The intellect which cannot see the difference—the essential difference—of these words must, in some way or other, be very far from being healthy. The three great Powers acknowledged the justice of the alterations, and M.Drouyn de Lhuys, though he “regrets the introduction of any modifications into the Vienna note, certainly considers them to be for the better.”—(Blue Book, vol. ii., p. 85.) These modifications the Emperor of Russia refused to accept; and though France and England, still desirous of peace, advised the Turks not to declare war against Russia, is it surprising that she did? The wonder is that she suffered her hands to be tied so long, considering that the enemy was in her territories and exercising all the powers of military government over her subjects. Because Turkey refused the first note, and Russia the amended one, Mr.Brighthas the audacity to tell us that “the Turks should have been prevented from going to war,or should have been allowed to go to war on their own risk.” In no fit of temporary excitement did the Turks adopt this last resort of nations. She summoned a council of her wisest, her gravest, and her best, and then, after mature deliberation, issued the declaration of war. “The decisions were unanimous. The meeting consisted of more than a hundred persons.”—(Blue Book, vol. ii., p. 130.)
Such is the history of that contest which is at present waging between England, France, Turkey, and Russia. I have endeavoured to state the whole question without prejudice or passion. Believing thoroughly in the justice of the war, I have sought to master all its bearings, and so to state the result that reason should be the only adjudicator appealed to. I have expressed few opinions of my own, preferring to quote from official documents, so that the reader might have the authoritative documents in his possession, and be thus enabled to compare them with the garbled extracts which have been made from these very interesting Blue Books on the Holy Places. The whole development of the question reveals Russia at her old game; a game she has unceasingly played since the time of Peter I.; a game by which she has more than doubled her original empire; a game which has brought to her unholy rule Poland, Finland, the Crimea, Georgia, Bessarabia, and so many other provinces which she has filched from her neighbours. “For one hundred and sixty years Russiahas steadily kept in view the objects of ambition in the East first contemplated by Peter I., and bequeathed by him to his successors. These were, to raise Russia upon the ruins of Turkey—to obtain exclusive possession of the Caspian and Black Sea, with the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles—to extend her dominions beyond the Caucasus—to domineer in Persia with a view to open the road to India; and history perhaps furnishes no other example of equal pertinacity in prosecuting,per fas et nefas, a predetermined course of aggrandisement. Her crown has frequently been transferred, by open violence or secret crime, from one head or one family to another, but each successive sovereign, with hardly an exception, has made some progress towards the attainment of these objects, and she continues to prosecute them with unabated avidity.”[16a]Yet, with these facts before his eyes, and strengthening himself with a quotation from LordPalmerston, who says just what suits his purpose at the moment, Mr.Brightdeclares that “The danger of the Russian power was a phantom.” Any one might suppose from such statements that men read history with their understandings warped by some strange hallucination which prevented them from profitting by its lessons. Russian power of aggression a phantom! Why her whole modern history is one continued record of aggressions committed on foreign states, and she is now as desirous as ever of increasing her dominions. The late Emperor was scarcely cold before his son,AlexanderII., asked “Providence which has selected us for so high a calling to be our guide and protector, that we may maintain Russia on the highest standard of power and glory, and in our person accomplish the incessant wishes and aims of Peter, of Catherine, of Alexander, and of our father.” One of these incessant wishes and aims is the possession of Constantinople, the Bosphorous, and the Dardanelles.
To show the nature of the Russian policy and her unvarying method of carrying it out, I select a few instances of her aggressions. A goodly volume might be filled with such violations of all rights, natural and divine:—From Sweden she gained Finland in 1809; the lion’s share of Poland fell to her after the three fatal partitions of 1772, 1793, and 1795, and Warsaw was added in 1815; from Persia she wrung Georgia, in 1814; and Turkey lost the Crimea in 1784, and Bessarabia in 1812. I now give an abstract of the extent of her acquisitions, which proves that within the last sixty-four years she has acquired territories equal in extent and importance to the whole empire she had in Europe before that time. From Sweden she has stolen more than what now remains of that kingdom; what she won from Poland nearly equals the whole Austrian empire; from Turkey in Europe, her gain is greater than the Prussian dominions, exclusive of the Rhenish Provinces; and from Turkey in Asia it is nearly equal to the whole of the smaller states of Germany. Persia has been plundered of dominions equal to England; and from Tartary she has filched possessions not inferior to that of Turkey in Europe, Greece, Italy, and Spain.[16b]Surely this is a sufficient evidence of her aggressive policy, and also sufficient to show that her power is not a mere phantom.
Mr.Brightcan never have read Russian history, or he would scarcely have penned the sentence that we are at war for “the maintenanceof the most immoral and filthy of all despotisms over one of the fairest portions of the earth which it has desolated, and over a population it has degraded, but has not been able to destroy.” Bad as Turkish despotism has been, it must pale its ineffectual fires before that of Russia; the horrors committed by Peter and Catherine, the religious persecutions of Nicholas, the fate of the Minsk nuns, the massacre of thousands of unopposing and helpless victims which everywhere defiles her annals. Of her horrible crimes, too hideous to be named; of her serf population, of her degraded priesthood guilty of every enormity of which human nature is capable, I need not here enlarge. From the days when Peter had his own son assassinated, butchered his people, massacred the Strelitzes, and at a banquet which he gave to the Prussian Ambassador, Prinz, had twenty of these unfortunate men brought into the room and there beheaded; and as each head fell he quaffed a bumper, desiring his guest to do the same; from the days when her GeneralsPotemkinandSuvaroff, at the command of Catherine, slaughtered in the Crimea “thirty thousand Tartars of either sex and every age, in cold blood,” down to the Sinope horrors of last year, her policy, her spirit, her objects and aims have undergone no change. And it is sad quibbling to say, as it has recently been said by an advocate of the Peace Society, that the Secret Correspondence contains not a single word threatening, or intimating a threat, of active aggression on the part of Russia against the “sick man.” Russia nevertalksof active aggression, but always of peace, and is always aggrandising. Her course is well drawn by her own historianKaramsin, and he says, “The object and character of our military policy has invariably been,to seek to be at peace with everybody,and to make conquests without war;always keeping ourselves on the defensive,placing no faith on the friendship of those whose interests do not accord with our own,and losing no opportunity of injuring,without ostensibly breaking our treaties with them.” Such is the moral code of a nation whose apologists are not a few in free and moral England!
The Emperor tells Europe, and Mr.Brightsupports him, that “England and France have sided with the enemies of Christianity against Russia combating for the Orthodox Faith.” Now if the Turks have justice on their side, and I trust sufficient evidence has been advanced to prove they have, how can we be at war against Christianity in supporting them? Is not justice the very basis of all religion? It is the basis and only true ground-work of mercy itself, without which it is mere idleness to talk of religion. But the Czar and Mr.Brighthave availed themselves of the simply fact that the RussiansprofessChristianity, and that the Turks are Mahommedans, to inform the world that we are fighting the battle of the infidel against the faithful. We will not pause here to show what a Christianity this is which the Emperor proclaims as the only one orthodox faith, and for the propagation and establishment of which Russia has been selected by Divine Providence. It is not a religious war at all. It is simply a political war. But even if it were a religious war—by taking whose side in this quarrel should we be best helping the cause of religion? “Well,” says a member of the Prussian Senate, “thewrongthat Russia was doing was not maderightby the religious grounds that she put forward as a pretence for her policy. It was true the question had a religious bearing; the whole earth was eventually to be converted to Christianity; but this providential future development of the world will not authorise any onesecular power to constitute itself the executioner of the Divine will, and it could not be in conformity therewith when a great power sought to crush a weaker by a breach of treaty and force of arms.” The Earl ofShaftesbury, whose religious character none will doubt, and whose devotion to the cause of Religious Freedom has won for him a high place in the annals of England, has met this question in its true bearing. In his masterly speech in the House of Lords on the Turkish difficulty he said, “As to the alliance with Turkey, there is a wide difference between an alliance with any power, heathen though it may be, to maintain the cause of justice and order against the aggressions of professing Christians, and an alliance of which the result would be the development and aggrandisement of that power. Justice, Order, and Right are such things in the eyes of God that they must be respected * * It could be shown that, with the Turks, there were facilities for the promotion of civilization and the improvement of mankind, which were denied to the Christians within the territory of Russia, and which would be still more denied them if the Emperor were enabled to extend his dominions over the East. There are more than forty towns and villages in Turkey in which there are distinct congregations of Protestant seceders from the Greek Church. * * During the last twenty years the diffusion of the Bible in Turkey had been almost incredible; whereas not even a single copy had been printed in Russia—the language of the people since 1823, and the circulation of it is forbidden under the severest penalties. With a population of 2,000,000 of Jews in his dominions, the Emperor will not permit a single copy of the Scriptures in Hebrew to pass the frontiers.” The Earl ofShaftesburyalso read the following Imperial Firman, which shows the liberality of the Sultan in strong contrast to the persecuting spirit of the Czar:—
“Firman.—To my Vizier, Mahmoud Pasha, Prefect of Police in Constantinople. When this sublime and august mandate reaches you, let it be known that hitherto those of my Christian subjects who have embraced the Protestant faith have suffered much inconvenience and distress. But, in necessary accordance with my Imperial compassion, which is the support of all, and which is manifested to all classes of my subjects, it is contrary to my Imperial pleasure that any one class of them should be exposed to suffering. As, therefore, by reason of their faith, the above-mentioned are already a separate community, it is my Royal compassionate will that, for facilitating the conducting of their affairs, and that they may obtain ease, and quiet, and safety, a faithful and trustworthy person from among themselves, and by their own selection, shall be appointed, with the title ofAgent for the Protestants, and that he should be in relations with the Prefecture of the Police. You will not permit anything to be required of them in the name of fee, or other pretence, for marriage licences or registration. You will see to it, that, like the other communities of the empire, in all their affairs, such as procuring cemeteries and places of worship, they should have every facility and every needful assistance. You will not permit that any of the other communities shall in any way interfere with their edifices, or with their worldly matters or concerns, or, in short, with any of their affairs, either secular or religious, that thus they may be free to exercise the usages of their faith. And it is enjoined upon you not to allow them to be molested an iota in these particulars, or in any others; and that all attention and perseverance be put in requisition to maintain them in quiet and security. And, in case of necessity, they shall be freeto make representations regarding their affairs, through their agent, to the Sublime Porte.”
“Firman.—To my Vizier, Mahmoud Pasha, Prefect of Police in Constantinople. When this sublime and august mandate reaches you, let it be known that hitherto those of my Christian subjects who have embraced the Protestant faith have suffered much inconvenience and distress. But, in necessary accordance with my Imperial compassion, which is the support of all, and which is manifested to all classes of my subjects, it is contrary to my Imperial pleasure that any one class of them should be exposed to suffering. As, therefore, by reason of their faith, the above-mentioned are already a separate community, it is my Royal compassionate will that, for facilitating the conducting of their affairs, and that they may obtain ease, and quiet, and safety, a faithful and trustworthy person from among themselves, and by their own selection, shall be appointed, with the title ofAgent for the Protestants, and that he should be in relations with the Prefecture of the Police. You will not permit anything to be required of them in the name of fee, or other pretence, for marriage licences or registration. You will see to it, that, like the other communities of the empire, in all their affairs, such as procuring cemeteries and places of worship, they should have every facility and every needful assistance. You will not permit that any of the other communities shall in any way interfere with their edifices, or with their worldly matters or concerns, or, in short, with any of their affairs, either secular or religious, that thus they may be free to exercise the usages of their faith. And it is enjoined upon you not to allow them to be molested an iota in these particulars, or in any others; and that all attention and perseverance be put in requisition to maintain them in quiet and security. And, in case of necessity, they shall be freeto make representations regarding their affairs, through their agent, to the Sublime Porte.”
“In this,” continued the Earl, “I believe is to be found the whole secret of the movement on the part of the Emperor of Russia. He saw that it would give to these Greek Christians a status, a recognized independence, and emancipated them from the influence of Russia; he saw that the circulation of the Scriptures was giving rise to those aspirations after liberty, which religious freedom must inevitably be followed by, and his own dominions were contiguous to those in which this religious freedom was tolerated.”
The true nature of Russia’s religious movement is well pointed out by LordStratforddeRedcliffe. He is giving the Earl ofClarendona summary of the state of the question when he arrived at Constantinople, and of the difficulties which lie in the way of its settlement. As respects arriving at an amicable adjustment of the differences he says, “The prospect in this direction would be more promising if Russia were to shew signs of being disposed to act on Christian rather than on sectarian principles. But it appears that the protection which her Government wish to exercise with so little control or limitation, is of a strictly exclusive character; and it has reached me, from more quarters than one, that, among the motives for increasing their influence in this country, is the desire of repressing Protestantism wherever it appears.”—(Blue Book, vol. i., p. 29.)
England, France, and Turkey have striven to divest this quarrel of any character of Islamism versus Christianity, and to rest it on the broad basis of justice and right. The Emperor has sought to make it a second crusade, and has used every influence in his power as head of the Church to excite the fanaticism, sectarian zeal, and religious bigotry of his people. In doing so he has shown himself capable of calling into action the most terrible of all weapons, so that therewith he can achieve his end. It was little to have been expected that a member of the most peaceful and tolerant of Christian communities should have aided him in this dreadful and iniquitous course. It is one more fatal illustration of how far men will allow themselves to be carried when once they abandon the strict path of reason, and allow feeling and prejudice to warp their otherwise sound judgment.
Before I leave this question of the “secret correspondence,” I will quote a passage from Sir G. H.Seymour, which I commend to the most careful consideration of those who think that Russia was desirous of keeping on terms of amity and justice with the Porte. The words are,—“The sovereign who insists with much pertinacity upon the impending fall of a neighbouring state, must have settled in his own mind that the hour, if notofits dissolution, yetforits dissolution, is at hand.” To my mind, it is clear in what mannerNicholashad made up his mind respecting this dissolution; and it was no fault of his if the hour is not at hand.
A few words more. One course pursued by the Peace Society is very strange. While apologising for and defending Russia, most of its public speakers and lecturers denounce France and Austria. I shall not defend either of these Powers. Those who oppose Russia on the same grounds which I do, will be slow to dothat. But how can these men, opposing the present war, reconcile it to their consciences to seek to embroil us with two other powers? Is it that they only deprecate war when waged against a favourite despot, and are reckless as to fanning the flames when others are concerned? Whatever may be their reasons, it is still a strangeproblem—one which these gentlemen may find some difficulty in solving. Now that we are at war, let us hope that we shall not again sheath the sword until we have secured peace on such a firm and secure basis that it shall not be in the power of future squabblers about a key, a stone, or a cupola, on the one hand—nor of aggrandising and unscrupulous ambition on the other—to overthrow the peace of nations, to threaten the existence and liberties of weaker states, to interrupt the commerce of the world, and to retard the civilization of the race. For many years Russia has been the incubus of Europe. She has laid her cold grasp upon all its aspirations, and sent out her serried legions to quench in blood the budding life and reviving freedom of many states. Her name has been a terror—her presence a curse; her instruments are fraud, rapine, and destruction; her rule is based upon ignorance, superstition and slavery; and, brutal herself, she knows of only one system of governing men—a system which depends on chains, the knout, Siberia, and death! The man who lauds such a system is hardly fit to speak the tongue which Shakspere spoke; and, as he is so much of a Russian subject, it is a pity that his citizenship is not complete, and that he were a dweller beneath her mild rule—a sojourner beneath her clement skies. For him our forefathers have lived, fought, and achieved freedom in vain.
“Who would not blush, if such a man there be?Who would not weep, if Atticus were he?”
“Who would not blush, if such a man there be?Who would not weep, if Atticus were he?”
J. A. LANGFORD, PRINTER, ANN-STREET, BIRMINGHAM.
[9]The Progress and Present Position of Russia in the East: an Historical Summary, Preface, p. vi.
[11a]Progress of Russia in the East: an Historical Summary, p. 153.
[11b]Progress of Russia in the East: an Historical Summary, p. 159.
[11c]Letter ofJohn Bright, Esq., M.P.
[12]“Now the Principalities have been invaded, not only without any pretence of right, but by the most flagrant violations of all the principles of right, by the armies of Russia. The revenues of the Principalities have been seized, all the privatematerielof those countries sequestered, and the inhabitants compelled to join the Russian armies and to make war on their own Sovereign.”—Lord Lyndhurst,in the House of Lords,March20, 1855. Even weak, vacillating, and Russia-allied Prussia was forced to admit that “a great wrong had been committed.”
[14]Progress of Russia in the East: an Historical Summary, pp. 148–49.
[16a]The Progress of Russia in the East: an Historical Summary. Preface, pp. v. and vi.
[16b]The above abstract is made from Mr.Arrowsmith’svaluable map, accompanying the pamphlet, “The Progress of Russia in the East; an Historical Summary.”