THE GOVERNMENT AND CONSTANTINOPLE.
THE notion which no small part of the English public have taken up, that the honour of the Government is pledged to prevent Constantinople from falling even temporarily into Russian hands, is an exceedingly mistaken one. Little as we approve of the policy of the present Government on the Eastern Question, we should frankly admit that a pledge given by any Government, however mischievous its policy, can rarely indeed be repudiated by the country without anni- hilating the influence of England in the councils of Europe. It is ,not. enough to say that one Government repudiates, and would never have given, the pledge of a previous Govern- ment which it is asked to redeem. To foreign countries, the British Empire must be either a unit of national life which may always be asked to take up the engagements which have been recently and spontaneously given in its name, or it cannot be a Power to take account of at all. Hence we regard it as a matter of great moment to the Country to understand clearly=quite apart from the wisdom or the imprudence of the pledges given—what those pledges have been. And we should be the first to recognise that a distinct pledge given by our Government on a • subject of the fast moment, must, underthe same conditions to which it applied, be redeemed by the nation, if the nation really wishes to count for anything in the councils of the world. Let us see, then, what precisely the language is which the present Government has used on the subject of Constantinople. For by that we fairly admit the country must hold itself bound, unless, indeed, it could be shown that the pledge was in itself so utterly mischievous that no consideration of any, kind for the consistency and in- fluence of Great Britain, would justify us in redeeming it. And we need not say that in relation to such a question as the occupation of Constantinople by a foreign Power, it would not bp feasible to show that any view seriously adopted by either of the great English parties, was of that nature. The first time that the present Government defined its posi- tion -at all in relation to Constantinople was in Lord Derby's despatch of the 6th of May, the language of which was recast and very much coloured two days later by Mr. Cross in the House of Commons. That language has been often since cited by the speakers on this subject, but it is not always cited accurately, and is frequently misunderstood. These were Lord Derby's words to Count Schouvaloff :—" The vast importance of Constanti- nople, whether in a military, a political, or a commer- cial point of view, is too well understood to require explanation. It is therefore scarcely necessary to point out that her Majesty's Government are not prepared to regard with indifference the passing into other hands than those of its present, possessors of a capital holding so peculiar and commanding a position." Now, when Mr. Cross referred to the same point on Monday, May 8, in the House of Com- mons, his language was as follows :—" Well, what am I to say about the treaties as to the Straits of the Dardanelles and the possession of -Constantinople ? Is it necessary for carrying on the war between Russia and Turkey, and for the protection of the Christians in • Turkey, that Constantinople ,should be either attacked, approached, or occupied? I say, 'No.' These are questions which no country in Europe could regard with indifference ; and when I mention them, I hope they are so remote that they will not practically arise. But they are questions which must be considered by any British Government, and which, any-Ministry, even if the right honour- able gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) himself were at its head, would not dare to neglect, or if it did, the country would very soon send - it an Answer which it could not mistake." Now, it is very clear that Mr. Cross, in this apeech, very materially enlarged, and so to say painted-up the language of Lord Derby's warning, till , it became something quite different from the warning officially given. In the mouth of the Home -Secretary, it certainly sounded. like a warning that the British Government would not allow Constantinople to be either " attacked, ap- proached, or occupied" by Russia ; and that he held that the opinion of the country would call the Government to account, if it permitted anything of the sort. But the fact that Mr. Cross used this strong language on May 8 in the House of Commons is a very important one from our own point of view, when we consider the official language by which it was followed. Prince Gortschalroff replied to Lord Derby's despatch by indirectly suggesting that it might be necessary in the interests of the Russian policy to take temporarily the very steps which Mr. Cross had declared that it would not be necessary for Russia, in the interests of the cause she had espoused, to take. And yet not only was Prince Gortschakoffs explanation received with satisfaction, and not only did it fail to excite controversy of any kind, at the time we refer to, but perfectly explicit language subsequently used by the Czar himself, had the same result. These were Prince Gortschakoff's words, written under the date of May 18 in last, year :—" Pour ce qui concerne Constantinople, sans pouvoir prejuger la mare& ni l'iesne de la guerre, le Cabinet Imperial repete qu'une acquisition de. cette capitale est exclue des rues de sa Majeste 1'Empereur. II reeonnait qu'en tout cas le sort de Constantinople est une question d'interet commun, qui ne peat etre reglee que par une entente generale, et que si in possession de cette ville devait etre miss en question, elle ne saurait appartenir u aucune des Puissances de l'Europe." In this despatch, the phrase " sans pouvoir prejuger le marche ni l'issue de la guerre "sufficiently indicated that Prince Gortschakoff, while repudiating in the name of Russia all idea of acquiring Constantinople, would not bind himself not to occupy it temporarily as the Germans temporarily occupied Paris ; and when the British Govern- ment intimated their general satisfaction with Prince Gort- schakoff's explanations, of course they tacitly withdrew any- thing in Mr. Cross's language which might have been inter- preted as going far beyond the terms of Lord Derby's despateh, and as" prejudging," to use Prince Gortschakoff's phrase, "the course and issue of the war."
But the Russian Government did not even rest satisfied with this tacit ignoring by Lord Derby of the language used by Mr. Cross in the House of Commons. On the 17th of July the Emperor himself returned to the subject, and in a conversation with Colonel Wellesley at Biela, which Colonel Wellesley immediately embodied in a Memorandum,—a Memo- randum suppressed by the Government for six months, and only presented to Parliament within the last ten days,—the following statement was made :—" The Emperor will not occupy Constantinople for the sake of military honour, but only if such a step is rendered necessary by the march of events." Whatever this vague phrase, the "march of events," means,— and it may mean almost anything, according to the mind of him who interprets the march of events, and regards them as re- quiring one thing or another,—here was the most explicit and deliberate notice that the Russian Government thought that something or other might make such an occupation expedient, and reserved its right to determine on this step. And how did our Government receive this notice ? It was met by a memorandum communicated to the Russian Ambassador, and dated 28th July last, in which we find, first, the general statement that " her Majesty's Government receive with much satisfaction the statement which his Majesty the Emperor has authorised Colonel Wellesley to make, that he is ready to treat for peace, if the Sultan will make suitable propositions ;" and then, without saying anything at all on the specific notice given that the " march of events " might " render necessary " the temporary occupation of the capital, the Government go on to state that the "march of events" might also render it necessary for them, when the Russian forces- should " draw nearer to the capital," to send the Fleet to Constantinople, and to deprecate in such a case any hostile interpretation on the part of Russia ; " Her Majesty's Government look with much anxiety at the state of things in Constantinople, and the pro- spect of the disorder and bloodshed, and even anarchy,,which may occur there, as the Russian forces draw nearer to the capital. The crisis which may at any moment arrive in Con- stantinople may be such as her Majesty's Government could not overlook, while they had the means of mitigating its horrors. Her Majesty's Government are fully determined (unless it-should be necessary for the preservation of interests which they have already stated that they are bound to maintain) not to depart from the line of neutrality which they have declared their intention to observe ; but they do not consider that they would be departing from this neutrality, and they think that Russia will not consider that they are so doing, if they should find themselves compelled to direct their Fleet to proceed to Con- stantinople, and thus afford protection to the-European popu- lation against internal disturbances. It must be clearly under- stood that no decision in favour of such a proceeding has been taken by her Majesty's Government, but they are anxious that, in the event of its becoming necessary, no misunderstanding should arise as to their intentions ; and that the Government of Russia, with which it is their sincere desire to remain on friendly terms, should not be taken by surprise." Now that is language written deliberately in reply to a notice that a tem- porary occupation of Constantinople might be required by the "march of events," and assuming the close approach, of the Russians to Constantinople as the basis of its own state- ments. Now, this was written on the 28th July last. A more complete though tacit withdrawal of the rhetorical threat used by Mr. Cross in the House of Commons on the 8th May as to the consequences of " attacking, approaching, or occupying " Constantinople cannot well be imagined.
It will be said, however, that the British Government, while it took one line on this subject in July, took quite this obstinacy and these illusions more than any belief of party or principle are cloven by the lines of nationality. The Turkey's that England would, under certain conditions, send right of saying " Accedo ad —" possessed by each Cardinal up the Fleet to Constantinople. And so the matter rested when a voting has been gone through without result, disturbs till the English Fleet was sent up to Constantinople, when, as all calculations, and it is more than possible that the name a matter of course, the Russian Government deemed it right which emerges ultimately from the urn will be almost unknown to reply by reasserting its right to make a partial occupation to Europe, and entirely outside the calculations of the astute of Constantinople, to which the " march of events," and in- men who have reckoned up for each Government interested deed most likely the very event with regard to which Russia the chances of the candidates. The system, indeed, elabo- had always reserved her complete freedom of action, naturally rated as it has been by generations of subtle intellects, is pointed. now nearly perfect for its ends, so perfect that no Cardinal, even Now, can we for a moment say that our Government is pledged if spokesman of a group, can enter the Conclave certain in his in honour to any further action, as a consequence of this partial own mind of a particular result. occupation, which, if it happens, it will have itself precipitated This is undoubtedly one cause of the extreme interest taken Mr. Cross's language in May last would have been commonly in this election by all cultivated Protestants throughout the regarded as a threat of war, in case of any Russian occupation world. It is the single example, in an age of elections, of a of Constantinople. But as we have seen, that language was machinery so constructed that every elector can vote in his judg- practically and most explicitly withdrawn by the subsequent ment and conscience for the favourite of his choice, and yet the replies of Lord Derby to Prince Gortschakoff. Lord Derby's total result remain as uncertain as if the successful candidate rather unfortunate Memorandum of the 13th December did not had been selected by lot. The Catholic Church has realised the reiterate, or anything like reiterate, Mr. Cross's language, ideal which the framers of the American Constitution pursued in though it did explain how serious the British Government vain, and their formula may yet, as election becomes the un- considered the danger of a Russian occupation of Constantinople, versal system of the world, find for the second time imitators and the kind of measure by which the British Government in secular politics. It can scarcely be fairly doubted that the might think it necessary to reply. In fact, the British Fleet idea of a Representative Assembly was derived from the early has anticipated the Russian occupation of Constantinople, and Councils, and the method of choosing an Executive Head may indeed virtually caused it. But even so, we are pledged, so yet be copied from the one elaborated by the Sacred College. far as the published correspondence goes, to nothing more,— The element of uncertainty is not, however, sufficient to ac- only to that rather critical and dangerous conjoint action im- count for the interest felt in the event by people who know plied in a British occupation of the waters, simultaneously with nothing of Papal methods, who regard the Papacy as an evil a Russian occupation of the city, of Constantinople. That is institution, or who are penetrated with the notion, as, for in- not, and ought not to mean, war, though it does and must stance, one-half of all educated Protestant women are pene- imply a strained and critical situation, which the diplomatists trated with it, that the election is a prearranged comedy. on both sides should seek to cut as short as possible, and The truth is that the interest in all ecclesiastical occurrences which ought never to have been brought about. has of late years among Protestants increased, and increased in
Previous page
