ENGLAND AND RUSSIA.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5320, 15 April 1878, Page 3

ENGLAND AND RUSSIA.

TO THE EDITOR Of THE HEW ZEALAND TIMES.. Sir, —Your correspondent “Pax,” in a letter in Friday’s issue, complains that “Bellnra” in his reply abuses but does not reply to him. He surely did not expect “ Bellum” to write a life of Lord Beaconsfield to disprove his modest assertion that he is a driveller. Such nonsense as ‘‘Pax” writes contains its own answer. In his last letter there is not much to controvert : there are one or two general assertions and a totally inaplicable, parallel. , These of “Bellum’s” way of thinking do not base their want of confidence in Russia because she is sparing of good words, but because there is such a disparity between her good words and her good works. Will “Pax” particularise the social and religions advancement the vastness of which he boasts of i Doubtless the Russians are more civilised to-day than they were a hundred years ago ; —they can’t help it ; but that there is any genuine spontaneous improvement I deny. Will “Pax” point out a single man of the first eminence that Russia has produced in the last two hundred years? I venture to assert that the Chinese, the Japanese, and even the Maoris, have made more progress during the last fifty years than the Russians. About the beginning of 1877 a crowd of people assembled in front of* the cathedral at St. Petersburg, when some discontented individuals in the crowd gave expression to some seditious crieSj and for this a large number of arrests were made. The prisoners—men and women—were tried with closed doors. The result was that amongst others nine young women were sentenced, for terras of from three years to life, tobanishmonttoSiberia, withhard labor in the mines; a sentence equal in most cases to slow death with torture. This in 1877, and speak of social progress ! As to religious advancement, your correspondent being probably an nltra-Protestant will consider the inhuman persecution that the poor Poles underwent in 1876-7, when those who would not be driven into the Greek Church were driven from their homes, and pursued like wild beasts, as evidence of religious advancement. -..* . The modesty of your correspondent, m charging those who differ from him with ignorance, and who look upon his effusions simply as so much nonsense, is admirable. The parallel in his letter between the cases of Germany and France, and Russia and Turkey, gives point to it. France provoked a most unjust war with Germany, and got defeated for her pains. To prevent retaliation and a repetition of “ a Berhn,’’ Germany insisted that Alsace and Lorraine, with their great fortresses (Metz and Strasbourg), should be ceded. Now take the Russian case. The Congress met, but failed to get Turkey to agree to the abnegation of her independence; but as soon as the congress was over Turkey hastened to grant all that was asked of her, formulating a constitution embracing all the communities of her Empire. But this was not what Russia wanted; liberty and good government would have deprived her of all excuse for interference; so she replied to this by launching her army into Bulgaria, to prevent such a consummation. The Russians with the aid of the Roumanians, and we all know how valuable that aid was, conquered the Turks, and by way of showing the value they put upon that aid they demand that the Roumanians shall give up to the Russians Bessarabia, thus shutting them out from , the Black Sea, and also to a large extent from the Danube—in fact, dealing a deadlier blow to their good allies than to their bitter enemies the Turks ; not that this strip of country is of much value to Russia as so much land; its importance consists in enabling them to carry out their idea of making the Black Sea a Russian lake, and keeping their communications open for the future invasion of Turkey and the seizure of Constantinople when the opportunity arrives. I cannot do better than close this already long letter by a quotation from ohe who, has been closely concerned with this Eastern Question for the last fifty years;— “The Eastern Question is a question of. Russian power; if this line be struck out, the Eastern Question ceases, ipso facto, to be a European question. It descends at once to the level of internal questions, whose changing phases may be followed sympathetically or antipatbetically, according to the inspiration of political principles or instinctive feelings ; hut they will never disturb the sleep of any European Power.” I do not write to convince “Pax” nor to defend “ Bellum,” who I have no doubt can take care of himself. Rusaiaphobia is like Hydrophobia, incurable; but I desire to put before the public facts, and not sentimental and nonsensical political party views.—l am, &c., Histobicds.