ENGLAND AND OTTOMAN PUBLIC OPINION.

Thames Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2826, 6 March 1878, Page 3

ENGLAND AND OTTOMAN PUBLIC OPINION.

The Times' Pera correspondent furnished the following translation of an article on the above subject from the Turkish semi-official organ, The Vakit t— " The Correspondents of some English newspapers had translated and sent home some of our articles. These bad also attracted the attention of ihe Ottoman public, who disapproved our criticism of the policy of England, our natural friend and ally. Wo have even received a letter from an important personage, who speaks of the advantage of the moral assistance afforded to us by England ; but, being of a private nature, we do not feel authorised to publish it. These advantages are incontestable and have been set forth in several newspapers. The Russian Press has even expressed its dissatisfaction with the moral assistance Kngland has lent to Turkey. We have never criticised English neutrally in a hostile spirit. We might, strictly speaking, and with reason, have shown coolness towards England, whose alliance and friendship we are the first to value. Our pen has nnver been, and never will be, hostile to England. We are of opinion that the Eastern iutereels of England nre too great and too.essential not to warn her against the dangers which threatened them. All our remarks are made in this sense. We find in cur correspondent's letter one important point. It is his wish to see England assume towards Turkey the same

position which Germany lia3 assumed towards Russia. When pence is to he concluded there must he nu-dinlorn and Kngland would ho the advor-at«> of Turkey. But can vre admit- Unit the sihug terms exist between us and England aa between Germany and liussia ? We have shown, on the contrary, that the relations betweeu Enplnnd and Turkuy «ri imt quire as they might be wished. "The Emprrnr Vv ril iain has complimented, by telegram, tho Kussian regiment which boars hiu. name,'and wished it victories. Germany has in'terforcd to declare that Turkey dees not respect the Geneva Convention; she domnndcd.and still demands, explanations as to the fate of the Russian wounded, ns if the Turks had killed theni; she bos authorised her doctors and surgeons to enter the llussian service; she has promised her assistance to liussia to put down a Polish insurrection, should it brenk out. Lastly, not satisfied with giving every aid to Russia, sho hns come to an agreement with Italy so as to strengthen her Russian alliance. " What hns England done for Turkey ? To speak, first of all, of the five millions loan, we have given a sound security in the Egyptian tribute—a guarantee quite sufficient for a five million loan ; and yet we shall barely receive one million. On such terms, failing the London market, we could hare borrowed as much from Athens. " Tho Russians had not respected tho Red Crescent at Rustchuk—that is, they violated the Geneva Convention by pointing their fire at our hospitals. They even destroyed the British Consulate ; and yet England kept silent. " The Bulgarians and Cossacks killed women and children, and committed atrocities. England, who last year had made so much noise about the Bulgarian incidents, did not condescend to give us even one word of consolation about the Russian atrocities. "The Mussulmans of Bombay wished to make some demonstrations of sympathy for the Ottoman Envoy sent by the Porte to Afghanistan to defend British interests; the British Indian authorities prevented tho3e demonstrations. " Millions of Indian Mussulmans petitioned the' British Government Maying that it would not remain indifferent in tho Eastern Question. Not only did these petitions remain fruitless, but they were prohibited. The Red Cross Society of England no doubt.has sent relief to the Turkish wounded by means of liberal subscriptions in England and India, but there is in this nothing to blind a politician. It is merely a humanitarian work which no Government could thwart. Had England given us one quarter of the moral and material assistance which Germany has given to Russia we could agree with our correspondent in recognizing the advantages of English aid. " What surprises us is that Germany has given that aid without any material advantage to counterbalance such service, and even with some danger for her in the extension of Russian influence; but what is still more surprising is that England having so many interests in the East has refused us her assistance. With such evident truths before us can we agree with our correspondent P It is a general rule that a war must lead to peace, but there is no international rule that at the end. of every war there should be mediators. The belligerents may conclude peace without having recourse to the office of mediators. As to an intervention, the interested Powers alone can create one. If England has interests in the East, she must get at least to acknowledge them; no doubt England has so many interests in the East that we may say our troops fighting in Asia and . Europe are defending precisely thcaame interests as if they were British soldiers. But, unfortunately, England is far from caring fur her interests. If Turkey beaten concluded a peace direct with Russia, she would be justified in rejecting any, mediation, and thus, perhaps, sparing for herself a moral defeat. Some time ago a certain person was asked if the presence of the British Fleet at Besika was of any importance. He replied that the British Fleet was in the JEgean Sea just as the fleets of the friendly Powers could at all times be there. This is.the plain truth, for if it became necessary to defend British interests the Fleet is simply insufficient to do-so. We have wished to speak out a few truths which are perhaps hard to hear* but bur remarks are only those of a disappointed friend whose complaint may annoy for the moment, but the truth of which will be recognised when it is too late."