. The as- 

 surance of his Eminence that the Government 

 of Russia would strictly and conscientiously 

 adhere to the general principles of the Treaty 

 of 1856 had been highly gratifying to the 

 King, who sincerely hoped that the harmo- 

 nious feeling hitherto entertained by the 

 signers of that treaty toward each other 

 might not be disturbed by any precipitate ac- 

 tion on the part of any of them. 



During the earlier part of December, minis- 

 terial councils were held every night at Pera, 

 by order of the Sultan, and every preparation 

 was made in anticipation of serious contin- 

 gencies. The Turkish fleet was kept under 

 orders to be ready for immediate service, al- 

 though General Ignatieff, the Russian minister 

 to the Porte, gave assurance that there would 

 be no rupture of existing relations between 

 Russia and Turkey. In Egypt the army fur- 



loughs were all withdrawn, in order that the 

 full contingent could be placed at the disposal 

 of the Sultan. 



On December 2d, Prince Gortschakoff trans- 

 mitted to Baron Brunnow the following reply 

 to the note of Earl Granville : 



TZAESKOE SELO, Novemler 20 (Dec. 2), 1870. 



MONSIEUR LE BARON: The ambassador of Eng- 

 land has read and left with me a copy of Lord Gran- 

 ville's reply to our communication of the 19th of Oc- 

 tober, which I submitted to his Majesty the Emper- 

 ,pr. Our august master was pleased to point out that 

 it contained, in the first place, an expression of the 

 earnest desire of the Cabmet of London to preserve 

 the cordial relations between England and Eussia ; 

 and, secondly, an assurance that the English Cabi- 

 net would not have refused to enter into an exami- 

 nation of the results of the treaty of 1856, so far as 

 they have been modified by circumstances. 



As for the question of strict right, stated by Lord 

 Granville, we have no wish to enter into any discus- 

 sion, to recall any precedent, or cite any example. 

 Such a controversy would in no way promote the 

 good understanding which we desire. Our august 

 master had to discharge an imperious duty to his 

 own country, without wishing to injure in any way 

 the governments which were signatories of the Treaty 

 of 1856. On the contrary, his Imperial Majesty ap- 

 peals to their sense of justice and to their regard for 

 their own dignity. 



We regret to see that Earl Granville addresses 

 himself principally to the form of our communica- 

 tion. The form was not our choice. We could have 

 asked nothing better, surely, than to attain our end 

 by an agreement with the signatories of the Treaty 

 or 1856 | but the principal Secretaries of State of her 

 Britannic Majesty well Know that the attempts made 

 at different times to assemble the powers in a gen- 

 eral conference, with a view to remove the causes of 

 difficulty which disturb the general peace, have in- 

 variably failed. 



The prolongation of the present crisis and the ab- 

 sence of a regular government in France postpone 

 still further the possibility of such an agreement. 

 Meanwhile, the position in which the tre.vty left 

 Kussia has become more and more intolerable. Earl 

 Granville will agree that the Europe of to-day is 

 very far from being the Europe which signed the 

 Treaty of 1856. It was impossible that Eussia should 

 agree to remain the only power bound indefinitely 

 to an arrangement which, onerous as it was at the 

 time when it was concluded, became daily weaker in 

 its guarantees. Our august master has too deep a 

 sense of what he owes to his country to force it to 

 submit any longer to an obligation against which the 

 national sentiment protests. We cannot adniit that 

 the abrogation of a purely theoretical principle, not 

 followed by its immediate application, and which 

 visibly restores to Eussia a right of which no great 

 power could consent to be deprived, ought to be con- 

 sidered as a menace to peace, nor that, in avoiding 

 one point of the Treaty of 1856, the abrogation of all 

 is implied. The Imperial Cabinet never had any 

 such intention. On the contrary, our communication 

 of October 19th declared, in the most explicit terms, 

 that his Majesty the Emperor maintains his adhesion 

 to the general principles of the Treaty of 1856, and 

 that he is ready to come to an agreement with the 

 signatory powers of that treaty, either to confirm its 

 general stipulations or to renew them, or to substi- 

 tute for them any other equitable arrangement which 

 may be thought suitable to secure the repose of the 

 East and the equilibrium of Europe. 



There seems, then, to be no reason why the Cabi- 

 net of London should not, if it please, enter into an 

 explanation with the signatories of the Treaty of 

 1856. For our part, we are ready to meet in any de- 

 liberation having for its object the settlement of 

 guarantees for the consolidation of peace in the East. 



