UC-NRLF

$B 742 2^13

1876-1880.

m- ' y i ^

. -St

/i>,W-

vl/

'k'^'^^ '

3-'

-ife:.

"" r

^1

i

'ir,'< ,

.P

EUSSIA AND ENGLAND

From 1876 to 1880

I.OXCON : PRINTED BY

BP0TTJ8\VOO.-K AND t-O., KKW-STUKKT SQIAIIB

AXi) PABUAMKXT STUEET

> ^'' •• ,•••*•• • • •'•JTICOLAS KIR^EFF

?* t r^2 ••* *l 'rrtm^nilHf ^^ian volunteer killed i.v skrvia

JULY y«g, 1876

RUSSIA AND ENGLAND

FROM

1876 TO 1880

A PROTEST AND AN APPEAL

BY

0. K.t/ve^/f'-r*-"^

AUTHOR OF * IS RUSSIA VfRONQ ?
WITH A PREFACE

BT

JAMKS ANTHONY FKOUDE, M.A.

SECOND EDITION
REVISED Ay I) EXLAROED

LONDON
LONGMANS, GEEEN, AND CO.

1880

A II right t vsr/rfd

V1

So t^t gltmotg of
NICOLAS KIEfiEFF

the first russian volunteer killed in servia
July ^, 1876

®;^is gooK is Jcbicatctr

^'938^3

PEEFACE

LiTOLE more than two years ago, when a war with
Eussia seemed probable and even imminent, a book
was published in London explaining the view of the
Eussians themselves on the cause of their quarrel
with Turkey. The writer, a Eussian lady, described
herself only under the initials O. K. : and as under
these circumstances an introduction of some kind was
thought desirable, at the request of the authoress I
wrote a few words of preface to this book. I was
the more willing to do it, because as far back as
the Crimean War I was one of the few Englishmen
who considered that for us to quarrel with Eussia in
defence of the Ottoman Empire was impolitic and
useless, and that so far from simplifying the problems
which were coming upon us, not in Turkey only, but
throughout Asia, it would enormously increase them.
When the Emperor Nicholas spoke of the Turk as
the sick man, for whose approaching end he invited
us to assist him in making preparation, it appeared to

viii Preface.

me that he was speaking the truth, and that to
refuse to acknowledge it would prove as futile in the
long run as the denial of any other fact of nature.
Fact, as. always happens, had asserted itself. The
sick man's state could no longer be questioned by the
most obstinate increduUty. But the provisions which
the Emperor Nicholas desired had not been made.
The European conflict which he foresaw would follow
from the absence of it, was on the point of breaking
out; and small as the prospect of peace appeared
when the Kussians were advancing upon Con-
stantinople, I was glad to be able to assist, in how-
ever slight a degree, the courageous lady who was
pleading the cause of the Slavs before the English
public.

The danger is no longer immediate. The Eussian
army and the English fleet were almost within the
range of each other's guns : a mistaken telegram or
the indiscretion of a commander on either side might
have precipitated a collision, and all Asia, and per-
haps Europe also, would at this moment have been in
conflagration.

The moderation of Eussia prevented so frightful
a calamity. The Treaty of San Stefano was modified,
and the English Cabinet, if it won no victory in war,
was able to boast, with or without reason, of a dip-
lomatic triumph. Continental statesmen could no
longer speak of the eflacement of England as a

Preface. ix

European Power. England had shown that she had
the will and strength to interfere where she chose
and when she cliose. But the question remains
whether our interference answered a useful purpose,
or whethi^r in effect we had proved more than a boy-
proves who shows that he cannot be prevented from
laying a bar across a railway, and converting a useful
express train into a pile of spHnters and dead bodies.

Happily the common sense of Europe and the
large minority of right-minded Englishmen had
forbidden a repetition of the follies which accom-
panied the Crimean war. No cant could be listened
to at Berlin about the integrity and independence of
the Ottoman Empire. No English Prime Minister
could affect to believe in Turkish progress, except as
progress to destruction. A war might still have
risen from the disappointment of tlie English Cabinet
at the turn which events had taken, had not Russia
surrendered something that she had won. But the
purpose for which she had interposed in Turkey
was substantially accomplished. No more Bashi
Bazouks and Circassian hyenas will massacre Chris-
tian men in Bulgaria and dishonour Christian
women.

In Europe the power of the Ottoman is gone to a
shadow. In Asia, in spite of our protests, we have
been ourselves obhged to undertake that it shall be
no longer abused as it has been. For the time there

X Preface.

is a respite, and we can breathe again. But the death-
rattle is in the Ottoman's throat. The end is close
upon us. In a few years at most, a dozen questions
as hard as the Bulgarian will be pressing for a settle-
ment. So far as Europe is concerned, the Eastern
policy of the Cabinet has not been a success. Sir
Henry Layard would not pretend that the Eussian
and Turkish war had terminated as he hoped that it
would terminate. The English people themselves, in
their own consciences, know that it has not. Their
warhke propensity had been roused. They hoped to
have fought Eussia nearer home, and, to allay their
disappointment, a demonstration against Eussia, which
turned into a war, has been got up in Afghanistan.
This adventure also has not been wholly prosperous,
and it promises ill for the future. What is to be the
end of this determined animosity against the Eussians,
and what are we to gain by it? What harm can
Eussia do us, unless we go out of our way to attack
her? She cannot invade us at home : no sane person,
not Sir Henry Eawlinson himself, imagines that she can
invade us in India. We are not wild enough to covet
the barren steppes which form her costly, unfruitful,
uninviting Asiatic Empire. Is it necessary to our
self-esteem that we must have some imaginary enemy
whom we must always be defying and quarrelUng
with ? and that we select Eussia, because of all the
Great Powers she is the one which we think can least

Preface, xi

materially hurt us P A thoughtful consideration of
our relative positions will suggest a different con-
clusion.

Eussia and England are not likely to come into ^^
collision in Europe. The Great Powers who might ^
themselves be involved will forbid it for their own
sakes. In Asia we stand side by side as the repre-
sentatives of Western civilisation, and on the attitude
which we assume to one another the future condition
of that enormous Continent may be said to depend. It
is for us and for us alone to decide whether we are
to be allies or enemies. If we can act in concert, if
we can dismiss our jealousies, take each other's hands
and be friends, the position of each of us will grow
stronger, and along with it our power of doing good.
Civilisation will advance on an even course, bringing
with it industry and good government, and the
Asiatic races will have reason to bless us, as the
bearers among them of peace and prosperity. If, on
the other hand, the spirit is to be permanent which
has guided our Eastern policy for the last four years
and has been so generally prevalent in England, then
these wretched myriads of people (amounting — if we
include the Chinese, who will not long escape — to
half the human race) will be simply torn in pieces
as a carcase between us, till they learn to hate, and
justly hate, the very name of the civilisation which
will have brought misery so infinite upon them.

xii Preface.

Which of these two courses is to be chosen,
depends upon England. Kussia has long sought an
English alliance. She has sacrificed her interests,
she has sacrificed her pride ; she has stooped, peril aps,
below her rank as a Great Power in suing for it. We
still hold off, and are cold and suspicious. Is it be-
cause Kussia is aggressive ? we are more aggressive.
Is Eussia without a Constitutional Government and
therefore not to be trusted ? We govern two hundred
million subjects in India, to whom we do not dream
01 giving a Constitution. Is it because Russia does
not observe her engagements? That may be our
opinion ; but ask a Russian, or, for that matter, any
foreign statesman, whether we more accurately
observe ours. Nations can never be friends while
each insists on the other's faults and is blind to its
own : —

Qui ne tuberibus propriis offendat amicum
Postulat, ignoscat veiTucis illius.

If we act otlierwise, it can only be because we
have no wish to be friends with Russia. And why
should we not be friends with her? Is it because
we Islanders are so independent, tliat we will brook
neither rival nor companion on any road which we
choose to follow, and that being establislied in Asia
we must have Asia to ourselves ? Such a feeling no
doubt is to be found in large masses of Englislimen.
I cannot pay our Premier or his colleagues so bad

Preface. xiii

a compliment as to suspect them of sharing it. They
know well that if we were inflated with so vain an
ambition, this great Empire of ours would burst
like an air bubble. It is hard to credit, either, that
the English Tory party really believes that Eussian
autocracy is dangerous to rational liberty. The love
of the Tory party for liberty has not hitherto been of
so violent a kind. My own early years were spent
among Tories, and Eussia I heard spoken of among
them as the main support that was left of sound
principles of government. Docile as they are under
the educating hand of their chief, the country gentle-
men of England cannot have fallen into their present
attitude towards Eussia on political conviction. I
interpret their action as no more than a passing
illustration of the working of Government by party.
Having obtained power they wish to keep it. They
have seen an opportunity of making themselves
popular by large talk about English dignity, and by
appeals to the national susceptibility. The interests
of Europe, the interests of Asia, have been simply
used as cards and counters in a game, where the
stake played for is the majority at the next election.

Alas, the real stake in this reckless adventure is
the future position of England itself. The world will
understand and partly tolerate a selfish policy if it
is really a national policy. The world will scarcely
be satisfied to find its interests trifled with, that Tory

xiv Preface.

or Liberal may rule in Downing Street. It is to be
hoped therefore that EngUsh people, who prefer
their country to the factions which divide it, will
endeavour for themselves to examine the questions
supposed to be at issue between ourselves and Eussia
with more care than they have hitherto bestowed on
them. We can understand nothing till we have
looked at both sides of it. Thus, it is with no com-
mon pleasure that I commend to my countrymen
the new volume with which this Russian lady again
presents us. For her own sake I could have "wished
that some weightier person than myself should have
written a preface for her, if preface was needed, but
it is as well perhaps that her book should appeal to
our attention on its own merits, rather than through
the authority of some powerful name.

The writer, known to us hitherto only as 0. K.,
fills out her initials for herself, and tells us that she is
one of a family whose noblest representatives have
devoted themselves for the Slavonian cause. She
alludes to her eldest brother, General Kireeff, now
on the Staff of the Grand Duke Constantine, and a
most active member of the Slavonian Committee.
The story of the second which resembles a legend of
some mythic Koman patriot or medigeval Crusader,
the reader will find told, as no other English writer
could tell it, by Mr. Kinglake. Under the influence
of the same passionate patriotism which sent her

Preface, xv

brother to his death, the sister has laboured year
after year in England, believing that, however misled,
we are a generous people at heart, and that, if we really
knew the objects at which Russia was aiming, we should
cease to suspect or thwart them. Her self-imposed
task has been so hard that only enthusiasm could
have carried her through it. We, in our present
humour, believing that the world is governed wholly
by selfish interests, have forgotten that there were
times in our own history, and those the times best
worth remembering, when interest was nothing to
us, and some cause which we considered holy was
everything. Among those of us who have heard of
this lady many have regarded her as a secret instru-
ment of the Eussian Court, and persons who have
held such an opinion about her are unlikely to
change it, however absurd it may be, for any words
of mine. By those who can still appreciate noble
and generous motives, the Kireefis will be recognised
as belonging to the exceptional race of mortals who
form the forlorn hopes of mankind, who are perhaps
too quixotic, but to whom history makes amends by
consecrating their memories.

The object of this book is to exhibit our own
conduct to us, during the past four years, as it
appears to Russian eyes. If we disclaim the portrait
we shall still gain something by looking at it, and
some few of us may be led to reflect, that if Russia is

a

xvi Preface,

mistaken in her judgment of England, we may be our-
selves as much mistaken in our judgment of Kussia.
Ajs to execution and workmanship, no foreigner who
has attempted to write in the Enghsh language has
ever, to my knowledge, shown more effective command
of it. 0. K. plays with our most complicated idioms,
and turns and twists and points her sarcasms with a
skill which many an accomphshed English authoress
might despair of imitating. She seems to have read
every book that has been written, and every notable
speech which has been uttered, on the Eastern ques-
tion, for the last half century. Far from bearing us
ill will, she desires nothing so much as a hearty
alliance between her country and ours. She protests
justly against the eagerness with which every wild
story to Eussia's disadvantage obtains credit among
us, and against the wilful embittering of relations
which ought to be friendly and cordial.

She tells us that Eussia has spared no effort, short
of the sacrifice of honour and duty, to humour our
prejudices or consider our interests. If it is all in
vain, if we persist in meeting the advances of Eussia
with ill will, in misrepresenting her policy, and in
crossing and denouncing it when it is identical with
the policy which we pursue for ourselves under
analogous circumstances, she warns us that we may
desire Eussia's friendship hereafter and may not find
it. There will grow up in her people a correspond-

Preface. xvii

ing feeling of settled resentment, and in the end a
determined antagonism.

We are now at the parting of the ways : it is for
us to choose what the future is to be ; and in choosing
let us bear this in mind, that there runs through the
affairs of men a slow-moving but sure and steady
tide of justice, which even steam-driven ironclads will
find in the end that they cannot overcome. When
the drama, which is to be acted, is on so vast a scale,
it is not the will of one nation which will be able to
prevail, still less the will of one party in that nation.
Therefore those who most wish to see England con-
tinue great and strong and honoured as it has been
honoured in the past, must embrace in their thoughts
some wider object than immediate seeming advan-
tage or partisan success, if they would have their
country in the place which they desire for it when
the curtain falls upon the play which is now opening.

With these few words I recommend this excellent
book to the attention of my countrymen.

J. A. Froude.

a2

CONTENTS

PAET I.

THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE AND THE WAR.

CnAPTER PAGI

I. Introductory 3

II. The Two Russias : Moscow and St. Petersburg 8

III. Secret Societies and the War.— Mr. Aksa

koff's Speech on the Servian War

IV. Cross and Crescent ....

V. Before the Fall of Plevna. — Mr. Aksakoff
Address on Russian Disasters

VI. The Bulgarians and their Liberators .

VII. After Plevna . . . . . .

VIII. English Neutrality . ♦

IX. On the Eve of the Congress

X. After the Congress. — Mr. Aksakoff's Speech
ON Russian Concessions . . .

XI. Divided Bulgaria

18
40

45
61
70

;7

88

95
111

XX Contents,

r PART 11.

THE FUTURE OF THE EASTERN QUESTION.

CHAPTER PAGE

I. Lord Salisbury AS Herald Angel . , .123

II. The Anglo-Turkish Convention . . . 134

III. The Heirs of ' the Sick Man ' . . .142

IV, 'The Last Word of the Eastern Question' . 160

PAET IIL

MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND PREJUDICES.

I. Some English Prejudices . . . .181

11. Poland and Circassia 196

IIL Siberia 209

IV. KussiAN Autocracy . . . . . , 223

V. Constitutionalism in Kussia .... 239

VI. The Attempt ON the Emperor . . ^ . 252

PAET IV.

THE ANGLO-RUSSIAN ALLIANCE.

I. Friends or Foes ? . . . . . . 263

II. England's ' Traditional Policy ' ... 272
IIL Russia and English Parties . . . .277

Contents. xxi

CBAPTEH PAQB

IV. Kussia's Foreign Policy. — A Reply to Mr.
Gladstone. — Letter from M. Emile de

Laveleye 290

V. Russian Aggression 321

VI. Russia and the Afghan War . . . . 332

VII. Russians in Central Asia . . . . 346

VIII. Traditional Policy of Russia . . . . 352

IX. Some Last Words 367

Appendix . 371

Index 379

Portrait To face Title.

MAPSc

Bulgaria : Ethnological and Political.

The Three Bulgarias; Constantinople,
San Stefano, and Berlin.

To face p. 120

PART I.

THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE AND THE WAR.

1. INTRODUCTORY.

2. THE TWO RUSSIAS : MOSCOW AND ST. PETERSBURG.

3. SECRET SOCIETIES AND THE WAR.— MR. AKSAKOFF'S

SPEECH ON THE SERVUN WAR.

4. CROSS AND CRESCENT.

6. BEFORE THE FALL OF PLEVNA. — MR. AKSAKOFF'S
ADDRESS ON RUSSIAN DISASTERS.

6. THE BULGARLA.NS AND THEIR LIBERATORS.

7. AFTER PLEVNA.

8. ENGLISH NEUTRALITY.

9. ON THE EVE OF THE CONGRESS.

10. AFTER THE CONGRESS.— MR. AKSAKOFF'S SPEECH ON

RUSSIAN CONCESSIONS.

11. DIVIDED BULGARIA.

B

CHAPTER I.

INTEODUCTORY.

Constantinople may be the last word of the Eastern
Question, but it is certainly not the first.

For a good understanding between England and
Russia the first thing needful is to clear up the mis-
understanding about the origin of the recent war in
the East. ^ If it were true, as our enemies assert, that
the Russian Government dehberately planned the
war, in order to pursue a policy of plunder, so far
from attempting to justify its action in the EngHsh
press, as a patriotic Russian, I should sympathise with
those who denounced a Government guilty of so grave
an international crime.

But the assertion is a baseless calumny. Even if
there were, as has been so firequently asserted, under-
standings between the three Emperors as to the re-
arrangement of territory in the East on the natural
break-up of the Ottoman Empire, of which I know
nothing, that is a very difierent thing from a deter-
mination.to make war in order to partition * Turkey.'
It would merely be a statesmanUke concert prealable
in view of a probable contingency, such, as I am free

B 2

4**** '* • ''' The' RuMah 'People and the War.

to confess, I would very much desire to see established
among the Powers to-day.

Between such an understanding, entered into in
order to minimise the disastrous consequences which
would in any case follow the collapse of the Ottoman
Empire, and a determination to go to war to bring
about that collapse, there is a wide gulf fixed.

Eussian diplomacy, as your Blue Books prove,
laboured assiduously to prevent the overthrow of the
Turkish Power. The attitude of the Eussian Govern-
ment was thus clearly and accurately defined by
Prince Gortschakoff to Count Schouvaloff, in a de-
spatch from Ems, y^^ June, 1876 : —
/ * From the commencement of the troubles in the
^ast our august Master's sole aim has been to check
"(heir spread and to prevent a general conflagration in
Turkey. We, hke Mr. Disraeh, have no belief in the
indefinite duration of the abnormal state of things we
see in the Ottoman Empire. But, as yet, nothing is
prepared to replace it, and were it suddenly to fall,
there would be a risk of catastrophes, both in the
East and in Europe (et sa chute subite risquerait
d'ebranler I'Orient et I'Europe). Thus it is desirable
to maintain the pohtical status quo by a general
improvement in the lot of the Christian populations,
which appeared, and still appears, an indispensable
condition of the existence of the Ottoman Empire.
. ' The success of the diplomatic action in
which we were associated depended on the unanimity
of the Cabinets. In default of this unanimity, which
alone could restrain the passions raging in the East,

Introductory. 5

an explosion was foreseen, and we have not had long
to wait for it. At the present moment, as was the
case eight months ago, we see no reason for desiring
a decisive crisis in the East, because matters are not
sufficiently ripe for settlement. We are ready to
welcome any idea which the London Cabinet may
communicate to us for securing the pacification of the
East. We sincerely desire a good understanding with
them.' ^

A week later, Count Schouvalofi* explained to the
Earl of Derby the views of the Eussian Government
as to the pacification of the East. ' With regard io
the remedies to be appUed to the present state of
aflfairs,' writes Lord Derby to Lord Augustus Loftus,
' Prince Gortschakoff* agrees with me that these are
the best which offer the most practical solution. For
this reason the Eussian Government incline to the plan
of vassal and tributary autonomous States. Such an
arrangement would not alter the poUtical and terri-
torial status quo of Turkey, while it would lighten the
burdens which now exhaust the financial resources
of the Porte.' 2

The only difierence between the pohcies of Eng-
land and Eussia was, that England ignored, while
Eussia recognised, the fact that a ' genuine improve-
ment of the condition of the Christian populations *
was really indispensable for the maintenance of the
status quo.

The internal and poUtical status quo of the Otto-
man Empire was incompatible with the maintenance

1 Blue Book, Tui'koy, 3 (1876), p. 283. « Ibid,, 3 (1876), p. 313.

6 The Russian People and the War.

of the territorial status quo in the East. Eussia was
ready to sacrifice the former to preserve the latter.
England insisted on maintaining both, and as a conse-
quence both were destroyed.

A cordial co-operation on the part of the English
Cabinet with the other Powers would have enabled
the Eussian Government to have restrained the forces,
national, religious, and humanitarian, which, by the
pro-Turkish policy of Lord Beaconsfield, were let
loose on the Ottoman Empire.

The ' passionate desire for peace ' which Lord
Salisbury truly declared was the predominating
feehng of our Emperor, was paralysed by the acqui-
escence of European diplomacy in the obstinate
refusal of the Turks to make any ameHoration of the
condition of their Christian subjects. The Emperor
told the English Ambassador that, 'if Europe was
wilUng to receive these repeated rebuffs from the
Porte, he could no longer consider it as consistent
either with the honour, the dignity or the interests of
Eussia. He was anxious not to separate from the
European concert ; but the present state of things was
intolerable and could not be allowed to continue, and
unless Europe was prepared to act with firmness and
energy, he should be compelled to act alone.' ^

Europe refused, and Eussia acted. With the hesi-
tation and reserve of Eussian diplomacy, due, no
doubt, largely to the intense desire of the Emperor
for peace and the knowledge of the Government that
they were quite unprepared for war — the Eussian

1 Blue Book, Turkey, 1 (1877), p. 643.

Introductory. , 7

people had no sympathy. While in your eyes the
Eussian Government was eagerly pressing for the
destruction of the Turks, the Eussian nation was
indignant at the restraint placed by its diplomacy
upon the fulfilment of our national duty.

To enable the English reader to look at the war
from the Eussian point of view, and to reahse the
feehngs of the Eussian people, I reproduce in these
pages some letters, most of which I addressed to the
Northern Echo in 1877 and 1878, together with two or
three speeches of Mr. Aksakoff, the President of the
Moscow Slavonic Committee, making material addi-
tions and alterations, in order to bring the narra-
tive down to the present time.

The Russian People and the War.

CHAPTER n.

THE TWO RUSSI AS— MOSCOW AND ST. PETERSBURG.^

* So the people who made the war are already repent-
ing of their folly ! ' sneers a cynical pohtician, as he
lays down the Times of last Wednesday, after perusing
a letter from its St. Petersburg correspondent with the
above heading. ^ Indeed ! ' I exclaim, with unfeigned
surprise, ' that is strange news. Who says so ? What
is your authority ? '

' The St. Petersburg correspondent of the Times^'
rejoins the cynic, ' who, as the Pall Mall Gazette says,
is known as the writer of a famous book on Eussia,
which appeared some months ago — in other words, all
but naming Mr. E. Mackenzie Wallace.'

' And Mr. Wallace says the people who made the
war are repenting of what they did,' I continue.
' Where does he say so ? I don't see any such state-
ment in his letter.'

» The Times of Nov. 14, 1877, published a letter from its correspon-
dent in St. Petersburg, describing a minority in the Russian capital as
wearied of the war and anxious to make peace, regardless of the fate of
the Southern Slavs. The Pall Mall Gazette, noticing his remarks under
the suggestive heading * Reported return of reason in Russia,' exulted in
the hope that the Russians were about to abandon their heroic enterprise.
This delusion can be removed most effectually by the simple statement of
facts, too often ignored in England.

The Two Russias. 9

' Do you not ? ' he asks in amazement. ' What can
be plainer than his account of the regret with which
the war, its objects, and its sacrifices are spoken of in
St. Petersburg by men " who consider themselves
good patriots ? " Here, for instance, he speaks of the
statesman or official dignitary, the representative of
the St. Petersburg Liberal press, and the commercial
man, all of whose sentiments are faithfully reproduced.
What more would you have as a proof that those who
made the war are repenting in sackcloth and ashes of
their Quixotic undertaking ? '

I could not help smihng. 'And so that is the
evidence upon which you and Mr. Wallace build your
theories of " peace possibilities in Eussia ! " These
people — they did not make the war ! Not they, in
deed ! It was not these " patriots " to whose voices
our Emperor gave ear ! '

And so dismissing my Turkophile acquaintance,
let me in a few sentences correct the false impression
which that letter in the Times has produced, as the
high character and deserved reputation of its author
may mislead many.

The English people were told last year, and truly
told, that there are two Kussias. There is ofiicial
Eussia, and national Eussia. There is, in a word, the
Eussia of St. Petersburg, and the Eussia of Moscow.^
Now, the Times correspondent lives in St. Petersburg,

^ An English lady residing in Moscow from 1876 to 1878, described
with simple fidelity the enthusiasm prevailing in the ancient capital of
Russia, in a series of letters to the Daily News and to the Northeym Echo,
which Messrs. Remington & Co. republished in a volume — Sketches of
Russian Life and Custojns, by Selwyn Eyre.

10 llie Russian People and the War.

and he transmits faithfully enough to England his im-
pressions of public opinion in St. Petersburg. The
only danger is that his readers may mistake St. Peters-
burg for Eussia. But St. Petersburg, thank God ! is
not Eussia, any more than the West-end of London is
England. The whole course of European history, for
the last two years, would be utterly incomprehensible
on the contrary hypothesis. It was because foreigners
took their impression of Eussia from St. Petersburg
that they blundered so grossly about the courso which
events would take in the East, and they will blunder
not less grossly if, disregarding the lessons of the past,
they once more entertain the hollow fallacy that the
national opinion of Eussia can be ascertained in the
salons of St. Petersburg or by interviewing official
personages on the banks of the Neva.

There are good men and true in St. Petersburg,
as there are good men and true even in the clubs of
Pall Mall ; but the typical St. Petersburger, of whom
Mr. Wallace writes, is as destitute of faith and of
enthusiasm as the West-ender. But just as you say
London is Turkophile, although many Londoners are
anti-Turks, so we say St. Petersburg is anti-Slav.
But then it must not be forgotten that St. Petersburg
is not Eussia. Peter the Great styled it ' a window
out of which Eussia could look upon the Western
world ; ' but it is not a window by which the Western
world can look in upon Eussia. No, St. Petersburg
is not Eussian ! It is cosmopohtan. It is not vitalised
with the fierce warm current of Eussia's life-blood.
It stands apart. It undoubtedly exercises a great

The Two Eussias. 11

influence in ordinary times, but at great crises it is
powerless. St. Petersburg did its best to avert the
war. It sneered at our Servian volunteers — nay, if it
had had its way it would have arrested them as male-
factors. Those who went first to Servia on their
heroic mission were compelled to smuggle themselves
as it were out of the country for fear of the interfer-
ence of officialdom supreme at St. Petersburg. St.
Petersburg would, if it could, have suppressed our
Slav Committees, and it did its best to induce our
generous Emperor to violate that knightly word which
he pledged at Moscow, amid the unbounded enthusi-
asm of all his subjects, to take up the cause jof the
Slavs, ' although he had to take it up alone.' In the
midst of the great uprising of the nation occasioned
by the Bulgarian atrocities and the Servian war, St.
Petersburg was comparatively unmoved — a mere dead
cold cinder in the midst of the glowing warmth of
our national revival, j All the diplomatic negotiations
which preceded the war are inexphcable unless this
is borne in mind. My countrymen, rising in the
sacred wrath kindled by the inexpiable wrongs in-
flicted upon their kinsmen, pressed sternly, steadily
onward to redress these wrongs, to terminate for ever
the status guo, which rendered them chronic, inevit-
able. Official Eussia, unable to arrest the movement
entirely, nevertheless attempted, and attempted in
vain, to divert it by diplomatic contrivances. We had
one device after another invented in rapid succession
to avoid the war by which alone our brethren could
be freed. It is humihating to recall the tortuous

12 The Russian People and the War.

windings of Kussian diplomacy, the inexhaustible ex-
pedients by which the Petersburg party endeavoured
to balk the fulfilment of the national aspirations.^
y The last of these was the Protocol I By that famous
document official Eussia consented, for the sake of the
European concert and the peace of the Continent, to
postpone indefinitely all action on behalf of the South-
ern Slavs, receiving in return for this sacrifice of her
mission a promise that the Great Powers would watch
the Turks, and after a period of time, not particularly
specified, when it had once more, for the thousandth
time, been demonstrated to the satisfaction even of
the diplomatic mind that Turkish domination is utterly
incapable of reform, improvement, or other ameliora-
tion than its total destruction, the Powers promised —
oh, great concession ! — to consider what should then
be done to save our tortured brethren from the Otto-
man horde. This was the patent St. Petersburg
device for disappointing the hopes of the Eussian
people, and eagerly these officials, representatives of
the Liberal press, and commercial men, who are now
prating of peace to the Times correspondent, hoped

* In the Memoirs of Baron Stockmar occur some observations about
diplomacy and diplomatists wWcli are often too true : — ' Diplomatists are
for the most part a frivolous, superficial and rather ignorant set of people,
whose fiiTst object is to lull matters to sleep for a few years, and to patch
up things for a time. The distant future troubles them but little.
They console themselves with such maxims as " Alors comme alors,"
" sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." With statesmen of this
kind it is sorry work discussing the conditions of a new political crea-
tion to be carried out under difficult circumstances. They have no real
conception what work of this kind means. To those who point out the
difficulties, they reply, " It will all come right in time," or they attempt
to throw dust in the eyes by vague promises.' — Baron Stockma7'''s Memoirs,
vol. i. p. 121.

The Two Russias. 13

that it would stave off what they are deriding now as
the ' Quixotic enterprise ' of the War of Liberation.
In Moscow, however — that great heart of the Kussian
Empire — the suspense occasioned by the negotiations
about the Protocol was one longdrawn-out agony.
Those who lived in the very heart of the national
movement can never forget the terrible forebodings
of those dismal days. We all moved under the pres-
sure of a great dread. Was it to end thus ? Were
all our sacrifices to be sacrificed ? was the blood of
our martyrs spilt in vain? Was Holy Eussia Holy
Eussia no more, but a mere appanage to cosmopoUtan
St. Petersburg ? When the news came that the Eng-
lish Cabinet was insisting upon alterations, we breathed
more freely. ' Demobihsation ! ' we cried. ' No, it is
not demobihsation ; it is demoralisation ! The Emperor
is too noble, too good a Eussian ; he will never con-
sent to that ! ' But, then, again the news came that
even that was to be accepted ; and the sky grew very
dark overhead, and we went about as if in the chamber
of death, speaking in low accents and oppressed by a
terrible fear of that national dishonour which we Eus-
sians, strange as it may appear to some people, dread
even more than death ! At last, to our great relief,
the cloud hfted, the darkness disappeared, for the
Turks rejected the Protocol ; and the declaration of
war was as grateful to us as the bright burst of sun-
light in the east after a long, dark, stormy night.

And here may I venture, as a Eussian, to say that,
in securing by his provisoes the rejection of the Pro-
tocol by the Turks, Lord Derby has at least done one

14 The Russian People and the War.

good thing at the Enghsh Foreign Office. He may
not have intended it, but, as a matter of fact, he was
our most efficient ally. But for him St. Petersburg
might have triumphed. Eussia might have been dis-
graced, and the Turks might have received a new
lease of power. The Slav world has reason to thank
him for having secured the victory of our cause by
rendering it impossible for Eussia to refrain from
drawing the sword in the cause of the Southern
Slavs.

Even St. Petersburg could not shrink from the
contest after that last deadly blow was administered
by the Turks to the schemes of the diplomatists.
The war began. It is going on, and it will go on
until the end is accompHshed. No babble of St.
Petersburg will now be able to bring that war to a
dishonourable close ; and no peace can be honourable
that does not secure the object of the war. St.
Petersburg is even worse than usual just now. Its
best elements are in Bulgaria and Eoumania. The
Emperor is there, and the sight of the fiendish atroci-
ties perpetrated by the Turks upon our patient
soldiers can only confirm his resolution to persevere
' until the end.' And behind him there stands,
arrayed as one man, the whole Eussian nation, ready
to endure any sacrifices rather than leave the Turk
to re-establish his desolating sovereignty over our
brethren.

Is it so strange to Enghshmen that there should
be two Eussias ? Are there not two Englands ? The
England that is true to Enghsh love for Hberty, and

The Two Russias. ^ 15

tlie England that sees in liberty itself only a text for
a sneer ? There is the England of St. James's Hall
and the England of the Guildhall. An England with
a soul and a heart, and an England which has only a
pocket. In other words, there is the England of Mr.
Gladstone and the England of Lord Beaconsfield. We
Russians, too, have our sordid cynics, but they are in
a minority. They may sneer, but they cannot rule ;
and, with that distinction, let me conclude by saying
that these St. Petersburg Tchinovniks, whose views Mr.
Wallace reproduces, are now what they have always
been, the Beaconsfields of Russia !

The above letter was written in the middle of
November, 1877.

Rightly to understand the genuine spontaneity of
the national Slavonic movement which forced our
Government into a war at a time when they were
notoriously unprepared for such an enterprise, it was
necessary to have resided in Russia when the news of
the rising of the Christians in the Balkans stirred the
national heart to its depths. Whatever doubts might
prevail outside Russia, no one, be he ever so preju-
diced, who witnessed the explosion of national and
religious enthusiasm which shook Russia from her
centre to her circumference, could deny the reaUty
and spontaneity of the all- prevailing sentiment, the
fervour of which our officials in vain endeavoured to
abate. Even the EngUsli Ambassador was impressed
by the unprecedented spectacle of a torrent of enthu-
siasm, sweeping away an entire people. Writing to

16 The Russian People %nd the War.

the Earl of Derby, from St. Petersburg, on August 16,
1876, he says : —

The enthusiasm for the cause of the Servians and Chris-
tian Slavs is daily increasing here. The feeling is universal,
and it pervades all classes from the Crown to the peasant.
The sympathy of the masses has been roused by the atroci-
ties which have been committed in Bulgaria, and bears a
religious and not a political character.

Public collections are being made for the sick and
wounded. Officers with the ' Red Cross,' and ladies of the
Court and of society go from house to house requesting sub-
scriptions. At the railway stations, on the steam-boats, even
in the carriages of the tramways, the < Red Cross ' is present
everywhere, with a sealed box for donations. Every stimu-
lant, even to the use of the name of the Empress, is resorted
to, with a view to animate feelings of compassion for the
suffering Christians and to swell the funds for providing
ambulances for the sick and wounded.

I am informed that such is the excitement in favour of
the Christians that workmen are leaving to join the Servian
army. Within the last fortnight seventy-five officers of the
Guards have announced their intention to accept service in
the Servian army, and it is reported that 120 officers at
Moscow and in Southern Russia are on the point of leaving
to join the Servian ranks.

I have also received private information that 20,000
Cossacks are going to Servia in disguise to join the Servian
army.

The number is probably greatly exaggerated, but the
fact of a considerable number of Cossacks having volunteered
for service in aid of the Christians is undoubtedly true.

The religious feeling of the Russian nation is deeply
roused in favour of their Christian Slav brethren, while the
impassioned tone of the press is daily exciting the popular
feeling.

From the foregoing symptoms it might be feared that

The Two Russias. 17

should any fresh atrocities occur to influence the public
mind, neither the Emperor nor Prince Gortschakoff would be
able to resist the unanimous appeal of the nation for inter-
vention to protect and save their co-religionists.*

Lord Augustus Loftus inclosed an extract from a
letter published in the Moscow Gazette^ from a ' Ketired
Cossack,' who writes from the capital of the Cossacks
of the Don. The writer, describing the state of ex-
citement in which he found the Cossacks, says : —

Even women, old men and children speak of nothing but
the Slavonic war ; the warlike spirit of the Cossacks is on
fire, and from small to great they all await permission
to fall on the Turks like a whirlwind. At many of the
settlements the Cossacks are getting their arms ready,
with a full conviction that in a few days the order will
be given to fall on the enemies of the Holy Faith, and
of their Slav brethren. There is at the same time a general
murmuring against diplomacy for its dilatoriness in com-
ing to the rescue. Deputies have arrived from many of the
Cossack settlements to represent to the Ataman that the
Cossacks are no longer able to stand the ezternaination of

the Christians.^

•

There is abundance of similar testimonies in your
Blue Book.

Those who are not satisfied with oflScial testi-
monies, will find unoflScial confirmation of the reality
of the popular movement in the pages of Mr. D.
Mackenzie Wallace's ' Kussia,' ^ a work which is cer-
tainly not characterised by too great a partiality to-
wards us.

1 Turkey, 1 (1877), No. 55, pp. 44-5.
^ Ihid., Inclosiire in No. 56, pp. 45-6. * Vol. ii. p. 453.

18 The Russian People and the War.

CHAPTEE III.

SECRET SOCIETIES AND THE WAR.^

Lord Salisbury recently advised the victims of the
baseless scare of a Eussian invasion of India to buy
large-sized maps and learn how insuperable are the
obstacles which nature has placed between the land
of the Tzar and the dominions of the Empress.
Would it be too presumptuous in a Eussian to express
a wish that Enghshmen would pay a httle attention
to the history of their own country in the days of the
great Ehzabeth, before attempting to pronounce an
opinion upon the action of the Eussian people in this
war ? 2 Perhaps the discovery that only three cen-
turies ago the heroism and enthusiasm of the English
Protestants anticipated in Holland and France the
course taken last year by the newly- awakened enthu-
siasm of the Eussian people in Bulgaria and Servia
would moderate the vehemence of their censure, even
if it did not secure for my countrymen the sympathy
which Enghshmen used to feel for those who are

1 This letter was written at the beginning of November, 1877.

^ Lord Salisbury, in 1879, speaking at Hatfield, said Lord Beacons-
field's Government had pursued a truly Elizabethan policy : a statement
which probably was meant to be interpreted by the rule of contrary.

Secret Societies and the War. 19

willing to sacrifice all, even life itself, in the cause of
Liberty and Eight.

Without sympathy understanding is impossible.
Prejudice closes the door against all explanation.
But no one who had entered into the spirit of the
times when Sir Phihp Sydney went forth to fight in
the Low Countries, and Francis Drake swept the
Spanish Main, could possibly have made so many gro-
tesque blunders as those which are to be found in
most articles professing to describe Pan-Slavists and
the Slav Committees. It is not very difficult to under-
stand the source of their inspiration. Instead of
ascertaining the objects of the Slavophils from their
own lips, they repeat all the stupid calumnies where-
with our enemies have vainly attempted to prejudice
our Emperor against the Slav cause. That is not
fair. If a Russian writer were to describe the opera-
tions of the Eastern Question Association and Mr.
Gladstone from the slanders of the Enghsh Turko-
philes, he would not err more from the truth than do
those English writers who caricature the Slav Com-
mittees by repeating the calumnies of some of our
official enemies,

' The Slav Committees,' it is said, ' have brought
about this war,' — an accusation of which I am proud,
for the only alternative to war was a selfish abandon-
ment of our Southern brethren to the merciless ven-
geance of the Turks. ^ But when they say that we

* * It is when those Public Societies, which are called Governments
fail in their duty and abdicate their proper functions, that Secret Socie-
ties find their opportunities of action.' — Duke of Argyll, The Easteim
Question, vol. i. p. 273.

c 2

20 The Russian People and tlie War.

brought it about in order ' to crush in Eussia thd
present form of Government — the absolute rule of
the Tzar,' they state that which is not only untrue,
but what is known to be an absurdity by every Slavo-
phile in Eussia. The statement is even more absurd
than the assertion made by Lord Beaconsfield that the
Servian war was made by the Secret Societies. The
Slavonic Committees are not secret, and they are cer-
tainly not composed of Eevolutionists. It used to be
the reproach of the Slav party that it was in all
things too Conservative. Now we are told that we
are Eadicals, who hate the present form of the Eussian
State. Both reproaches can hardly be true. As a
matter of fact, both are false. Some writers charge
Mr. Aksakoff with being, as President of the Moscow
Committee, the head-centre of revolutionary Eussia.
As one of Mr. Aksakoff's numerous friends, I may be
permitted to say that there never was a more mon-
strous assertion. Mr. Aksakoff, although no courtier,
is devotedly loyal. His wife was our Empress's lady-
in-waiting, and governess to the Duchess of Edin-
burgh; and he himself, although abused in the
Turkophile papers as a Eussian Mazzini, is one of the
last men in the world to undertake a crusade against
the Tzardom. Simple, honest, enthusiastic, Mr. Ak-
sakoff is no conspirator ; he is simply the leading
spokesman of the Eussian Slavs, by whom he was
elected to the post of President of the Moscow Slavonic
Committee with only one dissentient voice. Much
surprise was expressed that there should be even one
vote against his appointment. But that surprise was

Secret Societies and the War, 21

succeeded by a smile when it was announced that the
sohtary dissentient was Mr. Aksakoff himself. So far
from aiming at the destruction of the Eussian State,
they aim at the much less ambitious and more useful
task of emancipating their Southern brethren from
Turkish oppression. There is no mystery about the
operations of our Committees. There work is prosaic
in the extreme. Brought into existence long ago by
the operation of the same benevolent spirit which
leads English people to send tracts to Fiji cannibals,
these Committees laboured unnoticed and unseen
until the close of 1875. At that time occurred the
great revolt of the Southern Slavs against their
Turkish despots ; and it is the peculiar glory of the
Slavonic Committees that they were able to give rapid
effect to the enthusiasm kindled in Eussia by the story
of the sufferings of our brethren, and, by sustaining
the struggle for emancipation, were able to keep the
condition of the Slavs before the Powers, until at last
the Eussian Government stepped in to free them from
bondage. All Eussia — Emperor, Government and all
— became but one vast Slavonic Committee for the
liberation of the Southern Slavs ; and we have far
less reason for wishing to destroy a State which has
so nobly undertaken the heroic task of liberating our
brethren than Enghshmen have for desiring to upset
their Parhamentary system which has enabled a Lord
Beaconsfield to balk the generous aspirations expressed
by the nation during the autumn of 1876.

It is entirely false that to our Slav Committees
belongs the honour of having originated the insurrec-

22 The Russian People and the War.

tion of the Herzegovina. After it began it attracted
our attention, and we would have assisted it if we
could, but, unfortunately, the Eussian people were
not aroused, and there were next to no funds at
our disposal to assist the heroic insurgents whose
desperate resolve to achieve liberty or death on their
native hills first compelled the Powers to face what
Europe calls the Eastern Question, but what we call
the Emancipation of the Slavs. The utmost that we
could do in the first year of the insurrection was to
collect £ome 10,000Z. for the relief of the refugees in
the Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Eagusa. Enghsh
sympathisers, notably Mr. Freeman, also collected
contributions for the same cause. General Tcher-
nayeff proposed in September to take fifty non-com-
missioned officers to Montenegro, with arms for five
hundred men ; but he could not carry out his scheme
because we had no funds. I state this as a matter of
fact, which I regret.

Proof of this melancholy fact can be had, I regret
to say, in only too great abundance, but it will be
sufficient here to refer the sceptical to the most
interesting account of the rising in the Herzegovina
by Mr. W. J. Stillman, who was correspondent of the
Times in that region during the insurrection, in which
he will find ample confirmation of my confession that
our Eussian Committees could not claim the honour of
having encouraged the Herzegovinese at the first to
strike that blow for freedom which led to the ruin of
the Ottoman Empire. Eussian influence at first was
an influence of constraint. It was not until December

Secret Societies and the War. 23

1875, that the Slavonic sympathies of the Eussians
were felt in the Herzegovina.^

It is the duty of free Slavs to assist their enslaved
brethren to throw off the yoke of bondage. Our war
may be condemned, but the heroism of our volunteers
is appreciated even by those who support the
Turks. Can Englishmen wonder that we Eussians,
brethren in race and in rehgion to the Eayahs of
Northern Turkey, should endeavour to assist them as
the English of Elizabeth's reign endeavoured to assist
the Protestants of Holland and of France ? But the
fact that we would glory in assisting our enslaved
brethren to throw off the yoke of the Turk should
entitle us to be beUeved when we sorrowfully admit
that, as a matter of fact, we have no claim to the credit
of having fomented the insurrection which every one
now can see was a death-blow to the domination of
the Ottoman. It was not tiU after the insurrection
had made considerable progress — not, in fact, until
the atrocities in Bulgaria and the Servian war — that
Eussia awoke and assumed the liberating mission
which, after great and terrible sacrifices, promises at
last to be crowned with complete success.

It is a mistake to say, that our Eussian volunteers
in Servia were paid. It is also false that 9,000
Eussians went to Servia. We could only find the
travelUng expenses of 4,000 ; none of whom received
any other pay, but all of whom were eagerly ready to
die for the cause. One-third of them perished as
martyrs, but their blood has not been shed in vain.

^ See Herzegovina and the late Uprising, p. 101.

24 The Russian People and the War.

Their death sealed the doom of the Turks. The
Emperor has undertaken the championship of the
Slavonic cause, and the war will only end when the
liberation of the Southern Slavs is complete. So far
from desiring the war to destroy the Tzardom, we
were never so proud of Eussia as we are to-day ; never
were we so unanimously and enthusiastically united
in support of our heroic Emperor, who, after
liberating twenty-three millions of serfs at home, is
now crowning his reign with glory by emancipating
the Southern Slavs.

In the foregoing letter I have referred to Mr.
AksakofT. It is better that he should speak for him-
self. Here is a condensed translation of the speech
which he delivered, on November 6, 1876, before the
Moscow Slavonic Committee, which I pubhshed in
English in the same month. I may preface it with
one sentence from Mr. Wallace's ' Eussia,' endorsing
it heartily. ' As to the authenticity of the testimony, I
may add, that I have known Mr. Aksakoff, and have
never in any country met a more honest and truthful
man.' ^ Mr. AksakofT said : —

It may be thought that the hour has at last arrived
for Russia to resign into the hands of the State this great
and important work, which during so many months the
people have carried on with incredible exertion, without
any help or co-operation from the Grovernment. I do
not speak here of the help afforded to the sick and the
wounded, the famished and the destitute Bulgarians and
Servians of different denominations. I do not speak of the

^ Vol. ii. p. 452.

Mr. Aksahoff on the Servian War. 25

help in the shape of money and clothes, but the help of
the nation's blood, the toilsome work of deliverance — in one
word, the active share the Eussian people took in the Servian
war for Slavonic independence. The armistice lately signed
by the Porte does not insure with certainty the conclusion
of such a peace as would satisfy the lawful claims of our
brethren, the honour of our people, and repay the bloody
sacrifices made by Russia. The temporary cessation of the
war cannot be a reason for relaxing the exertions which have
signalised the last few months of our public life. This is
not the moment to send in our resignation. The time has
not yet come for our Society to lay aside the heavy burden
of this uncommon, unforeseen and unexpected activity.

I have said * uncommon, unforeseen and unexpected,'
because what has been done lately in Eussia is indeed un-
paralleled, not only in the history of Eussia, but in that of
any other nation. The Society, or rather the people, with-
out the help of the Government (which is unconditionally
true to its diplomatic obligations), and without the help of
any official organisation, carry on a war in the person of some
thousands of her sons (I say aoTiSy not hirelings), at their
own expense, in a country which, though bound to ours by
strong ties of relationship, is little known to the masses, and
has been up till now rarely spoken of. And this is done
neither for the sake of gain, nor in view of selfishly practical
or material interests, but for interests apparently foreign and
abstract. The war is carried on, not stealthily or secretly,
but openly, in sight of all, with full conviction of the lawful-
ness, right and holiness of the cause. This plain and spon-
taneous movement cannot be understood by Western Europe,
where most public movements appear to be the result of a
prepared conspiracy, and can only take place under the
direction and through the medium of regularly organised
secret societies. It is therefore not to be wondered at that
some persons like Lord Beaconsfield, and not he alone, but
even some Eussians, ignorant of their own country, and
mostly of the highest rank, find secret societies even in

26 The Russian People and the War.

Kussia, so that all the ' shame,' or, as we think, all the
honour, of the Kussian popular interference in the Servian
war is to be ascribed to the Slavonic Committee.

One cannot read without a smile such strange ideas of
the power of our Society. You, gentlemen, know better
than any how little our Society deserves the honour attri-
buted to it. Such is the nature of this popular movement
that it could never have been invented by the Committee,
nor could it have shrunk into the narrow moulds which the
Society could have formed for it. In reality it has far over-
stepped its borders, and has nearly crushed by its force our
modest organisation. At present it is not the concern of
the Slavonic Committee, but of the whole of Kussia ; and it
is the greatest honour of our Society to become the simple
instrument of the popular idea and the popular will — an in-
strument, to our regret, very feeble and insufficient.

That there was no premeditation in the action of the
Committee can be best seen in the fact that the Society was
not prepared for the immense activity which fell to its lot.
Our Committee of management, composed only of three or
four persons without any regular office, continued for a long
time to work in its usual way, though with great difficulty.
In July they engaged a paid secretary, and, thereafter yield-
ing by degrees to necessity, they enlarged the number of
officials, and accepted at the same time the zealous and
efficient co-operation spontaneously offered by many members
of the Slavonic Committee, and of nearly the whole staff of
the Mutual Credit Society, of which I have the honour to be
the President. If this frank acknowledgment of ours can
draw upon us the reproach of want of foresight, it can on the
other hand serve as a most eloquent answer to the calumnies
of foreign newspapers. The English Premier, I suppose,
would be very much astonished if he verified his notions of
our Committee by an examination of our ledgers and accounts.
But even the reproach of shortsightedness would be unjust.
The popular movement has surprised not only the whole of
Europe, but also Kussian society (that is, the educated re-

Mr. Aksakoff on the Servian War. 27

fleeting part of Kussia), precisely because it was popular,
not in the rhetorical, but in the plain literal meaning of the
word. For scores of years the preaching of the so-called
Slavophils resounded, and was, it seemed, as the voice * of
one crying in the wilderness.*

Twenty-two years ago the Crimean war broke out also
as a result of the Eastern, or, more strictly speaking, the
Slavonic, Question, and evoked a powerful expression of
patriotism. It did not, however, awaken the historical self-
consciousness in those classes of the people in which are the
roots of the Kussian power, both spiritual and external. Un-
seen by us and invisible is the secret process of the popular
ripening and the working of the popular organism.

We could certainly assume that with the abolition of
serfdom, and of many legal class distinctions, together with
the spread of elementary education, the intellectual view of
the people must expand and their mind acquire greater free-
dom of action. But the events which have occurred have
surpassed the most sanguine expectations. I confess frankly
that every new appearance of popular sympathy came upon
me as a delightful surprise, until at last it was manifested in
its full power and truth. Not less astonished was I by the
gradual change in the thoughts and expressions of our so-
called intelligent circles and in our press. All the literary
parties and factions intermingled, and found themselves,
to their mutual surprise, in agreement and unity on this
question. The opponents of yesterday found themselves
friends, as if they had broken their stilts, come down to the
ground, thrown off the disguise of harlequins, and shown
themselves — what they are in truth — Kussians, and nothing
else.

There was, in all this, enough to surprise any one who
remembered the past of our social life. It was cleared up
not at once, but gradually, by the current of events.

When the rising in the Herzegovina began, rather more
than a year ago, and the Slavonic Committee of Moscow, as
well as the St. Petersburg branch, published the appeals of the

28 The Russian People and the War.

Servian and Montenegrin Metropolitans, and these appeals
from the ecclesiastical personages were made known (only
made known and nothing else), the donations assumed un-
heard-of dimensions.

The limits of the Orthodox world began to widen before
the eyes of the people ; new vistas of fraternity were opened
up to them ; but all was still in confusion. Not less con-
fused were the ideas of the higher classes. When General
Tchemayeff arrived in Moscow in September last year, and
proposed to take with him to Montenegro fifty non-commis-
sioned officers, and arms for 500 persons, his plan could not
be put into execution because the Committee had no funds,
and private persons did not show any readiness to supply
them.

The subsequent activity of the Committee was for some
time, in appearance and reality, of a charitable nature. The
volunteers who started for the Herzegovina were all South
Slavonians, Servians and Bulgarians living in Kussia. The
only exceptions were two Eussian officers, who had expressly
come to Moscow, after having been refused assistance in St.
Petersburg.

When on the Slavonic horizon appeared the dawn of a
new, and in the political sense a more important, struggle —
the struggle between the Servian Principalities and the Porte
for the freedom of the Slavonic territories tributary to the
Turks — and when at the end of last March General Tcher-
nayeff announced to the Committee his intention of going to
Servia, the Committee could but perceive the great signifi-
cance of such an event as the appearance of Tchemayeff at
the head of the Servian army. But neither the Committee
nor Tchemayeff could then foresee what would happen to the
Kussian people. It was clear to the Committee that the act
of self-sacrifice on the part of Tchemayeff could not but
raise among the Slavonians the honour of the Russian name,
greatly compromised by diplomacy, and could not fail at the
same time to raise the moral level of Russian society by in-
creasing its self-respect. It was necessary to remove some

M7\ Aksahoff on the Servian War. 29

pecuniary difficulties which prevented the departure of
Tchernayeff. A sum of 6,000 roubles was needed, and the
Committee did not hesitate to advance it.

Soon after TchernayefiTs arrival in Servia began the
Turkish atrocities in Bulgaria.^ No special efforts were
required to awaken Russian sympathy and compassion. For
the Russians there is no enemy more popular than the
Turk. Donations of money and effects flowed in in torrents.

The Servian war began. With breathless anxiety Russia
followed the uneven struggle of the little Orthodox country
— smaller than the province of Tamboff — with the vast
army, gathered together from Asiatic hordes dispersed over
three quarters of the globe. But when the Servian army
suffered the first defeat ; when on the soil of the awakened
popular feeling fell, so to speak, the first drop of Russian
blood; when the first deed of love was completed; when
the first pure victim was sacrificed for the faith, and on
behalf of the brethren of Russia, in the person of one of her
own sons, then the conscience of all Russia shuddered.

As from the first, so afterwards, the Muscovite Slavonic
Committee offered no invitations nor allurements to secure
volunteers. One after another came, retired officers request-
ing advice and directions how to go to Servia, and enter the
ranks of the army under the command of Tchernayeff. The
news of the death of Kireeff, the first Russian who fell in
this war, at once stimulated hundreds to become volunteers,
— an event which repeated itself when the news was received
of other deaths among the Russian volunteers^. Death did
not frighten, but, as it were, attracted, them. At the
beginning of the movement the volunteers were men who
had belonged to the army, and chiefly from among the
nobles. I remember the feeling of real emotion which I
experienced when the first sergeant came, requesting me to
send him to Servia — so new was to me the existence of such
a feeling in the ranks of the people. This feeling soon grew
in intensity when not only old soldiers, but even peasants,

» May, 1876.

30 The Russian People and the War.

came to me with the same request. And how humbly did
they persevere in their petition, as if begging alms ! With
tears they begged me, on their knees, to send them to the
field of battle. Such petitions of the peasants were mostly
granted, and you should have seen their joy at the announce-
ment of the decision ! However, those scenes became so
frequent, and business increased to such an extent, that it
was quite impossible to watch the expression of popular
feeling, or to inquire into particulars from the volunteers as
to their motives. 'I have resolved to die for my faith.'
' My heart burns.' ' I want to help our brethren.' ' Our
people are being killed.' Such were the brief answers which
were given with quiet sincerity. T repeat there was not, and
could not be, any mercenary motive on the part of the
volunteers.' I, at least, conscientiously warned every one of
the hard lot awaiting him, and, indeed, even at first sight,
no particular advantage could appear. Each one received
only fifty roubles, out of which thirty-five went to pay the
fare through Eoumania, and the rest was for food and other
expenses. The movement assumed at last such dimensions
that we had to establish a special section for the reception
of the volunteers and the examination of their requests and
depositions.

All parts of Kussia were desirous of having branches of
the Slavonic Committee. From every town propositions
were sent to us, but, to our regret, we were unable to satisfy
their urgent demands. The permission to establish fresh
sections did not depend upon us, but upon the Minister of
the Interior. Fortunately there is a society in Odessa called
the Benevolent Society of Cyril and Methodius, which ren-
dered great services to the general cause. Fortunately also,
in some of our provincial towns, there were governors who
took a part in the popular feeling, and who allowed the
inhabitants to organise small societies for the reception of
donations. These latter became afterwards centres for local
activity. But when a movement embraces tens of millions
of people, scattered over an extent equal to nearly a quarter

Mr. Aksakoff on the Servian War. 31

of the globe, it is impossible to arrange and regulate the
expression of feeling, and particularly without the requisite
publicity. Those who imagine that it is easy to subordinate
such a movement to any Committee or organisation, do not
know the nature of popular movements, especially in Eussia.
The donations became special, according to the wish of the
donor. Many towns, villages, and private persons, without
communicating with the Committees, wrote direct to Tcher-
nayeff, Prince IVIilan, Princess Nathalie, Prince Nicholas of
Montenegro, or the Metropolitan Michael. They even sent
deputations, volunteers, money, and clothes, minutely ex-
plaining the purpose for which each article was intended,
expressing at the same time their sympathies and hopes.
All this irregularity was quite natural, for the thing itself
was most unusual and unprecedented.

Yes, gentlemen, there was no precedent, no experience,
either in Kussian society in general, or in our Committee in
particular. The Committee had not only to distribute help
in money, but also to take the duties of superintendence,
inspection, providing medicine, arms, provisions, and, one
might even add, duties of the general staff. There is not
the least doubt that such an unaccustomed work, organised
so suddenly, was fraught with many mistakes, and some-
times, notwithstanding all our efforts, did not obtain the
desired results. ' But one must also bear in mind that there
was a total absence of any sort of organisation in Servia
herself. Be this as it may, the Slavonic Committee worked
hard and conscientiously. I come now to the question of
the accounts. We cannot give, however, at present very
detailed or precise ones, for from various places we have as
yet not received them ourselves.

I foresee that the amount of our receipts will greatly
disappoint the public. We have heard and read daily that
Eussia has sent to the Slavs millions of money ; and the
stern question arises, ' What became of these millions ? '
The rumours set afloat about these millions have as much
truth as those concerning the numbers of volunteers, of

3^ The Russian People and the War.

whom it is said we sent 20,000, when in fact only a fifth
part of that number — perhaps less — were sent. The truth
is, at Moscow and St. Petersburg we received a little more
than a million and half of roubles. It must be borne in mind
that we had to give help to the Herzegovina, Montenegro,
Bosnia, Bulgaria, and Servia. During the last months,
many small Committees were formed over the whole of
Russia, and sent out their donations independently of us.
But these sums were comparatively small. Nearly all
Western Russia dispensed with the co-operation of our
Slavonic Committee. Some societies and commercial estab-
lishments— as, for instance, the St. Petersburg Municipal
Credit Co., which had remitted to Tchernayefif 100,000
roubles, and had given also the same amount to the St. Pe-
tersburg Committee — likewise sent out help themselves. It
is therefore still impossible to state the precise amount of
the donations ; but it may be said that, including the money
spent by the chief Society for the tending of the sick and
wounded soldiers, the total sum would be scarcely more than
three millions of roubles. The value of the articles given
may amount to half a million more.

The sum is enormous, and yet it is small — that is to say,
in comparison with the requirements ; for upwards of three
millions of our Orthodox brethren of the Balkan Peninsula
are in want of the most important and essential things —
food, clothing, and shelter. It is small compared to the
size of Russia, with her 80,000,000 of inhabitants and her
power — small in comparison with the scores of millions
reported. It is enormous, if you consider the source from
which it came, our social condition, and the impediments
which came in the way — enormous, because two-thirds of
the donations were given by our poor peasants, much
oppressed by want ; and every copper coin they gave will
weigh undoubtedly heavier in the scale of history than
hundreds of ducats. One may remark, in general, that the
amount of the donations decreased according to the exalted
position of the donor in the social scale. There were a few

Mr. Aksahoff on the Servian War. 33

exceptions to this rule, and we must also consider the bad
harvests of the last years. It is an undoubted fact, however,
that the eminently wealthy took no share in the movement,
probably from a lack of sympathy. Finally, the sum is
enormous, considering the novelty of the matter, the inability
of working together, the difficulty of intercourse between the
different parts of Russia, and the impossibility of using freely
the help of the press.

I shall not stop now to explain the particulars of our
receipts, though they are of great interest. But because
they are so full of interest they demand a minute exposition;
and our honourable Secretary, who is also a professor of
history, is now engaged on that work. The letters, which
came with the donations, are now assorted; and many of
them, being the simple expressions of the popular feeling,
bear witness to the truth of the present historical movement.

Mr. Aksakoff then gave a detailed statement of
expenditure, of which the following are the leading
features : — ' Herzegovina, Bosnia, and Montenegro,
185,000 roubles; General Tchernayeff and his staff
— none of the volunteers were paid by the Servian
Government — 79,000 roubles ; General Novosseloff
and the Russian volunteers on the Ibar, 21,000
roubles ; sick and wounded in Servia, 31,000 roubles ;
army and telegraph, 9,000 roubles ; movable churches
and volunteers' clothes, 10,000 roubles ; and 159,000
roubles were still on hand/

Mr. Aksakoff continued : —

The expenses, as you perceive, are not so great after all,
considering the importance of the matter and the multitude
of urgent wants. We have still to face unavoidable expenses
imposed upon us by the national conscience; we have to
provide for the Russian volunteers who are still in Servia,
for the wounded, and for the families of those who have

D

34 The Russian People and the War.

fallen, and we must give to the surviving volunteers the
means for returning home. We now have taken measures
to form a regular system of paying salary to the volunteers
in the service of Servia (which we had not done before), and
this will be continued as long as we have the means of
doing so.

The Kussian people will not abandon the work which it
has begun ; of that we may be sure.

One cannot but remark that in the last few days, under
the influence of the newspaper correspondence, the public
sympathy for the Servians has cooled. Whatever may have
been the faults of some Servians towards some Eussians, on
the whole we are to blame — not the Servians. Yes, we, as
a community, as Eussia. The Servians cannot be expected
to know, and cannot understand, that the help offered to
them is merely the result of private efforts. Nor can they
understand the peculiar conditions in which we are placed.
They write, print, and talk about the help from Eussia,
' the millions of Eussia.' Under the name of Eussia, the
Servians and all Trans-Danubian Slavonians do not under-
stand a certain class of society, but the Eussian Empire in
its entirety. In a word, they are not accustomed to dis-
tinguish in Eussia between the people and the Grovernment ;
and, trusting to Eussia, they began a struggle above their
strength.

The results of this mistaken belief are known to every-
body. Towns in flames, hundreds of villages destroyed, the
occupation of the third part of their land by the Turks, ex-
haustion of means, and general ruin. Are we to punish them
for their ruin ? We must also not forget that the Servians
of the Principality have fought not only for their country,
but for the deliverance of all the Slavonians who are suffer-
ing and dying under the yoke of the Turk, and whose fate is
just as near to the heart of the Eussian people. We are in
debt to the Servians! But we shall not long remain so.
The Eussian people will not allow the Eussian name to be
disgraced ; and the blessed hour so much hoped for by all is

Mr. Aksakoff on the Servian War. 85

near, when this work, which belongs properly to the State,
will pass into the hands of our strong organised Grovernment.
Being led and aided by the popular force, the Government
will take into its powerful hands the defence of the Slavs.
So let it be !

The reference which Mr. Aksakoff makes to the
death of my brother will be better understood by
reading the following extract from the brilliant pages
of Mr. Kinglake, the historian of the Crimean War,
who writes as follows, in the Preface to the sixth
edition of his great work : —

The Kussians are a warm-hearted, enthusiastic people,
with an element of poetry in them, which derives perhaps
from the memory of subjection undergone in old times and
the days of Tartar yoke, for if Shelley speaks truly-
Most wretched men
Are cradled into poetry by wrong",
They learn in sorrow what they teach in song.

.... They can be honestly and beyond measure vehe-
ment in favour of an idealised cause which demands their
active sympathy. That the voice of the nation, when eagerly
expressing these feelings, is conunonly genuine and spon-
taneous, there seems no reason to doubt. Far from having
been inspired by the rulers, an outburst of the fraternising
enthusiasm, which tends towards State quarrels and war, is
often unwelcome at first in the precincts of the Grovernment
offices.

After referring to the Servian War and to the
presence of a few Russian volunteers in the Servian
camp, Mr. Kinglake says : —

This armed emigration at first was upon a small scale,
and the Servian cause stood in peril of suffering a not dis-
tant collapse, when the incident I am going to mention,
began to exert its strange sway over the course of events.

The young Colonel Nicholai Kireeff was a noble, whose

D 2

36 The Russian People and the War.

birth and possessions connected him with the districts af-
fected by Moscow's fiery aspirations ; and being by nature
a man of an enthusiastic disposition, he had accustomed
himself to the idea of self-sacrifice. Upon the outbreak of
Prince Milan's insurrection, he went off to Servia with the
design of acting simply under the banner of the Ked Cross,
and had already entered upon his humane task, when he
found himself called upon by General Tchernayeff to accept
the command of what we may call a brigade — a force of
some five thousand infantry, consisting of volunteers and
militiamen, supported, it seems, by five guns; and before
long, he not only had to take his brigade into action, but to
use it as the means of assailing an entrenched position at
Eokowitz. Kireeff very well understood that the irregular
force entrusted to him was far from being one that could
be commanded in the hour of battle by taking a look with a
field-glass and uttering a few words to an aide-de-camp ; so
he determined to carry forward his men by the simple and
primitive expedient of personally advancing in front of them.
He was a man of great stature, with extraordinary beauty of
features ; and, whether owing to the midsummer heat, or
from any wild, martyr-like impulse, he chose, as he had done
from the first, to be clothed altogether in white. Whilst
advancing in front of his troops against the Turkish battery,
he was struck — first by a shot passing through his left arm,
then presently by another one which struck him in the neck,
and then again by yet another one which shattered his right
hand and forced him to drop his sword ; but, despite all
these wounds, he was still continuing his -resolute advance,
when a fourth shot passed through his lungs, and brought
him, at length, to the ground, yet did not prevent him from
uttering — although with great effort — the cry of * Forward !
Forward ! ' A fifth shot, however, fired low, passed through
the fallen chiefs heart and quenched his gallant spirit. The
brigade he had commanded fell back, and his body — vainly
asked for soon afterwards by General Tchernayeff — remained
in the hands of the Turks.

Mr. Aksahoff on the Servian War. 37

These are the bare facts upon which a huge superstruc-
ture was speedily raised. It may be that the grandeur of the
young Colonel's form and stature, and the sight of the blood,
showing vividly on his white attire, added something extra-
neous and weird to the sentiment which might well be inspired
by witnessing his personal heroism. But, be that as it may,
the actual result was that accounts of the incident — accounts
growing every day more and more marvellous — flew so swiftly
from city to city, frc«n village to village, that before seven
days had passed, the smouldering fire of Russian enthusiasm
leapt up into a dangerous flame. Under countless green
domes, big and small, priests chanting the ' Kequiem ' for a
young hero's soul, and setting forth the glory of dying in
defence of ' syn-orthodox ' brethren, drew warlike responses
from men who cried aloud that they, too, would go where
the young Kireeff had gone ; and so many of them hastened
to keep their word, that before long a flood of volunteers
from many parts of Russia was pouring fast into Belgrade.
To sustain the once kindled enthusiasm apt means were
taken. The simple photograph, representing the young
KireefiPs noble features, soon expanded to large-sized por-
traits; and Fable then springing forward in the path of
Truth, but transcending it with the swiftness of our modern
appliances, there was constituted, in a strangely short time,
one of those stirring legends which used to be the growth of
long years — a legend half-warlike, half-superstitious, which
exalted its really tall hero to the dimensions of a giant, and
showed him piling up hecatombs by a mighty slaughter of
Turks.^

The mine — the charged mine of enthusiasm upon which
this kindling spark fell — was the same in many respects that

* The able correspondents of our English newspapers lately acting in
Servia took care to mention the exploit and death of Colonel KireefFwith
more or less of detail, and the information they furnished is for the most
part consistent with the scrutinised accounts on which I found the above
narrative. The corps in which the Colonel formerly served was that of
the Cavalry of the Guards, but he had quitted the army, long before the
beginning of this year.

38 The Russian People and the War.

we saw giving warlike impulsion to the Russia of 1853 ; but
then now was added the wrath, the just wrath at the thought

of Bulgaria — which Russia shared with our people

Thus the phantom of KireefF, with the blood on his
snowy-white clothing, gave an impulse which was scarce less
romantic, and proved even perhaps more powerful than the
sentiment for the Holy Shrines.

Mr. Kinglake concludes by declaring that ' the
impulse which has been stirring the Eussian people
was for the most part a genuine, honest enthusiasm.'^

Before concluding this chapter, permit me to
quote the following testimony to the national cha-
racter of our war, which, if viewed as a speculation,
was mad enough, no doubt, but which in reality was
one of the most heroic wars ever fought. The writer,
the learned Dr. J. J. Overbeck, whose intimate
acquaintance with Eussia and the Eussians entitles
him to speak with authority, says : ^ —

It was not a political war, planned by statesmen ; it was a
national war, a holy war, and the first victim in it was
Nicholas de Kireeff, a splendid pattern of a Christian soldier,
whose name will for ever shine in the annals of history.

As we were personally acquainted with Colonel Nicholas
de Kireeff, we cannot refrain from adding that his heroic
death was only the legitimate crowning of an heroic life — a
life of self-sacrifice for the benefit of his suffering brethren.
Nicholas Kireeff was an upright and zealous Orthodox ; and
he did not only believe, but acted accordingly. If ever prac-
tical Christianity shone forth from the life of a man, we find

* The year 1853 and the year 1876. A Preface to the sixth edition
of the Invasion of the Crimea^ vol. i. pp. vi-xv. See also Wallace's
Russia y vol. ii. p. 453. Salisbury's Two Months luith General Tcherna-
yefin Servia,ip^. l94:-7.

2 Orthodox Catholic JRevieiv, vol. vii. p. 10. Trubner & Co.

Mr. Aksakoff on the Servian War. 39

it here. Never the poor applied in vain to him. Never the
hungry passed his door unfed. His last roubles he shared
with two poor Bulgarians. Such virtues could not fail con-
quering even his enemies. Eussia, able to produce such a
man, shows her own healthy and vigorous life, and may be
sure of its final victory in the present momentous struggle.^

* I cannot dismiss this subject without a passing reference to the
influence which Mr. Gladstone's pamphlet is supposed to have had in
leading Russians to volunteer for service in Servia. The movement, as
Mr. Aksakoff states, assumed national importance at the end of July,
after my brother's death. On page 16 I quote a despatch, the date of
which is worth noting, for it shows that on August 16 the British
Ambassador reported the state of feeling in Russia to be such that
volunteering was going on everywhere. It was not till September 6
that Mr. Gladstone published his pamphlet, and it was not translated
into Russian until the close of the month. To ascribe the departure of
Russian volunteers to Servia as being due to Mr. Gladstone's pamphlet
is chronologically as absurd as, to a Russian, it is grotesquely ridiculous.
The speech delivered by Sir William Ilarcourtin Parliament, August 11,
and that of the Duke of Argyll at Glasgow were also translated into
Russian. Unaccustomed as Russians are to hear impartial generous
utterances in favour of the Eastern Christians from English sources,
they were happy to point out these noble exceptions. But to imagine,
as the Hon. R. Bourke appears to have done, * ever since October, 1876,'
that Russians needed to be taught their duty by an Englishman, and
that the numbers of volunteers with General Tchernayeff were affected
by Mr. Glad'stone's pamphlet, is one of the most curious illustrations of
insular British delusions which ever excited the laughter of astonished
Russians. We did not need English advices as to our duty towards the
oppressed brethren, nor did Mr. Gladstone ever advise our intervention.
On the contrary, he strongly deprecated it. He wrote : ' Every circum-
stance of the most obvious prudence dictates to Russia for the present
epoch what is called the waiting game. Her policy is, to preserve or to
restore tranquillity for the present, and to take the chances of the future.'
The whole pamphlet was, a plea for concerted, as opposed to isolated,
action in the East.

40 The Russian People and the War,

CHAPTEE IV.

CEOSS AND CRESCENT.

Why do the Eussians hate the Turks ?

Because they know them.

An all-sufficient answer. Our knowledge was
not bought without bitter tears. The Tartar wrote
his character across our Eussia in letters of flame.
You English people are not touched with a feeling of
the suflerings of the rayahs, because you have not
been in all points afflicted as they : Eussians have.
In centuries of anguish they have learned the lesson
of sympathy with those who are crushed beneath an
Asiatic yoke. We feel for them because we suffered
with them. As they are — so we were. They are not
only our brethren in race and religion, they are also
our brothers in misfortune, united to us in ' the
sacred communion of sorrow.'

Many of my English friends know but httle about
the causes of hereditary hatred of the Eussian for the
Turk. I venture, therefore, to state briefly the facts
which my countrymen can never forget.

It is not more than six hundred years since
first the Eussian people fell under the curse of Tartar
domination. Before that time the Eussians were as

Cross and Crescent. 41

free, as prosperous, and as progressive as their neigh-
bours. Serfdom was unknown. The knout, Mr.
Tennyson's abomination, was not introduced until two
hundred and fifty years after the Tartar conquest.
There were EepubHcs in Kussia as in Italy, and
the Grand Prince had no more power than other
sovereigns. But in the middle of the thirteenth
century Kussia, lying nearest to Asia, experienced
a Tartar invasion. An accident of geographical
position subjected her to a visitation, from the conse-
quences of which she has freed herself by superhuman
struggles.

It was in 1224 that the Tartars first established
themselves as conquerors in South-Eastern Kussia.
It was not till the close of the sixteenth century that
we finally rid ourselves of these troublesome intruders.
The Tartar domination, however, did not last much
more than two hundred years. It was in 1252 that
St. Alexander Nevsky received the title of Grand-
Duke from the Tartars. It was not till 1476 that we
ceased to pay tribute to our conquerors. But long
after Ivan III. had broken the power of the
Mongol horde the Tartars spread desolation and death
through Kussia. As late as 1571, when England,
under Ehzabeth, had just given birth to a Shakespeare,
Moscow was burnt to the ground by a wandering
host of Asiatics. It is easy to write the words,
' invaded by the Tartars ; ' but who can reaUse
the fact ? Western Europe, which felt afar oiT
the scorching of the storm of fire which swept
over Kussia, throbbed with horror. Kind-hearted

42 The Russian People and the War,

St. Louis of France prayed ' that the Tartars might be
banished to the Tartarus from whence they had come,
lest they might depopulate the earth !' All the
monsters who to you are mere names were to us
horrible realities. The Khans, the Begs, of whose
pyramids of skulls the world still hears with dread,
rioted in rapine throughout the whole of Eussia.
Five generations of Eussians lived and died under the
same degrading yoke as that which has crushed
the manhood out of the Bulgarians.

For centuries every strolling Tartar was as abso-
lute master of the life, the property, and the honour
of the Eussians as the Zaptieh is of the lives of the
Southern Slavs. To you Enghsh people atrocities are
things to read of and imagine. To us Eussians they
are a repetition of horrors with which we have been
familiar from childhood. Moscow has twice suffered
the fate of Batak, and nearly every city in Eussia has
suffered the horrors inflicted upon Yeni-Zagra.

For at least three centuries our national history is
little more than a record of the struggle of our race
for liberty to live. Our national heroes are the
warriors who did battle with the Asiatic intruder, and
to this hour in our churches the images of St. Michael
of Twer being put to death by the Tartars for
refusing to become a renegade stir the patriotism and
excite the imagination of the youthful Eussian. The
path of liberty was steep and thorny. Again and
again our efforts were baffled. A town revolted, and
it was consumed. Bands of armed peasants who
resisted the Tartars were from time to time massacred

Cross and Crescejit. 43

to a man. But the Russian nation did not despair.
As your own Byron sang — Byron, who gave his
life to the cause for which thousands of my country-
men are giving theirs to-day —

Freedom's battle, once begun,
Bequeathed by bleeding sire to son,
Though baffled oft, is ever won.

Gradually Eussia shook off the yoke of her oppressors.
Her advance resembled that of Servia and Roumania.
After having enjoyed administrative autonomy, she
secured her position as a tributary State, and then, at
last, waxing strong with freedom, she burst the
chains with which she had been so long bound.

Russia was free from the Asiatic oppressor, but
the evil results of his domination remained. Mr.
Gladstone, in one of his grandest speeches on the
Eastern Question, explained the comparatively low
intellectual condition of the Southern Slavs, by refer-
ring to the sandy barrier which, while producing
nothing valuable itself, nevertheless keeps the
destroying wave from encroaching upon the fertile
land. What the Southern Slavs did for Southern,
Russia did for Northern Europe. Upon us the Asiatic
wave spent its force. We were overwhelmed. But
we saved Europe from the Mongol horde.

While we saved, we suffered ; we emerged from
the flood of barbarism ourselves partially barbarous.
Our progress had been arrested for centuries. All
our national energies had been diverted into the
struggle against our conquerors. What had once
been flourishing towns were blackened ruins.

44 The Russian People and the War,

Liberty itself disappeared for a time. To fight
the Tartar all power was centred in the hand of one
ruler. Serfdom was amongst the legacies of Tartar
domination. While the rest of the world had
advanced, Eussia had even been forced back.

It was a terrible visitation, but it left behind
it at least one benefit. But for the tortures of these
sad centuries, the Eussian people might have been
as indifierent as the French and the Enghsh to
the cries of those who are still under the power of
the Pashas. But for the sympathy of the Eussian
people, Chefket Pasha and Achmet Aga might have
ruled for ever in Bosnia and Bulgaria. The Tartars
prevented that. They taught the Eussian people
what the rule of the Asiatic is, — a dreadful lesson,
creating that hatred of the Turk which will ultimately
secure his ejection from Europe.

The death-warrant of the Ottoman Empire was
signed by Timour the Tartar.

45

CHAPTER V.

BEFOKE THE FALL OF PLEVNA.^

EussiAN papers mention a great personage who, on
overhearing some discussion about the possible con-
clusion of peace, observed significantly that the time
was too serious for jokes. Whoever the personage
may be, we may bless him for his remark. Yet
EngUsh people discuss the possibilities of peace with-
out any consciousness that their talk cannot be
regarded as serious. There is evidently an in-
surmountable difficulty on the part of Enghshmen to
understand the way in which we regard this war in
Kussia. Were it not so, we should hear less of the
hopes so freely expressed and so thoughtlessly cheered
that foreign advice might guide Russia in bringing
our war to a close. In England you have evidently
forgotten all about the object of the war in the eager-
ness with which you have followed its details. The
death-struggle in Bulgaria and Armenia is to you
what a gladiatorial combat was to the pampered
populace of ancient Rome. You sit as spectators
round the arena, cheering now the Turk and now the
Russian, as if these brave men were being butchered

* This letter was written a few weeks before the fall of Plevna.

46 The Russian People and the War.

solely to afford you an exciting spectacle. Tired at
last, you cry, ' Enough, enough ! clear the ring, and
pass on to some other sport.' But had you not
ignored the nature of the fight, you would never ask
to do that. It is not a mere gladiators' war. It is
not a duel between two Powers about some punctilio
of offended honour, which might be satisfied — as
Mr. Freeman so well says — by the killing of a decent
number of people. Were it either of these things,
there would be some reason for the tragedy to close,
for it would have been a crime from the first. But
the war in which my countrymen are dying by
thousands, so far from being a crime was an im-
perative duty, for it was the only means for attaining
an end the righteousness of which all Europe has
admitted. It was the only way for Eussia of being
consistent.

We did not make war for the sake of war. We
sorrowfully but resolutely accepted that terrible
alternative because we had no other choice, since
ill-advised Turkey would not hsten to the voice of
justice. To us it would be a crime if, after having
begun the work, we were to draw back without
having accomplished the object which alone justified
so terrible an undertaking. Hence all this talk of
mediation, intervention, conferences, and of peace
proposals sounds to us as mere mockery. There
can be no peace until we have attained our end,
and that we cannot do until we have completely
freed the Christian Slavs. The war to us is a cruel
reality, instead of merely a theatrical spectacle. We

Before the Fall of Plevna. 47

bear the blows the mere sight of which unnerves
you. It is our hearths that are darkened by the
shadow of death. Yet in all Eussia you will hear
no cry for peace until we have secured our end. I
grieve to say Eussia has its Beaconsfields. But as
I said before, they are in a minority, and they
become what they ought to be — thoroughly Eussian,
when asked to die for their country. Amongst the
heroes whose deaths Eussia deplores were people
who — thanks to foreign influences, thanks to an idle,
unoccupied life — ^became estranged from national
interests ; but their hearts throbbed afresh on hearing
cries for help in accents of agony, and on seeing
with their own eyes the appalling miseries of their
brethren. The war brings out to dayUght the best,
the noblest elements of my country. Our armies are
appreciated by the whole world. Colonel Bracken-
bury's eloquent tribute to the Eussian character,
pubhshed by the Times^ carries -with it a strong
conviction of its absolute accuracy. As a Eussian
I read it with deep emotions of gratitude. There
is another side of the question, which, although
seldom mentioned by the press, deserves the highest
praise — I mean the part played in the war by the
Eussian women. From the highest to the lowest
rank, regardless of any social differences, they devote
themselves entirely to the rehef of the sick and
wounded, both on the field of battle and at home. In
fact, the Eed Cross Society includes in its ranks the
whole womanhood, of Eussia. This spirit of self-

» December 1, 1877.

48 The Russian People and the War.

sacrifice and devotion is shown even by those who,
before the testing moment, appeared to be utterly
lost in worldly, frivolous pursuits.

Yes, this grand war has given a new impulse to
Eussian Hfe, a deeper feehng of higher missions in
this world. Someone said that Hfe was nothing but
an examination one had to pass in order to die nobly,
and to prove that we did not make a bad use of the
greatest privilege given to mortals — that of moral
liberty. My countrymen and countrywomen are
passing their examination splendidly ; and the Slavs
— the cause of this new heroism of the whole of
Kussia — have claims upon our gratitude as much as
upon our sympathies ! If it had not been for Servia
and the Eussian volunteers, the Slavonic world might
have waited for its dehverance many, many years
more.

In vain we try to pierce the impervious veil
which conceals the future, but we know that our
Tzar is the very incarnation of his country, and that
having often shown a remarkable kind-heartedness,
he has also given striking proofs of his firm will in
great, decisive moments. The fate of the Christian
Slavs is in noble and generous liands. The result of
the war . no Eussian can for one moment doubt.
Come what may, the Slavs will be freed. All ' pos-
sible terms of peace,' that do not include the ejection
of the Zaptieh and the Pasha, bag and baggage,
from the Balkans are manifestly impossible. Deluded
and obstinate as the Turk is, he will not go out until
he is beaten a plates coutures.

Before the Fall of Plevna. 49

After the barbarian is swept away the task of
reorganising the government of these lands will be
much simplified. It will not be impossible to main-
tain sufficient order in the province whilst its inhabi-
tants are gradually acquiring, like the Serbs and
Eoumans, the habit of self-government. As to Con-
stantinople, even if the fortune of war should compel
us to enter tliat city, we should enter it as the Germans
entered Paris, to celebrate a triumph, not to make
an annexation. Our Emperor's word upon this was
solemn and conclusive.

The refusal to believe such an assurance from
such a man implies an incapacity to understand the
very existence of good faith. Certain suspicions
reflect discredit only upon those who entertain them.
The nobler England is above such unworthy dis-
trust.

Eoumania stretches as a barrier between us and
the soil of Turkey, which we are supposed to covet,
and Eoumania will not suffer for her alliance with
Eussia.^

We have no warmer allies than the foremost
statesmen and scholars of England. Only two or
three days ago Sir George Cox, the eminent historian
of Greece, urged his countrymen to present an
address to the Tzar, ' assuring him that in the great
work of freeing Europe wholly and for ever from the
defilement of Turkish rule we heartily wish him and

* Roumania gained both independence and the Dobroudja, a large
territory and three seaports. Do not be so innocent as to suppose that
Roumania in her heart of hearts is actually displeased with the exchange.
AVe know something about that.

E

50 The Russian People and the War.

all his people " God speed,'* and that we wait im-
patiently for the day when the Eussian Emperor
shall proclaim the freedom of the Christian subjects
of the Sultan in the city of Constantine. There only
can the work be consummated ; and there, by esta-
blishing European law, and then withdrawing from
the land which he shall have set free, he will have
won for himself an undying glory, and, what is of
infinitely greater moment, he will have done his duty
in the sight of God and man.'

Well, it is a difficult question ! The Guardian^
I see, advises us to annex Armenia. Mr. Forster
and Mr. Bryce declared that for the Armenians
Eussian annexation would be a great change for
the better. They received our troops as dehverers,
and thousands accompanied them on their retreat
into Eussian territory. We cannot surrender these
poor creatures into the hands of the Turks. What
must we do, then? K we retire, the Turk will
return, and the last state of Armenia will be worse
than the first. Eussia is wealthy enough in territory,
but what are we to do about the Armenians ? This
difficulty is not felt by Eussians alone, but is shared
by Englishmen who have studied the question. One
of those whose name stands high in the Hterary
world, remarked, the other day : —

'You have captured Kars thrice this century.
Why should you give it up ? The Germans did not
give up Metz. They did not desire any conquest,
they aimed at no aggrandisement ; but they kept
Metz as a safeguard against another war. Suppose

Before the Fall of Plevna. 51

you keep Kars, who has any right to complain ? Not
the Turks, for the victor has a right to the spoils.
As for the other Powers, if they had helped you in
your battle, they might have claimed to be heard, but
not now.'

Then there is Batoum. It is close on our frontier.
It is notorious that it is solely due to a misspelKng in
an old treaty that it is not already ours. Why should
we not rectify the clerical mistake of the transcriber ?
Batoum is the natural port of Russian Armenia. Its
harbour is most frequented by Eussian ships. It
was certainly not worth while going to war for Batoum
or Kars, and the Turkish fleet into the bargain. But
now that we have had to go to war, is it not a moral
duty to make the Turks pay as dearly as possible for
the sacrifices which they have cost us ? If we could
punish the Turks without annexing any territory, I
would not annex either Kars or Batoum ; but if that
is the only way in which they can be punished, and
the Armenians protected, my scruples against annexa-
tion may disappear.

There were many of us in Russia when war was
declared who beheved that the whole of the campaign
would be simply a mihtary promenade. Many said,
* We will occupy Constantinople in June or July, and,
after dictating in that capital our terms of peace, we
will return home with the happy consciousness that
we have arranged everything to our satisfaction ! '
But now we are in November ; we have lost 71,000
men killed and wounded ; we are spending millions
and millions for the war, and we are not yet in occu-

B 2

52 The Russian People and the War.

pation of Constantinople. The difficulty and costliness
of the enterprise render it impossible for Eussia to
secure any adequate compensation for her sacrifices.
We may get some kind of an indemnity — using the
word to signify a war fine — and it is well to distinguish
between a war fine and compensation. We have made
great sacrifices, and we may yet have to make still
greater should Lord Beaconsfield succeed in arraying
England against us ; but the hberation of the Slavs is
now certain. Between the status quo ante bellum and
the present he too many precious graves for it ever to
be restored. Our mihtary promenade has transformed
itself into a gigantic burial procession ; but when its
end is attained our regret for the brave who have
fallen in the fight will be rendered less poignant by
the joy with which we shall hail the resurrection of
the Southern Slavs.

About the time I was writing the above letter, the
same subject was treated in a speech of characteristic
fervour and eloquence by Mr. Aksakoff* in an Address
to the Moscow Slavonic Committee. Here is a slightly
condensed translation of that speech : —

The last time I conversed with you we hailed the declara-
tion of war as the approach of a great and difficult historical
day. Eussia is now at work. We have entered on the
busiest harvest time. There is need of labour— hard, obsti-
nate, gigantic labour, corresponding to the gigantic task
which we have undertaken. The end of it is not yet in sight,
and not soon will the labourers be able to rest. As Presi-
dent of the Slavonic Society, I ought to describe to you the
general position of the Slavonic world. But all its attention

Mr. Aksahoff on Russian Reverses, 53

is fixed on the seat of war, and it lives on the news received
daily from the Caucasus and the Danube. On those two
points are centred all its most essential and most vital in-
terests. The question of its existence is being decided there,
where flows in torrents our Russian blood. Of what else can
we speak or think about at this moment ? The time has
not yet come for calculating results, for the war, with all its
accidents and vicissitudes, is still raging fiercely. Let us
confess openly and boldly that we have had little opportunity
of being spoilt by military success. But it was not on for-
tune that Russia placed her hopes. Our consolation and
our joy are as yet not in the results of the war, but in the
wonderful bravery of our soldiers. Never before did their
bravery appear with such a sacred halo. Above all that heap
of contradictory rumours, scandal, intrigues, calumnies, and
accusations produced by the war, rises in unquestionable
greatness only the bright image of the Russian soldier —
good-natured, simple, and impregnably strong in his religious
faith and resignation. He has conquered all the passionate
partiality and prejudices of hostile spectators, and now the
European world respectfully recognises his military firmness
and his humane, genuine goodness of heart. Already half a
hundred thousand of these heroes have been put hors de
combat. And what has been obtained by their superhuman
efforts and their precious blood ? It is not for us, and per-
haps it is not yet the proper time, to judge of the art, the
knowledge, the ability, and the talents of the military com-
manders. We can speak only of what is felt and experienced
at present by all Russia. Seeing such an expenditure of
efforts and blood, and at the same time such relatively in-
significant results, Russia is at a loss to understand the fact.
Like one of the old fabled heroes, suddenly paralysed by a
wicked enchanter, she is astonished and involuntarily in-
quires why she is thus powerless. Light ! light ! as much
light as possible — that is what she now requires. In light
are health, force, power, and the possibility of recovery.
But the light is sparingly granted to us, and comes to us

54 The Rusaian People and the War.

chiefly from foreign distant lands. With morbid eagerness
Kussia peers into the darkness, and sees, as it were through
a mist, only the sad vision of innumerable heroic sacrifices.
With morbid eagerness she listens, and hears from the organs
of the authorities nothing but the frightful numbers of the
killed and wounded and fragmentary, confused intelligence.
Is it not strange and disgraceful that all Eussians, from the
highest to the lowest ranks, are condemned to find the best
accounts of the great struggle in the letters of foreign cor-
respondents ? That high honour has fallen chiefly to the lot
of two English correspondents, Forbes and MacGrahan. Their
independent, impartial voice has inspired confidence, more
than the timid evidence of Russia, carefully filtered by the
Censure. We have to thank them for the sympathy which
they have shown to our cause, for their pious respect to our
soldiers, for their praises of our officers' bravery, and, above
all, for the calm, bitter truths they have spoken. That
truth, in the translations of Russian newspapers, has spread
over all Russia, for there is now scarcely a village in which
newspapers are not read.

Yes, the people have been unable to understand, and
perplexity has, like a heavy cloud, spread over the land ; but
only perplexity, not depression. On all that boundless ex-
panse amid the millions of the popular masses, is heard no
word of complaint or murmur. No one asks, With what aim,
on what account, or for what purpose, do we carry on war ?
The people are simply unable to understand why it is carried
on thus, and not otherwise ; why the most heroic war in the
world has hitherto given no victories. Not for a single
moment has a doubt crept into the popular mind as to the
holiness of the enterprise. Never has there been the least
hesitation about finishing what has been begun. The people
will bear the burden to the end, will bring out on their broad
shoulders the dignity of Russia untarnished, and the fulfil-
ment of her historical mission — redeeming with their blood
the sins which have prevented victory. These sins, however,
lie not at the door of the common people — not on ' the

Mr- Aksahoff on Russian Reverses. 55

younger brothers,' as people in our class haughtily and pa-
tronisingly call them — but on us, the ' elder brothers,' who
have committed the deadly sin, which is the root of all our
social evils — the sin of forsaking Russian nationality. Never
has the difference between the people and the educated
classes come out so clearly as in the present war. At a
moment when our enemies rejoice, when our soldiers are
generously sacrificing themselves in thousands, when those
who remain alive have been made stronger and firmer on the
anvil of adversity, and anxiously expect from Russia words of
encouragement and approval, what voices, rising louder and
louder, do they hear ? The voices of those who lament and
predict for Russia almost thorough defeat. ' Look, look ! '
say these prophets of evil in a wailing tone, trying in vain to
hide their malicious delight and parodying the part of lovers
of the people, ' We were right ! We tried by every means to
oppose that mad, useless war, forced upon Russia by the im-
pudent boldness of the Slavonic Committee, by the raving of
the penny-a-liner, and by other fanatics, who unfortunately
were not repressed. What have we to do with Slavs, Bul-
garians, and Servians ? We are, first of all, Russians, and
ought to think only of the interests of Russia. What busi-
ness have we to emancipate and educate others when we have
misfortunes enough of our own ? All this we said again and
again ; but we were not listened to ; our advice was rejected,
and what has been gained ? '

So speak the political wiseacres. It may seem idle to
pay attention to their expression of cheap wisdom and self-
satisfied light-headedness, but, unfortunately, that intel-
lectual and moral emptiness to which every one who forsakes
his nationality is condemned, has been invested with a certain
significance and has exercised wide-reaching influence. Apart
from accidental failures, who but these people are the chief
causes of our disasters, of our misfortunes, and of that multi-
tude of sacrifices which they bewail ? On whom, if not on
them, must fall the responsibility for superfluous bloodshed ?
Was it not they who strengthened the enemy by holding

56 The Russian People and the War.

back the blow which might have been dealt at the proper
moment, thereby giving him time to prepare ? They talk
about a war without cause — a war forced upon them.
Having eyes they see not, and having ears they hear not.
Like foreigners, they cannot understand the natural simpli-
city of the popular motives and the historical significance of
the struggle. They ought, by their education and social
position, to be the highest organ of the popular conscious-
ness, but in reality they are utterly unacquainted with these
elements of the national spirit which exist in the masses and
create historical life. It may, perhaps, be objected that the
masses know nothing about historical missions and ideals.
In a certain sense this is true. If we ask individual peasants
or a group of peasants what the historical mission of Eussia
is, we find, of course, that they know nothing about it. We
ought, however, to remember that neither individuals nor
groups of individuals fully represent a people. A people is
a peculiar, entire organism, ruled by its internal historical
laws, and possessing power of development, memory, aspira-
tions, missions, and aims, all of which can be reflected
only very imperfectly by individuals. The processes of this
organic national life can be perceived and understood only
by a few who have raised themselves by thought and educa-
tion above the ordinary level. The Kussian common people
have little historical knowledge and no abstract conceptions
about the mission of Eussia in the Slavonic world ; but they
have historical instinct, and they clearly perceive one thing,
that the war was caused neither by the caprice of an auto-
cratic Tzar nor by unintelligible political consideration.
Free from all ambition and all desire of military glory, they
accepted the war as a moral duty imposed by Providence — a
war for the faith, for Orthodox Christians of the same race
as themselves, tortured by the wicked enemies of Christianity.
We had illustrations of this in the Servian war of last year.
Some village communes, desirous of taking part in the great
Christian work, equipped volunteers, and these volunteers,
when we asked them why they wished to go to Servia, replied

Mr, Aksakoff on Russian Reverses, 57

simply and sincerely that they wished to suffer and die for
the faith. To our ' Conservatives ' all this seemed foolish-
ness. They mocked, ridiculed, condemned, calumniated
those who were animated with such religious feelings, and
succeeded in making the Grovemment doubt the sincerity
and genuineness of the popular movement. They even re-
presented the movement as revolutionary, and the conse-
quence of this has been that the ablest Russian actors in the
Servian struggle (Tchernayeff and his staff) have not been
allowed to take part in the present war. That struggle was
the prologue to the great drama which is now being played
out, and yet those who are now fighting for the emancipation
of the Bulgarians seem to disown the crusade undertaken
last year for another branch of the Slav family.

That which the masses have recognised as a moral, abso-
lute duty is at the same time the historical mission of Russia
as the head and representative of the orthodox Slavonic
world, not yet fully created, but capable of being created,
and awaiting its concrete historical form. All the import-
ance of Russia in the great world lies in her peculiar religious
and national characteristics combined with external material
force — in her Orthodoxy and Slavonism, which distinguish
her from Western Europe. She cannot attain her full de-
velopment without securing the triumph of those spiritual
elements in their ancient homes and re-establishing equality
of rights for races closely allied to her by blood and spirit.
Without the emancipation of the orthodox East from the
Turkish yoke, and from the material and moral encroach-
ments of the West, Russia must remain for ever mutilated
and maimed. For her the war was a necessity, an act of
self-defence, or rather the natural continuation of her
historical organic development. Blessed is the country
whose political missions coincide with the fulfilment of a
high moral duty ! The triumph of Russia is the triumph of
peace, liberty, and fraternal equality. In this respect her
position is very different from that of certain 'Christian'
and ' civilised ' Powers, whose very existence reposes on the

58 The Russian People and the War.

humiliation, enslavement, and demoralisation of foreign
races, and, consequently, contains the germ of condemnation
and ruin. For the interests of Grreat Britain, for instance,
it is necessary that the population of the Balkan Peninsula
should be kept in misery and perpetual minority, that the
Turks should rule over the Christians, and that the Bible
should be trampled on by the Koran. Turkish atrocities,
slaughter of Bulgarians, and wholesale massacres of women
and children, all that is permitted by England in order to
deprive Kussia of her triumph, and is for England a matter
of patriotism ! So it is likewise for Austro-Hungary, whose
existence is founded on injustice to the Slavs. But all this
has remained unintelligible to our Conservatives. When the
Tzar, who stands and acts before the face of history and is
responsible for the destinies of Eussia, recognised the neces-
sity of the long-expected struggle, they put in motion all
the influences in their power to prevent the declaration of
hostilities. Poor unfortunates ! They dreamt of stopping
the march of history. In that they did not, of course,
succeed ; but they did succeed in obstructing, diverting, and
distorting it. Turkey, unprepared for the struggle, blessed
them and made preparations. And what did we do ? Who
threw into confusion, weakened and kept back the prepara-
tions which we had to make ? Who strengthened the hands
and raised the courage of our enemies ? Who undermined
from the very beginning the external force and energy of
Kussia ?

Diplomacy, the true reflection of that absence of indi-
viduality and nationality, began its work, advantageous for
our enemies and disadvantageous for us. Europe, believing
the assertions that Russia was unprepared and not disposed
for war, subjected us to the torture of gradual humiliating
diplomatic concessions. Whose dominant opinions obscured
the plain indications of history and prevented Russia from
making the preparations necessary for the fulfilment of her
mission ? Our so-called Conservatives. Thanks to them,
the Russian soldier went forth to fight laden with heavy

Mr. Aksahoff on Russian Reverses. 59

weights which prevented all free exercise of his strength.
For the sake of European peace the war was condemned to
localisation. The interests of Europe ! That is one of those
empty phrases in which Europe herself does not believe, but
which serve as a bait to catch Kussian simplicity and Eussian
pretensions to Europeanism. Since the natural development,
perhaps the very existence, of Russia is inconsistent with
European interests, ought we not to contract or even entirely
efface ourselves for the tranquillity of the West ? But what
did the locaHsation mean ? It meant the freeing of Turkey
from all trouble with regard to Servia, Bosnia, Greece,
Epirus, Thessaly, Egypt, and the directing of all its forces
against the Russian army in Bulgaria, the practical result of
all which was Plevna, thousands of killed and wounded, the
prospect of a winter campaign, and perhaps, after all, a
European war.

But this is not all. The Turks know well that for them
it is a question of ' to be or not to be,' and therefore for them
the war is a war of race and religion. In the Russian
popular consciousness it is likewise a war for the faith ; but
our Conservatives have done all in their power to deprive it
of its true significance and to repress all manifestations of
the Russian popular spirit by forbidding the use of such
words as ' Orthodoxy ' and ' Slavdom.' There lies the chief
cause of our defeats. The Conservatives, who have abandoned
your nationality, are like ships without ballast — light-headed,
not serious people. Your inevitable portion in life is light-
headedness, superficiality, ignorance, and misconception of
the vital wants and interests of the country. Though you
are filled with patriotism and knightly honour, and go fear-
lessly into the fight, meeting death bravely on the field of
battle, your conceptions are narrow, your patriotism merely
external and political. You care not for the essential ele-
ments of Russian nationality. Ready to lay down your life
in the struggle with Europe for the outward dignity and
independence of the Empire, you at the same time slavishly
prostrate yourselves in spirit before European civilisation

60 The Russian People and the War.

and the moral authority of the West. Dying at Shipka or
Plevna, you sow with your blood the seeds of a new Slavonic,
Orthodox world, the very name of which was distasteful to
you during your lifetime. 0, you who know how to die, but
do not know how to live as Kussians, will you ever awake
and remember who you are ?

But enough ! We are all of us, in our own way, guilty
and responsible for the present state of affairs. Let us put
away mutual recrimination, and, bearing each other's bur-
dens, let us take upon ourselves, all together, the sin and
the punishment and repentance. A new day is dawning.
As the rising sun chases away the terrors of the night, so
now the light beaming from the hills of Armenia and
the heights of Plevna has shown us our errors and our
shortcomings. If we profit by the lesson taught by much
blood, the heroic sacrifices will not have been in vain.
There must be no hesitation, as there is no choice. We
must conquer. Kussia cannot retreat or stop, though all
Europe should place itself as a wall in our path. Ketreat
would be treachery towards the suffering Slavs, treason to
our historical mission, and the beginning of political death.
Let us accept new burdens and make new sacrifices. The
nation has an unbounded confidence in the watchfulness
and justice of the Tzar. Its historical path has been and is
still surrounded and obstructed by many obstacles and many
trials ; but with the help of Grod it has overcome them in
the past, is overcoming them in the present, and will over-
come them in the future !

61

CHAPTEE VI.

THE BULGARIANS AND THEIR LIBERATORS.^

' Light, more light ! ' murmured Goethe on his death-
bed. We Eussians are in more urgent need of light
in order to Hve. Mr. Aksakoff last month said, ' Light !
light ! as much Hght as possible — that is what Eussia
now requires. In Hght are health, force, power, and
the possibility of recovery.' That hght, he said, comes
to us chiefly from abroad, and we owe most of it to
two English correspondents — Mr. MacGahan and Mr.
Forbes. In the name of the whole of the Eussian
people, which even in its remotest villages has read
and re-read their letters, Mr. Aksakoff thanked these
Englishmen, not only for their sympathy, but still
more for ' the calm, bitter truths ' which they had
spoken.

Since Mr. Aksakoff spoke Mr. Forbes has pubUshed
an article in the Nineteenth Century} He praises my

* This letter was written in reply to an ai'ticle by Mr. A. Forbes (a
correspondent of the Daily News) in the Nineteenth CeTitury of November,
1877, on ' Russians, Turks, and Bulgarians at the Seat of War.'

^ Mr. Archibald Forbes, in an article in the Nineteenth Century, of
January, 1880, on * War Correspondents and the Authorities,' says, that
* during the past six months, war correspondents have been altogether
prohibited from accompanying a British army in the field,' which he
seems to think is hardly an advance upon the custom of the ' barbarous
Muscovite,' who, ' in the recent war admitted all comers decently vouched

62 The Russian People and the War.

countrymen, and I thank him for doing them justice.^

for on very simple stipulations.* Mr. Forbes remarks : ' The Russians
are wise in their generation. At Plevna, in July, 1877, they sustained a
terrible reverse. It fell to the present writer to record that event in its
sadness alike and its unavailing heroism. The record neither spared
blame nor stinted praise. Its author did his work in the full conviction
that his candour would cost him his permission to witness the succeeding
episodes of the campaign. But the Russian military authorities, recog-
nising the solid virtue of truthfulness, accepted his narrative of the
battle, and authorised its publication in their home newspapers, with
their imprimatur on it as an accurate record of a miserable failure relieved
by gallant courage.'

* Mr. Forbes's testimony to the character of the Russian soldier
may perhaps be forgotten. I therefore reproduce it here. He says :

' The Russian private is the finest material for a soldier that the
world affords. He i s an extraordinary marcher, he never grumbles, he
is sincerely pious according to his narrow lights ; and this, with his
whole-hearted devotion to the Czar and his constitutional courage, com
bin6s to make him willing, prompt, and brave in battle. He is a de-
lightful comrade, his good humour is inexhaustible, he is humane, he has
a certain genuine and unobtrusive magnanimity, and never decries an
enemy. As for Russian ** atrocities," ' on soul and conscience,' exclaims
Mr. Forbes, with solemn emphasis, ^ I believe the allegations of atrocities
to be utterly false. Constantly accompanying the Cossacks in recon-
naissances, I never noticed even any disposition to cruelty; Cossack
lances and Russian sabres wrought no barbarity on defenceless men,
women, and children. The Russian of my experience is instinctively
a humane man, with a strong innate sense of the manliness of fair
play.'

In confirmation of this testimony of Mr. Forbes, is the evidence of
an eye-witness whose experience during and subsequent to the war was
much more extensive. He dates from Bucharest, February 2, and his
letter appeared in the Times on February 6, 1880 : —

* 1 have seen so many references in English journals of recent date to
the Mussulmans having been driven from Bulgaria that it appears to be
necessary once more to repeat the denial which the facts of the case
demand. The truth is, that the Mussulmans were not driven from Bul-
garia, and / deft/ any one to mention one solitary village from which the
Mussulman population was expelled during the late war. In all cases in
which the Turkish peasants ran away at the approach of the Russian
forces their exodus was the result of their own fears or of the counsels of
their Turkish superiors. During the campaign I made the most minute
enquiries on this subject of the Turks themselves who remained inside
the Russian lines, and never found a single case in which a Mussulman
was interfered with in any way whatever. I saw many Turks bringing

The Bulgarians and their Liberators. 63

He criticises their administration, and I thank him
still more for his candour in assisting us to remedy
our shortcomings. He severely condemns some of
our mihtary commanders, and, if true, these things
cannot be too plainly exposed. We are not infaUible,
we Eussians, as is the Holy Father, whose infallibihty,
however, has not prevented him from sympathising
with the infidels against whom his no less infallible
predecessors preached crusades. Like other nations,
we make mistakes, and no one can do us better service
.than by pointing them out. Mr. Forbes might have
spared us a few sneers, but these we can overlook.
As a Eussian, I do not complain.

But as a Slav I protest against the way in which
he abuses the Bulgarians. I am indignant at these

in supplies for the Russians, and they always told me that they were
paid for their material. Since the war I have visited the country occu-
pied by the Ru&sians, and in the various villages in which the Mussul-
mans remained in their homes they invariably assured me that they had
not only been unmolested, but had sold all their produce to the Russians
for higher prices than they had received in former years. Even in Turkish
villages lying on both sides of a chaussSe where thousands upon thousands
of soldiers had passed I was assured that they had lost nothing. It is,
however, true that, with very few exceptions, the houses of Turks who
fled before the advanced guards of the Russians have been destroyed.
All abandoned property was seized by Bulgarians or soldiers, generally by
the former, and the bands of Mussulman fugitives, while on the road in
flight, were in a great many cases most cruelly and brutally treated by the
Bulgarians whom they encountered en route. Every Turk with whom I
have conversed since the war cordially cursed the Kaimakam or Pasha
who advised them to flee from the Russian advance ; and when the
former residents of ruined villages, deserted by their owners, returned
after the conclusion of peace, and found their fellow Mussulmans in
adjoining hamlets, who had remained inside the Russian lines, with flocks,
herds, and houses unmolested, and with more hard silver in their pockets
than they had ever had before, their own hapless condition, contrasted
with the prosperity of their neighbours, fully justified the opprobrious
epithets bestowed upon their former Kaimakams.'

64 The Riissian People and the War.

virulent attacks upon the feeble and those who have
no helper. Better— far better— that he should de-
nounce us and spare them. We are strong, but
they, the weak, the wretched, the oppressed->is it
manly to heap insults upon such as these? They
cannot reply. They cannot resent his abuse, no mat-
ter how undeserved. And it is undeserved! Mr.
Forbes has never been for a single day in Bulgaria
under Turkish rule. He has only seen Bulgarians
after the Pasha, the Zaptieh, the Tcherkess, and the
Bashi-Bazouk had fled ' bag and baggage ' before our
liberating army. How is he to know what they
suffered ? Mr. MacGahan, who visited Bulgaria when
the Turk was in possession, gives a very different ac-
count of the happiness of the Bulgarian. Mr. Forbes
has never been across the Balkans. He has never
been near the scene of the atrocities. But he admits
that the Turks are ' persistent, indomitable barbarians.'
He says they ' wield the axe and the chopper of ruth-
less savages,' that they mutilate the dead and torture
the wounded. The Bulgarians are at the mercy of
these men. Unless they become renegades, — and the
Greeks and other Europeans who serve Turkish in-
terests and persecute the Christians are the very
worst kind of renegades, — their complaints and testi-
monies are not accepted by the Turkish tribunals.
Power which elsewhere is believed to be too vast to
be entrusted to the most civiUsed of men, in Bulgaria
is exercised by the Ottoman barbarians, and from
their will there is no appeal.

In Eussia we sometimes indignantly say that the

The Bulgarians and their Liberators 65

heart of England is eaten up with love of gold*
Surely that cannot be true. Still, what is Mr. Forbes's
argument, so eagerly repeated by Turkophiles ? Is it
not based upon a belief that money is everything ?
The Bulgarian, unUke ' Devonshire Giles,' has more
than nine shillings a week. The fact, in the first
place, is not general, but, if it were, does it prove
that therefore he needs no liberation? His wives
and daughters are at the mercy of the Zaptieh. But
is woman's honour really nothing compared with
' nine shillings a week ' ?

Eussians are pretty good judges of courage.
Well, there is not one Eussian, who fought side by
side with the Bulgarians, who does not praise their
courage and their simple, determined way of meeting
death. Mr. Forbes himself, in his description of the
Shipka battles, showed that he shared Eussian views
upon this matter. A certain way of sacrificing life is
a very charming argument in favour of the moral
character of the nation.

The result of Turkish oppression on the character
of the Bulgarians is not favourable. But even that,
in Mr. Forbes's eyes, tells in favour of the Turks, as
the Bulgarians are so degraded they are not worth
saving. If four centuries of Turkish misrule have
brutalised these poor Bulgarians, is it not time that it
ceased ? Permit me to extract some words of Earl
Eussell's I find in a pamphlet, given to me by Messrs.
Zancoff and BalabanofF, the Bulgarian delegates. He
wrote : ' It would indeed be a hopeless case for
mankind if despotism were thus allowed to take ad-

F

66 The Russian People and the War.

vantage of its own wrong, and to bring the evidence
of its own crimes as the title-deeds of its right. It
would be, indeed, a strange perversion of justice
if absolute Governments might say, "Look how
ignorant, base, false, and cruel people have become
under our sway : therefore we have a right to retain
them in eternal subjection, in everlasting slavery." *
Yet this ' strange perversion of justice ' is employed
in order to damage the cause of the Southern Slavs. ^

^ Mr. MacGahan, who knew tlie Bulgarians much better than any-
other correspondent of the English press, and certainly than Mr. Forbes,
wrote of them in the Daily News, October 30, 1877 : — ' They are a quiet,
peaceable, hard-working, thrifty people, more adapted to civilisation and
to civilised life than perhaps any other of the Slav races. They are a
miserable, wretched, downtrodden race, now gagged, bound hand and
foot, with nobody to plead their cause. The attacks that have been made
on them, the slanders, accusations, and lies that have been heaped up
against them, are disgraceful, shameful, and unworthy anybody who has
the least regard for justice and fair play.' Sir Henry Havelock's testi-
mony as to the Bulgarian character contradicts that of Mr. Forbes, and
confirms that of Mr. MacGahan. On his return from Bulgaria, Sir Henry
Havelock told his constituents he did not think the Bulgarians deserving
of the abuse they had received. * He had lived in their villages and they
were undoubtedly a timid people, and in some respects a selfish people.
These were vices inherent in a people trodden down for the last four
hundred years. On the other hand, he would say that he believed the
Bulgarians were improvable, and that they were patriotic and truthful.
The sight that struck a stranger was that in the Bulgarian village there
was first of all a fine church, and that too where people seemed to have a
difiiculty in making both ends meet. The next thing they saw was a
magnificent schoolhouse. Among the Bulgarians there was a universal
love of learning and of improving themselves when opportunity occurred.
There were many hundreds of them who had been educated in the
American Colleges in Constantinople, or in the Colleges of Roumania.
These were educated, refined men, speaking four or five languages, as
attached to liberty as we ourselves, and quite as capable of making use of
it. Russia has found it necessary to raise a Bulgarian legion, which con-
sisted of Bulgarians, who were sent into action for the first time at Eski-
Zagra. That legion numbered 1,800 Bulgarians, and though fortune was
against the Russians, out of the 1,800 men, 800 remained wounded or
killed upon the field. He thought the people who could act in this

The Bulgarians and their Liberators. 67

The Eussian administration, according to Mr.
Forbes, is so very corrupt that a French corre-
spondent has employed himself in collecting and
authenticating cases of peculation with a view to its
future publication. If that French correspondent
does his work thoroughly he will be entitled to the
gratitude of the Eussian people. There are corrupt
contractors I suppose in Eoumania, as there have
always been in all wars, and perhaps always will be,
and we are more interested in their detection and
punishment even than Mr. Forbes. But it is a
mistake to attach so exaggerated importance to such
stories. Gambetta's contractors sold the new levies
paper-soled boots. Great fortunes were made by
dishonest purveyors to the army of the Potomac ; and
the English army in the Crimea was not too well
served at the commencement of the war. Is there
no bribing in England — not even among the detective
poUce ?^ Are ' tips ' and ' commissions ' known only
in Eussia ? But this is beside the question. If Mr.
Forbes will substantiate his accusations, we will thank
him for revealing the weak places in our armour.
The charge that Eussian officers are willing to betray
their country for a bribe is too serious to be made in
such vague terms. It ought either to be supported with
details, dates, and names, or it ought not to be made
at all. Vagueness in a case like this is simply cruel to

way during a first essay in war were not unworthy of efibrts to improve
them.'

^ In November 1877, when this letter was written, the English
papers were full of reports of the trial and conviction of London de-
tectives on charges of corruption.

F 2

68 The Russian People and the War,

the whole Eussian army. At present it cannot be
investigated ; but, as an act of simple justice, Mr.
Forbes should so far overcome his ' melancholy ' as
to enable the Eussian nation to punish these traitors.
One word more about our officers. I am not a
mihtary authority, and do not meddle with these
things. Enghshmen, of course, who never have any
Httle difficulties between the Horse Guards and the
War Office, and who select their Commander-in-Chief,
not because he is a Eoyal Highness, but solely because
he is the greatest mihtary genius in the land, cannot
understand the existence of such a thing as favouritism
in the army. But it is not necessary to resort to
such an argument to explain the absence of those
generals named by Mr. Forbes from the seat of war.
Todleben, for instance, who, according to Mr. Forbes,
was only sent for as a last resource, was engaged at
the beginning of the campaign in putting the Baltic
ports in a position to resist the anticipated attack of
the English fleet. Kaufmann remained in Turkestan
because he of all men was best fitted for the arduous
and responsible work of governing Central Asia.
Only foreigners consider Turkestan a sinecure or a
Paradise. As for the ' neglected retirement ' ol
Prince Bariatinsky, it is the usual accusation that the
Bariatinskys are in too great favour at Court. Both
charges cannot be true, and one may be left to an-
swer the other. Count Kotzebue is in command in
Warsaw, nor is the position one to be despised. As
for the hon-hearted Tchernayeff, to whom I am
heartily glad to see Mr. Forbes pays a well-merited

The Bulgarians and their Liberators. 69

word of praise, we regret as much as any one that
he was not permitted to take a prominent part in
the campaign. But can Enghshmen not suspect the
reason why the General who fought against Turkey
when Eussia was at peace, is not appointed at once
to high command now that Eussia is at war? No
one fought in Servia without first resigning his
commission in the Eussian army, and diplomatic
susceptibilities might be offended if the Eussian
Government were so completely to condone the part
played by Tchernayeff in the Servian War.^

In conclusion, let me say that Mr. Forbes, as
unfortunately so many of our critics, generalises too
hastily from imperfect data. He jumps to erroneous
conclusions, and prefers his own theories to the well-
attested evidence of trustworthy eye-witnesses. Mr.
Aksakoff thanked him for stating ' calm and bitter
truths.' The statements in his last article may be
' bitter,' but they certainly are not ' calm,' and many
of them as little deserve the name of ' truths.'

' See antej Aksakofi's Speech on Russian Reverses, p. 57.

70 . Tke Russian People and the War.

CHAPTEE VII.

AFTER PLEVNA.

Plevna fell in December, 1877. Before the New
Year our armies were across the Balkans driving
before them the defeated and disorganised hosts of
the Turks. But by the very triumphs of our troops
the interest of the Eussian people was directed from
the seat of war in the Balkans to the diplomatic,
campaign in the capitals of Europe, and especially in
London. Those who had noted with eagerness the
professions of English sympathy with the Slavs in
1876 and 1877 looked forward with some anxiety to
see whether at the critical moment these professions
would be justified by deeds. The others, who had
bestowed but little attention on the preceding phases
of the diplomatic conflict, heard with indignation that
it was possible the fruits of their victories might be
snatched from them by the intervention of foreign
Powers. Hence it happened that the attention of
Eussians was concentrated upon England just at the
time when England was most hostile, not merely to
Eussia, but to the cause of liberty in the East. Those
who expected the least were not the most disappointed,
and those who had always declared that England was
insincere in her professions of sympathy for the

After Plevna. 71

Bulgarians found only too many proofs in the policy
of the English Government to support their views.
Eussia, her hand upon her sword, hstened impatiently
for some clear declaration of England's pohcy, either
of peace or war, but it only heard across the
Continent a confused chorus of blustering voices
singing ' Eule Britannia ' and the Jingo Song.^ During
that period of prolonged anxiety, some faint idea of
the feelings of the Eussian people may be gathered
from the following extracts from letters written from
Moscow between January and April 1878, giving at
foot their dates.^

We live in a state of feverish excitement. Expecting
the worst, we are compelled to take precautions. Already
for spring are ordered great mihtary preparations. More
sacrifices, more lives, more treasure ! Well, so be it, if it
must be so. We will not, dare not, shrink from obeying the
voice of duty ; but my heart sinks within me when I think
that our two nations may very shortly be at war. Is it
England's will that the Slavs should not be free ? Or only
Lord Beaconsfield's ? We are watching with wonder to see
whether your Parhament will vote the money for the war.
We have respected every British interest which the English
Government specified. We have made concessions which as
a Eussian I think you have had no right to demand, and
such as you never would have made to Kussia.

It is impossible for us to hsten to those who would re-
establish the Turkish Grovemment in Bulgaria, which it cost
so many precious lives to overthrow. Is it so unreasonable ?
Put yourself in our place. If all England was one vast
ambulance, if there was not a town or village which had not

* In England, as in Russia, after the fall of Plevna, equal uncertainty
prevailed as to the probable course of England's policy. — Vide Appendix,
Mr. Froude's preface to Is Russia wrony ?

2 January ff, 1878.

72 The llusmin People and the War.

its wounded to watch and its dead to lament, perhaps even
your Queen might be as determined as our Emperor not to
sacrifice the sacrifices of his people by consenting to a
shameful peace which left unremoved the causes of the war.
Not for that did our brave soldiers perform these deeds of
prowess, in spite of all the horrible difficulties and obstacles
of a Balkan winter, which have no parallel in history.

The indignation here is very great. ^ We are almost as
disappointed with our Grovemment for its want of energy as
we are indignant with yours for its insults and menaces.

Out of deference to British susceptibilities, out of regard
to the imaginary interests of your Grovernment — which from
the first has been hostile to the cause for which we have shed
rivers of our blood— we consented not to enter Constantinople,
if England abstained from acts of hostility. And how were
we rewarded for our concessions ? No sooner is our heroic
army brought to a halt within sight of the distant domes of
Constantinople, out of deference to the pledges given to
your Ministers, than we are startled with the news that the
English fleet is ordered to the Bosphorus !

Our promise not to enter Constantinople was strictly con-
ditional upon England preserving a strictly neutral attitude.
As we were grateful to your Cabinet for securing the re-
jection of the Protocol, which enabled us to liberate our
brethren in Bulgaria, so were we not less grateful to your
Ministers for opening to us the gates of Constantinople.^
But we were disappointed. Our statesmen, it seems, had
not even yet exhausted their concessions. If our Govern-
ment had listened to the unanimous voice of the Eussian
people, instead of sending useless warnings, they would have
taken the only step, at once rational and dignified, by oc-
cupying Constantinople without further loss of time. They

1 February |§, 1878.

* This is also the opinion of the Duke of Argyll : * It cannot be
denied that it was precisely such a step as Russia would have desired if
she had wished for an excuse to occupy Constantinople.' — Eastern
Qtiestion, vol. ii. p. 93.

After Plevna. 73

have not done that ; and in Moscow, as elsewhere in Russia,
there are everywhere heard the most vehement expressions
of disappointment and of indignation.

******

Straightforward manly fighting against us would have
created far less irritation here than the malice with which
the English Grovernment has persisted in its provocations all
through this trying time J We can respect an honest enemy.
We are irritated by the intentional insults of a professed
neutral. On every side military preparations are being
pushed forward with great rapidity. Millions upon millions
are being spent in order that we may be ready if Lord
Beaconsfield persists in humiliating us first and declaring
war afterwards. It is a terrible prospect. Everywhere the
horizon is dark. We have, however, only ourselves to blame.
If it is a sin for a woman to please everybody, it is still
worse for a Government to have that weakness. For every
concession we have been rewarded by an insult. If the voice
of the Russian nation had been heard there would have
been but short work made with these repeated deferences to
Lord Beaconsfield. We should have done our duty without
hampering ourselves with unnecessary engagements to re-
spect limits which the English Government violates itself
the moment it suits it. It was the English, and not the
Russians, who forced the Dardanelles, the Treaty of Paris
notwithstanding.

The exact terms of peace from San Stefano are published
here, and do not by any means give unmixed satisfaction.
Everybody is delighted with the extension of Montenegro.
Bulgaria is not badly off; but it would be infinitely better if
no European interference were allowed next year. Bosnia
and the Herzegovina have been sacrificed — to please Austria.
Our troops are deeply himiiliated by not being permitted to
march through Constantinople. The Bulgarian fortresses are
to be demolished — to please Europe. Adrianople remains
Turkish — to please England and the Sultan. Bessarabia
1 March V, 1878.

74 The Russian People and the War.

will only be taken from Roumania in exchange for the
Dobrudscha. The bargain is not a bad one for Koumania.
The narrow strip of Bessarabia belonged to Russia before
Roumania even existed. It was in 1856 given up to Turkey,
not even to Moldavia. In 1792, by the Treaty of Jassy,
Russia exacted from Turkey the right to protect Moldavia,
and twenty years afterwards she brought from the Hospodar
of Moldavia the district of Mourouri, which is now called
Bessarabia. Its value to us arises chiefly because it was
torn away from us after the Crimean War. On the whole,
while the Slavs are freed, England has spoiled our work.
But, as I have said, it is our own fault, for why should we
have permitted her to influence our deeds ?

Russia was abused in England for attacking the inde-
pendence of the Sultan, and was accused of a desire to
change the law of the Straits. What do we see to-day ? ^
England forces the Dardanelles. Her ironclads anchor in
Turkish waters. The Sultan's protest is ignored by his
best friends. The much-vaunted independence of the Turk
is categorically denied. By her own acts England abolishes
the Paris Treaty. In international law the forcing of the
Dardanelles is as much an invasion of Turkey as our passage
of the Danube. England in this follows our example, with
a difference. She waits till her ally is helpless to invade
her waters, and she acts solely for her own interest.

We welcome your adhesion to the cause which our
sacrifices have rendered it safe for you to adopt. But in
your enthusiastic zeal you overdo it. Our heroic volunteers
rallied to the aid of the Slavs in the Servian War, and died
in the cause to which they had devoted their lives. You
abused them for a glaring violation of neutrality, which could
only have been committed by so lawless a nation as Russia.
One year later, when we went to liberate Bulgaria, England
solemnly proclaimed her neutrality and forbade any English-
man helping the belligerents. With regard to helping us,
' March f|, 1878.

After Plevna. 75

nothing could exceed the respect paid to that proclamation.
But on the other side it was different. The Turks had
volunteers in plenty from England — Her Majesty's proclama-
tion notwithstanding. You sent an admiral to command
the Turkish ironclads and a general fresh from penance to
command a Turkish army. There were others also, but
again there was a difference. Our volunteers sacrificed
everything — home, family, friends, country, life itself — in
order to free their brethren, and one-third fell on Servian
soil. Your volunteers, less idealistic and more practical, sold
their services for gold, and all of them seem to have suc-
ceeded pretty well in preserving their precious skin.

English Turkophiles objected to our arming before the
Constantinople Conference — as a ' menace to Europe.' But
whilst the Berlin Congress was talked of, was England com-
pletely forgetful of guns and loaded revolvers ? Is the
six millions vote not an imitation of a partial Russian
mobilisation ?

Lord Salisbury's Circular fills everyone with indignation.'
' British interests ' no longer availing to pick a quarrel with
Russia, your Grovernment must now reward the respect we
showed for the interests you mentioned, by making Turkish
power a British interest! Of course, if you insist upon
restoring the jurisdiction of the Sultan, there can be no other
issue than war. But unless your Government means to
force us to fight, why demand what we cannot concede ?

We know too well what war is to think of a new war
with a light heart. Moscow is silent and sad, although
sustained by the consciousness of having achieved a great
success in a heroic cause. Few households but mourn for
some one who has perished in the fight. Russia is not rich —
better be poor than be suffocated with wealth. I would
that Russia took nothing for herself — nothing at all. But
we cannot sacrifice our honour, forget our sacred duty, and
abandon our brethren in Bulgaria to the vengeance of the

1 April 12 1878
March 31^ lO/O.

76 The Russian People and the War,

Turks. Is that not what Lord Salisbury wants ? To tear
up our Treaty, and to leave these millions of Slavs, who
depend entirely upon us for freedom and protection, to the
tender mercies of their oppressors ? ^

Turkophiles say ' Europe will protect Bulgaria.' Europe
is a mythological lady who does nothing but stupid mischief
when she interferes with the Slavs. Much to our regret,
Bosnia and the Herzegovina were left to the protection of
Europe — and has Europe protected them? There are still
outrages, atrocities, refugees — all is unchanged. So it would
be in Bulgaria if Kussia ceased to guard the liberties which
she has won.

You indulge in strange illusions when you say Bulgaria
will be Kussian if it is not Turkish. Is Greece Eussian —
Greece that owed her independence chiefly to us ? Is
Roumania Russian — Roumania whose liberties we defended
in so many wars? The point is worth insisting on. We
Russians have very clear views on this matter, and no
illusions.

We are not particularly satisfied with the San Stefano
Treaty. It might have been much better. Montenegro
and Bulgaria are not ill treated ; but the Herzegovina,
Bosnia, Servia, Epirus, Thessaly, Albania — we would have
made them all really happy if we could only have consulted
the Liberals of England and the Slavs of Austria, and not
the English and Austrian Cabinets. With Lord Beaconsfield
and the Magyars to please, our work has been spoiled.

As for the Greek provinces, that is England's fault. If
poor King George had dared to disobey Lord Beaconsfield,
Epirus and Thessaly would belong to him now. But
Russians are anxious to give every support possible to
Greece. Poor Greece, she trembles with fear because Eng-
land can destroy her at a moment's notice! but still we
hope she may receive her provinces.

^ Fortunately, a few weeks later, Lord Salisbury judiciously modified
his views, and concluded the secret agreement with Count Schouvaloff,
in which practically he abandoned the position taken up in his Circular.

77

CHAPTEE Vm.

ENGLISH NEUTRALITY.

' The determination of the Government is for neutral-
ity. But for what neutrality .f^ The House will give me
leave to say for an honest and real neutrality. Any
other would be unworthy of the nation. The choice
is between neutrality and war. If we mean war, let
us openly choose it, but if we mean neutrahty, let it
not be neutrality under the mask of non-interference
with one party whilst a secret support is given to the
other. If you ask me what are the hues, rules, and
limits of a just neutrality, I will tell you them in one
word. There is a golden maxim which applies as
well to politics as to morals — " Do unto others as you
would that others should do unto you." But to
England I say, " Do unto others what you have made
others do unto you." ' ^

So spoke Mr. Canning in 1823 concerning the
policy of England in relation to the French Ex-
pedition to Spain, and if Mr. Canning had been in
Lord Beaconsfield's place when the Eastern question
was reopened in 1876, the relations between England
and Eussia would have been very different from

^ Memoirs of Canning^ pp. 485-6.

78 The Ritssian People and the War.

what, unfortunately, they are to-day. For Mr. Can-
ning would have pursued ' a policy worthy of
England,' whereas Lord Beaconsfield has persistently
acted upon that unworthy policy which Mr. Canning
denounced more than half a century ago. How often
the best voices in England use almost the same words
and express the same counsels as those which Eussia
has been uttering all through the troubles in the
East. When the European concert was destroyed
by England's refusal to coerce the Turks on behalf of
the Bulgarians, as Mr. Canning coerced the Turks on
behalf of the Greeks, all that Eussia asked for — and
surely it was not too much to ask — was that England
would not pursue a policy which Mr. Canning
branded as ' unworthy of the nation.' Unfortunately
this boon, small as it was, was denied to us, and the
pretended neutrality of the Enghsh Government
during the war excited the bitterest feelings in
Eussia, which were still more inflamed by its active
intervention at the Congress for the re-enslavement of
Southern Bulgaria.

It is better not to reopen the old sores. They
are, however, far from healed, but festering ; and it
may not be useless simply to express the universal
feeling excited in Eussia by your sham neutrality.

No one can object to that phrase ' sham neu-
traUty,' for English neutrahty during the war was
exactly defined by Mr. Canning as that which is
neither honest, nor real, nor just — ' Neutrality with
the mask of non-interference with one party, whilst a
covert support is given to the other.' It is always

English Neutrality. 79

difficult to put oneself in another's place ; but if Mr
Canning's principle is a just one, perhaps you could
do that if you imagined Eussia playing the part in
Afghanistan that England played in our war with
Turkey.

The parallel, I admit, is not diplomatically exact.
Afghanistan is ' beyond the sphere of Eussian in-
terests.' Turkey, on the other hand, is a matter of
concern to all the Powers. But these distinctions are
little thought of on the battle-field. Their place is
in the Cabinet, not in the camp ; and although poH-
ticians would be more scandahsed by Eussian neu-
trahty a VAnglaise in Afghanistan, the popular heart
is more keenly touched by such covert interference
as took place in 1877 in Constantinople than by any-
thing we could do at Cabul.

Eussia's war in Bulgaria to Eussians was a re-
ligious, humanitarian, unselfish struggle, to Uberate
kinsfolk from cruel oppression — an object in which
England professed to be deeply interested.

England's war in Afghanistan is a war confess-
edly of prestige, of conquest, of rivalry between Eng-
land and Eussia. If Eussia had interfered covertly
to thwart it, however guilty she might be of violating
diplomatic compacts, she would not be interfering to
frustrate an object which she ostentatiously professed
to have at heart.

How, then, would you like us to do to you in
Afghanistan as you did to us in Turkey ? Suppose
as a ' dehcate mark of attention ' we had sent the
bitterest and most unscrupulous Anglophobe we could

80 The Russian People and the War.

find in all Eussia to represent us at Cabul, whose
notorious conviction was that the preservation of the
Afghan kingdom was indispensable to Eussian in-
terests, and permitted him to assure the Ameer that
the Emperor ' felt true sympathy for him, and the
liveHest concern in his happiness and welfare.'
Suppose, further, that the whole time of that Anglo-
phobe Ambassador was taken up in intriguing against
the progress of the British armies, telegraphing to
St. Petersburg horrible legends of British atrocities,
and consulting with the Ameer how best to secure
the defeat of the English invaders and the intervention
of Eussia.

Would you regard that as an honest and just
neutrality ?

It is no new thing in diplomacy for your Ambas-
sador at Constantinople to pursue a much more pro-
nounced pro-Turkish policy than that which is pro-
fessed at Downing Street. Let me recall one striking
instance of this which occurred a little more than a
hundred years ago. It furnishes a curious precedent
for the conduct of Sir Austin Layard ; but I regret
to say the British Cabinet has not followed the good
example of the Cabinet of Lord North.

In 1772 England was represented at Constanti-
nople by Mr. Murray, who shared your present
Ambassador's notions about the terrible danger of
'Eussian aggression,' and encouraged the Turks to
continue their war against Eussia in the presumed
interests of Great Britain and of Poland. His conduct
brought upon him the grave reproof of the Earl of

English Neutrality. 81

Eochford, whose despatch of July 24, 1772, shows
that Enghsh statesmen in those days had a keener
sense of the duties of neutrahty than appears to pre-
vail in the Beaconsfield Cabinet. Lord Eochford
wrote : —

' His Majesty and his Ministers could not but con-
sider as an extraordinary misapprehension of your
duty the advice you have, on your own speculation,
upon the intended dismemberment of Poland, taken
upon you to give to the Porte, tending directly to
retard the conclusion of that pacification which it
has been his Majesty's constant wish to accelerate as
much as possible. His Majesty,' Lord Eochford con-
tinued, 'was disposed to overlook the offence ; but if
it should be made a ground of complaint against you
by the Court of St. Petersburg, as is too probable, it
will be difficult to find a vindication of so unfriendly
a conduct in his Ambassador.' Eeferring to the par-
tition of Poland, Mr. Murray was informed : ' The
commercial Powers have not thought it of such
present importance as to make a direct opposition to
it or enter into action (as your Excellency supposes
necessary) to prevent it. The King is still less in-
clined to try the indirect method of encouraging the
continuance of a Turkish war, which, exclusive of the
evils it carries with it of interruption of commerce
and devastation, could by no means answer the end
in a manner desirable to Great Britain. For if car-
ried on successfully by Eussia the Porte must be
more and more unable to interfere in regard to the
independence of Poland, and, if unsuccessfully, it

a

82 The Russian People and the Wa7\

must greatly weaken an Empire, which, although
there has not been lately shown on their part that
openness and confidence in his Majesty which he
justly deserves, he cannot but look upon, neverthe-
less, as a natural ally of his Crown, and with which
he is Hkely sooner or later to be closely connected.' ^

This, however, by the way. The appointment of
Sir Austin Layard, unfortunately, was only the be-
ginning of the mischief. Suppose the Persians sent a
contingent to assist the Afghans, and Eussia were to
forbid you to land a single soldier on the Persian
coast, or show a single gunboat on the Persian Gulf,
and then add to these prohibitions a veto upon, first,
the annexations, and then even the occupation of the
city of Cabul. For Persia, read Egypt, and for Cabul,
Constantinople, and you have exactly two conditions
of your neutrahty in the recent war.

These conditions were at least open and straight-
forward. But suppose the most efiective force under
the Afghan standard was commanded by a Eussian
officer in receipt of regular pay from the Eussian
Exchequer until the war actually broke out, and that
this force, led by this ex-Eussian General, were to
make raids upon the Indian plains, bombarding Indian
cities with Eussian guns, would England tolerate that
singular manifestation of Eussian ' neutrahty ? '

Wherein Hes the difference between such service
by a Eussian General and the operations of the
Turkish Fleet under Admiral Hobart ? The first shell
fired on the Danube into the Eussian ranks was fired

' Mahon's History of England j vol. y. App. p. 37-38.

Eiiglish Neutrality. 83

by the English Admiral from an English gun, as he
swept on an Enghsh-built gunboat down the river to
the sea, amid the enthusiastic applause of the English
press

In the American War the Government of the
Union was indignant at Enghsh neutraUty, but no
Englishman commanded the fleets or armies of the
Confederates. It was held to be an offence merely
to build the ships and supply the weapons for the
South. As Lowell sang : —

You wonder why we're hot, John ?

Your mark wuz on the guns,
The neutral guns, thet shot, John,

Our brothers an' our sons.

Russia would have been well content if England's
assistance to the Turks had been limited to the sup-
ply of munitions of war to the Turks, although Eussia
has not even supplied a rifle to the Afghans, who,
indeed, were armed by the English Government in
hopes of their becoming our enemies. I think this
latter fact will not be denied even by the * veracious '
Lord Salisbury.

How would England have enjoyed the news that
the Ameer had appointed a distinguished Eussian
cavalry ofScer to the post of General of Brigade in
order to ' raise and discipline ' a non-existent gendar-
merie in Afghanistan ? Would you have heard with
composure that, with the sanction and approval of
the Eussian Government, he had been joined by the
following ofiicers on half-pay — two colonels, three
majors, seven captains, and an adjutant ^ — most of

1 Blue Book—TuTkej, I. (1878), 461.
a 2

Si The Russian People and the War.

whom, in flagrant defiance of the proclamation of
neutrality, took an active part in resisting the British
arms at Cabul ?

I hardly think that if the Afghans at the battle of
Charasiab had been commanded by a Eussian officer
the EngHsh Government would have manifested the
same composure which was displayed at St. Peters-
burg when ex-Colonel Baker covered the retreat of
Sulieman Pasha from the Balkans.

And here, to anticipate objections, allow me to
say that I am not going to defend the intervention of
General Tchernayeff in Servia from the point of view
of International Law. It was condemned at the time
by our own Government, and can only be justified by
referring to considerations of race, rehgion, and hu-
manity, which only occasionally combine in sufficient
force to justify such enterprises, and such ties, so far
as I know, do not exist between the English and the
Turks. But General Tchernayefi* in Servia should
rather be compared to Sir Philip Sydney in Holland,
of whom you may well be proud, than to Hobart
Pacha in the Black Sea.

England in her advance did her best to detach the
hill tribes from Afghanistan, if not to turn their arms
against the Ameer.

If Kussia had brought all her influence to bear in
a contrary direction, and supported her representa-
tives by an army corps in the passes of the Hindoo
Koosh, I fear we should have had some httle difficulty
in persuading English people that we were really ob-

English Neutrality. 85

serving neutrality, although we should be doing no
more than you did in Greece.

Even after the war was over, you subsidised the
Lazes at Batoum, who were resisting our arms.^ This,
I suppose, will not be denied. But it is not generally
known to what an extent the English Government
was committed by its officials to the support of the
Turkish cause. I append in a footnote^ a curious
manifesto signed by your Consuls Blunt and Merlin,
which was addressed to the Hellenes, who had taken
arms against the Turks in May, 1878. It is somewhat
strange ' neutrahty ' which, even after peace was made
with the Turks, permits your Consuls to describe
Eussia to the Greeks as 'the great and common enemy
of yourselves and Europe.'

Two unofficial Enghshmen had a good deal to do in
promoting the Rhodope insurrection ; and Sir Austin
Layard exerted himself to the utmost to excite oppo-

^ Duke of Argyll, The Eastern Questionj vol. ii. p. 137.

* To the Greeks in Insurrection.

Esteemed Hellenic chiefs and men. — We are sent by the Government
of our augfust Queen, the Sovereign of Great Britain, as mediators
between yourselves, insurgents, and your fellow-countrymen the Mussul-
mans. Both of you are men carrying on a struggle which menaces the
ruin of both peoples — ^for the great and common enemy of yourselves and
Europe has overrun with his armies Turkey in Europe and Asia, so that
having abolished Mussulman sovereignty, it threatens to change to Slavs,
both Mussulmans and Christians, to which, we believe, both peoples are
opposed.

Be united then, and after the enemy shall have been driven from your
country', Europe, taking into consideration your just complaints, will
accord to each what is right ; and thus, we are con\inced, you will live
together as brothers. In the name then of the Government of our august
Sovereign we counsel you to lay down your arms.

Signed Blunt,

Merlin.

86 The Russian People and the War.

sition to the Treaty of San Stefano, just as Mr. Butler
Johnstone, professing to speak in the name of Lord
Beaconsfield, is said to have eagerly advised the
Turks to resist the pressure of the Constantinople
Conference, while Lord SaHsbury used quite a different
language.

I forbear to allude to the speeches wherein your
Prime Minister encouraged openly the resistance of the
Turks, for, perhaps, it is the Turks who have most
reason to complain.

Can you wonder that a neutrality a VAnglaise is
regarded as very little better than war a la Russe?

' We were neutral,' reply some Englishmen ; ' but
we were bound to show a friendly neutrahty to the
Turks ; ' and, therefore, I suppose, a hostile neutrality
to Eussia. ' Neutrahty and friendly ! ' once exclaimed
Kossuth, ' a steel hoop made of words.' Contradictio
in adjecto ! But Enghsh statesmen have themselves
exposed the hoUowness of the pretext. Earl Gran-
ville, in his despatch to Count Bernsdorff of Septem-
ber 15, 1870, wrote : ' It seems hardly to admit of
doubt that neutrality, when it once departs from
strict impartiality, runs the risk of altering its essence,
and that the moment a neutral allows his im-
partiality to be biassed by predilection for one of two
belligerents, he ceases to be a neutral. The idea,
therefore, of benevolent neutrality can mean little
less than the extinction of neutrality.' Again, on
October 21, Lord Granville wrote ; ' Good offices may
be benevolent, but neutrality, like arbitration, cannot
be so.' When Mr. Canning and Lord Granville,

English Neutrality. 87

English Foreign Ministers in 1823 and 1870, agree in
condemning such a ' neutraHty ' practised by England
in the late war, need you be surprised if the conduct
of the Enghsh Government during the recent war has
not contributed to the realisation of that cordial
friendship between England and Eussia which is so
desirable for both ?

88 The Russian People and the War,

CHAPTER IX.

ON THE EVE OF THE CONGRESS,^

Eeally, it is quite bewildering ! Transformation
scenes succeed each other so rapidly that one
begins to lose consciousness of one's own identity ! It
is but six months ago that I was in England. English-
men then, although a little indignant at the sufferings
of their interesting protege^ the Turk, still retained
their self-possession. Even those who hated us poor
Russians — describing us, as Mr. Carlyle said, as if we
were ' evil spirits ' — at least paid us the compUment
of beheving that we were not mere children. Before
we took Plevna there were many who attributed all
sorts of daring designs to my countrymen. They
were accused of meditating the annexation of Con-
stantinople, the invasion of India, the capture of
Egypt, the subjugation of the world, and some other
enterprises equally easy. 'Russia is ruthless, reck-
less ; her ambition and audacity have no bounds,'
cried some very penetrating politicians. I ventured
sometimes to protest, and, of course, protested in

1 This letter was written from Moscow, on June 7, 1878, on the Eve
of the Congress, when the fact that the Schouvaloft-Salisbury Memorandum
had annulled the Salisbury Circular, was as yet only known to the three
Governments who were privy to its negotiation, and to Mr. Marvin — the
indiscreet copjist of the English Eoreigu Office.

On the Eve of the Congress, 89

vain. One likes to be feared, but one is bound in
honour to calm people whose fear takes the shape of
a kind of moral paralysis. But the more frankly I
spoke, the less were my words accepted. ' Eussia,' I
was told, ' might veil her designs while she was still
in the midst of the battle ; but the moment she
is victorious, she'll throw off the mask, and will reveal
the natural aggressiveness of a military despotism,'
and so on.

Well, Eussia has been victorious. Moltke, the
great German mihtary genius, never admitted for one
moment that our troops could pass the Balkans in
winter time. The Eussians did, however, undertake
that impossible thing, and have succeeded. They are
now, and for many, many weeks past have been,
at the gates of Constantinople. The whole of the
world is now informed of the San Stefano Treaty.
Far from fulfilhng the fears of my EngUsh friends,
Eussia has displayed a magnanimity which is even
culpable. The prostrate barbarian is not only al-
lowed to live, but even to tyrannise still over a great
many Christians. In that Prehminary Treaty Eussia
is wrong, and I am jealous of the good which united
Europe may do in improving it^ whilst Eussia had
the power to strike the great blow herself. We lost
more than one hundred thousand Eussians, and what
Eussians ? the best, most self-sacrificing and gallant
men we had — in order to stop half-way, and leave
everything unfinished.

* Jealousy, alas ! quite unfounded, for as the result proved, United
Ej^rope did aujthing but improve it.

90 The Eitssian People and the War.

People tell me here, ' Oh I but you see we are on
good terms yet with England ; we could not forget
her wishes.' Of course, if our first object in life is to
please Lord Beaconsfield we are right in being wrong.
But I don't see that in the least, and not for the
life of me shall I ever take your Premier as the best
representative of the real England. I know many
of your countrymen, as generous and as chivalrous
as some of our departed Eussian friends ; and I
think it unjust not to insist upon this point, even
if Lord Beaconsfield should choose the Congress as
a new arena for his threats and insults, and even if
war between Eussia and England should be the
result of the coming ' friendly ' meeting.

The curious fact, however, to which I should like
to allude, is that now — since we have ' the key of
Constantinople in our pocket' — ^we are all at once
described as so weak that we dare not defend
even the humble half-measure called ' The Ste-
fano Treaty' against one Power. Eussia, yet un-
successful, was a terror to Europe. Eussia, vic-
torious, turns out to be a nonentity to be sneered /
at ! This, indeed, is a startling transformation. The
' Colossus ' turns out to be a wretched weakling
trembling at the sight of a drawn sword !

It did not need the jingUng of Six MiUions Vote of
Confidence, ' warranted not to be spent,' to convince
us that England was rich. In fact, we thought
she was so rich that she would not have needed
to have gone a borrowing to raise so small a sum.
Anyone can borrow, even poor, dear Austria I

On the Eve of the Congress. 91

The other warlike demonstrations that followed
frighten, perhaps, some old Enghsh ladies, but here
they raise only a good-natured smile. The handful of
your Eeserves — about one army corps — give us a very
pacific view of your warlike threats. Surely you do
not think that 40,000 of reserves can terrify a mili-
tary empire that counts its soldiers not by tens, but by
hundreds of thousands ? We have at this present
moment more Turkish prisoners of war in Kussia than
all your reserves.

But what amuses us and fills me with doubts
whether the England which I know and love so well
has not disappeared altogether, is the delusion that
Eussians are to be frightened into compliance with
Lord Beaconsfield's dictates by the sudden apparition
of your Indian soldiers: Chinese rather like sham
demonstrations of this sol*t, and employ pasteboard
dragons, and shields painted with horrible demons,
to frighten European soldiers. Why should Lord
Beaconsfleld imitate the Chinese ?

England — and we Eussians know it very well —
is the greatest naval Power in the world. But it is
not given to one nation to be supreme in both
elements. To attempt it, is to provoke failure. You
can bring, not one, but several handfuls of Orientals
to threaten us, but you'll obtain the very opposite
result to that which you desire. You should always
keep in mind that Eussians are not cut off from
all access to official information pubhshed by your
Indian Office, and we also understand why certain
measures are taken when Parliament is prorogued.

92 The Russian People and the War.

Why should we be afraid of your Indian soldiers?
Turkey had more soldiers to oppose to our armies
than England can put in the field, but that did not
save her from defeat. Your Premier forgets that,
although Eussia has made but small annexations in
Asia compared with England, yet we govern enough
territory there to understand the conditions of Em-
pire in the East. Asiatic dominion impairs, instead
of increasing, the power of intervention in Europe.^
You send 6,000 Sepoys to Malta. Well and good.
But, in order to be able to get these 6,000 Asiatics,
you have to maintain nearly 60,000 Enghsh troops
in India.

Since the Crimean War India has become a
greater drain than ever upon your resources in men.
Have you not had to keep 15,000 more Enghsh
soldiers in India since the Mutiny than when you
fought us at SebastopoL? And these 15,000 English-
men, were they not worth many 6,000 sepoys ?

Your Indian Viceroy, I see, has been taking
measures of precaution in India, which somehow
strangely conflict with the impression that India
is glowing with enthusiastic fervour to send her sons
to fight the battles of England. The taxes are being
increased, the armies of your tributary princes are
complained of as too large, and the native press is to
be put under the censure.

Lord Napier's celebrated Minute on your Indian
Army is too categorical in its exposition of the mili-
tary dangers of the English position in India to be

^ Afghanistan, to wit.

On the Eve of the Congress. 93

effaced by bringing 6,000 sepoys to Malta. Accord-
ing to the Indian Commander-in-Chief, the natives of
India do not seem particularly devoted to their Em-
press. Were not the sepoys the greatest danger to
English rule during the Mutiny ?

But why should these unworthy demonstrations
be continued? Surely no serious Englishman can
believe that Kussia will yield to England that which
she beUeves to be unjust, because Lord Beaconsfield
has added to the forces of the Empress 40,000
reserves and 6,000 sepoys ? We knew before these
' spirited demonstrations ' that England was rich, and
we also knew the precise limits of your mihtary
resources.

Why do you forget our history ? Napoleon took
Moscow, but he did not conquer Eussia ; nor did
England, with all her allies, succeed in doing more
than capture Sebastopol. Vulgar insults and ridicu-
lous threats do a great deal of harm — but not in
the sense some people imagine.

I say ' England,' not Lord Beaconsfield, for it
seems as if EngUshmen, bold enough to be guided
by some other consideration than a fear of embar-
rassing the Cabinet, form a very weak minority
for the present, and our diplomatists are right in
having only your Cabinet in view when they write
and speak about England. But a party may be weak
in a certain sense, and nevertheless worthy of the
admiration of all who can yet admire that which
stands on a high moral level. Mr. Bright and his few
friends did not succeed in preventing the Crimean

94 The Russian People and the War.

War. Mr. Gladstone, Lord Derby, Lord Carnarvon,
Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. Fawcett, Mr. Courtney, and
some few others will not prevent its repetition if
Lord Beaconsfield insists upon his own objects ; but
the following generations will not forget their pro-
tests, even if at present they should be made in
vain.

95

CHAPTEE X.

AFTER THE CONGEBSS.^

English papers are still filled with accounts of Lord
Beaconsfield's triumphs ; his reception at the Guild-
hall on the same night that a majority of 143 in the
House of Commons accorded him full Parhamentary
approval for all his doings. It is all very charming
for Lord Beaconsfield, no doubt ; but was it not a httle
cruel to bring him in the last scene of the comedy to
Guildhall ? Is it not associated in history with his
terrible threat, ' to fight three campaigns in defence
of the integrity and independence of the Ottoman
Empire?* Were there no echoes of his former
speeches hngering about the gorgeous roof to mock
the speaker whose voice has been so often uplifted
there in defence of a poHcy which is violated by almost
every clause of the Treaty which he was applauded for
signing ? Pardon my frankness if I say that the Eng-
Hsh seem, indeed, to have short memories, and are
capable of rapid conversions ; but it puzzles me to
explain the triumph accorded to Lord Beaconsfield by
men who, some months ago, were abusing Mr. Glad-

1 The following letter was written on August 26, 1878, after the
* triumphant ' return of the British Plenipotentiaries from Berlin.

96 The Russian People and the War.

stone for recommending far less sweeping changes
than those which Lord Beaconsfield has sanctioned.
Are they only making believe now, or were they ,
making believe then ?

Lord Beaconsfield, according to some of his adhe-
rents, seems to be infallible. Now such, I need hardly
say, is not the view in Eussia. We have his utterance
ex cathedrd to prove that Turkey is strengthened by
losing half her territory. If any one else had ventured
to argue in that way last year who would have
listened to him ? But then, of course, every one has
not the gift of making people beheve that black is
white merely by saying so. Henceforth it strikes me
that we have now two Popes. I thought one was
already more than enough ; yet it seems that the Pope
at Downing Street makes quite as exhaustive demands
upon the faith of the Faithful as the Holy Father at
the Vatican.

If we had entered upon the war simply to anni-
hilate Lord Beaconsfield 's pohcy, the Berlin Treaty
would be a great and complete success. But, in
drawing the sword, we did not even think of Lord
Beaconsfield, except as a possible foe. Our object was
a nobler and a higher one ; and, therefore, although
Lord Beaconsfield at BerUn gave up entirely his for-
mer policy and became one of the partitioners of the
Ottoman Empire, he nevertheless, according to our
views, did a great mischief, which rankles in the heart
of every true Eussian. There is hardly a demand
that our diplomats have made for Eussia that your
Premier has not granted kindly enough. But the

After the Congress. 97

proposals wliicli extended the area of freedom and
emancipated the Slavs — these he has curtailed with
the willing assent of interested and designing in-
triguers, who see in the dissatisfaction of those be-
trayed peoples the effectual instruments for achieving
in the future their aggressive designs.^

England has conspired with Austria to deprive the
Slavs of the liberty which we promised them, and to
betray them into the hands of those from whom our
brothers died to free them for ever.

Had Bulgaria been entirely free, Kussia would have
had no reason for interfering again. The weaker
Bulgaria is, the more she depends upon us, and the
more absolutely she is in our power.'^

It is a terrible game ! It involves the betrayal of
a sacred trust, of a solemn pledge. But the reckless
enthusiasm, the sympathies of the Russian people,
have not been extinguished at Berlin. We keenly
feel the shame of having surrendered the interests of
those who had no other protector. England, through
her representatives, was their persecutor, and we un-
fortunately played at Berlin a i^^^ondemned for

* * We baulked and defeated Russia in what she sought on behalf of
oppressed and suffering humanity ; in what concerned our own pride
and power we suffered, not only suffered, but effectually helped her to
get her way.' — Mr. Gladstone, ' The Friends and Foes of Russia,' Nine-
teenth Century^ January 1879, p. 179.

'^ On this point the Earl of Derby's words are very clear. *■ A large
Bulgaria reaching to the sea would be necessarily much more indepen-
dent of Russian influence. It would contain a mixed population not
exclusively Slav, and by mere contact with the sea would be more open
to your influence. But the small State is also entirely inaccessible to you,
and the influence exercised over it will be exclusively Russian, and if
you want to put pressure on the people there is not a point where you
can do it.' Speech in House of Lords on Berlin Treaty, July 18, 1878,

H

98 The Russian People and the War,

nearly two thousand years — that of a ' practical '
Pilate.

The indignation throughout the whole of Kussia
on hearing of the first exaggerated reports of the
abandonment of the cause of the Southern Slavs at the
Congress was very intense. This feeling found what
now appears perhaps even too vehement an expression
in the speech of Mr, AksakofF, although at that time, I
must admit, he only expressed the universal opinion
at Moscow. Addressing the Moscow Slavonic Com-
mittee on July 4, 1878, he said ; —

Gentlemen, — A funeral oration inaugurated our two last
meetings. Four months ago we attended the funeral of a
man, illustrious by his intelligence, who freely gave his life
to serve a sacred cause — the liberation of the oppressed
Slavs. We were then deploring the premature death of the
civil administrator of Bulgaria— Prince Tcherkassky, whose
fame will ever be remembered in connection with one of the
most notable deeds in the history of modern Christianity.
At that time, in truth, the whole of Bulgaria had begun to
enjoy a new life, and there remained not one single enslaved
Christian in the wide expanse of territory on which was
dispersed the Bulgarian people, from the Danube to the
Maritza. We now meet once more, and are we not again
met together to attend a funeral — not, indeed, of one man,
but of many, many thousands, the populations, not of towns
merely, but of whole countries — to attend the burial, as it
were, of all hopes of liberating Bulgarians and of securing
the independence of the Servians ? ^ Are we not now burying
the cause which all the Kussians have at heart — the legacies,
the traditions of our ancestors, our own aspirations, the

^ In so far as Servia was concerned these exaggerated rumours were
fortunate!}' as false as Mr. AksakofF declared, them to be ; the indepen-
dence of Servia, secured at San Stefano, was not annulled, but ratified by
the Congress.

After the Congress. 99

national renown, the honour, the conscience of the Russian
people ? No ! no ! I repeat the word No ! Were all the
victories and sacrifices of the war, the untold burdens
cheerfully borne by the mass of the Russian people, no
more than a fable, a legend, the outpouring of an over-
heated brain ? Who knows ? But if all this has actually
taken place, can it be true, that there is any truth in the
reports which reach us on every side of shameful concessions
at the Congress — tidings placed before the Russian nation
(and never contradicted by the Russian Grovemment) causing
it now to redden with shame, now exciting the pangs of
conscience, and then overwhelming her with a heavy load
of uncertainty ? And what revelations are here made
public ? Lies ! Even if letters and telegrams should ex-
hibit Russia in such a monstrous light, that very mon-
strousness would be the best voucher that this is not truth,
but falsehood. Not that we doubt the truth of what re-
fers to the plotting between Great Britain and Austria,
and the pretensions put forward by these Powers, hectored
by the German Chancellor. In no wise. The injustice, the
insolence of the West towards Russia, and in general to-
wards Eastern Europe, has no limit, and is now, as always,
immeasurable. This axiom in our history, together with
all historical warnings, are forgotten by Russian diplomat-
ists and by those who pull the strings at St. Petersburg.
Only too probable, alas ! appears to us what is told of the
conduct of our representatives at the Congress when we
remember ' the services ' for which Russia had to thank her
national diplomacy during the last two years. But by what-
ever 'generous concessions' our diplomatists may have grati-
fied the enemies of Russia at the cost of our national honour,
can it be that Russia, in the person of her august and
revered representative, has pronounced the last word ? Nay,
we will not believe this generosity, which renders useless
that shedding of torrents of Russian blood and makes light
of the national honour, can possibly meet with the approval
of our supreme ruler. We refuse to believe it, and shall

II t>

100 lite Russian People and the War.

persist in refusing to do so till it appears under the authori-
sation of an official announcement on the part of the Go-
vernment. To do so sooner would be no less a crime than
that of abusing the dignity of the ruling power which sways
the destinies of this great nation ! And in truth, is it
possible that such a mountain of absurdities, that heart-
rending folly which characterises the decisions of the Con-
gress, that long list of insults levelled against Eussia, could
ever become a fait accompli ? Judge for yourselves. What
caused this war to break out ? What prompted Kussia to
engage in it ? A general massacre of populations which
inhabit Southern Bulgaria. What problem, then, was this
war intended to solve ? To deliver the Bulgarian peoples
from the Turkish yoke. Never was such an universal in-
terest, an interest so keenly excited by any war. Never did
any war originate such sacrifices prompted by sublime charity,
and deserve in the full meaning conveyed by these words the
name of a national war.

By the Treaty of San Stefano, to which was appended the
signature of the Emperor of Russia and that of the Sultan
himself, the whole of Bulgaria, on this side and on the
farther side of the Balkans, was raised to the rank of a
Principality ; and arrangements were made to summon a
national assembly. At length, 0 long-afflicted land, for a
moment you believed yourself free ; a bright future which
seemed to be dawning filled you with exultation ; resuscitated,
you now breathed freely, when lo, as would now appear, with
the sanction of that self-same generous liberator of Eussia,
Bulgaria is sawn asunder alive, and the best, the richest
portion of her territory, that beyond the Balkans, finds itself
anew under the Turkish yoke! And the Eussian hosts,
those very armies which shed their life-blood to secure the
independence of Southern Bulgaria, have assigned to them
the duty of rivetting upon them once more the chains of the
vanquished monster, to surrender in person to Turkish
brutality the Christian women and children who hailed
the Eussian s as friends and dehverers ! In St. Petersburg,

After the Congress. 101

according to the papers, there are those who dare to insult
our Bulgarian brethren for distrusting Russian promises ;
but let us ask whether, after so shamefully breaking our
word, are we worthy of the confidence and of the aifection of
this people ? Alas ! poor Russian soldiers ! You will shrink
now from looking in the face your ' younger brothers.' And
how is it that you, too, thanks to the Russian diplomacy,
have now fastened upon you the odious stigma which
attaches to the word ' traitor ' ? What, then, has happened ?
Is it that we have met with some terrible disaster, worse
than what occurred on the fatal day of Sedan — for this even
did not move France to make peace or deter her from con-
tinuing a struggle which lasted five months longer ? No
disaster has occurred, no battle, no defeat. Beaconsfield
stamped his foot, Austria held up a threatening finger,
Russian diplomats were terrified, and all was surrendered.
What makes this the more difficult to believe is that Russia,
however others may deceive themselves about the lot of the
inhabitants of Southern Bulgaria, knows full well that the
hope of reform, grounded on the appointment of a Christian
governor and divers improvements is illusory.^ History
furnishes the Russian Grovemment with too many proofs to

^ Alas ! so fai" as the larger portion of Southern Bulgaria was con-
cerned, the Congress did not even provide for the appointment of a
Christian Governor, but redelivered to the direct authority of the Porte,
without taking any guarantee for reform, one third of the Bulgarian land
which Russia had freed. I cannot imderstand how it is that Englishmen
— even Liberal Englishmen — should so strangely ignore the fact that
* Eastern Roumelia,' so far from being co-extensive with Southern Bul-
garia, does not include one half the Bulgarian lands south of the Balkan.
In 1870, Mr. Gladstone wrote : — * If it be allowable that the Executive
power of Turkey should renew at this great crisis, by permission or
authority of Europe, the charter of its existence in Bulgaria, then there
is not on record, since the beginning of political economy, a protest that
man has lodged against intolerable misgovernment, or a stroke he has
dealt at loathsome tjTanny, that ought not hencefoi-ward to be branded
as a crime.' In 1878, the Turkish charter of absolute authority in South
Western Bulgaria, annulled by Russia at San Stefano, was deliberately
restored by Europe at Berlin, but against this outrage has even Mr.
Gladstone so much ns uttered a single protest ?

102 The Russian People and the War.

the contrary ; and, at the Conference at Constantinople, did
it not moreover forcibly demonstrate the insufficiency of such
guarantees ? England did not permit the, discussion of such
reforms in the wide sense of administrative autonomy, and
authorised it solely with a view of facilitating with some
show of decency the withdrawal by Russia of her claims.
Not only was it in opposition to British interests to relieve
the Southern Bulgarians, but she used every effort to efface
from Southern Bulgaria every vestige of nationality, and
even the name itself. If, after the not very dignified with-
drawal of the Imperial Commissary of Philippopolis to
Tirnova ; if, after the retrogade movement of the Russian
armies across the Balkans, Turkish barbarities should re-
commence ; if blood be shed anew ; if once more Turkish
outrages on Christian women recommence, and we hear again
of such things, Russia, her blood boiling with indignation
and smarting with many wounds — would she not rise to
a man and fall on the Turk, sending off to her diplomatists
a good budget of maledictions? Fall on them I But in
what way ? Is it not to guard against such generous
Russian fervour that all Beaconsfield's measures of precau-
tion have been taken, and taken, it would seem, in concert
with Russian diplomatists ? The English Minister, with all
the candour of one who knows the forces he has at his back,
has he not said openly that his object is to protect Turkey
against victorious Russia, be the Christians martyred as they
may? — in a word, that the Congress is nothing more nor less
than an undisguised conspiracy against the Russian people ?
A conspiracy plotted with the concurrence even of the
Russian representatives themselves. Experience having
shown that the Balkans, viewed hitherto as an insur-
mo Lin table natural obstacle, could not prevent the advance
of our armies, the Congress has issued orders for the
construction of a line of forts (of course Avith the aid of
English engineers and English money) along the whole
extent of (he Balkan range, which, manned by Turkish
garrisons, will render the Balkans virtually impregnable*

After the Congress. 103

Was it for this, then, that our brave troops toiled so inde-
fatigably, and died so heroically, in escalading the Balkans
in the height of winter ? Without a deep blush of shame,
without heartfelt grief, can the Russian henceforth pronounce
the words Shipka, Carlova, Bayazid, and all those names of
places rendered illustrious by the valour, thickly strewn with
the graves of our heroes, given over now to be dishonoured
by the Turk ? Our soldiers, on their return home, will not
thank those diplomatists who wrested from the Congress the
fruits of this campaign. And some would have us believe
that all this has received the sanction of our supreme ruler.
Never ! Our diplomacy seeks to console itself by the thought
that the Congress has permitted the Danubian portion of
Bulgaria to be elevated to the rank of a Principality. Oh,
touching simplicity ! Have we reason to believe that
England and Austria will take no measures necessary to
jsecure their interests here — measures which will effectually
paralyse all the importance of the Principality, and bring it
under their influence in all matters political and economic ?
Details are relegated to special commissions in the Embassies
at CoQstantinople, and in these details England and Austria
will entangle the Bulgaro-Danubian Principality, and will
enclose her in an iron band, out of which she will find
no further means of escape ! Words fail when we correctly
characterise this betrayal, this perfidy, done in the face
of historical tradition and of the duty and sacred mission
assigned to Russia. To abide by all this is no more or
less than to formally abdicate one's post as the chief re-
presentative of all the Slav races and of all the orthodox
East ; it means to lose, not merely our influence and to
sacrifice our interests, but to forfeit the esteem of these
races, our natural allies — the only allies we really have in
Europe. The liberty, the intellectual development, the
moral progress of the Slavonic nationality can only be at-
tained by union and an entente cordiale with the Russian

people Russian diplomacy thinks otherwise !

And was it then for this that the Russian nation, the only

104 The Eusman People and the War.

powerful and independent portion of the Slavonic race, has
shed its precious blood, offered as a holocaust hundreds of
thousands of her sons, has reduced herself temporarily
almost to beggary, and in very deed won the thorny
crown of martyrdom, only to make her victories them-
selves the means of securing her humiliation and depriving
her of her proud position among Slavonic peoples, of en-
larging the possessions and increasing the power of their
enemies, and of submitting the orthodox Slavs to the
authority of German and Catholic adverse elements ?
Martyr in a vain cause, despised conqueror, admire the
work of thy hands !

When, during the Constantinople Conference, we dis-
cussed— our cheeks burning — the buffets received there,
what shall we say now of these solemn insults of daily recur-
rence ? And the Kussian diplomatists, if the journals are to
be credited, after each blow content themselves with attest-
ing the same, and for Kussia only ask in return a voucher of
disinterested motives. Yes, very disinterested indeed, and
the voucher is forthcoming. Words fail one, the mind is
chilled and bewildered by the extravagant conduct on the
part of the Eussian diplomatists by this terrible display of
servile folly. The bitterest enemy of Russia and of her
Government could not conceive of anything more prejudicial
to Her peace. See, then, our true Nihilists, for whom exists
neither Russia nor Russian nationality, nor orthodoxy nor
traditions, beings who resemble our Bogoluboffs, Sasulitch
and Company, deprived like these of all sympathy with
history, of all sentiments of ardent national enthusiasm.
Judge for yourselves who then among these, whether the
mere anarchists or the Government Nihilists, not less
lacking faith and patriotism, who, in point of fact, are those
Russia has most cause to fear, who are those most prejudicial
to her moral development and her civic dignity? Is it
possible that Turkey, which threatened, by audaciously re-
sisting its authority, to make a dead letter of the Congress,
should be called upon to play the part of guardian angel of

After the Congress. 105

Kussian honour ? No ; be the doings of the Congress what
they may, however our national honour may be insulted,
her crowned guardian, he lives, he is strong, he is also her
natural avenger ! If the mere reading of the papers makes
our blood boil in our veins, what, then, must experience the
Sovereign of Kussia, who bears the weight of the responsi-
bility which history will lay on his shoulders ? Did not he
himself give the appellation of a ' holy undertaking ' to the
war in question ? Is it not he who, on his return from
the Danube, proclaimed triumphantly to deputations from
Moscow and other Russian towns ' that the holy undertaking
should be completed ? ' Terrible are the horrors of war, and
the heart of our Sovereign cannot lightly call on his subjects
for a renewal of deaths, and a fresh shedding of blood — on
his subjects ready for all sacrifices. And yet it is not by
concessions which are detrimental to the national honour
and conscience that one can counteract disasters. Russia
wishes not for war, but less still would she desire a peace
which dishonours her. Question the first you meet in any
way you please : would he not prefer to fight till blood could
flow no more and strength offer no fiurther resistance if thus
the Russian name could be rescued from opprobrium, and
the part of a traitor should not be played in the presence of
his brethren in Christ ? There is no disgrace in sometimes
yielding to superior forces of united enemies after long-
contested and heroic battles, as we ourselves yielded in 1856,
without detriment to our glory, as recently yielded France.
But to give way preventively, without a battle, without
firing a shot : this is not a concession, it is a desertion. But
who, then, in Europe would have quite decided on war?
Not England, indeed, who has only her Indian monsters on
land, for even in a naval warfare she would suffer more than
we should. Not Austria, indeed, whose whole body is no
more than a heel of Achilles, who, as well she may, fears
more than anything else a war with Russia, for the raising
of the Austrian question depends on the will of Russia alone !
. . . Invincible, invulnerable is the Russian Czar, from the

106 The Russian People and the War.

moment when, with a firm belief in the mission of his
people, putting aside thoughts about the interests of Western
Europe — interests hostile to our own — he will lift up, as say
our ancient chronicles, ' with dignity, severity, and honour,'
the standard of Russia, which is also the standard of the
Slavs and of all Eastern Christians. The nation is agitated,
irritated, troubled each day by the proceedings of the
Congress at Berlin, and awaits, as manna from on high, the
final decision of its ruler. It waits and hopes. Her hope
will not prove vain, for the words of the Tzar will be ful-
filled : ' The holy undertaking shall be accomplished.' The
duty of faithful subjects is to hope and believe, but the same
duty forbids us to keep silence. In these days of turpitude
and iniquity, which raise up a wall of separation between
Tzar and country, between the wishes of the Sovereign and
those of his people, is it possible that an answer should ever
reach us from high quarters in these authoritative words —
' Silence, honest tongues ! let us now listen to no words but
those which give utterance to flattery and lying I '

Such were the glowing and fervent words of the
fearless Aksakoff'; wliicli, I repeat, faithfully expressed
the feelings of us all in Moscow, at the time when we
were daily receiving the exaggerated reports of the
extent to which the Treaty of San Stefano was spoiled
in Congress.^

But while we did not sufiTer, he, although but the
exponent of our opinions, was less fortunate. He was
exiled, not, I am happy to say, so far away as to
Siberia, as was reported in the English press, but
nevertheless to a place even more inaccessible. He

^ Russians are not alone in believing tbat the Berlin Congress did
nothing but mischief. The Duke of Argyll says — ' The Congress, and
the English Plenipotentiaries especially, did nothing but sanction what
they could not prevent, and to limit to the utmost those liberties which
irom very shame they could not altogether refuse,' — Eastei'n Question,
vol. ii. p. 205.

After the Congress. 107

was ordered to leave Moscow and go to liis country
residence, a place which the President of the Slavonic
Committee did not possess. I need hardly add, that
his friends did not lose time in supplying the de-
ficiency, and he spent a couple of months at a coun-
try place four or five hours distant from Moscow.
Mr. AksakofF returned to find that his place in the
bank, in which he was one of the chief directors, had
never been filled up, and was open for him at once.
His colleagues had shared between themselves his
work, but liis salary remained untouched. Mr. Ak-
sakofF thanked them for the money, and immediately
used it for the maintenance of the Slav orphans.

Shortly after Mr. AksakofT's departure from Mos-
cow, we were agreeably surprised by the appearance,
in the official Government's Messenger^ of a very re-
nuirkable declaration of Russia's attitude in relation
to the Treaty of Berlin, wliicli expressed, of course in
very calm and dignified moderation, the same dissatis-
faction with the Berlin ' settlement ' wliicli prevailed
generally throughout Eussia. The significance of this
declaration was somewhat strangely overlooked in
many circles. The following is an extract from the
concluding passages of the article : —

As for Kussia, she recovers possession in Europe of a
territory temporarily severed from her rule after the Crimean
war, and which again places her in contact with the Danube.
In Asia she acquires territories, strategic positions, and a
port which will serve her as elements of security and pros
perity. Assuredly these results are far from realising what
Russia had a right to expect after the sacrifices of a victorious
wAr. They are far even from answering to the interests of

108 , The Russian PeopU and tlie War.

the East and of Europe, which would have been the gainers
from seeing a more complete and more regular solution
issue from this crisis. The work has many weak points.
One of those most to be regretted is the arbitrary settlement
of boundaries by geographical and political considerations
without regard to nationalities. The Imperial Cabinet had
proposed a more rational and equitable plan, which would
have left all the Eastern races free to develope themselves
each in its natural limits. This it was with regret obliged
to abandon. But everything depends on the way in which
the decisions of the Congress will be carried out. It cannot
be too often repeated that the difficulties of the Eastern
Question lie, not in Turkey, but in Europe. Whatever the
complications it presents, they cannot be in excess of the
forces at the disposal of the civilised Powers. If they unite
in the common idea of strengthening the germs created by
the Treaty of Berlin, in order to make them the starting-
point of a prosperous development of the peoples of the
East, the work of the Congress may be fertile both for the
East and Europe. The Imperial Cabinet pushed conciliation
to the furthest limits in order to effect that concert of will
which is the pledge of general peace and of the welfare of
the Christian East. Henceforth its task is to see that so
many efibrts do not remain unfruitful. Such, moreover,
has been the issue of all our Eastern wars. Despite all our
successes, we have not been able to complete our task. We
have always had to pull up before the inextricable diffi-
culties of this problem and before the solid mass of interests
and passions it excites. But each of our wars has been an
additional step towards the final goal, and thus has been
traced the sanguinary but glorious furrow which our tradi-
tions have left in history, and which must lead up to the
accomplishment of our national mission — the deliverance of
the Christian East. However incomplete it may be, the
work of the Berlin Congress marks a fresh step in that path
— an important though painfully secured step. It only
remains to consolidate and develope it. This will be the

After the Congress. 109

task of the future. The Treaty of 1856, that monument of
political passions which had led to an unjust war and an
unjust peace, that document which forced on Eussia a posi-
tion which a great nation could not tolerate, which for
.twenty-two years had tied her hands and Europe's, secured
impunity to the Turkish Government, and produced per-
manent disorders, the causes of the late war — the Treaty of
1856, violated by everybody, renounced even by its authors,
no longer exists. The victorious arms of Kussia have torn it
up. The Berlin Congress has expunged it from history.
Russia has secured the right of watching over its work, and
she will not let it be reduced to a nullity. The Ottoman
Empire has contracted a new lease with Christian and
civilised Europe. If it frankly enters on the path open to
it by scrupulously carrjang out the clauses which guarantee
the autonomy of its Christian populations, a prosperous
existence may be insured to it. Russia, who in her vast
territory numbers millions of Mussulman subjects, and who
protects their religion and security, so far from menacing it,
may become its best ally. In the opposite case, it will have
signed its own condemnation. If the laborious childbirth of
the Eastern world is no longer but a question of time, is not
yet terminated ; if regrettable restrictions produced by dis-
trust, prejudices, political rivalries, and the selfish calcula-
tions of material interests and party struggles still hamper
it ; if much remains to be done to finish it, much has never-
theless been done. Russia has the consciousness of having
powerfully contributed to it by her generous and resolute
initiative, as well as by her moderation. She has the con-
viction of being placed in the current of the great laws which
govern history, and that, despite the momentary obstacles
offered by the passions, littlenesses, and weaknesses of men,
humanity nevertheless pursues its invariable march towards
the goal appointed by Providence. The Berlin Congress has
been a stage in this laborious path. Looking at it from this
standpoint, Russia can draw from the past her confidence in
the future.

110 The Ricssian Peojjle and the War.

The subsequent policy of the Russian Government
showed that this declaration was not merely a series
of empty words, but proved that though Eussia, for
the sake of European peace, had made concessions at
Berlin, she remained faithful to the Slavonic cause
in the Balkan. If the Turkish garrisons are at this
moment absent from ' Eastern Roumelia,' the Bul-
garians of that province know perfectly well to what
Power they owe the practical abandonment of that
mischievous clause which Eng^land contributed to the
Treaty of Berlin.^

^ The importance of this practical modification of the Berlin Treaty
was forcibly stated by Sir AV. Ilarcourt when he addressed his con-
stituents in January 1880. He said : ' I told you last year that if there
was any attempt to carr}'' into effect the provisions of the Treaty of
Berlin as to Eastern Roumelia there would be resistance and war. Her
Majesty's Government and the Porte came later to the same conclusion ;
and when the time arrived for placing Eastern lioumelia under the direct
militarj^ and political autliority of tlie Sultan, according to the Treaty
of Berlin, the attempt was judiciously abandoned. Eastern Eoumelia
exists in name as a Turkish province, but the authority of the Turk is
extinguished within its borders. When Eastern Roumelia passed, as it
has practically passed, out of the hands of the Sultan, the whole fabric
of the Government plan of the Treaty of Berlin crumbled to pieces.
The line of the Balkans, which was to be the bulwark of consolidated
Turkey, was lost, and all the bombast of the triumphal return from
Berlin may be thrown into the waste-paper basket. You will see, then,
that the Treaty of Berlin, so far from realising to any extent the in-
tentions and desire of its authors in restoring and repairing the Turkish
Empire, has only advanced its destruction.'

Ill

CHAPTER XI.

DIVIDED BULGARIA.^

'Another insurrection in Turkey! Eising of the
Bulgarians ! ' As I read these words I am filled with
conflicting emotions. As a Russian, I blush. I fore-
see with dread the new torrents of blood, the new
victims of a struggle for that liberty — which we pro-
mised to acliieve for them. To me it is but a poor
consolation to say that other countries are to blame
for what Russia had to leave imdone. Wlien nume-
rous honest voices were lieard in Moscow deploring
the shameful results of tlie Berlin Congress, tliey
were accused of ridiculous self-devotion, of ' longing
for martyrdom ; ' and they were told ' that after all
Bulgaria liad gained much, chiefly thanks to the
Russians.'

Well, we now see the terrible results of our Berlin
endeavours to concihate our enemies. Had our dip-
lomacy had more confidence in the readiness of
Russians to make new sacrifices and in the support of

' This letter was written in October, 1878, on receiving the news ot
the first rising, after the Berlin Treaty, in South-Western Bulgaria, a
struggle, which although hitherto unsuccessful, will never be abandoned
until the whole of Bulgaria is united and free from the Danube to the
iEgean.

112 The liusmm People and the War.

the better part of England — had Enghsh SlavoiJiiles
been more courageous in their sympathies for a grand
cause, which they unanimously suj^ported only at the
St. James's Conference — things would have taken
another turn, and at this moment there might have
actually been ' Peace with honour.'

It happened to me this summer to discuss this very
question with a foreign statesman. He ' chaffed ' me,
to use an English colloquiahsm, upon the brilliant
results of the Congress. Without giving way to my
feehngs, I honestly confessed that I should prefer
losing Batoum, Kars, Bessarabia, everything, to giving
up one inch of the Slav territory for the benefit of
Turkish Pashas. ' You know Kussian people very
little indeed,' said I, ' if you think that we are pleased
with the so-called Eussian acquisitions. We want to
stand high morally, to see our every word backed by
deeds. As to the cost, as to poverty — dear me I what
wretched considerations those are.' ' Oh,' said he
eagerly, ' we would have willingly allowed Eussia to
have taken much more ; but we all made a point of
opposing the actual independence of Bulgaria.' It
struck me that a sham independence — like everything
that is sham — could be of no value.

We now see the results of our conciliatory efforts,
of Eussia's yielding, of England's triumphs. A new
struggle is beginning in the East. Bulgaria, after
all — poor, wretched, unsupported as she is — objects
to be ' sawn asunder alive.' ' Like a great high
priest of sacrifice,' say the Bulgarians in Philippo-
pohs in their address to Her Majesty the Queen of

Divided Bidgaria. 113

England, ' Lord Beaconsfield has sacrificed Bulgaria
at Berlin on the altar of the golden calf of Great
Britain/

I know that there are EngUshmen who feel deeply
the harm done in the name of their country, and who
blush even more than I do at the sacrifice of the Slavs.
But it was not as a lone unit of the Semitic race that
the Premier appeared at Berlin. He acted in the
name of England, and England did not protest. Eng-
land seemed generally to be silenced — to be paralysed ;
and the whole English nation apparently abdicated
precisely when its support was most needful. Sud-
denly it became ' unpatriotic ' to sympathise with the
oppressed ; it was declared ' to be playing Eussia s
game ' to support those whom she, unfortunately, was
abandoning ! Oh ! you do not know how keenly we
— those who had only one soul and one word — suffered
in observing your silence and your paralysis ! We —
the ridiculed Muscovites — were sneered at when we
still spoke of England *s love for liberty, love for justice,
love for high aims and beliefs ! Yes ; you were not
our friends ' in need.' You became frozen and wise ! ^

* This conviction is also shared by many Liberals. Mr. Leonard
Courtney, M.P., speaking to his constituents at the close of 1878, said : —
' We of the Liberal Party have not been true to our duty — have not been
true to our principles. In critical moments we have fallen away. Instead
of giving voice, trumpet-tongued, to what we believed and to what we
held to be the truth, we have been silent.' I rejoice to be able to quote
further the following generous outburst of indignation from the same
speaker : — * Though Russia were ten times our enemy, I cannot think of
those poor Russian peasants sent to their graves, I cannot think of their
women folk loaded with affliction, I cannot think of a great nation ar-
rested in its progress of civilisation, for the petty vanity of the Earl of
Beaconsfield, without being filled with indignation against the man who
has brought these evils about, and who has degraded the national spirit

I

114 The Russian People and the War.

Well, admire now the new rising of the Eoumelians,
and console yourselves by accusing some non-existent
secret Eussian societies of having done all the mis-
chief. As to us, we seek for no consolation of that
kind. We were blind in supposing it could be other-
wise.

The famous Berlin Congress divided Bulgaria
into three unequal parts : Bulgaria proper wholly
free ; South-eastern Bulgaria (baptized Eoumelia), half
free ; and the large tract of country stretching west-
ward from the Ehodope to Mount Pindus, which was
handed back to the absolute dominion of the Sultan.
According to the celebrated German Geographer —
Kiepert — the Bulgaria of San Stefano — the Bulgaria
that Eussia emancipated — consisted of 65,560 square
miles, with 3,980,000 inhabitants.

The Congress ' Bulgaria * consists only of 24,404
square miles, with 1,773,000 inhabitants. Eastern
Eoumeha, which was only half-freed, has 13,646
square miles, and 740,000 inhabitants. Thus the

of Englishmen. In order that he might have his way, the Bulgarians,
who were emancipated, those upon whom the dayspring from on high
had arisen, have been shut out from light and freedom, and have been
consigned once more to Turkish tyranny. Can you conceive tbat in
Roumelia, south of the Balkans, those Bulgarians who know that their
brothers in the north are going to be free, and that they themselves in the
south are to be shut out from freedom through the action, shame be it
said, of an English Minister, that these populations vrill bear good-will
towards England ? Can you conceive that they, thrown back into ser-
vitude, will feel anything other than indignation at the country which,
being free itself and enjoying the blessings of freedom, has, through the
most miserable jealousies interfered to prevent the giving of freedom to
others, or speak of Englishmen excepting as of those who would sacrifice
all human progress in order to further their most petty and miserable
designs ? *

Divided Bulgaria. 115

Bulgaria and Eastern Eoumelia, whose emancipation
and semi-emancipation the Congress legahsed, consist
only of 38,050 square miles, with 2,500,000 inhabit-
ants, and a great area of 27,510 square miles, with
a population of 1,500,000, was re-enslaved by
England at the Congress without any guarantee from
the Turks against a repetition of the atrocities which
occasioned the war.

The Bulgaria handed back to what an English
friend of mine described as ' the uncovenanted mercies
of the Turks' is actually greater in extent, and
almost equal in population to the Bulgaria north of
the Balkans, which alone was really freed. It is in
this portion of Bulgaria, given back unreservedly to
the Turks, that the insurrection has broken out.^

Unchanged and unchangeable, the Turk will
repeat that which only two years ago awoke in the
civilised world an outcry of horror and indignation.
What will England do now when her Moslem protege
in the regions restored to him by Lord Beaconsfield,
lights up once more the flames of Batak and re-
hearses again the ghastly tragedy of 1876 ? ^

* The following were the early centres of the rising : — the first and
strongest, along the Struma Valley, in the Perimdagh and the Malesh
Planina, extending from Djuma and Kriva down to Meliki and Doriana
the second, south of Kustendil, at Kosjak, and the Devanitza Planina,
down to Karatova ; and the third, in the country west of the Vardar
Valley, ranging from the Karadagh, near Uskub, down to Monastir and
Zlorina.

^ As I revise this, there lies before me an important letter from a distin-
guished Bulgarian in Philippopolis, which says : — ^ It is almost incredible
how little attention is paid in England to the condition of unhappy Mace-
donia, from which, alas, we daily receive dreadful reports of Turkish
atrocities on our helpless compatriots, who, as you know, compose the
great majority of the population.'

I 2

ll6 The Russian People and the War.

The locality where the insurrection has taken
place is very instructive. Although there is a great
agitation in Eastern Koumelia, the insurrectionary
movement exists in that part of Bulgaria which the
Congress handed back to the direct rule of the Turk
without any guarantees. A strange ignorance pre-
vails on this point even in well-informed English
circles. It is said ' the Bulgaria of San Stefano was
too big, and what you call South-Western Bulgaria
is Macedonia, and belongs not to the Slavs but to the
Greeks.' In reality it is not so. The boundaries of
Bulgaria in the south-west are tolerably weU defined.
Lord Salisbury at the Constantinople Conference drew
them substantially the same as they appear in the
Prehminary Treaty of San Stefano.

Can you wonder that the Bulgarians of Mace-
donia, for whom Europe demanded the irreducible
minimum of the Conference, and Eussia the com-
plete emancipation of the San Stefano Treaty, should
object to being, as before, surrendered to Turkish
misrule, in order to please some few diplomatists?
You know very well that a settlement of this kind
must be unsettled by the most natural course of
events. The intelligent leader of the Bulgarians of
Philippopolis writes thus : — 'We beheld with astonish-
ment the present attitude of the Enghsh nation,
which, in 1876, at the time of the massacres, gave its
assistance to the suffering Bulgarians. The sympathy
which is shown to us by the English press is not in
harmony with the acts of the English Government,
which strives continually, and by all means, to keep us

Divided Bulgaria, 117

in thraldom. It seeks again to thrust us under the
intolerable yoke of the Turkish Government, which
treated us like wild beasts for five centuries.'

Against this the Bulgarians have risen in revolt.
Why should you be astonished ? Have you already
forgotten the fate of the Treaty of Villafranca, that
miserable document which brought to a sudden and
disappointing close a war, undertaken for the Hbera-
tion of Italy ' from the Alps to the Adriatic ? ' That
Treaty was annihilated in less than a year — and why ?
Because it ignored the national aspirations of the
Italians. So will the Treaty of Berhn disappear, not
by the all-powerful ' Kussian intrigue,' but because it
was a mockery of a whole nation, deciding its future
in a merciless way, without even the semblance of
consulting its interests.^

Was England simply playing a part in her re-
joicing when Garibaldi's sword and Cavour's state-
craft completed the emancipation of Italy ? Was she
then hypocritical. And, if not, how can she curse
Bulgaria for attempting to free herself from an enemy
even worse than the Austrians and the Pope ? Have
you then been sincere ? Prove it now. The whole
Slavonic world watches you with eager interest.

* Mr. E. A. Freeman, added to his many services to the Slavonic
cause, that of wi*iting on October 30, 1878, one of his most vigorous and
spirited letters in defence of the insurgents, from which I venture to
make the following extract : — * England must once more insist that the
rulers of England shall at least do nothing against the cause of right and
freedom. We must speak out and tell Lord Beaconsfield and Lord
Salisbury that, if Macedonia can keep its freedom, either alone or by the
help of Russians or any other people, we at least will not hinder it. Let
all men understand that we will not be helpers in bringing Christian men
under barbarian bondage. If the Treaty of Berlin binds us to do so, it
binds us to do evil, and a promise to do evil is not binding*'

118 The Russian People and the War.

Whether the Russian Government likes it or not
— whether once more our officials try above all to
soothe Lord Beaconsfield's feelings — ' Bulgaria, United
and Free from the Danube to the ^gean,' will be the
battle-cry of the struggle which has now commenced.
Again, I ask : — Put to this new test, what will the
free, humanitarian, the noble England do ? Now, the
Slavs want deeds, not merely words. ' Enough of com-
phments ! ' Energetic, active sympathy is now wanted.

Let us hope that the men of Macedonia may
accomphsh a task which has baffled Christendom.

But the Treaty of Berlin — that solemn European
compact, does it bind the Bulgarians.^ Protocols,
though written with a golden pen, do they express
their wishes? Have they been signed by them?
Were the poor Slavs consulted about their destinies
and those of their children? Greeks were heard.
Roumanians, even Persians ; but Bulgarians, on
whose behalf war was undertaken, were not per-
mitted to raise their voices in the Areopagus of
Europe !

Against the injustice of Diplomacy behold in
South-Western Bulgaria the protest of Humanity ! I
quote once more, for the last time, from the Bulgarian
protest addressed to your Queen, which is dated
July 31, 1878 :—

We raise our voice to protest loudly against the unjust
decision of the Berlin Congress, and declare we can neither
accept it nor bow our heads before the attempt of England
to destroy us as a people. We cannot submit again to the
Turkish domination. Our nationality will defend itself to

Divided Bulgaria. 119

the last drop of its blood, rather than fall again under Tur-
kish rule. It will, therefore, be required that new torrents
of blood be shed in our unfortunate and devastated country.

If Bulgaria is not crushed by her former op-
pressors, if she gains her longed-for liberty, it will
happen in spite of what was done at Berlin. A
parchment may be torn, but a nationality has more
vitality than paper.^

* As these pages are passing through the press, I have received a copy
of the latest appeal which the unfortunate Bulgarians of Macedonia have
addressed to the Powers which handed them over to the vengeance of
their oppressors. This appeal is moderate in tone, and reasonable in its
request. It is dated January 1, 1880, is signed by 102 representatives of
Bulgarian communities, and is addressed to the Ambassadors of the Powers
at Constantinople. The following are its salient passages : — * The state
of affairs in Macedonia becomes daily, through the fault of the local
authorities, more and more intolerable. Thefts, misdemeanours, murders,
abuses, and crimes of all kinds increase in a most terrifying manner. The
criminals who were seized by the Christians and handed over to the
authorities remain not only unpunished, but are even acquitted, and they
use their freedom to continue, being armed from head to fotjt, their
former cruelties against the unarmed Bulgarians. The authorities openly
show their partiality for the Mahometans. These facts deprive us of
every hope that the local authorities will redress these grievances. The
public insecurity, of course, greatly endangers labour and wages; the
number of those in need of their daily bread is, therefore, already very
large. * The SubUme Porte has obliged itself, by means of Article XXIII.
of the Berlin Treaty, to introduce reforms into European Turkey, which
should, in order to make them correspond to the wants of every province,
be dehberated upon by Commissions in which the respective local elements
should be prominently represented, the final settlement of the projected
reforms to be made by a European Commission. The Bulgarians of
Macedonia most respectfully solicit the attention of the Government
represented by your Excellency for a speedy realisation of the abo\'e-
mentioned Article XXIII. A benevolent intervention of the powerful
Government of your Excellency can end the sufferings of the Macedonian
Christians, sufferings which, it is hoped, will be redressed by the intro-
duction of reforms.'

A vain hope ! Article XXIII., like all other articles of the Berlin
Treaty, depending for their execution on the Turk, remains a dead letter,
and will remain such as lorg as the Turk remains in his place of power.

BULGAEIA, ETHNOLOGICAL AND POLITICAL.

The accompanying Map gives the distribution of the different
races in the Balkan Peninsula as shown by Kiepert hefore the war.
During the war and since the conclusion of peace there has been
a considerable change, which no mapmaker has as yet ventured
to represent. There are now fewer Turks in Bulgaria and Eastern
Roumelia than there were before the war, and there are fewer
Bulgarians outside the limits of the free and autonomous States.
It will be seen at a glance that the Bulgaria of San Stefano
corresponds much more exactly with the ethnological facts than
the Bulgaria of Berlin, from which the most stiictly Bulgarian
district in the Balkan Peninsula has been excluded. Lest any
reader should question the authority of Kiepert, I will quote
here the testimony of Sir George Campbell, M.P. Referring
to the distribution of races in the Balkan, Sir George Campbell
writes : —

* So much of the present Eastern Question depends on a due
appreciation of the geographical area of the Bulgarian country,
that it should be rightly understood how much they occupy the
whole centre, and it may be said, body, of European Turkey. ... On
the South of the Balkan, almost as far as Salonica, the Bulgarian
race prevails. There is a small but very clear German ethno-
logical map by Kiepert, lately published, which gives the races
very well as far as they can be roughly delineated on a small
scale. I am bound to say that all my inquiries and personal
observations, so far as they enable me to test Kiepert's map, go
to confirm its general correctness. From collating consular and
other reports, and other inquiries, I had made out the Bulgarian
area to be much as Kiepert puts it before I had seen his map,
and in the parts of the country which I visited, my inquiries led
to the same result. . . . Kiepert gives the Greeks the country up
to and including Adrianople — that seems about as much as they
can fairly claim. From the Danube then to near Adrianople and ♦
Salonica, and from the Black Sea (less a small Greek fringe)
to the Albanian Hills, is the Bulgarian country, except so far as
Turkish settlements are interspersed in greater or less degree.'
A Very Becent View of Turkey, pp. 11-13.

THE THREE BULGAEIAS— CONSTANTINOPLE,
SAN STEFANO, AND BEELIN.

It will be seen from the accompanying Map, which is taken
from the two official maps published by the English Foreign Office,
that the Bulgaria of San Stefano corresponds much more closely
than the Bulgaria, of Berlin with the Bulgaria of the Con-
stantinople Conference. The only material difference between
the Bulgaria of San Stefano and the Bulgaria of Constantinople
is, that the former takes in a tract of distinctly Bulgarian country
between the Rhodope and Salonica, which the latter left out.
It is worthy of note that the third part of Bulgaria, entirely
re-enslaved at the Congress of Berlin, contained before the war
hardly any larger proportion of Moslems, including Albanians,
Pomaks, and Circassians, as well as Turks, than either the
Principality or Eastern Roumelia.

The following are Kiepert's figures : —

Inhabitants. Moslems. Per cent.

The Bulgaria of San Stefano . . . 3,986,000 . 1,538,000 . 39

Divided at Berlin :

The Free Principality 1,773,000 . . 681,500 . 38

Half-free Eastern Roumelia .... 746,000 . . 265,000 . 35
Re-enslaved South Western Bul-
garia . 1,467,000 . . 591,500 . 40

Total . . . 3,986,000 . 1,538,000 . 39

The extra two per cent, of Moslems in South Western Bul-
garia over the percentage in the Principality, is accounted for
by the inclusion of some non-Bulgarians resident in the littoral,
and by the inclnsion of the tongne of land south of Adrianople;
but the South Western District included in the Constantinople
Conference Bulgaria, although much more Bulgarian than the
Principality, was handed back to the Turks without any
guarantees such as were provided for Eastern Roumelia.

PAET II.

THE FUTURE OF THE EASTERN QUESTION.

l.-LORD SALISBURY AS HERALD ANGEL.

2. THE ANGLO-TURKISH CONVENTION.

3. THE HEIRS OF THE SICK MAN.

4. THE LAST WORD OF THE EASTERN QUESTION.

123

CHAPTEK I.

LORD SALISBURY AS HERALD ANGEL.^

Within the last few years Kussians have been much
puzzled by the rapid changes through which one of

* Lord Salisbury, Secretary of State for Foreipi Affairs, speaking at
a Conservative Banquet in the Free Trade Hall, Manchester, October 17,
1879, used the following expressions : — * If the Turk falls, remember that
Austria is now at Novi Bazar, and has advanced to the latitude of the
Balkans, and that no advance of Russia beyond the Balkans or beyond
the Danube can now be made unless the resistance of Austria is con-
quered. Austria herself is powerful. I believe that in the strength and
independence of Austria lie the best hopes of European stability and
peace. What has happened within the last few weeks justifies us in
hoping that Austria, if attacked, would not be alone. The newspapers
say — I know not whether they say rightly — that a defensive alliance has
been established between Germany and Austria. I will not pronounce
any opinion as to the accuracy of that information ; but I will only say
this to you and all who value the peace of Europe and the independence
of nations — I may say without profanity — that it is " good tidings of
great joy,"*

*The conception of constituting Austria the gaoler of the Slav
nationalities is a conception which is unworthy of practical statesmen,
and altogether repugnant to Liberal principles. Russia has pursued a
policy far more astute. She has won the hearts of those provinces by
making herself the patron of their independence. She leaves it to
Austria to assiune the position of the conqueror of alien races and of a
dissatisfied people. We have had " glad tidings of great joy " declared
to us by an uninspired and not particularly angelic Secretary of State,
but the proclamation of that evangel has not been followed by peace on
earth or goodwill towards men. It is my belief that that mischievous
speech has done more to embitter the passions and inflame the jealousies
of nations than any words which have been spoken in our time ; and
principally, I believe, as a consequence of it, we are threatened every
morning by the organs of the Government with a new European war.' — •
Sir William Harcourt, Jan. 13, 1880.

124 The Future of the Eastern Question.

your Ministers have passed ; but, accustomed as we
have been to the transformations of the modern
Proteus, we were hardly prepared for his sudden
advent as a Herald Angel. His proclamation to the
Manchester representatives of the Shepherds of
Bethlehem of the ' Good tidings of great joy ' has
hardly been accepted in Eussia as a message of peace
and goodwill. It is not the facts, or assumed facts,
that disturb us. It is the spirit of the speech which
excites the indignation occasioned by insulting menace
of wanton war. It is difficult to exaggerate the
feeling aroused by. Lord Salisbury's speech in all
Eussian circles. It even extends to the long-suffering
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. That humble paper,
the semi-official Journal de St. Petersbourg, seldom
expresses the most legitimate sentiments save in the
most timid, hesitating, over-diplomatic manner, but
even that journal declares that it could not beheve
that any Minister, especially the Foreign Minister of
a Great Power, could have made a speech so entirely
contrary to all the traditions governing Ministerial
utterances concerning Powers with which they enter-
tain friendly relations. ' The proceeding,' it remarks,
' is little suited {peu conforme) to the dignity of a great
nation with which our country is living at peace.'
That is the reserved fashion in which our semi-
official organ, respecting the conventionaUties of the
diplomatic intercourse which Lord Salisbury so
rudely violates, implies rather than expresses the
universal feeling of indignant surprise which the
speech excited in Eussia. For the frank, outspoken

Lord Salisbury as Herald Angel 125

expression of that feeling you must look to the
Moscow Gazette^ rather than to the French St. Peters-
burg paper, and the utterances of that best repre-
sentative of the views of the Russian people contrast
strongly with the few stammering remarks of its well-
bred St. Petersburg contemporary.^ The conviction

• The Moscow Gazette is the Times of Russia in one sense, but not in
another. It is the first paper in the Empire, but it leads rather than
foUows public opinion. The Times changes with the times. The Moscoio
Gazette adheres to its own views. The Times is impersonal, anonymous.
The Moscow Gazette is Mr. Katkoff, and Mr. KatkofF is the Moscow Ga^
zette. He has his colleagues, but his individuality permeates the paper.

Few men have influenced more deeply the course of events in Russia
since the Emancipation than the quondam Professor of Philosophy in the
University of Moscow. A Russian of the Russians, married to Princess
Shalikofij daughter of a Russian poet, he was at one time so ardent an
admirer of England and the English that his friends reproached him for
his Anglo-mania. A brilliant author, a learaed professor, a fearless
journalist, Mr. KatkolTs chief distinction is due to the fact that he more
than any man incarnated the national inspirations at three crises in
Russian history.

It was in 1863 that he first attracted the attention of Russia. In
that year the determination of the Poles that half of Russia should be
included in the limits of the Poland to which a Constitution was about
to be granted, brought them into violent collision with the Russian
Government. All the Powers of Europe began to intermeddle in the
matter. * You must do this ; you must not do that,' and so on. The
despatches came pouring in from this Court and from that, until even
little Portugal and barbarous Turkey ventured to send us their prescrip-
tions for pacifying Poland ! Russians felt profoundly humiliated, and
not a little indignant. * Were we not to be masters in our own house ?
Were we to be treated as if we were the vassals of the West ? ' These
angry questionings filled every breast ; and, amid the irritation occasioned
by the intermeddling of the Foreign Courts, everything was forgotten
but a stern resolve to vindicate the national independence. At that crisis
in our history Mr. Katkoff came boldly to the front, embodied the thoughts
of millions in his fiery articles, and gave voice and utterance to the patriotic
enthusiasm of every Russian, When the storm had passed, and all dan-
ger of war was averted by the adoption of the independent policy which
he had so vigorously advocated, the intrepid spokesman of the national
sentiment occupied the highest place in the esteem of his countrymen
ever attained by any journalist in Russia before or since. A public sub-
scription was raised, and Mr. Katkoff was presented, in the name of thou-

126 The Future of the Eastern Question.

is universal that it means mischief. ' If they did not
mean war,' our people naively say, ' they would not
provoke it. Surely serious statesmen have no time
for mauvaises plaisanteries. If they are in earnest,
let us be prepared.' The conclusion is as natural as
the consequences are deplorable. But although Lord
Salisbury has threatened and blustered in the past,
only to be answered by a slap in the face from the
Turks, it is, of course, not impossible that he may
sometime or other attempt to make good his words.
Apart from the bad results it has had on my

sands of sympathisers throughout the Empire, with a massive silver
figure of a soldier, in the old Russian uniform, holding proudly aloft a
standard, bearing ^ Unity of Russia ' as its inscription.

Some years later Mr. KatkofF came once more to the front. The ques-
tion of classical education then excited intense interest throughout Russia ;
and the Moscoio Gazette led the van of the fight, which resulted in the
complete victory of the classical party. As one result of this success,
* The Lyceum of the Grand-Duke Nicholas ' was founded at Moscow, in
honour of the late Tzarewitch. Mr. Katkoff" and Mr. Leontieif, his alter
ego — and a very distinguished scholar — ^were associated at first in the
superintendence of the new institution. Since the death of the latter —
which was lamented throughout Russia as a national loss — Mr. KatkofF
has discharged alone the duties of President.

The third great crisis in which Mr. Katkoff* and the Moscoio Gazette
did good service to the Russian cause was in the Slavonic movement of
last year. Mr. KatkoiF has never been identified with the Slavophile
party. But when the Servian war awakened the national enthusiasm,
Mr. Katkofi" threw himself heart and soul into the Slavonic cause. He
guided, directed, and sustained more than any single man the tumultuous
current of Russian opinion. The Moscow Gazette became once more the
exponent of the national conviction, and to this hour it maintains the
honourable position of the leading journal of Russia.

Mr. Katkoff" publishes not only the Moscoio Gazette, but also a monthly
literary organ — the Russian Messenger. He is famous throughout Europe
for his incisive style and his vigorous hard-hitting. The courage with
which he has assailed abuses has not prevented the appointment of his
daughter, Miss Barbe Katkoff*, — now married to that brilliant journalist,
Prince L^on Schohofskoy, — as demoiselle d'honneur to Her Majesty the
Empress.

Lord Salisbury as Herald Angel. V2il

countrymen, the speech rather amuses me. It is so
diverting to congratulate a Foreign Minister upon the
discovery of the existence of the German Empire.
What a pity he did not discover it sooner ! Writing
two years ago on 'England's Traditional Policy,' I
ventured to insist upon the obvious fact that the
estabhshment of the German Empire had transformed
the whole European situation, and for ever ' saved
the Continent from the dread of absolute pre-
dominance of Russia.' As no one believes that poor,
dear Austria contributes largely to the strength of
the ' Alhance,' I fail to see in the new Gospel of Lord
Salisbury anything more than a somewhat undignified
'Eureka' — almost as fresh as the virtues of large
maps. ' II fait de la prose sans le savoir,' and a hero
of the Berlin Congress has been somewhat tardy in
perceiving the political significance of United Ger-
many.

Not so long ago the will of our Emperor was law
in the Diet of Germany. At that time the small
German princes were known as the ' poor relatives of
the Tzar,' and their subservience to their august
patron was notorious. All this was changed, not
when Prince Bismarck favoured Vienna with a call,
but since the proclamation of the German Empire in
1871. Is it not known even at the EngHsh Foreign
OflEice that Russia had some little part in that historic
drama ? Surely not even the ' veracious ' Lord
Salisbury — as Sir Wilfrid Lawson so cruelly calls him
— would claim the German Empire as the product of
Lord Beaconsfield's diplomacy. If Russia were so

128 The Future of the Eastern Question.

given up to an aggressive policy, it was hardly con-
sistent to have aided so effectively the realisation of
the German national idea.^

Some people seem to think that Germany may
imitate the example of Austria, and ' astonish the
world by her ingratitude.' Surely we may hope, on
the contrary, that a race which, with Eussia's
support, has retained the realisation of its national
idea, will not oppose, but even support the equally
legitimate and natural aspirations of the Slavonic
race to secure the freedom and independence so
cruelly denied to that long-oppressed nationahty.

We have no wish to pick a quarrel with Germany,
nor has Germany, I believe, any intention of quarrel-
ling with us. There may have been some slight
personahties between personages, but that is all.
Even this has been ridiculously exaggerated. Take,
for instance, the sensational report published by the
Soleil of an alleged interview between its correspon-
dent and Prince Gortschakoff. Our Chancellor has a
rule, to which he makes no exception, never to receive
any newspaper correspondents. I heard the other
day that the famous 'interview* took place in the
street. The correspondent of the Soleil^ armed with
a letter of introduction from a distinguished French
statesman, accosted our Chancellor, who, excusing

^ Not so long ago it used to be a stock charge against us by our
enemies that Russia maintained for her own selfish purposes a weak and
divided Germany. A rabid writer during the Crimean war attacked
Russian policy under Alexander I. specially on that ground. He said : —
' Whatever endangered, impoverished, disgraced Germany, and kept
Germany down, was a stone added to the vast, but hollow, edifice of the
Russian autocracy.' — Foreign Biographies, vol. ii. p. 137.

Lord Salisbury as Herald Angel, 129

himself for being unable to receive him, disengaged
himself from his would-be interviewer with a few civil
commonplaces. Upon this the ingenious correspon-
dent allowed his imagination to fabricate the article
which created such a stir amongst the credulous.
Eussians — unfortunately perhaps — are so loath to
correct absurd stories, so persistently invented to
their discredit for sensational or for party purposes
in the West, that it is unfair — to say the least — to
conclude because no contradiction or explanation is
given, that, therefore, every legend must be true.

The policy of Eussia — nearest neighbours, fastest
friends — is too deeply rooted to be easily shaken. In
one respect, I am sorry to say, I resemble Lord
Salisbury. I am not in the secrets of European
Cabinets, and have, like that Foreign Minister, to seek
my information in the reports (not always particularly
trustworthy) of the newspapers. But if it be true
that the Triple Alliance is at an end, I do not mourn
over its decease. As Mr. Forster so truly said in his
forcible speech at Bradford, alliance with one Power
implies hostiUty to another. Now we have no
hostihty to France. Quite the contrary. And if we
are isolated, what harm is there in that ? Is isolation
not generally accompanied by independence, and
would it not give us a free hand at home as abroad ?

It is universally assumed that Eussians regard
Austria-Hungary with animosity. It is not so. There
can be no national hatred between Eussians and
Austrians, because there are no Austrians. As Prince

130 I'he Future of the Eastern Question.

Gortschakoff once wittily observed : ' Austria is not
a nation ; she is not even a State ; she is only a
Government.' In the vast conglomeration of nation-
alities included in the dominions of Francis Joseph
there is even now a majority of Slavs. Every step
southward increases the preponderance of the Slavonic
element. With the Slavs of Austria and Hungary —
that is, with the majority of the subjects of the
Hapsburgs — the Slavs of Kussia can only have the
liveliest feehngs of sympathy and fraternity.^

Lord Salisbury imphes that the Austrian occupa-
tion of the Bosnian Provinces was a triumphant
device of English diplomacy to checkmate ' Eussian
aggression.' But here, as in Germany, the great
' barrier to Eussian aggression ' was raised by Eussian
hands. The proposal that Austria should occupy the
Provinces emanated from our Government. It was
suggested by Eussia in the autumn of 1876,^ then
again in the autumn of 1877, and only accepted in
Berlin in 1878. But in 1876 Lord Salisbury, perhaps,
was too much engrossed in ' creating a pretext ' for

* A feeling, I may add, that is warmly reciprocated by them, as may
be seen by the following extract from a letter, addressed during the
recent war by Dr. Rieger, the influential leader of the Bohemian Pan-
slavists to the Moscow Slavonic Committee : — ^ How is it possible that the
Bohemian people should not desire from the bottom of its heart the com-
plete success of the Russian arms ? Do not the Russians go to battle for
right, freedom, religion, for humanitarianism, for the honour of the
family which have been long enough insulted on the soil of Christian
Europe ? The glory of the Russians in that struggle is our glory, and it
raises the pride of all Slavonians, and their self-consciousness that the
blood of our brethren will be shed for our brethren. We cannot but
rejoice when the powerful Slav, by defending the weak Slavs, has earned
a right to the gratitude and love of the whole Slavonic family.'

2 Blue Bookj Turkey, 1 (1877), p. 405.

Lord Salisbury as Herald Angel. 131

invading Afghanistan to notice such trifles as the fate
of the Ottoman Empire.

In spite of the newspapers — the oracles of EngUsh
diplomacy — I do not believe that the ' Austro-German
Alhance ' has the significance attached to it by certain
interested pohticians. But if an offensive and defen-
sive alhance has been concluded, why do you imagine
that it has any reference, much less exclusive refer-
ence, to Eussia? In all the accusations levelled
against Eussia for the last twenty years, who has ever
accused us of meditating war on Germany or Austria ?
But are such purposes actually unknown in other
lands ? The revindication of former frontiers, the
redemption of unredeemed territory, these are not
the watchwords of Eussian poUcy — although, perhaps,
they are not altogether unfamiUar to German and
Austrian statesmen.

I have not yet heard any antiphon from across
the Channel answering the song of the Herald Angel
of Manchester, proclaiming as good ' tidings of great
joy' the formation of an offensive and defensive
alliance between Austria-Hungary and the pos-
sessors of Alsace and Lorraine. K Lord Salisbury
sacrifices witli a light heart the entente cordiale
pour les beaux yeux of Prince Bismarck and Count
Andrassy, he will, of course, find his hands freer
in Egypt and the Mediterranean for counteracting
aggressive designs on British interests.

It is strange that the Austro-German Alliance
should be so heartily welcomed by an Enghsh Foreign
Secretary on the understanding that it foreshadows

* K 2

132 The Future of the Eastern Question.

Austria's succession to the inheritance of the Turk,
which would involve her total transformation. The
thrusting of Austria eastward was originally devised
to weaken England. Prince Talleyrand, who, like
Lord Salisbury, held curious theories as to the use of
language, was its author. In the excellent ' History
of Eussia ' by that briUiant writer M. Eambaud,^ so
well translated into English by Mrs. Lang, Lord
SaUsbury will find the following passage, which is
not without some httle interest : —

In 1809 Talleyrand had submitted to Napoleon a project
which consisted in indemnifying Austria by putting her into
possession of the Eoumanian Principalities and of the Slav
provinces of Turkey, which would have created a permanent
conflict of interests between Eussia and Austria. The former,
repulsed from the Danube, would have been forced to turn
towards Central Asia — towards Hindostan. In this emer-
gency she would in her turn, have found herself at perpetual
war with England ; and all germ of coahtion against the
French Empire would by this means have been extinguished.

The danger foreseen by Talleyrand is not more
remote to-day ; but I do not think it is greatly to be
dreaded.

Eussia will not permit Austria to possess herself
of the Balkan Peninsula any more than you will
permit France to possess Egypt — of that there is no
question. It is more probable that the development
of the East will result in the conversion of Austria-
Hungary and the States of the Balkans into a Con-
federation of the Danube, which, after the German
and Italian elements had sought their own, would be

1 Eambaud's History of Russia, vol. ii. p. 252.

Lord Salisbury as Herald Angel, ] 33

an essentially Slavonic State. It is a joke in Moscow
that the ' Sick Man ' at Constantinople being in articulo
mortis, the attention of Europe will have to be turned
to the ' Sick Woman ' of Vienna-Pesth. But surely,
after the experience of the late war, Eussia will not
be left, by the abdication of the European concert, to
settle another Eastern question by herself.

134:

CHAPTEE II.

THE ANGLO-TUKKISH CONVENTION.^

What do Eussians think of the Anglo-Turkish Con-
vention ? Frankly speaking, very httle. It excited
some attention at first, but now it is not regarded
seriously. In spite of the emphatic speeches one
hears on every side about the sacredness, the in-
violability, the eternity of treaties, somehow or other
it seems as if your Ministers themselves never con-
sidered that secret arrangement to be a reality. It
is rather regarded as an ideal, which, like every ideal,
by its very nature cannot be reahsed.

When it was first announced, of course, Eussians,
like other people, thought there must be something in
it. This impression was strengthened by the extra-
ordinary triumphs accorded to Lord Beaconsfield and
his alter ego — Lord Salisbury. London seemed enrap-
tured. The two conquerors were enthusiastically
welcomed, even ladies being anxious to accompany
their victorious procession, to testify before the eyes
of the world their dehght and sympathy.

Little by little, however, the scene began to change
like a mirage of the desert. Indiscreet questions were

1 Written Nov. 1878,

The Anglo-Turkish Convention. 135

heard to the effect as to who was the real gainer —
Turkey or England ? Lord Beaconsfield or the Sultan ?
Was it really a case of ' diamond cutting diamond ? '
Some sober minds appealed to facts, and tried to sum
up the real significance of these transactions. The
purchase of Cyprus was ironically designated in Kussia
as a new ' Qui perd^ gagne' Prudent and practical,
as you ever are, you undertook besides to defend the
Sultan's territory, without having ever had it definitely
explained what that defence would actually involve.^

When you really are in earnest you do not take
things so easily. In India you are invading Afghan-
istan with what the Times calls ' a great army ' of
34,000 men, which actually constitutes almost one of
our army corps, and all this simply in order to preserve
your frontier, from even the shadow of a Eussian
visitor — a hundred miles off at Cabul. Even the
adherents of the Afghan campaign admit that the
rectification of your north-western frontier wiU cost
you many milUons. The great natural rampart which
divides you from the terrible Afghans is pronounced
by your Premier to be haphazard, and therefore it

* While discussing Kussian opinions on the Convention it may be well
merely to mention that in December the Nord published the following sig-
nificant sentence in a letter from St. Petersburg : — ' You have been right in
saying that the separate Convention between England and the Porte rela-
tive to the island of Cyprus and Asia Minor does not bind any of the other
Powers. Not only this, but they are ignorant of its existence, or rather
for them it does not exist. By the Treaty of Berlin, Asia Minor remains
subject to the stipulations of the Treaty of Paris, and England having
signed both treaties she is, with regard to the other Powers, bound only
by their stipulations. The question of this separate Convention would
certainly have been raised if Lord Beaconsfield's Cabinet, continuing its
first attempts, had pretended to any particular rights in the internal
afilairs of Asia Minor.'

136 The Future of the Eastern Question.

must be replaced at once by a scientific frontier.
Yet, haphazard though it be, your Indian frontier,
compared with that of Asiatic Turkey, is simply
impregnable. But you do nothing to strengthen the
latter, although it lies defenceless at the feet of our
garrison at Kars.

The poor Turks, after their new Convention, can-
not even get a little money from you to build new
fortresses and equip their army. Actions always
speak louder than words, and as we interpret your
Convention by your conduct. Lord Beaconsfield's
' Halt,' seems to us to have no more reality than the
previous ' three campaigns ' with which he tried to
prevent Eussia doing her duty two years ago.

If you meant to fulfil your obligations, you would
prepare to meet your responsibihties.' But, seeing
that nothing is done, we conclude that you are some-
what uncertain as to the necessity of carrying out
any new pohcy. Are we so wrong, after all ? Or do
you defy every indiscreet investigation ? Of course,
we can only judge from our point of view, and thus
we can only be ' one-sided.' But is not that the case
with every poor mortal, however anxiously he pre-
tends to be the very opposite ? If we are mistaken, be
patient with us, and we will pay you with your own
coin. Besides, people differ so much about certain
notions. Some call ' Peace and honour ' what others
declare to be 'War and humbug,' to mention one
among many similar instances, and so granting the
fallibility of our judgments, let me express them
nevertheless.

The Anglo-Turkish Convention, 137

Although the Anglo-Turkish Convention practi-
cally seems to us to mean nothing, theoretically, it
is very highly esteemed in Eussia, at least by some
Russians, and these not the least influential. It is
the historical justification of the Treaty of Kainardji,
the tardy, but complete, admission by England of
the principle adopted by Eussia a hundred years ago.

There are those who speak of the Treaty of
BerHn as annihilating the results of the Crimean War.
In one sense they may be right, but in another they
are quite wrong.

The vital principle of the Paris Treaty, the recog-
nition of which by Europe was the great result of the
Crimean War, was not annihilated, but reaffirmed and
strengthened, by the BerUn Treaty. But that principle
— the European concert estabhshed by the Western
nations against Eussia at the Paris Congress — has
been annihilated by the Anglo-Turkish Convention.
The work of Lord Clarendon has been undone by
Lord Beaconsfield, and the Eussian principles, eclipsed
by the disasters at Sebastopol, have been vindicated
at last by the English Government.

This is all the more gratifying to Eussians, be-
cause it was the unsolicited act of our opponents.
The Anglo- Turkish Convention is but the Treaty of
Kainardji written large and apphed to Asia, where
there was much less need for it than in Europe, where
our protectorate was needed for the protection of the
Christian nationalities. It involves the formal re-
pudiation of the European concert, now publicly
derided by Lord Sahsbury, and the adoption of the

138 The Future of the Eastern Question.

old Eussian principle of direct dealing with the Porte,
with exclusive privileges of interfering in the internal
affairs of the Ottoman Empire. For maintaining this,
Eussia was denounced as the enemy of civiUsation ;
but, now that it is affirmed by Lord Beaconsfield and
Lord Salisbury, you load them with honours and
decorations. To simple-minded people hke ourselves
it seems a curious inconsistency.^

The re-estabhshment of the principle of direct
deahngs with the Porte is not merely a complete
vindication of Eussia before the tribunal of history,
it is most important with relation to the future
development of events in the East. Eussia loyally
recognised the authority of the European concert
even when England was destroying it. We carried
our Preliminary Treaty of San Stefano to the Euro-,
pean Areopagus — to be mutilated by diplomacy —
only to learn that England, which had made no
sacrifices but those of (what we call) honour and

^ Speaking on November 27, 1879, in Midlothian, of the Anglo-
Turkish Convention, Mr. Gladstone said : — ^ For who would have be-
lieved it possible that we should assert before the world the principle
that Europe only could deal with the affairs of the Turkish Empire,
and should ask Parliament for six millions to support us in asserting
that principle, should send Ministers to Berlin, who declared that un-
less that principle was acted upon they would go to war with the
material that Parliament had placed in their hands, and should at the
same time be concluding a separate agreement with Turkey, under
which those matters of European jurisdiction were coolly transferred
to English jurisdiction; and the whole matter was sealed with the
worthless bribe of the possession and administration of the island of
Cyprus ? In the case of the Anglo-Turkish Convention, we have as-
serted for ourselves a principle that we had denied to others — namely,
the principle of overriding the European authority of the Treaty of
Paris, and taking the matters which that treaty gave to Europe into
our own separate jurisdiction.' — Political SpeecheSy p. 60.

The Anglo-Turkish Convention, 139

truth, had made a secret treaty with the Sultan,
which she refused to submit to the BerHn Congress.^
Many people thought that measure not exactly chival-
rous, but the refusal to have any judge as to her
actions, the determination to follow only her own
views without any coquettish desire to gratify every-
body, displayed a certain defiant self-assertion with
which I can sympathise.

The lesson was a painful one, but at least we have
henceforth a free hand. Kussia evidently has now the
right to make Conventions with the Porte as well as
England ; and, frankly speaking, we could afford to

^ Speaking at Glasgow in December, 1879, Mr. Gladstone said * the
Anglo-Turkisli Convention was in itself a gross and manifest breach of
the public law of Europe. Because, by the Treaty of Paris, the result
of the Crimean war, it was solemnly enacted that everything that per-
tained to the integrity and independence of Turkey, and to the relations
between the Sultan and his subjects, was matter, not for the cognisance
of one particular Power, but for the joint cognisance of the great Powers
of Europe. And what did we do in 1878 ? When the Russian war
with Turkey came to a close, we held Russia rigidly to that principle.
We insisted that the treaty she had made should be subject to the
review of Europe, and that Europe should be entitled to give a final
judgment on those matters which fell within the scope of the Treaty
of Paris. We did that, and we even wasted six millions in warlike
preparations for giving effect to that declaration. We then brought
together at Berlin, or assisted to bring together at Berlin, the Powers
of Europe for the purpose of exercising this supreme jurisdiction ; and
while they were there, while they were at work, and without the know-
ledge of any one among them except Turkey, we extorted from the
Sultan of Turkey — I am afraid by threatening him with abandoning the
advocacy of his cause before the Congress — we extorted from the Sul-
tan of Turkey the Anglo-Turkish Convention. But the xVnglo-Turkish
Convention was a Convention which aimed at giving us power, in the
teeth of the Treaty of Paris, to interfere between the Sultan and his
subjects; and it was a Convention which virtually severed from his
empire the possession of the island of Cj-prus. It interfered with the
integrity. It interfered with the independence. It broke the Treaty
of Paris, and the Treaty of Paris was the public law of Europe.' —
Political Speeches, p. 92.

140 The Future of the Eastern Question.

let you have much more than Cyprus to regain the
right of direct deahng with the Sultan without
foreign intermeddhng.

The principle of European concert is sometimes
very good. Eussia has maintained it at great cost to
herself on more than one occasion, when England in-
sisted on isolation, and it is not Eussia who has
destroyed it. But England having done so, can you
be surprised if we, who have most to do with Turkey,
should shed no tears on that account ? Our treaties
henceforth will not be ' preliminary,' which really is
too humble and ridiculous, nor will they be politely
submitted to the mutilation of a Congress.

I am told in England that the loss of Cyprus
has neither diminished the Sultan's dominions nor
has it impaired his independence. Well, I daresay
there are other ' Isles of Cyprus ' as yet belonging to
the expiring ' Sick Man,' and other Powers will per-
haps take upon themselves the philanthropic duty
of ' civilising and improving them.'

Eussia has at least as much to offer as Eng-
land as the price of Cyprus concessions ; nor is
Lord Beaconsfield the only Minister who can
guarantee the Turkish frontier or the Sultan's
independence against aggressive encroaching Powers.
But we have also other equivalents to offer, without
giving troublesome guarantees — as, perhaps, you may
some day discover.

If, in spite of our efforts, a jealous antagonism
has to continue between us, if we are to be still
rivals ; we cannot sufficiently express our obligations

The Anglo- Turhish Convention, 141

to Lord Beaconsfield, whose only fault is that by
always moving "his pieces into our hands he makes
the game too easy to be exciting or even interesting.
Thoroughly to enjoy sport it is really necessary to
have to encounter difficulties and to overcome a cer-
tain cleverness and skill. But Lord Beaconsfield
positively seems to enjoy making the game dull. His
touching satisfaction at our annexing Batoum without
' shedding one drop of blood ; ' so contrary to the in-
dignation expressed by the whole of the Ministerial
press, was quite a curious surprise.

But perhaps the most curious feature of the Anglo-
Turkish Convention, is the fact that, while it condi-
tionally guarantees Asiatic Turkey, it leaves the
Sultan in unguaranteed possession of Constantinople.
Neither England nor any other Power guarantees to
the Turk the continued possession of Constantinople
or of one yard of European soil.

142 The Future of the Eastern Question.

CHAPTEE III.

THE HEIES OF 'THE SICK MAN.'

The Sick Man is very sick — sick even unto death.
What do you propose to do with his inheritance ?
Surely that question is not now too indiscreet ?

When the Emperor Nicholas made a similar in-
quiry, many years ago, you were shocked beyond
expression. Lord Palmerston was positive that this
interesting patient would soon be quite well, and ' in
great force.' Eussians, however, turned out to be
better diagnosists. You ^ear the Sick Man's death-
rattle. Who are to be his heirs ?

A friend of mine who sits at Stamboul, with his
finger on the Sick Man's pulse, writes that he does not
dare to leave the city even for a few days, lest on
his return he should find in place of the invalid only
a corpse on the Bosphorus. The definite catastrophe
is as near as it is unavoidable. The Empire, which
received a new lease of life at Berlin — ' thirty or forty
years at least,' Lord Salisbury said — is already in dis-
solution. What is to be done with its remains ?

That great triumph of English diplomacy — ' the
resuscitation of the Ottoman Empire' — is hardly so
dazzling now as it was last year. The Palace is in

The Heirs of ' The Sick Man: 143

want of mutton, the army in want of bread, the
treasury in want of funds, the Cabinet in want of
statesmen, the whole country in want of security
— both moral and material. Everywhere within this
sublime Empire nothing but insurrection. The
Druses are astir, the Arabs are seething in discontent,
Kurds and Armenians, plunderer and plundered, are
equally hostile to the Constantinople Pashas — these
common foes of human kind. Greek and Albanian
are even more hostile to the Sultan than the Slav.
The sword of the Turk has been wrenched from his
gore-stained hand ; and the East, with wicked in-
credulity, refuses to beUeve your Ministerial speechefs
as to the new lease of life granted to the Turkish
Power.

The outlook is not less gloomy abroad. In place
of friends gathering for his protection, the Sick Man
sees vultures impatiently waiting for their repast.
Even in Eussia we did not know how desperate was
the condition of the Sultan until we heard he had
sunk so low that Lord Beaconsfield had ventured to
insult him, and, without even waiting for ' the man-
date from Heaven' which was lacking in 1877 for the
liberation of Bulgaria, had coerced the Turk with
his ironclads to send Baker Pasha on a fooFs errand
into Asia Minor.

Surely, then, I may be permitted to quote the
words which our Emperor Nicholas addressed to the
English Ambassador at St. Petersburg in 1853. We
need not alter one word, not even one syllable, to
adapt them for the situation in 1879. Spoken in

144 The Future of the Eastern Question,

confidence — which you violated — twenty-six years
ago, we repeat them to-day without reserve as em-
bodying the wisest counsel that Eussians can offer to
Englishmen.

' The affairs of Turkey are in a very disorganised
condition, the country itself seems to be falling in
pieces, and it is very important that England and
Kussia should come to a perfectly good understanding
upon these affairs. We have on our hands a Sick
Man, a very Sick Man ; it will be, I tell you frankly,
a great misfortune if one of these days he should slip
away from us, especially before all necessary arrange-
ments were made ; and, if the Turkish Empire falls,
it falls to rise no more ; and I put it to you, there-
fore, whether it is not better to be provided before-
hand for a contingency, than to incur the chaos, con-
fusion, and the certainty of an European war, all of
which must attend the catastrophe if it should occur
unexpectedly and before some ulterior system has
been sketched. I repeat, the Sick Man is dying, and
we can never allow such an event to take us by sur-
prise. We must come to some understanding. It is
not an engagement, a convention which I ask of them ;
it is a free interchange of ideas, and, in case of need,
the word of a gentleman — that is enough between
us.'i

Time has justified our Emperor. Not even your
Ministry would now deny that the Sick Man's days
are numbered ; and the letter from Constantinople
mentioned above contains, curiously enough, almost

* Eastern Papers, Part V., pp. 2-5.

The Heirs of ' The Sick Man: 145

exactly the expressions of our Monarch. And then
the writer adds : ' iN^^efforts to galvanise him perma-
nently can possibly succeed. There will be a great
deal of fighting about liis inheritance' — which is
precisely the probability Eussia, in 1853, desired to
avert. Who are to be his heirs ? Surely sensible
people would not defer the settlement of that ques-
tion until we are all in the midst of a culbute
generale. Why is it so difficult to come to an under-
standing ?

Eussia ]ias no reserves, ller policy is perfectly
frank and straightforward on this question. Our
Emperors have repeatedly explained what our views
are of the disposition of the Sick Man's estates.

I liave no authority to speak in the name of
Eussia. I am not, as your papers so kindly declare,
an agent of our Government (whicli sometimes I
wish I were, because, then, believe me, I should
know how to make my voice, not only heai-d, but
attentively listened to !). But I am familiar with a
little of our history, and with the opinions of many
of our best Eussians upon the subject. Under these
circumstances, one is allowed, perhaps, to speak Avith
confidence as to the Eussian views on these nuxtters.

Eussia seeks no annexations on the Balkan Penin-
sula. Within the last sixty years Ave have thrice dic-
tated treaties to the vanquished Turks, but Av^e have
not at this moment one foot more territory in Europe
than we had in 1815. We have not even taken a
Cyprus concession from the Sultan in this continent
as the price of all our victories. Turkey in Europe,

h

146 The Fuhire of the Eastern Question.

so far as Eussia is concerned, is territorially as she was
when the Battle of Waterloo was fouf^^ht.

This fact at least gives us some claim to your con-
lidence, when we declare that we want nothing for
ourselves from the Sick Man's inlieritance.

Our policy was accurately defined by Count Nes-
selrode, exactly fifty years ago. He wrote : —

' The Emperor will not advance tlie boundaries of
liis territory, and only demands from his allies tliat
absence of ambition and of selfish designs of which
he will be the first to set the example.'^

Fifteen years later, when the Emperor Nicholas
visited England, he repeated this axiom of Eussian
pohcy in the Balkan. ' I do not claim,' he said, ' one
inch of Turkish soil,' when he anticipated in his in-
terview with Sir Eobert Peel the confidences which he
afterwards shared with Sir Hamilton Seymour. I own I
admire our Emperor's foresight at that time. ' Turkey,'
said he to Lord Aberdeen, ' is a dying man. We may
endeavour to keep him alive, but we shall not succeed
— he will, he must die.^ That will be a critical
moment. I foresee that I shall have to put my armies
in movement, and Austria must do the same. Must
not England be on the spot with the whole of iier
maritime forces ? But a Eussian army, an Austrian
army, a great Enghsh fleet, all congregated together
in tliese parts — so many powder barrels so close to

^ Wellington's Despatches, vol. vii. p. 80.

~ Euglisli politicians liow speak even more frankly tlian Russians on
this point. Sir W. Ilarcoiirt recently told his constituents : ' There is
no policy which is worth discussing which does not assume for its basis,
and make provision for, the inevitable dissolution of the Turkish Empire.
That is a thing which must be, which ought to be, and which will be.'

lite Heirs of - The Sick Man.' 147

the fire — how shall one prevent the sparks from
catching. Why should we not, then, come to a pre-
vious understanding, that in case anything unfore-
seen should happen in Turkey, Eussia and England
should come to a previous understanding with each
other as to what they should have to do in common
{que sHl arrivait quelque chose dHmprevu en Turquie^
la Russie et VAngleterre se concerteraient prealableme^it
entrelles sur ce qiCelles auraient a f aire en commim).'' ^

That straightforward and honest understanding,
with a view to a future concert prealable^ le cas
echeant, on which the Emperor Nicholas agreed
with the English Ministers in 1844, is exactly what
might be established now. No more and no less. It
is not to be desired the most in the interests of
Eussia. If there is to be a general scramble, Eussia
perhaps is not more unready for doing her part than
the Government of Lord Beaconsfield. Kars and
Batoum afford better bases of operation than Cyprus ;
and your difficulties in Zululand lead many to infer
that the conquest of Asia Minor may be a task be-
yond your powers.

The Duke of Wellington, in his Memorandum on
the Treaty of Adrianople, foreshadowed the concerted
understanding which is now more than ever to be
desired. He wrote : ' The object of our measures,
whatever they are, should be to obtain an engage-
ment, or, at all events, a clear understanding among
the Five PoAvers, that in case of the dissolution of tlie
Turkish Monarchy the disposition of the dominions

^ SfocJcmar's Memoittj vol. ii. pp. 106, 114.
L 2

148 The Future of the Eastern Question.

hitherto under its government should be concerted
and determined upon by the Five Powers in Con-
ference.' After urging the importance of concerting
what should be done, lie points out that by such an
arrangement the Powers would be ' assured that the
crumbling to pieces of the Turkish Government
would not create a war, and would not occasion such
an accession of dominion and power to any State as
would alter the general balance of power, or give
reasonable cause of apprehension to others/

The necessity of this 'concert prealable' is not
Eussian, but European. It is urged in the interest of
the general peace, and of the unhappy populations
of tlie East.

Without a general understanding on a basis of
abstention from conquests, there may arise most fatal
emergencies. Let us look at the facts as they are.
An emeute in Constantinople, or even an accident in
the Seraglio, might to-morrow give the signal for a
world-wide w^ar over the inheritance of the Turk.

If there is such a thing as statesmanship in
Europe, a contingency so terrible ought not to be
left for solution to chance.

It is assumed by some that England and Austria
have settled everything, w^ithout consulting the other
members of the European concert. Such a settle-
ment would only settle one thing, and that is — ^war.

No Power, and Eussia least of all, will permit a
question which vitally interests her as much as any,
and more than most, to be settled over her head.
Iler voice must be heard, her legitimate interests

' WcUinrftoWx Dapntchet, vol. vi. p. 210,

The Heirs of ' T^ Sick Man,' 149

respected, aiKl lier duties fulfilled. This is claiming
for my country no more than we concede to yours.
If you exclude us from the Council Chamber, you evi-
dently prefer meeting us in the field. But there is
no reason for this morbid dread of Eussia's councils,
unless there is some arriere pensee in your minds as to
territorial annexations. In that case you are, per-
haps, only right in shrouding your designs in impene-
trable darkness. We, who have no such reserves,
can speak frankly. \\^e seek no annexations for our-
selves ; but this very disinterestedness justifies us in
resolutely denying annexations to others.

Tlie territorial integrity of the Ottoman Empire —
tliat watchword of the past generation — reappears
in a new form as the embodiment of Eussias
j)olicy in tlie East. We maintain tlie territorial
integrity of the Ottoman Empire, but we demand,
not the independence, but the elimination of the
authority of the Sultan.

We extend that principle to those provinces —
to Servia, Montenegro', and Eoumania, from which
the Sultan's authority has been finally eliminated
by the Treaty of San Stefano, ratified at Berlin.

Of these States, as well as of all the territory left
to the Sultan by the Berlin Treaty, Eussia claims
nothing and concedes nothing. The Balkan lands
belong to tlie Balkan people. Mr. Aksakoff accurately
stated the views of Eussia when he wrote : ' The East
of Europe belongs to Oriental Europeans ; the
Slav countries belong to the Slavs. It is not a
question of territorial conquests for Eussia ; it is
a question of calling to an independent existence

150 The Future of the Easteim Question.

(political and social) all these different Slav groups
which people the Balkan Peninsula.' We have not
freed them from the pashas of Constantinople, to see
them handed over to the tax-gatherers of Vienna, or
even to the Commissioners of London. Do not
imagine that it is only Eussians who object to
an Austrian appropriation of the inheritance of
the sick man. There is no more rancorous Eus-
sophobist living than Louis Kossuth, and this
is his opinion as to the danger before Austria-
Hungary, which, he says, ' he sees like a death-pro-
phesying bird, with outstretched wings, fluttering over
my country.' ' What will be the result of the Vienna
Cabinet should it again follow this damnable poUcy of
expediency ? 1\\ the past, it has put a razor in the
hand of Eussia. Now, it would put this razor to the
throat of Hungary and also of Austria. . . .
What the Viennese Cabinet would pilfer from the
Turkish Empire would only weaken us, and become
eventually our death ; because it would eternally
multiply and put into further fermentation all the
already fermenting and dissolving elements. The
Slavonians who would be caught by the Viennese
Cabinet would take the latter with them. And what
would be the infallible final result? The punisliment
of talio. If St. Petersburg and Vienna should
divide the rags of the Turkish Empire, twenty-five
years would not elapse before the Eussians, the
Prussians, and the Itahans would divide Austria and
Hungary among themselves, perhaps leaving some-
thing of the booty to Wallachia, as the reward of

llie Heirs of ' The >Sic/c JIu/l 1-ji

subserviency to Russia. This is as true as that there
is a God.' ^

M. Euiile cle Laveleye, I regret to see, thinks that
to assure to the Slav populations liberty, autonomy,
and well-being, the only practical method is to extend
the influence of Austria. M. de Laveleye is a very
great authority, I admit ; but even M. de Laveleye's
ipse dixit would not reconcile these same Slav popu-
lations to Austrian annexation.'^ Servians, Bulgarians,
and even Eoumanians (though the latter are united to
the Balkan Slavs by their religion, not by their
nationality) regard the prospect of Austrian absorp-
tion with only le«.« dread than tlie restoration o1*
Turkish au t ho ri t y .

It is curious thai admiration I'oi* Austria has
sprung up in the West. In the East, where Austria
is better known, Austria is almost detested.

Even the terrible Russians are more popular
amongst the Southern Slavs than the admirable?
Austrians, as you may have noticed in tlie contrast

^ * Russian Aggression/ Contemporary Review^ December, 1877, pp.
22, 23.

"^ In tlie same review in which M. de Laveleye expresses this con-
viction, Mr. W. J. Stillman remarks: — 'The very constitution, history,
and organic habit of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy are such, that it
must always be a source of great apprehension to a weaker neighbour.
It is wliat the Americans call a carpet-bagger on an Imperial scale, and
has no possible utility for people who are not m need of an esoteric ride.
As its existence depends on its rights of conquest, its growth must
always be at the expense of its neighbours. It has no raison d'etre^ ex-
cept the incapacity of its subjects to govern themselves. It is purely
parasitic, and any subject nationality which retains vitality as such
must struggle to throw off the weight of it ; nor is there any possibility
of its becoming a permanent institution in the face of the development
of self-government, except by its identifying itself with some national
organism, after the example of the House of Savoy.' — Article ' Italy,'
Forlnitjhthj Revieir, Deceniler, 187D, p. 8o8.

152 The Future of the Eastern Question.

between our welcome by the Christians in Bulgaria
and the chilling reception in Bosnia. When we say
' Austria,' it is, in fact, giving a title of courtesy to
the German- Magyar Government of Vienna-Pesth.
If a new Austria, essentially Slavonic, were to be
formed, a voluntary union of the States of the Danube
might, perhaps, be established with advantage. But
the Confederation of the Danube must spring from the
voluntary alliance of Free States, it must not be the
offspring of military conquest, and we doubt whether
' Austria ' would be the name by which the Slavonic
Free States w^ould choose to be known.

General Chrzanowski, a Pole, whose antipathy to
Eussia was frank and vehement, is reported by Mr.
Senior, in his most interesting ' Conversations,' as
having uttered some remarks concerning Austria
which may enable you to understand why the Servians
and the Bulgarians regard her as only one degree
better than the Turk. ' Austria,' he remarked,* ' by
occupying, in 1855, the Principalities, has succeeded
in making even the Eussians regretted ; nothing has
so prepared the Moldavians and Wallachians for in-
corporation with Eussia as their experience of Aus-
trian rule. The pressure of Eussia is heavy, but
gradual. It is a screw slowly turned. The Austrians
are brutal and impatient ; they use not a screw, but a
mallet ; they insult while they rob. Eussia consoU-
dates her conquests; the subjects of Austria are
always impatient ; always on tlie brink of insurrection.'
Austria, no doubt, has improved since then ; but
impressions produced by centuries are slowly cflac ed.

* Senior's Conversations, vol. ii. p. 60.

The Heirs of ' The Sick Man.' 153

Why cannot these Balkan States be allowed, like
Italy, to 'fare da se'? That is Eussia's policy. Why
should it not be England's? It is, at all events,
fortunately, Mr. Gladstone's policy. The natural
alliance of the future is that of Orthodox Eussia and
Liberal England, to defend the independence and
develope the liberties of the populations of the Balkan
Peninsula.^

M. de Laveleye thinks that Austria will free

^ Addressing an enormous meeting of working men at Edinburgh on
November 29, 1879, Mr. Gladstone said : — * Who is to have the succes-
sion of Turkey ? Gentlemen, from the bottom of my heart, and with
the fullest conviction of my understanding, I will give you the reply — a
reply which I am perfectly certain will awaken a free, generous, and
luianimous echo in your bosoms. That succession is not to pass to
Russia. It is not to pass to Austria. It is not to pass to England,
under whatever name of Anglo-Turki.=?h Convention, or anything else.
It is to paGs to the people of these countries, to those who have inhabited
them for many long centuries, to those who had reared them to a state
of civilisation when the great calamity of Ottoman conquest spread like
a wild wave over that portion of the earth, and buried that civilisation
imder its overwhelming force. Gentlemen, I appeal to you to join me
in the expression of the hope that under the yoke of no Power whatever
will tliute free provinces be brought. It is not Russia alone whose
movements ought to be watched with vigilance. There are schemes
abroad of which others are the authors. There is too much reason to
suspect that some portion of the statesmen of Austria will endeavour to
extend her rule, and to fulfil the evil prophecies that have been uttered,
and cause the great change in the Balkan Peninsula to be only the sub-
stitution of one kind of supremacy for another. Gentlemen, let us place
the sympathies of this country on the side of the free. Rely upon it
those people who inhabit those provinces have no desire to trouble their
neighbours, no desire to vex you or me. Their desire is peacefully to
pass their human existence in the discharge of their duties to God and
man ; in the care of their families, in the enjoyment of tranquillity and
freedom, in making happiness prevail upou the earth which Las so long
been deformed in that portion of it by misery and by shame. But we
say, gentlemen, that this is a fair picture which is now presented to our
eyes, and one which should not be spoiled by the hand of man. I
demand of the authorities of this country, I demand it of our Govern-
ment, and I believe that you will echo the demand, that to no Russian
scheme, that to no Austrian scheme, to no English scheme — for here we
bring the matter home — shall they lend a moment's countenance ; but

154: The Future of tke Eastern Question.

Macedonia, but Austria, with England's aid, re-
enslaved Macedonia at the Congress. It would be
interesting to hear of any unselfish deed done by
Austria in the whole course of her history.^ It would
encourage us to hope that Macedonia may yet owe
her liberation to the hand of her enslaver. At pre-
sent the Slavs of the South may be pardoned if they
doubt whether their brethren the Czechs have suffi-
cient influence in Austria to prevent the exploitation
of the Balkan Peninsula for the benefit of Jews,
Germans, and Magyars.

Why should you distrust those rising races of
the East ? They are not strong as yet, neither are
they ri«'li : luit rhey ••unraiii tiie seeds of a prosperoii>
t'luure. 'riieir development may be retarded by diplo-
macy, but it cannot be prevented. Nationalities that
have survived the fiery furnace of Ottoman domina-
tion will not perish because of the swaddling clothes
of Western diplomacy.

It is of no use pointing to the troubles of Bul-

that we shall with a kindly care cherish and foster the "blessed institutions
of free government that are beginning to prevail — nay, that are already
at work in those now emancipated provinces,' — Political Speeches, p. 92.

In like manner spoke Sir William Harcourt at Oxford, January 13,
1880 : — ' The arrangements of the Treaty of Berlin have irretrievably
broken down. Ministers now pin their faith upon an Austria-German
Convention. That is only a new blunder. That is to replace the old
blunder by a new one. The conception of constituting Austria the
gaoler of the Slav nationalities is a conception which is unworthy of
practical statesmen, and altogether repugnant to Liberal principles,
llussia has won the hearts of those provinces by making herself the
patron of their independence. She leaves to Austria to assume the
position of the conqueror of alien races and of a dissatisfied people.'

^ Mr. Gladstone, in March, 1878, referred to the long catalogue of
Austria's misdeeds, ' scarcely relieved by a solitary act done on behalf of
justice and of freedom.' — 'Paths of Honour and of Shame,' Nineteenth
Century, p. 603.

Tke Heirs of ''The Sick Man' 155

garia and Eastern Koiimelia. These troubles, and
even worse difficulties, were expected by Russians as
the natural consequence of the policy of the Berlin
Congress. Instead of one strong, independent Bulgaria,
Europe insisted upon making three, and gave inde-
pendence only to the least advance.

You cannot say that this is an after-thought. On
June 10, 1877, before our army liad crossed the
Danube, Prince Gortschakoff informed your Govern-
ment that the separation of Bulgaria into two pro-
vinces would be impracticable, as local information
proved that Bulgaria must remain a single province,
otherwise the most laborious and intelligent of the
Bulgarian population would remain ex<^hided from
the autonomous iustitutioiL<.

A failure in Bulgaria and Eastern lioumelia would
not prove the unfitness of the Bulgarians for self-
government. It would merely prove our Chancellor
was right in 1877, and that the Congress was wrong
in 1878.^

^ The following official communication, which I translate from a
recent number of the Moscow Gazette, clears up a point on which there
has been some misunderstanding : — ' The ministerial crisis in Bulgaria
has evoked in the press discussions about the Bulgarian Constitution,
in which not only foreign but even Russian papers have maintained that
the Constitution granted to Bulgaria was the work of the Russian
Government. This is quite incorrect. According to the 4th and oth
clauses of the Berlin Treaty the National Assembly convoked at Tirnova
l»ad to elaborate the fundamental institutions of the principality. To
help and quicken these works the Russian Commissary presented a pro-
ject of a statute, simply as a foundation for further elaborations. The
Russian (Commissary declared positively that the final decision belonged
exclusively to the National Assembly. During the discussions several
points of this draft Constitution have been greatly modified. The Im-
perial Government carefully avoided every intervention, only advising
moderation, especially in regard to the liberty of the press and of the
rio-ht of public meeting. Therefore the responsibility for tlie twisting

1-3G The Future of the Easter it Qne^tw/i.

The English observers who speak most dispa-
ragingly of the Bulgarians only know tliose north of
the Balkans. Those who — like the late Mr. MacGahan,
Mr. Jasper More, Dr. Sandwith, Major Baker, and Sir
George Campbell — knew the Bulgarians of the South,
always spoke of them in the very highest terms.

Sir George Campbell, indeed, places them higli
above the Paissians, who, he says, ' can claim none of
the elements of an Imperial race.' I admired my
countrymen more than ever after reading this decla-
ration of Sir George Campbell's. It is wonderful to
make bricks without straw ; and it is a feat no one
else but Eussians could have accomplished, to create
and govern the largest Empire in the world without
possessing any single element of an ' Imperial race.'

But on one point I agree with the hon. member
for Kirkcaldy. Tlie Bulgarians are really a very
superior race. I well remember that General
TchernayefT, who is as patriotic a Eussian as lie is
a devoted friend of tlie Southern Slavs, declared to
me, on his return from a tour in the Balkans,
* Believe me, these Bulgarians are a capital people.
Give them ten years of good government, they'll
astonish every one by their progress.'

Similar testimony, not less emphatic, has been
given by your Consuls. Tell me, if we poor Eussians,
who, ' without any of the elements of an Imperial
race,' have contrived to build up the greatest Empire
the world ever saw, why can you not believe that

institutions rests entirely on the Tirnova Assembly. The modifications
which experience advises are not in the least opposed to the views of the
Imperial Government, whose chief object is the consolidation and wel-
fare of the Principality.'

The Heirs of ' The Sick Man: 157

these richly gifted Bulgarians, if freed from the inter •
meddhng of tlie Turks of Constantinople and of the
Turks of diplomacy, will at least be able to manage
their own affairs ?

I shall be told that the rival races of the Balkan
Peninsula hate each other almost as much, to judge from
English descriptions, as the Neapolitans used to hate
the Piedmontese, in the descriptions of those who ad-
vocated the maintenance of Austria's influence in Italy.

There are differences, no doubt. ^ Boundary lines

' The difference between the Bulgarian Exarch and the Patriarch of
Constantinople is now happily in a way to be healed. The separation of the
Bulfrarian Church from the Patriarchate was purely administrative, and
exclusively temporal. There are no differences as to dogma or purely
spiritual matters, and the Bulgarian Church occupies the same position to
the Patriarchate as the Churches of Russia, Servia, and Wallachia. The
quarrel about the Church of Sveta Petka in Philippopolis would never
liave arisen but for the differences between the Patriarch and the Exarch.
The Church of Sveta Petka was built by the Bulgarian Voulco Th^odo-
rovitch, at a cost of 50,713 piastres ; 43,013 were subscribed by Bulgarians,
and only 1,700 by Greeks. Its title deeds declare it to be communal
property, and to be controlled and maintained by the elected representa-
tives of the commune. In that commune 250 out of 305 families are
Bulgarians of the Bulgarian Church ; fifty are Bulgarians who side with
the Patriarch, and only five are Greek. When the independence of the
Bulgarian Church was recognised by the Sultan's decree in 1872, the
Bulgarians were allowed to hold all their churches wherever they pos-
sessed a majority. Whenever Bulgarian apathy permitted it, the in-
ll'ience of the Patriarch was exerted to prevent the churches passing out
of his jurisdictit)n. In this way the Cluirch of Sveta Petka, and another
called Sveta N^delia remained in the hands of the Greeks. The other
day the Bulgarians forcibly possessed themselves of tJie former church,
maintaining that by its origin, by its title deeds, by the majority of the
commune, and by the Firman of 1872, it belonged to them, and ought to
be under the jurisdiction, not of the Patriarch, but of the Exarch. Dis-
turbances ensued, and Prince Vogarides locked up the church and sent
the case for trial. So much has been made of this dispute to the preju-
dice of the Bulgarians, that it may be useful briejBly to state these facts,
and to point out that the quarrel arose, not so much out of a rivalry
of race, as from an ecclesiastic difference, which shortly will be removed.
A full account of the Sveta Petka will be found in the ably conducted
organ of the Southern l>ulj?arian9| the Murifza, February 5, 1880,

1 58 The Future of the Eastern Question.

would have to be traced, and many other things
Avould have to be done. But all these are mere trifles.
The peril of the Eastern Question does not lie in the
antipathies of local populations, but in the rivalries of
mighty Empires.

If the Powers honestly forswear individual
aggrandisement, a settlement of these topographical
details would be easy. The principle of the Treaty of
San Stefano, that the frontiers should be settled after
local examination on the spot, in accordance with
ethnographical facts, would suffice to settle these
small questions.^

You will object that in some districts the popu-
lation is too inextricably mixed up for division on
ethnographical principles. Well, it may be so. In
that case the obvious arrangement would be to adopt
the Eastern Eoumelian expedient, without the inter-
vention of the Sultan. Eastern Eoumelia is Bulgaria.'^
So is a large — possibly the largest — part of Mace-

^ Article VI. of the Treaty of San Stefano runs as follows: —
' Bulgaria is constituted an autonomous tributary Principality, witli a
Christian GoYernment and a national militia. The definitive frontiers of
the Bulgarian Principality will be laid down by a special Russo-Turkish
Commission before the evacuation of Roumelia by the Imperial Eussian
army. This Commission will take into its consideration, when consider-
ing on the spot the modifications to be made in the general map, the prin-
ciple of the nationality of the majority of the inhabitants of the districts,
conformably to the Bases of Peace, and also the topographical necessities
and practical interests of traffic of the local population. The extent of
the Bulgarian Principality is marked in general terms on the accompanying
map, which will serve as a basis for the definitive fixing of the limits.'

^ The overwhelming numerical preponderance of the Bulgarian popu-
lation in Eastern Roumelia, is proved by the result of the elections for
the first Provincial Assembly which were held in autumn 1879, under
the provisions of the Organic Statute drawn up by the International
Commission. The Bulgarian deputies outnumbered those of all other
nationalities by nearly six to one. The Greeks only elected four mem-
bers, the Turks threej and the Jews and Armenians two each.

The Heir.^ of ' The SiA- Man: . 159

(Ionia. This view was supported by Lord Salisbury
and his diplomatic colleagues at the Constantinople
Conference.^ But outside the limits of the Bulgaria
of tlie Constantinople Conference there may be a re-
gion, stretching from Adrianople to bej^ond Salonica,
including the south of Macedonia and the extreme
north of Epirus and Thessaly, not sufficiently Hellenic
to be annexed to Greece, or Bulgarian to be annexed
to Bulgaria, which might be governed on the plan,
which is little better than a vexatious absurdity
when appHed to the sub-Balkan districts of Bulgaria.

In time the races would amalgamate, or one
would acquire sufficient ascendancy to decide the
destinies of these narrow strips of border land,
through which, of course, both Servia and Bulgaria
should have access to the -35gean — Servia by an
international railway to Salonica, and Bulgaria by a
port at Enos, at tlie mouth of the Maritza.^

Albania is tolerably autonomous already ; but
Greece should receive Epirus, Thessaly, Crete, and
the Hellenic Islands, w^hich may, perhaps, include
Cyprus, when you get tired of it.

The rightful heirs of the Sick Man are his long
oppressed subjects.

There remains the Last Word of the Eastern
Question — Who is to liave Constantinople ?

» See Map, p. 120.

' Opinions differ as to the most suitable port for Bulgaria. The
Treaty of San Stefano suggested Kavalla; others have pointed to
Salonica, which, however, is more likely to become a free town, a neutral
sea-port. The advantages of Enos over both are obvious, as being at the
mouth of the Maritza, the chief river of Southern Bulgaria. They were
very forcibly pointed out by the late Mr. MacQahan, in one of the last let-
ters which that indefatigable and well-informed correspondent ever wrote.

160 . The Future of the Eastern Question,

CHAPTEE IV.

'THE LAST WORD OF THE EASTERN QUESTION.'

' The last word of the Eastern Question/ said Lord
Derby, ' is — Who is to have Constantinople ? '

Lord Derby may be right ; but it seems, after all,
that tlie importance of Constantinople has been
strangely, even ridiculously, exaggerated. The popu-
lar conception of the city as a kind of talisman oi
Empire is really as absurd as the otlier superstitions
about talismans which flourished in the age from
which the superstition about Constantinople is a
somewhat grotesque revival.

Constantinople has long since ceased to play the
most important part in the history of the world. The
idea of its importance dates from the time when
civilisation and commerce were almost confined to
the shores of tlie Meditexranean. When Constan-
tinople acquired its domination over the imagination
of men one-half of the capitals of modern Europe
did not exist ; and, with the exception of Eome,
none of those which had begun to live could ventuj^e
to rival the position of the city of Cons tan tine. All
that is chanG^ed. Alike in commerce and in war, in

The Last Word of the Eastern Question' 161

science and in religion, the world's centre is no longer
on the Bosphorus.

A company of London merchants have created at
the other side of Asia an Empire more splendid than
that of Amurath ; and our Peter the Great reared on
the icebound shores of the Northern Seas a capital
whose monarchs dictate the terms on which the
rulers of Constantinople are permitted to hold their
Empire.

The whole world has been transformed since our
ancestors, crusading with the Lion-heart or conquer-
ing with Sviatoslaf, learned to regard Constantinople
as the natural seat of universal Empire.

Constantinople is no longer even the commercial
emporium of the world, standing midway between
two continents, and essential to both. Since the days
of Constantine, an EngUshman, a Portuguese, and a
Frenchman have changed everything. Constantinople
resembles a seaport from which the ocean has re-
ceded, for the Steam Engine, the Cape route, and the
Suez Canal have dried up the ancient channels of
trade between Asia and Europe. The road to the
Indies no longer runs through the Bosphorus, and
the commercial glories of Constantinople are now
almost as faded as those of Trebizonde.

' The Empire of the world ' is so far from be-
longing to the owners of Constantinople, that even
the appointment of their officials is dictated to them
by telegrams from London, emphasised by ironclads
at Malta. Stripped of this romantic halo of super-
stition and exaggeration, what is Constantinople ?

M

162 The Future of the Eastern Question.

Constantinople is a city commanding the narrow
straits by which alone the dwellers on the shores of
the Black Sea and the vast populations on the rivers
draining into that ocean can gain access to the Medi-
terranean. To Eussia, Austria, Hungary, Eoumania,
and the Balkan States, the ownership of Constanti-
nople can never be the matter of indifference which
it might be to the other European States. Con-
stantinople is the gate of the Euxine, and the
question, Who shall keep its keys ? is of vital interest
only to Euxine and Danubian States, and therefore
primarily to Eussia.

Commercially the ownership of Constantinople,
as commanding the Bosphorus, which has been
described as the real mouth of the Danube, is almost
as important to Austria as to Eussia. Politically,
however, it is of more importance to Eussia. Austria
has no seaboard on the Black Sea ; no ironclads can
threaten her from the Euxine, while the Eussian
seaboard lies open to every attack. It is, therefore,
doubly important for us that the keys of the Black
Sea should be in the hands of — ^if not of a friendly
Power — then of a Power too weak to be a menace to
the safety of our ports or the security of our com-
merce.

From a commercial and political point of view,
the Sultan is as good a gatekeeper of the Euxine
as Eussia could wish to have. As Emperor Nicholas
told Sir Hamilton Seymour, ' Nothing better for our
interests could be desired.' In former times the
Sultan closed the Black Sea to all the commerce

' The Last Word of the Eastern Question' 163

of the world, and menaced Europe with conquest.
Eussia has effectively opened the Black Sea to trade,
and at the present day Eussia could not possibly
have a more submissive doorkeeper than her helpless
debtor, the Sultan, although if he has a fault it is
that he is a little too weak to uphold his treaty
rights against the encroachments of England.

In Constantinople, under the eye of the Am-
bassadors, the Sultan cannot do much harm, and he
need not have more than a ' cabbage garden in
Europe.' This arrangement is practicable enough.
It was nearly a century after the Turks made
Adrianople the capital of their European dominions,
that they succeeded in taking Constantinople, which
from 1361 to 1453 preserved its independence.

Eussia has repeatedly approached Constantinople.
She has never entered it. The only entrance with which
we have been credited was due to English ignorance
of the French language. While the discussion of Mr.
Forster's amendment in the House of Commons hostile
to the six millions war vote was proceeding, Count
Schouvaloff*, talking to a lady at an evening party in
London, observed in passing, ' Oh, mon Dieu ! quant
k Constantinople, nous sommes dedans,' a colloquial
French expression meaning, ' We have been taken
in or deceived.' It passed from mouth to mouth,
and was construed as a positive announcement by the
Eussian Ambassador that our army had entered
Constantinople !

Next morning several London papers appeared
with excited articles, commencing, ' Nous sommes

M 2

164 The Future of the Eastern Question.

dedans ! The Eussians are in Constantinople — such
was the categorical declaration of Count Schouvaloff,
the Eussian Ambassador ! ' and then followed tlie
usual inflammatory nonsense concerning Eussian
'perfidy' and Muscovite 'greed,' of which the
London press always keeps so large a quantity in
stock, and whilst Count SchouvalofF, with difficulty
preserving his gravity, was endeavouring to explain
French phrases to Enghsh Ministers, Sir A. Layard's
misleading telegrams about the alleged advance of
Eussian troops on Constantinople, seemed to the
masses to confirm the English interpretation of ' Nous
sommes dedans,' and, in the explosion of excitement
which followed, Mr. Forster's amendment was with-
drawn.

That, however, was the only Eussian entry into
Constantinople recorded in history. In 1829 a
Council of the Empire decided that as no arrangement
could be more advantageous to Eussia than the
maintenance of the Sultan in Constantinople, he
should be left on his throne. Eussia, in 1833, and
again in 1840, interfered to save the Sultan from
destruction, and it is possible events may again call
for her intervention against another foe. It was said
to be ' against the well understood interests of the
Eussian Empire ' that Turkey should be destroyed.

I was told the other day that a belief prevails in
high official quarters among the Turks that the
Enghsh Government intended to invite Austria to
occupy Constantinople when the collapse comes.
Ijord Sahsbury's ' sentinel of the gate ' is to be

' The Last Word of the Eastern Question' 165

placed in possession of the city, and the Government
of Vienna and Pesth is to hold the keys of the Black
Sea.

It is well to be plain spoken. Unless one admits
that Austrian statesmen have altogether taken leave
of their wits, one should acquit them of any desire to
reign on the Bosphorus. Is it not only to Lord
Salisbury that we should say, 'Pas trop cle zele ;
surtout pas trop de zele ? Poor ' Austrians ' have sins
enough on their conscience without our adding to
them all that the EngHsh Minister can meditate for
them to perpetrate. But should a design like this
really be contemplated, it could evidently be executed
only by war. Eussia could not himibly submit to
see the key of the Black Sea conferred upon a rival
Power without her becoming the laughing-stock of
the whole world. ' England understands,' said Count
Nesselrode in 1853 — what Austria understands to-day
— 'that Eussia cannot suffer the establishment at
Constantinople of a Christian Power sufficiently
strong to control or disquiet her. The Emperor
disclaimed any wish or design of establishing himself
there, but he has determined not to allow either the
EngHsh or the French to establish themselves there.'
In those days an Austrian occupation of Con-
stantinople was too absurd even to be talked of.
Eussia desires to see at Constantinople what your
Ministers pretended to desire to see at Cabul — a strong,
a friendly, and an independent Power. There is, how-
ever, this difference ; that for you such a state of
affairs was a superfluous luxury, whilst to us it would
be an imperative necessity.

166 The Future of the Eastern Question,

It is the inveterate superstition of Kussophobists
that we desire to annex Constantinople. Our history
does not justify the suspicion. But it is quite true
that Constantinople occupies such a place in the
Eussian imagination that, questions of self-preserva-
tion apart, no Eussian Emperor could tolerate the
Austrians on the Bosphorus.

The Italian Peninsula until twenty years ago was
the amphitheatre in which France and Austria
struggled for ascendancy. Austria represented the
power of the conqueror. France fostered the national
idea. The interest of the European drama has been
shifted eastward. The Balkan Peninsula takes the
place of that of Italy. Austria again represents
foreign conquest ; but the representative of nationality
and independence is no longer France, but Eussia —
' a Power,' as was observed the other day by a very
intelligent diplomatist, ' which never gave up in the
course of all this century any step which she thought
it her duty to pursue, though she sometimes con-
sented to intervals of halt.' In both peninsulas the
Imperial city exercises a strange fascination. To save
the Eternal City from falling into the hands of Austria,
the French Eepublicans stifled in blood the Eepublic
of Eome. Said M. Thiers, ' You can scarcely estimate
the importance we attach to Eome. As the throne
of Cathohcism, as the centre of Art, as having been
long the second city of the French Empire, it fills in
our minds almost as great a space as Paris. To know
that the Austrian flag was flying over the Castle of
St. Angelo is a humiliation under which no French-

' The Last Word of the Eastern Question' 167

man could bear to exist ; and,' then exclaimed the
impetuous Frenchman, ' rather than see the Austrian
eagle on the flagstaff that rises above the Tiber, I
would destroy a hundred Constitutions and a hundred
religions.'^

If the thought of Eome falling into the hands of
Catholic Austria excited such passions in the heart
of Catholic and Voltairean France, can you wonder if
the thought of CathoUc Austria in possession of St.
Sophia kindles feelings of ungovernable indignation in
the minds of Orthodox Eussia ? Constantinople fills
an even greater space in our imagination than Eome
in that of the Frenchman. Our religion is Byzantine,
our laws, our Constitution, our architecture have all
more or less been influenced by Byzantium.

Eussia may endure the statics quo. She has cer-
tainly no desire to possess Constantinople. But she
never could consent to Constantinople passing either
to Catholic Austria or Protestant England.

Eussia's relations to Constantinople take their rise
in the heroic ages of her history ; nor should Eussians
hesitate to admit that they began in a series of
attempts on the part of our early rulers to possess
themselves of Constantinople — that is, of Tzargrad,
or ' King of Cities,' as it was then popularly described
in Eussia.

No fewer than five several times in the course of
two centuries Eussia attempted to conquer Tzargrad,
and this, no doubt, is sufficient to convince our

^ Conversations with M. ThierSy M. Guizot, and other distinguished
PersonSf Nassau W. Senior, vol. i. pp. 63, 61.

168 The Future of the Eastern Question.

enemies that we are animated by a never-dying desire
to possess Constantinople. The argument, I confess,
seems to me somewhat weak.

The attempt to conquer the East at the dawn of
the Middle Ages was almost exclusively Scandinavian.
Whether it was directed from the North-East or the
North-West of Europe, the restless valour of the Norse
Vikings impelled ahke all theEussian expeditions under
our Variag^ Princes against Constantinople and the Cru-
sades of the Western monarchs. Oleg was no more a
Eussian than Eichard was an Englishman. The im-
pulse which drove the Franks to plant their standard
on the walls of Jerusalem, although to a large extent
rehgious, was greatly due to the same fierce Norman
fever for conquest which drove Sviatoslaf to capture
the city of Phihppopolis and Oleg to hang his shield
on the Golden Door at Byzantium. If these early
Variag expeditions of ours in the tenth century
against Constantinople prove that Eussia to-day desires
to seize the city of the Sultans, much more does the
conquering of Constantinople in the twelfth century
by the Crusaders from the West prove that Tzargrad
is in danger from the descendants of those who made
the Third Crusade.

The first attack was made by Askold and Dir,
who, true to their Viking instincts, conducted a naval
expedition against Byzantium. They perished, with
their two hundred vessels, in a tempest.

The second attack was more successful. Oleg, in
907, with 2,000 vessels, invested Tzargrad by land,

' In English usually called * Varangian,'

' The Last Word of the Eastern Question' 169

and dictated terms of peace at the gates of the city.
An indemnity was exacted from the Greek Emperor,
a commercial treaty was signed, and Oleg suspended
his shield from the Golden Door. His successor, Igor,
was less fortunate. His flotilla was destroyed by Greek
fire in his first attempt, but in 944 the menace of a
second invasion induced the rulers of Byzantium to
pay an indemnity and sign a new commercial treaty.
The most memorable war of early Kussia against tlie
Lower Empire was that which resulted in the annihi-
lation of the army of Sviatoslaf by the forces of John
Zimisces. The origin of the war was curious. The
Byzantine Emperor, finding himself in danger from
Bulgaria, then an independent kingdom under its own
Tzars, called on the Eussians to defend his capital
against the nationality on whose behalf Kussia fought
her war of 1877-8. Sviatoslaf, with an army of
60,000 men, subsidised by Byzantium, crushed the
resistance of the Bulgarians, captured their capital
and all their fortresses, and practically annexed their
country. John Zimisces demanded its evacuation.
Sviatoslaf replied by threatening Constantinople.
War ensued between the late allies, and after display-
ing marvellous bravery at Sihstria the Eussians were
completely defeated, and the remains of their heroic
army evacuated the Balkan. This was in 972. Seventy
years afterwards, Yaroslaf the Great, the Charlemagne
of Eussia, sent an expedition against the Greek Empire,
which met a disastrous fate. The stormy Euxine,
Greek fire, and the sword of Monomachus destroyed
it to the last man. Only 800 Eussians, blinded by

170 The Future of the Eastern Question.

their captors, survived as prisoners in Byzantium.
Seven centuries had to pass away before a Eussian
army again encamped in the Balkan Peninsula. It
was not until 1772 that Eussians again crossed the
Danube, and the war which was ended by the Treaty
of Kainardji certainly did not aim at the conquest of
Constantinople.

The only war which Eussia entered upon with the
design of changing the ownership of Constantinople
was that which sprang from ' the Greek project,' ar-
ranged between Catherine the Great and Joseph II.,
and which was begun by the Turks in 1787. But
although it was agreed by Austria and Eussia to place
Constantine, the second son of Paul L, on the vacant
throne of Tzargrad, it was expressly declared that
Constantinople should not be annexed to Eussia.

This arrangement was a strange one, and under
present circumstances it may be interesting to repro-
duce it, as it proves that, in the eighteenth as in the
nineteenth century, Austria's appetite for the inheri-
tance of the Sick Man was far greater than that of
Eussia.

Austria was to have Servia, Bosnia, and the Her-
zegovina, as weU as Dalmatia, which then belonged
to Venice, recouping the Venetians for Dalmatia by
ceding them the Morea, Candia, and Cyprus. Eussia
was only to have Otchakoff, the strip of land between
the Bug and the Dnieper, and one or two islands of
the Archipelago. If the war were crowned with such
success that the Turks were expelled from Constanti-
nople, the Greek Empire was to be re-estabhshed in

' The Last Word of the Eastern Question.'' 171

complete independence, the throne of Byzantium to
be filled by the Grand Duke Constantine Pavlovitch,
who was to renounce all claims to the throne of
Eussia, so that the two kingdoms might never be
united under the same sceptre.^

When the ambitious schemes of Catherine are
referred to as proving the desperate determination of
Eussia to annex Constantinople, it is well to remember
that that monarch laid it down as an imperative
direction for the policy of Eussia that Constantinople
and Moscow should never be united under the same
sceptre.

The war did not prosper as was expected. Poland
was partitioned instead of Turkey, and Eussia con-
tented herself with Otchakoff.

During the Napoleonic wars, Alexander I. sub-
mitted to England a scheme for the partition of the
Ottoman Empire, in case of its existence becoming in-
compatible with the present state of Europe. England
was not cordial, but she concluded a treaty of sub-
sidies with the Emperor against Napoleon. A few
years afterwards, when Napoleon and Alexander met
at Tilsit, there occurs the only occasion in history in
which a Eussian Emperor expressed a wish to secure
possession of Constantinople. Napoleon declares that
Alexander urged strongly a claim to Constantinople,
but that he refused to hear of it. The arrangement
that was arrived at provided that Eussia and France
should ' come to an understanding to withdraw all
the Ottoman provinces in Europe — Constantinople

^ Rambaud's History of Russia, vol. ii. p. 160.

172 The Future of the Eastern Question.

and Eoumelia excepted — from the yoke and tyranny
of th,e Turks.' That desirable consummation even
now is not yet completed, although the Treaty of
Berhn, in this respect, does not fall far short of the
provisions of the Treaty of Tilsit.

Since that time our Emperors have not only per-
sistently repudiated any intention to annex Constanti-
nople, but they have as consistently refused to take
any step to deprive the Sultan of his capital.

In 1829, when our armies were at Adrianople, it
was decided that it would be detrimental to Eussia's
interests to overthrow the Government of the Sultan
on the Bosphorus, but if such a contingency could not
be averted they proposed that Constantinople should
be made a free city.

The contingency did not arise, and the city re-
mained in the hands of the Sultan, to the regret even
of Conservative Englishmen. ' There is no doubt,'
said the Duke of Wellington, ' that it would have been
more fortunate, and better for the world, if the Treaty
of Adrianople had not been signed, and if the Eussians
had entered Constantinople, and if the Turkish Empire
had been dissolved.'^ Lord Holland was even more
outspoken. In the session of 1830, in his place in
Parliament he exclaimed, ' As a citizen of the world,
I am sorry that the Eussians have not taken Constan-
tinople.'''^

In 1833, when the success of Mehemet Ali threat-
ened the Ottoman Empire with sudden dissolution, a
Eussian army occupied Constantinople for the defence

^ Wellington Despatches, vol. \i. p. 219.
^ Thirty Years of Foreign Policy j p. 115.

' llie Last Word of the Eastern Question' 173

of the Sultan against his rebelhous vassal. Lord
Palmerston, in the debate on the presence of Eussians
at Constantinople, to which the English Government
had consented, said ; — ' I very much doubt whether
the Eussian nation would be prepared to see that
transference of power, of residence, and of authority
to the southern provinces which would be the neces-
sary consequence of the conquest by Eussia of Con-
stantinople ; and if we have quietly beheld the
temporary occupation of the Turkish capital by the
forces of Eussia it is because we have full confidence
in the honour and good faith of Eussia, and believe
that those troops will be withdrawn in a very short
time/ ^ Lord Palmerston was justified in his confidence,
and our troops were withdrawn when the capital was
out of danger.

If only a similar just confidence had been displayed
in 1878 Europe would not have been brought to the
verge of a gigantic war.

In the Crimean War I only need to refer to Mr.
Kinglake's authority to prove that ' it would be wrong
to believe' that when the steps were taken which
brought about the war ' Eussia was acting in further-
ance of territorial aggrandisement,' much less from a
design to annex Constantinople.

In 1876, and still more signally in 1878, Eussia
remained true to her traditional policy. The words
of our Emperor to Lord Augustus Loftus, at Livadia,
may here be given as the latest authoritative expres-
sion of Eussia's will on this subject.

* Sir Tollemache Sinclair's Defence of Jiiissia, p. 6.

174 The Future of the Eastern Qitestion.

The Emperor said he had not the smallest wish or
intention to be possessed of Constantinople. ' All that
had been said or written about a will of Peter the
Great and the aims of Catherine II. were illusions
and phantoms, and never existed in reality ; and he
considered that the acquisition of Constantinople
would be a misfortune for Eussia. There was no
question of it, nor had it ever been entertained by his
late father, who had given a proof of it in 1828 when
his victorious army was within four days' march of the
Turkish capital. . . . His Majesty pledged his sacred
word of honour, in the most earnest and solemn man-
ner, that he had no intention of acquiring Constanti-
nople.

'His Majesty here reverted to the proposal
addressed to Her Majesty's Government for the occu-
pation of Bosnia by Austria, of Bulgaria by Eussia,
and of a naval demonstration at Constantinople, where,
he said. Her Majesty's fleet would have been the
dominant power. This, His Majesty thought, ought
to be a sufficient proof that Eussia entertained no
intention of occupying that capital.

' His Majesty could not understand why there
should not be a perfect understanding between Eng-
land and Eussia— an understanding based on a policy
of peace — which would be equally beneficial to their
mutual interests and those of Europe at large.

' '^ Intentions," said His Majesty, " are attributed to
Eussia of a future conquest t)f India and of the posses-
sion of Constantinople. Can anything be more absurd ?
With regard to the former it is a perfect impossibility ;

' The Last Word of the Eastern Question' 175

and as regards the latter I repeat again the most
solemn assurances that I entertain neither the wish nor
the intention.'"^

Not less categorical was the more formal declara-
tion of the Eussian Government. Prince Gortschakoff,
on May 18, 1877, defined the position of Kiissia
towards that city. He wrote : — ' As far as concerns
Constantinople . . . the Imperial Cabinet repeats
that the acquisition of that capital is excluded from
the views of His Majesty the Emperor. They recog-
nise that in any case the future of Constantinople is a
question of common interest, which cannot be settled
otherwise than by a general understanding, and that
if the possession of the city were to be put in question,
it could not be allowed to belong to any of the Great
Powers.'

The Treaty of San Stefano — signed when Turkey
was absolutely in Eussia's power — proved that Eussia
had no intention of dispossessing the Sultan of Stam-
boul ; and it is probable that ' the well understood
interests of the Eussian Empire ' are still believed to
require the maintenance of his authority as custodian
of the Straits.

Constantinople, though it possesses great religious
and historical attractions to Eussians, has not that
exaggerated importance in our eyes that is held in the
minds of both EngHsh and Turkish statesmen. Mr.
Gladstone, at St. James's Hall, and again at Midlothian,
declared that if England had been in Eussia's place
' she would have eaten up Turkey long ago.' Fuad

1 Blue Book, Turkey 1 (1877), p. 643.

176 The Future of the Eastern Question.

Pasha, in that pohtical testament which affords so
singular an illustration of a statesman-like perception
on the part of a Turkish Minister, declares, ' If I had
been myself a Eussian Minister I would have over-
turned the world to have conquered Constantinople.'^
Eussian Ministers do not share the idea of Fuad
Pasha, that the possession of Constantinople is worth
the overturn of the world. If we transferred our
capital to the Bosphorus, Constantinople would be the
Achilles' heel of the Eussian Empire.

I was discussing this subject a short time since
with a brilliant Frenchman. ' I do not see,' he re-
marked, half jokingly, half seriously, ' why Eussia
should not have Constantinople. I desire nothing so
much as to see you there.' ' But,' I remonstrated,
' we do not share your desire. The day we estab-
lished ourselves on the Bosphorus our decHne would
begin.' ' Certainly,' rejoined my sarcastic friend ;
' and that is precisely why I wished to see you
there! '2

* Farley's Turks and Chiistians, Appendix III. p. 239.

^ Emperor Nicliolas told Sir Hamilton Seymour : ' If an Emperor of
Russia should one day chance to conquer Constantinople, or should find
himself forced to occupy it permanently and fortify it with a Tiew to
making it impregnable, from that day would date the decline of Russia.
... If once the Tzar were to take up his abode at Constantinople,
Russia would cease to be Russian. No Russian would like that.' Even
Mr. Cowen, M.P., in his lucid interval recognised this truth.
Coming from such a Russophobist, the following remarks are perhaps of
some little interest. 'Many intelligent Russians,' said Mr. Cowen — -
speaking at Blaydon on September 30, 1876 — * entertain strong objections
to the extension of the Russian rule to Constantinople. And for this
very sensible reason. . . . The Russians, whose number is considerable,
and I believe increasing, are of opinion that it would be imwise to
remove the capital of Russia from Petersburg to Constantinople. On
these grounds, then, I dismiss this question of Russian extension as

' The Last Word of the Eastern Question.'' 177

If, however, sudden collapse should occur, and the
ownership of Constantinople should come up for
settlement, it seems to me that there are, perhaps,
only two solutions which Eussia can even so much as
discuss.

The first is the conversion of Constantinople into
a free city under the guarantee of Europe, governed
by an International Commission. To this there is the
grave objection that Constantinople carries with it
the sovereignty of Asia Minor, which can hardly be
vested in either an International Commission or in the
civic authorities of a single city.

The other solution is the establishment under the
tutelage and guarantee of Europe of a European
Prince, a persona grata to all the Powers as Sovereign
of Byzantium and Asia Minor.

Time is not yet ripe for making Constantinople
the seat of a Balkan Confederation. It would be
absurd and dangerous to entrust it to Greece, and
the veto of Eussia is recorded in advance against any
scheme of placing Constantinople in the hands of any
of the Powers.

Our position is clear and unambiguous. If Eng-
land is equally free from all arrieres pensees as to the
last word of the Eastern Question, why should we not
come to a perfect understanding on the subject based
on ' a pohcy of peace which would be equally bene-
ficial to our mutual interests and to those of Europe
at large ' ?

unworthy of consideration. The fear of Russian aggression is an
exploded illusion.*

N

PAET III.

MISUNDERSTANDINGS AND PREJUDICES.

1. SOME ENGLISH PREJUDICES.

2. POLAND AND CIRCASSIA.

3. SIBERIA.

4. RUSSIAN AUTOCRACY.

5. CONSTITUTIONALISM IN RUSSIA.

6. THE ATTEMPT ON THE EMPEROR.

X 2

181

CHAPTER I.

SOME ENGLISH PREJUDICES.

Alas ! poor Russians ! we seem to have no chance,
no chance whatever, of obtaining justice among the
Enghsh in England. No sooner do we flatter our-
selves that at last we have met with a friend — with
at least one person who has the wisdom to question
the truth of accusations brought against us without
positive evidence, and to refuse to regard separate
cases as general absolute truths — than a rude rebuff
recalls us to reahty, and an act of pure unmistakable
hostility dissipates in a moment the pleasing illusion
that at last we had found an unprejudiced judge.

Fear can surely have no share in the production
of so persistent an animosity ! The menace to your
Indian realm exists only in the imagination of those
who fancy that it is but a stone's throw from the
banks of the Oxus to the southern slopes of the
Himalayas. In Russia we cannot understand why
Englishmen should permit a dread of Russian power
to colour all the speeches of your Conservative poli-
ticians, and to bias the pohcy of your Ministry. We
know too much of the power of England to accept
such a compliment as quite serious. We see that

182 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

England annexes new territories every year with a
facility which betrays to foreigners little evidence of
reluctance on her part to extend the boundaries of
her Empire. We know that she is all-powerful at
sea, and her financial position is first-class. Eussia,
on the other hand, is not wealthy. She is only
morally rich, which, according to old-fashioned Eus-
sian views, is not altogether to be despised. But that
moral wealth can neither threaten India nor annex
Great Britain. Why, then, this irrational panic,
which haunts the imagination of what used to be the
most self-confident, self-reliant, (ind fearless race in
the world ? If I were an Englishman I should blush
for shame if I entertained this coward fear of any
Power on earth.

It is impossible to believe that fears so groundless
can really occasion all the hostihty with which my
country is regarded by many Englishmen. If it is not
fear, to what unknown source, then, can we trace the
origin of Eussophobia ? To poor, simple-minded
Eussians it seems hopeless to undertake such an in-
quiry. One involuntaril}^ recalls Hamlet's remark,
'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
than are dreamt of in your philosopliy.' But per-
haps I may be ])ardoned if I suggest that ignorance,
pure, sheer, downright ignorance,^ has not a little to
do with it.'

* The Statesman of December 13, 1879, referring to this prevailing
ignorance says : — ' A few years ago, Father Coleridge earnestly warned us
in The Month that the English temper towards Eussia was such that we
were ready to attribute to her machinations the very physical disturbances
qf the earth. Jf Mount Etna breaks into eruption, the tamper of oi^r news?

Some English Prejudicefi. 183

Let me give an instance of this ignorance in
places where it might least be expected to exist. The
other day a friend mentioned, in the course of conver-
sation, that your great English poet, Mr. Tennyson,
hated Eussia.

' Indeed,' said I ; ' that is most unfortunate. But
can you tell me why ? '

' Oh,' was the response, ' we English people, you
know, cannot tolerate your knout system ! '

' How good of you ! " I exclaimed ; ' upon this
we perfectly agree. But tell me, why should your
Laureate live only in the past and take no notice of
the present ? Poets are not confined to the contem-
plation of the past ; the future itself is sometimes dis-
closed to their ken.'

With a puzzled look and hesitating accent, he

papers is such that they are ready at once to ascribe it to Russian agency
at the bottom of tlie crater. We tell our countrymen, almosft with
passionate earnestness, that while they permit themselves to be deluded
as they are, by German, Magyar, and Jewish hatred of Russia, there is
no hope of wise and noble guidance of the foreign policy of the nation.
The metropolitan press pours forth an incessant stream of the wildest
delusions concerning the great and simple-minded people whom it is our
misfortune to have made our enemies by the abuse and calumnies we
have poured upon them for years. It is most unworthy and most guilty ;
and until the English people are enlightened enough to judge of Russia
for themselves, instead of looking at her through the spectacles of
German Jews, Magyar patriots, and Romish priests, they will never
understand what Russia really is.' And again, on January 3, the States-
man says : — * These Continental scribblers have made the masses of our
countrymen insane about Russia. . . . Russia and xVmerica are marked out,
by every fact of their being, as the two natural allies of this country in
the great work of regenerating Asia. Neither Tory statesmen nor
publicists will permit the nation to cherish any other feelings than those
of hostility and jealousy towards both. . . . Russia is at this moment our
natural ally, and it is nothing but our own evil temper as a people
towards her that prevents our discerning it. But the guilt of it is not
t|ie people's —it is the publicists'.

184 Misunderstandings and Prejudices,

observed, 'But you do not mean to say that tlie
knout is a thing of the past, not of the present ? '

'That is exactly what I do mean to say,' I answered.
'If I wish to stick to facts I can say nothing else.
The knout has ceased to exist in Eussia — even in
the navy,' I added, ' which perhaps is also the case
with the cat-o'-nine-tails in the navy of England ! Is
it not so ? '

Without answering my question, my friend said,
' Since when ? '

' Shortly after the emancipation of the serfs,' said
I. 'Eussia is a long way off; but is seventeen years
not long enough for such a reform to reach the ears
of England's Laureate ? '

We may be ' barbarians,' but our criminal code,
judged by the standard of the Howard Association,
is more humane than that of at least one other nation,
which retains the lash in the army and navy,^ appHes
the cat-o'-nine-tails to the garotter, and secretly
strangles murderers in the recesses of her gaols.^

Well, perhaps that does not improve matters.
Is ignorance not invincible ? Does not Schiller say
' against stupidity the gods themselves contend in
vain ' ? If Englishmen, seventeen years after the
knout has disappeared from Eussia, persist in

^ Recent debates in Parliament almost lead one to believe that, in the
opinion of the English Government, at least, the Army Cat is quite a
pillar of the British Constitution.

"^ When this letter first appeared exception was taken to this phrase,
perhaps not without some ground. Newspaper reporters, it was said,
were ahoays present at English executions. Since then, however, the
Home Secretary, Mr. Cross, has excluded reporters by an Ukase, and so
the phrase can now remain unaltered.

Some English Prejudices, 185

denouncing Eussians for using the knout, what can
we hope ? And here again we Eussians labour at a
great disadvantage. We shrink from the task of
vindicating ourselves even from the most unjust
reproaches. Some accusations appear to us so incon-
ceivably absurd that we cannot understand how any
answer can be required.

Let me illustrate this. Last year a curious col-
lection of calumnies against Eussia was anony-
mously published in England. My Enghsh friends
were anxious that it should be refuted. I appUed,
and apphed in vain, to one after another of my
literary friends in Eussia to undertake such a task.
' How can you ask such a thing ! No Eussian with
any self-respect could stoop to notice such monstrous
libels. Your beloved England is evidently demoral-
ising you, or you would never pay attention to such
attacks.'

Is it either right or generous to declare that be-
cause no reply is made no reply can be made ? The
Golos in 1876 published a long and circumstantial
story of the way in which Lord Beaconsfield abused
his position as Premier to influence the Money Mar-
ket. Nobody in England dreamed of categorically
refuting it. They regarded the calumny as beneath
contempt. Has not a Eussian as much right to
silence when accused as Lord Beaconsfield ?

I am the more disposed to attribute this strange
antipathy to ignorance, because those Enghshmen
who really know us are among the best friends we
have. If there were really some secret antipathy

186 Misitnderstandinfis and Prejudices.

between the nations this would not be so. In cases
of mutual repulsion the repulsion is most marked
when the two objects approach. But English resi-
dents in Eussia rarely manifest the irrational anti-
pathy which is so strongly shown on the banks
of the Thames.

Examples of an exactly opposite feeling are
present to our memory — such, for instance, as the
warm-hearted letters which appeared in the Daily
News and the Times in 1876, from well-known Eng-
lish residents in Moscow ; and, frankly speaking, I
think they are only paying us with our own coin.

The position of Eussian visitors in England
is, unfortunately, not always so pleasant. When
England is determined only to recognise in every
Eussian a concealed enemy, intriguing against Eng-
lish interests, it is not to be wondered at if Eus-
sians shrink from visiting England, and if the two
nations are somewhat estranged. Permit me to illus-
trate this by a little personal detail. As many
Eussians generally do, I was going to spend my
summer and autumn abroad. Several people came
to take leave of me, and we began discussing the pro-
jected journey. No sooner did I say ' I hope to go
for a few weeks to England ' when I was interrupted
by several voices. ' It's impossible ! Can you really
go after what has happened ? Why should you not
rather go to China? ' ' What do you mean ? ' I asked.
'How can one take the place of the other?' ' Oh,'
they replied ; ' one is preferable to the other. The
Chinese are less afraid, ]ess sugpicioua of foreigner?.^

Some English Prejudices. 187

than the Enghsh ; and besides, what the Chmese say
and think of us we at least do not know.' ' But then,
the few friends we have, why should I not be
allowed to see them ? ' I asked. ' We have no
friends,' they exclaimed ; ' you are under a delusion !
And they but honestly expressed the general convic-
tion. How can it be otherwise, when it is impossible
for a Eussian to pay a friendly visit to London
without being regarded as a Eussian partisan or even
as a Eussian agent ?

Thousands of Eussians go to France. Every
Frenchman noticing the fact looks rather pleased, and
finds it only natural : ' Ma foi^ comme de raison,
on adore Paris ^ c'est tout simple ! ' But if a Eussian
comes to London it produces quite a different
impression upon Englishmen. ' What can be his
or her object in coming here? It looks very bad,
the very fact of these frequent visits — very bad
indeed ! ' The unfortunate foreigner tries to explain
that he has a great liking for the country, its peculiar
qualities, for some friends who have always been the
same, equally kind and intelligent. But, after he has
said all this, it remains as incredible as before ! And
yet, why should it be impossible for a Eussian to visit
England except as an ' agent ' ? You are really too
modest.

The evidence of war correspondents^ of the Eng-

* As so much lias been said of the ferocity of our soldiers, may I ask
credulous believers in Rhodope and other fables to read the following tes-
timony by a distinguished British officer who bears an illustrious name in
English history ? Addressing his constituents at Sunderland in 1877,
ftfter three months' sojourn in the Ilussian c^mp, Sir Henry Ilavelpck,

188 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

lisli press Is not without some little weight. Colonel
Brackenbury, Mr. MacGahan, Mr. Forbes, Sir Henry
Havelock, Mr. Boyle and others, less well known, made
the acquaintance of Eussians in Eou mania and Bul-
garia under circumstances which render concealment
of realities impossible. I desire no better verdict for
my countrymen than that pronounced by those
witnesses selected at random, although some were
hostile and others did not spare their reproaches
against what they beheved to be wrong — for, after
all, we cannot be vexed with people, although they
do not arrive at exactly the right result, if they
honestly do their best.

This habit of always reproaching us with past,
present, and future crimes is unjust and impolitic.
Just put yourself in our place, and imagine a foreigner
never uttering or writing a Avord about England

M.P., said lie found tlie Russian soldier docile, gentle, tractable, he had
almost said sheepish to a degree in his gentleness. During the time he
was with the Russians, he came into contact in one way or other
with 200,000 soldiers. Instead of finding them a degraded people, he
only saw three drunken men during the whole time ! In the dealings of
the Russians with the Bulgarians, he remarked at all times the greatest
gentleness and abstinence from violence. He not only saw them in large
masses, but in distant villages, at the roadside, where soldiers were
under no control, and the presence of a stranger like himself would have
no effect on their action. Their conduct was the most admirable he had
ever seen in his life. In their treatment of their enemies, were they the
bloodthirsty people they had been represented ? He was associated with
the Cossacks for about three months. He never saw a tamer set of
people in his life. He would challenge anybody to produce one single
well-authenticated instance of violence, even of a minor degree, per-
petrated by a Russian officer or soldier, either north or south of the
Balkans, during the whole time of their occupation of that country ! '
Those who desire other testimonies will find them in the admirable
papers on ^ The Rhodope Commission and the Pall Mall Gazette j
reprinted from the Spectatw by Ohatto and Windus.

Some English Prejudices. 189

without exclaiming, ' What a disgrace your Opium
Trade with China is, in these days of Christianity and
progress/ What would you feel ?— although the re-
proach is, perhaps, not so unfair as many you cast at
us. Suppose he even went further, and declared,
' You cannot care a straw for civilisation and liberty
as long as you continue to tolerate the Opium Trade,'
would he be worse than many Englishmen who dis-
believe our sympathies with the Slavs, because of
the shortcomings with which they reproach Eussia ? ^
In Eussia, when it happened to me to draw the
attention of my countrymen to some friendly notice
written about our people, and to read aloud some
few favourable Hnes, I generally was interrupted witli
' Well, well, when is the " but " coming ? Wlien
are you coming to "Poland," "barbarism," the

* This point is put very forcibly by Mr. James Annand in one of his
excellent Campaigning Pape7'8. He says : * Suppose England were in a
condition similar to that of Russia, with more tenitory than wealth,
and comparatively unknown among its neighbours, and suppose a set of
people, say in Germany, were to devote themselves to telling how we
blew Sepoys from guns in India, how we gag the native press, how we
forced on an opium war, how we fought small potentates with Uttle
provocation, and how wherever we go the aboriginal inhabitants perish
before us ; suppose it were told that our people are divorced from the
soil, that every thirtieth person we meet is an actual pauper, and every
sixth or seventh an occasional one ; suppose it were preached abroad
that our law holds a man innocent until he be proved guilty, and yet
he may be imprisoned like a common felon before his guilt is proved.
All these are facts, or rough semblances of facts, and yet they would
give an utterly inadequate idea of the kind of country England is, and
of the kind of people of whom it is composed. Suppose the fact of our
liberation of the West Indian slaves were suppressed or never referred
to as the Russian liberation of the Serfs is, and suppose all the evil we
ever did from the days of oiu: barbarism upwards were continually
brought before us whenever we made a movement to do well : we should
be somewhat in the position in which certain people placed Russia
during the late negotiations.'

100 Misiiiitlri\-<hi,n(liii(j^ and Prejudict'-<.

"cherished knout/' and the quicksilver mines, or at
least the latest series of atrocities which need to be
refuted ? ' Discoiu^aged, I often had to give up my
conciliatory attempt. Quicksilver mines, and Poland,
and the famous knout actually seldom failed to appear,
and my poor efforts to describe Enghsh sympathies
or to explain my Anglomania generally terminated in
a ridiculous fiasco.

No Englishman is asked to forget the duties which
he owes to. his own country : all that is wanted is
that he should speak out his friendly feelings — when
there are such — ^without trembling for being taken
for a partisan or an agent, and even might I hope,
without the everlasting ' but ' which now quahfies
and spoils almost every expression of your sympathy.

After the knout, Eussia is most abused for her
treatment of her subject races, and with as httle
reason. We have, for instance, many Mohammedan
subjects. They are not oppressed or persecuted.
They have all the Uberty enjoyed by the Mohamme-
dans in Turkey, except the liberty of oppressing their
Christian neighbours. They certainly enjoy a far
better government than their co-religionists in Asia
Minor. In the Baltic provinces there are many local
municipal institutions ; and no race has less reason to
complain of ill-treatment than the Germans, who
enjoy so large a share of the administration of the
Empire. It is a characteristic of Eussia that we
open even the highest branches of our service to all
our subject races — an example which England, I
think, does not follow in India. General MeHkoff

Some Eiiiflislt Prejfidires. 191

and General Lazareff, who have covered themselves
with glory in Armenia, are both Armenians. Todle-
ben and Heimann are Germans of the Baltic Pro-
vinces. Nepokoitschitzky is a Pole, as also is
Levitsky.

' Ah, Poland ! ' you exclaim. Of course it is in
vain for a Eussian to appeal for a hearing of his
defence about the Poles, even to those who deny Home
Rule to the Irish.

Have you studied the facts — ' those engrossed
hierograms,' as Mr. Carlyle says, of which so few
have the key ? Have you tried, before framing your
bill of indictment against a whole nation, at least to
read what is ^vritten by our few, but honest, coura-
geous defenders.

M. Emile de Girardin, in spite of his intimacy
with the Bonapartes, felt indignant at the sheer
ignorance of our accusers, and wrote his famous ' La
Pologne et la Diplomatic ' — full of authentic docu-
ments and historical proofs of the groundlessness
of the prevaiUng prejudices. But this book, I fear,
is not extensively circulated in England.

In another chapter I shall refer to tliis Polish Ques-
tion, but now I content myself with saying that Poland
would have had a Constitution of its own for the last
sixteen years if the Poles would have been content
with the boundaries of the kingdom of Poland. But
when they insisted, even at the sword's point, that
we should not only give Home Rule to Poland but
Polish rule almost to half Russia, which they claimed
to be theirs, then a reaction set in, and the reforms

192 Misunderstandings and Prejudices,

which the Grand Duke Constantine went to Warsaw
with such high hopes to estabhsh remained a dead
letter.

Constitutions are not unknown in Eussia, nor is it
beyond the boundaries of Eussian pohcy to grant
Home Eule to its subject provinces. Those who
think so should go to Finland. In that important
maritime province they would find the Finns in
possession of a very large measure of administrative
independence. The Eussian language is not employed
in Finnish courts or in Finnish official documents.
Am I wrong in saying that in Wales the Welsh lan-
guage is not so favoured ?

The Lutheran, and not the Eussian Orthodox
Church, is the established religion of Finland. Nay,
even the Eussian rouble will not circulate in that
Eussian province — which lies almost at the gates of
the Eussian capital. Finland has its own laws, its own
legislature, its own Church, its own coinage, its own
language, its own budget, and its own national debt.

M. de Circourt, one of the most distinguished
Frenchmen of this century, whose stores of informa-
tion were as exact as they were vast, in his conversa-
tions with Mr. Senior,^ referred to this subject in
terms which must horrify those who delight to repre-
sent Finland as one of the many victims of ' Eussian
aggression.' ' The Swedes,' said M. de Circourt, in
1863, 'must know that Finland is irrecoverably lost
to them. They ruled it oppressively. Not a Fin was
allowed to take part in the management of his own

1 Fortnightly Review ^ January, 1880, p. 115.

Some English Prejudices. 193

country. It is now one of the best governed countries
in the world. The population consists of about
50,000 Eussians, 250,000 Swedes, and 1,600,000 Fins.
The Finnish population has doubled since Finland
became Eussian. They detest Sweden, and are loyal
Eussians.' When asked by Mr. Senior, ' How do you
account for the popularity of Eussian rule in Finland
and its unpopularity in Poland ? ' M. de Circourt re-
phed, ' The causes are reUgion and race. The Fins
are Lutherans, enjoying the best form of Christianity.
The Poles are Eoman Cathohcs, subject to the worst.
Lutherans are tolerant, and are satisfied with tolera-
tion. Eoman Catholics require supremacy. In
Eussian and Prussian Poland and in Lithuania they
are merely on a par with the other Christian sects.
The Lutheran Fins are not merely unpersecuted, their
clergy are paid by the State. Then they are an ad-
mirable race : honest, diligent, quiet, and moral.
They are among the happiest people in Europe, as the
Poles are among the unhappiest.'

Nor does the recognition of local independence
destroy the loyalty of our Finns. During this war
their enthusiasm has been very great, although they
are connected neither by race nor rehgion with the
Southern Slavs. There is no conscription in Finland.
Its system of raising soldiers is the same as the Eng-
lish. A few weeks ago a call was made for volun-
teers in one district in Finland.^ In three days the
list was more than filled by gallant men who were
eager to be led to the liberation of Bulgaria. That

* This letter was written in Noyember 1877.
O

194 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

they knew it was no holiday work upon which they
had entered was shown by one grim httle fact. Every
volunteer before joining the ranks provided himself
with a dagger, in order that he might have the means
of saving himself by a swift death-stroke from the
mutilation and torture that awaits the wounded who
fall into the hands of the Turks! Have we not
reason to be proud of men who go out joyfully to
risk their lives in such a war ?

It is difficult to convince those who are not
famihar with Eussia how wilhngly the whole popula-
tion of my country will surrender all that they have,
even life itself, if it be required by the Tzar, in order
to carry on the war which he has undertaken for the
oppressed Slavs. The declaration in the petitions
which flowed in to the Emperor after the Moscow
address — ' We place our fortunes and our hves at
thy disposal' — was no meaningless phrase. The
records of Eussia's history prove that it is a simple
statement of a fact.

The calculating, sceptical, selfish part of Europe
may look upon the addresses and petitions to the
Emperor merely as a species of new-fashioned
eloquence. But in burning, decisive, historical mo-
ments such Eussian words have always been syn-
onymous with deeds. An offer of ' life and fortune '
can only be voluntary. We Eussians are sometimes
prevented from having this will categorically ex-
pressed and carried out ; but after we have almost
implored to be allowed to sacrifice them in a holy
cause we never fear to be taken at our word — we

Some English Prejudices. 195

never shrink from its consequences. The mighty-
voice of the Eussian people has never been heard
in vain.

Permit me to recall one instance alone out of
numbers which might be mentioned to illustrate
this characteristic of my countrymen. In tlie time
of Peter the Great, whilst Eussia was fighting, not for
the tortured Slavs, not for her persecuted co-reli-
gionists, but merely for the possession of the Baltic
Provinces — a question of comparatively small mo-
ment to the Eussian people — the Emperor sent a
ukase to the Senate fixing new taxes upon salt.
No sooner was the Imperial decree read than Prince
Jacob Dolgorouky sprang from his chair, and in the
presence of a numerous assemblage, to the bewilder-
ment of everyone, tore it to pieces.

' Emperor ! * exclaimed he, with a trembling
voice, ' you want money? We understand it ! But
why should the poor sufier and pay for it? Have
you no wealthy nobility to dispose of? Prince
Menshikofi* may build a ship at his private expense,
Apraxine another one, and I will certainly not re-
main behind my countrymen ! ' .

Such was the spirit displayed by the Eussians in
those days, and since the time of Peter the Great
Eussians have not degenerated.

0 2

196 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

CHAPTER II.

POLAND AND CIECASSIA.

EussiA, writes a gifted friend of mine, ' Eussia like
England has her faults : their faults are identical.'

Without endorsing this view, it strikes me that
there is, at all events, a great similarity in the com-
plaints which each makfes of the other. If you lived
in Eussia, you would see the other side of the shield,
which is not visible in England. Sometimes at
Moscow, when fresh from my Enghsh visit, when
I hear good Eussian patriots declaiming against
England's shortcomings, their words sound to me
like an eclio of the denunciations of Eussia with
which I am sometimes favoured by my Turkophile
friends. One cannot help smiling sometimes, for the
indignation in both cases is just as intense, the accu-
sations are just the same : only the names are
changed. At Moscow they say England where at
London they say Eussia, but with that exception
the philippics are almost identical.

While admitting that Eussian patriots are some-
times mistaken, I must submit that English patriots
are not always well informed about Eussia.

Take, for instance, the charges which rise to the

Poland and Cir cassia. 197

minds of these mutual accusers when they utter the
words ' Poland and Ireland.' Counting upon your
love for straightforwardness, I must say that we can
never understand why you should be so horrified
with Eussia for taking one share of partitioned
Poland, while England never seems ashamed of
having conquered Ireland by the sword. There are
many points in common between the Poles and the
Irish. Was it not your Prince Consort who said
' The Poles ! they are the Irish of the Continent ' ?

And here I may make just a passing remark,
that it seems to a Eussian somewhat strange that of
the three Powers which divided Poland, your wrath
is entirely expended upon the one which had the
best historical justification for her action, whilst the
worst of the partitioning Powers is the special
favourite of EngUsh Conservatives.^

Of course I know that you have been induced by
Mr. Gladstone, and other Liberal statesmen before
his day, to improve the condition of the Irish. But
just as your Poet Laureate still complains of the
knout in Eussia, which we abolished many years ago,
so Eussian readers are sometimes apt to be so far
misled by the complaints of the Irish Home Eule
obstructionists as to beheve that Ireland still writhes
an unwilling victim in the grasp of the England — say
of 1798.

If our past in Poland is to be perpetually revived

* * The manner in which Austria acted was perhaps the worst of the
three confederates. Frederick and Catherine might be considered open
foes; but the blackness of Austria was double-dyed, for she was
treacherous and cowardly.' — Thirty Years of Foreign Policy j p. 32.

198 Mia under standings and Prejudices.

to inflame English animosities against Eussia, can
you wonder if your past in Ireland should occa-
sionally be used in E-ussia to justify invectives against
England, as ' a merciless oppressor of helpless
nationalities ' ? Is there not somewhere a saying
justifying the same measure you mete out to others
being meted out to you ? It is quite as unjust for
Enghshmen to abuse Eussia of to-day for the sack of
Warsaw, and to excite prejudice against us by re-
citing Campbell's rhapsodies about Kosciusko, as it
is for Eussians to denounce England's doings in
Ireland as if the Penal Laws were still in force and
' flogging Fitzgerald ' were still committing atrocities
upon the Irish peasantry.

Despite Polish legends and Irish grievances,
both Poland and Ireland, I believe, are getting on
tolerably well under the respective heels of the
Muscovite and the Saxon. As to Poland, let me, as
usual, revert to Enghsh testimony, for I carefuUy
avoid quoting our own, lest it should be said we are
acting as judges in our own case. Mr. Wilham
Mather, of Salford, returning home in May 1878,
from a lengthened tour in Eussia, wrote to the
Manchester Examiner : ' Poland is now one of the
most prosperous and rapidly developing parts of the
Empire. This I know to be a fact. In all business
and industrial pursuits, Poland is developing more
soundly than any other part of Eussia.'

Eecent reports of your consuls give the same
flattering accounts of the present condition of Poland.
They say, ' there is a very remarkable progress in

Poland and Cir cassia. 199

commerce, agriculture, and manufacture,' and further,
that ' the country is becoming rich and prosperous
beyond all expectation.'^

Whatever wrongs the Eussians may have done to
the Poles, they were by no means the unoffending
neighbours that some people believe.'^ That ' Sar-
matia fell unwept without a crime ' is, I believe, an
article in the English creed ; but the Poles took
Moscow before we took Warsaw, and there was
more excuse for rectifying our frontier at the expense
of Poland a hundred years ago than there is for
Lord Beaconsfield's scientific rectification of the
north-west frontier of India at the expense of
Afghanistan.

Mr. Cobden's testimony is well known.^ But I can

* See Mackenzie's The Nineteenth Centuri/f p. 370.

^ I wish that some of my countrymen who possess that -earnest love
of truth and superiority to popular prejudices which so eminently dis-
tinguish your great historian, Mr. Froude, woidd render the Russians in
Poland the inestimable service which the latter has rendered Hhe
English in Ireland.' Believe me the responsibility of the Poles for the
miseries of Poland is at least as great as that of the Irish for the sufier-
ings of Ireland.

^ Mr. Oobden, in 183G, declared that there had been 'lavished upon
Poland more false sentiment, deluded sympathy, and amiable ignor-
ance, than on any other subject of the present age;' and he proved
that, whatever might be the wickedness of the partitioning Powers,
their act had been fraught with incalculable blessings to the Poles.
He says: — 'Down to the partition, nineteen out of every twenty inhabi-
tants were slaves belonging to the very worst aristocracy of ancient
or modern times. The Poles, who are now viewed only as a suffering
and injured people, were, during the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth
centuries, a most formidable and aggressive enemy to the neighbouring
empires. They knew no other employment than that of the sword;
war, devastation, and bloodshed were the only fashionable occupations
for the nobility, whilst the peasants reaped the fruits of famine and

slaughter From the death of Sigismond, Poland became one

universal scene of corruption, faction, and confusion. There is nothing
in the history of the world comparable for confusion, suffering, and

200 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

call anotlier witness whose voice ought to be
heard with respect by those who refuse to listen to
Mr. Cobden. There was a debate in the House of
Commons on March 16, 1847, upon the annexation of
Cracow, in the course of which a very remarkable
speech was made from which I make no apology for
making the following lengthy extract.

If there be any assembly in Europe which should be the
last to criticise the conduct of the Powers with regard to
Poland it is the Parliament of England. Before the partition
of Poland took place the Minister of England was perfectly
aware of what was contemplated. He was in communication

wickedness to the condition of this unhappy kingdom during these two
centuries. The republic of Poland was a despotism one hundred thousand
times worse than that of Turkey at this time, because it gave to 100,000
tyrants absolute power over the lives of the rest of the community. The
historian of The Anarchy of Poland (in four octavo volumes) exclaims —
" Oh, that some strong despot would come, and in mercy rescue these
people from themselves." The fate of Poland was but a triumph of

justice, without which its history would have conveyed no moral

The dismemberment of that empire has been followed by an increase in
the amount of peace, wealth, liberty, civilisation and happiness enjoyed
by the great mass of the people. Slavery no more exists, the peasantry
now possess the control over their own persons and fortunes, and are at
liberty to pursue happiness according to their own free will and pleasure,
which is nearly the amount of freedom that can he felt to be possessed by
the great mass of any nation. Under Russian rule, the condition of the
country has continued to improve beyond all precedent ; at no former
period of its history was the public wealth so great and so generally
diffused. The happy countenances of the inferior classes of society ex-
hibited a wonderful contrast to what had lately been. To restore the
Polish nation to its condition previously to the first partition in 1772
would be to plunge nineteen-twentieths of the inhabitants from freedom
into bondage, from comparative happiness into the profoundest state of
misery. In all cases where neighbouring States have been annexed to Russia
the inhabitants have thereby been advanced in civilisation and happiness.
Poland has undoubtedly benefited more than any other country by its
incorporation with Russia. The spread of Russian Empire has invariably
increased instead of diminishing the growth of civilisation and com-
merce.'— Cobden's Political Writings: Poland, pp. 92-97 and 101.

Poland and Cir cassia. 201

with the Government of France, and France offered to unite
with England to prevent that partition. That Minister was
second to none of those who have regulated the affairs of
this nation in his knowledge of the Continent ; and what did
the Parliament do ? On the very eve of the partition of
Poland they turned that Minister out of office, and Poland
was partitioned.

Many events have happened since then. Who can now
deny that the spoliation of Poland has ceased to be a
political catastrophe, and must be regarded as an historical
fact ? There must have been some good cause for a great
and numerous race having met the doom we all acknowledge
they have encountered. We hear much of a great nation.
The hon. Member for Bolton tells us of twenty millions of
people ; but it is not the number of the people which makes
a great nation. A great nation is a nation which produces
great men. It is not by millions of population that we
prove the magnitude of mind; and when I hear of the
' infamous ' partition of Poland — although as an Englishman
I regret a political event which I think was injurious to our
country ' — 1 have no sympathy with the race which was
partitioned. It is just 100 years ago that it was proposed
to partition another Empire. Look at the proceedings that
took place at Frankfort against Maria Theresa of Austria.
Look at the arch-conspirators that were there leagued
together, at the head of whom was the King and the
Kepublic of Poland. Why was not Austria partitioned when
Poland was at the head of the conspirators to destroy her ?
I tell you it was the national character that saved Austria.
She was not twenty millions then, and yet she baffled Prussia,
she baffled France, she baffled Poland — that Poland which
always comes before us as if she had been the victim of
Europe instead of having been a ready conspirator on every
occasion, and the pamperer of the lusts of an aristocracy

^ The cynical doctrine of ' British interests/ which was applied to
Bulgaria in 1877, had been applied by its author, it would seem, to
Poland thirty years ago.

202 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

which ultimately betrayed her. Is it the suffering people
who raise the commotions which are constantly taking place
in Italy, in Poland, in Spain ? Are they the parties to those
movements ? No. In every country it is the remnant of a
subverted aristocracy — subverted because they were false to
their trust, and never placed themselves at the head of their
people. The men who really caused the fall of Poland were
not the great Powers whom you denounce in your hustings'
speeches. It was this order of men who never supported
the people, under whom the people, indeed, were serfs and
not free men. In Eussian Poland the peasantry are in a
far more easy condition than they were under independent
Poland. Are you surprised, then, that the men who found
themselves no longer serfs, but placed in this improved con-
dition, should adhere to the arbitrary constitution which you
denounce, and shrink from the aristocratic conspirators whom
you patronise ? If you assume to school the potentates and
guide the populations of Europe, it is at least expected of
you that your counsels should be founded on knowledge ; it
is at least expected that they should be expressed in the
decorous language of a dignified conciliation.^

That testimony is very strong, coming from any
Englishman at a time when, as a bitter enemy of
Eussia's declared, but a few months before ' the blood
of the aristocracy of Galicia had been poured out
like water in a common massacre,' but its weight will
no doubt be immeasurably increased, when I add that
the speaker was then Mr. Disraeli, who as the Earl of
Beaconsfield is now Prime Minister of England.

Fifteen years ago the Grand Duke Constantine
went to Poland to give her a Constitution. He was
ardently supported by the Marquis Weliapolsky
and Count Zamoisky, but the Marquis almost

^ Hansard, vol. xci. pp. 67-91.

Poland and Cir cassia. 203

miraculously escaped death from assassination, and
the offer of a Constitution was responded to by re-
bellion. Demands were made that autonomous
Poland should extend almost beyond Smolensk, and
in the troubles that ensued the Constitution was
abandoned. The facts are notorious, but if you
refuse to receive them on Eussian testimony, Mr.
Butler Johnstone, who is fanatically Turkophile,
states them in the letters which he wrote from
Eussia two or three years ago.^

But do you know that if the Poles have not a
national Government of their own, it is to some extent
due to English diplomacy ? After the overthrow *of
Napoleon, our Emperor was most anxious to re-
estabhsh the Polish Kingdom, and, if he failed, it was
due to the representations of Austria and Prussia, sup-
ported by the EngUsh Plenipotentiaries. It is not only
at Berlin that Enghsh Plenipotentiaries play a very
different part from that demanded by the English
people. Lord Beaconsfield had a good precedent for
opposing the resurrection of Bulgaria, for, more than

^ ' Political opinion in Russia would have been quite willing to grant
autonomy with reference to Poland proper — i.e. the Grand Duchy of
Warsaw. The chief organ of public opinion in Moscow was allowed
openly to advocate this solution of the Polish difficulty. It was the
Poles themselves who rejected it, . . . and insisted on their ancient
provinces of Lithuania sharing their future. This claim of the Polish
people to what the Russians call their Western Provinces was the tocsin
which roused the patriotism of the nation, and the unequal struggle
commenced. It was essentially and distinctly a struggle, not for Poland,
but for Lithuania, where the minority, the proprietors and ruling classes,
are chiefly Polish, but the majority, the peasantry, belonged to a dif-
ferent though kindred branch of the great Slav and Sarmatian family.' —
A Trip up the Volga. By F. Butler-Johnstone, p. 7.

204 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

sixty years ago, had not Lord Castlereagh opposed
the resurrection of Poland ?

Addressing the Marquis of Londonderry on
August 31, 1831, on the discussions which took
place between the powers in 1814-15, the Duke of
Wellington wrote as follows : —

I think the principal subject of the discussion between
Lord Castlereagh and the Emperor Alexander, who was then
in a liberal mood, was the desire of the latter to constitute
a Kingdom of Poland by adding to the provinces which had
formed the Duchy of Warsaw the Polish provinces acquired
by Eussia by different treaties of partition ; of which Kingdom
the Emperor of Eussia was to be King. The scheme created
great alarm in the Courts of Austria and Prussia, who felt
that their Polish provinces would be but insecure possessions
if it were adopted, and your brother took up the cause for
them. The affair ended by the partial adoption of the plan :
that is to say, the Emperor became the King of Poland, con-
sisting of those provinces which had constituted the Duchy
of Warsaw, with the exception of certain cessions to Prussia
and Austria respectively. The Emperor reserved to himself
the right of increasing the Kingdom of Poland by adding
thereto such Eusso-Polish provinces as he .might think
proper, and he stipulated for a national Government for the
Poles, not only by the King of Poland that was himself, but
by the Emperor of Austria and the King of Prussia. Eussia
is the one of three Governments which has executed this
last-mentioned article of the Treaty of Vienna with most
strictness.^

M. Adolphe de Circourt, Ambassador of the
French Eepublic of 1848 at the Court of Berlin,
gave to Mr. Senior in 1863^ some facts about

^ Wellington Despatches, vol. vii. p. 609.

^ See Fortriightly Eevietv, January, 1880: 'Conversations with
Adolphe de Circourt.'

Poland and Cir cassia. 205

Poland and the Poles which I take the liberty of
quoting here. M. de Circourt was, as M. Scherer
testifies, a man of ' prodigious erudition,' ' a living
dictionary,' whose- extraordinary attainments and
intellectual gifts gave him a European reputation.
Eeferring to the insurrection of 1863, M. de Circourt
told Mr. Senior that it was almost entirely the work
of the low townspeople, the poor nobles, and the
retainers of the richer proprietors. Hardly any of
the noble proprietors, or of the honne bourgeoisie^ or
of the peasants had taken part in it. The rising was
not much more important than the brigandage of
Naples. Eeferring to the aristocratic class which
gives to the Poles their national character, M. de
Circourt says : —

They sigh, and as long as they are kept poor by their
idleness, and idle by the want of education and by the pre-
judices of caste, they will sigh for the good old times, when
they were the human beings of Poland and the peasants
mere domestic animals ; when any one of them had power
to stop by a liherum veto the legislation and the policy of
the kingdom. They hate the improvement which has fol-
lowed the Kussian Grovernment. The bulk of the peasants
are indifferent, or opposed to the insurrection. The Kussian
Grovernment has not been a bad one to them. Even despotism
is better for the lower classes than an ignorant aristocracy.

The whole Pohsh population is six millions seven hundred
and ninety-two thousand— 3,872,100 in the Kingdom of
Poland, 1,100,000 in Gralicia, 1,140,000 in White and Little
Kussia, to the west of the Dnieper, to whom must be added
1,615,000 Roman Catholic Lithuanians, who, though not of
Polish race, sympathise with the Poles as co-rehgionists.
But of this total of eight millions and a half only the
3,872,000 of the Kingdom of Poland are compact enough to

206 Mi,9under standings and Prejudices.

form a separate State. In the Eussian provinces to the west
of the Dnieper there are 5,950,000 Kussians of the Grreek
Church, 1,140,000 Jews, and 115,000 Wallachs— that is,
6,215,000, as against 2,661,000 Poles and Catholic Lithu-
anians. In Galicia the Poles are only 1,100,000 ; the
Kuthenians and others of Eussian descent and religion are
3,100,000. So that in these outlying provinces the por-
tion of the population which is not Polish or Catholic is
9,315,000; that which is Polish or Catholic is only
3,661,000.

When the Poles penetrated into Western Eussia, the
Poles — that is to say, the Polish nobility — seized the land
and gradually reduced the peasants to the state of serfs.
From Poland the malady of serfdom spread over Eussia, but
was not finally established in Eussia proper — that is to say,
in Muscovy-— till about the year 1618. It was not a Eussian
institution.

On the whole the Poles are the worst nation in civilised
Europe : the most turbulent, the most unscrupulous, the
least capable of doing good to themselves or to anybody else,
and, after the French, the most capable of doing harm. And,
as is the case with all weak, silly, ill-conditioned nations,
they have been always ill-treated since the time when they
were strong enough to ill-treat others. I know that the
Eussian Government is anxious to do for the Poles all that
can be done for them without injustice to its subjects. It
cannot surrender to Poland a population of five millions of
Eussians in its western provinces, in order to please scarcely
more than one million Poles.

Independence means the right of eighty-five thousand
families to oppress four millions of their fellow-countrymen,
and six or seven millions more of people who differ from
them in race or in religion, and belong to them only because
they inhabit countries which two or three hundred years ago
went by the name of Poland.

Eussia will fight to the knife rather than create an inde-
pendent Poland. It would be a mere avant-garde of France
in her next war against Eussia.

Poland and Cir cassia. 207

M. de Circoiirt then reverts to a subject which
should not be lost sight of by those who are content
to derive all their ideas of Eussia and the Eussians
from Polish sources. Mr. Senior having asked whether
the Poles really enjoyed religious liberty as M. de
Circourt asserted, and referred to the famous legend
of persecution under Nicholas, and the outrages
inflicted on the abbess and the nuns of a convent at
Minsk, to force them to apostatise to the Greek
creed, M. de Circourt replied : —

'I do not believe a word of those stories. I do not
believe that there ever was such an abbess or such nuns or
such a convent. The lies of the Poles are beyond descrip-
tion or enumeration. Never believe a word a Pole tells you.
He secretes and then pours out falsehood naturally, almost
unconsciously.-

I do not pretend to write a treatise on the subject
of Poland. I merely jot down one or two things that
it strikes one are not always remembered by our
accusers. Believe me, we are not undesirous to do
' Justice to Poland,' but our efforts are made none
the easier by unjust invectives from those who are
unacquainted with our difficulties.

There is another sore subject with Enghshmen
when they speak of Eussia — that of Schamyl and the
Circassians. They formed a stock subject of English
attacks some years ago, but is it not time you re-
considered your ideas in the hght of recent facts ?

In 1876, Lord Beaconsfield described the Circas-
sians as peaceful, law-abiding, industrious settlers
in European Turkey. Mr, Sedley Taylor wittily

208 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

observed that he might as well have said that ' the
man-eating tiger has become a strict vegetarian,
and is engaged in drawing children about in go-carts,
without any imputation of ungraminiferous behaviour
resting on his character : ' but everyone was not so
well informed as Mr. Taylor, and your Premier no
doubt expressed a common delusion about that in-
teresting race. But even Lord Beaconsfield, un-
hesitating as he is in all his statements, would not
now insist upon the high moral excellence of the
Circassian character.

Instead of blaming us, we rather deserve your
sympathy for having had to establish peace and order
in regions inhabited by such untameable savages as
the Tcherkess, whose real character has been so
terribly attested by desolated Bulgaria. Even the
Turks have denounced them, and all the corre-
spondents of your journals agree as to their un-
enviable disposition.

As for Schamyl, ' the patriot chief defending in
his majestic mountains the freedom of his race,' the
conception no doubt is poetic, and interesting, only it
is puzzling to see how vividly it appeals to the
imagination of the people who are now making war
on the Amir.

Schamyl's son entered the Eussian army and
became an officer of rank in our European service.
I wonder if there is any chance of seeing a son of
Yakub Khan as an officer of the Guards in attendance
on the Empress of India ?

209

CHAPTER III.

SIBERIA.

' There are at this moment millions of Poles being
tortured to death in the quicksilver mines of Siberia
solely because they are Roman Catholics.'

Such is one of the startling assertions with which
all attempts to create an entente cordiale between
Russia and England are so often rudely repulsed. It
is more dignified, of course, to let stories of that kind
pass unnoticed. One scarcely admits that anybody
earnestly craving for truth can accept every absurdity.
But it is no easy task for English people to find out
what is the real state of things in Russia, our language
being not an easy one to learn, ^ and we publish so
seldom any refutation in our self-defence in any foreign
tongue. I think my countrymen are wrong in never
caring for what is said of them abroad, the moment

* On this point Prince Bismarck is an authority. In Busch's remark-
able book, Bismarck und seine Leute^ the German Chancellor expresses
himself as follows : — * I cannot conceive why Greek should be learnt
at all. If it is contended that the study of Greek is excellent
mental discipline, to learn Russian would be still more so, and at the
same time practically useful. Twent3'-eight declensions and the innu-
merable niceties by which the deficiencies of conjugations are made up
for are something to exercise the memory. And then, how are the words
changed ! Frequently nothing but a single letter of the original root
remains."

210 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

they perceive that ill-faith has anything to do with this

«

or with that calumny. There is too much pride in
our systematic contempt for injustice. I see no
humiliation in trying to explain the very little I
know.

I wish I could be eloquent and persuasive. J3ut I
can only be true and outspoken. Nor is there any
great merit in reporting what has already become a
commonplace. That, surely, requires little civic or
moral courage ! But there is a reason which often
prevents Eussians from protesting, with which I
heartily sympathise. As a rule, the more you have
to defend yourself the more you come to the ungene-
rous ' Tu quoque ! ' Now, there is very little consola-
tion in thinking that we both are equally bad ; but
how are you to realise our difficulties if you are not
reminded of your own ?

When you accuse us, for instance, of our ' atrocious
convict system,' how are we to avoid reminding you
that you exiled your convicts to the Antipodes as late
as 1853, and that your convict establishments at Nor-
folk Island and Macquarrie Harbour were not supposed
to be exactly what philanthropists could wish for?
Indeed, Eussians have been often told stories of horror
of the chain-gang and the lash at the Antipodes which
rival even the worst your libellers have invented about
our quicksilver mines.

England made a point of disbelieving the reality
of our good feelings because of our shortcomings.
Are we to apply the same system in judging you?
When we honestly sought your alliance in supporting

Siberia. 211

the Eastern Christians, you not only refused your help
but strengthened as much as you could the Turkish
resistance. Your Government brought upon us a
war which cost us not only millions of money, but
many, many lives, whose loss will always be present
to our memory, in spite of the lapse of time and in
spite of all the advantages which a successful war
could gain. Your Government has done us a great
deal of harm ; and that it did not go further was
simply because it felt convinced that no sacrifice, no
danger could stop us the moment we thought it our
duty to resist its concealed or open attacks. And in
order to calm some generous, straightforward Eng-
lishmen, your officials tried to estrange them from us
by inventing ' Russian atrocities ' in Southern Bul-
garia and elsewhere ; and the ridiculous story about
the millions of Poles exiled on account of their reli-
gion to Siberia is one of the snares set for Enghsh
creduHty.

The fact is this : Since this century commenced
there have been (taking the most exaggerated num-
bers) about five hundred thousand persons exiled to
Siberia, or less than ten thousand a year, but the
majority of these were not Poles but Russians ; nor
were the Poles exiled on account of their rehgion
— unless ordered to be rebels by their religion, as
has sometimes been the case : but even then they
were exiled for their rebelHon, not for their rehgion.
Imaginary geography is, I dare say, well studied
in England, but the real one is decidedly not. Allow
me, therefore, to remind you of what Siberia really

p 2

212 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

is. Siberia is the northern half of the continent
of Asia, exceeding in size the whole of Europe, and,
as such, not easily described in a single formula. In
the extreme north it is almost uninhabitable, and it is
not thither that we send our criminals, for obvious
reasons. It is too far off, and if we sent them into
these dreary expanses of snow and ice, we should have
to feed them at a ruinous expense. As you see, I do
not want to ideaUse the measures taken by our
Government. But, sending our criminals to Siberia,
as we do, in order to get rid of them cheaply, it would
defeat our object to send them into the confines of the
Arctic Circle. When you say Siberia, you imagine
only the desolate north. Siberia, to exiles, with few
exceptions, in reality means the fertile south, so fer-
tile, indeed, that when set at liberty the exiles very
often prefer to remain on its rich and cultivated soil.
A university is going to be established at Tomsk,
which will enable their children to profit by all the
results of culture and civilisation. Only the worst
criminals, murderers, and desperate enemies of the
State are sent to the mines and there employed in
hard labour. But they form a small minority. In
nine cases out of ten, exile to Siberia means enforced
emigration to a fertile and scantily-peopled country.
Transportation with us does not necessarily imply
penal servitude. In many cases we simply convey the
convicts across the Oural range, and then turn them
loose to help themselves. Once in Siberia they are
free to go where they please, as long as they do not
return to European Kussia.

Siberia, 213

As the Governor - General of Western Siberia
reports only the other day, the EngUsh convict system
differed from the Eussian chiefly in severity. The
English convict was compelled to work on penalty of
the lash or gallows ; the Eussian convict — I quote
General Koznakoff's exact words, as I have good
reasons for trusting his word — is pitchforked into
Siberia, and permitted to do whatever he likes short
of actual crime. Many weighty voices are heard
against 'the too great liberty accorded to convicts.'
But foolish kind-heartedness, however absurd such an
assertion may appear to you, is one of our national
features. We often bear in mind what our great
Empress, Catherine the Second, used to say : — ' Better
pardon ten criminals than punish one innocent.* We
feel tliese words, and act accordingly, and I would
prefer being still more foolish to introducing the
slavery of English convict prisons into Siberia. To
accuse and find fault is always an easy thing. To
accuse with indisputable good ground is more difli-
cult, but to understand entirely those we judge is
almost beyond our power. So, as you see, it is only
natural to distrust our judgment if its object is to tor-
ture those who depend upon it. But is it such a cruel
thing, so revolting to Enghsh humanity, when a man
has committed even a crime to give him a new start
in life in a new and more fertile country ?

Mr. Barry, in his ' Eussia in 1870,' declares that in
many districts the chmate of Siberia has the mildness
of that of Italy, lying, as it does, in the same latitude
as Venice. The soil is a rich, deep black loam, capable

214 Misunderstandmgs mid Prejudices.

of yielding prodigious harvests. Fruit grows wild in
any quantity. Game is in abundance, and food is
exceedingly cheap. ' I can think of no country in the
world/ he concludes by asserting, ' which offers the
same advantages to a young man with a small capital
as Siberia. Whenever I travel in Siberia I always
think — ^Why is it that our countrymen are sent away
to the Antipodes in search of a colony ? Here they
would be nearer home ; they can get better land,
cheaper than in many of our colonies ! They could live
more cheaply, get cheaper labour, and enjoy many
advantages of civihsation which they would want in
the colonies.'

That is not Eussian — that is English testimony.
Another EngUshman who employed many workmen
in Eussia recently remarked : ' Many of our hands
come from Siberia, but they never remain very long.
After two or three years they begin to pine for home,
and when they leave they give no reason except — '^ It
is very good, but not Hke Siberia ! " '

Many Englishmen seem to think that Siberia is a
large torture chamber— a gigantic quicksilver mine
— where we send innocent persons to be slowly mur-
dered. It is, on the contrary, a huge emigration field,
whither we send criminals with the double object of
getting rid of them and of supplying a sparsely-peopled
province with colonists. It may not be a good way
of dealing with criminals according to your view, but
at least the charge of too great leniency is quite the
reverse of what we are usually blamed for. To some
the sentence ordering them to go to Siberia inflicts no

Siberia. 215

disgrace. In their case it is simply equivalent to a
compulsory passage to one of your colonies.

The number sent to Siberia, according to the latest
official report, averages since 1860 about 20,000 per
annum — not a very large proportion out of a popula-
tion of 84,000,000. In England and Wales, with little
more than one quarter of the population, you have
12,000 criminal convictions every year. The evils of
which General Koznakoff complains are precisely those
which would never arise if the facts corresponded to
the English notion. So Uttle limitation is placed upon
the liberty of our convicts that numbers escape. In
Tobolsk, in January, 1876, out of 51,122 exiles only
34,293 could be found. In Tomsk nearly 5,000 were
missing out of 30,000. The great mischief of our
system of pitchforking convicts into Siberia, and tell-
ing them to do what they please, is that very few of
them take to honest labour. The country is so rich
that they can live without hard work, and they be-
come idle, good-for-nothing vagabonds. It is an easy
way of getting rid of convicts, but it is not good for
Siberia. M. Koznakoff, the Governor-General, de-
clares that millions are spent in governing them
without there being the sUghtest return for the expen-
diture in the shape of private or public works. Since
1870 about four thousand persons a year have been
exiled for ' offences against the Administration,' some
of whom, of course, are pohtical offenders. But no
mistake could be greater than to suppose that all these
political offenders were sent to the quicksilver mines.
For the most part they are left free to do as they

216 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

please in certain districts, subject to police surveil-
lance. As to the quicksilver mines, they are solely
reserved for murderers and political criminals of the
worst kind — people many of whom in England you
would have hanged offhand. But as we have abo-
lished capital punishment, we must do something with
our murderers, &c., so we send them to the mines.

Of course, there may be great abuses in our estab-
lishments— I wish I could deny that — just as there
were in New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land
before you discontinued transportation. I admit
injustice and mistakes on the part of our authorities
— authorities are not infalhble. But you would be
wise in not accepting implicitly every libel told
against us by Polish rebels. A few months ago a
friend sent me a report of the most dreadful cruelties
which a Fenian prisoner said he had suffered in your
convict prisons. Believe me, our Poles, when insti-
gated by their father confessors, are not behind your
Fenians in the compilation of a catalogue of horrors.
If merely Eussophobes attacked us I would not make
even the shortest reply. But the minds of some of
our friends are evidently put out of ease with these
horrible legends, and I do not like to strengthen our
enemies' hands by refraining from stating the truth.

If it is complained that ' I idealise even Siberia,' I
may quote from an article embodying the results of
Eecent Exploration of the Siberian Coast,' by Cap-
tain Wiggins, the adventurous explorer of the
Arctic regions, whose enterprise in opening up a
trade route by sea to Siberia has attracted much

Siberia. 217

attention in Eussia. As the testimony of an inde-
pendent witness, I make the following extract : ^ —
' Captain Wiggins has had many opportunities during
his visits of thoroughly studying the system of exile
from other parts of the Eussian Empire, which is
such a prominent subject in connection with Siberia,
and, like others who have personally investigated it,
he has arrived at conclusions very different from those
popularly entertained. The captain declares that not
one-third of these time-service exiles elect to make
the return journey to their former homes ; they find
that Ufe is easier and pleasanter in the land to which
they have been forcibly sent, and they end by
becoming free settlers in the country of tlieir adop-
tion. Desperate criminals only are sent to labour in
the quicksilver mines and for these there is a specially
severe discipUne provided, and " horrors, witliout
doubt, exist." '

The explorer goes on to say, for many years past
the desire of the Eussian Government has been to
forward, by all means in their power, the settlement
of this portion of their territory, and they have
learnt that it is good policy to take the utmost pos-
sible care of the Uves of the exiles, and to place them
in the best possible positions for self-maintenance at
the earliest opportunity. With the exception of
the robbers and cut-throats specially condemned
to the mines, the exiles are spread about in the
towns and agricultural districts soon after their

^ From an article published on Nov. 21, 1878, by the Newcastle
Chronicle f the organ, I am told, of one of the most prejudiced of Eng-
lish Russophobes.

218 Misunderstandings and Prejudices,

arrival, and, as a rule, they are left to shift for them-
selves. The supervision over them is slight, but
tolerably effectual. The exiles, when quitting for
any length of time the district to which they are
assigned, must report their project to the head man,
and they are- then at liberty to go where they please,
up or down the great river systems of the country,
but they must not attempt to pass westward towards
European Eussia. A great number of the Eussian
exiles and immigrants employ themselves in the mines,
and Captain Wiggins' experience of the people con-
vinces him that they are ' a happy, rolHcking, joyous
community — ^well clad, well fed, and well cared for.'
During the summer months they are able to earn
sufficient money to provide for the wants of their
respective households in the long winter ; and the
commencement of the cold season, when they visit
the town to make their purchases, is generally a time
of high festivity amongst them. Captain Wiggins
declares that some exiles are now settled in the north
by the Eussian Government, which, in this particular
kind of banishment, undertakes certain responsibilities
with regard to the maintenance of the convicts. Sup-
phes of rye meal are, in the summer season, for-
warded to the furthest northern limits where the
head men are appointed. These officials dispense the
stores, during the winter, on a sort of credit system,
to such exiles (or even families of the native tribes)
as may need it, and in the succeeding summer the
indebted parties must liquidate the cost price of the
food they have received in furs, skins, or dried fish.

Siberia. 219

Captain Wiggins, unlike most writers on Enssian
questions, has visited Siberia and seen the country
with his own eyes. It was, therefore, but natural
that his evidence should be favourable. More sur-
prising and unexpected is the testimony as to the
falsity of the prevailing prejudices which appeared
in November, 1879, in the Conservative Standard^
entitled, 'The Future of Siberia.' It really is
encouraging to find such truthful remarks as the fol-
lowing in the columns of a Ministerial organ : —

Siberia, to the mind of Europe, is associated with nothing
but horror. One connects it with the crack of Bashkir Cos-
sack's whip, with the gi'oans of wretched exiles dying — or,
worse still, living — in the mines of Nertchinsk, and with cold
and misery. In reality these ideas, though firmly imbedded in
the English mind, are altogether erroneous if they are to be
accepted as true of Siberia at large or of the state of matters
in that country at present. The truth is Siberia is a country
of such extent that no general description can apply to all of
it, and even when the accounts which have reached Europe
have been true, which in the vast number of cases they were
not, they related only to the northern part of the territory.
Siberia is an infinitely richer and finer country than Canada
or the northern part of America generally. Though the
Polish exiles and others of a literary turn have not un-
naturally given it a bad name, they have allowed their own
sufferings to colour their narrative. In Siberia the Kussian
peasant can get the ' black earth ' soil, and he escapes, under
certain conditions, the military service. Doubtless the * un-
fortunates' who are sent on an average at the rate of 13,000
per annum to the penal colonies of Siberia are not pampered
to any alarming extent. But that they are nowadays
treated with the severity they were in the times of Peter,
Catherine, Paul, and even Nicholas, is entirely untrue.
Indeed, since the accession of the present Tzar, who in early

220 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

life visited the penal settlements, the bureaucrats' complaint
is that so mild has the punishment of expatriation become
that Siberia is losing its terrors. It is, indeed, the locality
into which the Kussian gaols are annually emptied, and an
offender is sent to that country who would in any other be
simply sentenced to a few years' imprisonment. In the vast
number of cases exile to Siberia is a very different matter
from what banishment to Tasmania or New South Wales
used to be. In the first place, as a rule, the Russian con-
victs go from a bad climate to a better, and are in such good
company that the disgrace of transportation gets much
modified. Only the third class — criminals of the deepest
dye — work in the mines. These mines are, however, not all
underground: they may consist of gold washeries, or the
exile may be set to the almost pleasureable excitement of
searching for gems. At one time the worst class of convicts
— usually murderers and particularly offensive politicians —
were not only compelled to work underground, but they had
to live there, and — horrible thought — were buried there
also. No wonder that Siberia got a bad name. But not
over one-fourth of the Siberian miners are convicts, and a
recent explorer is even of opinion that the latter are in
better circumstances physically, and lead quite as comfort-
able and more moral lives, than the corresponding class of
free men in America, England or Australia. Society in the
large towns is pleasant and polished. Banishment to Siberia
has been overdone, and thus the mischief is righting itself
by the natural law of compensation. It has long ceased to
be a disgrace ; it is rapidly ceasing to be a punishment.

No country in the world, except, perhaps, the valleys of
the Amazon and the Mississippi, has such a perfect system
of water communication as Siberia. The rich meadows near
the mouth of the Yenessei, even though far within the
Arctic Circle, astonished the Norwegian walrus-hunters who
accompanied Professor Nordenskjold. 'What a land Grod
has given the Russians ! ' was the half-admiring, half-envious
exclamation of a peasant seaman who owned a little patch

Siberia. 221

among the uplands in the Scandinavian Nordland. Yet
these few pastures are uncropped and unscythed. The river
has good coal-beds and fine forests, and south of the forest
region level, stoneless plains, covered for hundreds of leagues
with the richest ' black earth ' soil, only wanting the plough
of the farmer to yield abundant harvests. Still further
south the river flows through a region where the vine grows
in the open air. Altogether it is believed that by the ex-
penditure of about one hundred thousand pounds the
Yenessei could be made navigable, though its tributary, the
Angora, on the Lake Baikal — an inland sea not much smaller
than Lake Superior — and the Obi could be connected with
the Yenessei, and the Yenessei with the Lena.

Leaving out of account the numerous other Siberian
rivers all more or less navigable, a country could be thus
thrown open equal to the combined territories of all the
rivers which flow into the Black Sea, the ' Sea of Marmora,
and the Mediterranean. Yet from these rivers flowing into
the Arctic Ocean, so cheap is produce in their valleys, one of
which contains over two millions of people, that Captain
Wiggins ballasted his ship with black lead of fine quality.
The valleys are full of the most magnificent timber, larch,
spruce, &c., which is so little in demand that at the town of
Yenesseik, a ship's mast, 36 inches in diameter at the base,
18 inches diameter at the top, and 60 feet long, can be
bought for a sovereign, and any number supplied in a few
days ; beef costs 2\d. per lb., and game of all kinds may be
got in such abundance as to render mere living cheap enough.
So abundant is com and hay on the great steppes between
Tomsk and Tjumen that horses are hired for one halfpenny
per mile. A ton of salt, which costs in England 15s., is sold
on the Yenessei for 15L; and wheat, which commands 15Z.
or 16L per ton in London, may be got in any quantity for
25s. per ton. To use the words of Mr. Seebohm, ' a colossal
fortune awaits the adventurer who is backed by sufficient
capital, and a properly organised staff", to carry on a trade
between this country and Siberia, via the Kara Sea.' To-

222 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

day, a fresh market for the disposal of our manufactures, is
as much required as it was three centuries ago. Here in
' frozen Siberia ' — miscalled — is a field richer than Central
Africa, and about as little cultivated as Corea^ waiting his
energy and his knowledge.

99^

CHAPTEK IV.

RUSSIAN AUTOCRACY.

If I were English I would probably be a Liberal ;
were I an American I would. undoubtedly be a Eepub-
lican ; as I am a Kussian I am, after all — and ' Ho7ii
soit qui vial y pense ' — a believer in the Autocracy.

This is no paradox, nor am I inconsistent. At
Liberal meetings in this country nothing is more
common than an appeal to the results of Liberalism.
The greatness and the glory of the Empire of England
are referred to as a proof of the success of Liberal
principles. It seems to me quite true. But it is
equally true that the greatness and glory of the
Empire of Eussia have been indissoluble from the
autocracy.

Mr. Wallace, after several years' close study of
my country, declares quite truly: 'Never was the
autocratic power stronger in Eussia, or more secure,
than it is to-day.' Can you say as much of Liberal
principles in England ? Are you not rather inchned
to approximate to Eussian doctrines ? Is your Pre-
mier not exalting the Eoyal prerogative, and your
Parliament only allowed to discuss triviahties and
faits accomplis? Your example gives moments of

224 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

serious hesitation and doubts even to those in Eussia
who dream of a Constitution.

Autocracy has been good for Eussia. I doubt
whether it would be as good for England. Auto-
cracy without an autocrat, or a constitutionalism
reduced to a despotism plus humbug, is not
attractive to me, and I hope no unkind friend will
accuse me of endeavouring to popularise absolutism
in England. ' In submission to despotism,' wrote M.
de Tocqueville,^ ' after having enjoyed liberty, there
is nothing but degradation ; but there often enters
into the submission of a people who have never been
free a principle of moraUty which must not be over-
looked.'

The great obstacle to good understanding between
England and Eussia is that there is no understanding
at all of each other's pohtical views. I wish some-
body else, abler and better informed than I, desired to
throw some light upon the relations existing between
the two countries ; but unfortunately amongst my
countrymen it is considered a positive folly to
write a word of self-defence or explanation for Eng-
lish readers, who are generally supposed not to care
really for our intimate acquaintance. I beg, there-
fore, the permission to explain as simply as I can
how it is that we Eussians cannot understand why our
devotion to our Emperor — which in the lower classes
is certainly not weaker than in the higher — should be
looked down upon by constitutional peoples. If we
introduced universal suffrage and vote by ballot to-

* Remains of Alexis de Tocqueville, vol. i. p. 255*

Russian Autocracy, 225

morrow it would strengthen, not diminish, the Im-
perial power in Eiissia.

We believe in our Emperor because we owe to the
autocracy our national existence and the progress of
our civilisation.

When Europe emerged from the dark ages there
were two Slav nations struggling into being — one
was Poland, the other Eussia. At first both were
almost equally anarchic. Poland was richer, more
populous, nearer to 'Europe,' and had a lustre of
civiUsation which was lacking to Eussia. The latter
was exposed for centuries to the withering blast of
Tartar invasions, from which she sheltered her western
neighbour. To-day Poland no longer exists, espe-
cially in Germanised Posen, whilst Eussia is one of
the greatest empires of the world. Why? Be-
cause Eussians, tutored in the terrible school of ad-
versity, learned the lesson of identifying themselves
with an autocracy, and thus formed one strongly-
united body ; whilst anarchic Poland, which clung
persistently to her divided aristocracy, has been
blotted out of the map of Europe. Of course we
are blamed for that. But the Poles attacked Moscow
before the Eussians took Warsaw ; and even if Eussia
had as Uttle excuse for conquering Poland as England
for conquering Ireland, the fate of Poland demon-
strates the weakness of anarchy and the strength of
the opposite principle.

Anarchy was the besetting sin of the Slavs.
Eussia passed through a frightful experience before
she learned the necessity of creating that strong central

Q

226 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

power to which, to a very great extent, she owes all
that she has. At the dawn of our history the con-
sciousness of this national weakness led the Eussian
Slavs, after driving out the Variags, to call them
back across the Baltic to maintain order and exercise
authority in Eussia. If Eurik and his successors had
not divided and re-divided their soldiers and their
lands amongst their children, Eussia might have
escaped both the horrors of intestine war and the
scourge of the Tartar conquest, as well as the neces-
sity, born of these troubles, of estabhshing the
autocracy.

Unfortunately, the law of division prevailed. No
strong central power existed. In Httle more than a
century, as M. Eambaud remarks,^ Eussia saw no
fewer than sixty-four principahties with 293 rival
princes, whose feuds occasioned no less than eighty-
three civil wars. Our unhappy country, convulsed
by their incessant strife, was the prey of all her
neighbours. In that period the Polo vtzi alone invaded
Eussian territory forty-six times. At the close of
that terrible time retribution came in the shape of the
Tartar conquest. Eussia was submerged by a tide of
Asiatic barbarism, and for more than two centuries
the Eussian State almost ceased to exist.

In the darkness and despair of these awful cen-
turies Eussians learnt the necessity of creating and
obeying implicitly a strong central Government.
To smite down the Infidel, Eussia's sword must be
placed in a single hand, and that hand must be

* History of Russiay toI. i. p. 93.

Russian Autocracy. 227

nerved with the strength of the whole nation.
While under the Tartar domination that sword was
slowly 'forged by adverse fates,' until at length it
was keen and strong for its work. Not until the
autocratic power was founded were the Tartars van-
quished and Kussia freed.

Some people define Eussian autocracy as a Dic-
tatorship en permanence. Granted ; and the ancient
Eomans found dictatorship necessary. Machiavelli
even beUeved that the dictatorship alone rendered
possible the continuance of the Eoman EepubUc.
Nothing but a dictatorship could have saved Eussia
from her foes. That dictatorship, founded to rescue
Europe from Asia and Christendom from the Moslem
invasion, will not have completed its task until the
Sultan ceases to rule in Europe, and the last results
of the Tartar conquest have been obliterated.

At present neither of these results have been
attained, although one, fortunately, is not far distant.

While we stood sentinel on the ramparts of
Europe, you Westerns, protected by our sacrifices,
were making rapid progress in civilisation. To
overtake you we found the dictatorship as necessary
as it was to get rid of the horde. Before we even
could start in the race we had to gain elbow-room by
beating back enemies that threatened to extinguish
our national existence. As late as 1571, a Tartar
Khan burnt Moscow and swept 100,000 of her in-
habitants into slavery. Forty years later our ancient
capital was destroyed by Poles. The Zaporogues and
the Cossacks of the Don ravaged our country, and all

228 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

the outlying provinces were given over to anarchy.
The Swedes estabhshed themselves at ' Novgorod the
Great/ Thus, when the English were beginning to
defend ParUamentary Government against the Stuarts
we were still locked in a life-and-death struggle
for the right to exist. In that struggle, but for the
absolute power of our Tzars, we had been for ever
undone. Thanks to that principle, Eussia emerged,
bruised and bleeding, but still a nation and a State.

In England civilisation has come from below — the
people led, the rulers followed. In Eussia the process
is reversed. I shall be told that that is to admit that
the Eussian people were ignorant and destitute of
civilisation. Yes, they were ! Who ever denied it ?
What better would you have been if you had had a
Tartar Conquest instead of a Magna Charta, and
Enghshmen had seen London burnt by Mongols in-
stead of witnessing the dispersion of the Armada ?

But Eussian civilisation has to contend against
another difficulty, from which you are entirely free.
Civihsation, from its name, is the product of cities.
Eussia is an Empire of villages. The enormous ex-
panse of territory over which our population is
scattered — an expanse all the more formidable by
the scarcity of good roads — renders spontaneous
civilisation impossible. Eussia thus could only be
civiUsed from above, and it is the glory of our
Emperors that they applied themselves strenuously
to the work.

One of my English friends — ^who is, perhaps, a
little tinged with Eepublicanism — declares that for

Russian Autocracy. 229

three centuries there has been only one King in Eng-
land who was worth his rations, and he was a Dutch-
man ; and he added that since WiUiam of Orange, when
they did more than draw their rations they always
did mischief. My friend, no doubt, exaggerates.
But with us it is quite different. Of course there
have been exceptions ; but our Emperors have been
the real reformers of Eussia. Peter the Great —
' that noblest example of history,' as Mr. Cobden
styled him — ^was but the most striking figure among
many Emperors and Empresses who laboured without
ceasing to the best of their ability to elevate, to
educate, to civilise their people. And amidst what
difficulties ! As a rule the Eussian worships his old
traditions and customs of former days ; he idoHses
his past, he distrusts innovations. ' Novelty brings
calamity ' was not merely a proverb, it was almost an
article of faith. Yet upon such people Peter turned
the full light of Western civilisation. Even in our
days you often meet Eussians who reproach him for
having done so, for not having simply developed our
own national elements, without any attempt to wrap
us up in Western mantles. ' Why should we imitate
other nations ? ' they exclaim ; ' Their superiority is
more apparent than real,' &c, Peter the Great,
however, pursued his own views upon the matter,
and it is not for Westerns to ignore his innovations.
There was nothing too great or too small to escape
his attention. It was he who published the first
Eussian newspaper, and created the modern Eussian
civil alphabet. Like some mythic hero of the dim

230 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

and distant past, this man of the seventeenth century
appeared to incarnate all the energies of a mighty
nation. Deserted by friends, betrayed by those of
his own household, confronted aUke by foreign foe
and internal rebellion, he never wavered, he never
flinched. Sometimes a despairing cry broke from
him, when baffled by some more than ordinary dis-
play of stupidity, but it was only for a moment ; the
next he was hard at work, receiving Prussian Am-
bassadors at the topsail of the mainmast, digging
canals, pubhshing books, building ships, never resting
in his efforts to civilise his country. By turns pilot,
smith, labourer, carpenter, astronomer, manufacturer,
artilleryman, ' he worked harder than a bourlak.'
As our greatest poet, Alexander Poushkin, wrote : —

With lielm and hammer, pen and sword,

He stamped his soul on Kussia's story,
And like a workman for reward.

Worked night and day for Russians glory.*

Peter was not the first, neither was he the last of
the Emperors to whom Eussia owes reforms, which
she could not and would not have introduced under
a Parliamentary system. In the present reign the
emancipation of the serfs and the liberation of the
Southern Slavs are achievements even more brilUant
than the founding of St. Petersburg and the victory of
Poltava.^ Our Emperor is true to the traditions of

* Translated by Madame A. B y in her Translations from

Russian and Gtrman PoetSy published at Baden-Baden, 1878.

2 ' The present Sovereign of Russia, by the emancipation of serfs,
said to reach forty millions in number, has placed himself on the first
rank of the philanthropic legislators of the world.' — Mr. Gladstone,
^ Russians in Turkestan' {Contemporary Review, Nov. 1876, p. 877).

Russian Autocracy. 231

the autocracy ; and in the future, as in the past, we
expect confidently the power of the Emperor will
enable Kussia to take even larger strides in civiHsation
than if we substituted for him a Parhament elected
on an English model.

We firmly beUeve that had it not been for the
concentration of power, which enabled us with
greater ease to introduce at once desired reforms all
over the realm, we might never have been able to
play the grand role befitting the only Slav country at
once free, independent, and strong.

Eussians are not easily forgetful. If they remem-
ber well the harm done, they also keep in mind all
their obhgations. Now, the magnificent reforms in-
troduced by our present Emperor have claims upon
our confidence. He is as good a Eussian, as devoted
to the grand destinies of his country, as the best
amongst us. We only want to add to his omnipotence
the advantages of omniscience. In our history we
have examples of how this might be done which
might be known by anybody who cares to study the
subject. The Zemskie Sobory to which I refer were a
natural development of our pohtical growth. The
so-caUed Zemskie Sobory were a kind of Assembly of
difierent representatives — of deputies — not a legis-
lative, but a consultative body, composed of the high
clergy, nobility, and merchants. When the Tzar
John the Fourth, three hundred years ago, had to
give an answer to Poland, and to accept or refuse
the truce proposed by the King, he consulted th^
Assembly, or Sobor, which rejected the truce,

232 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

advised the prosecution of the war, and offered the
Tzar men and money to bring it to a successful con-
clusion. These Zemskie Sobory played a great and
interesting part in our country. To mention only
one instance, in 1598, on the death of Feodor, it
formed a kind of Diet, and offered Boris Godounoff
the throne of Eussia.

There is a nobility in Eussia — it never had, how-
ever, the privileges of your aristocracy : the privileges
it had have disappeared almost entirely since the
emancipation of the serfs and the general military
conscription. In reality, Eussia now is a democratic
coimtry,^ and a ' House of Lords ' in Eussia would be
a very ridiculous innovation indeed. In the democracy
lies the great strength of the autocracy. Alexis de
Tocqueville says : — ' A democratic people tends to-
wards centralisation as it were by instinct. The
citizens being so nearly equal among themselves, are
naturally led to place the details of administration in
the hands of the only power which stands forth con-
spicuously in an elevated position above them all,
viz., the central government of the State.' ^

Under Anne Ivanovna, an oligarchic Consti-
tution, framed by the Princes Galitzine and Dol-
gorouky, which destroyed the autocracy, was set

^ Mr. Kinglake, in the preface to tlie sixtli edition of Ms Invasion of
the Crimea^ says : * A very able and interesting account of the political
Russia of the present day was given to the world on October 26, 1876,
by Prince M. Mestchersky. The Prince assures his readers that Russia
is now a Democracy, with " liberty, equality, and fraternity " all com-
plete ; but it is loyal, he says, and religious, and not therefore deserving
to be confounded with the Democracy of the French Revolution.'

* Jicmains of Alexis de Tocqueville^ vol. i. p. 242,

Russian Autocracy. 233

aside by a popular movement, which demanded the
re-estabhshment of the autocracy in the name of the
people and in the interests of progress. In Poland
the aristocracy crushed the people beneath the yoke
of 100,000 despots. In Eussia they had only one
master, and that master was, and is at this moment,
regarded as the Tribune of the People, to whom they
only need to make known their wrongs to obtain
immediate redress.^ If they suffer injustice it is not
because it is the will of the Emperor, but because, as
the popular proverb says, ' Heaven is high, and the
Tzar is too far off.* That this deep, unalterable,
unshaken conviction of the Eussian peasants in the
goodness of their Emperor has been without cause is
as much opposed to the teachings of history as it is
logically absurd.

The example of the Pohsh Constitution strength-
ened the advocates of autocracy in Eussia in former
days, just as Lord Beaconsfield's unceremonious policy
paralyses now in Eussia people who once had faith
in Constitutionahsm. Whenever any attempt was
made to limit the autocratic power of our Emperors
in the past it was checked by a reference to the
anarchy which the Pacta Conventa occasioned in
Poland. The nation at large not only was not
opposed to autocracy, but defended it and supported
it with all its energy and power.

To-day in Eussia Liberals are often silenced by a
reference to the Nihihsts. The Poles in the seven-

' For a striking English testimony to this effect, see Herbert Barry's
Hus&ia in 1870, p. 201.

234 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

teenth and the Nihilists in the nineteenth are the
drunken helots employed by Eussian Conservatism to
deter the natives from drinking the dangerous waters
of Liberalism and reform. The first can easily be
understood ; the second is quite unjust. Nihilism is
not Liberahsm. A Liberal has a positive code of
principles before him, a political religion, a stern
national duty. A Nihilist scorns and derides those
who care either for their country or for those things
which constitute the greatest blessings of all civilised
countries. A Nihihst is an anarchist in the widest
sense of the word. To those who are opposed to
every reform, every real progress, it naturally appears
as an easy way of making a terrible mess of all the
different schools and tendencies of Liberahsm by
declaring they all lead to Nihilism. Does it not
happen sometimes in England that the Conservative
party does not disdain to describe as Eepubhcan and
Eevolutionary every measure which threatens a
cherished abuse or attacks a vested interest? So
with us, men who would die for their country and
their Emperor are represented sometimes as dan-
gerous and most wicked merely because they dare to
have their own views upon some separate questions.

The great democratic principle which it needed a
French Eevolution to estabhsh in the West, ' La
carriere ouverte aux talents^' was established in Eussia
almost by itself, and always supported by our
crowned heads. Our history abounds with instances
in which men and women have risen from the lower
ranks to the highest offices of State. Peter the
Great's wife, Catherine L, was taken from the

Russian Autocracy, 235

humblest spheres ; Lomonossoff was a peasant ;
Menshikoff began Ufe as a pastrycook ; Speransky
was the son of a poor village curate, &c. Nor was
the career closed to talented men because they were
not Eussian. Our autocracy, more free from pre-
judices than some more constitutional systems, has
thrown open the highest offices in the State to men
of all nationalities. Le Fort, Peter*s admiral, was a
Swiss ; Bruce and Gordon, his trusted generals, were
Scotchmen ; Munich was a German. In Catherine's
reign the officer who led the attack which annihilated
the Turkish fleet in the Bay of Ghesma was an
Englishman. In the last war, as in the Crimean,
high commands were held by Armenians and Poles,
and the army before Batoum was said to be com-
manded by a Montenegrin, not to speak of Germans
and Finns who abound in our State service.

On the field of Poltava, at which, as M. Rambaud
says, ' the Slav race, so long humiliated, made a
triumphal entry on to the stage of the world,' Peter
the Great addressed his soldiers in words which truly
described the relation between our Emperors and
the people : — ' You must not think it is for Peter you
fight ; no ! it is for the country, it is for our orthodox
faith, for the Church of God ! As for Peter, know
that he is ready to sacrifice himself for a prosperous
and glorious future for Eussia.' Catherine the Great
instructed the Assembly of Eepresentatives which
she summoned to draw up the new code that ' the
nation is not made for the Sovereign, but the
Sovereign for the nation.'

The autocracy is a weapon by which democracy

236 Misunderstandings and Prejudices,

smites down its enemies, and it is the instrument
which, after securing the emancipation of the serf,
is destined to achieve still further reforms.

Kor, pardon me, do I see why we should be
described as ' inappropriate instruments ' ^ for secur-
ing the hberation of our co-rehgionists, the Slavs
of the Balkan, because we believe in a system of
government which freed Eussia from the yoke of the
Tartars, and enabled us to take giant strides in
civilising and educating our people.

We beheve, with Goethe, that the best of all
Governments is that which best teaches self-govern-
ment, but a permanent head of a strong centralised
Administration is sometimes a necessity even for the
development of self-government. In this respect
Eussia may compare favourably with England, for
we have rural municipalities elected by universal
suffrage, established by the Emperor Nicholas, and I
suppose I am not wrong in saying that you have no
such elective authorities in your country districts.

The centrahsed administration of Eussia is com-
plained of by many who complain still more bitterly

^ 'A great work of liberation has "been done in wliich we have had no
part. But bitter as is the mortification with which I for one reflect upon
that exclusion, I thank God that the work has been done. It has been
done in one sense, perhaps, by the most inappropriate of instruments.'
Curiously enough the newspaper which reported that speech by one of
your statesmen contained a despatch from Bulgaria, mentioning that the
liberated Bulgarians had just passed an address of gratitude to those
said * inappropriate instruments ' of their emancipation. Compare the
Duke of Argyll : — ' Russia's ancient and hereditary hostility to the Mos-
lem Empire of the Turks has made her power a fitting instrument in
the gradual destruction of the most desolating dominion that has ever
cursed the world.' — Eastern Question, vol. ii. p. 254.

Russian Autocracy. 237

of the excesses and abuses which spring from the
independent powers given to the rural communes.
Eussia needs a strong Executive in order to civilise
her people ; but our democratic Empire is not so
centralising or so despotic in many respects as the
democratic Eepublic of France. In France le per-
sonnel administratif changes ; le pouvoir administratif
remains much the same under Empire, Eepublic, or
any shape of Monarchy. EngHsh people are always
abusing centraUsation, and always centraUsing ; but
decentralisation is not always a proof of civilisation.
M. Thiers, whose words deservedly command atten-
tion in England, was an enthusiastic eulogist of a
system of centraUsation to which that of Eussia can-
not be compared for stringency. 'The wisest and
most complete system of administration,' he told your
Mr. Senior,^ ' is that of France, where there is not a
single independent local authority ; where the central
power knows and superintends, and, in fact, regulates,
the concerns of every commune, and where every
pulsation of the heart of France is instantly felt in
the Pyrenees and on the Ehine.'

As believers in progress and in hberty, we think
that more progress and more freedom is possible
in Eussia at the present time, by placing supreme
power in the hands of an enlightened autocrat, than
by vesting it in an assembly which either must be
elected by a minority of the people or by a majority
which can hardly read and write.^

* Conversations, vol. i. p. 135.

* Even in England tlie opinion of the majority is not always the

238 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

' It is the everlasting privilege of the foolish to be
governed by the wise ; that/ says Mr. Carlyle, ' is the
first right of man.' Eussians are almost always of the
opinion of Mr. Carlyle.

As for the power of the Crown, ' the majesty of
the people,' and the other catch-words of our judges,
does not Lord Beaconsfield declare, ' The House of
Commons is the House of a few ; the Sovereign is the
sovereign of all. The proper leader of the people is
the individual who sits upon the throne ' ?

wisest. Indeed tlie Duke of Somerset, in his recent * Keflections,' goes so
far as to say : * Until a late period in the history of the country, a real
representation of the majority of the people would have been a national
calamity.*

239

CHAPTEE V.

CONSTITUTIONALISM IN RUSSIA.

The other day I was favoured with a call from
one of your M.P.s. My visitor looked very solemn
and dignified, and spoke in a monotonous, didactic
way concerning Eussia and her many shortcomings.
It was rather amusing at the first, for he displayed
such a wonderful ignorance of the most elementary
facts that he might have been taken for Eobinson
Crusoe, fresh from the desolate island where he spent
so many years with no other company than that of
his famous Friday.

He began : ' We must keep a very sharp look out ;
Eussia is not to be trusted. She is a standing danger
to us, both in India and in this country.*

' Oh, yes,' I repHed, for I am now quite famihar
with such pleasant observations. * Why should
you not keep a sharp look out ? Only I do not see
why you should think England so very weak, both in
Asia and in Europe, that she is in such danger from
any foreign country.'

' Eussia is dangerous,' answered my visitor^
' because she has no Constitutional Government.

240 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

We, in England, can only have confidence in Consti-
tutional States.'

' Yes ; I know your views on these matters,' I
replied. ' And I dare say your dear ally Turkey
has prospered amazingly since she adopted your insti-
tutions ! '

' Why, of course, it's better to have a Constitu-
tion,' rejoined he. ' It makes countries strong and
powerful.'

' Then, it is because you want to see Eussia
stronger and more powerful,' I timidly ventured to
suggest, ' that you wish us to adopt a Constitution ?
I thought she was too strong already for your moral
comfort.'

The inconsistency of my visitor was common
enough to pass unnoticed here, but it often strikes
foreigners. Those who profess to fear us most,
and who certainly seem to entertain anything but
friendly feeUngs towards us, are the most imperious in
tendering their unasked-for advice to adopt Constitu-
tionahsm as a sovereign remedy for all our ailments,
real or imaginary. The advice may be good, but it
comes from a suspicious source. Nor are counsels
accepted the more readily when prefaced by insults.

Do you know that in Eussia there is a conviction
widely spread all over the country that the reason
why European Governments insisted so strongly on a
Constitution for young Bulgaria was in order to
embarrass her development, and as much as possible
to mar Eussia s work ?

Nevertheless, it is true that, if the Eussian people

Cojistitutionalism in Russia. 241

had been consulted last year, it would have been the
worse for the English Cabinet. No power but the
autocracy could have compelled our victorious army
to halt within sight of Constantinople. Eussians did
not wish to retain Constantinople ; but they longed
to dictate peace there, and march in triumph through
its streets.

It was a national aspiration, and the disappoint-
ment has occasioned natural regret amongst all
Eussians.

Last year I met General Grant, the American
ex-President, in Paris. Almost the first thing he
asked was, ' Can you explain how it happened that
the Eussians did not occupy Constantinople, when
they had it entirely in their hands ? '

' Alas ! ' I repUed, ' I have no good explanation
to give. We never expected such a voluntary abdi-
cation of power. In fact, some of our military
people telegraphed to Moscow, saying, " To-morrow
Constantinople will be occupied for several days ! "
It is difficult to give you an idea of the disap-
pointment throughout all Eussia when it was found
out that Constantinople, after all, was not to be the
place where we were to dictate peace. The general
conviction in Eussia is, that our Government, misled
by news from abroad, telegraphed orders to our
generals not to advance.'

General Grant, who was listening attentively,
smiled and said, ' Well, I can only say one thing ; had
I been one of your generals I would have put the

R

242 Misunderstandings and Prejudices,

order in my pocket and opened it at Constantinople
three or four days later/

'Yes,' I rejoined, 'it was a great trial for our
national feelings, and we feel sure that nobody on
earth will ever thank us for that unnecessary con-
cession/

The same day I dined with M. Emile de Girardin,
where several eminent guests were assembled. I
repeated General Grant's conversation. 'Are you
surprised at his remark ? ' several persons asked me
at the same time, and using almost the same expres-
sions. ' It's unnecessary to say how little we hked
the German promenade through Paris, but we under-
stood, nevertheless, that the German Government
could not deprive its troops of so legitimate a satis-
faction.'

I heard, on very good authority, that Prince
Bismarck, on learning that Eussia, after all, was not
going to occupy Constantinople, exclaimed with
rather an uncomphmentary emphasis, ' Nein^ mit den
Leuten ist nichts anzufangen ' (No, there is no doing
anything with those people ! )., The German Chan-
cellor, in his heart of hearts, was naturally pleased
with every mistake on our part, but as a good po-
htical chess-player, he felt impatient at anybody
taking a wrong step.

All these remarks often come back to my memory.
Had the Eussian people been consulted, the English
Government would never have had the glorification
of getting from the Eussian Government the conces-

Constitutionalism in Russia. 243

sions which it longed for so much, but for which it is
so httle grateful.

Some St. Petersburg officials laugh at our regrets,
and call it childish sentimentalism. ' Eussia,' they
exclaim, 'has got what was really important, and
does not care particularly about what are, after all,
only apparent victories.' Now we, Eussian Slavo-
philes, have notions of our own, as far as victories
are concerned, and what practical people care for is
not exactly our chief object in hfe. But I grant
that English Eussophobes did not gain much by our
concession either from their point of view or from
the point of view of our diplomatists.

You could not indulge in a greater delusion than
to imagine, because we Eussian Slavophiles support
the autocracy, that therefore we have no opinions of
our own, and do not care to express them. We do
not share your impUcit faith in Constitutional Govern-
ment. We abide by our national traditions. We
are guided by the teachings of our history, to which
most of our advisers are quite indifferent. We trust
our Emperor. We know his readiness to serve his
country, and our trust in him has not been rooted in
our hearts without strong arguments and eloquent
facts. We obey him even when, as in the hoped-for
temporary occupation of Constantiaople, his command
destroys our most cherished aspirations. But, at the
same time, we wish to make known our sentiments,
and therefore we desire the complete freedom of the
press and the re-estabUshment of the Zemskie Sobory.

Of the former I need say nothing, excepting that

R 2

244 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

the strange use you make of it sometimes in England
inclines some Eussians to make the mistake of congra-
tulating themselves that they are without it.

Of the latter, so little is known in England, that I
may be pardoned if I explain how modest are the
wishes of the Eussian national party. The word
' Sohor ' means an assembly, a gathering ; ' Zemskie
Sobory,' assemblies from all the land, a kind of national
assembly, generally summoned when the country was
in want of an honest, frank advice. It was not a per-
manent institution hke your Parhament, which to us
appears to be more a kind of chatting club, where
people are obliged to make speeches, though they
know very often that they have very little to say
and that they are scarcely Ustened to. We admire
that institution of yours, but merely from a literary
point of view.

There is not one country in the world whose
example could be bhndly followed by Eussia. Each
has its drawbacks ; and Eussians beheve they will do
well to remain faithful to their own institutions.^ Our

^ A well-informed Englishman, writing on Italian affairs in the New
Quarterly Review for January, 1880, makes some observations on Parlia-
mentary government, which contain truths too often ignored in English
criticisms of countries without Parliamentary institutions. He says : —
* Among a people where the habit of working together for a common
public end is little developed, Parliamentary institutions may themselves
become the very best school of selfishness and corruption. Those who
hold the comfortable theory that if once you give a people free institu-
tions all the rest will come of itself, have only to look at the Italian
Chamber to be undeceived. It is not the off-hand judgment of a hostile
criticism, but it is the deliberate opinion of the best and most serious and
most experienced Italians, expressed over and over again of late years in
books, in pamphlets, in speeches, in newspapers, and in conversation, that
the Italian Chamber, as it now stands, does not answer the ends for

Constitutionalism in Russia. 245

present Emperor has never deceived us. As I said in
my last letter, we do not want to impair his omnipo-
tence, we only wish to confer upon him the advantage
of omniscience. We want him to come into closer
contact with his people, to see our wants, our short-
comings, to know the failure of some of his officials,
their bad faith, and their neglect of their duties. The
latter naturally are afraid of that close contact, and
do their best (and for us their worst) to conceal facts
which it is for the honour and welfare of Eussia our
Emperor should know. The Zemskie Sobory would
answer that purpose.

It is only those ignorant of Eussian history, or men
estranged by foreign influence from their own country,
who see in the plea for the re-estabUshment of the
Zemskie Sobory an attack upon the autocracy. His-
tory proves, on the contrary, that the will of the whole
Eussian people has always been directed to the support

which Parliamentary government is established. Unless there is a change,
it is not too soon to say that Parliamentary institutions cannot possibly
last in Italy. The feeling of indignation at the futility of them as they
have been worked of late is one that is spreading. The disbelief in them
as a means of solving the social and economical problems which are the
most urgent questions for the country is becoming more general. The
fact is that Parliamentary government, in its modem form, is about
as much a national product as is the Church of England. To suppose
that when transplanted to a wholly different soil, among a race whose
character, sentiment, history, and tmditions are thoroughly unlike our
own, it wiU produce the same results, is against all experience. It is
not wonderful that the prestige of the English Parliament should have
imposed itself on other nations. But to copy its practice without wide
alterations and without careful adaptation to the needs of each country
can only work mischief. It needs no conjuror to tell ua that either there
must be a radical change in the mode in which the Italian Chamber dis-
charges its duties, or else that the existence of Parliamentary government
in Italy will shortly be in the gravest peril.' — New Quarterly Magazine,
No. 26, New Series, pp. 71, 90, 91.

246 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

of that form of government, even when an aristocratic
faction tried to undo it.

There was a striking illustration of this at the be-
ginning of the reign of the Empress Anne Ivanovna.
She was living at Mitau, when an aristocratic depu-
tation offered her the Eussian throne on the condition
that she should accept an oligarchic Constitution.
She accepted it on these terms. Some time after
reaching Moscow she summoned a Zemskie Sobory.
' Let her keep to our institutions I ' exclaimed the
Assembly, and they pressed upon her to resume the
absolute power. ' What ! ' she exclaimed to one of
her minister-conspirators, ' then the conditions sent
me through you were not the will of the nation?
Then you have deceived me?' And thus, by the
will of the people expressed through the Zemskie
Sobory, the oligarchic Constitution was replaced by
the old autocracy.

JSTo Eussian Emperor can doubt of the support of
his country ; his greatest power lies in the confidence
of his people.

Eussia, hke every great country which has not
given up her high aspirations and lofty feelings, has
moments of self-sacrifice, of a disregard of practical
interests. Such was the case in the Servian and
Turkish wars of the last three years ; but, as a rule,
Eussians are not so simple as you fancy. There must
be something in their devotion to autocracy ; it's not
so bhnd and irrational as people suppose, or they would
not so often have insisted upon it.

There are officials in Eussia who, as I said already,

Constitutionalism in Russia, 247

are eager to prevent these Assemblies, who want to
estrange the Emperor from his people, who some-
times take measures which are as nonsensical as
unjust. But facts of that sort happen in the most
constitutional and angehc countries in the world. We
have ' red-tapists * who could be a good match for
some of yours.

Do not forget that to these National Sobory,
which were originated by our- Tzars themselves,
Eussia owes the Eomanoff dynasty, which was
founded by one of them 276 years ago. In 1613,
after the Great War, in which Prince Pojarsky
and the butcher Minine deUvered Eussia froni the
Poles, the Sobor assembled at Moscow and placed
Michel Eomanoff on the throne. Five years later,
when the Poles were threatening again to attack
Moscow, the Sobor again assembled, and the unity
between the Tzar and the people was strikingly de-
monstrated. ' I am ready,' said the Monarch, ' to
suffer hunger in besieged Moscow and to fight the
aggressors, but you must do the same for me.' The
Assembly, with true Eussian spirit, responded enthu-
siastically to the appeal, and preparations were at
once made for a national resistance to the common
enemy.

The important part played by the Sobory is some-
times forgotten, even in Eussia. In 1627 the Cossacks
of the Don, having captured Azoff, offered it to Eussia ;
our Tzar would not accept it until he had ascertained
the opinion of the Sobor. It was summoned. The
nobles were in favour of accepting the proposed gift ;

248 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

the clergy and the merchants, on the other hand,
opposed its acceptance. The voice of the Sobor was
then given against the annexation of Azoff, and the
annexation was accordingly refused. This was 250
years ago, and in ' barbarous, despotic, aggressive
Eussia ! '

Tell me, when last year your Government seized
Cyprus, was there as much regard paid to the Par-
liament of civilised, constitutional, unaggressive
England ?

After the seventeenth century the Sobory were
not often summoned. In the latter part of the
eighteenth, however, a remarkable assembly sat in
Moscow discussing the new code which Catherine the
Great was anxious to compile. It was not called
Sobor, but the Great Legislative Commission, and it
was virtually a Kussian representative Parliament,
only not a permanent one. Curiously enough it con-
tained exactly the same number of members as your
present House of Commons. The following is the de-
scription of its constitution from M. Alfred Eambaud's
History: —

The Commission was composed of deputies from all the
services of the State, from all the orders and all the races of
the Empire. Besides the delegates from the Senate, the
Synod, and the colleges, and the Courts of Chancery, the
nobles elected a representative for each district, the citizens
one for every city, the free colonists one for every province,
the soldiers, militia, and other fighting men also one for each
province; the Crown peasants, the fixed tribes, whether
Christian or not, equally elected one for each province. The
deputation of the Cossack armies was fixed by their atamans.

Constitutionalism in Russia. 249

Six hundred and fifty-two deputies assembled at Moscow,
officials, nobles, citizens, peasants, Tartars, Kalmucks, Lapps,
Samoyedes, and many others. Each man was to be fur-
nished with full powers and with papers compiled by at
least five of the electors. They were exempted for ever from
all corporal punishments, and were declared inviolable dur-
ing the session.'

It held 200 sittings and many important discus-
sions upon economical, municipal, social, and political
matters. After sitting for two years, the Empress was
reluctantly compelled, by the outbreak of the Turkish
war, to break up the Assembly. In dismissing it, she
bore testimony to its utility.

The Commission for the Code has given me hints for all
the Empire. I know now what is necessary, and with what I
should occupy myself. It has elaborated all parts of the
legislation, and has distributed the affairs under heads. I
should have done more without the war with Turkey, but a
unity hitherto unknown in the principles and methods of
discussion has been introduced.

That remarkable Commission, in which, as Catherine
wrote to Voltaire, ' the Orthodox was sitting between
the heretic and the Mussulman, all three listening to
the voice of an idolater, and all four consulting how
to render their conclusion palatable to all,' was the
last representative assembly of that kind which has
met in Eussia.

In Poland, however, the Emperor Alexander, after
the war with Napoleon, established a Constitution with
a representative Diet. In opening that Diet, in 1818,
the Emperor spoke in praise of representative institu-

* History of Bussia, vol. ii. p. 139.

250 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

tions. He said : ' I hope to prove to the contemporary
kings that the liberal institutions, which they pretend
to confound with the disastrous doctrines which in
these days threaten the social system with a frightful
catastrophe, are not a dangerous illusion, but that,
reduced in good faith to practice, and directed in a
pure spirit towards conservative ends and the good of
humanity, they are perfectly allied to order, and the
best security for the happiness of nations.'

We are certainly not going to throw mud upon
our Constitutionalists. Some of them misunderstood
their country, but they were men of very noble, self-
sacrificing principles, of very high and lofty ideas —
especially the majority of those who were known as the
Decembrists. But, unfortunately for them, they mis-
took the spirit of their nation. When they urged the
people to cry for a Constitution, some of their follow-
ers understood Constitution to refer to Constantine's
wife — a Polish lady for whom he had given up his
claims to the throne !

Our ideas are much more reasonable and much
more practical; and the re-establishment of the
Zemskie Sobory perhaps would be not less useful
than the imposing Constitution generously sketched
out for us in some foreign newspapers.

We Eussians may be very mistaken in our adhesion
to the autocracy ; but that is not the opinion of your
Prime Minister, for he wrote long ago : ' The tendency
of advanced civilisation is in truth to pure Monarchy,
and in an enlightened age the Monarch on the throne,
free from the vulgar prejudices and the corrupt inte-

Constitutionalism in Russia. 251

rests of the subject, becomes again Divine.'^ And,
again, he says : * There is a whisper rising in this
country ' — even in England — ' that Loyalty is not a
phrase, Faith not a delusion, and Popular Liberty
something more diffusive and substantial than the
profane exercise of the sacred rights of sovereignty
by pohtical classes ! ' '^

^ The passage from which I take this extract is placed in the mouth
of Sidonia in * Ooningsby.' It is curious as showing that in the opinion
of the English Prime Minister, so far from the freedom of the press
undermining the Monarchy, the establishment of an autocratic govern-
ment follows as a natural consequence from the growth of the power of
the press: — 'The tendency of advanced civilisation is, in truth, to pure
Monarchy. Monarchy is, indeed, a government which requires a high
degree of civilisation for its full development. It needs the support of
free laws and manners, and of a widely-diffused intelligence. Political
compromises are not to be tolerated except at periods of rude transition.
An educated nation recoils from the imperfect vicariate of what is called
a representative government. Your House of Commons, that has ab-
sorbed all other powers in the State, will, in all probability, fall more
rapidly than it rose. Public opinion has a more direct, a more compre-
hensive, a more efficient organ for its utterance than a body of men
sectionally chosen. The Printing Press is a political element unknown
to classic or feudal times. It absorbs in a great degree the duties of the
Sovereign, the Priest, the Parliament ; it controb, it educates, it dis-
cusses. That public opinion, when it acts, would appear in the form of
one who has no class interests. In an enlightened age the Monarch on
the throne, free from the vulgar prejudices and the corrupt interests of
the subject, becomes again Divine !' — Coningsby, book v. eh. 8.

^ Sybil, book vi. ch. 13.

252 Misunderstandings and Pi^ejudices.

CHAPTEE VI.

THE ATTEMPT ON THE EMPEROR.

No words, written or spoken, can express, even
slightly, the feehngs of horror and indignation felt by
Eussians at the news of the monstrous attempt to
destroy our Emperor's life. To us such a crime is
almost parricide. That a second time within a single
year such an attempt should be made fills our hearts
with humiliation and covers us with shame.

In the midst of our distress it adds little to our
comfort that in some parts of Europe such deeds are
hailed with imconcealed satisfaction. In England
there is perceptible behind the conventional ex-
pression of indignation a sardonic chuckle of satis-
faction. Of course, it is very wicked, all your papers
say, this attempted assassination ; but it is to be
hoped that it will lead to the abandonment of Eussia's
Slavonic mission, the modification of Eussia's auto-
cratic Constitution, or some other result desired by
our censors. They would not commit the crime, oh
no ! But, as it is committed, they do their best to
extract political capital out of it.

This eager morahsing has naturally a very bad
efiect in Eussia. You do not know how widely the

The Attempt on the Emperor. 253

suspicion prevails amongst our people that these
Nihihst outrages are due to foreign instigation.
Eightly or wrongly, our people believe that the
foreigners, Jews certainly not excluded, supply funds
for the Terrorists.^ Our war for the liberation of the
Christians in the East rendered the Jews more hostile
to us than ever.^ In Eussia we generally think them
only consistent with their religion, and thus they are
naturally ready to injure their rehgious enemies.
Therefore, there is a great feehng of distrust towards
them, and they do not enjoy all the civil rights of the
Christian natives. Those who defend them in this
country, for instance, generally declare them to be
inconsistent, and friendly to the Christians in other

* Some English friends protest that it is incredible that the Jews could
be allied with the Nihilists or Anarchists. Permit me to remind them
what the Earl of Beaconsfield wrote of the part played by the Jews in
1848, in his political biography of Lord George Bentinck. Speaking of
that still recent * outburst of destructive forces which had ravaged
Europe/ Mr. Disraeli, himself of Jewish descent, declared that out-
break would never have attained such proportions but for the * fiery
energy and teeming resources ' of the sons of Israel. Men of the Jewish
race were found at the head of all the provisional Governments in Europe.
* The people of God co-operate with Atheists ; the most skilful accumulators
of property ally themselves with Communists ; the peculiar and chosen
race touch the hand of all the scum and low castes of Europe, and all
this because they wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes
to them even its name, and whose tyranny they can no longer endure.'
Lord George Bentinck : a Political Biography, by B. Disraeli, p. 499.

* Dr. H. Sandwith refers to this subject in his article in the Fort^
nightly Itevietv for December, 1879. He says: — 'I had (during his
journey ' from Belgrade to Samakov ') an ample explanation of the in-
tolerance shown to the Jews by the Christians of the East. During all
these horrors they played the part of jackal to the Turkish lion. They
himted out and betrayed the Christians ; they were the niost zealous
volunteer spies ; and they were always ready to purchase the plundered
property of the rayahs. The dislike of the Eastern Christians to the
Jews is not merely the result of religious intolerance.' — P. 898. See
Appendix, The Jeivish Question.

254 Misunderstandings and Prejudices,

countries. Our experience has taught us differently.
Amongst our Nihihsts there are many of Jewish origin.
But forgive me for giving you another detail, which
can surprise no Eussian, but which, I dare say, may
shock you. Even more deeply rooted is the con-
viction that the Nihilist agitation is supported not
only by the Internationale^ but that the NihiUst paper
is pubhshed at one of the servant's rooms of the
Embassies of St. Petersburg — whether Austrian,
Turkish, or British is not particularly specified.
Ambassadors, of course, have their immunities. I
have heard some declare that if they had the right of
search in foreign Embassies the pubUcation of the
Nihilist organs of assassination would speedily be
stopped.^ This suspicion is not dispelled by the
evident pleasure with which our foreign critics seize
upon every outrage to emphasise their advice, and
find a new reason for pressing their counsels in every
murder.

It sickens one to read the conventional twaddle
about ' the ruthless despotism ' which is supposed to
be responsible for such crimes. No Monarch in
Europe has been fortunate enough not to have been
chosen as a target more than once, and if anyone
deserved it less than the others it was certainly our
present Emperor.

The shortcomings, the mistakes, the abuses of
our officials can neither explain nor justify these

^ This remark seems to have displeased the Times. In a leader of
December 17, 1879, it describes my statement as one of the maddest of
myths. Let us hope that, by a happy chance, the Time^ this time is
right.

The Attempt on the Emperor. 255

monstrous attacks upon the Monarch hhnself. We
look to him for their removal, and we feel certain
that whenever mismanagements are discovered and
malpractices are proved, the criminals will be
punished without even the chance of being recom-
mended to friendly countries as trustworthy re-
formers.

The Emperor is absolute. He is the repre-
sentative of the people, to whom we look for the
remedy of abuses and the reform of the adminis-
tration. Until you can reahse that, you understand
nothing about our Government. I wish our critics
would apply to themselves the words Mr. Gladstone
at Glasgow addressed to the historian. If they
would ' lift themselves out of theii- environment, and
assume the points of view and think under the entire
conditions which belong to the person (or nation)
they are calling to account,' they would not, as at
present, ' pervert judgment by taking their seat in
the tribunal loaded with u-relevant and misleading
matter.'^

To replace the Emperor by a Eussian House of
Commons would not substitute for the autocracy the
government of the elected representatives of the
people. The autocracy would merely be replaced by
the bureaucracy, and the representatives of the
people, unfamiliar with poUtical affairs, and returned
by constituents largely under the influence of the
officials, might not be so effective a check upon mis-
government as is the Emperor.

1 Rectorial Address, Glasgow University, Dec. 1879.

256 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

It is not by attempted assassinations that Eussians
will be persuaded to alter their institutions in the
Constitutional direction. The tendency of such
crimes is just the opposite. Even in Ireland far less
offences lead to the suspension of Constitutional safe-
guards, and the crimes of the Anarchists would
justify the creation of a Dictatorship rather than the
proclamation of a Constitution.

The Anarchists ^ care as little for a Constitution

* The Nihilists believe, as their name implies, in nothing. * We say,
No law, no religion — Nihil,' and the only article of th6 no-faith in which
they believe is, that everything must be destroyed. The following ex-
tracts from the manifesto of Bakunin exhibit Nihilism as pourtrayed by
its founder in 1868 : — * Brethren, I come to announce unto you a new
gospel, which must penetrate to the very ends of the world. This gospel
admits of no half-measures and hesitations. The old world must be
destroyed, and replaced by a new one. The Lie must be stamped out
and give way to Truth. It is our mission to destroy the Lie ; and, to
effect this, we must begin at the very commencement. Now the begin-
ning of all those lies which have ground down this poor world in slavery,
is God. Tear out of your hearts the belief in the existence of God ; for,
as long as an atom of that silly superstition remains in your minds, you
will never know what freedom is.

* When you have got rid of the belief in this priest-begotten God, and
when, moreover, you are convinced that your existence, and that of the
surrounding world, is due to the conglomeration of atoms, in accordance
with the laws of gravity and attraction, then, and then only, you will
have accomplished the first step towards liberty, and you will experience
less difficulty in ridding your minds of that second lie which tyranny has
invented.

* The first lie is God. The second lie is Right. Might invented the
fiction of Right in order to insure and strengthen her reign. Mighty my
friends, forms the sole groundwork of society. Might makes and unmakes
laws, and that might should be in the hands of the majority. Once
penetrated with a clear conviction of your own might, you will be able to
destroy this mere notion of Right.

* And when you have freed your minds from the fear of a God, and
from that childish respect for the fiction of Right, then all the remaining
chains which bind you, and which are called science, civilisation, property,
marriage, morality, and justice, will snap asunder like threads.

* Let your own happiness be your only law. But in order to get this

The Attempt on the Emperor. 257

as they do for the Slavonic cause. They openly
declare they despise it as much as the honour of
their country or its moral development. Their reli-
gious, or rather philosophical, tenets allow them to
do whatever they like or can to crush, not merely
the Government, but the family, property, and,
above all, the Christian rehgion. They are Russian
Communards, and no society, no Government on
earth, in defending all that is precious and holy to
man, could allow them to have a free hand.

No Government in Europe, and certainly not the
Government of England, would have been more
forbearing than the Russian with such deadly enemies.
Since the murder of General Mezentzoff, and the
attempted assassination of the Emperor on April 14,
down to October, when I heard the matter discussed
by people entitled to speak with authority, not more
than twelve Nihilists have been put to death,
although the number of murders, and attempts to
murder Government officials, have been far greater.

The French Government, dealing with enemies
far less unscrupulous, after crushing the Commune of
Paris, shot 3,000 Communards ; and even in England
you usually hang more murderers every year than
we have executed Terrorists since they resorted to

law recognised, and to bring about the proper relations whicb should
exist between the majority and minority of mankind, you must destroy
everything which exists in the shape of State or social organisation.
Our first work must be destruction and annihilation of everything as it
now exists. You must accustom yourselves to destroy everything, the
good with the bad ; for if but an atom of this old world remains, the new
will never be created.

' Take heed that no ark be allowed to rescue any atom of this old
world which we consecrate to destruction.'

S

258 Misunderstandings and Prejudices.

assassination.^ The majority of the NihiHsts con-
victed of crimes have been sent to Eastern Eussia or
Western Siberia, where the climate is as healthy as
that of Moscow. About 400 men and women have
been sent to Saghalien, but only a small part of them
belonged to the Nihilists. Compare these measures
with those of Napoleon, who, after December 2, sent
about 2,000 men to a lingering death in Cayenne.^
No society has the right to tolerate certain deeds,
and if the Eussian Government is guilty of anything,
it is of a most unwise leniency.

That, at all events, is the opinion of Eussians. A
hurried note from St. Petersburg, written the day
after the attempt on the Emperor, thus describes the
feehng excited in the capital : — ' The people, espe-
cially the lower classes, are very angry with the
leniency of the judges towards the Nihilists. The
house from which the mine was fired has been
partially destroyed by the populace. The police had
to interfere to prevent its total demolition. Should
any catastrophe occur (which Heaven forbid !) to the
Emperor and his son, the Grand Duke Tzarewitch
— between whom, I need hardly add, there are the
closest ties of affection and confidence — there will be

^ In England, in 1879, twenty murderers were sentenced to death and
fifteen were hanged.

* This is a very moderate computation. Mr. Kjnglake says : — ^ None
will ever know the number of men who at this period were either killed
or imprisoned in France or sent to die in Africa or Cayenne ; but the
panegyrist (Granier de Cassagnac) of Louis Bonaparte and his fellow
plotters acknowledges that the number of people who were seized and
transported between the few weeks which followed the 2nd of December
amounted to the enormous number of twenty-six thousand five hundred.'
— Invasion of Crimea, sixth edition, vol. i. p. 312.

The Attempt on the Emperor. 259

witnessed a popular outburst of the maddest and
most terrible character. No power could then
restrain the people from attacking and punishing
without mercy every individual whom they may
suspect of Mhilist sympathies.'

Have we not some justification for our indigna-
tion? Mirsky's life was granted, at the request of
General Drenteln, his would-be victim. Within three
days the answer to this from the Nihilist camp was
the attempt to kill our Emperor !

s 2

PAET IV.

THE ANGLO-KUSSIAN ALLIANCE.

1. FKIENDS OR FOES ?

2. ENGLAND'S 'TRADITIONAL POLICY/

3. RUSSL^ AND ENGLISH PARTIES.

4. RUSSIA'S FOREIGN POLICY:— A REPLY TO MR. GLAD-

STONE. LETTER FROM M. EMILE DE LAVELEYE.

5. RUSSIAN AGGRESSION.

6. RUSSIA AND THE AFGHAN WAR.

7. RUSSIANS IN CENTRAL ASIi.

8. TRADITIONAL POLICY OF RUSSIA.

9. SOME LAST WORDS.

263

CHAPTER I.

FRIENDS OR FOES?

' I DESIRE nothing from you ; I do not come to you in
a precarious way, non ut cliens, sed ut amicus. My
business is to make you an offer of that which is
worthy of acceptance by any prince in Europe, the
friendship of the EngUsh Commonwealth, which, if
you please to embrace it on just and honourable
terms, will be for your advantage as well as ours.
If not, you yourselves will have as much prejudice
as any other by the refusal.'

Such was the straightforward declaration made
by an Enghsh Ambassador ^ when the Swedish Chan-
cellor, Oxenstierne, asked him what England desired
from Sweden.

This is one of the numerous cases in which
Eussians could have nothing better to do than to
follow the EngUsh example. I am not in any sense
an ambassador, I simply state my own views, as
well as those of many Eussians, but were I to speak
in the name of Eussia to England, I could not find
better terms of expressing the feeling which alone
can guarantee a real, cordial alUance between us.

1 Bulstrode Whitelocke, 1654.

264 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

We do not want your patronage any more than
you want ours. But the Kussian Government as well
as the Eussian people have taken more than one step
to secure your friendship, and have gone further —
I openly say — than was compatible with our national
dignity, especially in the course of the last three years.
We made concession after concession ; we sacrificed
our prestige ; ^ we forgot not only our own interests,
but those of people depending solely upon us, in a
manner which was altogether incompatible with our
duty. With what results I need not say, but, believe
me, the insults, the injuries of these last times have
not increased the enthusiasm or the number of your
friends in Eussia.

If this policy is still to be persisted in, I am afraid
things will not improve in that respect. The irri-
tation already occasioned is as sore as a bleeding
wound, and it will only become sorer, if no energetic
attempt is speedily made by Enghshmen whose
personal views and sympathies are favourable to
the Slavonic cause. And here, let me say, that while
I hold Lord Beaconsfield's ' triumphs ' of infinite in-
significance, there is one victory which I really
regret. He certainly has achieved a great success in

* This, perhaps, was not so much matter. We can afford to re-
gard Kussias prestige as Mr. Carlyle regards that of England when he
says : ' The prestige of England on the Continent, I am told, is much
decayed of late, which is a lamentable thing to various editors ; to me
not. Prestige, prsestigium, magical illusion— I never understood that
poor England had in her good days, or cared to have, any prestige on the
Continent, or elsewhere. The word was Napoleonic, expressive enough
of a Grand-Napoleonic fact; better leave it on its own side of the
Channel ; not wanted here ! ' — Shooting Niagara, p. 377.

Friends or Foes ? 265

paralysing the England which was so heartily in
accord with our efforts for the emancipation of the
Christians. To judge from much that is said, and
even done now, it seems as if consistency, per-
severance in a course held to be but natural and just
only two years ago, is now regarded as almost a treason
to England. Yet if these people were really traitors
to their own country, who could trust their pro-
fessions, who could esteem them, who could ever care
for their friendship ? Not we Eussians, certainly not.

But has it really come to this, that friendship to
Eussia is treason to England? What a monstrous
conclusion ! But before accepting it as an absolute
truth, would it not be well to hear what can be said
on the other side ?

Has the experience of the last three years been
so very satisfactory as to justify a persistence in a
policy of systematic animosity? Do you like the
results at which we have already arrived ? Are you
in a better position now than if St. James's Hall,
instead of Guildhall, had dictated England's answer
to our friendly advances ? No matter what Eussia
proposed, England rejected it, while the one thing
you proposed — the Constantinople Conference — we
cordially accepted. Lord Beaconsfield adopted a
policy of isolation from his devotion to 'English
interests.' Tell me, has it been so much to your
interest to care for nothing but ' interests.' Has
anyone gained by it ?

Of course Eussia has suffered. We have lost two
hundred thousand lives, not to speak of money ; but

266 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

is that an adequate compensation to you for having
made enemies of a hundred millions of Slavs ? Per-
haps it might, if you had really succeeded in re-
generating and re-establishing the Ottoman Empire.
Eussia has her compensations even more moral than
material for her sacrifices. Where are those of the
Sultan, or — may I add — your own ? Your promised
' Three Campaigns ' were only fought at the Guild-
hall, and — whilst the poor Sultan was sighing if only
for one — our armies crossed the Danube, crossed the
' impregnable ' Balkans, reached Constantinople, and
dictated peace !

I repeat, who, then, has gained ? This policy of
antagonism has kept Europe in perpetual anxiety.
Greece has trusted you only to be betrayed, in com-
mon with those simple souls who put their trust in
the singular Salisbury Circular. Even Austria, in
spite of her large compensation for — ^well — I do not
know exactly for what — does not seem over grateful.
Has England then benefited herself? Have you
reaped any material advantages ? But if not ma-
terially, perhaps you have gained much morally?
Have you added much to your prestige ? Does your
national honour stand higher since your secret agree-
ments and your Cyprus concessions ?

Your glory in the past was to have been the
friend of the oppressed, the refuge of the persecuted,
the emancipator of the slave, and the champion of
the weak against the strong. Has that glory, which
we sincerely envied you, been enhanced by your
recent policy in the East, or have you not conferred

Friends or Foes ? 267

upon us the proud position of standing forth as
the vindicator of hberty and humanity in the Balkan
Peninsula ?

Honestly speaking, I do not think that the results
- of the policy of antagonism have been encouraging,
and I am not without hope that many Englishmen
share my conclusion.^

* Mr. Gladstone, writing in the Nineteenth Century for August, 1879,
on ' The Country and the Government,' says : — * In no form whatever is
there any sensible counterpoise to the immense mass of folly and of mis-
chief which is now crowning us so richly with its natural fruits. Having
had in former days a tolerable character for unselfishness, we have now
nauseated the world with the doctrine that *' British interests " supply
the final criterion of right and wrong. Upon every contested question
that has arisen in the councils of Europe we have been the champions
not of freedom but of oppression. Not an inch has been added to free
soil through our agency, or with our good will. Servia, Montenegro,
Bulgaria, Greece, perhaps Roumania — every one of them are smaller
through our influence than they would have been without us. For the
first time it can now be said with truth, that in the management of a
great crisis of human destiny it would have been better for the interests
of justice and of liberty if the British nation had not existed. . . . Our
only gain has been that we were supposed to have " peace with honour ; "
the honour of providing the Sultan with a line of fortresses along the
Balkans ; the honour of arresting the southward march of freedom at the
mountain passes, and leaving on the map the ill-starred testimony — on
the northern side, " This is free land, liberated by the Despot of Russia ; "
on the other hand, " This is Turkish land, recovered for the Ottomans by
the Tory Ministry and Parliament of England." . . There is not a nation
upon earth with which we have drawn the bonds of friendship closer by
the transactions of these last years ; but we have played perilous tricks
with the loyalty of India, have estranged the ninety millions who inhabit
Russia, and have severed ourselves from the Christians of Turkey, Greek
and Slav alike, without gaining the respect of the Moslem. And all
this we have done not to increase our power, but only our engagements ;
not to add at any point to our resources in men and money, but only and
largely to the claims which may be made upon them. Assertions so
broad as these must bear, in the eyes of those who have not carefully
followed the facts, the aspect of exaggeration. Yet they are simply the
summing up of ample Parliamentary demonstrations; they nowhere
exceed the truth, and in sonie cases fall within it.'

268 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

How different it might have been if there had
really been established that perfect understanding
between England and Kussia which our Emperor,
representing the best aspirations of his people, urged
upon Lord 'Augustus Loftus at Livadia in 1876. 'It
would indeed,' as he so truly said, ' have been equally
beneficial to their mutual interests and to those of
Europe at large.'

Is it now too late ? Alas ! too many of my
countrymen have lost all faith in the possibility of
any friendly understanding after the painful disap-
pointment occasioned by the success with which
Lord Beaconsfield has paralysed our friends. The
St. James's Hall Conference and the hearty support
of the Slavonic cause, by such men as Mr. Carlyle,
Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Bright, Mr. Freeman, the Duke
of Argyll, Canon Liddon, and many others, whose
names will ever be precious to us, raised hopes of
co-operation which were rudely dashed to the
ground by the conduct of your Government. Nor
is this the only obstacle in the way. Not only is
there a feeling of the hopelessness of removing Eng-
lish suspicion, but the irritation and resentment occa-
sioned amongst all classes of the Eussian people by
your menaces and insults have created a formidable
barrier between the two nations. This, however, was
one of the consequences of the policy adopted by
your Ministry, and it was urged in vain upon them as
a reason for adopting an opposite course.

Five days before Lord Beaconsfield made his im-
mortal Speech of the Three Campaigns, Lord Augustus

Friends or Foes f 269

Loftus was writing at Yalta a report of a conversation
which he had with an independent Kussian nobleman,
' of high rank and influence, who is known for his
admiration of England and everything English.' In
his despatch occurs the following passage, which I
quote from your Blue Book : —

He said he hoped England would act in co-operation with
Russia. There was every motive, political or otherwise, to
engage her to do so for her own interests, and for those of
Europe. England would then reap with Russia the gratitude
of the Christian Eastern races, and augment her influence
with them. It was an opportunity which might not easily
occur again, and if once lost, would not be regained. More-
over, he expressed a great anxiety that the present occasion
should be profited of to establish a cordial understanding
between the British and Russian nations. It would be the
means of dispelling that mist of distrust which has so long
disturbed the friendly feelings between the two countries,
for their mutual disadvantage. He feared that if England
should now continue an antagonistic policy to Russia there
would arise in this country an Anglophobia far surpassing
what had hitherto been known in England under the name
of Russophobia.*

Disregarding all our appeals, your Government
persisted in its antagonistic policy, with the results
which were anticipated. And yet, my firm impression
is, that if England determines upon a new departure
in her deahngs with Eussia, your advances will receive
a warmer welcome from us than you extended to
ours. The initiative this time must come from you ;
we can do no more.

1 Affairs of Turkey, No. 1 (1877), p. 646.

270 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

Sir Charles Trevelyan, writing to the Times^ con-
firms my hope, he says : —

I should despair of the present state of feeling towards
Eussia if I did not remember the time when it was part of
an Englishman's religion to hate the French. England used
to be on the side of every oppressed nationality ; but the
wrongs of Bulgarians, Greeks, Armenians, even our detesta-
tion of slavery, seem to be swallowed up by our fear and
hatred of Eussia. Nevertheless, I look forward to a time
when we shall awake from this delusion also. England and
Eussia have a great work of Christian civilisation to perform,
and, instead of counteracting each other, they ought, in no
grudging or ungenerous spirit, to give each other mutual
help.

And — who knows? — instead of war, perhaps, at
last England will join her in that sacred work, and
the two great united and confident peoples will begin
a new era worthy of them both, and renew the inti-
macy which existed after the fall of Napoleon the
First.

Mr. Bright, in his speech on the Six Million Vote,^
made a declaration which supports my hope that in
the future we may be Friends not Foes. Speaking
with all his usual eloquence, he said : —

The Grovernment of this country ought to declare, and
the time is not far distant, I believe, when they will declare
it — it is now pretty much the mind of the people of England
— that we have no interest in any longer taking any step
whatever to maintain the Ottoman rule in Europe, and that
we have no interest in maintaining a perpetual enmity with
Eussia. There are two policies before us — an old policy
which, if we leave it to our children, will be a legacy of

» December, 1878. 2 January 31, 1878.

Friends or Foes f 271

future wars ; and a new policy for which I contend and which
I preach, by the adoption of which we shall leave to our
country, not a legacy of war, but a legacy of peace and of a
growing and lasting friendship with one of the greatest
Empires in the world.

To that, with all my heart, I subscribe !

272 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

CHAPTEE n.

England's 'traditional policy.'

' We must support the Turk, for it is our traditional
policy,' is the motto of England. No, not of England,
but of many Englishmen, The tradition, however,
does not go very far back — ^not much farther, in fact,
than the Crimean war ^ — a war the wisdom of which
many of its authors now seriously doubt.

But I will not raise that question now. Grant it

* The vehemently Russophobist author of Thirty Years of Foreign
Policy, writing in 1865, says : — ' It is forgotten that this violent sym-
pathy for the Turkish cause is of a very recent date. Among Liberal
politicians especially it is only within the last few years that the exist-
ence of Turkey has ever been admitted to be a political necessity. The
statesmen of tbe last generation, with perhaps the exception of William
Pitt, utterly detested the Turkish Government. Even Burke called the
Turks a race of savages and worse tban savages, and said that any
Minister who allowed them to be of any weigbt in the European system,
deserved the curses of posterity. Thirty years ago the English Whigs
and the Tzar were both bent on wresting Greece from Turkey and doing
all the harm they could to the Sultan. After Navarino, the English
Opposition bitterly reproached the Ministers for declaring it was
necessary to maintain the Turkish Empire. In 1828, Lord Holland
could scarcely find words to express his horror at any expression of
sympathy for the Ottoman Empire. Had Lord Aberdeen and the Duke
of Wellington declared war in 1829 in defence of Turkey, they would
have been strongly opposed by a more formidable section of Liberal
politicians than ever resisted Pitt when he commenced hostilities
against the French Republicans. Religious fanaticism, popular preju-
dices, and liberal enthusiasm were all against the cause of the Sultan.' —
Pp. 107, 110, 113, 116, 117.

England's ' Traditional Policy.' 273

if you will, that the Pasha and the Bashi-Bazouk are
the traditional alHes of free England. Must what has
been always continue ? Must the past bind for ever
both the present and the future ? The history of
every nation is nothing but a record of the changes
in its traditional, internal, and external poKcy.

Policies must be adjusted to facts, not facts to
policies. No rule of conduct can be immutable. The
wisdom of yesterday is often the folly of to-day. To
be truly consistent as to one's object, one must often
be completely inconsistent as to the means.

The truth is not a paradox. It is a truism of
poHtics. Two or three years ago a clerical member
of the Prussian Herrenhaus attempted to overwhelm
the German Chancellor by quoting at great length
from a speech delivered by M. Bismarck some twenty
years previously, in which he vehemently attacked
the policy he had subsequently adopted as his own.

Nothing daunted by hearing the recent pohcy of
his Government denounced so vehemently from
the tribune in extracts selected from his former
speech. Prince Bismarck listened attentively, and
with a slight smile upon his strongly-marked features.
When his assailant, with an air of triumph, had
resumed his seat. Prince Bismarck said, ' I have
listened attentively to the speech which I delivered
twenty years ago. I heard it with pleasure, and I am
delighted to see that twenty years ago I understood
the situation so well. At the present moment it
would be all wrong, but then it was exactly what was
needed. It is impossible now to secure the safety of

T

274 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

the State except by departing from the tradition of
that time.*

Other statesmen have shown even less anxiety to
justify the change of pohcy forced upon them by
altered circumstances. The Duke of Wellington,
when on one occasion he was challenged in the House
of Lords with an apparent inconsistency, simply
repHed, with charming frankness, 'I have changed
my mind ! '

Every reform is more or less of a protest against
the poUcy bequeathed to us by our ancestors — a
revolt against the estabhshed traditions of the past.
When the reform is accomplished, men marvel at the
opposition which it encountered. Of numberless
instances take a case which was mentioned to me the
other day, when we were talking of the universal
satisfaction with which the aboUtion of the Concordat
was regarded in Austria-Hungary. When the Council
of the Vatican proclaimed the infallibility of the
Holy Father, the enunciation of that dogma effected a
change in the relation between the Papacy and the
Courts of Europe. Count Beust, at that time Chan-
cellor of Austria-Hungary, recognised, with the keen
perception of a statesman, that the time had come
for breaking with the traditional policy of the past.
Count Beust abolished the Concordat, and boldly
initiated the new policy which the occasion required.

There is a significance about that last fact which
should not be lost. The Sultan has not proclaimed
in set terms the dogma of his infallibility, but he has
done worse. At the Conference at Constantinople he
asserted, for the first time for many years, his deli-

England's ' Traditional Policy' 275

berate intention to defy the councils of all the Powers.
Unanimously they urged him to accept the irreducible
minima, and pertinaciously he refused. That refusal
in itself changed the whole situation. It was the
Mussulman counterpart to the decree of the Vatican
— an act of defiance to Europe and to civilisation.
To some extent the English Government has recog-
nised the impossibility of carrying out the old policy
under such new conditions ; but, unlike Count Beust,
it has not boldly broken with the past, and annulled
the unwritten Concordat which bound England to
the Turk.

The reasons which led England to fight Eussia in
1854 no longer exist. The whole situation is trans-
formed. Is it not necessary to abandon the mistaken
attempts to secure the peace of Europe by main-
taining a government always and unavoidably at war
with its own subjects ? Peace, said Lord Derby, is
the greatest of British interests. Why sacrifice it,
then, by maintaining so obstinately a policy which
has become an anachronism? Can you quick-
moving Westerns, who invent the locomotive and talk
by the telephone, be so absorbed in the trivial details
of each day's business as to ignore two of the greatest
facts of modern history? What are these facts?
The first is the evident progress of Eussia under our
present Tzar.^ The second is the estabUshment of

* I thought this was undisputed, but of late some people seem deter-
mined to dispute everything to our credit, and I therefore may be par-
doned if I quote in support of this statement the evidence of one of our
most determined enemies, Mr. Butler Johnstone, who can never forgive
Lord Beaconsfield's Government for not making war upon Russia in 1877.
Writing in 1875 on * Russia as it is,' he says : — * One thing is quite

T 2

276 The Anglo-Russian Alliance,

the German Empire. By the first, Eussia gained new
claims upon the sympathies of the civihsed world.
The second saved the Continent from the dread of the
absolute predominance of Eussia. The Turk is the
only unprogressive Power left in Europe, and Turkish
oppression is a worse menace to peace than ' Eussian
aggression,'

The Sick Man is sick unto death. England has
tried to galvanise him into life ; but the task exceeds
even the resources of English wealth. And yet there
are some who say, ' Let him have one more chance ! '
But what is the meaning of this phrase ? What can
be the relations between the Turks and the Christians
after the events of the last two years ? But it is pos-
sible that the Turk may be spared.^ Enghsh diplo-
matic influence may succeed in maintaining the
Turkish Empire against the determination of the
whole of Eussia. If so, while apparently adhering to
the traditional policy of England, Lord Beaconsfield
will have sacrificed the object for which that policy
was invented, viz., the maintenance of a Power at
Constantinople strong enough to keep peace in the
East.

clear, tlie Russia of 1874 is no more the Russia of the Crimean war than
it is the Russia of Boris Godounoff. That war ruined Turkey and rege-
nerated Russia. . . . Every branch of Russian administration has been
reformed. Corruption is not absolutely rooted out, but has at any rate
been checked and compelled to hide its head ; a network of railways has
been undertaken, and, greatest triumph of all, the emancipation of the
serfs was resolved upon, and, in spite of the obstacles, has been success-
fully carried out. In fact, there has been progress — great, rapid, and
astounding progress — material and social and moral progress — along the
whole line.' — A Trip up the Volga, pp. 5-6.
1 This letter was written in November, 1877.

277

CHAPTEE m.

RUSSIA AND ENGLISH PARTIES.

It sometimes amuses me to see your papers de-
claring that Eussians place all their hopes in the
accession of the Enghsh Liberals to office.^ Eussia is

1 In his first Midlothian speech, Mr. Gladstone emphatically admits
that the English Liberals did little to excite the confid^ce with which
it is mistakenly assumed they are regarded by Russians. He said : —
* Down to the end of the session 1876, although the Government had
been adopting measures of the utmost importance in direct contradiction
to the spirit and action of the rest of the Powers of Europe, there was
not one word of hostile comment from the Liberal party. Was it faction
in the Liberal party to remain silent during all these important acts, and
to extend their confidence to the Government in the afiairs of the Tur-
kish Empire, even when that Government was acting in contradiction to
the whole spirit, I may say, of civilised mankind — cei*tainly in contradic-
tion to the united proposals of the five Great Powers of the continent of
Europe ? Ear more difficult is it to justify the Liberal party upon the
other side. Why did we allow the East to be thrown into confusion ?
Why did we allow the concert of Europe to be broken up ? Why did
we allow the Berlin Memorandum to be thrown behind the fire, and no
other measure substituted in its place ? Why did we allow that fatal
progression of events to advance, unchecked by us, so far, even after the
fields of Bulgaria had flowed with blood, and the cry of every horror
known and unknown had ascended to heaven from that country ? Why
did we remain silent for such a length of time ? Gentlemen, that is not
all. It is quite true that there was soon after a refusal of the great
human heart of this country, not in Parliament, but outside of Parlia-
ment, to acquiesce in what was going on, and to maintain the ignominious
silence which we had maintained on the subject of the Bulgarian mas-
sacres. In August and September, 1876, there was an outburst, an
involuntary outbiurst, for the strain could no longer be borne, from the
people of this country, in every quarter of the country, denouncing those

278 The Anglo-Russian Alliance,

not so weak as to place all her hopes even in * good
tidings of great joy ' from foreign capitals. Eussia
has her own poHcy, and to fulfil it she relies upon
herself. No doubt Eussians would gladly see a
change in the position of parties in England — not
because they hope much from the Liberals, but
because they have been convinced by years of abuse
and bad faith that no tolerable modus vivendi is pos-
sible with the present Conservative Government.
Those who desire to see peace maintained in Europe
and Asia would welcome the accession of any fresh
Ministry to power. It might be better, and could
not possibly be worse. But to imagine that Eussians
generally entertain great hopes of the entente cordiale
with England if the Liberals return to power is
decidedly a mistake. The majority attribute the
speeches of the Opposition to party spirit, and, I
regret to say, are very sceptical as to the reality of
Liberal devotion to the cause of the Christians of the
East.

Some Eussians do not even desire any change.
Convinced by the speeches of your Ministers that war
is inevitable, they wish for nothing better than that
Lord Beaconsfield should remain in office. As Mr. F.
de Martens, Professor of International Law at the Uni-
versity of St. Petersburg, truly remarks in his excel-
lent pamphlet on 'Eussia and England in Central

massacres. But the Liberal party was not, as a party, in the field. And
it was not till after nearly two years— viz., late in the spring or during
the sprirg of 1877— it was not until nearly two years after the Govern-
ment had been busy with the Eastern Question that the Liberal party
first began somewhat feebly to raise its voice in the House of Commons.

Russia and English Parties. 279

Asia ' : ' Kussian Anglophobists are extremely grateful
to the Administration of Lord Beaconsfield, because
it has, at a single stroke, brought England's Lidian
possessions into close proximity with the Asiatic terri-
tories which acknowledge the supremacy of Kussia.' ^
England is much more vulnerable than before ; and,
as I said last year, if England and Eussia are to be
foes, it would be unpatriotic in a Eussian to write
one word against Lord Beaconsfield, who has thrown
away Britannia's shield, and left her exposed to
hostile attacks.

It is very difficult, indeed, for foreign nations to
understand the working of EngUsh parties. To the
average Eussian Lord Beaconsfield is England, and
the Opposition attacks upon his policy are mere party
attacks upon their powerful opponent — party attacks
of no actual significance. ' What does it matter ? *
said one of our most influential journahsts to me in
Moscow, ' What does it matter ? These Liberals
may say what they like in Opposition, but when they
enter office they will do no more for the Eastern
nationahties than Lord Beaconsfield. They are all
ahke, these English — some of them, taken separately,
perfectly charming and well intentioned, generous, cul-
tivated ; but, take them as a whole, as a nation, they
are not to be trusted in any way. Can you seriously
be so bUnd, so utterly under English influence, as to
believe that they care a straw for the Slavs, the
Greeks, or any other oppressed nationality, or for any-
thing in the world except their own interests ; and

^ Russia and England in Central Asia, Martens, p. 10.

280 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

what interests ! You may point out, as you usually
do, some straightforward and noble words said, or
written, by Englishmen, but what is the position of
these people at home ? Some of them — merely be-
cause they are not rich enough to buy at an election
the confidence of their countrymen, or are too frank
and outspoken to conciliate the prejudices of electors
— are not even in Parliament. The others, even in
Parliament, are quite powerless. England,' he con-
tinued, 'is chiefly governed now, not by men of high
moral principle and of commanding intellect, as she
was on many occasions in former days. England is
nothing but a plutocracy — the most demorahsing and
vulgarising shape of government known in all history.
Compassion, generosity, self-sacrifice- — you little know
how httle this adds to your pocket ; but in England
this is only too well known.' I protested, but in vain.
A solitary voice is sometimes raised in the Eussian
press, expressing unshaken faith in the honour and
sincerity of the English Liberals, and a deep con-
viction that they would pursue in office the pohcy
advocated in opposition ; but it is vox clamantis in
deserto ; and even the editor who inserts the article
emphatically declares that he does not share its sen-
timents, ' for one is as bad as the other, and after
these years no one can trust an Englishman.'

Devoted advocates of the entente cordiale between
Kussia and England sometimes almost despair of this
unjust suspicion of all things EngUsh, which, however,
is perhaps not altogether unnatural after the frequent
disappointments of the last three years.

Russia and English Parties, 281

In the autumn of 1876, Eussians, with delighted
surprise, began to believe that England would work
with them in securing the peaceful emancipation of
the Slavs. How gladly we hailed that prospect Lord
Salisbury can tell, for no one at the Conference of
Constantinople, certainly not his own colleague, so
cordially supported him as the representative of
Eussia. After the Conference, we had nothing but
disappointments. The Government would not coerce
the Turks ; even the miserable Protocol was not
signed without provisoes making it of no effect. Mr.
Gladstone's resolutions were no sooner introduced
than all but one or two were withdrawn,^ and Eussia
was compelled single-handed to do the work of
Europe.

When the war was over, and Bulgaria was freed
from the Danube to the iEgean, the Enghsh Govern-
ment demanded six milhons to threaten war for re-
enslaving Southern Bulgaria. Mr. Forster's ' amend-
ment ' was moved, but it also was rapidly withdrawn.
Preparations for w^ar went on. The Enghsh Liberals
seemed paralysed. Their Eussian friends were in
despair. Then came the Congress at Berlin. Lord
Beaconsfield and Lord Salisbury, on their return to
London, were received as conquering heroes, with
shouts of enthusiastic applause, making it their chief,
and indeed their only, boast that they had restored to

1 Such at least is the universal opinion abroad. I am informed, how-
ever, on excellent authority, that these resolutions were not actually
abandoned, and that the operation, mistaken for a withdrawal, was ' a
mere matter of parliamentary form, not easily explained to those outside.'
This is another proof of the difficulty of understanding the working of
English party-government.

282 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

the power of the Turk the very province whose
sufferings evoked the magnificent demonstrations
against the Turks in 1876. What wonder if, after
that, Eussians became impatient when they were told
that one-half of England cordially sympathised with
their sacrifices and shared their devotion to the cause
of freedom in the East ?

It is very painful for me to admit that Eussians
distrust the Liberals almost as much as the Conserva-
tives, because it is to some slight extent the confession
of my own failure. Yes, my utmost efforts have com-
pletely failed to inspire my countrymen with confidence
in the reahty of Liberal devotion to the cause of
emancipation in the East. All that is effected is that
Eussians will watch with some sceptical curiosity to
see whether the next Liberal Cabinet will carry out
the policy professed in Opposition. They hope httle,
and expect less ; but they are wilhng to admit the
possibility that the Liberals may do something,
however small, to work with Eussia to promote the
independence of the nationalities in the Balkan Penin-
sula.

The declaration of devotion to the engagements of
the present Government is another matter that some-
what puzzles Eussians ; ' for how,' they ask, ' can they
fulfil the Conservative treaties and remain faithful to
Liberal pledges ? ' I understand, however, that that
inconsistency is only apparent. It is possible to ac-
cept the treaties in order to modify the policy, as
reformers recognise the Constitution which they seek
to free from abuses. Eussia also accepts existing

Russia and English Parties, 283

obligations in the same sense, I suppose. Except in
some few points, she cordially welcomes declarations
of devotion to the Treaty of Berlin. The Treaty
of Berlin is, three-quarters of it, the Treaty of San
Stefano. The more faithfully it is fulfilled, the better
Eussia will be pleased. But in at least one important
point it is not so. The partition of Bulgaria is an
outrage decreed at Berlin. Against that partition
English Liberals also have protested as loudly as the
Moscow Slavophiles. What will they do when they
return to power ? I quite share my brother General
Alexander Kireeif's desires on this matter. The other
day, when I was reminding him of several protests
made by some friends of mine in England, ' Well,'
said he, not without a tinge of regret, ' let the
Liberals achieve the work we have left undone ; let
them, by some energetic measure, repair the harm
their country has done in the course of these three
years.'

Will they take this course ? I am glad to see that
Mr. Leonard Courtney, M.P., seems to think they
will. Speaking at Liskeard, in November, 1879, he
said : —

The duty of the new Liberal Government would simply
be to work out what has been begun, but in a different spirit
from the present Ministry, which impedes as much as pos-
sible the action of what is good, and furthers as much as pos-
sible the action of what is evil. The new Liberal Govern-
ment would promote the liberation of Greece — the extension
of Greece. A Liberal Government would come to the help
of Greece, and would insist on the performance of the pro-
mises that have been given. A Liberal Government would

284 The Anglo-Russian Alliance,

take up the work that has been done, would clear it of
imperfections, make perfect what has been left imperfect,
and would do in no grudging spirit that which the present
Government is trying to avoid doing at all.^

Nor is it only in the East that the Kussians have
been led to regard with some indifference the fortunes
of political warfare in England. There is nothing
that is more desired than a cordial understanding and
a lasting friendship with England. Eussia seeks no
alliance with England so far as civilised States are
concerned, for she seeks no alliance against any
Power. But in Asia, and in that rapidly-diminishing
section of Asia overlapping the East of Europe, the
Anglo-Eussian alliance against barbarism, anarchy,
and fanaticism is the watchword of Civilisation, the
key to the peaceful development of the Orient. Yet
is it not a fact that in the party conflict of the last
twelve months the Liberal party have, in pursuance
of, it may be, legitimate tactics of party warfare, done
much to convince Eussia that with Liberal England
also all hope of an entente cordiale is an idle dream ?

What was the Liberal contention at the commence-
ment of the Afghan War ? 1 remember distinctly the
cheers that hailed Mr. Gladstone's declaration at

1 Even more categorical is the following definition of the policy
which many Liberals hope to be able to pursue on their return to office: —
* Q. What will the Liberals do with the Turks ? A. Labour to secure
concerted European co-operation under the Treaty of Berlin, to decentral-
ise or disintegrate the Ottoman Empire ; to develop the liberties of the
subject races, to permit the union of the Bulgarias, to extend the frontier
of Greece, and to preserve the integrity of Turkey, by extinguishing, as
expeditiously as is compatible with peace, the power of the ruling Turks.'
— A Political Catechismj published by Infield, 1880, p. 26.

Russia and English Parties. 285

Greenwich, that if war had to he made, it ought to
have been made with Eussia, not with Afghanistan.
Mr. Gladstone, I suppose, did not beUeve that war
should be made at all. But too many Eussians
ignored the proviso, and even Professor Martens
places Mr. Gladstone's arguments in the mouth of
' advocates of war with Eussia,' and congratulates his
countrymen on the fact that the Conservative Minis-
ters who declared that the sending of our Mission
' was perfectly allowable ' under the circumstances,
were wise and courageous enough to thwart ' these
efforts to provoke a rupture ' between the two Powers.^
The provisoes, the limitations, are invisible at the
distance of Moscow and St. Petersburg; and the
effect is exactly opposite to that which is really
desired.

I mention these matters with great regret. It is
with almost a greater sacrifice to my own feehngs
that I allude to the unfortunate effect occasioned in
Eussia by Mr. Gladstone's article in the Nineteenth
Century for January 1879, on ' The Friends and
Foes of Eussia ; ' for its allusions to our volunteers
in Servia rendered it very precious to me, and it
abounds with such generous tributes to the reaUty of
our liberating work in Bulgaria that it is most painful
to refer to it except in terms of gratitude.

In Eussia Mr. Gladstone seemed so great in
his magnificent advocacy of the cause of the op-
pressed, that we regarded him with feelings of en-
thusiastic admiration. When our best and bravest

* Russia and England in Central Asia, pp. 3-4.

286 The Anglo- Russian Alliance.

had died for that noble cause, when every Eussian
home was saddened by the thoughts of those ' who
went, but who return no more,' and when Lord
Beaconsfield was straining every nerve to bring about
a war to re-enslave the Bulgarians, we were cheered
by the spectacle of Mr. Gladstone contending, almost
single-handed, but with unwavering resolution, against
those who wished to destroy the Uberating work which
our armies had accompHshed.

His efforts were unsuccessful. Southern Bulgaria
was ' restored to the Turk ; ' and Montenegro shorn of
her territory ; but, none the less for that, Mr. Gladstone
has stamped his name in imperishable characters on
every Slavonic heart. In the Hberation of Bulgaria
we had been aUies ; not foes, but friends united by a
common enthusiasm and by mutual sympathies ; and
we beheved that if ever he returned to power the
memory of that great campaign for hberty would
render possible that longed-for consummation — the
establishment of a hearty entente^ and the most
friendly understanding between England and Eussia
for the complete dehverance of the Eastern Chris-
tians.

I still share that hope ; but, unfortunately, the
exigencies of party warfare in England have led to
its abandonment by many Eussians. The article on
' The Friends and Foes of Eussia ' was, no doubt, an
effective polemic. It may have served an excellent
party purpose to have retorted on the Conservatives
their utterly unfounded charge of undue predilection
for Eussia ; but its effect was anything but excellent

Russia and English Parties. 287

in Eussia. A slight from a friend is worse than a blow
from a foe. To many Eussians it seemed as if Mr.
Gladstone, the only foreign statesman whom they had
regarded with absolute confidence and esteem, was
repudiating almost as an insult the charge that he
entertained friendly feelings for their country.^
' Well,' they exclaimed, ' if even Mr. Gladstone re-
gards our friendship as a stigma to be affixed upon
the Conservative party and repudiated as a disgrace
for the Liberals, let us not dream any longer of a good
understanding with England.' It was in vain I pointed
out that, even in that very article, Mr. Gladstone said,
' The standing motto of Liberals is friendship with
every country,' and that the friendship with Eussia,
which he repudiated, was not the loyal friendship of
great peoples, but an undue subserviency to the wishes
of a foreign Power. I was told that Mr. Gladstone
assumed, as a matter of course, that Eussia would in
the future naturally and inevitably pursue a policy
in Europe hostile to freedom and humanity ; and, of
course, with such a poUcy no real friendship is

' It is a curious thing that distinguished Englishmen out of Parlia-
ment are, as a rule, much more courageous in avowing publicly their
sympathies with us than those who, having evenly-balanced constituen-
cies to humour, shrink from uttering the generous words which might
risk the doubtful vote. For example, how seldom do you find an M.P.
speaking like Dr. Sandwith, who recently said at a large meeting in
London : — ' The Conservatives accuse us of being friends of Russia. As
for Russia, I here declare openly that I at least am not ashamed of being
a friend of that noble and chivalrous people, who, iu these degenerate
times, scorning the cold calculations of prudence, rashly, gloriously
rushed to the rescue of suffering humanity, not counting the cost, and
dragging their more prudent Government after them. All honour be to
them, while I blush with shame for the miserable part which England
played in that struggle.'

288 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

possible. ' If Ml*. Gladstone/ they added, ' could say
such things, what chance is there of any Liberal
Government entertaining friendly relations with
Kussia ? ' If Eussia is to be assumed, even by those
who sympathised most deeply with her great work
of liberation, to be the eternal foe of freedom and
humanity, ' except when she departs from herself,' of
course, the only relation England should maintain
towards Eussia would be one of opposition.

But surely Eussia, which played some httle part in
the liberation of Italy, in the unification of Germany,
in the emancipation of Greece, Servia, Eoumania, and
Bulgaria, and which, without any pressure from
without or any revolution at home, has liberated
twenty-two miUions of her own serfs — a fact too often
forgotten by our supreme judges — is not justly as-
sumed to be predestined to ' oppose freedom in all its
forms * ? But why assume a guilt which has not yet
been committed ?

The feehng in Eussia with regard to the re-
peated rebuffs which we have received at the
hands of England is one of indignation. These ad-
vances, they say, should never have been made.
Eussia is not going to implore anybody's friendship,
not even that of England. Pardon me, but the very
idea makes me smile. Boasting and blustering may
not be our characteristic, but we really are not so
humble as some imagine. If England wishes for our
friendship it is not wise to repel every attempt on our
part to promote a good understanding. Fortunately,
Eussia is not depending for her greatness and her

Russia and English Parties. 289

existence upon the goodwill of any other country,
not even on that of England.

The Future is ours !

' The Germans have reached their day, the Eng-
lish their mid-day, the French their afternoon, the
Italians their evening, the Spaniards their night, but
the Slavs stand on the threshold of the morning.'

u

290 The Anglo-Russian Alliance,

CHAPTEE IV.

Russia's foreign policy : a reply to mr. Gladstone.^

M. Emile de Laveleye, writing with his usual talent
and brilUancy in the Fortnightly Eeview for December,
gives a curious account of the apparently anti-Kussian
animus of Prince Bismarck's visit to Vienna, which
does not appear, as yet, to have attracted much atten-
tion. It is rather daring to differ from so great an
authority as the celebrated Belgian Professor. But
since Moliere submitted his hterary works to the
critical appreciation of a humble kitchen-maid, other
simple mortals can also avail themselves of the charm-
ing privilege of plain speaking.

Is it really proved that questions of mere person-
ahties always play such a decisive part in the pohcy
of Powers ? Is M. de Laveleye absolutely right in his
conclusions either as to the mission of Austria — that
is, of the present Government of Austria-Hungary —
in the Balkan Peninsula, or as to the anti-Eus-
sian character of the Austro-German AUiance ?
Although these questions are doubtful, nevertheless
he may be well informed about the motif of the Ger-

* Vide Mr. Gladstone's article in the Nineteenth Century, January
1879 ; < The Friends and Foes of Russia.'

Russia s Foreign Policy. 291

man Chancellor's trip to Vienna, and his story is as
follows : —

In May, 1875, the mihtary party in Germany,
with or without Prince Bismarck's sanction, deter-
mined upon attacking France without any pretext but
that she was becoming too strong. It was intended
to demand the reduction of the French army to
200,000 men, and the immediate suspension of the
reconstruction of fortresses. The ultimatum being
rejected, France was to be invaded, dismembered, and
destroyed. Eussia, supported by England, interfered,
and vetoed the projected war. Russia, says M. de
Laveleye, was offered Constantinople by Germany as
the price of her neutrahty. The bribe was refused.
Prince Gortschakoff insisted that France must be left
alone. He, therefore, preserved the peace of Europe,
and saved France from invasion ; but he encountered
the deadly animosity of Prince Bismarck. ' The visit
to Vienna, which resulted in an Austro-German
AUiance,' M. de Laveleye asserts, 'is the German
Chancellor's revenge for Prince Gortschakofl^s inter-
ference in 1875.' Yet, the Herald Angel of that
' good tidings of great joy for all who cared for the
peace of Europe or the independence of nations ' was
a leading member of the Cabinet which then co-
operated with Eussia in preserving the peace of
Europe, and the independence of France from the
designs of Germany ! ' It seems to be the destiny of
Eussia,' most justly remarks M. de Laveleye, ' to meet
with ingratitude.' But even Eussians, inured to
ingratitude, recollect no precedent for this exultation

tt2

292 The Anglo-Russian Alliance,

by a former ally over a misfortune supposed to have
overtaken us because of our share in the Peace
AlUance of 1875.

This last occasion on which England and
Eussia acted cordially in concert in Continental
politics is not encouraging for those who still hope for
the triumph of common sense over absurd prejudices.
The two nations have so much in common, their true
interests lead so naturally to their co-operation, that
if once this fever fit of suspicion passed away, a cordial
understanding would be seen to be a mutual necessity.

' Nations, like individuals,' as has been observed
more than once, ' may sometimes go mad,' and the
prevalence of Eussophobia is an illustration of national
dehrium. Nothing but temporary mental derange-
ment, leading to total obUvion of their own history,
could lead Enghshmen to exult in an imagined efface-
ment of Eussia.^ The best Enghsh historians have,

^ I am glad to see that there is even in Lord Beaconsfield's Cabinet a
staunch Conservative member who holds more rational views, and not
only most kindly allows us to live, but even desires our friendship. The
First Lord of the Admiralty, Mr. W. H. Smith, speaking at Sutton on
January 16, 1880, said : — ' Do not let it be supposed that Her Majesty's
Government have any hostility against Russia. We have no desire
whatever to have any other relations than those of the most perfect
amity with Russia. There is no portion of the territory of Russia which
we covet. There is no portion of the legitimate influence of Russia
which we desire to decrease. There is no portion of the trade of Russia
or the commerce of Russia that we desire to interfere with. The greatest
desire of this country must be that a vast empire like Russia shall be
prosperous, shall be contented, shall be well governed, and at peace with
itself. We deplore as much as any individual can deplore the misfor-
tunes— I can speak in no other terms — which have occurred with regard
to the Government of Russia during the past few months. Anything
which requires assassination and conspiracy and bloodshed, and acts of
that character, must be wrong in itself. It is abominable and hateful to

Russia s Foreign Policy. 293

therefore, throughout all this last Eastern crisis been
on our side, beginning with Mr. Carlyle, the noblest
genius of our age.^ History proves that Eussia is an
element in the balance of power with which England,
whether she Ukes it or not, can hardly afford to dis-
pense.^

every humau being. It is impossible that conspiracy can be right,
directed against a Sovereign reigning for the benefit of his subjects. We
long to be at peace with Russia, and there is no reason why we should
not be at peace with Russia if Russia remains, as we trust she will be, on
peaceful and honest terms with us.' Peaceful and honest terms by all
means, but England hitherto has hardly regarded these stipulations with
which Russia has loyally complied.

* On the eve of the St. James's Hall Conference, Mr. Carlyle wrote : —
^ For fifty years back my clear belief about the Russians has been that
they are a good and even noble element in Europe. Ever since Peter the
Great's appearance among them, they have been in steady progress of
development. In our own time they have done signal service to God
and man in drilling into order and peace anarchic populations all over
their side of the world. The present Tzar of Russia I judge to be a
strictly honest and just man, and, in short, my belief is that the Russians
are called to do great things in the world, and to be a conspicuous
benefit, directly and indirectly, to their fellow-men.' And again in 1876
he said, with characteristic force: — 'The newspaper outcry against
Russia is no more respectable to me than the bowlings of Bedlam, pro-
ceeding as it does from the deepest ignorance, egoism, and paltry national
jealousy.'

^ In saying this I assert no more than what has been admitted by at
least one of the present Ministers. Mr. Lowther, M.P., Irish Secretary,
addressing his constituents at York, Feb. 18, 1878, when war between Eng-
land and Russia was believed to be imminent, said : — * He did not, however,
conceal his opinion that Russia was a Power which had its uses in the
world. Russia in the past had filled a position which made him think
that anything which tended to remove so great an influence for weal or
woe from the body politic of nations would be a calamity. He had
always considered the position of Russia as one of the Northern Powers,
when its attention was not directed to the acquisition of her neighboiu-'s
land, which possessed a conservative and pacific influence in Europe ;
for they must not forget at that moment, when there was nothing but
Eastern clouds in the horizon, there was a Western question. They
must remember that most of the battles of this counti-y, in a contest
which overawed all others, was not waged so much in the East as in the

294 The Anglo- Russian Alliance.

Each member of the European family has its his-
toric mission, which no other nation can perform. To
efface one Power is to weaken all.

In party polemics, Liberals sometimes, with little
regard for our feelings, say that Eussia on the Conti-
nent has, with few exceptions, supported a reactionary
policy which commanded the support of English
Conservatives. Now, English Liberals tolerate free
and plain speaking ; they not seldom display a noble
courage in confessing their error, if it is proved that
any of their passing remarks are contrary to some
facts which may easily have slipped from their
memory at the time. This encourages me to insist
upon certain truths which appear to be forgotten.
Eussia is not infallible, and if you are only happy in
referring to our shortcomings, do so as often as you
like ; but, judging from the speeches of some of your
best statesmen, whose opinions are weighty and well
informed, our policy has been throughout the greater
part of the nineteenth century more in accordance
with the matured views of Enghsh Liberalism than
the policy of England herself.

In the East events have vindicated the policy of
Eussia. The real nature of Turkish misrule is not
denied now, even by Conservatives. English Liberals
have, at last, realised the iniquity of supporting the
Turk, which our Tzar Boris GodounofF urged upon
your Queen Elizabeth, nearly three hundred years
ago, in the following letter, which was, curiously

West, and in that they had Russia as their ally. At that moment, when
considerable irritation was felt, they must not forget that Russia had
stood them in good stead, and might do so again.'

Russia's Foreign Policy. 295

enough, referred to Lord Eobert Cecil — Lord Salis-
bury's distinguished ancestor and ' a friend of Eussia '
at that distant time. The Tzar wrote : —

We have learned that the Queen has furnished help to
the Turks against the Kaiser of Grermany. We are astonished
at it, as to act thus is not proper for Christian Sovereigns ;
and you, our well beloved sister, ought not for the future to
enter into relationship of friendship with Bousourman (Mus-
sulman) princes, nor to help them in any way whether by
men or silver ; but, on the contrary, should desire and insist
that all the great Christian potentates should have a good
understanding, union, and strong friendship, and make one
against the Mussulmans till the hand of the Christians rise
and that of the Mussulmans is abased.^

Eussian methods may not meet your approval, but
Eussian policy — the breaking down of the Ottoman
Power and the emancipation of the subject races —
has even in England triumphed over the old English
policy of upholding the Porte. In the historical
development of the East, the leading part has been
played, not by England, but by Eussia.

Once, and only once, by an ' untoward event,'
England struck a blow for freedom in the East ; but
the emancipation of the Christians has been the
sacred mission of Eussia from the day she achieved
her own liberation.

Eoumania, Servia, and Bulgaria owe their liberties
to us, not to you ; and even for Greece the battle of
Navarino would have availed little but for the vic-
tories of General Diebitch.

Tell me, as you look back across the centuries,

* Rambaud, History of Utissiaj vol. i. p. 344.

296 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

whicli policy was more truly liberal in the East —
that of England, which supported the Sultan ; or that
of Eussia, which freed his subjects?

Yes ! replies one of our eloquent accusers, I
admit that in the East. Eussia has marched in the
van of progress ; but it was only a noble inconsis-
tency. Elsewhere she has been the persistent foe of
freedom, the disturber of the peace, a standing
menace to the independence of nations — in short, a
fitting ally of our Conservative Government.^

But why do they generally refuse to give any
proofs of their sweeping accusations ? Is it fair-
play? I am referred, in answer, to Hungary and
Belgium.

I do not defend our intervention in Hungary.
In the first place — pardon my frankness — because we
ought to have known beforehand that, in return for
our help, Austria would only ' astonish the world
with her ingratitude,' as was graphically described by
Prince Schwartzenberg. In the second, because
Hungary was not altogether wrong in complaining of
her rulers. But it should not be forgotten that if it
had not been stopped from the beginning, very pro-
bably the revolution would have been continued in
other countries — in Eussia as well as in Germany.

* * A Power whose action in European politics has been as a rule on
the side opposed to English sympathies.' (Mr. Gladstone, Nineteenth
Century, Feb. 1878, p. 209.) And again, * Unless in cases of pure excep-
tion, Russia has uniformly and habitually ranged herself in European
politics with the anta.gonists of freedom.' {Ibid. Jan. 1879, p. 172.) *Every-
where, except in Turkey, Russian statesmanship has headed and sus-
tained the votaries of reaction, with the support and sympathy of English
Toryism ' (p. 174).

Eussia's Foreign Policy. 297

But is it not curious that our saving Austria is
almost the only act of ours ^ which still finds eulogists
among your Ministers, which of course is rather a
bad sign?

We must, however, remember that the Emperor
Nicholas — a preux chevalier in all his feelings, a
sincere ally of his allies — in saving ' the keystone of
Central Europe ' from ruin prevented the subjection
of the Slavs ^ of Hungary to the Magyars, and the
Kussian troops behaved with far greater humanity to
the insurgents than did the Austrians. The question
was not so very simple ; it could be judged very
differently indeed by men of very good faith and very
generous views.^

The Emperor Nicholas was greatly misunderstood

' Mr. Gladstone writes : — * I say nothing of Hungary, for Russia's
intervention there, however odious to Liberals, is, I apprehend, within
the limits of the high Tory creed, is supported by the practice of older
and more advanced countries, and cannot be compared in guilt of details
with our intervention in the two Sicilies only half a century before.*
— Nineteenth Century, February 1878, p. 214. {See Speech by Lord
Beaconsfield, then Mr. Disraeli, Feb. 1, 1849). A Conservative Secretary
of State mentioned our intervention in Hungary as an instance in which
Russia had done good service to the cause of order and peace by saving
the keystone of Central Europe from destruction.

^ The Slavs in 1849 were not avowed as brethren, or rather were
only recognised by the few so-called * Moscow Slavophiles,' the poet
Homiakoff, Pogodine, Kosheleff, the three Aksakoffs, Samarine, the two
brothers Kir€efsky, Prince Tcherkassky, and some others. The Ru.s;?ian
Government, until the Servian war, ignored them officially, but could
not help feeling for them and sympathising with their unfortunate lot.

* Prosper M^rim^e, speaking to Mr. Senior in 1859, said : — ^ Austria,
with her usual stupidity and brutality, has made enemies, not only of
Magyars, but also of the Croats, who rendered her such services in the
late insurrection. The Russians, when they entered Hungary, behaved
with the utmost moderation, paid liberally for all that they wanted, and
when they had beaten the Hungarians, protected them against the
Austrians.' — Senior's Conversations, vol. ii. p. 246.

298 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

abroad. He was certainly not the heartless tyrant
he is represented in this country ; just the opposite,
and those who knew him well will gladly endorse my
opinion. He was certainly not a diplomatist, as was
well proved by his famous conversation with your
Ambassador, Sir Hamilton Seymour. He was not a
man of science. But he was devoted to his country :
he was proud of her, he upheld her dignity with all
his power, and he followed without hesitation
wherever his duty led. He understood as well as his
people that sometimes a reverse is not a disgrace,
and the noble motto of his life was ' Fais ce que dois^
advienne que pourra.' Of course, this does not save
a man from mistakes — but what does ? ^

If Eussia made war from a mistaken idea, she
demanded no compensation for her sacrifices, and
also 'astonished the world,' but only because she
retired without annexing a single verst of the Empire
she restored to the Hapsburgs. Even our bitterest
enemies do not deny that the measure was dictated
'by a spirit of austere virtue ranging high above

^ Mr. Klaczko, the distinguished Polish author, in his Ttoo Chan-
cellorSf S2i^s : — ' It is undeniable that the intervention of the Emperor
Nicholas in Hungary bears the stamp of a generous and chivalrous nature,
and was in itself an undertaking that astonished his contemporaries.'
Mr. Klaczki * mentions the fact that Bismarck, then an unknown young
member for the Prussian Chamber, expressed, in September 6, 1849, his
admiration of the brilliant conduct of the Emperor, and expressed his
patriotic regret that this magnanimous task should not have devolved
upon his own country (Prussia)' (p. 26). The same author pays a well
deserved tribute to the policy of the Emperor Nicholas, whose * perfect up-
rightness and immovable firmness none dared contest, and which was
employed, with a remarkable disinterestedness, to maintain the world's
equilibrium and enforce respect for treaties' (pp. 11-13).

Russia's Foreign Policy. 299

common ambition/ Our Emperor — ' the Chief
Justice of Europe ' — not only believed himself ' bound
in honour' (and these words, to Eussians, have a
very great weiglit) to assist the youthful Kaiser in
distress, but he was convinced the explosive forces of
the revolution needed his intervention, and many
Englishmen shared his views.

In the case of Belgium, where we are accused of
actively manifesting our displeasure against the
creation of the new kingdom, I assert confidently
that the accusation is unjustified, and that whatever
faults there may have been in Russian policy — and
the worst that can be charged against her is a lack
of zeal and some indecision in the first stages of the
affair — was far more than atoned for by the pro-
tection she extended to Belgium in 1851.

You will find the whole story of our short-,
comings, such as they were, told at length in the
Memoirs of Baron Stockmar. I do not think they
bear out the sweeping charge of Russia's opposition
to freedom all over the world. Belgium in 1814 and
1815 was, by England's advice, added to Holland in
the Treaty of Vienna. The Belgians revolted in
1830, and Europe was threatened with a general
European war. The heir to the Dutch throne was
the brother-in-law of our Emperor, and Nicholas I.
combined a scrupulous respect for treaties with a
marked horror of revolutions. Nevertheless, he did
not oppose — on the contrary, as soon as it was
evident that no attack was meditated by France —
he supported, with some natural hesitation and ex-

300 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

cusable vacillation, the establishment of the Belgian
Kingdom.^

Eussia was one of the five Powers to whom
Belgium owed her existence.^ The Emperor ratified
both the treaties of 1831 and 1839, and although
somewhat slow to move, so far from oifering any
opposition to the policy of England, always ultimately
supported it. We should be well content if you had
supported our pohcy in Bulgaria as we supported
your policy in Belgium.

But granting that Eussia did not in Belgium, as
she did in the East, do more than any other Power
for the cause of liberty and independence, her short-
comings were abundantly atoned for twenty years
later, when but for Eussia Napoleon would have
annexed Belgium.

This fact is too often ignored in England, yet its
authenticity is beyond dispute. King Leopold told
Mr. Senior that Belgium, after the coup d'etat^ was in
imminent danger of being annexed by France. He

^ See, at the end of this chapter, the letter from the distinguished
Belgian Professor, M. Emile de Laveleye, vindicating against me
Russian policy in Belgium in 1830.

^ Besides the treaties of the five Powers, to which Russia was a
party, there was a separate Anglo-Russian Convention, by which Russia
hound herself to do nothing in relation to Belgium without consulting
England. The second article of the Convention shows that Russia,
equally with England, upheld the independent neutrality of Belgium. It
is as follows : — * S.M. I'Empereur de toutes les Russies s'engage si (ce
qu'a Dieu ne plaise) les arrangements arretds pour I'ind^pendance et la
neutrality de la Belgique, et au maintien desquels les deux hautes Puis-
sances sont ^galement li^es, venaient a etre compromis.par les ^v^nements,
a ne se plier a aucun arrangement nouveau, sans concert pr^alable avec
S.M. Britannique et sans son assentiment formel.' — Memoirs of Stockmarj
vol. i. pp. 267-8.

Russia's Foreign Policy. 301

said : ' I have reason to know that Napoleon intended
to copy the decrees by which his uncle annexed to
France first Holland, and afterwards the provinces
at the mouths of the Weser and of the Elbe. I
beheve that the decree for the annexation of Belgium
was actually drawn out. He was checked by Eussia.
After the 2nd of December he wrote to the different
Sovereigns announcing his election. The smaller
Powers could only express their acquiescence. Aus-
tria offered the most friendly congratulations ; Eussia
administered to him a grave admonition. The Em-
peror said he trusted that France was prepared to
respect what Eussia was determined to enforce —
the existing treaties, the existing Hmits, the existing
balance of power. This was a warning which he did
not venture to disregard.' ^

But for that intimation King Leopold declared
that the annexation of Belgium, in spite of England,
would certainly have been attempted by France.

Again, in 1870, the failure of the Benedetti pro-
ject for the annexation of Belgium was largely due to
Eussia's arrangement with Germany.^

Surely, then, it is unhistorical to represent Eussia
as exercising an evil and reactionary pohcy in Europe
on account of Belgium ? May I not, on the contrary,
fairly assert that the history of Belgium affords a
signal illustration of the importance to the cause of
hberty of the Eussian element in the balance of
Power ?

^ Senior's Conversations, vol. i. p. 89.
'^ Klaczko's Two Chancellors, p. 244.

302 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

England can surely not have forgotten the
services which Eussia rendered to England and the
cause of Liberty in the Napoleonic wars, which even
the Treaty of Tilsit cannot obscure.

In the brilhant pages of Mr. Kinglake you may
read^ of the services to Europe, and especially to
England, rendered by Eussia's ' loyal obedience to
the great usage ' which forms the safeguard of
Europe and the protection of the weak against the
strong. It was the Eussian alUance with Austria in
1805 that broke up the camp of Boulogne, and saved
England from invasion several weeks before the
battle of Trafalgar. Again, in 1806, our Emperor
came forward with his army to the rescue of the
Continent. Although his heroic struggles were un-
successful, his ' faithful, valorous efforts ' gained him
the respect of Europe and the eloquent tribute of
your great historian.

Have you forgotten the glorious year of 1812 —
generally known in Eussia simply as ' the year 12 ' —
in which Moscow was offered up as a burnt sacrifice
on the altar of European freedom? You may be
proud, indeed, of the briUiant exploits of the ' Iron
Duke ; ' but although he contributed in the Penin-
sular War to the defeat of Napoleon, the leading part
of that great tragic drama was not taken by your Irish
general and your troops, but by our Emperor and
our people. After Eussia had been freed from the
invading army of twenty nations, Alexander the First
determined on the liberation of Europe. 'Confiance

^ Invasion of the Gimeaf sixth edition, toI. i. pp. 2C, 27.

Russia's Foreign Policy. 303

en Dieu, Courage, Perseverance, Union ! ' were his
watchwords, when, as Stein, the German patriot-
statesman, says, ' with the eye of faith, which boldly
and imdazzled looks up to heaven, he surrendered
himself to the inspiration of his large-hearted noble
soul, and hurled the giant to the ground.' ^

Alexander became the soul of the coalition which
crushed Napoleon at Leipzig, and it was his in-
domitable resolution that led him to begin that march
on Paris which freed Europe.

It was no idle boast, his proclamation of Freiburg,
when he told his heroic troops, ' Already we have
saved and glorified our country. We have given
back to Europe her Hberty and independence.' Un-
daunted by temporary reverses, he remained faithful
to his wise resolve : ' No peace as long as Napoleon
is on the throne.' When at last Napoleon was de-
throned, he who had been the foremost in the fight
was the most generous to his vanquished foe ! If you
read Las Casas' ' Memorial de St. H^lene ' you will

* In a speech delivered by Mr. Canning at a public dinner in Liver-
pool, January 10, 1814, your great statesman, speaking of the overthrow
of Napoleon, put this point in a very striking manner : — ' By what power,
in what part of the world, has that final blow been struck which has
smitten the tyrant to the ground ? I suppose by some enlightened re-
public, I suppose by some nation which, in the excess of popular freedom,
considers even a representative system as defective unless each individual
interferes directly in the national concerns ; some nation of enlightened
patriots, every man of whom is a politician in the coffee-house as well as
in the Senate. I suppose it is from such government as this that the
Conqueror of Autocrats, the sworn destroyer of Monarchical England,
has met his doom. I look through the European world in vain. I find
there no such august community. But where was the blow struck?
Where ? Alas ! for theory ! In the wilds of despotic Russia. It was
followed up on the plains of Leipzig by Russian, Prussian, and Austrian
arms.' — Memoir of Georye Canning, p. 323.

304 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

see that the captive representative of passed glories
speaks in terms of admiration of his conqueror.

M. Alfred Eambaud — himself a Frenchman —
bears unqualified testimony to this feature of Eus-
sian policy. He says : — ' The Power which had
struck hardest for the freedom of Europe was most
poorly compensated. It is an incontestable fact that
of all the allies Eussia showed herself the least
grasping. It was she who had given the signal for
the struggle against Napoleon, and had shown the
most perseverance in pursuit of the common end.
Without her example the States of Europe would
never have dreamed of arming against him. Her
skilful leniency towards France finished the work
begun by the war. Alexander was incontestably at
the head of the European Areopagus.' ^

The pohcy of Eussia towards the later years of
Alexander's life— from 1819-1825 — although it com-
manded the warm admiration of the EngUsh Con-
servatives, I do not defend, although I would not
condemn. During these six years Eussia exerted
herself against the assassinating Eevolutionists of
Germany, the Carbonari of Naples, and the Consti-
tutionalists of Spain. It was a time of reaction at
home and abroad. Europe, still shaking with the
earthquake of the French Eevolution, was not in-
clined to tolerate insurrectionary movements ; and
Alexander, who was the leader of the European
coalition against Napoleon, believed himself bound to

^ Rambaud's History of Russia, vol. ii. pp. 297, 300, 304. Vide
M, Emile de Laveleye's letter at the close of this chapter.

Russia's Foreign Policy. 305

support the Conservative cause against all tlic
Eevolutionists of Europe.

But it is rather amusing to hear the conduct
of Emperor Alexander during the last years of liis
life alluded to as a conclusive proof that the foreign
policy of an autocracy is opposed to liberty. Tlic
foreign policy of Constitutional England and of
Parliamentary, thougli Legitimist, France was almost
(if not quite) as reactionary as that of autocratic
Eussia. It is as great a mistake to believe that
because a State possesses free institutions itself it will
always support them abroad, as to believe that
because a nation is governed by an autocrat it will
be the eternal foe of liberty in neighbouring States.

Permit me to give a striking illustration of this.
Perhaps the most iUiberal act of Alexander I. was
his diplomatic opposition to the estabhshment of
Constitutional Government in Spain in 1822. But
while Eussia contented herself with diplomatic repre-
sentations, France — that enlightened Western nation,
enjoying herself Constitutional Government — marched
an army across the Pyrenees, and crushed by her
cannon the Constitution of Spain.

M. Thiers thirty years after justilied that inter-
vention— which, indeed, lie had counselled from the
first — by argument^ which may be recommended to
those who think that Constitutional States can be
trusted to support liberty in other countries. Eeply-
ing to those who declared it would be an enormity
to hinder an independent nation shaking off an in-
tolerable tyranny, M. Thiers maintained that it was

X

806 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

necessary'to do so. He argued that ' If Spain con-
tinued Constitutional the antipathy of the Spaniards
towards the French would make her a rival or an
enemy, instead of an ally. It was the duty, therefore,
of every French Government to put down every
Spanish Constitution ! ' ^

After the death of the Emperor Alexander the
policy of Eussia ceased to deserve the denunciations of
English Liberals. That it received the anathemas of
English Tories may, perhaps, be a recommendation
in some eyes. When we are accused of uniformly
supporting the side of power, and of commanding on
that account the uniform support of English Toryism,
I cannot help wondering if our accusers ever read
Lord Aberdeen's letter to the Duke of Wellington, in
1830, in which he says ; ' It is a most extraordinary
thing that the Eussian policy, altliough at home the
most despotic in the world, should have supported
in every country for some time past the efforts
of every party opposed to the established Govern-
ment.' ^

We are blamed for being displeased with the
French Eevolution of 1830, but we did not oppose
it. Our displeasure was purely platonic. Eeniem-
bering the Continental catastrophe which followed
the preceding Eevolution, it was no more a proof of
a rooted antipathy to liberty than was Lord Pal-
merston's eager recognition of the hero of the coup
d'etat — a crime which our Emperor did not so slightly
condone.

^ Senior's Conversations, vol. i. p. 63.
^ Wellington Despatches, vol. iii. p. 158,

JRussia's Foreign Policy. 307

If we are to go into questions of sentimental
sympathy, I may be perhaps permitted to recall the
fact that, in the great war of hberation in America,
Eussian opinion was much more strongly on the
side of freedom in the North than was the case with
public opinion in England. Our ' displeasure ' with
the Eevolution of 1830 was by no means so serious an
offence against the cause of liberty as the delight
manifested in England at the early successes of the
Southern slaveowners.

But why dwell on such trivialities ? Look at the
great movements of our century, and ask whether it
was England or Eussia that furthered most the policy
which, in the opinion of English Liberals to-day, was
most in harmony with the development of Liberty
and the progress of Civilisation ?

The first of these was the Liberation of Italy.
One or two despatches of Prince Gortschakoff's
criticising minor incidents in the unification of Italy
have caused it to be forgotten how large a share
Eussia had in achieving the liberation of that country.
The fact is that, next to France, Eussia was the best
friend of Italy.

Of this there is abundant evidence of the best
kind — the evidence of a hostile Avitness in Mi\ Martin's
last volume of the ' Life of the Prince Consort.' From
that valuable mine of authentic documents one might
bring many conclusive extracts proving that the
English Government opposed, while Eussia strongly
supported, the cause of Italian emancipation. Your
Queen, for instance, according to Mr. Martin, de-

X 2

308 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

clared that the war of unification undertaken by
Napoleon was ' brought about by the wicked folly of
Eussia and France.' ^ The Pnnce Consort declared —
' The Eussians are, of course, at the bottom of tlie
whole thing,' '^ and mentions the suggestive little fact,
that Eussia placed an army of 200,000 men on her
frontiers, to keep Austria and Prussia in check,
whilst Napoleon Avas engaged in the campaign in
Lombardy. I even find a characteristic bon mot o\
my old and sarcastic friend. Lord Clarendon, relative
to our proposal to France that a European Congress
should be summoned to secure the liberation of Italy.
' One despotic Power,' said he, ' has proposed to
another despotic Power that by means of a Congress
a third despotic Power should pave the way for
liberal institutions.' ^

Her Majesty's Historian-in-Waiting, Mr. Martin,
liimself says that English statesmen distrusted the
plan by which France and Eussia would play the
liberators of Italy. In spite of your distrust, how-
ever, the ' two absolute despotic Powers ' ^ achieved
their end, and the freedom of Italy was added to the
other boons which liberal Europe owes in part to
autocratic Eussia.

• Another great movement in* the North of Europe
has been carried to a triumphant conclusion ; nor is
the Unification of Germany less remarkable as a
triumph of Liberal ideas than the Liberation of Italy.
Tell me who was the most potent factor in the Euro-

^ Life of Prince Consort, vol. iv. p. 429. ^ Ibid., p. 426.

« Ibid., p. 352. 4 Ibid., p. 349.

B/ussias Foreu/n Policy. 309

pean policy AvliicJi rendered possible the realisation
of the ' great German idea ' — England or Enssia ? If
Eussia meditated schemes of aggression, or even of
predominance in Europe, she ought to have opposed,
not supported, tlie national movement in Germany.
It was left to England to oppose that movement at
its commencement, and to preserve a cold neutrality
towards it at its close. It is needless to refer to the
part played by Eussia on that occasion. Wrongly
or rightly, whetlier contrary to or according to her
OAvn interests, Eussia has supported the unification of
Germany. Immediately after signing the treaty,
closing the war by which Germany was united, the
Emperor WilHam sent to the Emperor Alexander tlie
following message : ' Never will Prussia forget that
to you it is due that the war did not assume larger
proportions. May God bless yon for it! Your grate-
ful fi'iend for life.' ^

A third great movement, not yet completed, owes
also more to Eussia than to Enghmd. I reier to the
Transformation of Austria. Austria is once more
becoming an ' o,ster-reich ' — an Eastern kingdom. The
war of 1859 ejected Austria from Italy. Tlie war of
1866 converted Austria into Austria-Hungary. The
ultimate result of the war of 1877-78 will be to sub-
stitute for tlie Dual Monarchy a Confederation of the
Danube, in which the Slavonic element will assert that
pre-eminence de jure^ Avhich already exists cle factor

In all tliese stages Eussia lias played a great part.

^ Klaczko's Tico ChanceUors, p. 'JOG.

- See the * Heirs of the Sick Man,' ante., p. lo2.

310 The Anglo- Russian Alliance,

' The constant security,' which Prince Bismarck could
indulge as to Eussia in 1866 was hardly less im-
portant for Austria-Hungary than were the Eussian
victories in Bulgaria. The end is not yet. But
whatever may be its final shape, the Transformation
of Austria, the third great beneficent revolution on
the Continent, like the two which preceded it, owes
certainly more to Eussia than to England.

In these Eussia played a part, secondary though
important. In the fourth great revolution, which
constitutes the glory of the Nineteenth Century
Eussia has done the work alone. The Emancipation
of the East, the gradual overthrow of the inhuman
domination of the Turk, the establishment of inde-
pendent, self- governed, democratic States on the ruins
of the Ottoman despotism — that has been Eussia's
splendid mission, and faithfully has she fulfilled it.

At the price of the life-blood of hundreds of tliou-
sands of her noblest sons, Eussia has purchased the
Freedom of the East. I forbear to speak of the part
in that great struggle which was played by England.^

* On this point I may quote the foUowinp^ passage from the masterly
work of the Duke of Argyll on the Eastern Question. Excepting three
minor points in which amendments, introduced hy the Congress, were
accepted by Russia, — * Everything that has heen gained to the cause of
human freedom to the East of Europe by the Treaty of Berlin has been
gained wholly and entirely by the sword of Russia. It need not have
been so, it ought not to have been so. But so it is.' Vol. ii. p. 200. . . .
* AH these great elements of good ought to be acknowledged, although,
most unfortunately, everyone of them has been due to the interests and
to the power and to the policy of Russia.' P. 213. . . . ' The voice of
the English Cabinet was uniformly given against every enlargement of
the " bounds of freedom," and also in favour of every possible restiiction,
even on the autonomous institutions, which it was compelled to sanc-
tion.' P. 180.

Rui^fiia''s Foreign Policy. oil

Even in details the same contrast may be traced.
Eussia supported the union of the Eoumanian
nationahty. England opposed it : but Time recorded
its decision in favour of Eussia. Eussia supported
the union of Bulgaria. England has opposed it.
Time again will prove whicli Power was in the right.
Eussia proposed to add Thessaly, Epirus, and Crete
to Greece. England thwarted this. I am content to
let the conscience of the Western world decide which
poUcy was most in accordance with liberty, civilisa-
tion, and progress.

Eussia's policy — against which you fought in the
Crimea, and which in England was supported perhaps
by a dozen men, whose names we Eussians will never
forget — now needs no defence. It has received tardy
but ample justification at the hands of the EngUsh
Government. Eussia's offence in the eyes of the
West was her claim, based upon an undisputed
treaty, to an exclusive protectorate in the Ottoman
Empire. That offence is now declared to be a virtue.
The Ancrlo-Turkish Convention is Enoiand's official
confession that, in principle, Eussia was right, and
the West was wrong, in the dispute of 1853.

I make no claim for my country which is not
based upon facts easily verified from English sources.
Eussia has its faults, like the others ; but, judged
by the Liberal standard, her foreign policy has done
more for the development of Liberty in Europe and
the realisation of the aspirations of Nationahties than
has been done by the foreign policy of England.

It is very odd that amongst those Av.ho .declare

312 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

that between Eussia and England no alliance is
possible, are, as a rule, the most ardent advocates of
an alUance with Austria. Yet Austria was Eussia 's
CO -partner in every reactionary measure for which
we are abused. It Avas Austria that crushed the
Carbonari in Naples ; it was for Austria that we
subdued the Magyars, and it was in concert witli
Austria that we extinguished Polish independence in
Cracow — a measure of which Austria reaped all the
benefit. In our good actions Austria had no share.
She only participated in those exceptional measures
when our influence was employed against liberty.

I must not forget one unpardonable oifence which
is charged against us by our enemies — the annulment
of the clause of the Treaty of Paris, neutralising the
Black Sea. It is rather curious, but frequently
forgotten, that it was Austria that first proposed that
modification in a despatch, signed by Count Beust,
and dated January 1, 1867.^

^ In view of the absurd importance which Russophobes so persistently
attach to the modification of the Black Sea Clause in the Treaty of
Paris, Mr. Klaczko's remarks on this point are not without interest. After
pointing out that Count Beust saw that the Treaty of Paris, even in
1867, had failed to secure the integrity and vitality of the Ottoman
Empire, and proposed to substitute for it a general agreement to put the
Christian populations of the Sultan under obligations to the whole of
Europe, by endowing them, under guarantees from all the Courts, with
independent institutions in accordance with their various religions and
races, Mr. Klaczko continues : — ' Count Beust was all the more inclined
to sacrifice to this vast conception the article concerning the Black Sea
contained in the Treaty of Paris, from the fact that Austria had opposed
it from the first, and also that suceeding events had since exposed its
complete uselessness. . . Finally, the Cabinet of Vienna summed up in
the following characteristic words: — ''Amour jvopre ought to be set
aside in the presence of such immense interests as are now at stake."
And in fact we cannot give this truth a too important place ; the clause

Russia's Foreign Policy. 313

Eussia has reason to be proud of her disinterested
pohcy.

From 1814, when Alexander I. was hailed
throughout the world as the Liberator of Europe,
down to 1879, when Alexander II. liberated the
Southern Slavs, Eussia has not added to her territory
in Europe one single square foot. Her trophies
must be sought, not in subjugated provinces and
captured cities, but in the liberties of emancipated
nationalities and the destruction of oppressive and
effete despotisms.

Let me sum up this rapid survey of the Con-
tinental policy of Eussia. I will first take our offences
against Liberal ideas : —

In 1819, at the Congress of Laybach, Alexander L,
with the sympathy of the English Government, sup-
ported a Conservative policy in Germany.

In 1821, at the Congress of Verona, Alexander I.,
with the sympathy of the English Government, sup-
ported a Conservative policy at Naples.

In 1823 Eussia supported French intervention
in Spain, against the opposition of the English
Government.^

In 1846, allied to Austria, Eussia annexed to

on the subject of the Euxine had been for a long time past but a question
of amour propre between the Western Powers and liussia ; and M. de
Beust showed himself to be clear and farsighted in his despatch of Jan.
14, 1867.'— Klaczko's Two ChanceUors, pp. 263-6.

^ Even in this case Russian views were shared by the English
Court. * George the Fourth did not hesitate to let France know that
Canning was not agreeable to him, and secretly to encourage the French
invasion, against which his Ministers protested.' See Thirty Years of
Foreign Policy j p. 87.

314 llie Ancjlo-Eussian Alliance.

Austria the Eepublic of Cracow, against the protest
of England.^

There was another instance about this time when
Eussian and Enghsh pohcy was in opposition : Lord
Palmerston treated Greece in the Pacifico business
with a high-handed violence which led the Eussian
Government to protest strongly against his conduct.
Mr. Gladstone, however, cannot refer to this as an
instance in which Eussia upheld the cause of arbi-
trary power against the liberty and independence of
nations, because he was the most eloquent defender
of the principles which Count Nesselrode invoked in
his protest against the policy of Lord Palmerston,
and with Mr. Gladstone went the majority in the
House of Lords, and a considerable number of the
most eminent Liberals in the House of Commons.

Li 1849 Eussia assisted Austria in suppressing
the Magyar rebelhon, with the approval of most
English Conservatives.

Li 1853 Eussia attacked Turkey, and was at-
tacked by England on account of the principle
of an exclusive protectorate, which, by the Anglo-
Turkish Convention, England has now adopted as
her own.

In 1871 Eussia, with the sanction of all Europe,
repealed the Black Sea clause of the Treaty of Paris
— a reform which had been proposed by Austria
four years before.

^ Both parties in your Parliament united in condemning this step, hut
it was strenuously defended hy the Earl of Beaconsfield, then Mr.
Disraeli, while bis leader, Lord George Bentinck, warmly thanked the
Emperor of Russia for his action in the matter.

IlU'^'siad Foreu/n Policy. 315

In 1878 Eussia, with the sanction of the Enghsh
Government, restored Bessarabia, which had been
taken away after the Crimean War.

Now, on the otlier hand, let nie put down the
instances in which our poHcy commended itself to
views of Liberal England : —

At the beginning of this century, Eussia, allied
with England, rescued the liberties and independence
of Europe from tlie ascendancy of Napoleon.

In 1826 Eussia freed Servia, England standing
neutral.

In 1829 Eussia, assisted only at first by England,
achieved the independence of Greece.

In 1831 Eussia co-operated with England in
establishing the Kingdom of Belgium.

In 1833 Eussia co-operated with England to
prevent the destruction of the Ottoman Empire by
Mehemet Ali.

In 1840 Eussia again united with England to save-
Turkey from disruption by France and Egypt.

In 1850 Eussia, in concert with England, com-
pelled Germany to evacuate Schleswig-Holstein.

In 1851 Eussia saved Belgium from Napoleon III.
with the hearty approval of the Englisli Government.

In 1859 Eussia, opposed by England, supported
the French liberation of Italy.^

^ Lord Beaconsfield, then Mr. Disraeli, strongly condemned Lord
Palmerston for pursuing ' the phantom of an imlimited Italy.' Nine
years before the same authority, who resisted Bulgarian liberation on
account of British interests, applied the same doctrine to Italy. In his
speech on Lord Palmerston's Foreign Policy in 1850, Mr. Disraeli de-
clared ' it was a great English interest ' that the north of Italy should
belong to Austria, and that Sicily should belong to Naples.'

31 G The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

In 1860 Eussia, supported by England, approved
of the French occupation of the Lebanon.

In 1866 Eussia supported Prussia in the Prusso-
Itahan war with Austria— England being neutral —
which began German unity, completed the unity of
Italy, and resulted in the freedom of Hungary.

In 1867 Eussia, in concert with England, secured
tlie evacuation by the Turks of the Servian fortresses.

In 1868, Eussia, opposed by England, supported
tlie Cretan insurrection (unfortunately, not per-
severingly enough).^

In 1870, Eussia — England being neutral — sup-
ported Germany by neutralising Austria, and thus
secured the completion of German unity and the
overthrow of the French Empire.

In 1875, Eussia, in concert with England, pre-
vented a German attack on France.

In 1877, Eussia, opposed by England, secured
tlie liberation of Bulgaria, the tutelage of Turkey,
and the complete independence of Servia, Montenegro,
and Eoumania.

Tlie concert between the two Governments is
significant. Can you, then, wonder at our doubting
the sanity of those who systematically speak as if the

^ lu Russia we greatly regret the misunderstandings existing between
the Slavs and the Greeks. Amongst Russian Slavophils there are very
few indeed who are not at the same time sympathisers with their Greek
co-religionists. I well remember the moral support which the Candiotea
lound in Russia at the time of their rising. Amongst others, my brother,
Nicholas KireefF, whose Slavonic S}mpathies have been sufficiently
proved, then quite a young man, was enthusiastically supporting the
("andiote cause, collecting money and organising all sorts of funds for the
relief and assistance of the insurgents. Everything was done which
could be done, so far r.s th.e Russian people was concerned.

Russia's Foreign Policij. 317

effacement of Eussia from the political map and the
elimination of Eussia from the balance of power
ought to be the chief ends of English diplomacy ?
The State that took the leading share in freeing
Europe from the yoke of Napoleon, and in the
emancipation of the East from the yoke of the Turk,
and that has successfully exerted lier influence to
secure the preservation of Belgium, the liberation of
Italy, the unity of Germany, and the transformation
of Austria, is not one whose presence can be spared
from the Council table of Europe without loss to the
cause of Liberty, Nationality, and Justice. ,

Letter from M. Emile de Laveleye.

On the appearance of the foregoing letter in the
press, M. de Laveleye addressed to me the following
letter : —

Chere Madame, — Permettez-moi deux mots a Tappui de
voire these que la Russie a souvent defendu en Europe la
cause de la liberie.

Vous admetiez un tort qui n'exisie pas, ei voiis oubHez
un fait liberal que les Memoires du Prince Meiternich,
recemmeni parus, meiieni en pleine lumiere.

La Russie n'a pas approuve la Revolution de 1830, c'esi
vrai, mais elle a eu parfaiiement raison. La reunion de la
Belgique et de la Hollande eiait ce que le iraiie de Vienne
avait fait de mieux. C'eiaii le reiablissement des Pays Bas
du XVIe siecle, formation hisiorique reposani sur des con-
venances geographiques evidentes. La Hollande apporiaii le
commerce ei les colonies, la Belgique I'industrie ei Fagri-
culture. Les Pays Bas unis eiaieni un element de siabiliie
europeenne, car c'eiaii un irop gros morceau pour etre avale,
soii par I'Allemagne, soit par la France. Depuis 1830 la

318 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

Belgique n'a cesse de trembler pour son existence. C'est la
un fait certain. La Eevolution de 1830 a ete faite principale-
ment par les pretres contre un roi protestant, et les plus
prevoyants parmi les Liberaux etaient Orangistes et regret-
taient la separation d'avec la Hollande. La Kussie dans
son opposition defendait done la cause du liberalisme et du
veritable equilibre europeen. N'est-il pas evident que notre
situation serait autrement forte si nous etions restes unis a
la Hollande, si nous avions son commerce et ses colonies ?
Aussi on s'efforce de reparer la faute de 1830 par une union
douanniere. Done le tort que vous admettez au passe
liberal de la Russie en 1830 n'existe pas. Tout au contraire,
la France a soutenu notre revolution parcequ'elle comptait
bien nous annexer, et I'Angleterre parcequ'elle etait jalouse
du commerce en Hollande.

Voici I'oubli. Metternich raconte avec indignation qu'en
1814 I'Empereur Alexandre, au lieu de restaurer les Bour-
bons, voulait qu'on convoquat une Assemblee qui aurait libre-
ment choisi la forme de gouvernement qui convenait a la
France. II prevoyait que la restauration ne pouvait durer.
Metternich ne le dit pas, mais il est connu que I'Empereur
Alexandre eut admis meme la Republique. Ne se montrait-
il pas prevoyant, en meme temps que devoue a la cause du
progres et de la liberte ?

Et votre Empereur actuel n'a-t-il pas bien merite de
I'humanite en abolissant le servage, et en affranchissant les
populations soumises au detestable regime turc ? Ce qu'il
faut a la Russie actuellement, ce n'est pas le Parlement,
mais un Souverain qui s^insjpio^e des traditions democra-
tiques du Slavisme,

Ceci serait trop long a developper. Je m'arrete en me
disant votre bien devoue,

Emile de Laveleye.
Decembre 28, 1879.

Translation,
Dear Madam, — Allow me to add two words in support of

Russia's Foreign Policy. 319

your thesis, that Kussia has often in Europe defended the
cause of liberty.

You admit a fault which does not exist, and you forget
a liberal deed, which Prince Metternich's Memoirs, newly
published, brings into full relief.

Kussia, it is true, has not approved the Kevolution of
1830, and in this she was perfectly right. The union of
Belgium with Holland was the best thing done by the Treaty
of Vienna. It was the re-establishment of the Netherlands
of the 16th century, an historical formation, based upon
palpable geographical conveniences. Holland contributed
her commerce and her colonies ; Belgium brought industry
and agriculture.

The United Netherlands formed an element of European
stability, because it was too large a morsel to be swallowed
either by Germany or by PVance.

Since 1830 Belgium has never ceased trembling for her
existence. That, at least, is certain. The Kevolution of
1830 was principally got up by the priests against a Protes-
tant king, and the most farseeing amongst the Liberals were
all Orangistes, and regretted the separation from Holland.

Kussia, in her opposition, defended therefore the cause
of Liberalism, and that of the true equilibrium. Is it not
evident that our position would be infinitely stronger had we
remained united to Holland, and shared in her commerce
and her colonies ? We are now making strenuous endeavours
to repair the mistake of 1830 by the establishment of a
Customs Union.

Thus the fault you admit in the Liberal past of Kussia
does not exist. Just the opposite. France supported our
revolution, hoping to annex us, and England being jealous of
the commerce of Holland.

Here is your omission. Mettemich relates with indig-
nation that in 1814 the Emperor Alexander, instead of
restoring the Bourbons, desired that there should be con-
voked an Assembly, empowered freely to choose the form of
government most convenient for France.

320 The Anglo-Russian Alliance,

He foresaw that the Kestoration could not last. Metter-
nich does not say what is well known, that the Emperor
Alexander would even have accepted a Kepublic.

Did he not prove his foresight as well as his devotion to
the cause of progress and liberty ?

And your present Emperor, has he not deserved well of
Humanity, in abolishing serfdom, and in liberating the popu-
lations subjected to the detestable Turkish rule ?

What is needed for Russia now is not a ParKament, but
a Sovereign, inspired by the democratic traditions of Sla-
vism.

But this subject would lead me too far ; I close it in
remaining.

Yours truly, Emile de Laveleye.

December 28, 1879, Liege.

321

CHAPTER y.

'RUSSIAN AGGRESSION.'

Of all the reproaches brought against Eussia the
most persistent and the most touching is that of
her 'greed for territory/ ' Russian aggression' is the
fashionable mot d'ordre now in England. Well, if we
are aggressive, is it not another instance of the simi-
larity between the two countries ? Does it not only
prove how closely we try to imitate the Imperial
pohcy of England ?

Permit me to quote here an English official testi-
mony concerning what has been called ' comparative
aggression.' Mr. T. H. Farrer, Permanent Under-
Secretary of your Board of Trade, wrote an article
in the Fortnightly Review of March, 1878, which
contained many useful statistics on this point. He
writes : —

We are apt to impute to Russia an aggressive policy,
and this accusation may be just; but what is the case with
ourselves? The conquests of England have been much
larger than those of Russia in area, whilst they have been
beyond all comparison greater in value and population.
The conquests of England within the last hundred and
thirty years amount to 2,650,000 square miles, and nearly
250,000,000 people. All these are conquests, and all these

322 The Anglo-Russian Alliance,

conquests, except Jamaica and one of the small West Indian
Is-lands, have been made since the middle of the last century.
Countries colonised and unconquered, such as Australia, are
not included.* Eussian conquests within the last one
hundred and thirty years only amount to 1,642,000 square
miles, with a population of 17,133,000. Add to this that,
whilst Eussia has extended her borders, England has sought
her conquests beyond seas, and has established a garrison in
every point of vantage in every corner of the globe. Under
these circumstances it is not for England to complain of
aggression and conquest. Whatever the motives and what-
ever the results, the broad fact remains that England has
acquired by conquest an empire more extensive, more popu-
lous, more wealthy, than any nation of the modem world.

You say you annex unwillingly under ' imperious
necessity,' and you alone among the nations are des-
titute of ' earth hunger/ Possibly. Judging, how-
ever, by results, it appears that although you have no
appetite, no one contrives to make a larger meal.

Necessity is as imperious with Eussia as with
England, nor are our destinies less inexorable. For-
tunately, yours always take you to rich and fertile
land, good business, profitable customers, or com-
manding positions ; although, to find them, ' imperious
necessity ' takes you thousands of miles from home.

Eussia has never yet annexed a foot of land that
is not conterminous with her frontier. Time after
time she has tried to arrest the natural and inevi-
table advance of her frontiers, and she has always
tried in vain. Her conquests are free from the sus-

* Among these immentioned annexations are Australasia, 3,086,518
square miles, and 2,500,000 inhabitants, and the Transvaal, 114,360
square miles, and 300,000 inhabitants. Cyprus of course is not annexed
— only occupied.

Russian Aggression. 323

picion of profit.^ Our annexations (I am sorry to
say) are almost all what Afghanistan will probably be
to you — a permanent source of ruinous expenditure.

Eussia and England, of all nations, ought to be
the readiest to excuse each other's failings, because
alone among nations we have to grapple with the
same difficulties.^

To us belongs the sceptre of Asia. Whetlier we
like it or not, that continent has been given both
to Eussia and to England as a common heritage.
Neither can exclude the other from its share in
the arduous work of civilising and educating the
Oriental world.

To Eussia has been given the cold inhospitable
North, and the barren burning steppe ; while to you

^ * The Russians can hardly have teen dmwn into Turkestan by the
expectation of making money there. . . . Russia's acquisitions in Tur-
kestan have entailed upon it fresh and heavy burdens. The possession
of Turkestan seems to me to be a burden laid on Russia rather than a
boon granted to her. Were it otherwise, I should not grudge it her, for
it seems to be the opinion of all rational observers that Providence has
committed in that country a civilising mission to her care. ... If
Russia be formidable with Turkestan, she would be still more for-
midable without it. For her it is cost, it is care, it is liability to attack,
it is responsibility.' — Mr. Gladstone: 'RufsIhu Policy and Deeds in Tur-
kestan,' Contemporary Review, Nov. 1876, pp. 879, 881, 882.

"^ ' A fussy and fretful jealousy of the teriitorial acquisitions of others,
entertained in a country which exceeds all otheis in its multiplied
annexations all over the globe, is not a little detrimental, as I think, to
our dignity, and is peculiarly odious, and even not a little despicable, in
the eyes of the nations.' — Mr. Gladstone : ' Russian Policy and Deeds in
Turkestan,' Cmite^nporary Review , Nov. 1876, p. 880. ^ During the last
hundred years England has, for every square league of territory annexed
to Russia, by force, violence, or fraud, appropriated to herself three ;
nor are the means whereby Great Britain has augmented her possessions
a whit less reprehensible than those which have been resorted to by
the Northern Power for a similar purpose.' — Cobden's Political irritinys,
' Russian and British Aggression,' p. 86.

T 2

324 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

belong the teeming myriads of the South, with all the
fabled wealth of Hindostan.

You have antique civihsations in ruins at your
feet; we have but to deal with the nomad of the
desert, and the savage and the fanatical Tartars of
Turkestan.

Is it reasonable to expect from our officers that
strict execution of every engagement, under the
stress and strain of the struggle to maintain their
footing, whilst 'carrying the torch of civilisation
amongst barrels of gunpowder,' which you never suc-
ceeded in exacting from your representatives amongst
the mild Hindoos ?

When the history of British India is described,
even by Enghshmen, as one long series of violated
pledges and disobeyed instructions, why do you talk
as if Eussians were sinners beyond all other sinners,
because in our advance across Central Asia you can
detect discrepancies between intention and per-
formance ?

Granted, ' Eussia is advancing towards India ! '
but no faster than you are advancing towards Eussian
Turkestan.^ Within the last forty years each of us
has taken a stride towards the Hindoo Koosh, and it
is not Eussia who is invading Afghanistan. Why do
you quarrel with a law of nature ? It was Sir
Eobert Peel who said, ' When civilisation and bar-

1 ^ We talk coolly of the gigantic strides — that is the stock phrj
made by Russia in her career of Asiatic conquest. But her gains have
been as nothing to the gains of the British Empire during the same
period in conquests and annexations.' —Duke of Argyll, Eastern QuestioVy
vol. ii. p. 223.

Russian Aggression. 325

barism come into contact, the latter must inevitably
give way,' and if that were true in 1844 of Scinde, is
it not equally true of the Khanates of Turkestan ?

Your advance, although as rapid as ours, excites
no fear in Eussia. Why do you feel so nervous ? As
for '^Eussian Intrigue,' well, let me quote Sir Henry
Eawlinson as to the comparative danger, on that
score, of each Power in Asia. ' It must always be
remembered,' he says — although I fear his impera-
tive ' must ' is frequently disregarded even by himself
— ' it must always be remembered that Eussia is far
more vulnerable than England in this respect, and
that we could instigate a great anti-Eussian Moham-
medan movement, north of the Oxus, with much
greater facility than Eussia could stir up the Sikhs
and Hindoos beyond the Indus.' ^

Sir Henry Eawlinson is ' an old Eussophobist,' but
he thinks the extension of Eussian power in the East
is inevitable. 'In reality,' he said, writing in 1874,
' when Eussia had once crossed the Steppe, there
could be no substantial or permanent check to her
expansion until she was arrested by the barrier
of British Indian influence,' and, again, ' Eussia
cannot stop midway in the career in which she has
now entered.'

Take, as a typical instance of the hollowness of
the complaints of the so-called ' Bussian perfidy,'
the case of Khiva. That we had no alternative but
to send an ex^pedition against that robber Khanate,

* England and Russia in the JSasf,, p. 305,

326 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

is admitted even by our most uncompromising oppo-
nents.^

Having sent that expedition to Khiva and reduced
it to obedience, would we have been justified in
leaving the Khan as free as before to resume the mal-
practices which necessitated our costly intervention ?
Eeally, the abuse and misrepresentation to which we
have been subjected about the matter are not the
best specimens of ' English fair play.' We promised
not to annex Khiva, and we have not annexed Khiva.
There is not a Eussian in Khiva at this hour. We
have been repeatedly pressed to take Khiva ; but we
have hitherto resisted the pressure, chiefly in order
to keep — ^what many amongst us thought — our most
unreasonable promise to England. Promises! pledges!
Can one ever sufiiciently foresee the future to justify
giving assurances which may involve either the sacri-
fice of one's word or one's country's interest ? I can-

* Of many I will only quote one. Writing of our first expedition
against Khiva under Perofski, Sir Henry Rawlinson says : ^ The expedi-
tion liad long been contemplated. As a measure of mere frontier police,
and irrespective of all considerations of external policy, it was urgently
needed. With the exception, indeed, of the claim of the prescriptive
mzeraineU over Khiva, there was not a single weak point in the Russian
bill of indictment against Khiva. The Uzbegs of Khiva either directly,
or through the Turkomans and Khirghiz who obeyed them, had for years
committed every conceivable atrocity against the Russian Government.
To manstealing and raids upon the friendly Khirghiz were added the
constantly recurring plunder of caravans ; attacks upon the Russian out-
posts, burdens upon trade which weighed it to the ground ; outrages upon
Russian subjects who ventured into the country; indignities to the
Government, and finally a systematic course of agitation in the Steppe,
undertaken with a view of inciting the Khirghiz to rebellion. The pro-
vocation, indeed, offered by Khiva was not less complete as a casus belli
than the invasion of India by the Sikhs, which terminated in our own
annexation of the Punjaub.' — England and Russia in the JEastj p. 149.

Russian Aggression. 327

not understand how anyone can help burning with
indignant wrath, when any foreign Minister has the
audacity to demand such engagements !

Eussia, unquestionably, has ' rectified her frontier,'
at the expense of the Khan, but she left him to reign
in Khiva over the Khanate. I cannot see how
Eussia can be said to have annexed Khiva because of
that rectification, any more than Germany can be
said to have annexed France, or France to have
annexed Italy, because Prince Bismarck took Alsace
and Lorraine, and the Emperor Napoleon, Nice and
Savoy.

Yes. Eussia established her influence over
Khiva ; and, I suppose, in spite of all you say about
its independence, you are trying to do the same in
Afghanistan.

It is not wise on your .part perpetually to accuse
us of breaking our word, when we are all the time
inconveniencing ourselves in order to keep it. I was
glad to read Mr. Forster's words on this point when
he warned our enemies, that ' by constantly asserting
that Eussia has seized upon Khiva, they may at last
be taken at their word, and Eussia may do what she
is constantly told she is doing, and which she has not
done yet.

That admirable paper, the Statesman., which speaks
out the truth with such refreshing frankness, deals
with this subject more trenchantly than any Eussian
would care to do. Permit me to quote this testi-
mony of an experienced Anglo-Indian journahst.

After referring to what he describes as a mon-

328 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

strous falsehood, so persistently circulated by English

papers, that the Emperor has annexed Khiva, he

says : —

The course of events, honestly interpreted, showed the
absolute good faith of the Kussian monarch. He kept his
word to the letter. The public are told, in every con-
ceivable form of falsehood, that Russia has annexed Khiva.
It would be as true to say that England has annexed the
moon. The Expedition to Khiva was attended by severe
treatment of the Turkoman hordes in its neighbourhood.
Fearing their resentment upon the withdrawal of the Eussian
forces, the Khan of Khiva made an urgent request for the
retention of a part of the Russian army in Khiva itself. The
request was refused, but the danger being real, it was finally
settled that a small Cossack force of some eight hundred
men should be posted on the Khivan frontier, where the
Amu Daria discharges itself into the Sea of Aral; and a
strip of land was assigned as the territorial limits of the
force. The step was a military necessity, as Mr. Schuyler
shows, and as subsequent events have proved. Attack after
attack upon Khiva has been made by the Turkoman hordes
since the Russian army withdrew, and the presence of this
small Cossack force is simply the nucleus of defence against
their invasions. The State of Khiva is to-day as indepen-
dent as it ever was, the only change being that its slave
market is closed — let us hope for ever. Instead of ' annex-
ing ' Khiva, as we annex territories, substituting therein our
own alien executive for that of the subdued people, there is
not a Russian, so far as we have been able to ascertain, in
the whole Khivan State. Russia is feared beyond doubt in
Central Asia ; but she is respected at the same time, for her
name is a synonym for the suppression of kidnapping,
plundering, and slavery; and we, as Englishmen, rejoice
with our whole heart at her progress in those regions, and
view with bitter shame and humiliation the efforts of our
countrymen to decry what she is doing. We wish, with our

Russian Aggression. 329

whole heart, that she were at Merv, for it is the last slave
market in Central Asia.^

Unfortunately, such honest voices are too rare in
the English press ; although, I gratefully admit, that
they find a responsive echo in the hearts of many of
the best Englishmen.

Let me say, also, how delighted I was with the
letter in the Times ^ from that staunch friend of all

^ Statesman J December 13 and 27, 1879.

^ Sir Charles Trevelyan, wrote as follows in the Times, Nov. 18,
1878 : — * Khiva was the centre of the Turkoman slave-huntinj? system
which had desolated the neighbouring provinces of Persia. This place
was the mart for the sale of the unhappy people who had been torn from
their homes, and the Khan derived great part of his revenue from the
dues upon the traffic. During the short period of our influence in Central
Asia, before our military occupation of Afghanistan collapsed, a British
officer was deputed to Khiva to obtain the release of the Russian slaves,
of whom a large number were safely delivered at Orenburg ; but a whole
population of Persian captives remained, who were finally emancipated
and sent back to their homes by General Kaufmann.

' The assurance given by Count Schouvaloff to our Government is
described as follows, in Lord Granville's letter to Lord A. Loftus of
January 8, 1873 : — *' The object of the expedition was to punish acts of
brigandage, to recover fifty Russian prisoners, and to teach the Khan
that such conduct on his part could not be continued with the impunity
in which the moderation of Russia had led him to believe. Not only
was it far from the intention of the Emperor to take possession of Khiva,
but positive orders had been prepared to prevent it, and directions given
that the conditions imposed should be such as could not in any way lead
to a prolonged occupation of Khiva," The hazards of the expedition
were under-estimated. Of the three columns which were to converge
from Tashkend, Orenburg, and the Caspian, the last never reached its
destination, and the other two with difficulty escaped the danger of the
desert which had always formed the defence of Khiva.

* In all these circumstances, how were the Russians to act in order to
accomplish the object of the expedition and at the same time to keep
faith with us ? Could they reasonably be expected, after recovering their
prisoners, to retire again behind the desert, leaving the Khivans and
their allies the Turkomans to resume their inhuman practices with more
than their previous security after this experience of the weak and strong
points of their position ? Should we have praised them for doing so ?

330 The Anglo-Russian Alliance,

good causes, Sir Charles Trevelyan. There are at
least some few who do us justice in this matter.
How much better our relations would be if you were
guided by their counsels, and ceased ' to obstruct
Russia in her costly and difficult task by habitual
misconstruction and depreciation ! '

The words of the Duke of Argyll are as emphatic,
and even more categorical, than those of Sir Charles
Trevelyan. The Duke says : — ' It is generally asserted,
and widely beheved, that in the conquest of Khiva
Russia has been guilty towards us of flagrant breaches
of engagement. The papers presented to Parlia-
ment disprove this assertion altogether. They do
more than this, they convict those who make these
accusations of that kind of reckless misquotation,
which, although often the effect of mere passion,
approaches very nearly to the bad faith which they
charge on Russia.' ^

'Let Russia and England,' wrote Lord Mayo,
' declare to the world that they have a common
mission in Asia, namely, the estabUshment of good
government and the civilisation of the mighty nations

Should we ourselves have done so in like circumstances ? What was
actually done was that a military station was established on the north
"bank of the Oxus, and Khiva was placed by treaty in subordinate political
relation to Russia. The town of Khiva and the rich irrigated country to
the south of the Oxus were left to the Khan, while the country on the
northern bank was in part transferred to Bokhara and in part retained
by Russia. This has always been our own method of dealing with Pin-
darries, Mahratta, and other predatory tribes, there being no other way
of controlling them and reducing them to order. Upon this statement of
fact, I ask whether the Russian Government can justly be accused of
having broken faith with us?' (See also Games of the Afghan W*%7\
p. 239.)

' Eastern Question, vol. ii. p. 301.

Russian Aggression. 331

committed to their care,' and even although the
poHcy of Lord Beaconsfield should lead to the ex-
tinction of the ' line of independent States between
their respective frontiers,' which Lord Mayo desired
to maintain as a ' pledge of good faith ; ' if we meet
at Merv, or on the slopes of the Hindoo Koosh, we
shall meet, not as foes, but as friends !

332 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

CHAPTEE VI.

RUSSIA AND THE AFGHAN WAR.

When, in 1878, I wrote upon the Afghan war,
which was then commencing, I had to contend
against a widespread prejudice that Eussia had
behaved very badly to England in Afghanistan.
To-day, except in ill-informed quarters, that prejudice
has greatly subsided. The leaders of both parties in
the State have repeatedly and publicly declared that
the conduct of the Eussian Government in sending an
envoy to Cabul, at Midsummer, 1878, was perfectly
justifiable, from every point of view, under the then
existing circumstances. Lord Beaconsfield himself
took the opportunity, last year, to state in the House
of Lords that the StoletofT Mission was ' quite per-
missible.' Here are the exact words of your
Premier : —

Now, my Lords, I may speak on that matter with frank-
ness. It is, indeed, much easier to speak on that matter
than it would have been a year ago, or eight months ago.
Eight months ago war was more than probable between this
country and Eussia. An imprudent word might have pre-
cipitated that war. At present we know, by the gracious
speech from the Throne, that Her Majesty's relations with
aU Powers are friendly, and they are not less friendly with

Russia and the Afghan War. 333

Russia than with any other Power. I will say of the expe-
dition which Russia was preparing at the time when she
thought war was inevitable between our country and herself —
I will say at once that / hold that those 'preparations were
perfectly allowable. They would be no cause of quarrel to
England if war did not take place, and if war did take
place of course they would have contributed to bringing
about the ultimate result, whatever that may have been.
Had we been in the position of Russia, I doubt not we might
have undertaken some enterprises of a similar character. . . .
If war had taken place between the two countries, all the
preparations which either had made would have been per-
fectly justifiable. When it was found war was not to take
place, and Her Majesty's Government made representations
to the Court of St. Petersburg, it was impossible to act with
more promptitude than Russia did. Russia said at once,
'It is quite true that we did intend to attack you and
injure you there as much as we could, but war has not taken
place, and war, I trust, will not take place between Russia
and England. We have already given orders for our troops
to retire to their stations beyond the Oxus ; our Ambassador
shall be considered really as a temporary Ambassador on a
mission of courtesy, and as soon as possible disappear.' I
think that that was sufficient and satisfactory conduct on the
part of Russia as regards this matter.*

Lord Salisbury and Sir Stafford Northcote also
spoke emphatically on this point. On the other side,
the testimonies have been not less numerous and
emphatic. The Duke of Argyll, after referring to the
preparations of the Indian Government to attack the
Eussian dominions in Central Asia, through Afghan-
istan, says : —

The British Government was, of course, quite right to

^ Speech by Lord Beaconsfield in the House of Lords on the Afghan
War, Dec. 10, 1878.

334 The Anglo-Russiari Alliance.

take every measure in its power to defeat Russia if it con-
templated the probability of a war with that Power. But
if the Grovernment of England had a perfect right to make
such preparations and to devise such plans, it will hardly be
denied that Russia had an equal right to take precautions
against them. It is true she had an engagement with us
not to interfere in Afghanistan. But it will hardly be con-
tended that she was to continue to be bound by this engage-
ment when the Viceroy of India was known, or believed,
to be organising an attack upon her, of which Afghanistan
was to be the base. We may take it as certain that the
whole of the Russian proceedings, including the Mission,
were taken in connection with a policy of self-defence, and
that the Mission to Cabul was a direct and immediate conse-
quence, not of any preconceived design on the part of Russia
to invade India, or gratuitously to break her engagements
with us in respect to Afghanistan, but of the threatening
policy of the British Cabinet in Europe, and of its intention,
in pursuance of that policy, to make India the base of hostile
operations against Russia.'

Am I, therefore, presuming too much when I
say that the chiefs, both of the Ministry and Opposi-
tion, have fully justified the Stoletoff Mission ?

It is sufficient for me to say that we did not
depart from our engagement to exercise no influence
in Afghanistan hostile to British sovereignty in India
until the English Government broke its treaty engage-
ment by sending your fleet through the Dardanelles,
and that the position taken up by England in Asia
Minor is far less defensible, from an international
point of view, than the greatest offence which Eussia
has committed, even in the imminent prospect of war
in Afghanistan.

^ Eastern Question j vol. ii. pp. 496, 497.

Russia and the Afghan War. 335

The Cabul Mission was, as the Duke of Argyll
phrases it, ' simply a countermove in the game of
war,' and in that game England, not Eussia, took the
lead. While we were fighting to free Bulgaria, Lord
Lytton was making strenuous attempts to induce the
Ameer to enter into an ofiensive alliance with England
against Eussia, in which case Afghanistan would have
been made the base of 30,000 English troops opera-
ting against us in Turkestan.^ As the Duke of Argyll
points out, this is in itself sufficient to justify all that
was done by Eussia to ward off the threatened blow,
which, however, frankly speaking, we never dreaded
very much, and now hardly dread at all.

The Afghan War has, at least, done one thing,
which is very valuable. It has demonstrated the
impossibility either of a Eussian invasion of India, or
of a British invasion of Turkestan. We have always
told you that we could not get at your precious India,
and we may be pardoned if we tell you that you
would find it just as difficult to invade Eussian
Turkestan. Eussia said this. England has proved it.
The breakdown of your transport, which is the staple
topic of all telegrams from Cabul and Candahar,
is a continual reminder of the absurdity of Eus-
sophobia. Eussia could as soon invade England by
sea, as India through the rugged defiles of Afghan
hills.

The two words. Transport and Commissariat, are
fatal to any scheme of invasion. In the wilderness of
hills which intervenes between us, there exists no

' Pionee7'f September 4, 1878.

336 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

food to supply the wants of a modern army, even if
either in Turkestan or India there could be collected
animals sufficient to carry the impedimenta of the
invaders.^

The whole of your camels, mules, horses, and
oxen in India are as inadequate to convey a large
army to Merv as our navy is to convey a Eussian
expedition to Calcutta.

• Eussia cannot invade India, unless you advance
the Indian frontier to the Oxus. Then, no doubt,
we shall really be formidable to you. At pre-
sent we can only do you harm by tempting your
nervous, or ' Mervous,' authorities, to embark upon
ruinous expenditure, in order to lock the doors upon
a nightmare.''* The first Afghan war cost you twenty
millions. How much the second will cost you, your
Government, probably, will not hurry too much to
state. Yet you are further off* your object to-day
than ever you were before. When our Mission

^ See Colonel Osborne's paper on ' India and Afghanistan,' Contem-
poj-ary Review, OctolDer, 1879: — 'The want of food, far more than the
physical difficulties of the country, is, and always will be, the insuperable
obstacle to carrying* on extensive military operations in Afghanistan.'
P. 204.

^ This phrase is not mine but Lord Salisbury's. Speaking at the
Merchant Taylors' banquet, in London, on June 11, 1877, on this very
subject, the present Secretary for Foreign Afiairs said : — * It has gene-
rally been acknowledged to be an imprudent act to go to war for an idea,
but if there is anything more unsatisfactory than that it is going to
war against a nightmare.' It was in this speech that Lord Salisbury so
effectively ridiculed the policy — subsequently adopted as his own — of
allowing your ' enemy to choose his own ground, to follow him across
deserts and impassable mountain chains into a field which he has chosen
for himself, instead of waiting till he comes within your own range,
where only your peculiar arms and peculiar strength will enable you to
deal with him with invincible effect.'

Russia and the Afghan War. 337

visited Cabul in 1878, the Afghans declared that the
year 1842, when the Enghsh had ruined nearly the
whole of their country, remained fresh in the memory
of all the inhabitants. These memories have not been
effaced by your triumphs in 1879, and the more you
are dishked, the warmer will be the welcome which
the Afghans will extend to your enemies, be they who
they may.

So far from creating a barrier to Eussia's advance
to your frontier, your recent operations have removed
the only pohtical difficulty from our path, which
would now be easy enough, if the real obstacles had
not always been natural, not pohtical.^

Your Ministers protest they want nothing so
much as a friendly Afghanistan, but to simple-minded
Eussians your method of courtship is somewhat
puzzling, and reminds me a little of the following
anecdote : —

^ Addressing the House of Commons on April 22, 1873, Sir Charles
"Wingfield, M.P., in the course of a very judicious speech, foretold the
exact consequences which have followed your intervention : — * Whatever
European Power first entered Afghanistan would make the Afghans
their enemies. Our re-appearance in that country would revive the
memories of our former occupation in the minds of the people. What-
ever dependence might be placed on the ruler of the country, no reliance
could be placed on the subjects. A national party would be formed
which would rouse the fanatical feeling of the people against the English
alliance, and would prove as great a source of weakness to the present
ruler as it had done to a former one.' The same lesson is stated even
more bluntly by an Englishman, who writes after witnessing the evil
results of your expedition to Cabul. * England's true policy,' he says, * is
to leave the Afghans alone, strengthen our own frontier, and if Russia
should ever become our enemy, to pray for no better luck than that she
may try to march a large army through the wilderness of hills swarming
with hostile freebooters, which is the best bulwark of our Indian Empire.
The Afghans are the allies of the second comers, and the friends of the
enemies of their invaders.'

338 The Anglo-Russian Alliance*

As Frederick the Great's father — Frederick
WilHam I. — was once walking in a wood, he per-
ceived a man who was evidently hiding himself.
After watching him for some time, at last the King
took hold of him. ' What is the matter ? ' said he ;
' why do you hide yourself from me ? ' 'I am afraid
of your Majesty ! ' confessed the poor prisoner, with
a trembling voice. ' Afraid ! ' exclaimed His Majesty,
' you ought to love me, and not be afraid ; yes, to
love me, I tell you ! Liehen muss man mich, niclit
fiirchten I ' and upon this the King belaboured the
peasant with- repeated blows from his cudgel, honestly
thinking that a stick was the best channel for creating
affectionate feelings.

This involuntarily comes to my memory when I
read of the system which you are employing with
the -Afghans in order to gain their friendship. Even
barbarous and aggressive Eussia seems to have less
difficulty in Avinning the affections of the Asiatic
races than civilised and pacific England. On this
. point let me, as usual, revert to English testimony.
In an article by Professor Monier Williams on ' Af-
ghanistan and the Punjaub,' in the ' Contemporary
Eeview ' (January, 1879), I find some really remark-
able admissions, mingled, however, with some very
uncomplimentary observations as to the character of
the Eussian advance in Central Asia. We are so
familiar with accusations, I will only quote the ad-
missions. Your learned professor writes : —

Kussia is far better informed than we* are on all political
subjects, European and Oriental. Its system assimilates

Russia and the Afghan War. 339

itself far more readily than ours to the present condition of
the Asiatic mind. It brings with it the manifest advantages
of organised government and security of property. Hence
Russians advance is often ivelcomed in Asia as a boon,
where ours is deprecated as a grievance, or barely tolerated
as a necessary infiiction.

The troubles you are suffering were all foreseen,
as well as others which may easily come. Eussia will
not interfere with your operations. If we are to be
enemies, the deeper you get entangled in Afghan
affairs the better. The nearer you approach our
frontiers, the more vulnerable you become. Annex
Cabul and Candahar, if you please ; but Eussia told
you long since what would be the consequences of
such a step. One of our officials reported to our
Government, forty years ago, ' Eussia feels no anxiety
at the interference of England in Afghanistan. The
reports of Vitkevitcli have satisfied her that, owing
to the disorganised condition, the turbulent charac-
ter, and the conflicting interests of the Afghan tribes,
Cabul and Candahar can never form a bulwark for
India. They are more likely to shatter the fabric to
which they are violently attached, and cause it to
crumble permanently to ruin.'

You avoided following our advice, but had you
done so — had your gallant Major Cavagnari profited
by Colonel Stoletoffs experience, he might have been
alive to-day. When our Embassy was at Cabul,
although the Afghans have no reason to be hostile to
us, as they are to you, all its members were kept
almost like prisoners, within four walls, and were

z 2

340 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

refused permission even to see the town. They
were told there was nothing to see, and that if they
went out they would excite the fanaticism of the
populace. Cabul for Christians is either a prison or
a grave. Colonel Stoletoff avoided the latter, only
by accepting the former. Major Cavagnari preserved
his hberty, but lost his hfe.^

Last year Eussia was put on the defensive, even
by friendly Englishmen, for her conduct in Afghan-
istan. Now that the facts are more clearly seen, the
guilt is seen not to be at our door, but at that of your
own Government.

The Duke of Argyll's views upon that matter
have been expressed with the fearless frankness
characteristic of that illustrious statesman. After
describing how your Government made the war, the
Duke says : —

^ The following extract from a letter written by a member of the
Stoletoff ^fission, dated Cabul, October, 1878, may not be without interest
for English readers. After mentioning that Colonel Stoletoff had personal
access to the Ameer, he says : — ' The other members of the Mission began
to feel weary of the monotonous life they spent within four walls. Every
one was extremely anxious to visit the town, to see its bazaar, or, at any
rate, to take a drive or ride round Cabul, which lay temptingly at the
foot of the palace occupied by our Mission. Vain desire ! At the palace
gates stands the Guard of Honour, which allows no one to pass without
the permission of the Vizier. Watchmen are stationed at every wall.
All this appeared too reverential to the members of the Embassy. They
several times expressed to General Stoletoff their desire to visit the city
or its environs, but always met with a decided refusal, which was ex-
plained on the ground that there was nothing worth seeing in the town.
Another reason adduced was the fear of exciting the fanaticism of the
populace.' The same writer mentions that the only escort accompanying
the Russian mission on its way to Cabul was composed of twenty Cos-
sacks and a few Uzbecks, and that there never was any question of an offen-
fcive and defensive alliance with Afghanistan, which 'is simply an inven-
tion of the English press, ever ready to magnify a fly into an elephant.'

Mudbia and the Afghan TVar. Ml

I confess I cannot Avrite these sentences without emotion.
They seem to me to be the record of sayings and of doings
which cast an indelible disgrace upon our country. The page
of history is full of the Proclamations and Manifestoes of
powerful Kings and Governments who have desired to cover,
under plausible pretexts, acts of violence and injustice against
weaker States. It may well be doubted whether in the whole
of this melancholy list any one specimen could be found more
unfair in its accusations, more reckless in its assertions, than
this Ultimatum Letter addressed to the Ameer of Cabul by
the Cabinet of the Queen.^

That the despatch of our Mission to Cabul was
' perfectly allowable,' under the circumstances, is now
admitted by all ; but some people still seem to be
troubled by General Kaufmann's correspondence with
the Ameer.

I will not deny that the terms of the Anglo-Kus-
sian understanding might be interpreted so as to
forbid even an exchange of the comphments of the
season with the Ameer. It is sufficient to point out
that it is quite as capable of another interpretation,
and that General Kaufmann, in sending messages of
courtesy to Cabul was acting in good faith. Knowing
him, as I do, I confess it even shocks me to discuss
his good faith : it is so obvious ; for his interpretation
of the understanding was admitted by the Indian
Government itself

To write a letter of courtesy is not to exercise in-
fluence ; nor is every Bokhariot postman a ' Kussian
agent.' Your Government advised the Ameer to
cultivate friendly relations with General Kaufmann,

^ Eastern QueMion, vol. ii. p. 514.

342 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

and how could he do so, if he were forbidden, even to
receive a letter ? But is it not curious that among
the official papers upon which this latest charge
against Eussia is based, the Indian Government refers
complacently to one of General Kaufmann's many
letters to the Ameer as one of the incontrovertible
proofs that Eussia was loyally fulfilling her engage-
ment with England ? Surely, if General Kauftnann's
letters to Cabul were so flagrant a breach of our pro-
mise, as even the Daily News said last year, your
Indian Government would not refer to one of these
letters as a clear proof that Eussia was keeping her
word. The correspondence was no secret. Your
Viceroy, I beheve, used to dictate the Ameer's
rephes.

General Kaufmann sent an English duplicate of
his first letter to Shere Ali. ' Probably,' says the
author of ' The Causes of the Afghan War,' ' with a
view to its being made known to the Government of
India, and there is nothing all through the corre-
spondence to indicate any desire on the part of Kauf-
mann to keep it secret from the British authorities.' ^

Lord Mayo, so far from officially resenting the
correspondence, officially informed Shere Ah that
General Kaufmann's letter should be a source of
satisfaction and an additional ground of confidence to
the Ameer, and that the assurances they contained
had given him (Lord Mayo) unfeigned satisfaction,
for he saw in them a further and additional security

^ rage^254.

Russia and the Afcjhan War. 343

for the permanency of the Ameer's kingdom and the
estabhshment of his power .^

Besides, to prove, still more, General Kaufmann's
good faith, let me quote the remark, that ' Both
General Kaiifmann and Shere Ali had every reason to
believe that a correspondence, sanctioned and encou-
raged by men Uke Lord Mayo, Lord Napier of Mag-
dala, and Sir J. Fitzjames Stephen, could not be
otherwise than agreeable to the British Government.'^

Lord Northbrook was of the same opinion. He
officially informed Shere Ali that, so far from regard-
ing these letters with apprehension, the Viceroy and
Governor-General in Council saw in them an addi-
tional reason for beUeving that the Eussian authori-
ties desired to maintain no relations but those of
amity with the Government of Afghanistan.^

Not until your Government began to pick a
quarrel with the Ameer, and to prepare for war with
Russia, was there any complaint of these letters. The
change was on your side ; not on ours. Nor could
General Kaufmann be expected to understand that
what was a useful and commendable expression of
friendship before the rejection of the Berlin Memo-
randum became unscrupulous intrigue after that
date.

After Lord Lytton broke off all communication
with the Ameer, in May, 1877, and began to prepare
for hostilities with Eussia, I do not know what was
done; but if after that date the relations between

1 Blue Book, Central Asia, No. 1 (1878), p. 184.

2 Causes of the Afghan War, p. 263.

3 Central Asia, No. 1 (1878), p. 198.

344 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

General Kaufmann and the late Ameer became more
intimate, it was your doing. To prepare to resist a
meditated attack is ' perfectly allowable,' under such
circumstances ; and Eussia's good faith cannot be
affected by anything which took place between the
Peshawur Conference of May, 1877, and the retire-
ment of the Stoletoff Mission, at the close of 1878, a
period during which Eussia was daily expecting to
be attacked by England.^

There is only one other objection wliich is taken
to our conduct, and that is, that although we have
acted within our right towards England, we acted
cruelly and treacherously to Shere Ali. Having
compelled him to receive our Mission, we are told,
we should have supported him in his war with you.

I hardly think such a quixotic interpretation of
duty would commend itself to the judgment of Eng-
lish statesmen. Under great pressure, Shere Ah
received our Mission when war was beheved to be
imminent ; but he did not commit himself to us in
any way, and as soon as the crisis passed away, our
Mission was withdrawn. I hardly think we were
bound in honour to go to war with England, because
your Ministers eagerly availed themselves of the pre-
text afforded by the appearance of our Mission to
declare the war they had been preparing since 1876.
We had not committed the Ameer in any way. We
did not advise him to refuse to receive the British
Mission. We had received nothing at his hands.

' This point is clearly and succinctly stated by tliat courageous and
uncompromising assailant of popular misconceptions concerning Russia,
tlie Eev. Malcolm MacOoU, in the Spectator, Jan. 3, 1880.

Eussia and the Afghan War, 345

Our advance to his capital was forced upon us by
your threats of war. Why, then, should we have
made your attack upon the Ameer a casus belli f

' Afghanistan was beyond the sphere of our
interests.' Our intervention on the Ameer's behalf,
diplomatically or otherwise, would have inflamed your
animosity against us both, without soothing any-
thing. Pardon me, but if your Ministers had been
but reasonable, and had given the Ameer a httle
breathing time, he would have been able to clear
himself of all suspicion of compHcity with our
advance ; but the opportunity was denied him, and
Lord Lytton, delighted with so plausible a pretext,
hurried into war. This incident, I admit, is a painful
one. But, perhaps, after all, it will not be without
its uses, if it enables you to understand that a real
entente cordiale between England and Eussia might
do more good than the present poUcy of systematic
antagonism, and would better serve the interests of
peace and the prosperity of both.

346 The Anglo-Bussian Alliance.

CHAPTER VII.

KUSSIANS IN CENTRAL ASIA

' The Eussians have as much right to conquer Central
Asia as the EngUsh to seize India,' observed a pohte
EngHshman, the other day, evidently thinking that he
had gone to the extreme of condescending kindness !

' May I be quite frank ? ' said I. ' Well, it seems
to me that we have a great deal better right in
Central Asia than you have in India I ' So startling a
remark led to a long explanation. Perhaps Russian
views on that point might be of some Httle mterest in
England. I scarcely hope to convince many of my
readers, but I think it really is a duty to speak out
one's mind sometimes, even when you feel yourself
nothing but a poor exponent of the cause of truth.
I know my own shortcomings, but personal con-
siderations must be put aside under certain circum-
stances.

Well, now, as to the question of Central Asia.
Turkestan is at our door. Neither precipitous moun-
tain range nor stormy sea divided the Russian plain
from the Tartar steppe. Our merchants have always
traded with the Khanates ; caravans have wended
their way wearily over the monotonous expanse of

Russians in Central Asia. 347

the Central Asian desert for centuries. Every disturb-
ance in Turkestan affected business in Eussia. It
became a necessity, for the protection of the legitimate
channels of commerce, to estabhsh some authority in
these regions more respectable than the nomadic
tribes who levied black mail with a threat of death.
Step by step, in the course of successive generations,
the Eussian civiliser encroached upon the Tartar
savage. Evils tolerable at a distance are intolerable
next door. Anarchy, objectionable everywhere, is
unbearable when it infringes upon the frontiers of
order. The extension of our sovereignty over the
tribes of Tartary was the unavoidable consequence of
our geographical position.^ Now : Was it so with you
in India ? You had to pass the Cape of Good Hope,
and sail half round the world, before you reached
the land which you have subdued. The internal
tranquillity, of India had no bearing upon EngHsh
interests. So you had, at first, no more right to con-
quer Hindostan than Eussia has to annex Brazil.

Eussia in Central Asia is without a rival, as she is
without an ally. If she did not establish order,
toleration, and peace among those rude tribes on her
frontiers, the work would have remained undone to
this day. In India, on the contrary, you have to

* Mr. Gladstone in liis third Midlothian speech says : — ^ The position
of Russia in Central Asia I believe to be one that has in the main been
forced upon her against her will. She has been compelled — and this is
the impartial opinion of the world — she has been compelled to extend her
frontier southward in Central Asia by causes in some degree analogous
to, but certainly more stringent and imperative than, the causes which
have commonly led us to extend, in a far more important manner, our
frontier in ludip.'

348 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

justify your conquest, not only against the reproaclies
of the conquered nations, but against the protests of
the Dutch, the Portuguese, and the French, whom
you ejected from the dominions which you had
marked for your own. Eussia in Central Asia does
the pohce work of an enormous expanse of thinly-
populated, poverty-stricken land. She taxes the
peasants of Saratoff and Kieff to maintain order in
Khokand and Tashkent. The Administration spends
two roubles in collecting one. The English people,
I think, pay nothing for the government of India.
The Hindoos had to pay the expense of their conquest,
and they defray at this moment the whole charges of
the foreign administration which is maintained in
India by Enghsh bayonets.

India is rich. Central Asia is poor. The whole
of the revenue raised in Turkestan is not half a
milhon in the year. In India you raise more than
fifty millions.

There was little to plunder in Tashkent — much
less than the Enghsh nabobs found in one of the
great cities of Northern India.

There was more need for Eussians in Central
Asia than there was for EngUshmen in Bengal.
The Tartar of the Steppe needs a pohceman much
more than the timid Bengalee. India had a civili-
sation of her own, the splendour of which is attested
to this day by those architectural remains to which
Mr. Fergusson has devoted such patient genius and
so many years of unremitting toil. The Khanates
were hotbeds of savagery and fanaticism. The con-

Russians in Central Asia. 349

dition of these Tartar States was unspeakably bad.
Arminius Vambery is one of the greatest Eussian-
haters in the world, but he admits that our soldiers
have made it possible for Europeans to live in
Bokhara. Formerly, Vambery himself could only
visit the city disguised as a Mohammedan. Mr.
Schuyler says : — ' The rule of Eussia is on the whole
beneficial to the natives, and it would be manifestly
unjust to them to withdraw her protection, and leave
them to anarchy and to the unbridled rule of fanatical
despots.'

We do not grudge England her Indian Empire,
but when we are reproached with territorial greed
for having annexed some deserts close to our frontiers,
we have a right to ask England to look to herself.
India is yours, and improved by your rule. May it
remain yours for ever ! But the happy possessors of
that magnificent Empire should not reproach us for
our poor Tartar steppes. To understand the dif-
ficulties of our position in Central Asia, look not to
India, but to your West African Settlements. You
hold territories there which do not pay their ex-
penses ; they involve occasional wars which you
wisely undertake without humbly asking the bene-
diction of Eussia or any other Power. Nevertheless,
you do not give them up ; you even extend them
from time to time without asking for our leave. Your
keeping these provinces is perhaps more generous
than giving them up ; but there are Eussians cruel
enough to read with a little smile of your troubles
with the King of Ashantee when they remember with

350 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

what admirable fortitude you bore our difficulties
with the Khan of Khiva.

In Central Asia Eussians suppress the slave-trade
as you do on the African coast, although at the first
your views upon the subject were less philanthropic
— ^if I remember well. Wherever the Eussian flag
flies freedom to the slave is guaranteed. If England
had but joined us in our crusade against the Turk,
the last stronghold of the slave-trade in Europe would
have already ceased to exist. English people have no
right to ignore this phase of the question when they
can refer to such an unimpeachable 'Statement of
Facts on Turkey and the Slave Trade ' as that written
by Mr. F. W. Chesson, whose name is familiar to
everyone as the energetic and fearless defender of the
oppressed. One of the numerous complaints against
us Eussians is that we do not open the markets of
Central Asia to the manufactures of all the world.
Were you free-traders when you first conquered
India ? The East India Company, I believe, held as
strict a monopoly as ever existed in the world.

Promises to desist from further conquests, as
English experience goes,^ cannot always be kept. The

* Since the Afghan war there is no need to refer to so distant a date
as 1783. Speaking of the negotiations which preceded the commence-
ment of hostilities, the Duke of Argyll says : — ' In a very humiliating
way, the whole of these transactions carry us back to the days of Olive.
We are reminded only too much of the unscrupulousness of his con-
duct. ... I speak of what was bad or doubtful in his conduct, not of
what was great. In this aspect of them the proceedings I have re-
corded have been worse than his. . . . The Government of India has
paltered with the force of existing Treaties ; it has repudiated solemn
pledges ; it has repeated over and over again insincere professions ; and it
has prepared new Treaties full of *^ tricky saving clauses."' — Eastern
Question^ vol. ii. pp. 516 to 618.

Russians in Central Asia, 351

illustrious Burke, in the House of Commons in 1783,
said that ' from Mount Imaus to Cape Comorin there
is not a single Prince or State with which the English
Government had come into contact which they had
not sold. There was not a single treaty which they
ever made with a native State or Prince which they
had not broken.'

But we admit, in spite of Burke's severe blame,
that, though probably only yielding to the necessity
of her position, England, at all events, has given to
India the blessings of a civilised and stable Govern-
ment. Is Kussia not entitled to the same amount of
credit ?

Even Lord Beaconsfield views with no mistrust
the advance of Eussia in Asia — that is, if you can
believe what he said not so very long ago from his
place in Parliament — where, I suppose, he speaks
with more precision than after dinner at the Guild-
hall. The Premier used the following words — which
I quote the more gladly because it is so seldom that
I can appeal to his testimony : — ' I think that Asia is
large enough for the destinies of Eussia and England.
Far from looking forward with alarm to the develop-
ment of Eussia in Central Asia, I see no reason why
they should not conquer Tartary any more than why
England should not have conquered India.' ^

Why should English Turkophiles out-Herod
Herod?

1 May 1876.

352 Tlie Anglo-Russian Alliance,

CHAPTEE VIII.

THE TRADITIONAL POLICY OF RUSSIA,

What is the Traditional Policy of Eussia ?

The Traditional Policy of Eussia is an alliance
with England !

Long before Eussia bowed beneath the Tartar
yoke, our reigning Prince, Vladimir Monomachus,
married Gyda, daughter of your noble Harold, who
fell on the fatal field of Senlac.

The Tartar invasion, lasting nearly three centuries,
did not favour communications, much less an alliance,
between Eussia and England.

But after we got rid of the Tartars, Ivan the
Fourth, graphically surnamed the Terrible, sent an
Embassy to your Queen Elizabeth to negotiate a
close alliance with England, and according to several
historians, he was even anxious to marry her. Your
Queen, however, preferring ' single blessedness ' re-
fused, and the death of Ivan IV. brought the nego-
tiations to an end.

Since then matrimonial ties were not spoken of
for nearly three hundred years, but many efforts
have been made by us to establish a cordial under-
standing, by other means, between the two nations.^

^ It is curious to find that almost in the first sentence of the first

The Traditional Policy of Russia. 353

Our efforts, however, have too often been paralysed
by lying legends and calumnies invented by our
enemies, to prejudice the ignorant against us. One of
these — perhaps the most famous — the spurious Will
of Peter the Great, written nearly a hundred years
after Peter's death by the ingenious Frenchman,
Lesur, is frequently appealed to, as the most con-
vincing proof of Eussia's wickedness : nevertheless,
forgery though it is, it contains one point which
was well adapted to Eussian views, viz., the Seventh
Article, which is as follows :

' Seek the alliance of England, on account of our
commerce, as being the country most useful to us for
the development of our navy and mercantile marine,
and for the exchange of our produce against her
gold.'

Eussian Emperors have always been of the opinion
that Eussia and England are natural allies, even
although circumstances have occasionally thrown them
into temporary antagonism to a mistaken English
policy.

Up to the very outbreak of the Crimean War, our
Emperor Nicholas was most sincerely anxious to be
* upon terms of closest amity with England.' In his
famous conversations with Sir Hamilton Seymour,
that anxious desire was most manifest.^

Speech from the Throne after the accession of the present Government to
office the Queen speaks as follows : — * My relations with all foreign
Powers continue to be most friendly. ... The marriage of my son, the
Duke of Edinburgh, with the Grand Duchess Marie Alexandrowna of
Russia is at once a source of happiness to myself, and a pledge of friend-
ship between two great Empires.'

^ ' You know ray opinions with regard to England. Were we agreed.

A A

354 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

Mr. Kinglake says : —

The Emperor Nicholas had laid down for himself a rule,
which was always to guide his conduct on the Eastern
Question, and it seems to be certain that at this time (the
eve of the Turkish war of 1853), even in his most angry
moments, he intended to cling to his resolve. What he had
determined was that no temptation should draw him into
hostile conflict with England.^

As to the attitude of Eussia before the late war,
even our most exacting critics admit that our Em-
peror could not possibly have done more than he did
to secure the alliance and the co-operation of Eng-
land. The Livadia despatch was but the culmination
of a long series of similar overtures for English friend-
ship— overtures which, I regret to say, met with but
cool and scanty responses from your Government.

In making these advances, our Government was
only carrying out the ancient, the traditional policy
of Eussia. The change has been with you ; not with
us.

At the beginning of the seventeenth century,
Boris GodounoiF sent an envoy to London to urge that
England should unite with Eussia and other Christian
powers to subdue the Turks and free the Christians of
the East.2

During the eighteenth century, the two Powers

I am quite without anxiety as to the West of Europe ; it is immaterial
what the others may think or do.' Again in January, 1863, alluding to
the probable fall of Turkey, *It is very important that England and
Russia should come to a perfectly good understanding upon these affairs,
and that neither should take any decisive step of which the other is not
apprised.'

* Invasion of the Crimea, vol, i. p. 199.

* See ante, ^ Russia's Foreign Policy,' p. 296.

The Traditional Policy of Russia. 355

were frequently in alliance both in peace and in war.
On one occasion, Eussian soldiers garrisoned the
Channel Islands. On another, Eussian fleets were
re-fitted in English dockyards. English admirals
often commanded Eussian navies, while Eussian and
English soldiers, as faithful allies, fought side by side
on many a hard-contested field.

The great statesmen of both countries recognised
the importance of the Anglo-Eussian alliance. Our
Minister, M. Panin, in 1766, informed the envoy of
your Earl of Chatham, that he entertained 'the
strongest desire of entering into the strictest engage-
ments, and the most intimate friendship with Eng-
land, being convinced that my policy could neither be
solid nor perfect unless Great Britain were a party to
it.' It was the repeatedly declared conviction of
Prince Potemkin that the union of Eussia and Eng-
land was absolutely essential to the peace of the
East.

That conviction has been strengthened, rather
than weakened, by the history of the last hundred
years. Prince WorontzofF, our ambassador at the
Court of St. James, was a devoted advocate of the
Anglo-Eussian Alliance, and his convictions are
shared by the Imperial Chancellor, Prince Gortscha-
koff.

The most illustrious English statesmen concurred
with Prince Potemkin and M. Panin, in the value
they placed on the alliance between the two countries.
Chatham was not ashamed to declare that ' he was
altogether a Eussian.' Fox, Burke, even Pitt, as well

A A 2

356 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

as Canning and others nearer our time, have either
concluded treaties of friendship with Eussia, or
expressed themselves as most favourable to the Eus-
sian alliance.^

It is not a century since it was the custom to refer
to Eussia in Parliament as ' the natural, ancient, and
traditional ally of England.'

In the great crisis of European history, England
and Eussia were the foremost opponents of the
Emperor Napoleon, and it was to their joint endea-
vours that Europe owed the overthrow of the ascend-
ancy of France.

You have now occupied Cyprus as ' a strong place
of arms,' to menace Eussia, but your previous Medi-
terranean occupation — that of the Ionian Islands —
was undertaken at the suggestion of your Eussian
ally. Nor did you always dread Eussia as a Medi-
terranean Power, for England has insisted upon our
fleet entering that sea, and once negotiations were
even begun to cede us a naval station at Minorca,
then an English possession.

Is it not a remarkable proof of the utility of the
Eussian alliance that on two occasions, when the
English Government so far forgot its true interests as
to threaten to make war upon Eussia, the war should
have been prevented by the vigorous protests of the
English people ? ^

^ ' The Whigs of that day (after the Congress of Vienna) were not
"behind the Tories in their devotion to the Czar. It may perhaps be
more correctly said that the alliance with Russia received especially the
approval of that distinguished section of the Whigs who followed in the
footsteps of Charles Fox.' — Thirty Years of Foreign Policy, pp. 61-2.

'' 1791 and 187G.

The Traditional Policy of Russia. 357

The instinct of the nation was wiser than the
statecraft of its rulers, and the Enghsh succeeded on
both occasions in doing that all but impossible thing
— even in Constitutional countries — of restraining a
Prime Minister who was bent on going to war. We
are not ungrateful for the generous sympathies and
natural friendliness of the English people. We only-
regret that in two important crises of your history,
your Constitutional Government so misrepresented
your real feelings as to render it necessary, to pre-
vent war, to overrule your Ministry by an almost
revolutionary agitation.

When Empress Catherine II. heard of the services
which Mr. Fox had rendered to the cause of humanity
in restraining Mr. Pitt from making war upon Eussia
about Otchakoff, she placed his bust between those of
Cicero and Demosthenes, exclaiming, ' II a delivre
par son eloquence la patrie et la Eussie d'une guerre
pour la quelle il n'y avait ni justice ni raisons.'

Mr. Fox, in his place in Parliament expressed him-
self highly gratified by the distinction conferred upon
him by the Empress, and made the memorable decla-
ration : — ' With regard to Eussia, it has ever been my
opinion that she was the Power in Europe with whom
the cultivation of reciprocal ties of friendship, both
commercial and political, was most natural and of the
greatest consequence to this country.'

Now, if Eussians venture to express their grati-
tude to an Enghsh statesman, whose eloquence, like
that of Mr. Fox, has indeed delivered both countries
from a senseless war, he is decried as a ' Eussian

358 lite Anglo-Russian Alliance.

agent ' and a traitor to his country. The change is
not exactly an improvement, nor is it calculated to
strengthen good feeling on either side.

Englishmen may yet discover that these prejudices
against us are detrimental to their interests. Seventy
years ago, an English author declared that Eussia,
the most powerful, the most natural, the most useful
of our allies, has so intimate a connection of interests
with us that the soundest policy must dictate to us a
imion of design and co-operation in action.^ If that
were true then, how much more so must it be now,
for since then we have divided Asia between us ?

Even Lord Palmerston, when the Crimean War
was still an affair of yesterday, declared to our Ambas-
sador, Count Chreptovitch, that ' Eussia and England
had great interests in common ; and that as long as
they did not come into collision about Turkey or
Persia, there was no reason why they should not act
in concert on many important matters.' '^

To Eussians, it seems that the danger of a collision
about the affairs of these countries is the greatest of
reasons why the two Powers should act in concert.

Eussia has always particularly sought for concert
with England in dealing with Turkey. Much as the
Eussian Government desired the English alliance
which Lord Chatham pressed upon us, it was refused
unless England would act in concert with us in
Turkish affairs. That principle, rejected by Chatham,
was accepted by Pitt in 1795. Only four years after

^ Eton's Survey of the Turkish Empire, p. 404.
^ Ashley's Life of Lord Palmerston, vol. ii. p. 116.

The Traditional Policy of Russia. 359

he had been threatening us with war, a treaty was
conduded which conceded that principle of common
action in the Levant, for which Eussia had never
ceased to contend.

Is not that fact a happy augury for the future ?
Four years after the War Vote of 1791, the two
Powers entered into a close alliance. Who knows but
the same thing may happen within four years of the
War Vote of 1878?

Even during this century, Eussia and England
have oftener been friends than foes. In the Napoleonic
wars, the EngHsh fleet menaced Constantinople
because the Turks had declared war against Eussia.
It was not in Eussia that the battle of Navarino was
condemned as ' an untoward event,' and in 1877,
in spite of the bitterness occasioned by the war, we
celebrated its jubilee with enthusiasm.

As we fought together against the Turks, so we
have also, I regret to say, been allied in support of
the Sultan. When Mehemet Ali threatened to over-
turn the Ottoman Empire, Eussian troops occupied
Constantinople, while an English fleet cruised off the
coast of Syria.

The Crimean war was, indeed, 'an untoward
event,' but the despatches of Lord John Eussell, before
war broke out, bore repeated testimony to the earnest-
ness and sincerity with which our Emperor laboured
to estabhsh a good understanding and concerted
action with England in the affairs of Turkey.

Since the Peace of Paris, in 1856, Eu«L«ja has never

360 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

been at war with England, while she has frequently
energetically seconded English policy.

At the Conference of Constantinople, General
IgnatiefF abandoned his own scheme of reforms, in
order to give a more effectual support to that of
Lord Salisbury ; and after the Conference failed,
Kussia exhausted every diplomatic expedient to pre-
serve the concert with England, before she drew the
sword.

Not until it was seen that the only concert with
England was concert in inaction, with all wrongs un-
redressed, and all the Slavs left in slavery, did Eussia
act alone.

But even when compelled unassisted to do single-
handed the duty of all Europe, Eussia displayed the
most scrupulous regard for ' British Interests.' As-
certaining them from Lord Derby at the beginning of
the war, Eussia brought the contest to a triumphant
close without threatening a single point specified by
your Foreign Minister.

We sent you our terms of peace before we crossed
the Danube, and we sent you the Treaty of San
Stefano, as soon as it reached St. Petersburg.

At the Berlin Congress we gave way repeatedly to
satisfy your demands, and surrendered all exclusive
privileges in order to act in concert with Europe.

How England rewarded this, I need not say. But
unless we surrendered the Christians of the East to
the vengeance of the Turk, we could do no more. In
fact, truly speaking, we even went too far. The
aspirations, the ardent wishes of the Eussian people

lite Timditional Policy of Russia. 361

have been sacrificed for your friendship. One step
more would be almost treason to our brethren — a
betrayal of our duty. Such a price could not be
paid — no 1 — not even for the purchase of the English
alUance.

If England, if the English people identify their in-
terests with the maintenance of Turkish power over
all the peoples south of the Balkans, then I re-
luctantly admit that any alliance between us is
impossible. As has frequently been said, ' at any
cost, .without even counting the cost,' Eussia must do
her duty. For us, there is no choice possible between
tlie Slavs and their oppressors. Some of our officials,
estranged from their own nation by their false
education, dislike the very name of Slavs ; but as long
as there is the slightest link between them and the
Eussian people, even they would not dare so far to
forget their duty as to sanction an alliance on such
terms.

Eussians know well that nothing great can be
obtained without sacrifices. If new sacrifices are
needed, what does it prove ? Only that we have not
done enough. No power on earth can stop the natural
development of events. The future of the Slavonic
world is as clear to us as the path of honour which
we have to follow.

But are we to believe that the English people,
after all their protestations of sympathy with the
Eastern Christians, will insist upon such a shameful
price for their alliance, as a support of the Turkish
power?

362 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

It is impossible !

I look forward confidently to the conclusion of a
good understanding between Eussia and England,
based upon the peaceful but effective elimination of
Turkish authority from Europe.

Only on that basis is real alliance possible.

And so with the farther East. Co-partners in the
work of civihsing Asia, our entente cordiale is the key
to the peace of the Continent.

Destroy it, and from Constantinople to Japan
there will be ceaseless intrigues, insurrections, and
war.

Mr. J. Anthony Froude, whose courageous ad-
vocacy of an Anglo-Eussian AUiance dates back to the
dark times of the Crimean War, expressed this truth
very clearly when he wrote in his admirable ' Short
Studies on Great Subjects,' ' We may be sure that if
it was understood in the East, that Eussia and
England, instead of enemies were cordial friends, that
they recognised each other's position and would assist
each other in difficulties, the imagination of resistance
would be quenched in the certainty of its hope-
lessness.'

It is not sufficient that we should not be at open
war, to secure peace in Asia. We must be staunch
friends, and act in cordial concert within our re-
spective spheres. The Oriental world is convulsed
with war when Eussia and England are in opposition.
Cross purposes between St. Petersburg and London
may be confined to despatches in Europe, but they
result in crossed swords in Persia and Afghanistan.

The Traditional Policy of Russia. 363

The only hope of barbarism in Asia lies in discord
between the two civilising Empires. If we are united,
civihsation is safe ; but a policy of antagonism, even
although we do not draw the sword, may end in re-
storing Asia to the Asiatics.

Beheve me, it is not Kussia who will suffer most
by persistence in this policy of hostility and sus-
picion. Our stake in Asia is trivial compared with
yours. Turkestan entails a costly drain upon our
exchequer, nor can we import Turkomans to make
war in Europe. With you in India it is different.
We do not want India. We could not take India if
we did want it. But when the visit of a single
Eussian envoy to Cabid induces you to undertake a
costly, useless war, what hope is there of peaceful
progress, and the development of civilisation in the
East, . if the two Powers are to be permanently
estranged ?

Lord Napier and Ettrick, who, after he had left
his ambassador's post at St. Petersburg, was con-
sidered in this country, as well as in Eussia, as a de-
cided Eussophobist, referring, on December 9, 1878,
in his speech in ParHament, to the Eussian mission to
Cabul, frankly said : —

Kussia had moved forward in the direction of national
sympathies and aspirations of the people, and with consum-
mate prudence. With a country so constituted, it was
necessary to employ judicious means for securing amity, if
not absolutely alliance, and the best means the Grovernment
could employ was an absolute plainness and frankness, so
that Russia should not be in any doubt as to the course we
should pursue with reference to Afghanistan. He thought

364 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

that, after the termination of the war, there should be a
definite treaty between England and Eussia, as it would be
likely to have a tranquillising effect upon India.

Our interests are identical, our mission is the
same ; why then can we not revert to the traditional
policy of Eussia, and become once more firm allies
and good friends ?

It is not only in Asia that the two nations stand
side by side. In Europe we occupy similar ground
in resisting the authority of Papal Eome ; each in our
own way, we protest against the corruptions and
abuses of the Vaticanate Church.

Thus presenting a common front, ahke against the
Mohammedan barbarism of Asia, and the spiritual
despotism of Europe, is it not time that we should
frankly recognise the similarity of our mission, and
loyally support each other in the face of the common
foe?

' The Eussians,' says Mr. Froude, ' though our
rivals in the East, had in Europe, till the outbreak of
the Crimean War, been our surest allies.' Even since
then, English Cabinets have had no reason to regret
the existence of Eussia in Europe. It is not so many
years ago that Lord Beaconsfield's Government allied
itself with the Eussian Empire to prevent a renewal
of the Franco-German War, and I believe it was Lord
Beaconsfield who pointed, ten years ago, to an
Anglo-Eussian alliance as a means of preventing
Napoleon's March ' a Berlin^' which terminated so
disastrously at Sedan.

The Traditional Policy of Russia. 365

We are also united in the great humanitarian
crusade against slavery and the slave trade.

You look back with pride to the abolition of
slavery in your colonies ; we glory in the emancipa-
tion of our serfs — that measure which for ever secured
our gratitude to Emperor Alexander, who understood
and supported the best aspirations of his people.

It is your proud boast that slaves cannot breathe
upon English soil. It is not less true of Eussia, who
for the last hundred years has waged unceasing war
against the slave trade, both in Europe and in Asia.
It was our conquest of the Crimea which suppressed
the market in which Polish and Eussian captives were
sold like cattle by the Mussulman, and the first-fruits
of our entry into Khiva was the release of all the
slaves in the Khanate.

But why enter into details ? Whether it is in the
field of exploration, or in the domain of science, or in
any other of the numberless departments of our com-
plex civilisation, you will find that Eussians are fellow-
workers with you, neither unfriendly nor unworthy.

Why then should you persist in regarding us as
worse than declared enemies ? — A very intelligent
friend of mine, who has enjoyed unusual opportuni-
ties of studying Eussian and English pohcy writes to
me: —

The popular clamour against Kussia in England is not
only unjust, but childish and contemptible, and defeats its
own purpose. To tell you the truth, I sometimes blush for
the half childish, half brutal national egotism of a great part
of my countrymen. If we have to fight, let us do so and be
done with it, respecting each other as honourable opponents.

366 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

but (like yourself) I do not see the least necessity for fight-
ing. It would be folly in England to go to war to put on
his legs the incurably Sick Man, and it would be equally
foolish of Kussia to go to war in order to accelerate by a few
years the inevitable death of the patient. How many diffi-
culties might be removed by a genuine understanding
between Eussia and England !

Why should there not be such an understanding
between us ?

Surely it has been sufficiently proved that we could
do each other a great deal of harm, although not
without injuring many a noble cause, which we
ought to serve, if we really care for Humanity and
Civilization.

It is for you — not for us — now to decide whether
we are to be Friends or Foes !

36'

CHAPTEE IX.

SOME LAST WORDS.

And now my book is finished !

As I look over its pages and remember the
friendly welcome which my poor attempts to promote
a better understanding between England and Eiissia
have received from some of the noblest men in both
countries, I feel almost ashamed of the moments of
despair and bitterness which I tried in vain to con-
ceal. And let me say, also, in parting, how gladly I
shall welcome the first proof that my bitterness was a
little unjust. Whatever may be the difficulties of the
present, they are, I hope, but temporary ; and they
have not been without some permanent compensa-
tion. Even the hostiUty manifested in certain quar-
ters has not been without its uses, for it evoked a
generous protest, which formed a new and precious
link of sympathy and confidence between us. That
sympathy and confidence may, I trust, be as an aurora,
promising the advent of a new and brighter day,
when ' the mist of distrust,' which has so long hung
over us, will fade away and finally disappear.

The removal of national misunderstandings is a
task which often baffles the wisdom of the greatest

368 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

statesmen, and defies the effort of the most powerful
monarchs. For a humble person like me to work in
that direction, however feebly, is naturally regarded,
even by myself, as somewhat ridiculous. My role,
however, is that of a pis aller, whose abiding hope
has been, that ere long so great a work may fall into
more able and powerful hands.

The fear of ridicule has blighted many a noble
aspiration, and the sacrifices demanded by loyalty to
truth and justice are not confined to the battlefield
alone. The struggle for the Ideal — by its very es-
sence, unattainable — is always somewhat quixotic ;
but would life be worth living without it ?

Coming back to the principal object of my book,
I must repeat what I have already said several times :
England and Eussia, cordially united, can overcome
many difficulties, otherwise insuperable, and serve
many good causes worthy of the support of two great
Christian Powers.

We must unite in order to atone for the sufferings
already occasioned to others by our mutual hostility.
It is a debt of honour, which has to be paid before
the others, and no time should be lost before moving
in that direction.

But unless there is a radical change for the better,
there may be a change for the worse, the conse-
quences of which, in many respects, would be fatal.

The issue now lies, not in the hands of the Cabi-
nets, but in those of the peoples.

To bring about an entente cordiale between Eng-
land and Russia is indispensable for the civilisation of

Some Last Words. 369

the Orient, and is the only good standpoint from
which can be approached the great problems of
Europe and Asia.

I may be told, perhaps, that by expressing too
frankly and unreservedly the feelings of Kussians on
England's policy, I injure more than I serve the
cause I have at heart. But this would be an indirect
accusation of England against which I protest.

In spite of all that has been done, written, and
said, I firmly believe that many Englishmen will not
lose sight of the motive which guided my pen, and
pardon my want of skilful reserve and concealment.

To understand why we are displeased with each
other is the first indispensable step for removing the
misunderstanding. Had I minced my words too
much, had I shrunk from stating facts with the
utmost frankness, I should not have been a faithful
and true exponent of Eussian views.

Once more, then, I review in these ' last words *
the question which I have pressed, I fear, perhaps
almost ad nauseam^ in every page : Why can we not
be friends ?

This inflamed animosity, so sedulously fostered by
interested parties, is a reproach to our intelligence and
our sense of duty.

We both have nothing to gain, and very much to
lose, by substituting hatred for cordiahty and suspi-
cion for confidence ; nor is it we alone who suffer. Every
human being between the outposts of the two Empires
is more or less affected by the relations existing
between England and Eussia.

B B

370 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

The Eussian people have been rehictantly driven
into an attitude of antagonism to England. Gladly
would we hail any prospect of escape from that in-
voluntary position, and heartily would we welcome
your co-operation in that task of developing the liber-
ties of the Christian East, Avhich is now proclaimed
as the policy of Liberal England, but which has always
been the Historical Mission of my country.

0. K.

371

APPENDIX.

The following was Mr. Froude's Preface to the first
series of the 0. K. Letters, published in December,
1877, under the title, ' Is Eussia Wrong?'

Very few words will suffice for an introduction of the fol-
lowing letters. The writer is a Kussian lady well acquainted
with England, who has seen with regret the misconceptions
which she considers prevail among us as to the character of
her countrymen ; she has therefore employed such skill as
she possesses in an honourable attempt to remove those mis-
conceptions. Individuals, however great their opportunities,
can but speak with certainty of what they personally know,
and * 0. K.' may draw too wide inferences from the ex-
periences of her own circle; but she writes in good faith,
and any contribution to our knowledge, which is true as far
as it goes, ought to be welcome to us — welcome to us espe-
cially at the present crisis, when the wise or unwise conduct
of English statesmen may affect incalculably for good or evil
the fortunes of many millions of mankind. To Kussia and
England has fallen the task of introducing European civilisa-
tion into Asia. It is a thankless labour at the best ; but
circumstances have forced an obligation upon both of us,
which neither they nor we can relinquish ; and our success
depends for its character on the relations which we can
establish between ourselves. If we can work harmoniously
together as for a common object, the progress of the Asiatic

372 The AnglO'Riissian Alliance,

people will be peaceful and rapid. If we are to be jealous
rivals, watching each other's movements with suspicion, and
on the look-out to thwart and defeat each other, every king-
dom and tribe from the Bosphorus to the Wall of China will
be a centre of intrigue ; and establishment of the new order
of things may be retarded for centuries, or disgraced by wars
and revolutions from which we shall all alike be sufterers.
On the broadest grounds, therefore, it is our interest to be
on good terms with Kussia, unless there is something in the
Muscovite proceedings so unqualifiedly bad that we are posi-
tively obliged to separate ourselves from them. And before
arriving at such a conclusion, we must take more pains than
we have done hitherto to know what the Kussians are. If
we could ' crumple ' them up as Mr. Cobden spoke of doing,
we might prefer to reign in the East without a rival. But
'' crumpling up ' is a long process, in which nothing is certain
but the expense of it. That enterprise we shall certainly
not attempt. There remains, therefore, the alternative:
either to settle into an attitude of fixed hostility to a Power
which will always exist side by side by us, or to place on
Russia's action towards the Asiatic races the same favourable
construction which we allow to our own, and to ask ourselves
whether in Russia's conduct there is anything materially
different from what we too accept as necessary in similar
circumstances.

The war of 1854 was a first step in what I considered
then, and consider now, to have been the wrong course — a
course leading direct, if persisted in, to most deplorable
issues. That war had been made inevitable from the indig-
nation of the Liberal party throughout Europe at Russia's
interference in Hungary. Professedly a war in defence of
Turkey, it was fought really for European liberty. European
liberty is no longer in danger, nor has the behaviour of Tur-
key since the peace been of a kind to give her a claim on
our interest for her own sake. The Ottoman Empire has
for half a century existed upon sufferance. An independence
accompanied with a right of interference by other nations

Apjpejidiv. 373

with its internal administration has lost its real meaning,
and the great Powers have been long agreed that the Porte
cannot be left to govern its Christian subjects after its own
pleasure. The question is merely in whom the right of
supervision is to reside. Before the Crimean war they were
under the sole protectorate of Eussia. The Treaty of Paris
abolished an exclusive privilege which was considered dan-
gerous, and substituted for it, by implication, a general
European protectorate. It seemed likely to many of us that,
while other objects of the war might have been secured, the
ostensible occasion of it would be forgotten ; that the Chris-
tians, having no longer Russia to appeal to, would be worse
treated than before ; and that after a very few years the
problem of how to compel the Turk to respect his engage-
ments would certainly return. Such anticipations, in the
enthusiasm of the moment, were ridiculed as absurd and
unpatriotic. The Turk himself was to rise out of the war
regenerate, and a ' new creature.' He was to be the advanced
guard of enlightenment, the bulwark of Europe against bar-
barism. There was no measure to the hopes in which
English people indulged in those days of delight and excite-
ment. But facts have gone their natural way. The Turk
has gone back, not forward. He remains what he has always
been, a blight upon every province on which he has set his
heel. His Christian subjects have appealed once more for
help; and the great Powers, England included, have admitted
the justice of their complaints, and the necessity of a remedy.
Unhappily England could not agree with the other Powers
on the nature of the remedy required. Eussia, unable to
trust fiu'ther to promises so often made and so uniformly
broken, has been obliged to take active measures, and at
once the Crimean ashes have again been blown into a flame ;
there is a cry that Eussia has sinister aims of her own, that
English interests are in danger, and that we must rush to
the support of our ancient friend and ally. How we are
decently to do it, under what plea, and for what purpose,
after the part which we took at the Conference, is not ex-

374 The Anglo-Russian Alliance.

plained. The rest of Europe is not alarmed. The rest of
Europe is satisfied that the Turk must be coerced, and looks
on, if not pleased, yet at least indifferent. If we go into
the struggle, we must go in without a single ally, and when
we have succeeded in defeating Russia, and re-establishing
Turkey (there is another possibility, that we may not succeed,
but this I will not contemplate), — as soon as we have suc-
ceeded, what then ? After the censures to which we stand
committed on Turkey's misconduct we cannot in decency hand
back Bulgaria to her without some check upon her tyranny.
We shall be obliged to take the responsibility on ourselves.
Kngland will have to be sole protector of the Bulgarian
Christians, and it is absolutely certain that they would then
be wholly and entirely at the Turk's mercy. It is absolutely
certain that we should be contracting obligations which we
could not fulfil if we wished. We should demand a few fine
promises from the Porte, which would be forgotten as soon as
made. A British protectorate is too ridiculous to be thought
of; and if the alternative be to place Bulgaria under a govern-
ment of its own, that is precisely the thing which Russia is
trying to do. To go to war with such a dilemma staring us
in the face, and with no object which we can distinctly
define, would be as absurd an enterprise as England was ever
entangled in. Yet even after Lord Derby's seeming recog-
nition of the character of the situation, there is still room
for misgiving. In constitutional countries politicians will
snatch at passing gusts of popular excitement to win a
momentary victory for themselves or their party. Our
Premier, unless he has been misrepresented, has dreamt of
closing his political career with a transformation scene —
Europe in flames behind him, and himself posing like harle-
quin before the footlights. Happily there is a power which
is stronger than even Parliamentary majorities — in public
opinion ; and public opinion has, I trust, already decided
that English bayonets shall not be stained again in defence
of Turkish tyranny. It will be well if we can proceed, when
the present war is over, to consider dispassionately the wider

Appendix. 375

problems, of which the Turkish difficulty is only a part ; and
if the letters of ' 0. K.' assist ever so little in making us
acquainted with the Eussian character, the writer will have
reason to congratulate herself on so happy a result of her
efforts.

The Jeivish Questmi,

This hostility to Jews is not confined to Slavs. A dis-
tinguished Englishman, who is very familiar with the move-
ments of Grerman thought, writes as follows to the ' Non-
conformist,* January 8, 1880: —

There is an Eastern Question, a Nihilist Question, a
Social Democratic Question, and so forth ; and there is also
a Jewish Question, at any rate, so it is thought in Berlin, in
Germany. But what is meant by the ' Jewish Question ? '
Not a question of the emancipation of the Jews from the
yoke of the Christian, not a question of giving the Jews
equal rights with Christians, but, so, with just a spice of
paradox, one might put it, a question of the emancipation
of the Christians from the yoke of the Jeius, and of the
Christians keeping equal rights with the Jefivs. That the
paradox is not all my own, the title of a pamphlet, which
has gone through eleven editions in, I believe, about as
many months, will tell you, it runs, ' The Victory of Judaism
over Grermanism.' It is written by a well-known Grerman
Publicist, W. Marr, and what does he say ? Let me quote
a few passages : —

'The 1800 years' war with Judaism approaches its end.
Let us confess it openly — Germanism has had its Sedan.
We have lost our armies, and we are not allowed to Gam-
bettize, we are not allowed to carry on a useless war with
volunteers. We have been vanquished in an open struggle.
.... We are no longer a match for this foreign race.
Even freedom has become a Jewish TrwTwpoly, It is com-
pelled to regulate itself by the social political dogmas of
the Jeivs, .... My voice is that of one crying in the

376 The Jewish Question.

desert, and I have only laid down facts — irrefragable facts.
Let us accommodate ourselves to the inevitable, if we cannot
alter it. That inevitable is Finis Germanice ! '

Let us hear another writer, a well-known Professor of
History, Henrich von Freitschke. In the November number
of the ' Preussische Jahrbiicher ' he wrote as follows. I
summarise rather than quote literally : —

' A great movement is going on in the depths of our
nation. Among its symptoms none strikes one as so strange
as the irritation against the Jews. A few months ago the
old Hepp Hepp cry might be said to be raised by the Jews
against the Christians, instead of by the Christians against
the Jews; criticism of national faults of the Germans,
French, and all other peoples were freely admitted into the
daily papers ; but if any one ventured, in however mild a
tongue, to point out the faults of the Jews, at once he was
branded by almost the entire press as a barbarian and re-
ligious persecutor. The feeling referred to is the reason
why the Breslau people rejected Lasker, having resolved to
elect no Jew as their representative. Up into the very
highest circles of culture, amongst men who are as far
removed as possible from every thought of ecclesiastical into-
lerance or national pride, one hears it said with unparalleled
unanimity, The Jews are our onisfortune. There has always
been a gulf between the Western and the Semitic character.
There will always be Jews who are nothing but German-speak-
ing Orientals. There will always be, too, a specifically Jewish
culture, and it has undoubted rights of its own. But the
antagonism between West and East will be bearable if the
Jews, who talk so much about toleration, will only learn to
be really tolerant, and to show some respect for the faith,
the customs, and the feelings of the German people, which
has given them the rights of men and citizens. But the
complete lack of this respect in a part of the mercantile and
literary Jewish community is the deepest reason for the pas-
sionate embitterment of which I have spoken.'

Let us hear yet another voice, that of the Court Chap-

Appendix. 377

lain, Stocker, a thoroughly honest, well-meaning, and fairly
representative man, now a Prussian Deputy for one of the
districts of Berlin, than whom scarcely anyone has been
more bitterly and either maliciously or ignorantly assailed
by so-called Liberals all over the world diu-ing the last two
years. He says : —

' The Jewish question has long been a burning question :
for the last few months the fire has burst into flames. It is
not fed either by religious fanaticism or by political passion.
Orthodox and Freethinkers, Conservatives and Liberals speak
and write about it with the like passionateness ; they . all
treat the Jews not as the apple of religious discord and in-
tolerance, but as a matter of social anxiety. " The social
question," writes Glagau, " is the Jew question." We do not
think that Xxermany is as near its end as W. Marr pro-
phesies (in the pamphlet from which I have already quoted);
' but symptoms of disease in our national body have un-
questionably been laid bare, and social hostility is never

absolutely groundless Modem Jiulaism is in very

deed a great danger for the life of the German nation,
.... Modern Judaism is certainly an irreligious force —
a force which everywhere bitterly attacks Christianity, up-
roots both the Christian faith and national sentiment, and
in return offers nothing but the idolatrous reverence of
itself." And as Auerbach says in his ' Waldfried,' " Educated
Jews are not so much Jews as non-Christians ! " Hence
their enthusiasm for creedless schools and the like.'

INDEX,

ABE

ABERDEEX, Lord, and Emperor
Nicholas, 146 ; on Russian foreign
policy, 306

Afghanistan, * outside sphere of Rus-
sian interests,' 79, 345 ; ' England's
true ix)licy in,' 337 ; Vitkevitch on,
339 ; Russian pledges kept in, 341 ;
Duke of Argyll on English policy
in, 341 ; on English bad faith to,
350

Afghan, the, Correspondence and
General Kaufmann, 341

Afghan War, the, Russian neutrality
in, 79 ; brings British frontier to
Russian, 279 ; increases Russia's
power of offence, 279, 337 ; Mr.
Gladstone on Russia and the, 285 ;
Russian Mission toCabul justifiable,
332; Russia and the, 332; Lord
Beaconsfield on, 333 ; Duke of
Argyll on, 334 ; proved impossi-
bility of invading India, 335 ; cost
of first, 336 ; Colonel Osborne on
difficulty of campaigning in, 336 ;
not calculated to produce friend-
ship, 337 ; Sir Charles Wingfield,
337 ; Cavagnari and Stoletoff, 339

Aggression, Russian, 321 ; Russian
and English since 1750, 322 ; Cob-
den on. 323

Aksakoff, Mr., President of Moscow
Slavonic Committee, 20 ; not a
Russian Mazzini, 20; Mr. Wal-

AKS
lace on, 24; < exiled,' 106; bank
director, 107

— speeches of, on the Servian war,
24; on Russian reverses in 1877,
52 ; on the Berlin Congress, 98

— on work of Slavonic committees,
25; Russian diplomacy, 25, 58, 103,
104 ; the roots of Russian power, 27 ;
spread of Slavophilism, 27 ; General
Tchemayeff, 28 ; death of Nicholas
Kireeff, 29 ; volunteers for Servia,
30 ; money raised, 32 ; how spent,
33 ; the Russian debt to the Ser-
vians, 34 ; the Russian soldier, 53 ;
effect of reverses on the people,
54 ; historic mission of Russia, 54,
56, 57; to spread 'peace, liberty,
and fraternal equality,' 57 ; com-
plaints of higher classes, 55, 59 ; *the
sin of forsaking Russian nation-
ality,' 55, 59; British interests,
58 ; Austria-Hungary and the
Slavs, 58 ; the limitation of war,
59 ; the Berlin Congress, 98 ;
Prince Tcberkassky, 98 ; Russia
and the Western Powers, 99 ;
Bulgaria * sawn asunder alive,'
100-103 ; Turkish garrisons in
Balkans, 102 ; Slavonic develop-
ment, 103 ; diplomatic Nihilists,
104 ; the Constantinople Conference,
104 ; England and her sepoys,
105; Austria-Hungary, *a heel of

180

Index.

ALE

Achilles,' 105 ; * the Balkan States
for Balkan peoples,' 149

Alexander I. and Turkey, 171 ; con-
cludes treaty with England, 171 ;
treats with Napoleon at Tilsit, 171 ;
wishes to re-establish Poland at
Congress of Vienna, 204 ; on Con-
stitutional Government, 250 ; libe-
rator of Europe, 302 ; Stein on,
303 ; esteemed by Napoleon, 303 ;
reactionary in later j^ears, 304;
liberality towards France, 304 ; too
liberal for Metternich, 318

Alexander II., Emperor, ' passionately
desirous of peace,' 6 ; but, if neces-
sary, will act alone, 6 ; Moscow
speech, enthusiastic reception of,
11 ; on Constantinople, 174 ; on
* Russian designs on India,' 174 ;
desires good understanding with
England, 174 ; visited Siberia, 220 ;
emancipator of serfs, liberator of
southern Slavs, 230 ; Mr. Gladstone
on, 230; confidence in, 243, 255;
attempt on the life of, 252, and the
Tzarewitch, 268 ; progress under,
275 ; M. de Laveleye on, 320

Alexander Nevsky, St., receives title
of Grand-Duke from Tartars, 41

America, civil war in United States of,
Russian and English sympathies,307

Anarchy, in Poland, 200, 225 ; be-
setting sin of Slavs, 225 ; in Russia,
226 ; in Central Asia, banished by
Russians, 349

Anglo- Russian Alliance, the, or entente
cordiale, Lord Rochford on, in
1772, 82; desired by Emperor
Alexander II. in 1876, 174 ; how
sought by Russia, 263, 288 ; Russia's
overtures rebuffed by England, 265 ;
Russian noble on, 269 ; initiative
must now be taken by England,
269; the traditional policy of
England, 272, 358 ; for Asia and
the East, the watchword of civili-
sation, 284; not indispensable to
Russia, 288; prevents German at-

ANN
tack on France 1875, 291; Lord
Beaconsfield urges it in 1870, 364 ;
civilising mission in Asia, 323 ; the
traditional policy of Russia, 352 ;
matrimonial ties past and present,
352 ; Peter the Great, 353 ; Cathe-
rine II., 357; Alexander L, 171,
359 ; Alexander II., 174 ; Panin,
355 ; Potemkin, 355 ; Woronzoff,
355 ; Gortschakoff, 355 ; Lord Robert
Cecil, 295; Chatham, 355; Burke,
355 ; Canning, 356 ; Fox, 356, 357 ;
Pitt, 359; Palmerston, 358; Mr.
Bright, 270 ; Sir Charles Trevelyan,
270; Mr. W. H. Smith, 292; Mr.
Lowther, 293; Lord Mayo, 330;
Lord Napier and Ettrick, 363;
Statesman, 182 ; in the seventeenth
century, 354 ; in the eighteenth,
355 ; in 1765, 359 ; 1812, 315, 359 ;
1827, 295, 315, 359; 1830, 300;
1833, 315, 359; 1840, 315, 359;
1850, 315; 1860, 315; 1867, 316;
1875, 291, 316, 364 ; and 1876, 281 ;
English people twice prevent armed
rupture of, 356 ; basis of, in East of
Europe, 361 ; key to peace of Asia,
363 ; evils caused by want of, 363,
372 ; in the hands of the peoples,
368 ; need for, 368

Anglo- Turkish Convention, the, 134 ;
Russian opinion on, 134 ; the Kord
on, 135 ; violates Treaty of Paris
135, 137, 138, 139; a sham, 136
Turkish frontier undefended, 136
destroys European concert, 137
justifies Treaty of Kainardji, 137
gives Russia right to deal directly
with Sultan, 140; and occupy
Turkish territory, 140 ; justifies
Russian principle in the Crimean
war, 311, 314 ; worse than Russian
Mission to Cabul, 334

Annand, James, on national mis-
representations, 189

Anne Ivanovna, Empress, 233, 246
accepts Oligarchic Constitution
233, 246 ; restores autocracy, 246

Index,

.81

ANN

Annexations, Russian from Turkey,
51, 74, 107, 313; of Armenia, 50;
Finland, 193; the Crimea, 365;
Poland, 200; Circassia, 208; Tur-
kestan, 333, 347; of Russia and
England since 1750, 322 ; Cobden
on, 200, 323; Duke of Argyll on,
324 ; Russian, benefit the annexed,
200

Argyll, the Duke of, speed) trans-
lated into Russian, 39 ; supports
cause of Christian East, 268 ; on
secret societies, 19 ; the English
entry of Dardanelles, 72 ; Berlin
Congress, 106 ; Russia as liberator
of the East, 236, 310; Treaty of
Berlin, 310; Russian and English
conquests in Asia, 324 ; Khiva, 330 ;
Russian mission to Cabul, 334 ;
English policy in Afghanistan, 341 ;
English bad faith to Afghans, 350

Aristocracy, Polish, ruin of Poland,
225 ; character of, by Cobden, 199 ;
by M. de Circouii, 205 ; denounced
by Lord Beaconsfield, 202 ; Russian,
attempt to destroy autocracy, 233,
246 ; present position of, in Russia,
232

Armenia, annexation of, discussed,
50

Armenian generals, 191, 235

Ashantee War parallel to Khiva Ex-
pedition, 349

Asia, sceptre of, given to England
and Russia, 323, 362

Askold and Dir attack Byzantium,
168

Assassination, attempt on the Em-
peror, 252 ; no proof of * ruthless
despotism,' 254 ; political effect of,
256; consequences if successful,
259; English press on, 252. See
Nihilism

Attempt, the, on the Emperor, 252

Austria-Hungary, and the Slavs, 59,
130, 132, 150, 152 ; Mr. Aksakoff on,
59, 105 ; influence of, on San Stefano
Treaty, 76 ; at Berlin Congress, 97,

AUT

99, 103 ; Russia not hostile to, 129 ;
Prince Gortschakoff on, 130; 'the
sick woman of Europe,' 133; *a
carpet bagger,' Stillman, 151 ;
occupies Bosnia at Russia's sug-
gestion, 130, 174 ; Talleyrand pro-
poses eastward extension of, 132 ;
must not annex the Balkan, 132 ;
nor Constantinople, 167; probable
future of, 132, 150, 152 ;. Kossuth
on annexations by, 150 ; M. de
Laveleye on, 151, 290 ; Sir William
Harcourton, 154; admired in West,
hated in East, 152 ; why ? Chrza-
nowski on cause of, 1 52 ; M6rim6e,
297 ; as a Danubian power interested
in Black Sea and Constantinople,
162 ; project for partition of Turkey,
170 ; partitions Poland, 197 ; par-
tition of, attempted by Poland,
201 ; opposes national idea in Italy,
166 ; and in the Balkan, 166 ; com-
pensated for nothing, but not con-
tent, 266 ; shares in Russia's evil
deeds, 312; Mr. Gladstone on, 154;
saved by Russia, 1849, 297 ; in-
gratitude of, 296 ; transformation
of, 309 ; originally proposed repeal
of Black Sea clause, 312 ; annexes
Cracow, 312, 314

Austro-German Alliance, the, Lord
Salisbury on, 123 ; a menace to
France and Italy, 131; Sir W.
Harcourt on, 123, 154 ; M.de Lave-
leye on, 290 ; alleged cause of, 291

Autocracy, the, in Russia, 223 ; great-
ness of Russia due to, 223 ; never
stronger than to-day, 223 ; De
Tocqueville on, 224, 232 ; preserves
national existence and secures pro-
gress, 225 ; needed to defeat Tartars,
226 ; and eject Turks from Europe,
227 ; dictatorship en 'permanence^
221 ; civilising power, 228, 237 ;
reforms of Peter the Great, 229 ;
of Alexander II., 230 ; no desire to
limit, 231; needs omniscience, 231,
245 ; democratic origin of, 232 ;

382

Index,.

AZO
* the sword of democracy,' 235 ;
destroyed by oligarchy, 233, 246 ;
restored by people, 233, 246 ; popu-
lar belief in, 233, 255 ; secures la
car?'iere ouveHe auae talens, 232 ;
exists for the people, 235 ; Mr.
Carlyle on, 238 ; Lord Beaconsfield
on, 238, 251 ; only alternative to
bureaucracy, 255 ; only check on
dishonest officials, 255 ; strength-
ened by attempted assassination,
256 ; not opposed to Constitu-
tionalism abroad, 305 ; often more
liberal in its foreign policy than
Constitutional States, 305-317; M.
de Laveleye on, 318
AzofE taken by Cossacks, 248 ; and
refused by Zemskie Sobor}'-, 249

BAKER, Ex - Colonel Valentine,
fights against Russia, 75, 83

Bakunin, the Nihilist leader, mani-
festo of, 256

Balkan, the peninsula, for the Balkan
peoples, AksakofF, 149 ; takes the
place of Italy, 117, 166

Balkans, the, to be garrisoned by
Turks, Aksakoff on, 102 ; not garri-
soned, 110; Sir W. Harcourt on,
110

Baltic provinces, local franchises in,
190

Bariatinsk}', Prince, 68

Barbarism, * must recede before civili-
sation,' Peel, 324; Anglo-Russian
war against, 363

Barry Herbert, on Siberia, 213; on
Russian loyalty, 233

Batoum, Russia's right to, 51 ; re-
sented by English, 85 ; Lord Bea-
consfield's delight at cession of, 141

Beaconsfield, the Earl of, on secret
societies, 20, 25 ; his Guildhall
speeches, 95, 266, 268 ; abandons
his policy at Berlin, 96; *an in-
fallible Pope,' 96; sacrifices Bul-
garia, 112, 203 ; is pleased at pacific

BIS
surrender of Batoum, 141 ; follows
Castlereagh's precedent, 203 ; ac-
cused by the Golos of stock-jobbing,
185; denounces the Poles, 201;
eulogises the Circassians, 207; on
absolute monarchy, 238, 250; on
representative government, 261 ; on
the press and monarchy, 251 ; on
Jewish revolutionists, 253 ; results
of his policy in England, 265 ; Mr.
Gladstone on, 267 ; popular with
Russian Anglophobes, 279 ; weakens
England, 279; on annexation of
Cracow, 201, 314 ; on Russian Mis-
sion to Cabul, 333; on Russia in
Central Asia, 351; allied with
Russia in 1875, 291, 364 ; recom-
mends Russian alliance in 1870,
364 ; fears excited by, in England,
in 1877, 374

Belgium, Russian policy in, 299 ;
condemned by Mr. Gladstone, 299;
vindicated by M. de Laveleye, 318 :
Russia supports independence of,
300 ; protects Belgium from Napo-
leon IIL, 301 ; M. de Laveleye on
insurrection of 1830, 318

Bentinck, Lord George, approves an-
nexation of Cracow, 314

Berlin Congress, the. On the Eve of,
88 ; After the, 95 ; Mr, Aksakoff on,
99 ; the Duke of Argyll on, 106 ;
Mr. Gladstone on, 97 ; Bulgarians
not heard at, 118

Berlin Treaty, the Russian Govern-
ment on, 107 ; doomed like that
of Villafranca, 117 ; three-quarters
of, taken from Treaty of San
Stefano, 283; 23rd Article not
executed, 119

Bessarabia ceded to Russia, 49, 74,
314

Beust, Count, and the Concordat,
274; proposes tutelage of Turkey
and repeal of Black Sea Treaty,
312

Bismarck, Prince, his visit to Vienna,
127, 291 ; M, de Laveleye 's expla-

Index.

383

BLA
nation of, 291 ; on diflBculty of
learning Russian, 209 ; on Russia's
non-entry into Constantinople, 242 ;
on change of political opinions,
273 ; offers Constantinople to Rus-
sia, 291; approves Russia's inter-
vention in Hungary, 298

Black Sea Treaty, the repeal of neu-
tralisation clauses, 1871, 312 ; pro-
posed by Count Beust, 1867, 312

Blunt, Consul, proclamation to Hel-
lenic insurgents, 85

Bosnia, occupation proposed by Russia,
130, 174; gave cool welcome to
Austrians, 152

Boris Godounoff elected to throne by
Zemskie Soborj"-, 232 ; reproves
Queen Elizabeth for helping the
Turks, 295 ; seeks alliance with
other powers against Turks, 295,
354

Bourke, Hon. R., delusion of, about
Mr. Gladstone's pamphlet, 39

Brackenbury, Colonel, on Russian
soldiers, 47

Bright, Mr., gratefully remembered
in Russia, 268, 311 ; pleads from
friendship between Russia and
England, 270

Bruce, a Scotch geneml of Peter's,
235

Bulgaria, effect of atrocities in, in
Russia, 23, 29, 102 ; to be freed
entirely, 48 ; will not be Russian,
76; threatened by the Salisbury
Circular, 76 ; not badly treated
at San Stefano, 73, 76; 'sawn
asunder alive,' Mr. Aksakoff, 100;
divided, HI ; insurrection in south-
western, 113: how divided at Ber-
lin, 114 ; one-third re-enslaved with-
out guarantees, 101, 115; will yet
be united, 117; its limits, 116;
defined at San Stefano, 155 ; di-
vided against Russia's will, 155, 267,
311 ; constitution of, not Russian,
155, 240 ; suggested ports for, 159 ;
in tenth century menaced Byzan-

CAR
tium, 169; crushed by Sviatoslaf,
169; resurrection of, opposed by
Lord Beaconsfield, 203 ; sacrificed
by Lord Beaconsfield, 113, 267;
union of, approved by English
Liberals, 284 ; opposed by English
Government, 311

Bulgarian delegates, MM. Zancoflf and
Balabanoff, 65

Bulgarians, and their Liberators,
61; abused by Mr. Forbes, 63;
degraded by Turkish oppression,
65 ; prosperity of, 64 ; character
of, MacGahan on, 64 ; Sir Henry
Havelock, 66 ; Sir George Camp-
bell, 156; General Tchernayetf,
156 ; protest against Berlin Treaty,
118; not heard at Congress, 118;
demand execution of 23rd Article,
119 ; difference between north and
south, 155 ; English observers on,
156 ; well treated by Russian sol-
diers, 188

Burke, Edmund, on Turkish alliance,
272 ; on English in India, 351

Byzantium, influence of, on Russia,
167. See Constantinople.

OABUL, Russian Mission to, jus-
tified, 332; by Lord Beacons-
field, 333 ; by Duke of Argyll, 334 ;
a prison or grave to Europeans,
340 ; Colonel Stoletoff and Major
Cavagnari at, 340; and Candahar as
bulwarks to India, Vitkevitch, 339

Campbell, Sir George, on Russians
and Bulgarians, 156 ; on Kiepert's
map, note to, 120

Canning, George, on English neu-
trality, 77 ; coerced Turks, 78 ; on
Russia's defeat of Napoleon, 303;
opposed by George IV., 313 ; allied
with Russia, 359

Capital punishment in England and
Russia, 184

Carlyle, Thomas, on absolute govern-

;84

Index.

CAS
ment, 238 ; on prestige, 264 ; Rus-
sians grateful to, 268 ; on Russia
and Russophobia, 293

Castlereagh, Lord, opposes Polish
independence at Vienna, 204

Cat, Army, the, * pillar of British
Constitution,' 184

Catherine I., 234

Catherine n., project about Constanti-
nople, 170 ; Alexander II. on, 174 ;
on mercy and justice, 213 ; * sove-
reign exists for the people,' 235 ;
summons representative assembly,
248 ; describes it to Voltaire, 249 ;
on Fox, 357

Cavagnari, Major, murdered at Cabul,
340

Centralisation, democratic tendency
towards, De Tocqueville, 232 ; M.
Thiers on, 237 ; necessary to civilise
Russia, 237

Chatham, Lord, 'altogether a Rus-
sian,' 355 ; refuses Russian alliance
in East, 358

Chesson, F. W., on slave trade in
Turkey, 350

Chinese less suspicious than English,
186 ; English opium trade with,
189 ; tactics imitated by Lord
Beaconsfield, 91

Chreptovitch, Count, 358

Chrzanowski, General, on Austrian
and Russian rule, 152

Circassians eulogised by Lord Beacons -
field, 207 ; true character of, 208 ;
Russian conquest of, 208

Circourt, M. de, on Finland, 192 ;
Poland, 1 93, 205 ; Polish mendacity,
207

Civilisation, the growth of cities,
228 ; in Russia, from above, 228 ;
must conquer barbarism, 324 ; of
Asia, the mission of Russia and
England, 323, 362, 372

Clarendon, Lord, work of, at Paris
undone by Lord Beaconsfield, 137 ;
on French and Russian intervention
in Italy, 308

CON

Cobden, Richard, on Poland, 199;
Russian annexations, 200 ; British
conquests, 323

Commune suppressed more cruelly
than Nihilism, 257

Concert of Europe. See European
Concert.

Concessions, Russian, to England, 73,
243, 264 ; denounced by Mr. Aksa-
koff, 105

Concordat, Count Beust and the, 274

Congress, On the Eve of the, 88 ;
After the, 95. See Berlin.

Congresses, Berlin, 95, 99, 107; Paris,
137; Vienna, 204; Laybach, 313;
Verona, 313

Conservatives, English, fear Russia,
181 ; formerly allied with Russia,
296 ; support Russia in reaction,
296, 313. See Beaconsfield, and
England.

Conservatism, Russian, 229

Constantino, ' Constitution ' mistaken
for wife of, 250

Constantino, Grand-Duke, his Polish
mission of reconciliation, 191, 202

Constantinople, in the Past, more
important than to-day, 160 ; a
great commercial emporium, 161 ;
to Russia, as Rome is to France,
166 ; five times attacked by Russia,
167 ; seized by Crusaders, 168 ;
Russian attacks on, 167 ; of Scan-
dinavian origin, 168 ; by Askold
and Dir, 168 ; Oleg, 169 ; Igor, 169;
Sviatoslaf, 169; Yaroslaf, 169;
designs of Catherine 11, 170, 174 ;
never to be under same sceptre as
Moscow, 171 ; the Tilsit interview
on, 171 ; not entered by Russia in
1829, 172, 174 ; occupied in 1833,
172 ; Crimean war not aimed at,
173

— and the War, Russians desire to
make peace in, not to annex, 49,
241 ; never entered by Russia, 163 ;
English scare about, 164 ; in-
dignation at non-entry of army

Indeos.

385

CON
into, 73, 241; General Grant on,
241 ; Bismarck on, 242

— the Future of, * last word of Eastern
Question,' 3, 160; no longer a
talisman of Empire, 160 ; com-
mercial decay of, 161 ; importance
of, to Euxine States, 162 ; political
importance of, to Kussia, 162 ; may
be left to Turks 'with a cabbage
garden,' 163 ; cannot pass to Aus-
tria, 165, 167 ; not desired by
Russia, 174, 176 ; Alexander II.
on, 174; Prince Gortschakoif on,
175 ; must belong to no Great
Power, 165, 175; Mr. Gladstone
on, 175 ; Fuad Pasha, 176 ; would
be Achilles' heel of Russia, 176 ;
Emperor Nicholas on, 176 ; Mr.
Co wen, 176; future discussed,
177 ; free city or capital of Asia
Minor, 177; said to be offered to
Russia by Bismarckj 1875^ 291

Constitution, the Bulgarian, 155, 240

— of England a plutocracy, 280
Constitutional States sometimes sup-
port despotism abroad, 305 ; France
in Spain, 306 ; England in Turkey,
310

Constitutionalism in Russia, Obstacles
to. Lord Beaconsfield, 223 ; Polish
anarchy, 233 ; Nihilism, 234 ; popu-
lar ignorance, 228, 235

— comparative failure of, in Italy,
244 ; Duke of Somerset on, 238 ;
Lord Beaconsfield on, 257 ; English
zealots of, inconsistent, 240; re-
presentative assemblies in Russia,

• 231, 244, 247, 248; Russian Con-
stitutionalists, 250 ; Alexander I. on,
250. In Russia, see Zemskie Sobory.

Convict system, Russian, milder than
English, 213

Corporal punishment in Russia and
England, 184

Cossacks, enthusiasm forlate war, 17 ;
^ Sir H. Havelock on, 188; capture

AzoflP, 247 ; ravage Russia in seven-
teenth century, 227

DEM

Coup (VEtaty severity after, 258 ;
Lord Palmerston condones, Nicholas
condemns, 306

Courtney, Mr. Leonard, on English
Liberals and the war, 113 ; on
Liberal policy in the East, 283

Gowen, Mr. Joseph, ridicules the
dread of Russian aggression, 176

Cox^ Sir George, suggests English ad-
dress to Emperor of Russia, 49

Cracow, annexation of, by Austria,
Lord Beaconsfield on, 200, 314 ;
Lord Georg Bentinck on, 314

Crete, insurrection in, supported by
Russian people, 316 ; opposed by
England, 316

Crimean war, Mr. Aksakoff on, 27 ; not
designed against Constantinople,
173; Russia's principle in, justified
by Anglo- Turkish Convention, 311,
314

Criminal convictions in Russia and
Eiigland, 215

Cross and Crescent, 41

Crusades, Norseman element in, 168 ;
Constantinople captured during, 168

Cyprus concession, the, 138 ; Mr.
Gladstone on, 138 ; value as prece-
dent to Russia, 140 ; possible ces-
sion to Greece, 159 ; seized without
Parliamentary sanction, 248

T\AILT NEWS, publishes letters

-^^ from Moscow, 1876, 9, 186;
accuses Russia of bad faith in Af-
ghanistan, 342

Danube, Confederation of the, pro-
bable future for Austria, 132, 152 ;
Austria's interest in the, 162 ; Bos-
phorus, real mouth of the, 162

Dardanelles forced by English fleet,
72, 334

Decembrists, the character of, 250

* Dedans, nous sommes^^ 163

Democracy, supports autocracy in
Russia, 232, 246 ; Prince Mestcher^
sky on, 232 ; centralising instinct
of, 232

CC

386

Index.

DER

Derby, Earl of, and the Protocol, 14 ;
on last word of the Eastern Ques-
tion, 160 ; says peace is the greatest
of British interests, 275

Despotism. See Autocracy.

Diebitch, General, 296

Diplomatists, Stockmar's opinion of,
12 ; Mr. Aksakoff on, 103, 104

Dir and Askold attack Constantinople,
168

Dolgorouky, Prince Jacob, and the
salt tax, 195

Drenteln, General, intercedes for his
would-be assassin, 25^

EASTERN Question, last and first
word of, 3, 160 ; future of, 123 ;
difficulties of, not in Turkey, but
in Europe, 108; not local, but
Imperial, 156 ; suggested solutions
of, 158, 159, 177

Education, classical, in Russia, 126

Egypt and English neutrality, 82,*
and Austro-German alliance, 131

Elizabeth, Queen, reign of, parallel to
Russia of to-day, 48 ^ reproved by
Boris Godounoff for helping Turks,
295 ; Ivan IV., and marriage nego-
tiations, 352

< Elizabethan Policy,' 48

Emperor of Russia. See Alexander
II., and Autocracy.

England, Eastern policy of, in 1876,
maintains status quo^ 6 ; Mr. Aksa-
koff on, 58 ; in 1877 a sliam neu-
trality, 77 ; in 1878 violates treaties,
74, 137, 139 ; conspires with Austria
to re-enslave Bulgaria, 97, 101, 113,
115 ; prevents annexation to Greece,
76-7, 266 ; menaces Russia, 91 ;
results of, in Russia, 264 ; in Eng-
land, 265 ; Mr. Gladstone on, 267 ;
opposed to freedom, 310

— Foreign policy of, less liberal than
Russia's, 294 ; in the East, 310 ; in
Italy, 307 ; in Austria, 309 ; in Ger-
many, 308 ; in Greece, 266, 295, 311,

EUR
314, 315 ; in Bulgaria, 311 ; in Rou-
mania, 311 ; in Belgium, M. de
Laveleye on, 318

— and Russia. See Russia and Eng-
land and Anglo-Russian alliance.

— Russian concessions to, condemned,,

73 ; opposes cession of Batoum, 85 \
imports Sepoys to Malta, 91, 105 f
occupies Cyprus, 138 ; objects td
Russian occupation of Constanti-
nople, 243 ; meditates attack on
Russia in Turkestan, 335

— GTraditional Policy of, 227
English aggression, Mr. Farrer on,

322; Mr. Gladstone, 323; Cobden,
323 ; Duke of Argyll, 324

— Constitution, a plutocracy, 280 ;
convict system, harsher than Rus-
sia's, 215 ; Historians on Russia's
side, 293 ; ignorance of French
language, 163 ; Kings, an English
opinion of, 229 ; people twice pre-
vent war with Russia, 356 ; reserves
hardly exceed one Russian army
corps, 91 ; selfishness, 279 ; volun-
teers in Turkey differ from Russian,

74 ; Jiumber of, 83

— Neutrality, 77 ; Canning on, 77 ;
contrasted with Russian, 79 ; con-
ditions of, 82 ; in American war, 83 ;
fourteen English officers in Turkish
gendarmerie, 83 ; in Greece, 85 ;
in the Rhodope, 85 ; in Lazistan, 85

— parties, Russia and, 277. See Con-
servatives and Liberals.

— Prejudices, Some, 181 ; Father
Coleridge on, 182; foreign origin
of, 183; due to ignorance, 182;
illustrations of, 183; the Knout,
184 ; Russian agents, 187 ; adminis-
tration, 190 ; Poland, 191 ; Finland,
192

Europe, inimical to Slavs, 76
European concert broken by England,
140, 265; Wellington, Duke of,
desired, 144; foreshadowed by
Boris Godounoflf, 295; Russia de-
sires, 144, 359

Index.

387

EXB

Executions in England, private, 184 ;

number of, 258
Exile, of Mr. Aksakoff, 106 ; number

sent to, 215. See Siberia

FARRER, Mr. T. H., on English
aggression, 321

Fenians on English prisons, 216

Finland, better governed by Russia
than Sweden, 193 ; Home Rule
in, 192 ; contrast to Poland, 193 ;
loyalty of, 194

Flogging in English army, 184

Forbes, Mr., correspondence of, read in
Russia, 54, 63 ; on War Correspon-
dents, 61 ; Russians, Turks and
Bulgarians, 61 ; Russian corruption,
65

Forster, Mr. on alliances, 129 ; his
amendment withdrawn, 281 ; on
Khiva, 327

Fox, Charles James, on Anglo-Rus-
sian Alliance, 367 ; Catherine II.
on, 357

France, Russia has no hostility to,
129 ; Austro-German alliance a
menace to, 131 ; and Rome, 166 ;
centralisation in, 237 ; intervention
of, in Spain, 305 ; and Alexander I„
304 ; protected by Russia and Eng-
land, 1875, 291 ; allied with Russia
in freeing Italy, 307 ; Revolution
of 1830 in, and Russia, 306 ; sup-
ported Belgian revolution, 319

Frederick the Great and his cudgel,
338

Freeman, Mr. E. A., collects money for
Slav refugees, 22 ; Russia grateful
to, 268 ; protests against re-enslave-
ment of Macedonia, 117

French language, English ignorance
of, 163

Friends or Foes 1 263

Froude, Mr. J. A., on Ireland, 199;
on Anglo- Russian alliance, 362,
364 ; preface to • Is Russia Wroi^,'
3n .

GLA
Fuad Pasha on Russia and Constan-
tinople, 176

p ALICIA, Polish population of, 205 ;

^ Massacre in, 202

George IV. opposed Canning's policy
in Spain, 313

Germany, at last discovered by Lord
Salisbury, 127 ; unity of, promoted
by Russia, 127, 309 ; effect of union
of, on balance of power, 128, 275,
309 5 Russian alliance with, 129, 309 ;
alleged cause of hostility of, to
Russia, 291 ; Russian policy in, in
1819, 304; in 1870, telegram of
Emperor William, 309. See Bis-
marck.

Girardin, M. Etnile de, on Poland, 191 ;
discussion on Constantinople at
house of, 242

Gladstone, Mr., his pamphlet in
Russia, 39 ; on the Southern Slavs,
43 ; on Berlin Congress, 97 ; has
not denounced re-enslavement of
S. W. Bulgaria, 101 ; on Anglo-
Turkish Convention, 138, 139;
Heirs of the Sick Man, 153 ; Russia
and Constantinople, 175 ; Alexander
n., 230 ; Historians, 255 ; results
of English policy in East, 267 ;
the Liberals and the East, 277 ; his
resolutions apparently withdrawn,
281 ; appeared to advocate war with
Russia about Afghanistan, 285 ;
writes ' Friends or Foes of Russia ? '
285 ; how regarded in Russia, 285 ;
appears to repudiate Russia's friend-
ship, 287; on Servian volunteers,
285 ; * Friendship for every Country,'
287 ; on Russia's foreign policy,
296; replied to, 290; his indict-
ment of Austria, 154 ; of Russia,
296; his speech on the Pacifico
case, 314 ; on Russians in Central
Asia, 323 ; on English jealousy of
Russia, 323 ; accused of being a
Russian agent, 358 ; resembles Fox,
357

C c 2

388

Index.

GLA

Gladstone, Mr^ • A reply to, on Russia's
Foreign Policy,' 290

Goethe on the best form of Govern-
ment, 236

Gordon, a Scotch general of Peter's,
235

Gortschakoff, Prince, on Russian
policy in Turkey, 1876, 4 ; alleged
interview with Soleil Reporter, 128 ;
saying of, about Austria, 130 ; pro-
tested in 1877 against division of
Bulgaria, 155 ; on Constantinople,
175 ; in favour of Anglo-Russian
alliance, 355

Grant, Gen., on Russian non-entry into
Constantinople, 241

Granville, Earl, on benevolent neu-
trality, 86

Greece,'proposed cessions to by Russia,
76 ; English intervention in, 85 ;
suggested additions to, 159; can-
not have Constantinople, 177 ; be-
trayed by England, 266; English
Liberals would help, 283 ; freed
more by Russia than England, 295 ;
Russian and English policy in, 295,
311,314,315

Greek project, the, of 1787, 170

HARCOURT Sir W. on the Berlin
treaty, 110 ; Heirs of Sick Man,
164 J Downfall of Turkey, 146 ; on
the Salisbury Evangel, 123

Harold's daughter Gyda marries Vlad-
imir Monomachus, 352

Havelock, Sir Henry, on Bulgarians,
66 ; on Russian soldiers, 187

Herzegovina, rising in, not originated
by Russia, 22

Herald Angel, Lord Salisbury as, 123

Historians, English on Russian side,
293

Holland, should not have been severed
from Belgium, 318

Holland, Lord regrets Russia did not
take Constantinople, 172

Hungary, Russian intervention in, 296 ;
causes of, 297; approved of by Eng-

JEW
lish Conservatives, 297 ; Mr. Glad-
stone on, 297 ; humanity of Russian
army in, 297 ; Lord Beaconsfield
on, 297

IGOR attacks Constantinople, 169
Indemnity or war fine levied on
Turks, 52

India, impairs England's strength,
92 ; not enthusiastically loyal, 92 ;
impossibility of Russian invasion of
asserted by Alexander IL, 174 ;
proved by Afghan war, 335; dan-
ger to from Russia imaginary, 181 ;
splendour of Empire in, 161 ; Rus-
sian advance towards, 324 ; a con-
quered Afghanistan no bulwark to,
339 ; richer than Turkestan, 348 ;
English promises broken in con-
quest of, 351

Infallibility, Decree of, leads to aboli-
tion of Concordat in Austria-Hun-
gary, 274

Internationale, l\ supports Nihilists,
254

Ionian Islands occupied to oblige
Russia, 356

Ireland, England's Poland, 197 ; Con-
stitutional safeguards sometimes
suspended in, 256 ; Mr. Froude on
English in, 199

Italy, England sympathised with, 117;
was as Bulgaria is, 117, 166 ; libera-
tion partly due to Russia, 307 ;
Austto-German alliance a menace
to, 131 ; constitutional government
not working well in, 244

Ivan in., broke power of Tartars, 41

Ivan IV., consulted Zemskie Sobory
about Polish War, 231 ; marriage
negotiations of, 352

JEWS support Nihilists, 253 ; hostile
to Christians, 253 ; Lord Beacons-
field on, as revolutionists, 253 ; Dr.
Sandwith on, 253
Jewish Question, the, 375

Indea.'.

389

JOH
Mr. Butler, at Constanti-

Johnstone
nople, 86 ; on Poland,
Russian progress, 275

203

on

TZAIRNARDJI, treaty of justified

J^ by Anglo-Turkish (Convention,
137

Kars, taken thrice by Russia, 50 ; dom-
inates Asia Minor, 136

Katkoff, Mr., and the Moscow Gazette,
125; and Poland, 125 ; and classical
education, 126; and the Slavonic
cause, 126 ; family of, 125

Kaufmann, Gen., in Turkestan, 68;
acts with good faith in Afghanistan,
341 ; his correspondence with Shere
Ali, 342 ; approved hy Lor4 Mayo,
only condemned by Lord Lytton,
343

Khiva, the truth about, 325 ; Sir H.
Rawlinson on casus belli with, 926 ;
Mr. Forster on, 327 ; the Statesman,
328; Sir Charles Trevelyan, 329;
Duke of Argyll, 330 ; Count Schou-
valoflE's assurance about, 329

Kiepert, M., the Geographer, 120;
Sir George Campbell on the Bul-
garia of, note to map, 120

Kinglake, Mr. A. W., describes death of
Nich. Kir^eff, 35-8 ; on Crimean war,
173 ; on the victims of the Coup d'
Etat, 258 ; on Russia and the balance
of power, 302 ; on Emperor Nicho-
las's friendship for England, 354

Kir6eflf, Nicholas, first Russian volun-
teer killed in Servia, 29 ; effect of
his death in Russia, Mr. Aksakoff on,
29; death at Zaitschar described,
36 ; character of, Dr. Overbeck on,
38 ; and the Cretan insurrection,
316

Klaczko, M., on Emperor Nicholas,
298 ; on the Black Sea Treaty, 312

Knout, the, introduced into Russia,
1474, 41 ; abolished 1862, 184

Kossuth^ Louis, on benevolent neu-
trality, 86 ; on Austrian annexa-
tions, 150

LYT

Kotzebue, Count, 67
Koznakoff, Gen., Governor- General of
Siberia, 213

LAST Words, Some, 367
Laveleye, M. Emile dc; on Russian
foreign policy, 317 ; on Austrians in
the Balkan Peninsula, 151 ; explains
cause of Bismarck's visit to Vienna,
291 ; on Belgium and Holland, 317 ;
thinks Russia does not want a
Parliament, 318, but a democratic
Slavonic Emperor, 318 ; on the
liberal policy of Alexander I., 318

Layard, Sir Austin, appointment of,
79 ; opposes treaty of San Stef ano, 86

Laybach, Congress of, 313

Lefort, Admiral, 235

Legislative Commission, great, at
Moscow, 248

Leontieff, Mr., 125

Leopold, King, on Russian protection
of Belgium, 301

Liberals, English, Mr. Gladstone on
Eastern policy of, 277 ; why dis-
trusted in Russia, 284 j will support
Berlin Treaty, 282 ; Mr. Courtney
on, 283 ; What will be their policy ?
284 ; more in accord with Russian
than English foreign policy, 294 ;
standing motto of ' Friendship with
every country,' Mr. Gladstone, 287

Liberals, Russian, accused of Nihilism,
233

Liddon, Canon, 268

Lithuania, Russo- Polish question in,
203

Lof tus, Lord Augustus, on Russian en-
thusiasm in 1876, 16 ; reports inter-
view with Emperor, 174, 268; with
Russian nobleman, 269
Lomonossoff, a peasant, 235
Lowell, J. R., on English neutrality, 83
Lowther, Mr. James, on Anglo-Russian

alliance, 293
Lytton, Lord, objects to the Kauf-
mann Correspondence, 343; and
makes war on Afghanistan, 345

390

Index.

MAC

MACEDONIA, re-enslaved, 114;
atrocities continuing in, 115, 119 ;

insurrection in, 112 ; protest from,

119 ; Mr. Freeman on, 117
MacGahan, Mr., letters read in Russia,

54 ; on Bulgarians, 64-6 ; recom-
mends Enos as port for Bulgaria,

159
Macchiavelli on Dictatorship, 227
MacColl, Rev. Malcolm, on Russia and

Afghanistan, 344
Manchester Examiner^ Correspondent

of, on Poland, 198
Martens, Professor, on Afghan war,

278, 285
Martin, Mr. Theodore, * Historian in

Waiting ' cited, 308
Marvin, Mr., < The indiscreet copyist,'

88
Mayo, Lord, on the common mission of

England and Russia in Asia, 330 j

on the Kaufmann Correspondence,

342
Mehemet Ali, England and Russia

allied against, 315
Menshikoff began life as a pastry^

cook, 235
Merim§e, M., on Austrians and Rus-
sians in Hungary, 297
Merv, the last slave market in Asia,

328 ; England and Russia may meet

as friends at, 331 ; England cannot

send a large army to, 336
Mezentzoff, Gen., murder of, 257
Michael of Twer, St., martyred by

Tartars, 42
Minine, the butcher, 247
Minorca, proposed cession to Russia of,

356
Minsk, the fabled outrage on nuns of,

207
Mirsky, the assassin, 259
Mohammedans in Russia, well treated,

190
Monarchy, Lord Beaoonsfield on, 238,

251. See Autocracy.
Monomachus defeats Yaroslaf the

Great, 109

NEU

Monomachus, Vladimir, marries Gyda,
Harold's daughter, 352

Montenegro, Gen. Tchemayeff pro-
posed to go to, 22, 28 ; money sent
to, 33 : not badly treated at San
Stefano, 73, 76

Moscow, heart of Russia, 13 ; differs
from St. Petersburg, 13 ; detests the
Protocol, 13 ; burnt twice by Tai
tars, 41 ; attacked by Poles, 199
225, 227, 247; Zemskie Sobory
meet at, 246, 247 ; Great Legis-
lative Commission at, 248 ; burnt
as a sacrifice to European freedom,
302

Moscow Gazette^ best exponent of
Russian views, 125

Moscow Slavophils in 1848, 297

Miinich, Gen., 235

Murray, Mr., English Ambassador at
Constantinople, 1772, 80

NAPIER, Lord, and Ettrick, on An-
glo-Russian Alliance, 363

Napier, Lord, of Magdala, on Eng-
land's dangers in India, 92; ap-
proves of the Kaufmann Corre-
spondence, 343

Naples, Russia interferes against Car-
bonari of, 304, 313

Napoleon I. at Tilsit, 171 ; overthrown
by Russia, 303 ; the invasion of Eng-
land by, frustrated by Russia, 304

Napoleon III, severity after Coup d'
Etat, 258 ; meditates annexation of
Belgium, 301 ; frustrated by Russia,
301 ; Emperor Nicholas and, 306

Navarino, Battle of, 295 ; jubilee in
Russia, 359

Nesselrode, Count, on Russian policy
in Turkey, 146 ; Constantinople,
165 ; Pacific© case, 314

Neutrality, Earl Granville and Kos-
suth on benevolent, 86 ; English in
Russo-Turkish war, 77; in 1772,
Turkophil ambassador reproved for
breach of ,81. See English Neutrality.

Index,

391

NEW

Newcastle Chranicle, article on Si-
beria and Captain Wiggins, 207

Newspapers read in every village in
Kussia, 54 ; correspondents of, in
English and Russian wars, 61 ; on
character of Russian soldiers, 188 ;
English and * nous sonwies dedans '
163 ; on attempt on the Emperor;
262 ; on Khiva, 328 ; Nihilist, how
published, 254

Nicholas, Emperor, on the Sick Man,
144 ; Conversations with Sir H.
Seymour, 143, 162, 176, 298; and
Lord Aberdeen, 146 ; on the Turk as
Gatekeeper of the Bosphorus, 162 ;
on Constantinople, 176; character
of, 298 ; Mr. Klaczko on, 298 ; hor-
ror of Revolution, 299 ; in Belgium,
299; in Hungary, 297; and the
Coup d'Etat, 306 ; desired peace
with England, 354

Nihilism, Russian Liberals accused of,
233

Nihilists attempt life of Emperor, 253;
supported by Jews, the Inter national,
and some Foreign Embassies, 254 ;
Anarchists and Communards, 257 J
not Constitutionalists or Panslavists,
257; their no-faith, 256; Baku-
min's programme, 256 ; treated with
leniency, 257 ; which they reward
by murder, 259 ; danger of popular
massacre of, 259

Nobility in Russia, privileges almost
gone, 232

Nordenskjold's, Prof essor. Walrus Hun-
ter in Siberia, 220

North, Lord, observes a more real neu-
trality than Lord Beaconsfield, 81

Northbrook, Lord, on the Kaufmann
Correspondence with Shere Ali, 343

NoHTi^rn Eclw, Russian correspond-
ence in, 7, 9

OLEG attacks Constantinople, 168
Opium Trade, the, Russian view
of, 189

PEE

Osborne, Col. on campaigning in
Afghanistan, 337

Ottoman Empire, and the Triple
Alliance, 3; destroyed by Lord
Beaconsfield's policy, 6 ; death-
blow dealt by the Herzegovinese,
22 ; death-warrant signed by
Timour the Tartar, 44 : present
condition of, 143 ; Austrian preten-
sions to succeed to, 150: the right-
ful heirs of, 159 ; altered position of,
275; exists, but does not answer
the end of its being, 276; pro-
jects of partition of, Talleyrand,
132; Greek project, 170; Alexander
L, 171 ; Napoleon L, 172

Overbeck, Dr. J. J., on Nicholas
Kireeff, 38

Oxenstierne and Bulstrode White-
locke, 263

PACIFICO case, the, England,
Russia and Greece, 314

Palmerston, Lord, on Turkey, 142 ; on
Russian occupation of Constantino-
ple, 173 ; on Pacifico case, 314 ; on
England and Russia, 358

Panslavism, see Slavophils and Slav-
onic Societies

Panin, M., on Anglo- Russian Alliance,
355

Paris, Treaty of, torn up by Berlin
Congress, 109 ; broken by Anglo -
Turkish Convention, 138 ; Black
Sea Clauses, repeal of proposed by
Austria, 312

Parliament, English, *a chatting
club,' 244 ; 'Russia does not need a,'
M. de Laveleye, 318. In Russia,
see Zemskie Sobory and Consti-
tutionalism.

Party Government, effect on foreign
states, 294

Partitions. See Austria, Ottoman Em-
pire, and Poland.

Peel, Sir Robert, and Emperor Nicho-
las, 146 ; on civilisation and bar-
barism in Asia, 324

392

Index,

PET

Peter the Great, builds St. Petersburg,
10, 161 ; and Prince Jacob Dolgou-
rouki, 195 ; Cobden on, 229 ; Con-
servative objections to, 229 ; the
Reforming Tzar, 230; his work, 230 ;
Poushkin on, 230 ; spurious will of,
353

Petersburg, St., cosmopolitan, 10 ; op-
posed to the war, 11 ; enthusiasm
for Servia at, 16 ; subscriptions to
Slavonic cause at, 32

Pitt, William, proposes war vote
against Russia, 1791, 359 ; concludes
Russian alliance, 1796, 359

Plevna, Before the Fall of, 45 ; rever-
ses before, how received in Russia,
54 ; Mr. Forbes' account of, circula-
ted in Russia, 63 ; After, 70

Plutocracy, English Constitution a,
• 280

Pojarsky, Prince, 247

Poland and Oircassia, 196

— anarchic and aristocratic, 199,
225 J and Diplomacy, M. de Girar-
din on, 191 ; effect of intervention
in, 125 ; at Congress of Vienna,
Lord Castlereagh opposes resur-
rection of, 204; Cobden on, 199;
Lord Beaconsfield on, 201 ; Mr.
Butler Johnstone, 203 ; indepen-
dence of, what it means, Cobden,
200; M. de Circourt, 206; in-
surrections in, caused by aristo-
cracy, Lord Beaconsfield, 201 ;
origin of insurrection of 1863, 190,
203, 205 ; question in dispute not
Polish but Lithuanian, 191, 203,
206

— Partition of, the English Foreign
Secretary on, 1772, 81 ; the English
Parliament and, 200 ; Lord Bea-
consfield on, 201 ; Austria's share in,
197; not without provocation, 199,
201, 206, 225, 227, 231, 247 ; Cobden
on, 199 ; increases happiness of
Poles, 198, 199, 202, 205, 206

proposed re-establishment of,

1814-5,203; opposed by England,

RHO

204 ; under the Treaty of Vienna,
204 ; constitution granted, 249 ;
Home Rule offered, 1863, 191, 202 :
refused, 203 ; demands Lithuania,
191, 203, 206 ; Russia anxious to do
justice to, 206 : prosperity of, under
Russian rule, 198, 199, 202, 205,
206 ; religious liberty in, 193, 207,
211

Poles, the, contrasted with Finns, 193 ;
* the Irish of the Continent,' 197;
Lord Beaconsfield denounces, 201 ;
'worst nation in Europe,' M. de
Circourt, 206; numbers of, 205;
demand religious supremacy, 193 ;
insurrectionary classes of, 202, 205 ;
millions said to be in Siberia, 209- ;
Germanised in Posen, 225; hold
high commands in Russian army,
286

Poltava, Battle of, Peter the Great at,
235

Potemkin, Prince, on Anglo-Russian
alliance, 355

Prejudices, Some English, 181 ; na-
tional, 189; origin of, 182. See
Prejudices

Press, complete liberty of the, desired
in Russia, 243 ; Lord Beaconsfield
on, 251. See Newspapers

Prestige, Mr. Carlyle on, 264

Protocol, detested in Moscow, 13 ;
rejection due to Lord Derby, 14

pAMBAUD'S History of Russia,

J^ 132,249,304

Rawlinson, Sir Henry, on Russia's
advance in Central Asia, 325 ; on
Russia's casus belli against Khiva,
326

Republics in Russia before Tartar
conquest, 41

Representative Government. See
Constitutionalism and Zemskie
Sobory.

Rhodope, the, insurrection in, fo-
mented by Englishmen, 85 ; fables
of atrocities in, 187, 188

Index.

393

RIE

Bieger, Dr., Bohemian Panslavist, on
Slavonic sympathy with Russia, 130

Kochford, Lord, English Foreign
Minister in 1772, 81

Roman Catholics not persecuted in
Poland, 193, 211

Romanoff, dynasty sprang from popu-
lar election, 247 ; Michel, and the
Zemskie Sobory, 247

Rome, the old and the new, 167 ;
church of, opposed by England and
Russia, 364

Roumania not dissatisfied with Do-
brudscha, 49, 74 ; cession of Bes-
sarabia by, 74 ; liberated by Russia,
288, 295 ; union of, supported by
Russia, 311

Roumelia, Eastern, not co- extensive
with Southern Bulgaria, 101, 115 ;
area and population, 114 ; a
vexatious absurdity, 158; consti-
tution of, might be adopted further
south, 158

Rurik, and successors divide Russia,
226

Russia and Afghan War, 332. See
Afghan War

Russia, and Austria, 130, 132, 150»
165, 167, 297, 309, 312; Belgium,
299, 301 ; Bulgaria, 76, 100, 112,
155, 267, 288, 295, 311; Circassia,
208 ; Constantinople, 160, 174, 241,
291 ; Finland, 192, 193 ; France,
129, 291, 304, 306 ; Germany, 127,
288, 291, 304, 313; Greece, 76, 288,
295, 311; Hungary, 296, 314;
Italy, 288, 307 ; Khiva, 325 ; Mon-
tenegro, 73, 316 ; Naples, 304, 313 ;
Poland, 192, 196, 199, 204, 249;
Roumania, 49, 74, 288, 296, 311 ;
Servia, 34, 288, 295 ; Spain, 304,
313; Sweden, 192; Tartars, 40,
226 ; Turkey, 40, 107, 144, 170, 296,
310, 314

Russia and England, parallels and con-
trasts between, in Azoff and Cyprus,
248 ; Circassia and Afghanistan,
208 ; Finland and Wales, 192 ;

BUS
Khiva and Ashantee, 349 ; Poland
and Ireland, 197 ; Servia and the
Netherlands, 18 ; Siberia and New
South Wales, 210 ; Turkestan and
India, 323, 348; Turkish pro-
tectorates of, 137, 311, 314 ; aggres-
sion, 322 ; annexations, 333 ; broken
pledges, 324 ; capital punishment,
184 ; cat and knout, 184 ; censor-
ship, 92 ; civilising mission, 362 ;
conquest, 323 ; constitution, 236,
244 ; convict system, 215 ; corporal
punishment, 184 ; war correspond-
ents, 61 ; corruption and favouritism,
66 ; the coup d'etat, 306 ; European
concert, 138, 140; Imperial powers,
338 ; liberation of the oppressed,
266 ; neutrality, 77 ; Napoleonic
wars, 302 ; religion, 364 ; slavery
and the slave trade, 365 ; San Ste-
fano and Cyprus, 138 ; General
Tchemayeflf and Sir Philip Sydney,
84 ; treaties annulled, 107, 137 ;
foreign policy of, 290 ; in America,
307 ; Austria, 309, 315 ; Belgium,
296, 315 ; Bulgaria, 295, 311 ;
Cracow, 312, 314; Crete, 316;
France, 302 ; Germany, 304, 315-6 ;
Greece, 255, 311, 314, 315; Hun-
gary, 296; Lebanon, 315; Italy,
288, 307 ; Montenegro, 316 ; Naples,
304, 306, 316; Poland, 204; Rou-
mania, 295, 311, 315 ; Schleswig
Hoist ein, 315; Servia, 295,315, 316 ;
Spain, 304, 313 ; Turkey, 266, 296,
310, 314, 315, 316
Russia, anarchy, early, of, 226 ; auto-
cracy, saved by, 228 ; and the
Black Sea, 312; Mr. Carlyle on,
293

— Constitutionalism in, 239

— democracy of, 232 ; an empire of
villages, 228

— and English Parties, 277

— Foreign Policy of, a Reply to Mr.
Gladstone, 290

— Lord Aberdeen on, 306 ; Mr. Glad-
stone on, 296 ; ' Friends or Foes ' of.

394

Index.

RUS
285 ; historic mission of, 56, 60,
293 ; inured to ingratitude, 291 ; as
a liberating power, 267, 288, 310 ;
prejudices against, 181 ; progress
of, since 1854, Mr* Butler John-
stone, 275
Russia, Traditional Policy of, 352

— saved Europe from Tartars, 43 ;
Tartar conquest of, 43, 226 ; treaty
of Kairnardji, 137; of Paris, 107,
137 ; of Berlin, 107, 283 ; vicissi-
tudes of, 227

Russian * agents,' 145 ; 'aggression an
exploded illusion,' Mr. Co wen, 176

— Aggression, 321

— Autocracy, 223

— concessions during the war, 73,
264 ; at the Congress, 102 ; consti-
tutionalism, 239 ; corruption, 65 ;
democracy, 232 ; disasters during
war, 52 ; generals, 68 ; intrigue,
325 ; language difficult to learn,
209 ; nationality, 'sin of forsaking,'
55 ; nobility, 232

— the. Government, opposed to war,
6, 11 ; pacific efforts paralysed by
England, 6 ; policy of, in the East,
1876, 5, 174 ; blamed by Russians
for being too pacific, 7, 58, 73, 103 ;
true to all its obligations, 25 ; op-
posed to volunteering for Servia,
11, 84 ; withholds information
about the war, 54 ; ' exiles ' Mr.
Aksakoff, for denouncing Berlin
Treaty, 106 ; official view of Berlin
Treaty, 107 ; proposes Austrian
occupation of Bosnia and naval
demonstration at Constantinople,
174

— the, People, enthusiasm for the
war in 1876, 7, 13, 29, 31, 46,
47, 54, 100, 194, 246; attested by
Lord Augustus Loftus, 16 ; by ' a
retired Cossack,' 17 ; by Mr. Wal-
lace, 17 ; and by Dr. Sand with, 287;
apathetic in 1875, 23 ; poor more
enthusiastic than rich, 32 ; popular
hatred of Turks, 29 ; its cause, 40 ;

RUS
volunteering for Servia, 29, 56 ; in
opposition to the Government, 11,
84 ; ' Two Russias,' 11 ; difference
not understood in Servia, 34 ; * in
debt to the Servians,' 34 ; speeches
of Mr. Aksakoff, 24, 52, 98 ; shrink
from no disaster, 46, 47, 54 ; women,
enthusiasm of, 47 ; educated classes
less enthusiastic, 55 ; fight for
'peace, liberty, and fraternal equal-
ity,' 57; suffering caused by war,
52, 75 ; condemned concessions to
England, 73 ; not alarmed at Eng-
lish menaces, 92, 105 ; humiliated
at Berlin, 104 ; popular view of the
cause and objects of the war, 100 ;
would rather fight than consent to
divide Bulgaria, 105; ready to
surrender everything to completely
liberate the Christians, 194 ; dis-
appointed that peace was not made
in Constantinople, 241 ; estranged
from England, 280 ; would welcome
alliance with, 269, 370; sceptical
about England's sympathies with
the Christians, 282 ; support auto-
cracy, 232 ; restore it, 233, 246

— Soldiers, character of, Colonel
Brackenbury, 47; Mr. Aksakoff,
53; Mr. Forbes, 63; Sir Henry
Havelock, 187 ; humanity of, in
Hungary, 297

Russians, the. Sir George Campbell
on, 156 ; are reluctant to notice
libels, 129, 185, 224

— in Central Asia, 346; cause of
their advance, 347 ; Mr. Gladstone
on, 323, 347 ; Duke of Argyll, 324 ;
Sir Henry Rawlinson, 325; Vam-
b6ry, 349 ; Mr. Schuyler, 349 ; Tur-
kestan not profitable to, 323, 348 ;
civilising mission of, 323 ; suppress
slave trade, 350; Protectionists,
350 ; Lord Mayo on, 330 ; Professor
Monier Williams, 339. See Af-
ghanistan, Khiva, Turkestan.

Russias, the Two, Moscow and St.
Petersburg, 8; difference between

Index.

395

RUS
national and official not understood
in Servia, 34

Russophobia, origin of, ignorance,
182 ; foreign misrepresentations,
182 ; some absurdities and incon-
sistencies of, 88; a national de-
lirium, 292 ; Mr. Carlyle on, 293

Russophobists, Sir Henry Layard, 79 ;
Mr. Murray, 1772, 80 ; Mr. Cowen,
176 ; Louis Kossuth, 150 ; Mr. But-
ler Johnstone, 275; Sir Henry
Rawlinson, 325 ; M. Vambery, 349

Russo- Turkish War, the, national not
imperial, humanitarian not pre-
datory, 3, 6, 14, 21, 23, 29, 34, 38,
46, 55, 79, 100; Russian Govern-
ment endeavoured to avert, 6, 58 ;
efforts paralysed by English Go-
vernment, 6 ; popular in Moscow
not in St. Petersburg, 11, 55 ; *the
most heroic war in the world,' Mr.
Aksakoff, 54 ; denounced by the
educated classes, 55 ; made by the
people through the Slavonic So-
cieties, 20, 65 ; Mr. Aksakoff on the
cause and objects of, 100; Mr. King-
lake on origin of, 36 ; Dr. Overbeck
on, 38 ; not a gladiator's but a
liberator's war, 46; ennobling
effect of, 47 ; expected to be over
by July, 1877, 51 ; sacrifices entailed
by, 51, 57, 205, 268; no com-
pensation possible for losses caused
by, 52 ; necessary to Russia's de-
velopment, 67 ; 'a high moral duty,'
67 ; reverses in, Mr. Aksakoff on,
52 ; its limitation denounced, 69

SAGHALIEN, only 400 convicts sent
to, 268
Salisbury, Lord, on large maps, 18;
* Elizabethan policy,' 1 8 ; circular of,
how regarded in Russia, 75 ; annuls
it by secret agreement, 88 ; as He-
rald Angel, 123, 291 ; Manchester
speech of, 123 ; Journal de St. Peters-
hourg on, 124 ; Russian opinion on,
125 ; defied by the Turks, 126 ; disco-

SER
vers Germany, 127; styled * the vera-
cious,' 127; pre-occupied in 1876
with * creating pretexts ' for Afghan
war, 181 ; deceives those who con-
fided in the Circular of, 266 ; sup-
ported by Russia at Constantinople,
281 ; ingratitude of, 291 ; on going
to war against nightmare, 336 ; on
a forward policy in Asia, 336

Salonica, probable free port, 159

Sandwith, Dr., on Jews in the East,
253 ; on Russian enthusiasm, 287

Schamyl and Shere Ali, 208

Schleswig-Holstein, Anglo - RiTssian
action in, 316

Schouvaloff, Count, the secret agree-
ment with, 88 ; his unlucky French
phrase 'nous sommes dedans,' 163;
and Khiva, 329

Scotchmen in Russian service, 235

Schuyler, Mr., on Russians in Central
Asia, 349

Secret societies, Duke of Argyll on,
19; Lord Beaconsfield on, 20, 25;
Slavonic societies not secret, 20

Sepoys, effect of bringing to Malta,
on Russia, 93, 106

Serfdom unknown before Tartar con-
quest, 41 ; Polish origin of, 206

Serfs, emancipation of, political con-
sequences of, 27; freed by Alex-
ander n., 230, 288 ; Mr. Gladstone
on, 230

Servia, sufferings of, by war, 34 ; Russia
indebted to, 34 ; railway to Sa-
lonica, 159 ; projected annexation
by Austria, 1787, 170 ; liberated by
Russia, 288, 295

Servian volunteers, Russian volun-
teering objected to at St. Peters-
burg, 11, 84 ; I jord Augustus Loftus
on, 16; compared to English in
Netherlands, 18 ; number 4,000, 23 ;
Mr. Aksakoff on, 29, 66 ; Nicholas
Kireeff, first volunteer killed, 29,
38 ; movement not due to Mr.
Gladstone's pamphlet, 39 ; Mr.
Gladstone's tribute to, 286

896

Index.

SER

Servian war not made by secret so-
cieties, 20, 25

Seymour, Sir Hamilton, conversations
with, 144, 162, 176, 298

Shere Ali, General Kaufmann's Cor-
respondence with, 342 ; Russia not
bound to defend, 345

Siberia, 209 ; misconceptions about,
211 ; and English convict settle-
ments, 213 ; number exiled since
1800, 211; since 1860, 215; area
of, 212, 219, 221 ; why convicts sent
to, 212 ; mines of, comparatively
few exiles in, 212 ; miners happy,
218 ; three-fourths not convicts,
220 ; defect of, too much freedom
and leniency, 213, 215 ; ceasing to
be a punishment, 220; Governor
General Koznakoff on, 225 ; soil
and climate, Herbert Barry on, 214,
258; Captain Wiggins, 217; the
Standard, 219, 221 ; political offen-
ders, 216 ; quicksilver mines sub-
stitute for death penalty, 216;
Polish falsehoods concerning, 207,
216, 219; infinitely richer than
Canada, 219 ; a vast market, 221 ;
river system of, 221 ; Mr. Seebohm
on, 221

Sick Man, Heirs of, 142 ; Emperor
Nicholas on, 144 ; Lord Palmerston,
142

— Woman, the, of Europe, 133

Silistria, defeat of Russians at, in 972,
169

Slavery and the slave trade, England
and Russia crusaders against, 328 ;
in Turkey, 350

Slavism, democratic, 320

Slavonic societies not secret, 20;
made the Russo-Turkish war, 20,
65 ; charitable, 21, 28 ; did not ori-
ginate rising in the Herzegovina,
22 ; Mr. Aksakoff on, 24 ; not pre-
pared for work thrust on them, 26 ;
first steps in 1875, 28; operations
of, 28; spontaneous and universal
spread of, 30 ; supported chiefly by

STO
the poor, 32 ; money raised by, 32 ;
how spent, 33 ; denounced by edu-
cated and official classes, 55

Slavophils, Moscow, in 1848, 297

Slavs, protect Europe from Asia, 43 ;
Russia's mission to, 57 ; Austria-
Hungary unjust to, 58 ; Russia,
chief representative of, 103 ; Aus-
trian sympathies with Russia, 1 30 ;
form a majority of subjects of
Francis Joseph, 130 ; ' Slav coun-
tries belong to Slavs,' 149; Kossuth
on, 150 ; will dominate the future
of Austria, 152, 309 ; rmistfare da
s<3, 153 ; anarchy, the besetting sin
of, 225; only Slav country free,
independent and strong, 231 ; ' stand
on the threshold of the morning,'
289 ; of Hungary protected but not
recognised by Russia in 1848, 297

Smith, Mr. W. H., on friendship with
Russia, 292

Somerset, Duke of, on representative
government, 238

Spain, Russian policy in, 1822, 304 ;
M. Thiers on French intervention
in, 305

Speranski, 335

Standard^ the, on Siberia, 219

Statesman^ the, on origin of Russo-
phobia, 182; on Khiva, 328

Status quo, in Turkey in 1876, internal
and external incompatible, 5

Stefano, San, Treaty of, excites dis-
pleasure in Russia, 73 ; a humble
half measure, 90 ; loyally submitted
to Congress, 138 ; on the boundaries
of Bulgaria, 158 ; three-fourths re-
enacted at Berlin, 283; commu-
nicated to England, 360

Stein on Alexander I., 303

Stephen, Sir J. Fitzjames, approved
of the Kaufmann Correspondence,
343

Stillman, Mr. W. J., TiTnes correspon-
dent in the Herzegovina, 22 ; on
Austria-Hungary, 151

Stockmar, Baron, on diplomatists,

Index,

197

STO

12 ; on Russian policy in Belgium,

299
Stoletoff's Mission at Cabul, 339. See

Afghan War.
Suez Canal, discrowns Constantinople,

161
Sviatoslaf crushes Bulgaria, and is

defeated by Zimisces, 169
Swedes, bad rulers of Finland, 192 ;

at Novgorod the Great, 228

rPALLEYRAND proposes Austrian

-^ annexation of Northern Turkey,
132

Tartar conquest of Russia, 40, 226;
its duration, 40 ; nature, 42 ; results,
43, 227

Tartars burn Moscow twice, 42, 227 ;
St. Louis of France on, 42 ; Russia
saved Europe from, 43 ; justify the
autocracy, 227

Tcherkassky, Prince, Mr. Aksakoflf on,
98

Tchernayeff, Gen., volunteers to go to
Montenegro, 22, 28 ; goes to Servia,
28 ; assisted by Slavonic Society,
29, 33 ; not employed in Turkish
war, 57, 69; resembles Sir Philip
Sydney more than Hobart Pasha,
81 ; his opinion of Bulgarians, 167

Tennyson, Mr., and the knout, 182

Thiers, M., on Austria and Rome,
166; on centralisation in France,
237 ; on French intervention in
Spain, 1822, 305

Tilsit, negotiations and treaty of,
172

Times, the, Mr. Stillman, correspon-
dent of, in the Herzegovina, 22 ;
Mr. Wallace at St. Petersburg, 8 ; a
weathercock, 125 ; publishes letters
from Moscow in 1876, 186; derides
Russian suspicion of Nihilistic in-
trigue in Foreign Embassies, 254

Timour the Tartar signs death-warrant
of Turkey, 44

TUR

Tocqueville, De, on the moral element
in submission to despotism, 224 ; on
centralising instinct of democracy,
232

Todleben, Gen., why not employed
earlier in the war, 68

Traditional policy of England, 272 ;
was Russian, 272, 354 ; needs re-
vision, 276

Traditional policy of Russia, 352. See
Anglo-Russian Alliance.

Treaties of Berlin, 95, 99, 107 ; Kair-
nardji, 137; Paris, 109, 138, 312;
Vienna, 204, 318 ; Villafranca, 117

Treaty obligations, Russia and Eng^
lish Liberals on, 283

Trevelyan, Sir Charles, on England
and Russia, 270 ; on Khiva, 329

Triple Alliance, the, and the East, 3 ;
decease of, not lamented by Russia,
129

Turkish-Anglo Convention, 134. See
Anglo-Turkish Convention.

Turkey, Russian policy in 1876, main-
tains status quo plus tributary states,
5 ; future policy in, 107 ; Russia
desires no annexations, 145 ; seeks
European concert, 148; and terri-
torial integrity of, 149; regards
Turkey as good gatekeeper of Bos-
phorus, 162 ; supported Turkey in
1833 and 1840, 164; liberating
mission of Russia in, approved by
English Liberals, 295, 310

Turkish alliance with England, Mr,
Aksakoff on, 58 ; denounced by
Burke, 272 ; Lord Holland, 272 ;
Fox, 357 ; Boris Godounoff on, 295,
354 ; comparatively recent, 272

Turks insult Lord Salisbury, 126;
defy Europe and civilisation, 275.
See Russo-Turkish War,

Turkestan, a questionable paradise,
68 ; not profitable, 323, 348 ; Russia's
civilising mission in, 323 ; Mr. Glad-
stone on, 323 ; more like African
settlements than Indian Empire,
349. See Russians in Central Asia.

398

Index.

TZA

Tzar. See Autocracy and Alexander

n.

Tzargrad, name of Constantinople,
167

VAMBERY, M., on Russian rule in
Bokhara, 349
Variags, or Varangians, expeditions

against Byzantium, 169 ; summoned

by Russians, 226
Venice, possessions in East in 1787,

170
Verona, Congress of, 313
Vienna, Congress of, Poland at, 204 ;

adds Belgium to Holland, 318
Vikings, early Russian monarchs, 168
Villafranca, Treaty of, destroyed by

aspirations of nationality, 117
Villages, Russia an empire of, 228
Vitkevitch on Afghanistan, 339
Vladimir Monomachus married

daughter of Harold, 352
Volunteers, Russian, in Servia. See

Servian Volunteers.
Volunteers, English in Netherlands,

19 ; in Turkey, 75, 83

WALLACE, Mr. D. M., Times cor-
respondent at St. Petersburg,
8 ; on Russian enthusiasm for war,
17; Mr. Aksakoff, 24; Russian
autocracy, 223
War correspondents, advantages of,
54 ; in Russia and England, 61 ;

ZIM
their testimony concerning Russia,
187

War vote, the, of six millions, 75, 359

Wellington, Duke of, on European
concert in Turkey, 147 ; regrets
Constantinople was not entered by
Russia, 172 ; on Poland, 204 ;
anecdote of, 274

Whitelocke, Bulstrode, ambassador to
Sweden, 263

Wiggins, Captain, on Siberia, 217

Williams, Professor Monier, on Eng-
land and Russia in Asia, 338

Wingfield, Sir Charles, on England's
Afghan policy, 337

Worontzoff, Prince, advocates Anglo-
Russian alliance, 355

YAROSLAF the Great defeated by
Monomachus, 169

ZEMSKIE Sobory, nature of, 231 ;
consulted by Ivan IV., 231 ;
offer crown to Boris Godounoff,
232 ; re-establishment desh'ed, 243 ;
meaning of, 244 ; objected to by
some officials, 245, 247 ; suppress oli-
garchy and restore autocracy, 246 ;
founded Romanoff dynasty, 247 ;
consulted by Michel Romanoff, on
Polish war, 247 ; on annexation of
Azoff, 248
Zimisces, John, defeats Sviatoslaf,
169

LOKDOX : PttlXTKD BY

KPOTT19WOODK ANU CO., NKW-STRKHT gQrAEB

ASn PAKt.IAMKKT 8TBEBT

39 Paternoster Row, E.C.
London, April 1881.

GENERAL LISTS OF WORKS

PUBLISHED BY

Messrs. Longmans, Green & Co

^J^Co*

HISTORY, POLITICS, HISTORICAL
MEMOIRS, <&:c.

History of England from

the Conclusion of the Great War
in 1815. By Spencer Walpole.
8vo. Vols. I. & II. 1815-1832 (Second
Edition, revised) price 36J. Vol. III.
1832-1841, price i8j.

History of England in the

iBth Century. By W. E. II. Lecky,
M.A. Vols. I. & II. 1 700-1760.
Second Edition. 2 vols. 8vo. 36j'.

The History of England

from the Accession of James II.

By the Right Hon. Lord Macaulay.

Student's Edition, 2 vols. cr. 8vo. i2j.
People's Edition, 4 vols. cr. 8vo. i6j.
Cabinet Edition, 8 vols, post 8vo. 48^.
Library Edition, 5 vols. 8vo. ^^4.

Lord Macaulay's Works.

Complete and uniform Library Edition.
Edited by his Sister, Lady Trevelyan.
8 vols. 8vo. with Portrait, ;^5. 5j-.

Critical and Historical

Essays contributed to the Edin-
burgh Review. By the Right Hon.
Lord Macaulay.

Cheap Edition, crown 8vo. 3^. 6^.
Student's Edition, crown 8vo. ds.
People's Edition, 2 vols, crown 8vo. 8j.
Cabinet Edition, 4 vols. 24J.
Library Edition, 3 vols. 8vo. 36J.

The History of England

from the Fall of Wolsey to the Defeat
of the Spanish Armada. By J. A.
Froude, M.A.

Popular Edition, 12 vols. crown,;^2. 2j.

Cabinet Edition, 12 vols, crown, ;^3.i2j.

The English in Ireland

in the Eighteenth Century. By J. A.
Froude, M.A. 3 vols, crown 8vo. \%s.

Journal of the Reigns of

King George IV. and King William
IV. By the late C. C. F. Greville,
Esq. Edited by H. Reeve, Esq.
Fifth Edition. 3 vols. 8vo. price 36j-.

The Life of Napoleon HL

derived from State Records, Unpub-
lished Family Correspondence, and
Personal Testimony. By Blanchard
Jerrold. In Four Volumes, 8vo. with
numerous Portraits and Facsimiles,
Vols. I. to III. price iSj. each.

Russia Before and After

the War. By the Author of * Society
in St. Petersburg' &c. Translated
from the German (with later Additions
by the Author) by Edward Fairfax
Taylor. Second Edition. 8vo. 14^.

Russia and England from

1876 to 1880 ; a Protest and an Appeal.
By O. K. Author of ' Is Russia Wrong?*
With a Preface by J. A. Froude, M.A.
Portrait and Maps. 8vo. 14;'.

WORKS puhlished by LONGMANS &- CO.

The Early History of

Charles James Fox. By George
Otto Trevelyan, M.P. Third Edi-
tion. 8vo. iSs.

The Constitutional His-
tory of England since the Accession
of George III. 1760-1870. By Sir

Thomas Erskine May, K.C.B. D.C.L.
Sixth Edition. 3 vols, cro^^^l 8vo. i8i-.

Democracy in Europe ;

a History. By Sir Thomas Erskine
May, K.C.B. D.C.L. 2 vols. Svo. 32^.

Introductory Lectures on

Modem History delivered in 1841
and 1842. By the late Thomas
Arnold, D.D. Svo. p. 6d.

On Parliamentary Go-
vernment in England. By Alpheus
Todd. 2 vols. Svo. 37^.

Parliamentary Govern-
ment in the British Colonies. By

Alpheus Todd. Svo. 21 j.

History of Civilisation in

England and France, Spain and
Scotland. By Henry Thomas
Buckle. 3 vols, crown Svo. 24?.

Lectures on the History

of England from the Earliest Times
to the Death of King Edward II.
By W. Longman, F.S.A. Maps and
Illustrations. Svo. 15^.

History of the Life &

Times of Edward III. By W. Long-
man, F.S.A. With 9 Maps, S Plates,
and 16 Woodcuts. 2 vols. Svo. 28j'.

The Historical Geogra-
phy of Europe. By Edward A.
Freeman, D.C.L. LL.D. With 65
Maps. 2 vols. Svo. 31J. 6(f.

History of England un-
der the Duke of Buckingham and
Charles I. 1624-1628. By S. R.
Gardiner. 2 vols. Svo. Maps, 24s,

The Personal Govern-
ment of Charles 1. from the Death of
Buckingham to the Declaration in favour
of Ship Money, 1628-1637. By S. R.
Gardiner. 2 vols. 8vo. 24?.

Memorials of the Civil

War between King Charles I. and the
Parliament of England as it affected
Herefordshire and the Adjacent
Counties. By the Rev. J. Webb, M. A.
Edited and completed by the Rev. T.
W. Webb, M. A. 2 vols. Svo. Illustra-
tions, 42s.

Popular History of

France, from the Earliest Times to
the Death of Louis XIV. By Miss
Sewell. Crown Svo. Maps, 'js. 6c/.

A Student's Manual of

the History of India from the Earliest
Period to the Present. By Col.
Meadows Taylor, M.R.A.S. Third
Thousand. Crown Svo. Maps, 7^. 6d.

Lord Minto in India ;

Correspondence of the First Earl of
Minto, while Governor-General of
India, from 1807 to 18 14. Edited by
his Great-Niece, the Countess of
Minto. Post Svo. Maps, 12s.

Waterloo Lectures ; a

Study of the Campaign of 181 5. By
Col. C. C. Chesney, R.E. Svo. 10^. 6c/.

The Oxford Reformers —

John Colet, Erasmus, and Thomas
More ; a History of their Fellow- Work.
By F. Seebohm. Svo. 14J.

History of the Romans

under the Empire. By Dean Meri-
vale, D.D. S vols, post Svo. 48 j.

General History of Rome

from B.C. 753 to a.d. 476. By Dean
Merivale, D.D. Crown Svo. Maps,
price 7j. 6d.

The Fall of the Roman

Republic ; a Short History of the Last
Century of the Commonwealth. By
Dean Merivale, D.D. i2mo. "js. 6d.

The History of Rome.

By WiLHELM Ihne. Vols. I. to III.
Svo. price 45^.

Carthage and the Cartha-
ginians. By R. BoswoRTH Smith,

M.A. Second Edition. Maps, Plans,
&c. Crown Svo. 10s. 6d.

WOJ^KS published by LONGMANS 6- CO.

3

History of Ancient Egypt.

By G. Rawlinson, M.A. With Map
and numerous Illustrations. 2 vols.
8vo. price 63^-.

The Seventh Great Ori-
ental Monarchy ; or, a History of
the Sassanians. By G. Rawlinson,
M.A. With Map and 95 Illustrations.
8vo. 28i-.

The History of European \

Morals from Augustus to Charle-
magne. By W. E, li. Lecky, M.A.
2 vols, crown Svo. i6s.

History of the Rise and

Influence of the Spirit of Rational-
ism in Europe. By W. E. H. Lecky,
M.A. 2 vols, crown Svo. i6s.

The History of Philo-
sophy, from Tliales to Comte. By
George Henry Lewes. Fifth
Edition. 2 vols. Svo. 32^.

A History of Classical

Greek Literature. By the Rev. J. P.
P. Maiiaffy, M.A, Crown Svo.
Vol. I. Poets, 7^. ^d. Vol. II.
Prose Writers, 7^. (>d,

Zeller's Stoics, Epicu-
reans, and Sceptics. Translated by
the Rev. O. J. Reichel, M.A. New
Edition revised. Crown Svo. l^s.

Zeller's Socrates & the

Socratic Schools. Translated by the
Rev. O. J. Reichel, M.A. Second
Edition. Crown Svo. ioj". 6d.

Zeller's Plato & the Older

Academy. Translated by S. Frances
Alleyne and Alfred Goodwin,
B.A. Crown Svo. iSj.

Zeller's Pre-Socratic

Schools ; a History of Greek Philo-
sophy from the Earliest Period to the
time of Socrates. Translated by Sarah
F. Alleyne. 2 vols, crown Svo. 305-.

Zeller's Aristotle and the

Elder Peripatetics. Translated by

B. F. C. CoSTELLOE, Balliol College,

Oxford. Crown Svo. \In preparation.

*^* The above volume will complete

the Authorised English Translation of

Dr. Zeller's Work on the Philosophy of

the Greeks.

Epochs of Modern His-
tory. Edited by C. Colbeck, M.A.

Church's Beginning of the Middle
Ages, 2s. 6d.

Cox's Crusades, 2s. 6d.

Creighton's Age of Elizabeth, 2s. 6d.

Gairdner's Houses of Lancaster and
York, 2s. 6d.

Gardiner's Puritan Revolution, 2s. 6d.

Thirty Years' War, 2s. 6d.

Hale's Fall of the Stuarts, 2s. 6d.
Johnson's Normans in Europe, 2s. 6d.
Longman's Frederic the Great and the

Seven Years' War, 2s. 6d.
Ludlow's War of American Indepen-
dence, 2s. 6d.
Morris's Age of Anne, 2s. 6d.
Seebohm's Protestant Revolution, 26,
Stubbs's Early Plantagenets, 2s. 6d,
Warburton's Edward IIL 2s. 6d.

Epochs of Ancient His-
tory. Edited by the Rev. Sir G. W.
Cox, Bart. M.A. & C. Sankey, M.A.

Beesly's Gracchi, Marius & Sulla, 2s.6d.

Capes's Age of the Antonines, 2s. 6d.

Early Roman Empire, 2s. 6d.

Cox's Athenian Empire, 2s. (>d.

Greeks & Persians, 2s. bd.

Curteis's Macedonian Empire, 2s. 6d.
Ihne's Rome to its Capture by the

Gauls, 2s. 6d.

Merivale's Roman Triumvirates, 2s. 6d.

Sankey's Spartan & Theban Supre-
macies, 2s. 6d.

Smith's Rome and Carthage, the Punic
Wars, 2s. 6d.

Creighton's Shilling His-
tory of England, introductory to
'Epochs of English History.' Fcp. is.

Epochs of English His-
tory. Edited by the Rev. Mandell
Creighton, M.A. Fcp. Svo. 5^.

Browning's Modem England, 1820-
1874, 9d.

Cordery's Struggle against Absolute
Monarchy, 1603-1688, gd.

Creighton's (Mrs.) England a Conti-
nental Power, 1066-1216, gd.

Creighton's (Rev. M.) Tudors and the
Reformation, 1485-1603, gd.

Rowley's Rise of the People, 1215-1485,
price gd.

Rowley's Settlement of the Constitu-
tion, 1688-1778, gd.

Tancock's England during the Ameri-
can & European Wars, 1778-1820, gd.

York-Powell's Early England to the
Conquest, is.

WORKS published by LONGMANS <^ CO,

The Student's Manual of

Ancient History; the Political History,
Geography and Social State of the
Principal Nations of Antiquity. By W.
Cooke Taylor, LL. D. Cr. 8vo. 7^. 6d.

The Student's Manual of

Modern History ; the Rise and Pro-
gress of the Principal European Nations.
By W, Cooke Taylor, LL.D. Crown
8vo. *js. dd.

BIOGRAPHICAL WORKS,

Reminiscences. By

Thomas Carlyle. Edited by James
Anthony Froude, M.A. formerly
Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford.
2 vols, crown 8vo. iSj-.

Autobiography. By John

Stuart Mill. 8vo. 7^-. dd.

Felix Mendelssohn's Let-
ters, translated by Lady WALLACE.
2 vols, crown 8vo. 5^. each.

Memoirs of the Life of

Anna Jameson, Author of ' Sacred and
Legendary Art ' &c. By her Niece,
G. Macpherson. 8vo. Portrait, \2s. 6d.

The Life and Letters of

Lord Macaulay. By his
G. Otto Trevelyan, M.P.

Nephe-\

Cabinet Edition, 2 vols, crown 8vo. 12s.
Library Edition, 2 vols. 8vo. 36^.

William Law, Nonjuror

and Myslic, Author of ' A Serious Call
to a Devout and Holy Life ' &c. a
Sketch of his Life, Character, and
Opinions. By J. XL Overton, M.A.
Vicar of Legbourne. 8vo. I5>f.

The Missionary Secre-
tariat of Henry Venn, B.D.
Prebendary of St. Paul's, and Hon.
Sec. of the Church Missionary Society.
By the Rev. W. Knight, M.A.
With Additions by Mr. Venn's Two
Sons, and a Portrait. 8vo. i8j.

A Dictionary of General

Biography. By W. L. R. Cates.
Third Edition, revised throughout and
completed to the Present Time ; with
new matter equal to One Hundred
pages, comprising nearly Four Hundred
Memoirs and Notices of Persons re-
cently deceased. 8vo. 28^.

Apologia pro Vita Sua ;

Being a History of his Religious
Opinions by John Henry Newman,
D.D. Crown 8vo. 6^.

Biographical Studies. By

the late Walter Bagehot, M.A.
Fellow of University College, London.
Uniform with ' Literary Studies ' and
' Economic Studies ' by the same
Author. 8vo. 12s.

Leaders of Public Opi-
nion in Ireland ; Swift, Flood,
Grattan, O'Connell. By W. E. H.
Lecky, M.A. Crown 8vo. ^s. 6d.

Essays in Ecclesiastical

Biography. By the Right Hon. Sir J.
Stephen, LL.D. Crown 8vo. 7^. 6d.

Caesar; a Sketch. By James

Anthony Froude, M.A. formerly
Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford.
With Portrait and Map. 8vo. l6s.

Life of the Duke of Wei-

ling^on. By the Rev. G. R. Gleig,
M.A. Crown 8vo. Portrait, 6s.

Memoirs of Sir Henry

Havelock, K.C.B. By John Clark
Marshman. Crown 8vo. ^s. 6d.

Vicissitudes of Families.

By Sir Bernard Burke, C.B.
vols, crown 8vo. 2ls.

Two

Maunder^s Treasury of

Biography, reconstructed and in great
part re- written, with above 1,600 ad-
ditional Memoirs by W. L. R. Cates.
Fcp. 8vo. 6s.

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO.

MENTAL and POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.

Comte's System of Posi-
tive Polity, or Treatise upon Socio-
logy. By various Translators. 4 vols.
8vo. £^.

De Tocqueville's Demo-
cracy in America, translated by H.
Reeve. 2 vols, crown 8vo. 16^.

Analysis of the Pheno-
mena of the Human Mind. By
James Mill. With Notes, Illustra-
tive and Critical. 2 vols. 8vo. 2'^s.

On Representative Go-
vernment. By John Stuart Mill.

Crown Svo. 2s.

On Liberty. By John

Stuart Mill. Post Svo. 7^. 6d.
crown Svo. is. ^d.

Principles of Political

Economy. By John Stuart Mill.
2 vols. Svo. 30i-. or I vol. crown Svo. 5^.

Essays on some Unset-
tied Questions of Political Economy.

By John Stuart Mill. Svo. 6s. 6J.

Utilitarianism. By John

Stuart Mill. Svo. $s.

The Subjection of Wo-
men. ByJOHN Stuart Mill. Fourth
Edition. Crown Svo. 6s.

Examination of Sir Wil-
liam Hamilton's Philosophy. By
John Stuart Mill. Svo. 16s.

A System of Logic, Ra-

tiocinative and Inductive. By John
Stuart Mill. 2 vols. Svo. 25^.

Dissertations and Dis-
cussions. By John Stuart Mill.
4 vols. Svo. £2. ys.

The A B C of Philosophy ;

a Text-Book for Students. By the
Rev. T. Griffith, M.A. Prebendary
of St. Paul's. Crown Svo. 5^.

A Systematic View of the

Science of Jurisprudence. By Shel-
don Amos, M.A. Svo. iSs.

Path and Goal ; a Discus-
sion on the Elements of Civilisation
and the Conditions of Happiness. By
M. M. Kalisch, Ph.D. M.A. Svo.
price 12^. 6c/.

The Law of Nations con-
sidered as Independent Political
Communities. By Sir Travers
Tvviss, D.C.L. 2 vols. Svo. ;^i. 131.

A Primer of the English

Constitution and Government. By
S. Amos, M.A. Crown Svo. 6s.

Fifty Years of the English

Constitution, 1830-1880. By Shel-
don Amos, M.A. Crown Svo. los. 6d.

Principles of Economical

Philosophy. By H. D. Macleod,
M.A. Second Edition, in 2 vols. Vol.
I. Svo. I5J-. Vol. II. Part i. \2s.

Lord Bacon's Works, col-
lected & edited by R. L. Ellis, M.A.
J. Spedding, M.A. and D. D. Heath.
7 vols. Svo. 2'3- I3-S"- 6^'

Letters and Life of Fran-
cis Bacon, including all his Occasional
Works. Collected and edited, w^ith a
Commentary, by J. Spedding. 7 vols.
Svo. £\. 4f.

The Institutes of Jus-
tinian ; with English Introduction,
Translation, and Notes. By T. C.
Sandars, M.A. Svo. \%s.

The Nicomachean Ethics

of Aristotle, translated into English
by R. Williams, B.A. Crown Svo.
price 7^. 6d.

Aristotle's Politics, Books

I. III. IV. (VII.) Greek Text, with
an English Translation by W. E. BoL-
land, M.A. and Short Essays by A.
Lang, M.A. Crown Svo. *js. 6d,

The Politics of Aristotle ;

Greek Text, with English Notes. By
Richard Congreve, M.A. Svo. iSj.

WORKS published by LONGMANS <5^• CO.

The Ethics of Aristotle ;

with Essays and Notes. By Sir A.
Grant, Bart. LL.D. 2 vols. 8vo. 32^.

Bacon's Essays, with An-
notations. By R. Whately, D.D.

8vo. IOJ-. 6d.

An Introduction to Logic.

By William H. Stanley Monck,
M.A. Professor of Moral Philosophy in
the University of Dublin. Crown 8vo.
price 5^.

Picture Logic ; an Attempt

to Popularise the Science of Reasoning.
By A. SwiNBOURNE, B.A. Post 8vo. 5^.

Elements of Logic. By

R. Whately, D.D. 8vo. loj-. 6d.
Crown 8vo. ^, 6d.

Elements of Rhetoric.

By R. Whately, D.D.
Crown 8vo. 4J-. 6d.

8vo, 10s. 6d.

The Senses and the In-
tellect. ByA. Bain, LL.D. 8vo. 15^.

The Veil of Isis, or Ideal-
ism. By Thomas E. Webb, LL.D.
Q.C. Regius Professor of Lavvs, and
Public Orator in the University of
Dublin. {Nearly ready.

On the Influence of Au-
thority in Matters of Opinion. By

the late Sir. G. C. Lewis, Bart. 8vo. 14^.

The Emotions and the

Will. ByA. Bain, LL.D. 8vo. 15^-.

Mental and Moral Sci-

ence ; a Compendium of Psychology
and Ethics. By A. Bain, LL.D.
Crown 8vo. los. 6d.

An Outline of the Neces-
sary Laws of Thought ; a Treatise
on Pure and Applied Logic. By W.
Thomson, D.D. Crown 8vo. 6s.

Essays in Political and

Moral Philosophy. By T. E. Cliffe
Leslie, Hon. LL.D. Dubl. of Lincoln's
Inn, Barrister-at-Law. 8vo. los. 6d.

Hume's Philosophical

Works; Edited, with Notes, &c. by
T. H. Green, M.A. and the Rev.
T. H. Grose, M. A. 4 vols. 8vo. 56^.
Or separately. Essays, 2 vols. 28^'.
Treatise on Human Nature, 2 vols. 28i".

Six Lectures on the

History of German Thought, from
the Seven Years' War to Goethe's
Death, delivered in 1879 at the Royal
Institution of Great Britain. By Karl
HiLLEBRAND. Crown 8vo. 7J-. 6d.

MISCELLANEOUS & CRITICAL WORKS.

Faiths and Fashions ;

Short Essays republished. By Lady
Violet Grevile. Crown 8vo. Js. 6d.

Selected Essays, chiefly

from Contributions to the Edinburgh
and Quarterly Reviews. By A. Hay-
ward, Q.C. 2 vols, crown 8vo. 12s.

Miscellaneous Writings

of J. Conington, M.A. Edited by
J. A. Symonds, M. a. 2 vols. 8vo. 28^.

Short Studies on Great

Subjects. By J. A. Froude, M.A.
3 vols, crown 8vo. 18^.

Literary Studies. By the

late Walter Bagehot, M.A. Fellow
of University College, London. Edited,
with a Prefatory Memoir, by R. H.
HUTTON. Second Edition. 2 vols.
8vo. with Portrait, 2Ss.

Manual of English Lite-
rature, Historical and Critical. By
T. Arnold, M. A. Crown 8vo. 7^-. 6d.

English Authors; Speci-
mens of English Poetry and Prose from
the earliest times to the present day ;
with references throughout to the
' Manual of English Literature. ' Edited
by T. Arnold, M.A. Crown 8vo.
[In the press.

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO.

The Wit and Wisdom of

the Rev. Sydney Smith. Crown
8vo. 3J. 6d.

Lord Macaulay's Miscel-
laneous Writings :—

Library Edition, 2 vols. 8vo. 21s. *
People's Edition, i vol. cr. 8vo. ^. 6d.

Lord Macaulay's Miscel-
laneous Writings and Speeches.

Student's Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.
Cabinet Edition, including Indian Penal
Code, Lays of Ancient Rome, and
other Poems. 4 vols, post 8vo. 24J".

Speeches of Lord

Macaulay, corrected by Himself.
Crown 8vo. 3^-. 6d.

Selections from the Wri-
tings of Lord Macaulay. Edited,
with Notes, by G. O. Trevelyan,
M.P. Crown. 8vo. 6s.

Miscellaneous Works of

Thomas Arnold, D.D. late Head
Master of Rugby School. 8vo. 7^-. 6d.

A Thousand Thoughts

from Various Authors. Selected and
arranged by Arthur B. Davison.
Crown 8vo. "js. 6d.

A Cavalier's Note Book;

being Notes, Anecdotes, and Observa-
tions of W. Blundell, of Crosby,
Lancashire, Esq. Captain in the Royalist
Army of 1642. Edited by the Rev.
T. Ellison Gibson. Small 4to. with
Facsimile, 14^-.

German Home Life ; a

Series of Essays on the Domestic Life
of Germany. Crown 8vo. 6s.

Realities of Irish Life.

By W. Steuart Trench. Crown
8vo. 2s. 6d. boards, or 3^. 6d. cloth.

Apparitions ; a Narrative

of Facts. By the Rev. B. W. Savile,
M.A. Second Edition. Crown 8vo.
price 5^-.

Evenings with the Skep-
tics ; or, Free Discussion on Free
Thinkers. By John Owen, Rector of
East Anstey, Devon. 2 vols. 8vo. 325.

Selected Essays on Lan-
guage, Mythology, and Religion.

By F. Max Muller, K.M. Foreign
Member of the French Institute. 2 vols,
crown 8vo. i6s.

Lectures on the Science

of Language. By F. Max Muller,
K.M. 2 vols, crown 8vo. i6s.

Chips from a German

Workshop ; Essays on the Science of
Religion, and on Mythology, Traditions
& Customs. By F. Max Muller,
K.M. 4 vols. 8vo. ;^i. i6s.

Language & Languages.

A Revised Edition of Chapters on Lan-
guage and Families of Speech. By
F. W. Farrar, D.D. F.R.S. Crown
8vo. 6s.

The Essays and Contri-
butions of A. K. H. B. Uniform
Cabinet Editions in crown 8vo.

Recreations of a Country Parson, Three
Series, 3^. 6d. each.

Landscapes, Churches, and Moralities,

price 2>s. 6d.
Seaside Musings, 3^-. 6d.

Changed Aspects of Unchanged
Truths, 3J. 6d.

Counsel and Comfort from a City
Pulpit, 3J-. 6d.

Lessons of Middle Age, 3^. 6d.

Leisure Hours in Town, 3J-. 6d.

Autumn Holidays of a Country Parson,

price 3^-. 6d.

Sunday Afternoons at the Parish
Church of a University City, 3^. 6d.

The Commonplace Philosopher in
Town and Country, 3^-. 6d.

Present-Day Thoughts, 3^. 6d.

Critical Essays of a Country Parson,

price 3^-. 6d.

The Graver Thoughts of a Country
Parson. Three Series, 3^. 6d. each.

WORKS published by LONGMANS c^ CO.

DICTIONARIES and OTHER BOOKS of
REFERENCE.

One-Volume Dictionary

of the English Language. By R.
G. Latham, M.A. M.D. Medium
8vo. 14J.

Larger Dictionary of

the English Language. By R. G.
Latham, M.A. M.D. Founded on
Johnson's English Dictionary as edited
by the Rev. H. J. Todd. 4 vols. 4to. £^.

Roget's Thesaurus of

English Words and Phrases, classi-
fied and arranged so as to facilitate the
expression of Ideas, and assist in
Literary Composition. Revised and
enlarged by the Author's Son, J. L.
RoGET. Crown 8vo. los. 6d.

English Synonymes. By

E. J. Whately. Edited by R.
Whately, D.D. Fcp. 8vo. 3^.

Handbook of the English

Language. By R. G. Latham, M.A.
M.D. Crown Svo. 6s.

Contanseau's Practical

Dictionary of the French and English
Languages. Post Svo. price 7^-. 6d.

Contanseau^s Pocket

Dictionary, French and English,
abridged from the Practical Dictionary
by the Author. Square i8mo. 3^. 6^.

A Practical Dictionary

of the German and English Lan-
guages. By Rev. W. L. Blackley,
M.A. & Dr. C. M. Friedlander.
Post 8vo. 7j. (>d.

A New Pocket Diction-
ary of the German and EngHsh
Languages. By F. W. LongxMAN,
Ball. Coll. Oxford. Square i8mo. 5^.

Becker's Callus ; Roman

Scenes of the Time of- Augustus.
Translated by the Rev. F. Metcalfe,
M.A. Post 8to. 7j. ed.

Becker's Charicles;

Illustrations of the Private Life of
the Ancient Greeks. Translated by
the Rev. F. Metcalfe, M.A. Post
8vQ. ^s. 6d.

A Dictionary of Roman

and Greek Antiquities. With 2,000
Woodcuts illustrative of the Arts and
Life of the Greeks and Romans. By
•A. Rich, B.A. Crown 8vo. Ts. 6d.

A Greek-English Lexi-
con. By H. G. Liddell, D.D. Dean
of Christ church, and R. Scott, D.D.
Dean of Rochester. Crown 4to. 36^.

Liddell & Scott's Lexi-

con, Greek and EngUsh, abridged for
Schools. Square i2mo. 7^. 6d.

An English-Greek Lexi-
con, containing all the Greek Words
used by Writers of good authority. By
C. D. Yonge, M.A. 4to. 21J. School
Abridgment, square l2mo. 2>s. 6d.

A Latin-English Diction-
ary. By John T. White, D.D.
Oxon. and J. E. Riddle, M.A. Oxon.
Sixth Edition, revised. Quarto 2 is.

White's College Latin-

English Dictionary, for the use of
University Students. Royal 8vo. 12s.

M 'Culloch's Dictionary

of Commerce and Commercial Navi-
gation. Re-edited, with a Supplement
shewing the Progress of British Com-
mercial Legislation to the Year 1880,
by Hugh G. Reid. With 11 Maps
and 30 Charts. 8vo. 63^.

Keith Johnston's General

Dictionary of Geography, Descriptive,
Physical, Statistical, and Historical ;
a complete Gazetteer of the World.
Medium 8vo. 42J.

The Public Schools Atlas

of Ancient Geography, in 28 entirel y
new Coloured Maps. Edited by th
Rev. G. Butler, M.A. Imperial Svo.
or imperial 4to. 7^. 6d.

The Public Schools Atlas

of Modern Geography, in 31 entirely
new Coloured Maps. Edited by tlie
Rev. G. Butler, M.A. Uniform, 5^.

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO.

ASTRONOMY and METEOROLOGY.

Outlines of Astronomy.

By Sir J. F. W. Herschel, Bart. M. A.
Latest Edition, with Plates and Dia-
grams. Square crowTi 8vo. I2s.

Essays on Astronomy.

A Series of Papers on Planets and
Meteors, the Sun and Sun -surrounding
Space, Stars and Star Cloudlets. By
R. A. Proctor, B.A. With lo Plates
and 24 Woodcuts. 8vo. 12s.

The Moon ; her Motions,

Aspects, Scenery, and Physical Con-
dition. By R. A. Proctor, B.A.
With Plates, Charts, Woodcuts, and
Lunar Photographs. Crown 8vo. ios.6d.

The Sun ; Ruler, Light, Fire,

and Life of the Planetary System. By
R. A. Proctor, B.A. With Plates &
Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 147.

The Orbs Around Us ;

a Series of Essays on the Moon &
Planets, Meteors & Comets, the Sun &
Coloured Pairs of Suns. By R. A.
Proctor, B.A. With Chart and Dia-
grams. Crown 8vo. 7^. 6d.

The Universe of Stars ;

Presenting Researches into and New
Views respecting the Constitution of
the Heavens. By R. A. Proctor,
B.A. Second Edition, with 22 Charts
(4 Coloured) and 22 Diagiams. 8vo.
price 10s. 6d.

Other Worlds than Ours ;

The Plurality of Wonds Studied under
the Light of Recent Scientific Re-
searches. By R. A. Proctor, B.A.
With 14 Illustrations. Cr. 8vo. loj. 6d.

Saturn and its System.

By R. A. Proctor, B.A. 8vo. with
14 Plates, 14?.

The Moon, and the Con-
dition and Configurations of its Surface.
By E. Neison, F.R.A.S. With 26
Maps & 5 Plates. Medium 8vo. 31J. 6a.

Celestial Objects for

Common Telescopes. By the Rev.
T. W. Webb, M.A. Fourth Edition,
revised and adapted to the Present State
of Sidereal Science ; Map, Plate, Wood-
cuts. Crown 8vo. 9^.

A New Star Atlas, for the

Library, the School, and the Obser-
vatory, in 12 Circular Maps (with 2
Index Plates). By R. A. Proctor,
B.A. Crown 8vo. $s.

Larger Star Atlas, for the

Library, in Twelve Circular Maps,
with Introduction and 2 Index Plates.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A. Folio, 15^.
or Maps only, 12s. 6d.

Air and Rain ; the Begin-
nings of a Chemical Climatology. By
R. A. Smith, F.R.S. 8vo. 24J.

NATURAL HISTORY and PHYSICAL
SCIENCE.

Elementary Treatise on

Physics, Experimental and Applied,
for the use of Colleges and Schools.
Translated and edited from Ganot's
Traite EUmentaire de Physique (with
the Author's sanction) by Edmund
Atkinson, Ph.D. F.C.S. Professor
of Experimental Science, Staff Col-
lege. Ninth Edition, revised and
enlarged ; with 4 Coloured Plates
and 844 Woodcuts. Large crown
8vo. 1 5 J.

Natural Philosophy for

General Readers and Young Per-
sons ; a Course of Physics divested of
Mathematical Formulae and expressed
in the language of daily life. Trans-
lated and edited from Ganot's Cours
de Physique (with the Author's sanction)
by Edmund Atkinson, Ph.D. F.C.S.
Professor of Experimental Science, Staff
College. FourthEdition, revised ; with
2 Plates and 471 Woodcuts. Crown
8vo. 7^. dd.

B

10

WORKS i>ubUshed by LONGMANS &> CO.

Professor Helmholtz on

the Sensations of Tone, as a Physio-
logical Basis for the Theory of Music.
Translated by A. J. Ellis, F.R.S.
8vo. 36i-.

Professor Helmholtz'

Popular Lectures on Scientific Sub-
jects. Translated and edited by Ed-
mund Atkinson, Ph.D. F.C.S. Pro-
fessor of Chemistry &c. Staff College,
Sandhurst. First Series, with a
Preface by Professor Tyndall, F.R.S.
Second Edition, with 51 Woodcuts.
Crown 8vo. 7^-. 6d.

Professor Helmholtz'

Popular Lectures on Scientific Sub-
jects, Second Series, on the Origin
and Signification of Geometrical Axioms,
the relation of Fonn, Shade, Colour
and Harmony of Colour to Painting,
the Origin of the Planetary System, &c.
Translated by Edmund Atkinson,
Ph.D. F.C.S. Professor of Chemistiy
&c. Staff College, Sandhurst. With
1 7 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 7^. 6if.

Arnotfs Elements of Phy-
sics or Natural Philosophy. Seventh
Edition, edited by A. Bain, LL.D.
and A. S. Taylor, M.D. F.R.S.
Crown Svo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6d.

The Correlation of Phy-
sical Forces. By the Hon. Sir W.
R. Grove, F.R.S. &c. Sixth Edition,
revised and augmented. Svo. 15^.

A Treatise on Magnet-
ism, General and Terrestrial. By H.
• Lloyd, D.D. D.C.L. &c. late Provost
of Trinity College, Dublin. Svo. 10s. 6d.

Elementary Treatise on

the Wave-Theory of Light. By
H. Lloyd, D.D. D.C L. &c. late Pro-
vost of Trinity College, Dublin. Svo.
price IOJ-. 6d.

The Mathematical and

other Tracts of the late James
M'Cullagh, F.T.C.D. Professor of
Natural Philosophy in the University
of Dublin. Now first collected, and
Edited by the Rev. J. H, Jellett,
B.D. and the Rev. S. Haughton, M.D.
Fellows of Trin. Coll. Dublin. Svo. i5j-.

A Text-Book of Syste-

matic Mineralogy. ByH.BAUERMAx,
F.G.S. Associate of the Royal School of
Mines. With numerous Woodcuts.
Small Svo. 6s.

A Text- Book of Descrip-
tive Mineralogy. In the same Series
of Text-Books of Scietue, and by the
same Author. Small Syo. Woodcuts.
[/« preparation.

Fragments of Science.

By John Tyndall, F.R.S. Sixth
Edition, revised and augmented. 2 vols,
crown Svo. 16^.

Heat a Mode of Motion.

By John Tyndall, F.R.S.
Sixth Edition (Thirteenth Thousand),
thoroughly revised and enlarged.
Crown Svo. 12s.

Sound. By John Tyndall,

F.R.S. Fourth Edition, including
Recent Researches. \_Nearly ready.

Contributions to Mole-
cular Physics in the domain of
Radiant Heat. By John Tyndall,
F.R.S. Plates and Woodcuts. Svo. 16 j.

Professor TyndalFs Re-
searches on Diamagnetism and
Magne-Crystallic Action ; including
Diamagnetic Polarity. New Edition
in preparation.

Professor Tyndairs Lec-
tures on Light, delivered in America
in 1S72 and 1S73. With Portrait, Plate
& Diagrams. Crown Svo. "js. 6d.

Professor TyndalFs Les-
sons in Electricity at the Royal
Institution, 1875-6. With 58 Wood-
cuts. Crown Svo. 2s, 6d.

ProfessorTyndairs Notes

of a Course of Seven Lectures on
Electrical Phenomena and Theo-
ries, delivered at the Royal Institution.
Crown Svo. is. sewed, is. 6d. cloth.

ProfessorTyndairs Notes

of a Course of Nine Lectures on
Light, delivered at the Royal Institu-
tion. CrowTiSvo. IJ. swd., u. 6^. cloth.

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO.

II

Text-Books of Science,

Mechanical and Physical, adapted for
the use of Artisans and of Students in
Public and Science Schools. Small
8vo. with Woodcuts, &c.

Abney's Photography, 3^. 6^.

Anderson's (Sir John) Strength of Ma-
terials, 3^. 6d.

Armstrong's Organic Chemistry, 3^. 6^.

Ball's Elements of Astronomy, 6j-.

Barry's Railway Appliances, 3^. (>d.

Bauerman's Systematic Mineralogy, 6^.

Bloxam's Metals, y. 6d.

Goodeve's Mechanics, 3^-. 6d.

Gore's Electro- Metallurgy, 6s.

Griffin's Algebra & Trigonometry, 3/6.

Jenkin's Electricity & Magnetism, 3/6.

Maxwell's Theory of Heat, 3^. 6d.

Merrifield's Technical Arithmetic, 35. 6d.

Miller's Inorganic Chemistry, 3^. 6d.

Preece & Sivewright's Telegraphy, 3/6.

Rutley's Study of Rocks, 4^. 6d.

Shelley's Workshop Appliances, 3^. 6d.

Thome's Structural and Physiological
Botany, 6^.

Thorpe's Quantitative Analysis, 4J. 6^.

Thorpe & Muir's Qualitative Analysis,
price 3J". 6d.

Tilden's Chemical Philosophy, 3^. 6d.

Unwin's Machine Design, 3^. 6d,

Watson's Plane & Solid Geometry, 3/6.

Six Lectures on Physi-
cal Geography, delivered in 1876,
with some Additions. By the Rev.
Samuel Haughton, F.R.S. M.D.
D.C.L. With 23 Diagrams. 8vo. i$s.

An Introduction to the

Systematic Zoology and Morpho-
logy of Vertebrate Animals. By A.
Macalister, M.D. With 28 Dia-
grams. 8vo. los. 6d.

The Comparative Ana-
tomy and Physiology of the Verte-
brate Animals. By Richard Owen,
F.R.S. With 1,472 Woodcuts. 3
vols. 8vo. £2i' I3-^' ^^•

Homes without Hands ;

a Description of the Habitations of
Animals, classed according to their
Principle of Construction. By the Rev.
J. G. Wood, M.A. With about 140
Vignettes on Wood. 8vo. 14-y.

Wood's Strange Dwell-
ings ; a Description of the Habitations
of Animals, abridged from ' Homes
without Hands.' With Frontispiece
and 60 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 'js. 6d.

Wood's Insects at Home;

a Popular Account of British Insects,
their Structure, Habits, and Trans-
formations. 8vo. Woodcuts, 14-5'.

Wood's Insects Abroad ;

a Popular Account of Foreign Insects,
their Stmcture, Habits, and Trans-
formations. 8vo. Woodcuts, 14 J.

Wood's Out of Doors ; a

Selection of Original Articles on
Practical Natural History. With 6
Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 7^. 6d.

Wood's Bible Animals ; a

description of every Living Creature
mentioned in the Scriptures, from the
Ape to the Coral. With 112 Vignettes.
8vo. I4J-.

The Sea and its Living

Wonders. By Dr. G. PIartwig.
8vo. with many Illustrations, igj-. 6d.

Hart wig's Tropical

World. With about 200 Illustrations.
8vo. los. 6d.

Hartwig's Polar World ;

a Description of Man and Nature in the
Arctic and Antarctic Regions of the
Globe. :Maps, Plates & Woodcuts.
8vo. lOi". 6d.

Hartwig's Subterranean

World. With Maps and Woodcuts.
8vo. los. 6d.

Hartwig's Aerial World ;

a Popular Account of the Phenomena
and Life of the Atmosphere. Map,
Plates, Woodcuts. 8vo. los. 6d.

A Familiar History of

Birds. By E. Stanley, D.D. New
Edition, revised and enlarged, with
160 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. ts.

12

WORKS published by LONGMANS (S^' CO,

Rural Bird Life ; Essays

on Ornithology, with Instructions for
Preserving Objects relating to that
Science. By Charles Dixon. With
Coloured Frontispiece and 44 Wood-
cuts by G. Pearson. Crown 8vo. 7^-. 6^.

The Note-book of an

Amateur Geologist. By John Ed-
ward Lee, F.G.S. F.S.A. &c. With
numerous Woodcuts and 200 Litho-
graphic Plates of Sketches and Sec-
tions. 8vo. 2IJ-.

Rocks Classified and De-
scribed. By Bern HARD Von Cotta.

An English Translation, by P. H.
Lawrence, with English, German, and
French Synonymes. Post 8vo. 14^.

The Geology of England

and Wales ; a Concise Account of
the Lithological Characters, Leading
Fossils, and Economic Products of the
Rocks. By H. B. Woodward, F. G. S.
Crown Svo. Map & Woodcuts, 145-.

Keller's Lake Dwellings

of Switzerland, and other Parts of
Europe. Translated by John E. Lee,
F.S.A. F.G.S. With 206 Illustra-
tions. 2 vols, royal Svo. 42J-.

Heer's Primaeval World

of Switzerland. Edited by James
Heywood, M.A. F.R.S. With Map,
19 Plates, & 372 Woodcuts. 2 vols.
Svo. i6j.

The Puzzle of Life and

How it Has Been Put Together ; a

Short History of Praehistoric Vegetable
and Animal Life on the Earth. By A.
NICOLS, F.R.G.S. With 12 Illustra-
tions. Crown Svo. 3^-. 6^.

The Origin of Civilisa-
tion, and the Primitive Condition of

Man ; Mental and Social Condition of
Savages. By Sir J. Lubbock, Bart.
M.P. F.R.S. Svo. Woodcuts, I 8j.

Light Science for Leisure

Hours ; Familiar Essays on Scientific
Subjects, Natural Phenomena, &c.
By R. A. Proctor, B.A. 2 vols,
crown Svo. 7^. dd. each.

A Dictionary of Science,

Literature, and Art Re-edited by
the Rev. Sir G. W. Cox, Bart. M.A.
3 vols, medium Svo. 63^.

Hullah's Course of Lec-
tures on the History of Modem
Music. Svo. Zs. 6d.

Hullah's Second Course

of Lectures on the Transition Period
of Musical History. Svo. ioj-. 6d.

Loudon's Encyclopaedia

of Plants ; the Specific Character,
Description, Culture, Histoiy, &c. of
all Plants found in Great Britain. With
12,000 Woodcuts. Svo. 42^-.

De Caisne & Le Maout's

Descriptive and Analytical Botany.

Translated by Mrs. Hooker ; edited
and an-angedby J. D. Hooker, M.D.
With 5,500 Woodcuts. Imperial Svo.
price 3 1 J. 6d.

Rivers's Orchard-House ;

or, the Cultivation of Fruit Trees under
Glass. Sixteenth Edition. Crown Svo.
with 25 Woodcuts, $s.

The Rose Amateur's

Guide. By Thomas Rivers. Latest
Edition. Fcp. Svo. 4^. 6d.

Town and Window Gar-
dening, including the Structure, Habits
and Uses of Plants. By Mrs. Buckton
With 127 Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 2s.

Loudon's Encyclopaedia

of Gardening ; the Theory and Prac-
tice of Horticulture, Floriculture, Arbori-
culture & Landscape Gardening. With
1,000 Woodcuts. Svo. 2 1 J.

CHEMISTRY and PHYSIOLOGY.
Experimental Chemistry | Practical Chemistry; the

for Junior Students. By J. E. Rey- | Principles of Qualitative Analysis.
NOLDS, M. D. F. R. S. Professor of Che- j By W. A. Tilden, D. Sc. Lond. F. C S.
mistry, University of Dublin. Part I. Professor of Chemistry in Mason's Col-
Introductory. Fcp. Svo. IS, 6d, I lege, Birmingham. Fcp. Svo. is. 6d.

WORKS published by LONGMANS &- CO.

13

Miller's Elements of Che-
mistry, Theoretical and Practical.
Re-edited, with Additions, by H.
MACLEOD, F.C.S. 3 vols. 8vo.

Part I. Chemical Physics. i6s.

Part II. Inorganic Chemistry, 24?.

Part III. Organic Chemistry, in Two
Sections. Section I. 31J. 6d.

Annals of Chemical Me-
dicine ; including the Application of
Chemistry to Physiology, Pathology,
Therapeutics, Pharmacy, Toxicology,
and Hygiene. Edited by J. L. W.
Thudichum, M.D. Vol. I. 8vo. 14^.

Health in the House :

Twenty-five Lectures on Elementary
Physiology in its Application to the
Daily Wants of Man and Animals.
By Mrs. Buckton. Crown 8vo.
Woodcuts, 2S.

A Dictionary of Chemis-
try and the Allied Branches of other
Sciences. Edited by Henry Watts,
F.C.S. 8 vols. medium 8vo. £i2.i2s.6d.

Third Supplement, completing the
Record of Chemical Discovery to the
year 1877. Part II. completion, is
now ready, price 50J.

Select Methods in Che-
mical Analysis, chiefly Inorganic. By
W. Crookes, F.R.S. With 22
Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d.

The History, Products,

and Processes of the Alkali Trade,

including the most recent Improve-
ments. By C. T. KiNGZETT, F.C.S.
With 32 Woodcuts. 8vo. 12s.

Animal Chemistry, or the

Relations of Chemistry to Physiology
and Pathology : a Manual for Medical
Men and Scientific Chemists. By
C. T. KiNGZETT, F.C.S. 8vo. i8j.

The FINE ARTS and ILLUSTRATED
EDITIONS.

Notes on Foreign Picture

Galleries. By C. L. Eastlake.
F.R.I.B.A. Keeper of the National
Gallery, London. Crown 8vo. fully
Ilhistrated. \Inprepatation.

Vol. I. The Brera Gallery, Milan.

,, II. The Louvre, Paris.

,, III. The Pinacothek, Munich.

In Fairyland ; Pictures

from the Elf-World. By Richard
Doyle. With 16 coloured Plates,
containing 36 Designs. Folio, \^s.

Lord Macaulay's Lays of

Ancient Rome, with Ivry and the
Armada. With 41 Wood Engravings
by G. Pearson from Original Drawings
by J. R. Weguelin. Crown 8vo. 6^.

Lord Macaulay's Lays of

Ancient Rome. With Ninety Illustra-
tions engraved on Wood from Drawings
by G. Scharf. Fcp. 4to. 2\s. or imperial
i6mo. loj. 6d.

The Three Cathedrals

dedicated to St. Paul in London.
By W. Longman, F.S.A. With
Illustrations. Square crown 8 vo. 21 j-.

Moore's Lalla Rookh.

Tenniel's Edition, with 68 Woodcut
Illustrations. Crown 8vo. \os. 6d.

Moore's Irish Melodies,

Maclise's Edition, with 161 Steel
Plates. Super-royal 8vo. 21s.

Lectures on Harmony,

delivered at the Royal Institution. By
G. A. Macfarren. 8vo. 12s.

\ Sacred and Legendary

Art. By Mrs. Jameson. 6 vols,
square crown 8vo. £$. i$s. 6d.

Jameson's Legends of the

Saints and Martyrs. With 19 Etch-
ings and 187 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 31J. 6d.

Jameson's Legends of the

Monastic Orders. With 11 Etchings
and 88 Woodcuts, i vol. 21s.

Jameson's Legends of the

Madonna. With 27 Etchings and 165
Woodcuts. I vol. 21S.

Jameson's History of the

Saviour, His Types and Precursors.
Completed by Lady Eastlake. With
13 Etchings and 281 W^oodcuts.
2 vols. 42 J.

14

WORKS puUished by LONGMANS &* CO,

The USEFUL ARTS, MANUFACTURES, &e.

The Elements of Me-
chanism. By T. M. GOODEVE, M.A.

Barrister-at-Law. New Edition, re-
written and enlarged, with 342 Wood-
cuts. Crown 8vo. 6s.

The Amateur Mechanics'

Practical Handbook ; describing the
different Tools required in the Work-
shop. By A. H. G. HOBSON. With
33 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d.

The Engineer's Valuing

Assistant. By H. D. IIoskold,
Civil and Mining Engineer. 8vo.
price 3i>f. 6d.

Industrial Chemistry; a

Manual for Manufacturers and for Col-
leges or Technical Schools ; a Transla-
tion (by Dr. T. H. Barry) of Stoh-
mann and Engler's German Edition of
Payen's 'Precis deChimie Industrielle;'
with Chapters on the Chemistry of the
Metals, &c.byB. H.Paul, Ph.D. With
698 Woodcuts. Medium 8yo. 42^'.

Gwilfs Encyclopaedia of

Architecture, with above 1,600 Wood-
cuts. Revised and extended by W.
Papworth. 8vo. $2S. 6d.

Lathes and Turning, Sim-
pie, Mechanical, and Ornamental. By
W. H. Northcott. Second Edition,
with 338 Illustrations. 8vo. iSs.

The Theory of Strains in

Girders and similar Structures, with
Observations on the application of
Theory to Practice, and Tables of the
Strength and other Properties of Ma-
terials. By B. B. Stoney, M.A.
M. Inst. C.E. Royal 8vo. with 5
Plates and 123 Woodcuts, 26s.

Recent Naval Adminis-
tration ; Shipbuilding for the Purposes
of War. By T. Brassey, M. P. 6 vols.
■ Svo. with Illustrations by the Chevalier
E. de MarKno. [lu the press,

A Treatise on Mills and

Millwork. By the late Sir W. Fair-
bairn, Bart. C.E. Fourth Edition,
with 18 Plates and 333 Woodcuts.
I vol. 8yo. 25J.

Useful Information for

Engineers. By the late Sir W.
Fairbairn, Bart. C.E. With many
Plates and Woodcuts. 3 vols, crown
Svo. 31^. dd.

The Application of Cast

and Wrought Iron to Building
Purposes. By the late Sir W. Fair-
bairn, Bart. C.E. With 6 Plates and
118 Woodcuts. 8vo. i6j-.

Hints on Household

Taste in Furniture, Upholstery,
and other Details. By C. L. East-
lake. Fourth Edition, with 100 Illus-
trations. Square crown 8vo. 14J.

Handbook of Practical

Telegraphy. By R. S. Culley,
Memb. Inst. C.E. Seventh Edition.
Plates & Woodcuts. Svo. \6s.

A Treatise on the Steam

Engine, in its various applications to
Mines, Mills, Steam Navigation, Rail-
ways and Agriculture. By J. Bourne,
C.E. With Portrait, 37 Plates, and
546 Woodcuts. 4to. 42J.

Catechism of the Steam

Engine, in its various Applications.
By John Bourne, C.E. Fcp. Svo.
Woodcuts, 6j.

Handbook of the Steam

Engine, a Key to the Author's Cate-
chism of the Steam Engine. By J.
Bourne, C.E. Fcp. Svo. Woodcuts, pj-.

Recent Improvements in

the Steam Engine. By J. Bourne,
C.E. Fcp. Svo. Woodcuts, 6j.

Examples of Steam and

Gas Engines of the most recent Ap-
proved Types as employed in Mines,
Factories, Steam Navigation, Railways
and Agriculture, practically described.
By John Bourne, C.E. With 54
Plates and 356 Woodcuts. 4to. 70^.

Ure's Dictionary of Arts,

Manufactures, and Mines. Seventh
Edition, re-written and enlarged by R.
Hunt, F.R.S. assisted by numerous
Contributors. With 2,604 Woodcuts.
4 vols, medium Svo. £"]. "is.

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO,

^5

Cresy's Encyclopaedia of

Civil Engineering-, Historical, Theo-
retical, and Practical. With above
3,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 25^-.

KerPs Practical Treatise

on Metallurgy. Adapted from the last
German Edition by W. Crookes, F. R. S.
&c. and E. RoHRiG, Ph.D. 3 vols.
8vo. with 625 Woodcuts. ^^4. 19^.

Ville on Artificial Ma-
nures, their Chemical Selection and
Scientific Application to Agriculture ;
a Series of Lectures given at the Ex-
perimental Farm at Vincennes. Trans-
lated and edited by W. Crookes,
F.R.S. With 31 Plates. 8vo. 2ij.

Mitcheirs Manual of

Practical Assaying. Fourth Edition,
revised, with the Recent Discoveries
incorporated, by W. Crookes, F.R.S.
Crown 8vo. Woodcuts, 3IJ'. 6d.

The Art of Perfumery,

and the Methods of Obtaining the
Odours of Plants ; the Growth and
general Flower Farm System of Rais-
ing Fragrant Herbs ; with Instructions
for the Manufacture of Perfumes for
the Handkerchief, Scented Powders,
Odorous Vinegars and Salts, Snuff,
Dentifrices, Cosmetics, Perfumed Soap,
&c. By G. W. S. Piesse, Ph.D.
F. C. S. Fourth Edition, with 96 Wood-
cuts. Square crown 8vo. lis.

Loudon's Encyclopaedia

of Gardening; the Theory and Prac-
tice'of Horticulture, Floriculture, Arbori-
culture & Landscape Gardening. With
1,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 2IJ.

Loudon's Encyclopaedia

of Agriculture r the Laying-out, Im-
provement, and Management of Landed
Property ; the Cultivation and Economy
of the Productions of Agriculture. With
1, 100 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21^.

RELIGIOUS and MORAL \VORKS.

A Handbook to the Bible,

or. Guide to the Study of the Holy
Scriptures derived from Ancient Monu-
ments and Modern Exploration. By
F. R. CONDER, and Lieut. C. R.
CONDER, R.E. Second Edit. ; Maps,
Plates of Coins, &c. Post 8vo. 7^. 6^.

A History of the Church

of England ; Pre- Reformation Period.
By the Rev. T. P. Boultbee, LL.D.
8vo. 1 5 J.

Sketch of the History of

the Church of England to the Revo-
lution of 1688. By T. V. Short,
D.D. Crown 8vo. 7j. 6</.

The English Church in

the Eighteenth Century. By Charles
J. Abbey, late Fellow of University
College, Oxford ; and John H. Over-
ton, late Scholar of Lincoln College,
Oxford. 2 vols. 8vo. 36^'.

An Exposition of the 39

Articles, Historical and Doctrinal. By
E. H. Browne, D.D. Bishop of Win-
chester. Eleventh Edition. 8vo. i6j.

A Commentary on the

39 Articles, forming an Introduction to
the Theology of the Church of England.
By the Rev. T. P. Boultbee, LL.D.
New Edition. Crown 8vo. 6^.

Sermons preached most-
ly in the Chapel of Rugby School

by the late T. Arnold, D.D. Collective
Edition, revised by the Author's
Daughter, Mrs.W. E. Forster. 6 vols,
crown 8vo. 30J. or separately, 5^-. each.

Historical Lectures on

the Life of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
By C. J. Ellicott, D.D. 8vo. 12s.

The Eclipse of Faith ; or

a Visit to a Religious Sceptic. By
Henry Rogers, Fcp. 8vo. 5^.

Defence of the Eclipse of

Faith. By H. Rogers. Fcp. 8vo. 3^. 6d,

Nature, the Utility of

Religion, and Theism. Three Essays
by John Stuart Mill. 8vo. 10^. 6^.

i6

WORKS published by LONGMANS ^ CO.

A Critical and Gram-
matical Commentary on St Paul's
Epistles. By C. J. Ellicott, D.D.
8vo. Galatians, 8j. dd. Ephesians,
85. dd. Pastoral Epistles, lOJ. dd.
Philippians, Colossians, «& Philemon,
loj. (id. Thessalonians, ^s. 6d.

Conybeare & Howson's

Life and Epistles of St. Paul.

Three Editions, copiously illustrated.

Library Edition, with all the Original
Illustrations, Maps, Landscapes on
Steel, Woodcuts, &c. 2 vols. 4to. 42^.

Intermediate Edition, M-ith a Selection
of Maps, Plates, and Woodcuts. 2 vols,
square crown 8vo. 21 s.

Student's Edition, revised and con-
densed, with 46 Illustrations and Maps.
1 vol. crown 8vo. 7^. 6d.

Smith's Voyage & Ship-
wreck of St. Paul ; with Disserta-
tions on the Life and Writings of St.
Luke, and the Ships and Navigation of
the Ancients. Fourth Edition, revised
by the Author's Son ; with a Memoir
of the Author, a Preface by the Bishop
OF Carlisle, and all the Original
Illustrations. Crown 8vo. ^s. 6d.

The Angel - Messiah of

Buddhists, Essenes, and Christians.
By Ernest de Bunsen. 8vo. los.dd.

Bible Studies. By M. M.

Kalisch, Ph.D. Part 1. The Fro-
phecies of Balaam. 8vo. lOJ-. dd.
Part II. The Book of Jonah. 8vo.
price 10^. dd.

Historical and Critical

Commentary on the Old Testament ;
with a New Translation. By M. M.
Kalisch, Ph.D. Vol. I. Genesis,
8vo. i8j. or adapted for the General
Header, 12^. Vol. II. Exodus, 15^-. or
adapted for the General Reader, \2s.
Vol. III. Leviticus, Part I. I5J-. or
adapted for the General Reader, 8j.
Vol. IV. Leviticus, Part II. 15J. or
adapted for the General Reader, %s.

The Four Gospels in

Greek, with Greek-English Lexicon.
By John T. White, D.D. Oxon.
Square 32mo. 5^-.

Ewald*s History of Israel.

Translated from the German by J. E.
Carpenter, M.A. with Preface by R.
Martineau, M.A. 5 vols. 8vo. dy.

Ewald's Antiquities of

Israel. Translated from the German
byH. S. Solly, M.A. 8vo. \2s. dd.

The Types of Genesis,

briefly considered as revealing the
Development of Human Nature. By
A. Jukes. Crown 8vo. 7^. dd.

The Second Death and

the Restitution of all Things ; with
some Preliminary Remarks on the
Nature and Inspiration of Holy Scrip-
ture. By A. Jukes. Crown 8vo. 3^. 6^.

The Gospel for the Nine-
teenth Century. Fourth Edition.
8vo. price loj. dd.

Supernatural Religion ;

an Inquiry into the Reality of Di-
vine Revelation. Complete Edition,
thoroughly revised. 3 vols. 8vo. 36j-.

Lectures on the Origin

and Growth of Religion, as illus-
trated by the Religions of India ;
being the Hibbert Lectures, delivered
at the Chapter House, Westminster
Abbey, in 1878, by F. Max Muller,
K.M. 8vo. IOJ-. dd.

Introduction to the Sci-
ence of Religion, Four Lectures de-
livered at the Royal Institution ; with
Essays on False Analogies and the
Philosophy of Mythology. By F. Max
MiJLLER, KM. Crown 8vo. loj. 6^/.

Passing Thoughts on

Religion. ByMissSEWELL. Fcp. 8vo.
price 3^. dd.

Thoughts for the Age.

By Miss Sewell. Fcp. 8vo. 3^-. dd.

Preparation for the Holy

Communion ; the Devotions chiefly
from the works of Jeremy Taylor. By
Miss Sewell. 32mo. y.

Private Devotions for

Young Persons. Compiled by
Elizabeth M. Sewell, Author of
* Amy Herbert' &c. i8mo. 2J-.

WORKS published by LONGMANS &- CO.

17

Bishop Jeremy Taylor's

Entire Works ; with Life by Bishop
Heber. Revised and corrected by the
Rev. C. P. Eden. 10 vols. ^^5. 5^.

Hymns of Praise and

Prayer. Corrected and edited by
Rev. John Martineau, LL.D.
Crown 8vo. 4?. dd. 32mo. i^. 6</.

Spiritual Songs for the

Sundays and Holidays throughout
the Year. By J. S. B. ISIonsell,
LL.D. Fop. 8vo. 5 J. i8mo. 2s,

Christ the Consoler; a

Book of Comfort for the Sick, By
Ellice Hopkins. Second Edhion.
Fcp. 8vo. 2s. 6d.

Lyra Germanica ; Hymns

translated from the German by Miss C
WlNKWORTH. Fcp. 8vO. 5^.

Hours of Thought on

Sacred Things ; Two Volumes of Ser-
mons. By James Martineau, D.D.
LL. D. 2 vols, crown 8vo. 7^. 6d. each.

Endeavours after the

Christian Life ; Discourses. By
James Martineau, D.D. LL.D.
Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo. 7^-. 6d.

The Pentateuch & Book

of Joshua Critically Exammed.
By J. W. CoLENSO, D.D. Bishop of
Natal. Crown 8vo. 6^.

Lectures on the Penta-
teuch and the Moabite Stone ; with
Appendices. By J. W. Colenso,
D.D. Bishop of Natal. 8vo. I2J.

TRAVELS, VOYAGES, &c.

The Flight of the ' Lap-

wing'; a Naval Officer's Jottings in
China, Formosa, and Japan. By the
Hon. H. N. Shore, R.N. AVith 2
Illustrations and 2 Maps. 8vo. i^s.

Turkish Armenia and

Eastern Asia Minor. By the Rev.
IL F. Tozer, M.A. F.R.G.S. With

Map and 5 Illustrations. 8vo. i6i-.

Sunshine and Storm in

the East, or Cruises to Cypriis and Con-
stantinople. By Mrs. Brassey. With
2 Maps and 1 14 Illustrations engraved
on Wood by G. Pearson, chiefly from
Drawings by the Hon. A. Y. Bingham;
the Cover from an Original Design by
Gustave Dore. 8vo. 21s.

A Voyage in the * Sun-
beam,' our Home on the Ocean for
Eleven Months. By Mrs. Brassey.
Cheaper Edition, with Map and 65
Wood Engravings. Crown 8vo. 7^. 6d.

Eight Years in Ceylon.

By Sir Samuel W. Baker, M.A.
Crown 8vo. Woodcuts, 7^. 6d.

The Rifle and the Hound

in Ceylon. By Sir Samuel W. Baker,
M.A. Crown 8vo. Woodcuts, 'js. 6d,

Sacred Palmlands ; or,

the Journal of a Spring Tour in Egypt
and the Holy Land. By A. G. Weld.
Crown 8vo. 7^. 6d.

One Thousand Miles up

the Nile; a Journey through Egypt
and Nubia to the Second Cataract.
By Miss Amelia B. Edwards. With
Facsimiles, &c. and 80 Illustrations en-
graved on Wood from Drawings by the
Author. Imperial 8vo. 42X.

Wintering in the Ri-
viera ; with Notes of Travel in Italy
and France, and Practical Hints to
Travellers. By William Miller,
S.S.C. Edinburgh. With 12 Illus-
trations. Post 8vo. 7^-. 6d.

San Remo and the Wes-
tern Riviera, climatically and medi-
cally considered. By A. Hill Hassall,
M.D. Map and Woodcuts. Crown
8vo. los. 6d.

Himalayan and Sub-

Himalayan Districts of British
India, their Climate, Medical Topo-
graphy, and Disease Distribution ; with
reasons for assigning a Malarious Origin
to Goitre and some other Diseases. By
F. N. Macnamara, M.D. With
Map and Fever Chart. 8vo. 21s.

i8

WORKS published by LONGMANS d- CO,

The Alpine Club Map of

Switzerland, with parts of the Neigh-
bouring Countries, on the scale of Four
Miles to an Inch. Edited by R. C.
Nichols, F.R.G.S. 4 Sheets in
Portfolio, ^2s. coloured, or 34^-. un-
coloured.

Dr. Rigby's Letters from

France, &c. in 1789. Edited by
his Daughter, Lady Eastlake. Crown
8vo. \os. 6d.

The Alpine Guide. By

John Ball, M.R.I. A. PostSvo. with
Maps and other Illustrations : —

The Eastern Alps, loi-. 6d.
Central Alps, including all

the Oberland District, *]s. 6d.

Western Alps, including

Mont Blanc, Monte Rosa, Zermatt, &c.
Price 6s. 6d.

On Alpine Travelling and

the Geology of the Alps. Price is.
Either of the Three Volumes or Parts of
the * Alpine Guide ' may be had with
this Introduction prefixed, is. extra.

V^ORKS of FICTION.

Novels and Tales. By the

Right Hon. the Earl of Beacons-
field, K.G. The Cabinet Edition.
Eleven Volumes, crown 8vo. 6s. each.
Endymion, 6s.
Lothair, 6s. Venetia, 6s.

Coningsby, 6s. Alroy, Ixion, &c. 6s.
Sybil, 6s. Young Duke &c. 6s..

Tancred, 6s. Vivian Grey, 6s.

Henrietta Temple, 6s.
Contarini Fleming, &c. 6s,

Blues and Buffs ; a Con-
tested Election and its Results. By
Arthur Mills. Crown 8vo. 6s.

Yellow Cap, and other

Fairy Stories for Children, viz.
Rumpty-Dudget, Calladon, and
Theeda. By Julian Hawthorne.
Crown 8vo. 6s. cloth extra, gilt edges.

The Crookit Meg: a

Scottish Story of the Year One. By
John Skelton, LL.D. Advocate,
Author of 'Essays in Romance and
Studies from Life' (by 'Shirley').
Crown 8vo. 6s.

Buried Alive ; or, Ten

Years of Penal Servitude in Siberia.
By Fedor Dostoyeffsky. Trans-
lated from the German by Marie von
Thilo. Post 8vo. los. 6d.

' Apart from its interest as a picture of prison life.
Buried Alive gives us several curious sketches of
Russian life and character. Of course it is of the
criniinal side, but it seems to agree with what we
learn from other sources of other classes.'

St. James's Gazette.

Whispers from Fairy-
land. By the Right Hon. E. H.
Knatchbull-Hugessen, M.P. With
9 Illustrations. Crovra 8vo. y. 6d.

Higgledy-piggledy; or,

Stories for Everybody and Every-
body's Children. By the Right Hon.
E. H. Knatchbull-Hugessen, M.P.
With 9 Illustrations. Cr. 8vo. 3J-. 6d.

Stories and Tales. By

Elizabeth M. Sewell. Cabinet
Edition, in Ten Volumes, each contain-
ing a com-plete Tale or Story :—

Amy Herbert, is. 6d. Gertrude, 2s. 6d.
The Earl's Daughter, 2s. 6d. The
Experience of Life, 2s. 6d. Cleve
Hall, 2s. 6d. Ivors, 2s. 6d. Katharine
Ashton, 2s. 6d. Margaret Percival,
Zs. 6d. Laneton Parsonage, 3^-. 6d.
Ursula, 3 J. 6d.

The Modern Novelist's

Library. Each work complete in itself,
price 2s. boards, or 2s. 6d. cloth : —

By Lord Beaconsfield.

Lothair.

Coningsby.

Sybil.

Tancred.

Venetia.

Henrietta Temple.
Contarini Fleming.
Alroy, Ixion, &c.
The Young Duke, &c.
Vivian Grey.

By Anthony Trollope.
Barchester Towers.
The Warden.

WORKS pihlished by LONGMANS 6- CO,

THE MODERN NOVELIST^S \A^Y<h.YCl -continued.

By Major Whyte-Melville.

Digby Grand.
General Bounce.
Kate Coventry.
The Gladiators.

Good for Nothing.
Holmby House.
The Interpreter.
Queen's Maries.

By the Author of ' The Rose Garden.'
Unawares.

19

By the Author of < Mile. Mori.'
The Atelier du Lys.
Mademoiselle Mori.

By Various Writers.
Atherstone Priory.
The Burgomaster's Family.
Elsa and her Vulture.
The Six Sisters of the Valleys.

Novels and Tales by the Right Honourable the

Earl of Beaconsfield, K.G. Ten Volumes, crown 8vo. cloth extra, gilt edges,
price 30J.

POETRY and
Poetical Works of Jean

Ingelow. New Edition, reprinted,
with Additional Matter, from the 23rd
and 6th Editions of the two volumes
respectively ; with 2 Vignettes. 2 vols,
fcp, 8vo. I2J-.

Faust. From the German

of Goethe. By T. E. Webd, LL.D.
one of Her Majesty's Counsel in Ire-
land ; sometime Fellow of Trinity
College, now Regius Professor of Laws
and Public Orator in the University of
Dublin. 8vo. \2s. 6 J.

Goethe's Faust. A New

Translation, chiefly in Blank Verse ;
with a complete Introduction and
copious Notes. By James Adey
Birds, B.A. F.G.S. Large crown
8vo. 1 2 J. 6d.

Goethe's Faust. The Ger-
man Text, with an English Introduction
and Notes for the use of Students. By
Albert M. Selss, M.A. Ph.D. &c.
Professor of German in the University
of Dublin. Crown 8vo. 5^-.

THE DRAMA.

Lays of Ancient Rome;

with Ivr}' and the Armada. By Lord
Macaulay. i6mo. 3^. 6d.

The Poem of the Cid : a

Translation from the Spanish, with
Introduction and Notes. By John
Ormsby. Crown Svo. 5^-.

Festus, a Poem. By

Philip James Bailey. loth Edition,
enlarged & revised. Crown Svo. 12s. 6d,

The Iliad of Homer, Ho-

mometrically translated by C. B.
Cayley. 8vo. I2s. 6d.

The ^neid of Virgil.

Translated into English Verse. By J.
CONINGTON, M.A. Crown Svo. 95-.

Bowdler's Family Shak-

speare. Genuine Edition, in i vol.
medium Svo. large type, with 36 Wood-
cuts, 14J. or in 6 vols. fcp. Svo. 21s.

Southey's Poetical

Works, with the Author's last Cor-
rections and Additions. Medium Svo.
with Portrait, 14^.

RURAL SPORTS, HORSE and CATTLE
MANAGEMENT, &e.

Blaine's Encyclopaedia of

Rural Sports; Complete Accounts,
Historical, Practical, and Descriptive,
of Hunting, Shooting, Fishing, Racing,
&c. With 600 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21s.

A Book on Angling ; or,

Treatise on the Art of Fishing in eveiy
branch ; including full Illustrated Lists
of Salmon Fhes. By Francis Francis.
Post Svo. Portrait and Plates, i$s.

20

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO,

Wilcocks's Sea- Fisher-
man : comprising the Chief Methods
of Hook and Line Fishing, a glance at
Nets, and remarks on Boats and Boat-
ing. Post 8vo. Woodcuts, \2s. 6d.

The Fly-Fisher's Ento-
mology. By Ai-FRED Ronalds.

With 20 Coloured Plates. 8vo. 14^.

Horses and Roads ; or,

How to Keep a Horse Sound on his
Legs. By Free-Lance. Second
Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s.

Horses and Riding. By

George Nevile, M. A. With 31 Illus-
trations, Crown Svo. 6s.

Youatt on the Horse.

Revised and enlarged by W. Watson,
M.R.C.V.S. Svo. Woodcuts, 7^. 6d.

Youatt's Work on the

Dog. Revised and enlarged.
W^oodcuts, 6^.

Svo.

The Dog in Health and

Disease. By Stonehenge. Third
Edition, with 78 Wood Engravings.
Square crown Svo. 7^. 6d,

The Greyhound. By

Stonehenge. Revised Edition, with
25 Portraits of Greyhounds, &c.
Square crown Svo. 15J.

Stables and Stable Fit-

tings. By W. Miles. Imp. Svo.
with 13 Plates, 15^.

The Horse's Foot, and

How to keep it Sound. By W.

Miles. Imp. Svo. Woodcuts, 12s. 6d.

A Plain Treatise on

Horse-shoeing. By W. Miles. Post
Svo. Woodcuts, 2s. 6d.

Remarks on Horses*

Teeth, addressed to Purchasers. By
W. Miles. Post Svo. is. 6d.

A Treatise on the Dis-
eases of the Ox ; being a Manual of
Bovine Pathology specially adapted for
the use of Veterinary Practitioners and
Students. By J. H. Steel, M.R.C.V.S.
F.Z.S. With 2 Plates and 116 Wood-
cuts. Svo. 1 5 J.

WORKS of UTILITY and GENERAL
INFORMATION.

Maunder's Biographical

Treasury. Latest Edition, recon-
structed and partly re-written, with
above 1,600 additional Memoirs, by
W. L. R. Cates. P^cp. Svo. 6s.

Maunder's Treasury of

Natural History ; or. Popular Dic-
tionary of Zoology. Revised and
corrected Edition. Fcp. Svo. with
900 Woodcuts, 6s.

Maunder's Treasury of

Geography, Physical, Historical,
Descriptive, and Political. Edited by
W. Hughes, F. R. G. S. With 7 Maps
and 16 Plates. Fcp. Svo. 6s.

Maunder's Historical

Treasury; Introductory Outlines of
Universal History, and Separate His-
tories of all Nations. Revised by the
Rev. Sir G. W. Cox, Bart. M.A.
Fcp. Svo. 6s.

Maunder's Treasury of

Knowledge and Library of Refer-
ence ; comprising an English Diction-
ary and Grammar, Universal Gazetteer,
Classical Dictionary, Chronology, Law
Dictionary, Synopsis of the Peerage,
Useful Tables, &c. Fcp. Svo. 6s.

Maunder's Scientific and

Literary Treasury; a Popular En-
cyclopaedia of Science, Literature, and
Art. Latest Edition, partly re-written,
with above 1,000 New Articles, by J.
Y. Johnson. Fcp. Svo. 6s.

The Treasury of Botany,

or Popular Dictionary of the Vegetable
Kingdom ; with which is incorporated
a Glossary of Botanical Terms. Edited
by J. LiNDLEY, F.R.S. and T. Moore,
F.L.S. With 274 Woodcuts and 20
Steel Plates. Two Parts, fcp. Svo. 12s.

WORKS puhlisJud by LONGMANS 6- CO,

21

The Treasury of Bible

Knowledge ; being a Dictionary of
the Books, Persons, Places, Events,
and other Matters of which mention is
made in Holy Scripture. By the Rev.
J. Ayre, M. a. Maps, Plates & Wood-
cuts. Fcp. 8vo. 6s,

A Practical Treatise on

Brewing ; with Formulae for Public
Brewers & Instructions for Private Fam-
ilies. By W. Black. 8vo. ioj-. dd.

The Theory of the Mo-
dem Scientific Game of Whist.
ByW. Pole, F.R.S. Twelfth Edition.
Fcp. 8vo. 2J-. 6d.

The Correct Card; or,

Plow to Play at Whist; a Whist
Catechism. By Major A. Campbell-
Walker, F.R.G.S. Latest Edition.
Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d.

The Cabinet Lawyer; a

Popular Digest of the Laws of England,
Civil, Criminal, and Constitutional.
Twenty-Fifth Edition, corrected and
extended. Fcp. Svo. 9j.

Chess Openings. ByF.W.

Longman, Balliol College, Oxford.
New Edition. Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d.

Pewtner's Compre-
hensive specifier; a Guide to the
Practical Specification of every kind of
Building- Artificer's Work. Edited by

' W. Young. Crown Svo. 6s.

Modern Cookery for Pri-
vate Families, reduced to a System
of Easy Practice in a Series of carefully-
tested Receipts. By Eliza Acton.
With 8 Plates and 150 Woodcuts. Fcp.
Svo. 6s.

Food and Home Cookery.

A Course of Instruction in Practical
Cookery and Cleaning, for Children in
Elementary Schools. By Mrs. Buck-
ton. Woodcuts. Crown Svo. 2s.

The Ventilation of Dwell-
ing Houses and the Uti isation of
Waste Heat from Open Fire- Places,
&c. By F. Edwards, Jun. Second
Edition. With numerous Lithographic
Plates, comprising lo6 Figures. Royal
Svo. los. 6d.

Hints to Mothers on the

Management of their Health during
the Period of Pregnancy and in the
Lying-in Room. By Thomas Bull,
M.D. Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d.

The Maternal Manage-
ment of Children in Health and
Disease. By Thomas Bull, M.D.
Fcp. Svo. 2s. 6d.

American Food and

Farming. By Finlay Dux, Special
Correspondent for the ' Times. ' Svo.
[/« the press.

The Farm Valuer. By

John Scott, Land Valuer. Crown
Svo. 5x.

Rents and Purchases ; or,

the Valuation of Landed Property^
Woods, Minerals, Buildings, &c. By
John Scott. Crown Svo. 6s.

Economic Studies. By

the late Walter Bagehot, M.A.
Fellow of University College, London.
Edited by Richard Holt Hutton.
Svo. 10^. 6d.

Economics for Beginners

By H. D. MACLEOD, M.A. Small
crown Svo. 2s. 6d.

The Elements of Bank-
ing. By H. D. MACLEOD, M.A.
Fourth Edition. Crown Svo. 5^.

The Theory and Practice

of Banking. By II. D. Macleod,
M.A. 2 vols. Svo. 26s.

The Resources of Mod-
em Countries ; Essays towards an
Estimate of the Economic Position of
Nations and British Trade Prospects.
By Alex. Wilson. 2 vols. Svo. 24J.

The Patentee's Manual ;

a Treatise on the Law and Practice of
Letters Patent, for the use of Patentees
and Inventors. By J. Johnson, Bar«
rister-at-Law ; and J. H. Johnson,
Assoc. Inst. C.E. Solicitor and Patent
Agent, Lincoln's Inn Fields and Glas-
gow. Fourth Edition, enlarged. Svo.
price los. 6d,

INDEX.

A bbey dr» Overtotis English Church History 15

Abneys Photography n

Acton's Modem Cookery 2T

Alpine Club Map of Switzerland 18

Guide (The) 18

Amos' s Jurisprudence 5

Primer of the Constitution 5

Fifty Years of the English Con-
stitution 5

Andersons Strength of Materials 11

Armstrong' s Oxg2ca\c Qh.&xri\<sXxy 11

Arnold's (Dr. ) Lectures on Modem History 2

Mi scellaneous Works 7

Sermons 15

(T. ) English Literature 6

Authors 6

Arnott's Elements of Physics 10

Atelier (The) du Lys 19

Atherstone Priory 19

Autumn Holidays of a Country Parson ... 7

Ayre's Treasury of Bible Knowledge 21

Bacon's Essays, by Whaiely 6

Life and Letters, by Sjiedding ... 5

Works 5

Bagehot's Biographical Studies 4

Economic Studies 21

^ — Literary Studies 6

Bailey s Festus, a Poem 19

Bain's Mental and Moral Science 6

on the Senses and Intellect 6

Emotions and Will 6

Baker's Two Works on Ceylon 17

i5d!//'j Alpine Guides 18

Elements of Astronomy 11

Barry on Railway Appliances 11

Bai^er?niin' s Mineralogy 10

Beaconsfield' s (Lord) Novels and Tales 18 & 19

Becker s Charicles and Gallus 8

Beesly's Gracchi, Marius, and Sulla 3

^/(2^/^'j Treatise on Brewing 21

Z?/.2^/^/.?yj German- Enghsh Dictionary 8

Blaine's Rural Sports 19

Bloxam's Metals 11

Bolland and La7tg's Aristotle's Pohtics 5

Boultbee on 39 Articles 15

's History of the English Church... 15

Bourne's Works on the Steam Engine 14

Bowdler's Family Shakespeare 19

Bramley-Moore s Six Sisters of the Valleys . 1 9
Brande's Dictionary of Science, Literature,

and Art 12

Brassey on Shipbuilding 14

Brassey's Sunshine and Storm in the East . 17

Voyage of the ' Sunbeam ' 17

Browjie's Exposition of the 39 Articles 15

Browning sMo6.cvn 'England 3

Buckle's History of Civilisation 2

Buckton's Food and Home Cookery 21

Health in the House 13

Town and Window Gardening... 12

Bull's Hints to Mothers 21

Maternal Management of Children . 21

Bunsen's Angel-Messiah 16

Burgomaster's Family (The) ....; 19

Buried Alive 18

Burke's Vicissitudes of Families 4

Cabinet Lawyer 21

CVz/^j' J Age of the Antonines 3

Early Roman Empire 3

Carlyle s Reminiscences 4

Gates' s Biographical Dictionary 4

Cayley'sViizAoiYiovcvQX 19

Changed Aspects of Unchanged Tmths ... 7

Chesneys Waterloo Campaign 2

Chtcrch's Beginning of the Middle Ages ... 3

Colenso on Moabite Stone &c 17

's Pentateuch and Book of Joshua. 17

Commonplace Philosopher 7

Cotnte's Positive Polity 5

Conder's Handbook to the Bible 15

Congreve's Pohtics of Aristotle 5

Conington' s Translation of Virgil's ^neid 19

Miscellaneous Writings 6

Contanseau's Two French Dictionaries ... 8

Conybeare and Howson's St. Paul 16

Cordery's Struggle against Absolute Mon-
archy 3

Cotta on Rocks, by Lawrence 12

Counsel and Comfort from a City Pulpit... 7

Cox's (G. W.) Athenian Empire 3

Cmsades 3

* Greeks and Persians 3

Creighton's Age of Elizabeth 3

England a Continental Power 3

Shilling History of England ... 3

Tudors and the Reformation 3

Cresy's Encyclopaedia of Civil Engineering 15

Critical Essays of a Country Parson 7

Crookes's Chemical Analysis 13

Culley's Handbook of Telegraphy 14

Curteis's Macedonian Empire 3

Davison's Thousand Thoughts 7

De Caisne and Le Maout's Botany 12

De Tocqueville' s Democracy in America... 5

Dixofis Rural Bird Life 12

Doyle's (R.) Fairyland 13

Dufi's American Food and Farming 21

Eastlake's Foreign Picture Galleries 13

Hints on Household Taste 14

^^Tt-ari^j- on Ventilation &c 21

Edwards's Nile 17

Ellicott's Scripture Commentaries 16

Lectures on Life of Christ 15

Elsa and her Vulture 19

Epochs of Ancient History 3

English History , 3

Modern History 3

Ewalds History of Israel 16

Antiquities of Israel 16

/^«?yi5d;e>;z' J Applications of Iron 14

Information for Engineers 14

Mills and Millwork 14

Farrar's Language and Languages 7

Francis's Fishing Book 19

Freeman's Historical Geography 2

Froude's Csesar 4

English in Ireland i

History of England i

Short Studies 6

Gairdner's Houses of Lancaster and York 3

Ganot's Elementary Physics 9

Natural Philosophy 9

Gardiner's Buckingham and Charles I. ... 2
Personal Government of Charles I. 2

WORKS piblished by LONGMANS d^» CO.

23

Gardiner s Puritan Resolution 3

Thirty Years' War 3

German Home Life 7

G/^^f?;?'^ Cavalier's Note Book 7

Goethe's Faust, by Birds 19

by Selss 19

by Webb 19

Goodeve's Mechanics 11

Mechanism 14

Gore's Electro-Metallurgy 11

Gospel (The) for the Nineteenth Century . 16

Grant's Ethics of Aristotle 6

Graver Thoughts of a Country Parson 7

Greville's Faiths and Fancies 6

Journal i

Griffin's Algebra and Trigonometry 11

Griffith's A B C of Philosophy 5

Grove on Correlation of Physical Forces... 10

Gwilt's Encyclopaedia of Architecture 14

//ix/^'j Fall of the Stuarts 3

Hartwig's Works on Natural History and

Popular Science 11

Hassall's Chmate of San Remo 17

Havghton s VhysicoX GQ0gv2c^\\y 11

Hawthorne's Fairy Stories 18

Hayward's Selected Essays 6

Heer's Primeval World of Switzerland 12

Helmholtz on Tone 10

Helmholtz s Scientific Lectures 10

HerscheTs Outlines of Astronomy 9

Hillebrand's Lectures on German Thought 6

Hobson's Amateur Mechanic 14

//((7/>5/«j'j Christ the Consoler 17

Horses and Roads 20

Hoskold's Engineer's Valuing Assistant ... 14

HullaJis History of Modern Music 12

Transition Period 12

Hume's 'Essays 6

Treatise on Human Nature 6

Ihne's Rome to its Capture by the Gauls... 3

History of Rome 2

Ingelow's Poems 19

Jameson's Sacred and Legendary Art 13

Memoirs by Macpherson 4

?enkin's Electricity and Magnetism 11

errold's Life of Napoleon 1

John soil's Nomians in Europe 3

Patentee's Manual 21

Johnston's Geographical Dictionary 8

Jukes's Types of Genesis 16

jfiikes on Second Death 16

ATr/wy^'j Bible Studies 16

- Commentary on the Bible 16

Path and Goal 5

Kellers Lake Dwellings of Sv/itzerland.... 12

Kerfs Metallurgy, by Crookcs and Rohrig. 15

^^^^^•(j^/'j AlkaU Trade 13

Animal Chemistry 13

Knatchbull-H ugessen s Fairy-Land 18

Higgledy-Piggledy 18

Landscapes, Churches, &c 7

Latham's English Dictionaries 8

Handbook of English Language 8

Leckys History of England 1

European Morals 3

i Rationalism 3

Leaders of Public Opinion 4

Lee's Geologist's Note Book 12

Leisure Hours in Town 7

Leslies Essays in Political and Moral

Philosophy 6

Lessons of Middle Age 7

Lewes' s History of Philosophy 3

Z^w/j on Authority 6

Liddell AXid. Scott's Greek-English Lexicons 8

Lindley and Moore s Treasury of Botany ... 20

Lloyd's Magnetism 10

Wave-Theory of Light 10

Longmans (F. W.) Chess Openings 21

Frederic the Great and

the Seven Years' War 3

——————— German Dictionary ... 8

(W.) Edward the Third 2

Lectures on History of England 2

Old and New St. Paul's 13

Loudon's Encyclopaedia of Agriculture ... 15

Gardening 12

Plants 12

Lubbock's Origin of Civilisation 12

Ludlow's American War of Independence 3

Lyra Germanica 17

Macalister s Vertebrate Animals n

Macaulay's (Lord) Essays i

History of England ... i

Lays, Illustrated Edits. 13

Cheap Edition... 19

Life and Letters 4

Miscellaneous Writings 7

Speeches 7

Works I

■ Writings, Selections from 7

MacCullagh'sTTa.cXs 10

McCulloch's Dictionary of Commerce 8

Macfarren on Musical Harmony 13

Macleod^s Economical Philosophy 5

Economics for Beginners 21

Theory and Practice of Banking ai

Elements of Banking 21

Macnamara's Himalayan Districts of British

India 17

Mademoiselle Mori ig

Mahaffy's Classical Greek Literattue 3

A/<a;rjAz«a«'j Life of Havelock 4

Martineau's Christian Life 17

Hours of Thought 17

Hymns 17

Maunder s Popular Treasuries 20

MaxwelTs Theory of Heat il

Mays History of Democracy 2

History of England 2

Melville's (Whyte) Novels and Tales 19

Mendelssohn s Letters 4

Merivale's Fall of the Roman RepubUc ... 2

General History of Rome 2

Roman Triumvirates 3

Romans under the Empire 2

Merrifield s Arithmetic and Mensuration... ii

Miles on Horse's Foot and Horse Shoeing 20

on Horse's Teeth and Stables 20

Mill (J.) on the Mind S

Mills (J. S.) Autobiography 4

Dissertations & Discussions 5

Essays on Religion 15

Hamilton's Philosophy 5

Liberty 5

Political Economy 5

Representative Government 5

Subjection of Women 5

System of Logic 5

' Unsettled Questions 5

Utilitarianism 5

Millers Elements of Chemistry 13

24

WORKS published by LONGMANS 6- CO,

^///(T/-' J Inorganic Chemistry ii

Wintering in the Riviera 17

Mills's Blues and Buffs 18

Minto (Lord) in India 2

Mitchell's Manual of Assaying 15

Modem Novelist's Library 18 & 19

Monck's Logic 6

Monsdts Spiritual Songs 17

Moore's Irish Melodies, Illustrated Edition 13

Lalla Rookh, Illustrated Edition.. 13

Morris's Age of Anne 3

Mailer s Chips from a German Workshop. 7

Hibbert Lectures on Religion ... 16

Science of Language 7

Science of Religion 16

Selected Essays 7

Nelson on the Moon 9

Neviles Horses and Riding 20

Newman's Apologia pro VitS, Sud 4

Nicols's Puzzle of Life 12

Northcott's Lathes & Turning 14

Ormsby's Poem of the Cid 19

Overton s \J\iQ, &c. of Law 4

Owen's Comparative Anatomy and Phy-
siology of Vertebrate Animals 11

Ozt><r//' J Evenings with the Skeptics 7

Pay en's Industrial Chemistry 14

Pewtner's Comprehensive Specifier 21

/'/<rj^^'j Art of Perfumery 15

Pole's Game of Whist 21

Powell's Early England 3

Preece & 5/z/««;rz^A/'j Telegraphy ii

Fresent-Day Thoughts 7

Proctor's Astronomical Works 9

Scientific Essays (Two Series) ... 12

Public Schools Atlases 8

iPaw/z«j(?«'^ Ancient Egypt 3

Sassanians 3

Recreations of a Country Parson 7

Reynolds' s Experimental Chemistry 12

^2V>^' J Dictionary of Antiquities 8

Rigby's Letters from France, &c, in 1789... 18

Rivers s Orchard House 12

Rose Amateur's Guide 12

Rogers's Eclipse of Faith 15

Defence of Eclipse of Faith 15

Roget's English TJaesaurus 8

Ronalds' Fly-Fisher's Entomology 20

/?cw/^yi' Rise of the People 3

Settlement of the Constitution ... 3

Russia and England i

Before and After the War 1

Rutley's Study of Rocks 11

.Sa»rfar/j Justinian's Institutes 5

5d!«>&(fyj Sparta and Thebes 3

Savile on Apparitions 7

Seaside Musings 7

Scott's Farm Valuer 21

Rents and Purchases 21

Seebohms Oxford Reformers of 1498 2

Protestant Revolution 3

SewelVs History of France 2

Passing Thoughts on Religion ... 16

Preparation for Communion 16

Private Devotions 16

Stories and Tales 18

Thoughts for the Age 16

Shelley s Workshop Appliances 11

5/i^r<fV Flight of the ' Lapwing ' 17

Short's Church History 15

Skeltons Crookit Meg 18

Smith's [Sydney) Wit and Wisdom 7

(Dr. R. A.) Air and Rain 9

(R. B.)Carthage& the Carthaginians 2

Rome and Carthage 3

(J.) Voyage and Shipwreck of

St. Paul 16

Southey's Poetical Works 19

Stanley's Familiar History of Birds n

Steel on Diseases of the Ox 29

Stephen's Ecclesiastical Biography 4

Stonehenge, Dog and Greyhound 20

Stoney on Strains 14

Stubbs's Early Plantagenets 3

Sunday Afternoons, by A. K. H.B. 7

Supernatural Religion 16

Swinbourne's Picture Logic 6

Tancock's England during the Wars,

1778-1820 3

T^zyA^r'j History of India 2

Ancient and Modern History ... 4

[Jeremy) Works, edited by Eden 17

Text-Books of Science 11

Thomi's Botany 11

Thomsons Laws of Thought 6

Thorpe's Quantitative Analysis 11

Thorpe and Muirs Qualitative Analysis ... 11

Thudichum' s Annals of Chemical Medicine 13

Tilden's Chemical Philosophy 11

Practical Chemistry 12

Todd on Parliamentary Government 2

Tozer's Armenia and Asia Minor 17

TrencKs Realities of Irish Life 17

Trevelyan s Life of Fox 2

Trollope's Warden and Barchester Towers 18

Twiss's Law of Nations 5

Tyndalls (Professor) Scientific Works ... 10

Unawares 19

f/»w/«'5 Machine Design 11

Ure's Arts, Manufactures, and Mines 14

Venn's Life, hy Knight 4

Ville on Artificial Manures 15

Walker oxi Whist ; 21

Walpole's History of England i

Warburton s Edward the Third 3

Watsons Geometery 11

Watts' s Dictionary of Chemistry 13

Webb's Celestial Objects 9

Civil War in Herefordshire 2

Veil of Isis 6

H^^/rf'j Sacred Palmlands 17

Wellington s Life, by Gleig 4

Whately sYxi^v^ Synonymes 8

Logic 6

Rhetoric 6

Whites Four Gospels in Greek 16

and Riddle's Latin Dictionaries ... 3

Wilcocks's Sea-Fisherman 20

H^zV/zawy^ Aristotle's Ethics 5

Wilson's Resources of Modern Countries... 21
Wood's (J. G.) Popular Works on Natural

History "

Woodward' s Q^oXo^ 12

Yonge's English-Greek Lexicons *.... 8

Youatt on the Dog and Horse 20

Zeller's Greek Philosophy 3

Spottiswoode &* Co. Printers, Nero-street Square, London.

1 L^E

RETURN TO DESK f ROM WHICH BORROWED

LOAN DEPT.

This book is due on the last date stamped below, or

on the date to which renewed.

Renewed books are subjea to immediate recall.

z

M£i

^-

RECEIVED

AUG 5 '66-3

LOAN DEF>T

ffB 3 1967 7

IN STACKS

IW

z

7^

-^
-^

^'A

PM m

71

r

1

BEC CIR. APli 9 '?5

IViAY 21 1992

0 DISC MAY 09 '92

JftN 20 m7

-?i7-Sl^y'

K-tlfV^ > -

LD 21A-60m-10,*65
(F7763sl0)476B

General Library

University of California

Berkeley

U£. BERKELEY LIBRARIES

CD^^5«^fi45^

4058ns

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY

Wj^^^' ^■

^:^:F

M

■ .41

*'(.V

&;/■'.