THE WAR IN EUROPE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VI, Issue 33, 8 February 1871, Page 2

THE WAR IN EUROPE.

RUSSIAN feeling on the eastern question*. The St. Petersburg correspondent of the Daily Neios writes as follows : — St. Petersburg, Nov. 25. The last two days have been quiet here, and nothing more of interest has-oecurred that you have uot already had by telegram. The journals a»*e occupied chiefly with discussing the articles in the foreign papers on the Russian note. Tliey find that it is the form and tone which are chiefly complained of, and strive to show tho politeness of the one and the propriety of the other. The question of principle is at present ignored. Perhaps they think enough has been said about that. They say now they will admit they havo violated a treaty, and thoy are perfectly willing to take the consequences, if there are any, still asserting the right and propriety* of their conduct. The Moscow Gazette says : — " The calm and dignified tone of the despatch of the 19th Octobeiv^ can have offended no one ; but were ffiS^ tone even rude, would war be made oj-p' Russia for that ? It is said, besides, that Russia professes an heretical doctrine on the value of treaties. Let us admit it ; but has it ever beeu heard that States can make war for such or, such a manner of regarding things ? Li the international sphere there is no censorship, either preventive or repressive. How, then, proceed against Russia if its appreciation of certain thiugs is really false ? The Treaty of Paris does not say a siujjle word on the value of treaties iv general, and it prescribes no form to the contracting parties in which to express their opinion or formulate their rights." Mr. John Stuart Mill was right in saying that it was much more difficult to judge of the moral question involved ia the declatiou of Russia than at first sight appears. If any of your readers were here they would at once see this. In reading over the articles in the Russian journals, we meet a great deal of sophistry and much special pleading, but also sound practical sense and arguments which are hard to refute. On the other hand, the Russians find a considerable amount of fault with the arguments and views of the foreign press. " Why," they say, "is our conduct so heinous, when you all approved the actiou of Italy a few weeks ago in rejecting the September Couveution the moment that France was down ? We show that the treaty of Paris was broken by the union of the Principalities, against which we protested, and you say that we have co reason to complain, because that does not injure us. Is the treaty not broken all the same, whether cur interests are particularly affected or not ? Count Beust even adds that this infraction is no reason why we should now make au attack on Turkey. But that is just what we disclaim doing." "Ah," you add, " that is a fait accompli." The Russiaus dislike that doctrine. I was talkiog the other day with one of the highest officers of the Government, and he spoke of this very thiug. li If a nation," he said, '* by means of an intrigue and secret preparation, suddenly violates a treaty, and obtains the desired advantage, the world stares a little, but does noLliing, unless the question is really worth fighting about, and that is very seldom. France, Italy, aud Prussia have acted thus, and the world now pretends to believe that they were right. When we, without intrigue or suterfuge, do not break a treaty, but boldly and honestly say, 'This is uuendurable, we will not keep it longer' — that Is, ODly declare our intention of breaking it — and you talk of destroying faith in treaties, of violating our plighted faith, &c. ; but we have as yet done nothing but declare our intentionslegalise them, if you wish. When Aye protest against the infraction of a trepfcjiy^^ such as the union of the Principalities, you say, , Oh, we can do, nothing , it is a fait accompli' and so you call a congress and legalise. What a wretched subterfuge that is ! Well now, here is a fait accompli, let Eogland aud Austria call a congress and accept it. We are quite willing for that." Two or three others near us warmly applauded these sentiments, and one added, " It is easy to see that we have acted with perfect good faith in this matter, to satisfy our national honor, aud for no warlike purpose. The stipulations of the treaty allow us ten ships on the Black Sea, and we have actually but three ; a fleet can't be built in a day, and we prefer to build it openly and honestly." Another took a very practical view, and said : — " Three strong fellows came into my house, turned me out, and made me promise lo live in the cellar. They knew well enough that I should not stay there longer than I could help. Now one of them is sick, and I take the opportunity to assert my rights and get possession of my own house. As they understood this perfectly . well when they made me promise, and have beeu feeling me ever since to see if my muscles

were still weak, I don't see any breach of faith in what. I do. " Treaties are not made to lust for ever ; and tlie world knows that a treaty imposing humiliating conditions wjjl, be broken at the first opportunity. As you have pe?n by the telegrams, addresses of thanks to the Emperor are coming in from all quarters. This is, I doubt nol, a genuine expression of feeling, though I have been told that, the hand of the Government is only too plainly visible. If this be true, it will show at least that the Government has no intention of retreating from its position, but is endeavoring to strengthen it hy popular support.