PRINCE GORTSCHAKOFF'S CIRCULAR

NOTE.

Czarskoe Selo, Oct. (31) 19. Successive alterations in the Treaties considered as the foundation of the European balance of power have rendered it necessary for the Imperial Cabinet to inquire how far the political position of Russia has been and ought to be modified by these changes. Among the Treaties alluded to, that which touches Russia more nearly than any other is the compact of March 30, 1856. The special

convention between the two States bordering on the Black Sea, which forms an appendix to this Treaty, obliges Russia to confine her naval forces to a minimum; at the same time this Treaty establishes the principle of the neutralization of the Black Sea. By laying down this principle the signatory Powers intended to remove the very possibility of a conflict between the Powers bordering on the Black Sea, or between either of them and the Maritime Powers. This arrangement was intended to increase the number of the territories which have been accorded the benefit of neutrality by common consent, and thus protect Russia herself from the danger of attack. A fifteen years' experience has proved that this principle, on which the safety of the South Russian frontiers exclusively depends, is no more than a theory. In reality, while Russia disarmed in the Black Sea, and, by a declaration contained in the minutes of the Conference, likewise loyally deprived herself of the possibility of taking measures for an effectual maritime defence in the adjoining seas and ports, Turkey preserved her privilege of having an unlimited number of men-of-war in the Archipelago and the Straits, while France and England were also at liberty to assemble their squadrons in the Mediterranean. Again, under the Treaty in question, the war flag of all nations is formally and perpetually prohibited entry into the Black Sea, but the so-called Straits Treaty closes the Straits only in time of peace to men-of-war. Owing to this inconsis tency, the shores of the Russian Empire are exposed to attack even from less powerful States if they have some naval forces at their disposal. All that Russia

could oppose to them would be some ships of small size. The Treaty of March 30 has, moreover, been modified by some of those infringements to which most European transactions have been latterly exposed, and in the face of which it would be difficult to maintain that the written law, founded upon the respect for Treaties as the basis of public right and the rule governing the relations between States, retains the moral validity which it may have possessed at other times. We have witnessed the Princi. palities, Moldavia and Wallachia, whose position had, under the guarantee of the Great Powers, been defined in the Treaty of Peace and the appended Protocols, accomplish a series of revolutions, which are equally at variance with the letter and spirit of these transactions, arrangements which first led to their reunion, and subsequently to the installation of a foreign Prince. These facts have obtained the sanction of the Porte and the consent of the Great Powers-or, at any rate, the latter have not thought it necessary to enforce their objection. The representative of Russia was the only one who raised his voice to remind the Cabinets that by this tolerance they were departing from distinct Treaty engagements. No doubt, if these concessions to one of the Christian nationalities of the East had proceeded from a general agreement between the Cabinets and the Porte, and if they had been based upon a principle alike applicable to all the Christian populations of Turkey, they would have been applauded by the Imperial Cabinet; but they were exclusive. The Imperial Cabinet could not but be surprised at seeing a most essential stipulation of the Treaty of March 30, 1856, violated with impunity but a few years after the conclusion of the said compact, and this at a moment when the representatives of the Great Powers, on whose collective authority the East relied for peace, were again assembled in Conference at Paris. But this infraction was not the only one. Repeatedly, and under various pretexts, foreign menof-war have been suffered to enter the Straits, and whole squadrons, whose presence in those waters was inconsistent with their unconditional neutralization, admitted to the Black Sea.

Our

While all the guarantees contained in the Treaty, and more especially those for the effective neutralization of the Black Sea, were thus being gradually invali dated, the adoption of ironclad vessels, a craft unknown and unforeseen in 1856, increased the danger menacing Russia in the event of war. She was now more unable than ever to encounter an enemy in the Black Sea. Under these circumstances, His Majesty could not but ask himself what are the rights and duties accruing to Russia from this modification of the general situation and the disregard shown to engagements which, although conceived in a spirit of distrust and levelled at herself, she has invariably and most conscientiously obeyed. After maturely considering this question, His Imperial Majesty arrived at the following conclusions, which you are instructed to bring to the knowledge of the Government to which you are accredited. illustrious Master cannot admit, de jure, that Treaties, violated in several of their general and essential clauses, should remain binding in ather clauses directly affecting the interests of his Empire. Nor can His Imperial Majesty admit, de facto, that Russia should rely for safety on a fiction which has not stood the test of time, and that she should allow her safety to be imperilled by herself respecting a Treaty partly set aside by others. Confiding in the equitable sentiments of the Powers who have signed the Treaty of 1856, as well as in their consciousness of their own dignity, the Emperor commands you to declare that His Imperial Majesty cannot any longer hold himself bound by those stipulations of the Treaty of March 30, 1856, which restrict the exercise of his sovereign rights in the Black Sea; that His Imperial Majesty deems himself both entitled and obliged to announce to His Majesty the Sultan that he will no longer regard as valid the special and additional convention appended to the said Treaty, the latter of which fixes the number and size of the men-of-war which the two Powers bordering on the Black Sea shall keep in that sea; that His Majesty loyally informs of this the Powers who have signed and guaranteed the more comprehensive Treaty, an integral part of which is the convention in question; and that His Majesty restores to the Sultan the full exercise of his sovereign rights in this respect, reclaiming the like full exercise of the same rights for himself. In acquitting yourself of this duty, you will take care to point out that the only object of our illustrious Master in this step is to pro

tect the safety and dignity of his Empire. His Imperial Majesty has no wish to revive the Eastern Question. His Im. perial Majesty sincerely desires to contribute towards the continuance and consolidation of peace in the East as well as every where else. His Imperial Majesty fully adheres to his consent to the general principles of the Treaty of 1856, which have fixed the position of Turkey in the European system. His Imperial Majesty is ready to enter into an understanding with the Powers who have signed that transaction, for the purpose either of confirming its general stipulations, or of renewing them, or of replacing them by some other equitable arrangement, calculated to secure the quiet of the East and the balance of power in Europe. His Imperial Majesty is convinced that peace and the balance of power will receive a fresh guarantee, if they are based upon a more just and solid foundation than one involving a state of things which no great Power can accept as the normal condition of its existence.

You are requested to read this despatch to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and leave him a copy.

I avail myself, &c.,
(Signed)
GORTSCHAKOFF.

PRINCE GORTSCHAKOFF TO BARON
BRUNNOW.

Czarskoe Selo, Oct. 20, 1870.

M. le Baron,-In making the communication to the principal Secretary of State of Her Britannic Majesty, according to the orders of His Majesty the Emperor, you will take care to explain its sense and bearing. When, at the commencement of 1866, there was a question of conferences between the Three Powers, with a view to prevent the war then imminent in Germany, by the Assembly of a Congress, in discussing the bases of such conferences with Earl Russell you had the opportunity of pointing out to him the compensations and the guarantees of security which would be necessarily required by Russia in case of certain eventualities occurring calculated to modify the status quo existing in the East. Lord Russell admitted this with perfect equity. He in no way disputed that any alteration made in the text and the spirit of the Treaty of 1856 must lead to the revision of that Act. Although those eventualities have not occurred, Lord Granville will not contest the fact that already this Treaty has undergone serious modifications in one of its essential provisions. That which must impress

Russia in respect of these modifications is not the appearance of factitious hostility towards her which they seem to bear, nor is it the consequences which may ensue to a great country from the creation upon its frontiers of a small quasi independent State; it is chiefly the facility with which, scarcely ten years after its conclusion, a solemn arrangement, clothed with a European guarantee, has been infringed both in letter and in spirit under the very eyes of the Powers who should have been its guardians. With such a precedent before us, what value can Russia attach to the efficacy of that arrangement and to the pledge of security which she believed she had obtained in the principle of the neutralization of the Black Sea? The balance of power established in the East by the Treaty of 1856 has, therefore, been disturbed to the detriment of Russia. The resolution adopted by our august Master has no other object than to restore that equilibrium.

The Government of Her Britannic Majesty would never consent to leave the security of her shores to the mercy of an arrangement which was no longer respected. It is too equitable not to award us the same duties and the same rights. But what we especially desire to impress is that this decision implies no change in the policy which His Majesty the Emperor has pursued in the East. You have already had on many occasions opportunities of discussing with the Cabinet of London the general views which the two Governments hold upon this important question. You have been able to establish a conformity of principles and interests, which we have noted with great satisfaction. From that we have drawn the conclusion that at present it is neither from England nor Russia that can arise the dangers which may menace the Ottoman Empire, that the two Cabinets have an equal desire to maintain its existence as long as possible by conciliation, and allaying differences between the Porte and the Christian subjects of the Sultan, and that, in the event of any decisive crisis presenting itself, despite their efforts, both were equally resolved to seek for its solution in the general agreement of the Great European Powers.

We have not ceased to hold these views. We believe that their perfect analogy renders possible a thorough understanding between the Government of Her Britannic Majesty and ourselves, and we attach the greatest value to it, as the best guarantee for the preservation of peace and the balance of power in Europe

from dangers which may result from complications in the East. By the order of His Majesty the Emperor your Excellency is authorized to repeat this assurance to Lord Granville. We shall sincerely congratulate ourselves if the frankness of these explanations may contribute to that end by removing every possibility of misunderstanding between the Government of Her Britannic Majesty and ourselves.

Receive, &c.,

(Signed) GORTSCHAKOFF.

EARL GRANVILLE TO SIR A. BUCHANAN. Foreign Office, Nov. 10, 1870.

Sir, Baron Brunnow made to me yesterday the communication respecting the Convention between the Emperor of Russia and the Sultan, limiting their naval forces in the Black Sea, signed at Paris on the 30th of March, 1856, to which you allude in your telegram of yesterday afternoon.

In my despatch of yesterday I gave you an account of what passed between us, and I now propose to observe upon Prince Gortschakoff's despatches of the 19th and 20th ult., communicated to me by the Russian Ambassador on that occasion.

Prince Gortschakoff declares, on the part of His Imperial Majesty, that the Treaty of 1856 has been infringed in various respects to the prejudice of Russia, and more especially in the case of the Principalities, against the explicit protest of his representative, and that, in consequence of these infractions, Russia is entitled to renounce those stipulations of the Treaty which directly touch her interests.

It is then announced that she will no longer be bound by the Treaties which restrict her rights of sovereignty in the Black Sea.

We have here an allegation that certain facts have occurred which, in the judgment of Russia, are at variance with certain stipulations of the Treaty, and the assumption is made that Russia, upon the strength of her own judgment as to the character of those facts, is entitled to release herself from certain other stipulations of that instrument.

This assumption is limited in its practical application to some of the provisions of the Treaty, but the assumption of a right to renounce any one of its terms involves the assumption of a right to renounce the whole.

This statement is wholly independent of the reasonableness or unreasonableness, on its own merits, of the desire of

Russia to be released from the observation of the stipulations of the Treaty of 1856 respecting the Black Sea.

For the question is, in whose hand lies the power of releasing one or more of the parties from all or any of these stipulations?

It has always been held that that right belongs only to the Governments who have been parties to the original instrument.

The despatches of Prince Gortschakoff appear to assume that any one of the Powers who have signed the engagement may allege that occurrences have taken place which in its opinion are at variance with the provisions of the Treaty; and although this view is not shared nor admitted by the co-signatory Powers, may found upon that allegation, not a request to those Governments for the consideration of the case, but an announcement to them that it has emancipated itself, or holds itself emancipated, from any stipu. lations of the Treaty which it thinks fit to disprove. Yet it is quite evident that the effect of such doctrine, and of any proceeding which, with or without avowal, is founded upon it, is to bring the entire authority and efficacy of Treaties under the discretionary control of each one of the Powers who may have signed them; the result of which would be the entire destruction of Treaties in their essence. For whereas their whole object is to bind Powers to one another, and for this purpose each one of the parties surrenders a portion of its free agency, by the doctrine and proceeding now in question one of the parties in its separate and individual capacity may bring back the entire subject into its own control, and remains bound only to it. self.

Accordingly, Prince Gortschakoff has announced in these despatches the intention of Russia to continue to observe certain of the provisions of the Treaty. However satisfactory this might be in itself, it is obviously an expression of the free will of that Power, which it might at any time alter or withdraw; and in this it is thus open to the same objections as the other portions of the communications, because it implies the right of Russia to annul the Treaty on the ground of allegations of which she constitutes herself the only judge.

The question therefore arises, not whether any desire expressed by Russia ought to be carefully examined in a friendly spirit by the co-signatory Powers, but whether they are to accept from her the announcement that, by her own act, without any consent from them,

she has released herself from a solemn covenant.

I need scarcely say that Her Majesty's Government have received this communication with deep regret, because it opens a discussion which might unsettle the cordial understanding it has been their earnest endeavour to maintain with the Russian Empire; and for the abovementioned reasons it is impossible for Her Majesty's Government to give any sanction, on their part, to the course announced by Prince Gortschakoff.

If, instead of such a declaration, the Russian Government had addressed Her Majesty's Government and the other Powers who are parties to the Treaty of 1856, and had proposed for consideration with them, whether any thing has occurred which could be held to amount to an infraction of the Treaty, or whether there is any thing in the terms which, from altered circumstances, presses with undue severity upon Russia, or which, in the course of events, had become unnecessary for the due protection of Turkey, Her Majesty's Government would not have refused to examine the question in concert with the co-signatories to the Treaty. Whatever might have been the result of such communications, a risk of future complications and a very dangerous precedent as to the validity of international obligations would have been avoided.

I am, &c., (Signed)

GRANVILLE. P.S.-You will read and give a copy of this despatch to Prince Gortschakoff.

PRINCE GORTSCHAKOFF TO BARON
BRUNNOW.

Czarskoe Selo, 8 (20) November, 1870.

M. le Baron,-The English Ambassador has read to and given me a copy of a despatch of Lord Granville relating to our communications of the 19th (31) of October.

I have hastened to place it before His Majesty the Emperor. It has pleased our August Master to notice, first, the earnest desire of the Cabinet of London to maintain a cordial understanding between England and Russia, and secondly, the assurance that it would not refuse to examine the modifications which circumstances have caused in the results of the Treaty of 1856. As regards the view of strict right laid down by Lord Granville we do not wish to enter into any discussion, recall any precedent, or cite any example, because such a debate would not conduce to the understanding that we desire.