254 



EASTERN QUESTION. 



the Ottoman Empire as loyal subjects of the Sultan. 

 This policy was frustrated by the unfortunate resist- 

 ance of the Ottoman Government itself, and, under 

 the altered circumstances of the present time, the 

 same result can not be attained to the same extent 

 by the same means. Large changes may, and no 

 doubt will, be requisite in the treaties by which 

 southeastern Europe has hitherto been ruled. But 

 good government, assured peace, and freedom, ior 

 populations to whom those blessings have been 

 strange, are still the objects which this country ear- 

 nestly desires to secure. 



In requiring a full consideration of the general 

 interests which the new arrangements threaten to 

 affect, her Majesty's Government believe that they 

 are taking the surest means of securing those objects. 

 They would willingly have entered a Congress in 

 which the stipulations in question could have_ been 

 examined as a whole, in their relation to existing 

 treaties, to the acknowledged rights of Great Britain 

 and of other Powers, and to the beneficent ends which 

 the united action of Europe has always been directed 

 to secure. But neither the interests which her Ma- 

 jesty's Government are specially bound to guard nor 

 the well-being of the regions with which the treaty 

 deals would be consulted by the assembling of a 

 Congress whose deliberations were to be. restricted 

 by such reservations as those which have been laid 

 down by Prince Gortchakoff in his most recent com- 

 munication. 



Prince Gortchakoff, in .1 reply to this circu- 

 lar, repeated the statement that the complete 

 treaty of San Stefano had been communicated 

 to the Powers, and that in Congress each Power 

 would have free right of action and withdrawal. 

 It also pointed out that " the Marquis of Salis- 

 bury tells us what the English Government 

 does not wish, but tells us nothing as to what 

 it does wish. We think it would be serviceable 

 if his Lordship would be good enough to make 

 this latter point known in order to promote 

 an understanding of the situation." In an an- 

 nex to his circular, Prince Gortchakoff replied 

 to the several objections of the treaty raised 

 in Lord Salisbury's dispatch. 



Another point on which the negotiations 

 threatened to come to an end was the question 

 of the withdrawal of the Russian and British 

 forces from the neighborhood of Constanti- 

 nople. (See TUKKEY.) The negotiations for 

 this purpose were, like all others, carried on 

 by the German Government ; and, although 

 Prince Bismarck's mediation obtained the rec- 

 ognition of the principle by both the Russian 

 and British Governments, the arrangement ot 

 the details presented difficulties which seemed 

 insuperable. 



Matters again assumed a more hopeful as- 

 pect when, on May 7th, Count Shuvaloff, the 

 Russian Ambassador in London, left that capi- 

 tal on a mission to St. Petersburg, after an 

 interview with Earl Beaconsfield, especially as 

 Count Shuvaloff was known to be a strong 

 member of the Russian peace party. He ar- 

 rived in St. Petersburg on May 12th, and had 

 long and frequent interviews with the Em- 

 peror, and with those who had the direction 

 of foreign affairs. He returned to London on 

 May 22d, having had interviews upon his return 

 journey with the German Emperor and Prince 

 Bismarck. The positive results of his mission, 



which was said to have been self-imposed, were 

 not known at the time. An agreement, however, 

 was signed at the British Foreign Office on 

 May 30th, by Lord Salisbury and Count Shu- 

 valoff, which did not become known until the 

 middle of June. This agreement comprised 

 two memorandums. After a preamble express- 

 ing the desire of the Russian and English Gov- 

 ernments to establish an understanding that 

 may obviate the settlement of the Eastern 

 question by the sword, the first memorandum 

 goes on to state : 



1. England discards the longitudinal division of 

 Bulgaria, but the representative of Eussia reserves 

 to himself to point out the advantages of it to the 

 Congress, promising nevertheless not to insist upon 

 it against the definitive opinion of England. 



2. The arrangement of the boundaries of Southern 

 Bulgaria should be modified in such a manner as to 

 remove them from the JSgean Sea, according to the 

 southern delimitation of the Bulgarian provinces pro- 

 posed by the Conference of Constantinople. This 

 does not concern the question of the frontiers so much 

 as it refers to the exclusion of the littoral of the 

 ^dEgean Sea that is to say, to the west of Lagos. 

 From this point to the coast of the Black Sea the 

 discussion of the frontier will remain free. 



3. The western frontiers of Bulgaria should be 

 rectified upon the base of nationalities, so as to ex- 

 clude from that province the non-Bulgarian popula- 

 tions. The western frontiers of Bulgaria ought not 

 to pass in principle a line traced from close to Novi- 

 Bazar to Koursha Balkan. 



4. The Bulgaria replaced in the limits which are 

 mentioned in the points 2 and 3 shall be divided into 

 two provinces, namely : The one, to the north of the 

 Balkans, should be endowed with political autonomy, 

 under the government of a prince ; and" the other, to 

 the south of the Balkans, should receive a large mea- 

 sure of administrative self-government (autonomie 

 administrative) for instance, like that which exists in 

 English colonies with a Christian governor named 

 with the acquiescence of Europe for five to ten 

 years. 



5. The Emperor of Eussia attaches a peculiar im- 

 portance to the retreat of the Turkish army from 

 Southern Bulgaria. His Majesty does not see any 

 security or guarantee for the Bulgarian population 

 in the future if the Ottoman troops are maintained 

 there. Lord Salisbury accepts the retreat of the 

 Turkish troops from Southern Bulgaria, but Eussia 

 will not object to what is enacted by the Congress 

 respecting the mode and the cases where the Turk- 

 ish troops would be allowed to enter the southern 

 province to resist an insurrection or invasion, whether 

 in a state of execution or in a state of menace. Eng- 

 land, nevertheless, reserves to herself to insist at 

 the Congress on the right of the Sultan to be able 

 to canton troops on the frontiers of Southern Bul- 

 garia. The representative of Eussia reserves to him- 

 self at the Congress complete liberty in the discus- 

 sion of this last proposition of Lord Salisbury. 



6. The British Government demands that the su- 

 perior officers (chefs superieurs) of the militia in South- 

 ern Bulgaria should be named by the Porte with the 

 consent of Europe. 



7. The promises concerning Armenia stipulated by 

 the preliminary treaty of San Stefano should not be 

 made exclusively to Eussia, but to England also. 



8. The Government of her Britannic Majesty tak- 

 ing, as well as the Imperial Government, a warm 

 interest in the future organization of the Greek prov- 

 inces of the Balkan Peninsula, Article XV. of the 

 preliminary treaty of San Stefano shall be modified 

 in such a manner 'that the other Powers, nnd notably 

 England, may have, like Eussia, a consulting voice 

 in the future organization of Epirus, Thessaly, and 



