[Paris Conferences. Peace with Russia.] No. 268.-PROTOCOLS OF CONFERENCES between Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia,* Russia, Sardinia, and Turkey, relating to the conclusion of Peace. Paris, February to April, 1856.† Protocol. "State Papers," vol. xlvi, page No. 1. Opening of Conferences for conclusion of General Treaty No. 3. No. 4. Paris, 28th February, 1856. * See Protocols, Nos. 9 and 11. 63 65 67 71 + See also Protocols, May to August, 1858, and April to September, 1859, respecting the United Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia. See also Convention between. Great Britain, &c., and Turkey, of 19th August, 1858; Protocols between Great Britain, &c., and Turkey, May to August, 1858, and April to September, 1859; Firman of Sultan of 6th December, 1861; and Protocols, May to June, 1866. § See also General and Separate Treaties of 30th March, 1856; Treaty of 13th March, 1871; and Protocols, January to March, 1871. || See also General and Separate Treaties of 30th March, 1856; Treaty of 13th March, 1871; and Protocols, January to March, 1871. See also Firman of the Porte of 18th February, 1856. ** See also Convention between Great Britain, France, and Russia of 30th March, 1856. ++ See also General Treaty of 30th March, 1856; Final Act of 5th Decomber, 1857; and Protocol of 28th April, 1858. See also General and Separate Treaties of 30th March, 1856; Treaty of 13th March, 1871; and Protocols, January to March, 1871. Protocol. [Paris Conferences. Peace with Russia.] "State Papers," vol. xlvi, page of Foreign Consuls to Russian and Turkish Ports in Black Paris, 4th March, 1856. No. 6. Limits of Asiatic Frontiers of Russia and Turkey. Bess- No. 7. Bessarabian Frontier. Organization of Danubian Principalities. Invitation to Prussia to take part in Conferences. Cemeteries and Monuments of Officers and Soldiers of Allies in Russia. Amnesty.... Paris, 10th March, 1856. No. 8. Organization of Danubian Principalities. Vessels of War in Black Sea. Navigation of the Danube. Paris, 12th March, 1856. No. 9. Bessarabian Frontier. Asiatic Frontiers of Russia and Turkey. Organization of Danubian Principalities. Admission of Turkey into European Concert. Assent of Prussia to take part in Deliberations. Paris, 14th March, 1856. No. 10. Vessels of War in Black Sea. Mediation in Turkey. No. 11. Introduction of Prussian Plenipotentiaries. Closing of No. 12. Paris, 18th March, 1856. 94 94 95 No. 14. Christian Privileges in Turkey. * See also Convention between Great Britain, &c., and Turkey, of 13th July, 1841; and General and Separate Treaties of 30th March, 1856. + See also General and Separate Treaties of 30th March, 1856; Treaty of 13th March, 1871; and Protocols, January to March, 1871. See also General Treaty of 30th March, 1856; Treaty between Great Britain, &c., and Turkey, of 19th June, 1857; Protocol between Great Britain, &c., and Turkey, of 6th January, 1857; and Definitive Act of 11th April, 1857. § See also Protocol between Great Britain, &c., and Turkey of 4th Sepember, 1862. See also Protocols of 17th April, 1860; 3rd May, 1864; and 26th October, 1866; and Turkish Conditions of 31st August, 1862. See also note, page 1438. [Paris Conferences. Protocol. Peace with Russia.] "State Papers," vol. xlvi, page Adoption of 104 No. 15. Sovereignty of Turkey over Montenegro.* Articles I to XIV of General Treaty of Peace. Paris, 26th March, 1856. No. 16. Adoption of Articles XV to XXX of General Treaty of Peace; Separate Convention between Russia and Turkey relative to Black Sea; Convention for Closing Dardanelles and Bosphorus to Vessels of War. Paris, 27th March, 1856. No. 17. Adoption of Concluding Articles of General Treaty of No. 20. Raising Blockade of Russian Restoration of Prizes made after 30th March. Com- Paris, 2nd April, 1856. No. 21. Commerce with Russia. Maritime Armistice. Evacuation No. 23. Maritime Law (Privateering, Mediation§... .... 107 113 114 115 116 117 120 No. 24. Signature of Maritime Law Declaration.§ See also Conditions of Turkey of 31st August, 1862, and Note, page + See note, page 1579. 1438. ‡ See also Treaty between France and Monaco of 2nd February, 1861. § See Declaration of 16th April, 1856. See next page. The question of Poland was not discussed at these Conferences, see Note, page 1685. [Mediation.] No. 269.-PROTOCOL OF CONFERENCE between Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia, and Turkey, suggesting the reference of Disputes between Foreign Powers to the Mediation of a Third Power, previous to Hostilities. Paris, 14th April, 1856.* (Translation as laid before Parliament.†) Present: The Plenipotentiaries of Austria, France, Great Britain, Prussia, Russia, Sardinia, and Turkey. (Extract.) Mediation previous to Hostilities. THE Earl of Clarendon having demanded permission to lay before the Congress a proposition which it appears to him ought to be favourably received, states that the calamities of War are still too present to every mind not to make it desirable to seek out every expedient calculated to prevent their return; that a stipulation had been inserted in Article VIII of the Treaty of Peace (No. 264), recommending that in case of Difference between the Porte and one or more of the other signing Powers, recourse should be had to the Mediation of a friendly State before resorting to force. The first Plenipotentiary of Great Britain conceives that this happy innovation might receive a more general application, and thus become a barrier against conflicts which frequently only break forth because it is not always possible to enter into explanation and to come to an understanding. He proposes, therefore, to agree upon a resolution calculated to afford to the Maintenance of Peace that chance of duration hereafter, without prejudice, however, to the Independence of Governments. Count Walewski delares himself authorised to support the idea expressed by the first Plenipotentiary of Great Britain: he gives the assurance that the Plenipotentiaries of France are wholly disposed to concur in the insertion in the Protocol of a wish which, being fully in accordance with the tendencies of our epoch, would not in any way fetter the free action of Governments. *Not embodied in the General Treaty of 30th March, 1856, except in so far as related to Turkey. (See Article VIII.) + For French version, see "State Papers," vol. xlvi, p. 133. [Mediation.] Count Buol would not hesitate to concur in the opinion of the Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain and of France, if the resolution of the Congress is to have the form indicated by Count Walewski, but he could not take, in the name of his Court, an absolute engagement calculated to limit the Independence of the Austrian Cabinet. The Earl of Clarendon replies that each Power is and will be the sole judge of the requirements of its honour and of its interests: that it is by no means his intention to restrict the authority of the Governments, but only to afford them the opportunity of not having recourse to Arms whenever Differences may be adjusted by other means. Baron Manteuffel gives the assurance that the King, his august Master, completely shares the ideas set forth by the Earl of Clarendon; that he therefore considers himself authorised to adhere to them, and to give them the utmost development which they admit of. Count Orloff, while admitting the wisdom of the proposal made to the Congress, considers that he must refer to his Court respecting it, before he expresses the opinion of the Plenipotentiaries of Russia. Count Cavour, before he gives his opinion, wishes to know whether, in the intention of the author of the proposition, the wish to be expressed by the Congress would extend to Military Interventions directed against de facto Governments, and quotes, as an instance, the Intervention of Austria in the Kingdom of Naples in 1821. Lord Clarendon replies that the wish of the Congress should allow of the most general application; he observes that if the Good Offices of another Power had induced the Government of Greece to respect the Laws of Neutrality, France and England would very probably have abstained from occupying the Piræus with their troops. He refers to the efforts made by the Cabinet of Great Britain in 1823, in order to prevent the Armed Inter vention which took place at that time in Spain. Count Walewski adds, that there is no question of stipulating for a right or of taking an engagement; that the wish expressed by the Congress cannot in any case oppose limits to the liberty of judgment of which no Power can divest itself in questions affecting its dignity; that there is therefore no inconvenience in attaching a general character to the idea entertained by the Earl of Clarendon, and giving to it the most extended application. |