The Globe. SATURDAY, JANUARY 12, 1878.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1204, 12 January 1878, Page 2

The Globe. SATURDAY, JANUARY 12, 1878.

At the meeting' of the Lyttelton Harbor Board yesterday, Mr. Cunningham gave notice of the following motion: That the Chairman and Messrs, Harman and Craig bo appointed a committee to report on the best means ot defence foi Lyttelton Harbor in time of war.” We are glad to find that an influential body like the Harbor Board has at last got this important question brought under its notice, and that there is some prospect of something being at last done to remove tiuj disgrace, as far as we are concerned, which attaches to New Zealand in connection with this matter. As Mr. Cunningham put it) wc would find ourselves in a very .ifvkward position were war to break out between England and Russia. The majority of our readers will also join with him in the opinion that the Government made a great mistake in refusing to allow Sir W. Jervois to report on the subject,of our defences. Since, however, the Government of the country had shown so little regard for our true welfare, Mr, Cunningham has done a service to Canterbury, in bringing tho question under the notice of i ho Board. At tho same meeting a letter was read from Mr. Harman, ia which that I gentleman a very strong opinion

that it was quite time something was done towards constructing defences for the port. In the course of the short discussion which followed, Mr. Turner, although admitting the necessity of such a work, was afraid that it did not come within the scope of the Board, and the Chairman undertook to obtain the opinion of the solicitor upon the question. In all probability that opinion will bo that the defence of the harbours does not come within the scope of the Board’s duties. Mr. Cunningham's resolution does not go the length of affirming that the Board should actually spend funds belonging to them on such a work; it only asks that a committee be a] (pointed to report on the best means of defence. The Board have a very valuable property under their charge, and surely they are at liberty to make some inquiries as to how it could be best protected. They may discover that the cost of such defence would bo enormous. On the other hand, it will most probably be found that a system of torpedo defence might be organised at a small cost; in which case there would be no difficulty about the funds. If the Government were not shamed into taking some action, the public might find the money. But some organised body must take the matter up, and no more suitable one could be found than the Harbour Board. Not only have they a valuable property under their charge, which requires protection, but they are individually in a position to bring pressure to bear upon the Government. Nay more, their example may be followed by other Harbour Boards throughout New Zealand, and thus such a pressure will be brought to bear upon Sir G. Grey that ho will be forced, after all, to do something. Wo hope, therefore, that the committee named by Mr. Cunningham •will bo appointed.

Now that there is a prospect of the conditions of peace between Russia and Turkey being discussed, it will be interesting to know the views of the Russians on that subject. The St. Petersburg correspondent of the London Times forwards to that journal a remarkable article by a well-known and influential Russian, Prince Wassiltchikoff, in which the conditions to be offered to Turkey are discussed. The writer admits that Russia is under an obligation not to annex any part of the European dominions of the Sultan, but, with respect to the Asiatic dominions or the Black Sea, she undertook no obligations. The writer is of opinion that in all probability a strong State will be formed at the mouth of the Danube, ruled by a German Prince. Were this the case, an effectual barrier would be placed between Russia and the Balkan peninsula. Russia, in the opinion of the writer, would therefore be compelled te seek some other way, presenting fewer political obstacles and less complicated interests. “Such a way is the Black Sea,” As to compensation for her lossses. the writer asks : “ Shall we Russians content ourselves with that high aim which we placed before ourselves in the present war —the emancipation of the Turkish Christians and the amelioration of their condition ? ... To us it

seems that this question must bo answered in the negative. Russia must demand compensation for her losses; hut as Turkey cannot, in her present bankrupt condition, pay the compensation in money, she must give it in some other form. The most effectual compensation of this kind ■would the the cession to Russia of the Turkish fleet. Thus the chief points of a future treaty of peace might bo the autonomy of the Slavonic provinces, and the cession to us of the Turkish ironclads.

. . . Freedom of navigation, the opening of the Straits, and the reconstruction of the Russian Black Sea fleet present such advantages for the future of Southern Russia and for the further solution of the Eastern question, that in comparison with them all other conditions of peace must be regarded as secondary.” Prince Wassiltchikoff, says the correspondent, thinks that if Russia had the complete command of the Black Sea she need not much insist on the question of the Straits, but on this point he differs from the great majority of his countrymen. “ The free passage of the Dardanelles” is universally regarded as an iudispensible condition of peace. But this “ free passage ” is for themselves, to the rigorous exclusion of all other nations, or as it is sometimes called, “ the joint dominion of the Straits by Turkey and Russia.” It is said “The right of free passage granted to all nations would bo a gross infraction of Russian interests. The navies of those Powers which have no possessions on the Black Sea coast, have no reason to pass through the straits except for purposes of attack and invasion. In a word, the right of exit from the Black Sea is for Russia the right of exit from an inner court to the free air of heaven; while the right of entrance granted to foreign nations would be the right to enter our inner court for the purpose of attack and robbery.” Alter quoting the above passage the Times says:—“ It is impossible | not tp admire the calm assumption that the Black Sea,is the Char’s private Igke. The theory, however, will be purely visionary so long ae> there are naval powers in the world.”