NEWS BY THE SUEZ MAIL.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 942, 2 July 1877, Page 3

NEWS BY THE SUEZ MAIL.

ENGLAND AND THE WAR. FROM THE CORRESPONDENT OF THE PRESS.] London, May 11. John Bull is sorely perplexed between Lords Beaconsfield and Derby on the one side and Mr Gladstone on the other. While the former are showing us the Russian in the true light, the latter statesman is doing his utmost to persuade us that it is purely on philanthropical principles that he is now waging war against the Turk, and I am bound to add that the right honourable gentleman does not seem to find it very hard to make a great many people believe that the black is white. It is utter folly to think, as Mr Gladstone and his disciples would have us think, that Russia has no other object in view than the relief of the oppressed Christians in Turkey. The cruelties perpetrated by Russia herself within even the last three or four years fall little short of those “Bulgarian atrocities” which have raised her righteous wrath to such an exalted pitch. In 1874 Colonel Mansfield, a delegate of our Government, wrote from Poland to Lord Granville describing how the Russian soldiers, acting under official mandate, surrounded the peasants of a district, and on their refusal to change their religion, had given fifty blows to every man, twenty-five to every woman, and ten to every child, while one woman more obstreperous than the rest received 100. Later these wretched Polish peasants were assembled and beaten by the Cossacks nearly to the point of death, and then they were driven through a half-frozen river to a chapel, where they were made by force to enrol themselves as members of the Established Church of Russia. And this, forsooth, is the country Mr Gladstone would have us believe is fighting for no other cause but the holy one of succouring the oppressed. It is fortunate for the dignity of this country that Mr Gladstone is not new at the head of its Government. I am happy to say that our foreign policy is in better hands. Lord Derby’s [reply to the Russian circular announcing the Emperor’s orders to his armies to cross the Turkish frontiers is one of the manliest and most outspoken compositions that diplomacy has produced, I should think. Ue simply informs Russia that England is not to be gulled. His lordship gives the Russian Chancellor a bit of his mind, and of England’s mind also, I should hope. He tells him that “ Her Majesty’s Government have received the communication with deep regret. They cannot accept the statements and conclusions with which Prince Gortschakoff lias accompanied it as justifying the resolution taken.” He very properly points out, too, that the presence of large Russian foi’ces on the frontiers of Turkey, menacingjits safety, rendering disarmament impossible, and exciting the fanaticism of the Mussulman population, was a material obstacle to internal pacification and reform, and that Her Majesty’s Government do not believe that the entrance of the Russian armies into Turkey will alleviate the difficulty or improve the condition of the Christians in the Sultan’s dominions. Moreover Lord Derby says flatly that the course taken by Russia is in direct contravention of the Treaty of Pai’is in 1876, and of the Conference of London in 1871. “ In taking action against Turkey on his own part,” concludes Lord Derby, “and having recourse to arms without further consultation with his allies, the Emperor of Russia has separated himself from the European concert hitherto maintained, and has at the same timo departed from the rule to which he himself had solemnly recorded his consent. It is impossible to foresee the consequences of such an act. Her Majesty’s Government would willingly have refrained from making any observations in regard to it, but as Prince Gortschakoff seems to assume, in a declaration addressed to all the Governments of Europe, that Russia is acting in the interest of Great Britain and that of the other Powers, they feel bound to state in a manner equally formal and public that the decision of the Russian Government is not one which can have their concurrence or approval.” This spirited rejoinder of Lord Derby’s fills up a little more than half a column of the Times, but the above quotations are the most striking portions, and will give your readers a good idea of the whole tenor, which is in the same strain. The Russian Government have not made nor do they mean to make any reply, for it would be hard for them to reply in any way but one, which would be tantamount to a declaration of war, and the Czar is not mad enough to court a collision with us while his hands are full as they can hold. Lord Derby’s bold language has given intense satisfaction to the Cabinets at Berlin and Vienna, and I believe it will have a most salutary effect in localising the present war. Mr Gladstone has not allowed the present opportunity to pass for creating an agitation hostile to Government. His impressibility in this direction reminds one of a highly nervous and excitable passenger who will talk to the man at the wheel at the most critical moment. He placed a short time five resolutions on the notice paper of the House. These resolutions have made a great stir throughout the country, and in the House of Commons a few nights ago they led to one of the most turbulent scenes that our Parliament has witnessed for many years. I shall not attempt to describe these now famous resolutions. In the first place, like the Home Secretary, who said as much in the House, I can make neither head nor tail of them, and in the second place, the pressure brought to bear upon Mr Gladstone by the feeling of the House induced him to confine himself to moving only the first one, which I give you verbatim, in order that you may judge for yourselves of the style of attacks on the Government to which Mr Gladstone —great and able statesman as he undoubtedly is—is capable now of descending. Here is the feeble little spark with which Mr Gladstone was able to set the whole House of Commons into a blaze: —“ That this House finds just cause of dissatisfaction in the conduct of the Ottoman Porte with regard to the despatch written by the Earl of Derby on the 21st day of September, 1876, and relating to the massacres in Bulgaria.” Considering the present juncture, can anything be much more ridiculous? Where, in the name of common sense, is the utility of harking back to what is past and cannot be undone when matters of mighty moment claim the calm and undivided attention of our statesmen in office? Had Mr Gladstone moved this resolution some months ago he would have been pursuing a course quite within the province of a watchful Opposition ; but in doing so now he is, to say the least of it, a great many days after the fair. However, to reverse the old saying, the mouse brought forth a mountain. The resolution led to one of the most exciting debates since those immediately preceding the Crimean war. Sir Henry Wolf, the speaker who followed Mr Gladstone, begged to move as an amendment —“ That

this House declines to entertain any resolution which may embarrass Her Majesty’s Government in the maintenance of peace, and in the protection of British interests,jjwithout indicating any alternative line of policy.” Thereupon ensued a debate which expanded into one embracing our Eastern policy in the immediate future, and evoked from the Homo Secretary the speech of the occasion in which it was satisfactory to learn that our Government will do their utmost to preserve a line of strict neutrality. There is one thing how- ' ever, as I told you some months ago, that England will not passively submit to, and that is a Russian occupation of Constantinople. This would be so antagonistic to the interests of Germany and Austria, as well as to us, that Russia will stop short of a course which would bring an overwhelming combination against her. As the Home Secretary seems to have been made the spokesman of the Cabinet on the occasion, his speech has caused a profound interest not only here, but throughout Europe, and it is worth while giving you in his own well weighed words the explanation of our policy. “It has not been in any way to sanction oppression or tyranny in any part of the world. It has been to preservc inviolate our treaty engagements, and to set an example which, if followed by other nations, would materially add to the happiness of the world. It is, deeply as we regret the war, to maintain the strictest neutrality between the contending nations. It is, outside the necessities of this actual war, to maintain the interests of England as they ought to be maintained. They (the Government) have no thought of fear; they have no thought of gain. Before the face of this House, of England, of Europe, of the world, they are conscious of the honesty of their own purpose. They are conscious of their own earnest desire for peace ; they are conscious, if need be, of their strength. They have, I hope, the wisdom not to use that strength improperly; and whenever the opportunity may offer to stop this war, to heal these wretched dissensions, to improve the condition of the Christian population, and the way to do so is, in my opinion, not by war. To localise, to minimize, or to wipe away the effects of this war, there the Government will give their services,” These words have had a very re-assuring effect on the country. One of the best ways to preserve the blessings of peace to ourselves in the present crisis is to be fully prepared for war, and I am glad to say that the Government seem keenly alive to this, and every effort is being made in our dockyards and our arsenals to push on the work of preparation. The greatest activity prevails at the Admiralty and the Horse Guards. Enormous flatbottomed boats, for the purpose of disembarking troops, are being constructed in large numbers; and officers of the navy and of the Quarter-Master-GeneraTs department of the army are conjointly engaged at Liverpool and other large ports in preliminary investigations regarding the taking up of shipping for military transport purposes. For the last two or three months the work of preparation has been quietly but steadily going on in our army, and the result is that whereas a short time ago we should have had difficulty in placing ten thousand troops in the field, fully equipped, wc should now be able in a very short time to despatch an efficient body of thirty-live thousand, aud a few weeks afterwards supplement that number by nearly as many again. The first corps d'armee is actually formed. Seven regiments of cavalry, four brigades of artillery, and fortythree battalions of infantry are specified and ordered to hold themselves in readiness to proceed on service at a moment’s notice. Amongst the infantry arc three battalions of the Guards. In the event of an array proceeding to the seat of war, the choice of a commander would, in all probability, lie between Lord Napier of Magdala, now Governor of Gibraltar, and Sir Lintorn Simmons, a distinguished officer of the Royal Engineers, now Inspector-General of Fortifications. In either case the choice would be a wise one, but let us hope that Lord Napier and Sir Lintorn Simmons will be able to pursue their duties in their respective positions uninterruptedly. Ton must not consider that this letter is overloaded with the Eastern Question, and “horribly stuffed with epithets of war.” It is, as I believe it shoidd be, merely the reflex of what “is going on here. Whatever is uppermost "here should be uppermost in my communications to your readers. These warlike preparations of which I have spoken must not be taken to indicate a warlike propensity so much as the pursuance of a wise and patriotic course which will enable us to be prepared for the worst. In accordance with our position of strict neutrality, Hobart Pasha, the Com-mander-in-Ohief of the Turkish Navy, has been called upon to resign his commission in our Navy or to secede immediately from the service of the Sultan. It was not likely that lie would do the latter, and he has elected to remain the Lord High Admiral of the Sultan’s fleets. I think there were few amongst us—whether for Russ or for Turk—-who did not feel proud of our countryman when we read a few days ago of the dash aud gallantry of Hobart Pasha in running the gauxitlet of the Russian batteries on the Danube. It is flattering to our national pride to think that the first conspicuous act of gallantry in what may be the most gigantic struggle on record, has been performed by an Englishman. Hobart Pasha is the third son of the Earl of Buckinghamshire and was born in 1822. He entered the Navy, became a Post Captain at an early age, and in 1867 joined the service of the Sultan of Turkey. An idea of his enterprising spirit may be gained from the fact that during the American War he ran the blockade eighteen times under the name of Captain Robert.

The story of the imprisoned miners at Pontypridd in Wales, and their rescue, is one of the most sensational things that I can recollect happening amongst us, and during those days of suspense the news from Pontypridd quite cast into the shade the news from the East. Ere you receive this you will of course have read the thrilling story, so I will only add that her Majesty has conferred the Albert Medal upon each of the gallant rescuers of the entombed miners, and that the public subscription for the benefit of the rescuers and the rescued now amounts to nearly £4OOO.