[War. Russia and Turkey.]

No. 139.- MANIFESTO of the Emperor of Russia. against Turkey. St. Petersburgh, 14th April, 1828.

(Translation as laid before Parliament.*)

War

By the Grace of God, Nicholas I, Emperor and Autocrat of All the Russias, &c.

The Peace of Bucharest, concluded in the year 1812,† with the Ottoman Porte, after having been for 16 years the subject of reiterated disputes, now no longer exists, in spite of all our exertions to maintain it, and to preserve it from violation. The Porte, not satisfied with having destroyed the bases of a state of Peace, now defies Russia, and prepares to wage against her a War of extermination; it summons its whole population to arms; accuses Russia of being its irreconcilable enemy; tramples under foot the Convention of Ackermann (No. 131), and therewith all preceding Treaties. Lastly, the Porte does not hesitate to declare, that it consented to the conditions of that Convention only as a mask to conceal its intentions, and its preparations for a new war.

Scarcely was this memorable confession made, when the rights of the Russian flag were violated, the vessels which carry it were detained, and the cargoes made the prey of a rapacious and arbitrary Government. Our subjects found themselves compelled to break their oath, or to leave without delay a hostile country; the Bosphorus was closed; our trade annihilated; our Southern Provinces, deprived of the only channel for the exportation of their produce, are threatened with incalculable injury. Nay more; at the very moment when the negotiations between Russia and Persia were on the eve of being concluded, a sudden change on the part of the Persian Government checked the course of them. It soon appeared that the Ottoman Porte had exerted herself to make Persia waver, by promising her powerful aid; that the Porte had hastily armed the troops of the Pachas on the borders, and was preparing to follow up this treacherous and hostile language by acts of open aggression.

Such has been the series of injuries of which Turkey has been guilty from the conclusion of the Treaty of Bucharest to the present time; such has unhappily been the fruit of the sacrifices *For French Version, see "State Papers," vol. xv, p. 655. +(9th May, 1812.) See Appendix.

and generous exertions by which Russia has incessantly laboured to maintain Peace with a neighbouring Power.

But all patience has its limits; the honour of the Russian name-the dignity of the Empire-the inviolability of its rights and of our national glory have prescribed to us the bounds of our forbearance.

It is not till after we have considered the full extent of the duties imposed on us by imperative necessity, that, inspired with the greatest confidence in the justice of our cause, we have ordered our forces to advance, under Divine protection, against an enemy who violates the most sacred obligations and the law of nations.

We are convinced that our faithful subjects will add to our prayers the most ardent wishes for the success of our enterprise, and that they will implore the Almighty to grant his support to our brave soldiers, and to shed his Divine blessing on our arms, which are destined to defend our holy Religion and our beloved Country.

Given at St. Petersburgh, the 14th April, in the year of Our Lord, 1828, and in the 3rd year of our reign.

The Vice-Chancellor,

COUNT NESSELRODE.

NICOLAS.

[War. Russia and Turkey.]

No. 140.-DECLARATION of the Porte, in Answer to the Russian Manifesto of 4th April, 1828. June, 1828.

(Translation, as laid before Parliament.)

MEN of sound judgment and upright minds know, and reflection united with experience clearly proves, that the principal means of preserving order in the world and the repose of nations, consists in the good understanding between Sovereigns, to whom the Supreme Master, in the plenitude of His mercy, has entrusted, as servants of God, with absolute and unlimited power, the reins of government, and the administration of the affairs of their subjects. It results from this principle that the solid existence and maintenance of this order of things essentially depend upon an equal and reciprocal observation of the obligations established between Sovereigns, which ought, therefore, to be respected in common and scrupulously executed.

God, all powerful, be praised for this, that the Sublime Porte has, since the commencement of her political existence, observed those salutary principles more than any other Power; and, as the confidence of the Porte is founded on the precepts of the pure and sacred law, and of the religion which Mussulmans observe in peace as well as war, and having never consulted anything but the law, even in the slightest circumstances, she has never deviated from the maxims of equity and justice, and, as is generally known, has never been placed in the situation of compromising her dignity by infringing, without any legitimate motive, Treaties concluded with friendly Powers.

It is equally well known to the whole world, and incontestible, that with regard to the Treaties, Conventions, and Stipulations, for peace and friendship, concluded under diplomatic forms with Russia, as a neighbouring Power, the Porte has constantly exercised the greatest care in respecting the duties and rights of good neighbourhood, and in availing herself of all proper means for consolidating the bonds of friendship between the two nations.

The Court of Russia has, however, without any motive, disturbed the existing Peace,--has declared War, and invaded the territory of the Sublime Porte. Russia alleges that the Sublime Porte has caused this War, and has published a Manifesto (Nos. 138, 139), in which she accuses the Porte of not having executed the conditions

[War. Russia and Turkey.]

of the Treaties of Bucharest* and Ackermann (No. 131); of having punished and ruined the Servians after having promised them pardon and amnesty; of having demanded fortresses in Asia which were essentially necessary to Russia; of having, without regard to the two provinces of Wallachia and Moldavia, punished with death the most distinguished men of Greece; with having, while publicly declaring that Russia is a natural enemy of the Mussulman nation, endeavoured to provoke to vengeance, and direct against her, the bravery of all the Mussulman people; of having signed the Treaty of Ackermann (No. 131) with mental reservation, seized the cargoes of Russian ships, and instigated the Court of Persia to make War upon Russia; and finally it is made a subject of complaint, that the Pachas of the Porte were making warlike preparations. It is these, and other charges of the same nature, that Russia has brought forward, a series of vain inculpations, destitute of all real foundation. It will be proper to make each the subject of a reply, founded on equity and justice, as well as on the real state of the facts.

Though Russia has published that these are the principal motives for the Declaration of War, it is, however, generally known that the War which terminated with the Treaty of Bucharest was commenced by herself. In fact, before that War, the Porte had, on just and legitimate grounds, dismissed the Waivodes of Wallachia and Moldavia, and Russia then pretended that these dismissals were contrary to Treaties; and though the Sublime Porte represented in an amicable manner things under the real aspect, Russia refused to listen to the reasons advanced; and as she continued to insist in her pretensions, the Sublime Porte, with the sole view of preserving Peace, and of maintaining the relations of friendship, did not hesitate to restore the dismissed Waivodes, - without paying attention to the consequences of such a condescension. But while Russia declared herself fully satisfied, and under the ministry of Gahib Pacha, then Reis Effendi, officially notified, through the first interpreter, Councillor Fonton, that the differences and difficulties existing on that account, between the two Courts, were completely removed, she immediately and unexpectedly made an attack on the side of Chotien and Bender. According to the regular course, the Sublime Porte demanded explanations from the Russian Ambassador, who tried to deceive, and formally disavowed what had taken place, adding that Russia was in a state of Peace and friendship with the Sublime Porte; that if War had been * (18th May, 1812.) See Appendix.

[War. Russia and Turkey.]

intended, the Ambassador must necessarily have known it; and that it could only be supposed that the Russian troops had some motive for advancing.

When the fact was finally proved, the Sublime Porte was under the necessity of resisting; but having a natural repugnance to War and the shedding of blood, she imposed on herself a sacrifice, and signed the Treaty of Bucharest. Russia did not respect the Treaty. Among other infractions, instead of evacuating the Asiatic frontier, according to the basis and the tenor of the Treaty, she unjustly annulled that Article, and regarded with indifference all the well-founded remonstrances of the Sublime Porte. Finally the Russian Plenipotentiaries at Ackermann, having altered and misinterpreted the pure sense of the Treaty, and being no longer able to answer the convincing arguments of the Turkish Plenipotentiaries, declared that a long space of time having elapsed since the Article in question had been executed, the Fortress claimed could not be given up. To such language the Turkish Plenipotentiaries might well have replied, that if the non-execution, in due time and place, of Articles officially stipulated, warranted a total renunciation, the other Articles, the more or less prompt fulfilment of which was demanded of the Sublime Porte, might also remain in statu quo. But their instructions did not authorize them to hold a language so foreign to the Treaties, and so contrary to the law of nations. And their mission restricting them to the consolidation of the bonds of Peace they acceded. Nevertheless the Russian Declaration represents this demand of evacuation as having had no foundation in fact; and by pretending that we had already renounced it, evidently deviates from the path of truth.

It was agreed that the Russian Tariff should be renewed every two years, and the other friendly Powers have renewed their tariffs according to agreement. The Tariff of Russia, however, has undergone no change for 27 years. Since the expiration of the term the renewal has ofttimes been proposed to the Russian Envoys and Chargé d'Affaires at Constantinople, but the application was always made in vain; Russia refused to do justice to the well-founded demands of the Sublime Porte. The conduct of Russia, as well in words as in actions, in these two affairs of the evacuation and the tariff, showing so strikingly to what degree she respects Treaties and the principles of equity, how can she attribute to the Sublime Porte their violation? and how can such an imputation ever be admitted?