[British Interests in the East.] No. 499.-DESPATCH from the Earl of Derby to Count Schouvaloff, defining British Interests in the East. Foreign Office, 6th May, 1877. TABLE. Suez Canal. Egypt. Constantinople. Bosphorus and Dardanelles. Persian Gulf, &c. Constantinople, Bulgaria, &c. M. l'Ambassadeur, I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Excellency's letter of the 6th instant, in which you inform me that you are about to proceed to Russia on a short leave of absence. As your Excellency will then doubtless have an opportunity of personally conferring with your Government, I take this occasion of placing before them some considerations of importance to the future good understanding between Great Britain and Russia. Her Majesty's Government do not propose again to enter on the question of the justice or necessity of the present war; they have already expressed their views with regard to it, and further discussion would be unavailing. They have accepted the obligations which a state of war imposed upon them, and have lost no time in issuing a Proclamation of Neutrality. They, from the first, warned the Porte that it must not look to them for assistance, and they are determined to carry impartially into effect the policy thus announced, so long as Turkish interests alone are involved. At the same time they think it right that there should be no misunderstanding as to their positions and intentions. Should the war now in progress unfortunately spread, interests may be imperilled which they are equally bound and determined to defend, and it is desirable that they should make it clear, so far as at the outset of the war can be done, what the most prominent of those interests are. [British Interests in the East.] Suez Canal. Foremost among them is the necessity of keeping open, uninjured and uninterrupted, the communication between Europe and the East by the Suez Canal. An attempt to blockade or otherwise to interfere with the Canal or its approaches would be regarded by them as a menace to India, and as a grave injury to the commerce of the world. On both these grounds any such step-which they hope and fully believe there is no intention on the part of either belligerent to take-would be inconsistent with the maintenance by them of an attitude of passive neutrality. Egypt. The mercantile and financial interests of European nations are also so largely involved in Egypt that an attack on that country, or its occupation, even temporary, for purposes of war, could scarcely be regarded with unconcern by the neutral Powers, certainly not by England. Constantinople. The vast importance of Constantinople, whether in a military, a political, or a commercial 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 witness with indifference the passing into other hands than those of its present possessors, of a capital holding so peculiar and commanding a position. Bosphorus and Dardanelles. The existing arrangements made under European sanction which regulate the navigation of the Bosphorus and Dardanelles (Nos. 193, 265, 439), appear to them wise and salutary, and there would be, in their judgment, serious objections to their alteration in any material particular. Persian Gulf; and other Interests. Her Majesty's Government have thought it right thus frankly to indicate their views. The course of events might show that there were still other interests, as, for instance, on the Persian Gulf, which it would be their duty to protect; but they do not [British Interests in the East.] doubt that they will have sufficiently pointed out to your Excellency the limits within which they hope that the war may be confined, or, at all events, those within which they themselves would be prepared, so far as present circumstances allow of an opinion being formed, to maintain a policy of abstention and neutrality. Constantinople. Bulgaria. They feel confident that the Emperor of Russia will appreciate their desire to make their policy understood at the outset of the war, and thus to respond to the assurances given by His Imperial Majesty at Livadia (No. 471), and published at your Excellency's request, when he pledged his word of honour that he had no intention of acquiring Constantinople, and that, if necessity should oblige him to occupy a portion of Bulgaria, it would only be provisionally, and until the peace and safety of the Christian population were secured. Her Majesty's Government cannot better show their confidence in these declarations of His Imperial Majesty than by requesting your Excellency to be so good as to convey to the Emperor and the Russian Government the frank explanations of British policy which I have had the honour of thus offering to you. I have, &c. [For the Russian Reply to this Despatch, dated 30th May, 1877, see No. 501, and Note, page 2627.] No. 500.-DESPATCH from the Roumanian Minister for Foreign Affairs to the Roumanian Agent at Paris, announcing the existence of a State of War with Turkey. Bucharest, 2nd May, 1877.* M. l'Agent, 14th (Translation as laid before Parliament.) THE publication in the "Moniteur Officiel" of the Conventions concluded between the Imperial Government of Russia and the Government of the Prince (Nos. 485, 486), and the Protest addressed on 2nd May by the Sublime Porte to its representatives at foreign Courts (No. 497), have informed you of our present position. The moment, therefore, seems to me favourable for putting on paper the reasons which determined the line of conduct forced on us by the exceptional circumstances in the midst of which we are placed. You are aware, M. l'Agent, that from the very beginning of the insurrection in the Herzegovina, Bosnia, and Bulgaria, and of the campaign undertaken by Servia and Montenegro against Turkey, the Government of his Most Serene Highness, in deference to the advice of the Guaranteeing Powers, accepted the obligations imposed by the strictest neutrality (No. 452); and if such a position could not be taken up without prejudice to our relations, both moral and material, with the population of the right bank, we could, nevertheless, indulge the hope that our conduct would receive compensation when the question of our neutrality came to be definitely settled. Thus, when more recently the outbreak of hostilities between Russia and Turkey seemed imminent, we suggested, both to the Great Powers and to the Porte, that the time had come for transforming and for placing on the footing of a formal right the obligations imposed on us by our neutrality, necessary for all sides, and which we have accepted, without gaining any advantage therefrom for Roumania. Nevertheless, the Great Powers, whether separately or united in Conference at Constantinople, refused to sanction a petition, which subsequent events have but too much justified, on the plea that the stipulations Communicated to Lord Lyons by M. Callimaki-Catargi, 16th May, 1877. which touch on this important point are insufficient, and without taking into account either the gravity of the situation or our real difficulties. On the other hand, the Sublime Porte, employing a system of delay which its own interests should have made it abandon long ago, maintained its refusal to settle the questions which have been pending these many years between the Governments of the Sultan and of the Prince. As a striking example of the Porte's conduct towards us, even at a time when its own interests called for good relations with our country, I may mention that it continued to deny us the recognition of the name Roumania, a title which had already received the sanction of all the Guaranteeing Powers.* Left alone, without either advice or support, we could not fail to find ourselves confronted by such a line of action as the imminence of war left us to anticipate, and which the attitude of indifference on the part of the Great Powers seemed naturally to authorize. Russia proposed to us that we should frankly enter into negotiations with her for the passage of the Imperial armies through our territory. She held the language of a Power which, having helped to create the Roumanian State, and joined in the guarantee of her political existence, had no intention whatever of giving the lie to her own work by a violation of our rights. Moreover, Russia appeared to us to be morally the mandataire of the Great Powers in carrying out a mission which Europe herself, in public and joint resolutions, had solemnly drawn up and agreed to. Had we, disregarding our legitimate sentiment of preservation, and failing to recognise the honourable character of the overtures made to us, given an inconsiderate refusal, and one which excluded all idea of assistance, Roumania might have found herself involved by her own fault in a fatal violation of her territory, of her rights, and of her dearest interests. I will not dwell any longer, M. l'Agent, on the urgent considerations which counselled us to adhere to the proposals of the Russian Imperial Government, and I leave it to the Conventions *On the 30th of November, 1876, the title of "Roumania" was recognized by Great Britain in a Declaration for regulating provisionally the commercial relations between the two countries, which was signed by the representatives of the British Government and of His Highness Prince Charles of Roumania. See "State Papers," Vol. 67, page 50. |