Page images
PDF
EPUB

remain the insuperable practical difficulty that I could not secure a night for the discussion. I cannot even yet learn when I am to get an opportunity for my Motion on Redistribution of Seats, which had to give way to the Budget a short time back.

I must, therefore, decline your proposition that I should bring forward this Declaration of Paris in the House.

I am, dear Sir, yours truly,

CHARLES W. DILKE.

St. Martin's Public Affairs Association, 229, Gooch-street, Birmingham, May 31st, 1875.

Sir, I am instructed by the above Association to thank you for your favour of the 27th inst. The Association would not again have troubled you with a letter upon this subject after your intimation of the pressure of business upon your hands, but that your last note conveys the impression that you, yourself, may still consider the "Declaration of Paris" binding, or the necessity of instructions from, or ratification by, the Crown in regard to Treaties as an open question. The Association does not do you the discredit to imagine that you do not understand the meaning of the passages quoted from VATTEL and BLACKSTONE, which clearly establish the necessity of ratification by the Crown of all Treaties; but, in confirmation, they call your attention to the 9th article of the Treaty signed at London, relative to the neutralisation of the Black Sea, and to the Protocol of the sitting of that date, which says:-"The Plenipotentiaries of Russia and Turkey announce that they have received authority from their respective Courts, to conclude a Convention to abrogate the stipulations of that signed at Paris on the 18-30th March, 1856, relative to the number and force of the vessels of war on the riverain Powers in the Black Sea. They propose to communicate this Convention to the Conference, and to exchange the ratifications of it on the same day as those of the Treaty, so that mention may be made thereof in the same certificate of exchange."

Treaties which involve supply or taxes, or an alteration of the municipal law, require in addition to all this the consent of Parliament, and that preliminaries of peace used to be there discussed has been already shown in the case of Versailles, 1783, and Amiens, 1802.

These are the requisites to make even a formal Treaty binding; but the Declaration of Paris, which is sought to be made binding by the arguments (if they can be so called) used by Mr. BOURKE in the House, and which we see are not applicable even to Treaties, is in itself no Treaty, but simply a declaration of a falsehood, affecting not only the taxes, but both municipal law and the law of nations.

And even at that it has not been acted upon, for privateering is not abolished (Spain, Chili, and the United States), and the principles declared to be inseparable have been proposed to other Powers piecemeal (England to the United States).

It may not be necessary that you should bring the matter before the House, but it would be as well to have no doubt in your own mind on the subject when some one else does. For what is the good of making or mending laws about redistribution of seats, or anything else, if they can be set aside in this easy way when made or mended ?

I am to enclose printed copy from Birmingham Gazette of letter from our chairman, in answer to the Law Journal on this subject, and ask your perusal of it.

I have the honour to be, Sir, your very obedient servant,
FREDERICK P. MOLES, Sec.

Sir C. Wentworth Dilke, M.P.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

April 13, 1875.

Mr. BOURKE said: "Both Houses of Parliament had refused to denounce the "Declaration of Paris when the subject had been brought before them. They "had refused to alter the terms of the Declaration of Paris, and he was a little "surprised to hear some hon. gentlemen say that because that instrument was not "ratified we were not bound by it. All he could say with respect to that was, that "he hoped he should never see the day when a Minister of the Crown, or one of its "law officers, would repudiate an engagement because it lacked certain formalities. "The Plenipotentiary had full power to sign the Declaration, and that went a "great way to show that the Declaration was binding upon us."

CONFERENCE OF PARIS.

[ocr errors]

April 8, 1856.

Count BUOL said that he was "not authorised to express an opinion upon a a matter of such importance— "The Plenipotentiaries had received no other "commission than to apply themselves to the affairs of the Levant."

The Maritime League for the Resumption of Naval Rights by Great Britain.

PRELIMINARY ADDRESS.

THE importance to the British Empire of the retention and the exercise to their full extent of those naval rights founded on the Law of Nature and sanctioned by the Law of Nations, by which alone a Maritime country can maintain its power on the seas, must commend itself to all who attach any importance to the existence of their country. The unauthoritative Declaration of Paris of 1856 assumes to abolish those rights, and Parliament, often appealed to to resume them by an authoritative declaration, has as repeatedly failed to do so.

It is apparent that a more thoroughly combined and organised action is necessary to obtain the desired result-that of freeing this country from the fetters of the Declaration of Paris.

On the 13th April, 1875, when Mr. BAILLIE COCHRANE'S Motion for withdrawal from the Declaration of Paris was presented, the House of Commons refused to entertain the question.

As the present House of Commons, therefore, has declined either to approve or to deny the necessity of the British Empire retaining its maritime rights and powers, and as the question is of the most vital importance to the existence of this Empire, it is felt that the time has come for uniting in one association all persons of every class who desire that the British Empire should remain a first-class naval Power, and who feel it their duty to work to this end. That the numbers of those who have this object at heart is very large is shown by the public meetings which have been held, by the numbers of petitions which have been addressed to both Houses of Parliament, and by the articles which have appeared in many of the most influential organs of the London and provincial press.

It is desirable therefore that all those who desire the attainment

of this object should enroll themselves as members of the Maritime League which it is proposed to form in order to achieve the result. The following propositions are laid down, as showing summarily the necessity for action in this matter:

1. That England, being a maritime country, must depend for her defence upon the power of waging war effectually at sea.

2. That war can only be waged effectually at sea by the capture of the enemy's property.

3. That by the Law of Nations every State when at war has the right to capture its enemy's property at sea, of whatever nature it be and in whatever vessels it is found.

4. That every State has also a right by the Law of Nations to arm and commission private vessels as an auxiliary to its naval force.

5. That the use of this auxiliary force is essential to the effectual capture of enemies' goods, as well as a necessary element in the development of the whole fighting power of the country.

6. That the exercise of this right of seizure and confiscation, whether by State vessels, or commissioned private vessels, while it is the most effective is the mildest and least cruel of all methods of making war.

7. That a document, known as the Declaration of Paris of 1856. nevertheless assumed to abolish this right, and to prohibit its exercise by Great Britain. 8. That nevertheless the Declaration of Paris has not been formally repudiated. 9. That it is therefore necessary that Great Britain should withdraw from the Declaration of Paris, and declare it not to be binding.

THE SOLE OBJECT OF THIS LEAGUE IS TO PROCURE THE WITHDRAWAL OF GREAT BRITAIN FROM THE DECLARATION of Paris of 1856.

The action of the League will be to spread the knowledge of the subject in every possible way-whether by disseminating that which has been already written and spoken on it by the most eminent Statesmen and Publicists; by private and public discussion; by lectures and public meetings; by addresses to Her Majesty, to Her Ministers, and to both Houses of Parliament; or by deputations to influential men; and, in case of a Parliamentary Election, by making the promise of support to a candidate dependent on his pledging himself to work for the withdrawal from the Declaration.

From time to time a list of the fallacies used in support of the Declaration of Paris will be given, together with their refutation.

After the first hundred members have been enrolled an Executive Council will be elected, by whom the affairs of the Association will be managed.

All those who desire to join the Maritime League are invited to send their names to the Honorary Secretary, Mr. THOMAS GIBSON BOWLES, 2, Harriet-street, Lowndes-square, London, S.W., to whom all communications should be addressed.

Printed and published by C. D. COLLET, at 22, East Temple Chambers, Whitefriars-street, Fleetstreet, London; and Sold by I. A. BROOKE, 282, Strand; Birmingham: MORRIS, High-street. Digbeth; Keighley: GREGSON, Low Gate; Manchester: Heywood, Deansgate, and HIBBERT, 67, Shudehill. And by all Booksellers and Newsmen in Town and Country.-July, 1875.

THE

DIPLOMATIC REVIEW.

"SO NATURAL IS THE UNION OF RELIGION WITH JUSTICE, THAT WE MAY BOLDLY DEEM THERE IS NEITHER WHERE BOTH ARE NOT.”—Hooker.

[blocks in formation]

Non-Intervention in the Affairs of Turkey
Traditional Policy of England and of Earl Russell towards
Turkey

PAGE

[ocr errors]

277

281

282

HOW THE TURKS MIGHT HAVE AVERTED THE CRIMEAN WAR 287
Kars

LATENT RESOURCES OF TURKEY AVAILABLE
FOR DISCHARGING HER DEBT

Petition to the Queen for the Removal of Earl Russell from

[blocks in formation]

292

298

[ocr errors]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

• 324

The French Government taking part against the Carlists . 330
The Ruin of France prepared for by the Reasonings of the

French

332

[blocks in formation]

THE continuation of the Ponsonby Correspondence has been put in type, but is unavoidably postponed on account of the press of matter relating to the European Conferences which it is intended to impose upon Turkey.

Historical Data for judging of the
Insurrection in the Herzegovina.

PERMANENT conspiracy maintained and sanctioned against the Ottoman Empire brings local and incidental insurrection, serving to illustrate the wonderful pertinacity in life with which it is endowed; and which would suffice to instruct the people of Europe, if they could be got thereby to perceive that not one of their Governments

[ocr errors]

could exist for an hour under the pressure of such grinding and decomposing action.

The Insurrection in the Herzegovina has led to a very remarkable incident, which is, that the discovery has been made that there are Christians in Turkey who take part with the Turks, and against the other Christians. The following will suffice as specimens of what has been often referred to lately in news from the East. Speaking of Northern Bosnia, the Times Vienna correspondent says (September 15):- "These attempts made to renew the movement in the "North of Bosnia are so much the more to be regretted as nowhere "is there less chance of even temporary success. The Mahomedan popu"lation is proportionately larger there than in any other part of Bosnia "and Herzegovina, while the 140,000 Catholics of Turkish Croatia side "with the Turks rather than with the Insurgents, who are heretics in their eyes, and the spirit of the Mahomedan population has been thoroughly roused. Without a single man of the regular soldiery they "have put down the first attempt, and they are now prepared and "organised, which they were not when the first rising occurred."

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

The correspondent of another paper says:-" The Belgrade papers "confess that all the Roman Catholic inhabitants and the wealthy "Greek Catholics have joined the Turks, who fought against the "insurgents and the corps of invasion (from Croatia and Servia)."*

We give this for corroboration to our students of what they have learnt and alone know; namely, that the Greek adherents of Russia have been made to pass in Europe for the "Christian populations of Turkey.".

[ocr errors]

Another element of discord appears among those Christian populations which are supposed to be the great danger for Turkey; in opposition to which we have not ceased to declare that the real danger for her lies only in the Mussulman populations. That is, when the moment shall have arrived when the evils imposed upon themselves and the weakness exhibited by their Government in introducing socalled reforms, and making concessions not for the good of their people but to get rid of the importunity of Foreign Ambassadors, shall have at length exhausted their wonderful patience and shaken their deep-rooted loyalty.

The one element of division is religion, the other is race; and this latter divides even where religion unites. The Greeks and the majority of the Christian Bosnians are of the same religion. But at this moment the former are, like the Catholic Croats, inclined to be with the Turks rather than with the Slaavs.

The Messager d'Athènes has lately had an article complaining of the changes that, have taken place since 1840, up to which time, it says, that the Christians of the East were known under the common designation of "Greeks;" but that since that time the spirit of "nationality" has been at work, and has imbued the Slaavs of Turkey with ideas and sentiments which did not exist before. An antagonism of races has been the result, and of this, created by herself, Russia has taken ad

Standard Vienna correspondent.

« PreviousContinue »