On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
fhfl crmienteirf . non--official documents , which do not concern jfr q ^ mjSerjjr alone , and Which contain the expressions of , a mtftTjal confidence . * What We are '^ permitted to say is ; fha ' t m iCTamfafo | J the ^ ir « timstances more or less Hkel y * o aflfe& the € amtlon yjf the ^ &rfws gwoin the Bast—ariwrajnunation undertaken from the conviction respectively ente * tainefl-that ««« t 7 > effaetishould beonade tasnstaia -that stotut guo , > and to } mil « n £ iliSSil < tag / ii 9 'p (» aible ~ - £ there . never wae ; any . question
warnings from all quarters , professed a belief ia the solemn , assurances of the Einpercsr Qf Russia . A ^ hat became of all those asseverations now ? The Emperor , i * seems , communicated , bis designs , aad met with an iadignant refusal . Are the two consistent ? But the statement of the : Timeg < doea not . merely refer to the jnreseni year . It refers to past communications made by the Emperor to Lord Aberdeen , in 1844 .. Immediately on the accession of Lord Aberdeen to office , in 1 & 53 , thesedesigns are
putiaopera-MAL 3 t £ SBcrax ' 6 eemed 4 ndignaat at theintrodactiont > f his name . Lord Aberdeen , he said , had no busineM *© make a statement , th ^ aecuracy ^ f which , he mi aot fuJir aware . It was not consistent with the uiiu ^ i of that House , or of gentlemen . Who wa » tbejrenZ tlemeo who had betrayed tkese , * eereta ? JFor « ome time past Cabinet secrets had ooxed puton * ubia ; U upon which information was refused to BarJiamenU He sfeould seriously consider whether a . soaicjbijng Parliamentary inquiry gliould not be ma 4 e into . , the « mattery . . ' ..-.. ' . : - , ¦ > ... ' ' Lord Abbeoekn said fo did . not knov at tha ^ io ment the name of the gentletnanr Xordl ^ BBr ^ aid that , unless for cross neelect ofdufcr . it ill bacama
the . First Lord < &the Tre ^ rjr to 4 tj ^^ ii ^ , poiiij » jy anixmocentmaJL .. Earl Qrk ^ joined is . 4 he deoun * ciatian " of the course adopted ; with respect . to Cabinet * ecrets . " , j Iaforinaj |^ n zK > i , to ^ Jw *» £ ? «?? && » was ^ Ijie ' ¦ $ && ¦ m ^^ g M ^ J ?^ lttf a public Journal . £ ord , Tjpzwji $ 4 ^ t ^ qually indiguiat , declared thoi their lord ^ hipeV ^ etoo ? much under , the dominion of the ^ ress ^ -it wuft moat ; mi » - cbieT « ns to the conduct of j ) uahc , affaira . . c ..,,,. „ . The next day Xxgd MAr , M » gBCTtY renewed dtti complaint . TVTJien in the 3 Poreign . offl (» h « J » d ^» pf pointed four cleffks ; three remained t one hid maraie « Jady of fortuiie , and had Mt the Qm ^» TbiUiimtMt have been the gentleman alluded tof ; Ba * i * be ; ifiw » denied having had any cemmuitfcaiiatt iritfe thtft
gentleman . , , . % v ^ -as / . M-t re- ? . ¦¦; <;? I # >^ oft Lord ABEBi > aKH aaid he was bapRrtfw *« tattti i « rfc liad beentmade ^ as he wasdea | jKm «^ h « jiQWtter . < ilioBi 4 reit on aa accurate : footingi - .. , -. . ,. , ,, . - . •;•< :. ; ^« r Hy- lorasj 70 a irilVrecolleiJt that the ^ le- « wl ^ bolnrflt } - dueefMhis subject lwt Bightg ^^ te Bo'mT ^^ b ^ w't anSutunationt that < b . a in ^ ttw ^^ witt ^ h ^ byraKlrliiM ^^ NB information was derived . Utejectitjg £ th « K inatanationin tfa « moetrperanpto ^ y manner 'I piw ^ could , i , i «« UWy ^ a aiai * . ttat it , w ^ prob ^ l ^ alJ . did wtWA ^ -iha ^ ww ^
iffi ^ KSl ^ gentleman aid talk of this corTespondtel ^;^ blsiKv ledge of * Ke extents of tKii c ' crrSp ^ e ^ -ii ^ r htSn cbnattutricate * to the Times .. - 3 . ^ ' ^^« cirifp | of ^ l ^^ i thoughhecertaiiily did not mm € on % W ^/ JZ ^ hawwmt it firomso rnariy differentr ( guarterataifc liUei quK » sltiiS « d to Mftriit to Ihe gentlemanr hunsalfc If ^» wm . tiuitih < r > idUi not mention ^ the . > existence , yff tins rnrTMiwinftwnn " ^^ 4 hr natnre of this coircspoudence ^ tlwnl wUV ^ aftwthat It «»» beep mow d ^ y ^ , than ^ Maa . < m ^ 99 fcn # ^ . ^ ii » H ^) l entirely to his ^ vni . t ^^ r ^ fflL iind , T » TnriT > iy ^ , noritii | r TJhwfff ascertained froip ,. quartern li » t T i ^ a ^ Mj ^^^ HfttL that it was mentioned W ^ s ^ littleh ^ ita ^ W ^ weaSftn that the Wtl ^ TOhinwelf will arow th » t he h »^
the Tt / nes newsfaper TcceiTed it from him , 'btrt ih-tn « ih « rt of tl » . monient , * nd in Tefererca to the iirthiMtions ^ Mhe noble awa , 'I oertaihlyvdid refer &t ; a . qwcisJtifiponifwhiillil nvghtiposfiibly have come * ,: Wint ?« Jucateta ^ utM > neaaiitl | might very well be known in another ; and , Jjftnr wWjftp noble ( e « l CDerby 3 stated , li ^ tr ^ j ^ ^ bM ^ lii , ; w «|» «» rar » of thecorreBpondence . at the be ^ nmg of ^ h « a ^ s «» iu ^ Pfefi m he I 0 arn % ? tter&iply ; m ^ &m WtV W > ^ , nm 3 E tha-t I thipk it vraa an act of % pruaen 60 t ( m . ^ e ^ iib , 6 f vtlM mntleman to talk in fhe way ^ h *¦ ¦ dia atwxtitthe ( Borttenttcrf this correspondence , wMch li »^ ceriainry 1 b ^ ^ giffi ^«^ conldentially ; lut , after all , Imade no char ^ e ^ md'T ^ repeiK that I believe tte gaotleinan hiowelf w » U -viols , 4 « ny whw I have stated . _ , ,, ; ,- ¦ . ; .:, ;; ... { , ¦ ¦¦ . . •¦ :.
Lord MAx « E * stritT d 0 tfMed ^ e ^ al » W | ienltt ) f ! E <* 4 Aberdeen whenhesaid he 'l ^^^ . novifEiik ^' -tipbtcdj ^ li ^ BEi clerk on the previous day ; and agaiaptotented thai he had "been unfairly used - \ Jn . . the Home > of Gommons < im Mtottdurj ^ , Mr . Dn *« BiitBEX , -following the usudl cnatow , -jmt -thfif sariMft questions to -Lora J . ^ Btrssmcao , and i » o 6 iTed a repljf similar to that given to Lord Defby T > y Lord Jtb ^ r doen—but no mention wfu mafl 0 of the eacajpe o £ sUte secrets on either sule . ., , . Xbe . aeoond incidenfe avoae in the ^ Honae' ^ ef « 0 on » . nians , out of the famous Napier banquet « t ^ fbetRa form Club . Here the quwtioners wen Mr . Fremibv Bir Thomas Herbert , attd Mr . Brig !« , who mafl ^ himself the hero of the erenting . Sir
Mr . IFbbnch put two c ^ ues ^ ions , to . X G »* bamu F 5 rs (; , by what authority he , fit * be Beform £ latb delegated power to Sir Chwrlen Napier , t © declimo war 5 and eecondly , whether he memnt thatiauthowty to be acted on in anticipation of the reply of 4 m CzarP Sir jAME ^ eaid—Although , bit , I am not disposed to admit the figHtitf the hon . gentleman toput «^ nwUon wito jrea ^ t | to , wAat noBBod after ixmix—Cgrea ^ bmffkter ^ aii * h « iBeform < Glnfr , ( Twould , pe » h « w , not be «» p « ctfal if I iireje , nofato «« iw anmfl unfiwer-to it . I haw U > aUto , than , t » tb » bavutfMmo
tl » man ~ wwitJU r « a »» ot to the autiuMtynM to i » m btmk civ ^ n by me to Sir Charlw Napier » o . dealar ft ^ w ^ : ta . ifcb # part of my speech wbieii l » fl « been fdlnitd to—cthftfe xttiuto piiBBod upon that occnaion wm th « 9 :: , 6 irCttiwk « JiftpicndM 9 saUl in the course of hie « pewh , that he kop * d iMfilrei Its entered tUe Baltic hojthould haveauthotily ^ odaolattovman and I , followiiu Sir QluideB : 3 fapi « ar ,. aad » Bpihdag ito th » iri >« serrations mwlo by him , stated that wban h « xjntat « d 4 A » iUitic I hoped th « tre < wauld 1 h > w > . difficulty onthiarpjrtiDAK oUring war . But I have to state faithtr , Iteife tb « te is « a proaentno declarfttion of waur ~ nib « t . Bfi ondws have ibe 4 Ja giveB to Sir Clarke Napier to flat ** * ho IWtio ~ imd ttiM *
The questions , ae continued , wfiich : I wishr ~ to put are very Binnplei They aTe—whettier her Mnjestfi ^ Jqverffuaent Wlieve the doenment inserted in the ^ St . ^ PfctetBbtirg paper to be an authentic one ? whether such correspondence ana comirianications as are there referred to as wln £ of > confideotiftl character Sid take place l > etw « en fyer ^ HmeSty ' s Government and the Government of Russia ? tut * if Sufeh correspondence did tale place , being now chaUengea ^ o produce it , and their confidential cbaractar having ^ een tBkMi
away irona them , I ask whether the-norfe earl will , tu justice to the people qf this countryv produce the whole of that ; corresr pondence , which I do uot olame him for not having Tbroduced beftire ? 1 will also ask whether there is- iany trdra in the stateme « t * aade by a particular paper in this couritrv- , vti > : the effect that there were communications of ui similar eharacter made in , 1 . 844 , at the thne'the Emperor of Russia was'in this country . ? and if so , whether these communications ever assumed fcUe form of writing ? « nd if they did , wliether -th * noble earl is prepared to place these papers also on the table of the House .
Lota Aberdeen toeganlris reply as follows : — The statement to which the noble earl haa : referred is certainly one of considerable intercut and : importance , , « nd findingtOfcia the ; plac « we do , Ipj ^ esame we . must consider it as poesessiag a « ort of official oharacteir . Mftre than that I kuowncthing ; and the noble « arl iB ^ uite aa w < H « bJea » myself to form a conclusion as to i the « haracter ofth ^ state meu * . I have seen it nowhere except where he has , aad knownomote , The communications to which 4 he noble eaiiihae referred , which took place . between h « rJfwe « ty ' s MinrsteEB and the Emperor himself , were « as the aoble . eatl has ataied- ^ and the coarse lias not been disapproved—re
tained by . her Majeistys Government ,, and , not , pEiated ^ with thepapeis laid upou the table of the Hohee , in consequence of the character of those communications . It ; hasnot been usual— 'whatever joslj be the cose with communications with foreign ministers—to lay upon , the table of the Bouseomcial . conversations and correspondence , Buch a& those described in this ( documont , between the Sovereign himself and ^ he Foreign Minister . " Eat that reason it was that her Majesty ! Governjnent did not thiak it proper-or consistent with that respect and delicacy which they were bound , --to- observe towards 0 . Sovereign with whom th ^ y vece still in alliwic © , to produe « these papera * which are of tiie charaotjer Jihave described .
He explained that , had not I ^ opd Dexfoy pat ithese questions , he sheuld have produced the papers . When , they are produced Lord BerbywiH floor himself egregiously mistaken in tits hope to meike out a case of luame against the GoTerament . The noble earl has , however , referred to the commentaries made upon this subject in a public joornel—the Times nevrapapec . The noble earl may , perhaye , . be snrpcUKdr—coosidering , as be does , that a very close connoxiop subsists , betweea that paper and some ' members of her Majeaty ' s . Go ^ verniu « rkt—to learn that until this morning , 1 -B ^ ver reAii the comments to wliicli he has referred ; and neith « r"dii « ctly nor iadirectly- —and here I feel some advantage in having the character of a man of honour—1 have neither '
directly nor indirectly the most remote conception of the origin of those remarks—not the slightest . I am , therefore , perfectly in ignorance of the source ifrom which they were received . I do not Jcnow that I cam say anythingmote upon the subject than that , being in total ignorance , I can form no conjecture as to the source from whence the . comments were derived , unless , as I have recently heard , from a cleek in [ the office over which the noble earl the Secretary for Foreign affairs presides—a gentleman introduced by the noble earl opposite ( Lord Malmeabury ) , ' but who Jhas betrayed , scandalously betrayed , the contents of some " official documents in the office with which he was connected . That is the way , 1 am informed ; but 1 do not know whether $ is from that source or not that the correspondence OM been
made public , and the comments mace uponJtrj ^ which 4 he noble earl has referred . All I can say is , that neither dv rectly nor indirectly havB I the slightest knowledge upon the eubjeofc . I have already answered the first question whidb theuoble earl has put to me , and 1 have also stated , what was -the intention of the Qoverntnent with r « 8 pe « t' to ft . With reepect to tho other question , it is certainly true that when the , Emperoi of iRussia was in this coontcf ^ mveml intcrviowB took place , and conversations b «( iW 4 eii > the Jat » Duke of Wellington and myself . I am mot sure whether any took place with Sir Robert £ eel or not . But with myself and the Duk « of Wellington the Emperor entered at
large into the state of affairs in tho Eaat , and expressed the views and prospects which he entertained on the subject . It was , I think , shortly after his Majesty's visit to tnte . country that Count Nesselrode came here , and I am not sure whether or not he was here at the same time - , but Count Nesselrode embodied these vi « ws of the Emperor « nd the conversations which hud taken |) lace in a memorandum reduced . to writing . I have not seen that memorandum for the la . it ten years , aince it was written , and probably the noble « a . rl opposite may know more about it than I do ; and not luiwiog seen it for so long a period , I am not prepared at this moment to sny whether it may bo fitting or not to lay it ujion tho table of tlie House .
Ijord Ellenijorouqu said , that tho Dmperor of Russia had commuuicated with Sir Jtobert PeeL Lord Cjlaniucakois hoped the whole of these private conversations would now be made public * Lord
ofia plan ; b > y which Russia and England might dispose txfareh ^ < f Ana jbetwjeen themselves , oftfce- ^ lestiny of the diflerent pio-puifies ' . wbich constitute the Ottomau empire , ; still , less of a formal « grfienient "to be concluded batweeii ioem ^ without the TcnowiSge ana anassisted "by the counsel and intervention of the other coorts . The two parties were limited to a frank anjf single ctnlfidence , but without reserve on either 8 ? ae ^ to * coramttmcat « What mfght be adverse to English InterestSj'what might'be so to Russian , so that in any given ca « Biio 8 tile » r'o » ea ^ ooateauictory « ctwnmigbtbe avoided . " '
Xord 'IBerby then insinuated rus chargeiaiatGoverament ^ having this correspondence in its hands ; fiad b ^ &fjfht to eacpress , as it baji done > « urprisc at iJ ^ aggT ^ Mve policy of EusBia . He did not . at all complatn that ibe correspondence had been
-vrith-*( eld . Previous to the production of those , papers I had soma intimation of tho existence , and even of the nature of each a correspondence ; hut I thought that the Government might regard ^ , it * s a corwsptmdence of so confidential a diaracter that it ehoujd not'lie made public , and in that case I considered itrjuy duty-mot to make use , m this House , of any information which -1 > might privately have obtained . But , my lorda ,. I am ^ aheut ito refer uow to the comments which are . xnade-r-comtnqBt&Df a very singular character—)> y the Times newspaper . This , is not the iirat occasion upon winch tie Timfi $ uewsjpajer , within the canrse of the last few months , has professed to be in possession , and has proved to ha in posseasionv of- secrete which ought to Tiave been known tuaimwc mmuBicatea
any co xne ,-ana nas nau co > to it papers which-iiftve beanieruaed , and are slill refused , to 'toeiiwo Houses of Barliametit . The noble earl at Jheheadof the Governmehtimay therefore' disclaim as he thinks fit iavmg any communication with the Times newspaper , I ild not say -whether lie has or not . He may have no conwnttnication whatever euirectly and personal himself ; but * 11 the noble earl ' s disclaimers will notpersnade me , or any 3 rantan being in this count * y , thiatithe wime * newspaper would insert such an artfcleasthsrt I am « bont to read to'your lordships , or would convey information of the character -of that "to which I am about to TCtfer , without being authorised by « person or ^ peraoinf who thereby have divulged that wmch ought to have been a Cabinet secret . The Times soya-. — " We
are nifonnedrthat ; ia th » course of Lord John Russell ' s brief administration of-the Foreign-office—that is , in Jaanary , 1853—Sit Baaniltou Seymour was requested by the Emperor , and empowered by his own Government , to enter'into-a dotailed private convwnwtion with the Emperor himself on this sui > ject ; and . a ^ correspondence- ensued , not of an official character , and th « secrecy of which- does not concern the Emperor alone , but which disclosed in the fullest confidence the views of the Court of St . Petersburg with reference to the approaching dissolution of the -Ottoman empire . * ' The Tines refers to previous and present transactions apparently with a full knowledge of the facts , aad gives to the communications of the Krnperor of Bussja , % he Interpretation which
I think is Hkely to be given to'tKem ly the country—jiamely , that the Emperor « f Russia did entertain the most ambitious views with regard to Turkey ,. and had , as he thotiglit , placed himself in a , ataterof identity of action with Che Britisn Govenoment . It . proceeds : — " We have not now to learn for the first time _ tW before the Emperor Nicholas engaged in these extraordinary transactions he had attempted at various times , and in Miflarent forms to luae almost every Court in Ettrope -to share in the plunder of Turkey . As long ago as his own visit to i ) his country he held the same language , and it may have been repeated in greater detail in tho course of * last winter . " How , the Times newspaper i 3 not only in po&session of the-fact of those communications having been
made , of this oorreapondence having taken place , aui of the character and nature of the correspondence ; but the Times newspaper Appears also to be aware of the fact of an answer having been , uent , and of the nature and character of that answer . It goes on , " But what answer did he get to these overtures ? What answer did he get when he sounded Lord John Ttussell , of all men in the world , on the subject of an eventual partition of TnrJtey ? We confidently reply , that h « was met by an indignant . refusal on the part of the British Government . He was told , if we are not greatly mistaken , that this country could entertain no proposal in any form which f resupposed the dismemberment of an empire the integrity of which we had frequently engaged to respect and evon to protect . ; that the British Government strenuously opposed any change ia the status quo of Turkey , as a source of danger and difisouHy to tho world ; and that , this comnnunoation
as had bean mado in a friendly spirit , England strongl j recommended the Ernperor of Iiuasia to abstain altogetbuer and scrupulously from any interference in the aftaire of Turkey which must bo productive of great perils to the world . As these communications were of a confidential natuie , aud wholly anterior to and unconnected -with the affair oi the Holy Places and Prince Mcnjjchikoff ' s luiBSion , the Government appear to have thought that they did not properly form part of the correspondence reoantly laid , !? , . ! ar » ameut , but constituted a separate transaction , lhis challenge of the Russian Government relieTes them irom all further uncertainty on that point . Lord John Jtussell s answer to tho Itussian OYerture will do liiio no dis-Jionour ; and , although in time of pence it might have been inconvenient to iny bare tho pretonsiyna Russia has somotimen indicated , our present relations are not likely to suffer from an ' indiscretion' she herself has provoked ; and wo trust U 10 whole correspondence will be immediately produced . " How was it that nny newspaper became of possessed of confidential information withheld from that House ? But that is a minor question . What ia important is , that hist yenr Government , in spite of
Untitled Article
Ma * PH : I 854 ] TM E , ftE AS >^^ . g ^
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), March 18, 1854, page 243, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2030/page/3/
-