RUSSIA AND ENGLAND.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5323, 18 April 1878, Page 3

RUSSIA AND ENGLAND.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND TIMES. Sib, —With your permission I! will supplement my last letter with a few more quotations from Russian and other European journals, in the hope that they may throw some light upon Lord Beaconsfield’s policy. His policy is one of absolute neutrality, but at the same time to keep a jealous watch over British interests., No one in his senses could imagine that Lord Beaoonsfield himself is desirous of seeing Great Britain involved in war. There is no doubt a large section of the British public, not particularly far-sighted, who have enthusiastically adopted the side of the Russians, or on the other hand.that of the Turks, and, without sufficient imagination to calculate the horrible results of sucha policy, would gladly see their country involved in war. But surely a, farseeing statesman like Lord Beaoonsfield, who knows that Great Britain will have quite enough to do to hold her own and defend her wide-scattered empire, is not likely to make war on account of Turkey; neither is he likely under any combination of circumstances to declare war with Russia. The “ British Lion” has dragged his great carcase to the “Sublime Porte,’.’ the “Gate of Gates,” Constantinople, and is now lying down before it. It is not likely the “ Bear” will dispute possession ; the probability is he will indulge in a vast amount of growling, but keep at a respectful distance, and when he sees the case is hopeless retire. Lord Derby, prior to the declaration of war by Russia against Turkey, said “the whole case of Turkey rested on who shall have Constantinople.”, An article in the Paris Debats, of November, 1876, which caused a great sensation in Paris, points out that England must have Stamboul, and uses the words of General Von Moltke, who said that “the true British Torres Vedras were,the road to Constantinople and the outlets of the Bosphorus.” This Is the Eastern Question, and this is the question that must be definitely settled before hostilities cease—- “ Who shall have Constantinople ?” It is not likely that this question will at once be settled in England’s favor ; there must he many complications and much diplomatic correspondence before Russia allows her rival to take possession of what she (Russia) looks upon as hers. - Touching the second capture of Constantinople the Turks have a curious legend ; it occurs in a history of the Turks by Leum Clavious (1591), and the following translation of it was forwarded to an English paper in 1854 :—“ It is found written in the books of the wise, and especially in the book called Mesaabih, that before -Degnal Lain, or the wicked and accursed Anti-Christ,. shall go forth, Constantinople will be twice occupied. First it will be taken by the sword; then, when the time for judgment shall come, the sons of Isaac will take it not by the sword but by calling upon thename of God.” The first occupation by force of arms they confess to have been fulfilled when Sultan Mahommed gained possession of.it in 1453. , Let ns see what the Russian views are with respect to the test question as to who shall have Constantinople. Prince Wassiltchikoff, a well-known political writer and President of the St. Petersburg Slavonic Society, published not long ago an article in a Russian newspaper, stating what Russia’s demands would be. These are in brief :—l. The surrender to herself of the entire Turkish fleet. 2. The exclusive right to navigate the .narrow straits connecting the Black Sea with the Mediterranean. This will be found amplified in the London Times of November 23. . Bitterly as this man writes against England, he is not able to conceal his fear of her. He says; “ England will receive with malicious anger the proposal ,to create anew a Russian fleet in the Black Sea, and perhaps«it will-offer armed resistance. We must therefore 5 weigh the consequences of the hostility of the British Empire with its powerful armadas and countless financial resources. To decide’ that question directly.in'Anr own favor, would he a light-headednct.” A most rabid article against England appears in a St; Petersburg journal, La V.oix, written by; a M. Markhof, Who ; is also a distinguished writer. A short extract will suffice to clear up any doubt as to what hia feelings are towards

England;—“lt were time,” he .writes,'; that Europe awoke from her, apathy and acknowledged the true promoter of the troubles and convulsions which recur periodically conceruiin' the interminable Eastern Question.. All Europe !—what have I said ? The whole universe is a prey to the cupidity of Great Britain. It would be quite time, I repeat, for Europe to cause this voracious . creature to give up the idea of living at the coat of other people, of imbibing their blood and,of .exciting civilised : nations one against another. I know not if Europe will approve of my idea, but what is certain is that the epoch of the naivetes and the delicate consideration of Russia regarding England is .past for .ever,” &c., &c., and much more to the same purpose. The Jouriml de it. Petersboury reproduced M. Mavkhof’s article, giving the following reason for so doing ; “ Because it has much bearing upon the question of the day, and also because it emanates from the pen ,of a publicist well known in Russia. The St. Petersboury Gazette lias a long article on England’s policy, which is said to express the opinions of “a large add influential section * f Russian society,” in which jealousy of Great Britain is clearly seen, and which suggests a universal coalition against British power, influence, and commerce. Great Britain is ;*.ot jealous of Russia or any other Power; it is they who are jealous of her. Great Britain knows her strength and instinctively recognises her proud destiny; she knows she can protect her own interests —which are the world’s interests could they, only see it, and beyond that she has no desire to go. It is not that the great heart of Britain lias ceased to feel for the down-trodden and oppressed of other countries, but the time has not yet come for her to dictate to the whole world. It is quite evident what is the policy of Russia; it is equally evident that England’s policy is to checkmate her; and it would appear from prophecy that England will win the game without fighting. Now, although England’s policy is so far against Russia, it does not at all. follow that she is to assist the Turks. In a late article on the Eastern Question in the, Fortniyhtly Review, the writer, a' member of the Imperial Parliament, says: “ It would be just as sensible for England to send au army to America to assist ‘Spotted Dog ’ against the United States, as to send an array to assist the Turks. The fact is both ‘Spotted Dog’and the ‘unspeakable Turk ’ are played out; their time has come. England’s policy towards Turkey is well illustrated in the instructions given to the British Consul Holmes, when he was sent at the express wish of the Sultan to form one of the delegation of consuls to confer with the Servian and Bosnian insurgents. He was instructed—‘Although the views aud instructions of the different Governments are identical, you will at the same time take the greatest pains to avoid anything that either in the eyes of the Turkish authorities, or in those of the insurgents, might have „the appearance of united action ; aud you will therefore abstain from collective steps, but will rather act individually. . . . . When you have fulfilled the duty thus confided to you, you will return to Mostar or such other other place in your district as you think most desirable, without waiting to know the 1 result of the negotiations.’ The Turks, true to their treacherous nature, as soon as the consuls' backs were turned fell on the insurgent delegates and massacred them. This was done by Chefket Pasha, who described it as “ clever strategy.” The consuls left the insurgent delegates on the 19th September, 1875; the massacre took place on the 20th. The Turks are as bitter against England now as the Russians are. Ali Suavi Effendi, chief of the Turkish; College at Constantinople, writes a letter to the Stamboul, in which he says: “ The source of every political evil, of every crime, is the English Government. I have studied England, therefore I know well that all the evils which the world suffers come from the English Government.” Perhaps some of your readers would like to know what Germany thinks of us. Prince Bismarck, on a recent occasion, is reported to have spoken as follows: “ The only question which preoccupied him was the attitude which the other great Powers of Europe might assume with respect to certain eventualities. Among these be did not. reckon England. England had for many a year been erased from all his political calculations.” Great Britain, however, steers a straight course, undeterred by the threats of France and Russia, by the taunts of Turkey, or by the sneers of Germany. She cares as little for the one as the other. The statesman who is now steering the ship of State has a true compass to steer by; he knows his course, and can see in his minds,eye the ultimate gaol; it is there he is bound, and the rocks, shoals, storms, and fogs he meets on his journey are mere nothings, for he has confidence in himself, he has confidence in his crew, and the ship is perfect.— l am, &c., Neutral.