THE EASTERN QUESTION.

Globe, Volume VII, Issue 795, 9 January 1877, Page 2

THE EASTERN QUESTION.

[From the Home News.] A fortnight ago, after an interval of great anxiety and suspense, there came the welcome intelligence that an armistice of two months had been agreed to between Turkey and Servia, and now the European powers are busily engaged in arranging the preliminaries of a conference. The proposal by tue Porte ofja six months’ armistice had been refused, it will be remembered by Russia, on the ground that it could only result in an intolerable degree of European tension. The present cessation of hostilities has not been arrived at without many difficulties, and more than once it has seemed as if war between Turkey and Russia was inevitable. On Tuesday, October 31st, while the terms of an armistice were being .discussed by the Russian Ambassador and the Turkish Government, came the alarming announcement that General Ignatieff had been instructed to demand an immediate cessation of hostilities on the part of the victorious Turkish troops in Servia, and in the event of a refusal within, or any delay beyond the space of eight hours, to leave Constantinople, and to stop all diplomatic relations with the Porte. Thursday morning, the day on which the forty-eight hours’ grace would expire, brought with it the intelligence that the Porte had consented to, and that General Ignatieff had approved of, an armistice of two months. The expl anal ion of this ultimatum was the sudden receipt of the intelligence by the Czar and his Government of the desperate straits in which the Servians were—-that Djunis had fallen, that Alexinatz had been evacuated, that Kruschevatz could not hold out much longer, that the Turks were in possession of the whole Valley of the Morava, that they had effectually intercepted the Servian lines of communication, aud that there was nothing to prevent the immediate advance of the Turks upon Belgrade. Further than this, Prince Milan had sent to the Russian Government an earnest prayer for immediate intervention. Moreover, two things suggested themselves as indispensable—first, that the confession of Servian defeat should be made with as much dignity and as little of mortification to the pride of the Slavs and Philo-Slavs as possible ; secondly, that Turkey should be deprived of the last pretext for wasting an extra hour.

The Muscovite ultimatum, contained something more than the bare demand above formulated. In it the Turks were reproached for fighting— i.c, for gaining victories—while negotiations for peace were proceeding, and accused of bad faith. It was farther said, as a general threat to the Porte, that Europe would not tolerate the continuance of hostilities while negotiations

for peace . were going on. The .ultimatum also contained a condition that the “ English bases ” should be entertained by the Porte as the ground for discussing the terms of peace, and these bases were said by their Turkish expositors to mean the independence of Bosnia, Bulgaria, and Herzegovina. An armistice having been arranged, the next question was a European Conference to endeavor to settle the conditions of a permanent peace. There are to be two Conferences, both of them at Constantinople. At the first the Porte will not be represented, and the Ambassadors and Special Envoys of the European Powers will discuss the terms of. settlement. This over, the second Conference will be held at once, when the Turkish representative, most likely Midhat Pasha, will have his place at the Council table, with some" colleague and assessor who has yet to be named. All the European Governments are, on this eventful occasion, to enjoy the opportunity of a dual representation, and all, according to Lord Beaconsfield’s statement at the Guildhall on November 9th, have accepted the Conference proposed, though both Germany and Italy at first showed a disposition to hang back. Lord Salisbury will proceed on Monday, November 20th, to Constantinople, as the Envoy Extraordinary of the British Government. Side by side with Lord Salisbury will sit the English Ambassador at the Porte, Sir Henry Elliot. It is doubtful whether Russia will consider it necessary to send anyone to strengthen the hands of General Ignatieff, whose diplomacy is regarded as uniformly successful, and is praised with perhaps injudicious enthusiasm by the special correspondent of the Times at Constantinople—Mr Gallengn, who, it is well to recollect, is, in the first place, not an Englishman, but an Italian, and thus more or less a cynically impartial spectator of events—and in the second, has ceased to be on speaking terms with Sir Henry Elliot. As with the armistice, so too with the conference, there have been obstacles in the path which it has required both caution and firmness to remove. The first hitch arose from the ambiguity of the expression, the *• English bases” of peace, Prince Gortschakoff demurred to the prefatory axiom which the English Government laid down, that, in accordance with the Treaty ®f Paris, the territorial integrity of the Porte was to be respected and maintained, on the ground that circumstances might present themselves which would render an occupation of the Ottoman territory necessary. The English Government held its own on this point, and Prince Gortschakoff is said to have given way. For the rest, it is understood that the proposals which England and Russia concur in approving include the restoration of the status quo ante helium in Servia and Montenegro, and administrative autonomy, or as Lord Derby prefers to put it, local selfgovernment, for Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Bulgaria, The net result of all this is that Europe finds itself led back to the point reached by the Andrassy note nine months ■ ago. The second difficulty in the way of a Conference arose from the objections entertained by the Porte itself. On Monday, November 13th, it was definitely said that Turkey had declined point blank to accept the idea. Let the European Powers, she was represented as Baying, tell us distinctly what they want us to do, and we will give them a categorical answer, Yes or No. It now transpires that Musurus Pasha, the Turkish Ambassador in London, was requested by the Sultan’s Cabinet to represent to the English Government, as arguments against the conference, that the idea of a meeting of European plenipotentiaries in the Turkish capital, ostensibly to dictate conditions to the Turkish Government, was derogatory to the dignity of the Ottoman Empire ; that the phrase autonomy was one of dangerously doubtful meaning ; that the creation of more independent Powers such as Servia was a perilous expedient; that it was unjust to grant to the Principalities named by the signatory Powers reforms not extended to other parts of the Porte’s dominions; and that such a course might conceivably prove a possible incentive to rebellion. By way of reply to these objections of the Porte, Lord Derby has sent a despatch to the British Ambassador at Constantinople, in which it is pointed out that a Conference is indispensable for the salvation of Turkey and the peace of Europe; that administrative autonomy does not include the creation of a new tributary provinca-—an additional proof, this, that there is an identity in spirit, if not in letter, between the “ English bases” and the Andrassy note ; that as for its being, as alleged by the Porte, a bad precedent to place on record the competence of a European Conference to discuss the internal affairs of the Sultan’s dominions, that there exists good example for this without any impeachment of sovereign dignity ; and that as to the argument of the Porte, that whatever reforms are decided upon should be extended to all the mixed populations of the Empire, and not only to the insurgent provinces, this is a view of which the English Government entirely approves. It is generally supposed that the Porte will protest no further. Of course the result of the deliberations is very doubtful. The real question is whether the different European Plenipotentiaries will be able to agree upon an interpretation of the words “ autonomy” and “ guarantees,” It is understood that England is endeavouring to establish as a preliminary condition of the negotiations that the European Powers shall pledge themselves not to profit by the partition of Turkish territory. As for the issues of the Conference, the immediate outlook is scarcely favorable. On Friday, November 10th, the Russian Emperor delivered a speech to the Nobles and Communal Council of Moscow, which seems to breathe the spirit of war, and to despair of peace. The Czar is anxious to preserve peace, but if the Conference is unable to exact from Turkey adequate guarantees for the better government of the “ Sclavonic brethren” of Russia, then the Czar is firmly determined to act independently, and is convinced that in this case the whole of Russia will respond to his summons. The Czar concluded with the devout ejaculation, “ May God help the holy cause 1” It has been stated that this speech of the Russian Emperor at Moscow was intended as an answer to Lord Beaconsfield’s statement on the previous day, November 9th, at the Guildhall, that England would abide by those treaties, of which the object was to maintain the integrity of the Turkish Empire, and that if war should come while she was devoted lo this righteous cause, then she was prepared to meet it. But it seems doubtful whether, as Lord Beaconsfield only spoke on Thursday night and the Czar on Friday morning, there was time for a telegraphic summary of the English Premier’s

words to reach the Russian Emperor. The unmistakable endeavor of the Czar to insist on the religious character of the contingently forthcoming conflict is ominous, and it is unfortunate also to hear that the Turkish officials responsible for, or implicated in, the Bulgarian atrocities, remain unpunished, and that the scandals of Turkish government in the European provinces are at the present moment unchecked. Another discouraging and alarming indication of Russian designs is to be found in. the circular which Prince Gortchakoff has issued, ordering the mobilisation of the Russian troops, and the accompanying explanations of the order. The latter amount to a paraphrase of the Czar’s address at Moscow, The circular, which is sent to all the representatives of Russia abroad, points out that “ the Emperor does not wish for war, and will, if possible, avoid it.” Prince Gortchakoff adds that “ bis Majesty is determined that the principles of justice which have been recognised as necessary by the whole of Europe shall be carried out in Turkey under efficacious guarantees.” Ir may well be remarked on as a strange and sinister coincidence that at the end of May, 1853, just before the outbreak of the Crimean war, Count Nesselrode addressed a letter to Redschid Pasha in terms almost identical with those now employed by Prince Gortchakoff, lannouncing then as now, the mobilisation .of the Russian forces, “ not, however, to wage war, which would be repugnant to his Majesty to undertake, . , . but to obtain those material guarantees until the moment when, brought to more equitable sentiments, the Ottoman Government will give the moral secr.rities in vain so long demanded.” In reply the Porte offered all manner of defences. The Government of the Czar replied that it was most anxious to preserve peace, and then immediately followed the march into Roumania. Recollecting these precedents, it is not easy for everyone to obey the advice which the Times gives its readers day after day not to be alarmed at anything which the Muscovite Government does or says. General satisfaction is felt and expressed by the English public and the English Press at Lord Salisbury’s appointment. The popular sentiment on the subject might be summed up in the words that the Secretary of State for India is a man of strong will, but at the same time as a practical statesman equally remarkable for patriotism and sound common sense. The Times applauded the appointment because Lord Salisbury is “ the strongest member of the Ministry,” and because he is Secretary of State for India since it is India which gives us real interest in the Eastern question. “ The vigorof Lord Salisbury’s,intellect,” adds the Times, ‘ has made it impossible that he should abide within the strictest limits of insular thought,” The Post says briefly that Lord Salisbury will maintain the honor and interests of England. The Telegraph says that the despatch of Lord Salisbury will be understood at home and abroad as a proof of the thorough unanimity of the Govern ment, as well as of its determination to hold and guard our Indian Empire. “When,” continues the Telegraph , “justice to the first of Mahommedan rulers is under consideration, the Power that governs fifty millions of Mussulmans is best represented by the official chief of the India Office.” The Standard thinks that “ Lord Salisbury will not be bamboozled,” and the Daily News is quietly convinced that hie lordship “ fully understands the gravity of the situation.” The Pall Mall Gazette alone ventures to note the fact that Lord Salisbury is a man, as shown by his appointment of young Dr Mylne to the Bishopric of Bombay, of as pronounced ecclesiastical tastes as Mr Gladstone. “ Whereas,” the Pall Mall Gazette concludes, “ it seems to us of deep importance that religious prejudices and fervors should be left at the door of the Conference, we know from the whole course of Lord Salisbury’s career that they cannot be absent wherever he appears.” The immediate cause, as has been said, of the Russian ultimatum which took Europe by surprise, was the result of the fighting in the Morava and Timok Valleys during the second fortnight o£ October. On Wednesday, October 18th, the Servians, with a force of 15,000, attempted to recover Bast Servia, and were beaten back with g”eat slaughter. On Thursday, October 19th, the Turks attacked, successfully, two important Servian positions in the Morava Valley. They renewed the offensive with similar good fortune on the two following days, Having masked their real purpose by making an attack on Alexinatz, a feint which withdrew the attention of the Servians from their purpose, they stormed Krevet, a fortified height lying to the south of Djunis and Kruschevatz, and succeeded, though sustaining a grievous loss, in capturing it. The next day the Turkish troops marched further north to Djunis, which they also capture I, thus breaking in at a second important point in the Servian line of defence. The object of the Turkish general was to cut off the Servian communication between Kruschevatz and Deligrad, which before the armistice was concluded he had virtually succeeded in doing, Cabinet Councils have been held in Downing street several times in the course of the last three weeks, their culminating result probably being the selection of Lord Salisbury to go to Constantinople. The atrocity indignation meetings have come to an end ; a few meetings to express confidence in the policy of the Government have been held ; several members of Parliament have addressed their constituents on the subject, and with the exception of Mr Chamberlain, M.P. for Birmingham, none of them have spoken with unmitigated bitterness of Lord Darby and Lord Beaconsfield. On November 3rd Lord Hartington made a speech of seme importance and interest at Keighley, As leader of the Opposition, he could scarcely bo expected to give an unreserved approval of the policy pursued by the Government, He did, however, approve the ends at which he thought the Cabinet had aimed, though he was not prepared to acquiesce in the specific steps which had been taken. What seems to have struck Lord Hartington most at Constantinople was the dilatoriness and the apathy of the Turks. This, he thought, rather than malice prepense, was the real cause of the Bulgarian massacres. Here Lord Hartington agrees almost verbally with Mr Gladstone, who said that the Turks were too weak to reform themselves, and required an initiative from without. There lingered in the minds of Turkish statesmen, Lord Hartington explained, an idea that England would never forsake them. Therefore, he argued, it was very necessary to disabuse them of the notion hat England would not unite with the iuropean Powers in demanding guarantees as well as promises of reform.