"historian may bear this title: England and Europe saved, 20thi "January, 1875."

Subsequent events have shown that it was not a commencement but an ending. The triumph in itself was complete, for no St. Petersburg Congress ever assembled. Little more than three months had passed away when England was again seen following the lead of Russia, by joining her in the farce played upon Europe by the alarm of war, of May 1875, when by the joint mediation of Russia and England the German attack upon France was supposed to have been prevented. Then followed the two debates of the Session in reference to the Declaration of Paris, in which the attitude of the Government was a source of such bitter disappointment.

These circumstances, however, we did not hold to be conclusive as to the intentions of the Prime Minister; they were capable of explanation by a want of support from his colleagues and the country. It was not until he himself came forward at the opening of the present Session, to defend the adhesion of England to the Andrassy Note, and to propose to make the QUEEN Empress of INDIA as the only answer to the breach of faith committed by Russia in Central Asia, and as the only means of opposing her aggressions there, that all hope had to be abandoned from that quarter. That is to say, those whom we represent were once more in their normal position of labouring to save England and the world from the consequences brought about by England herself, either negatively or positively.

Had the refusal to join the St. Petersburg Conference been a real commencement, there would have been no alarm of war in May, 1875, no opportunity for a pretended Russian intervention in favour of France, which was used to put down a proposed debate on a petition to withdraw from the Declaration of Paris. There would have been no Herzegovina Insurrection, no Turkish repudiation, no Andrassy Note, or Berlin Memorandum; Khiva would not have been conquered, nor Khokand annexed. Russia would be at this moment not merely trembling on the brink of bankruptcy, but actually involved in it. Turkey would not have needed to dethrone a monarch, and would be not only tranquil but manifestly strong and prosperous; so that no field would be open for secret agents and diplomatic

notes.

France and England jointly would have regained their position as Maritime States, and thus the Military Powers would no longer be visibly threatening the world, and using that influence to destroy religion and to upset law.

But, it may be asked, has not Russia received a serious defeat by the late events: has she not lost all the advantage she had gained during many years of astute labour? After all the parade about the Andrassy Note, the Berlin Memorandum is withdrawn, just as the St. Petersburg Congress was never held.

Of the defeat of Russia there is no doubt. whether it is the English Government that has

See Diplomatic Review for July, 1875.

The question is, brought it about,

and why that Government has now taken the line of protector of Turkey?

We do not know how far the events of Constantinople took either the English or Russian Governments by surprise. But we do know that even before the downfall of the ex-Grand Vizier, influences had been brought to bear upon the Sultan, which had caused the announcement to be made beforehand by telegram that he would not accept the Berlin decisions. It was with that knowledge that England refused her adhesion.

We also know that Russia was at once at work to turn the popular demonstration to account by provoking an attack upon the Christians. The Softas themselves arrested and brought to the police some persons who appeared to be Khodjas, but were found to be not even Turks, who had been exciting them against the Christians.

Here was a case for serious inquiry, and the publication of all the circumstances to the world. We see the hand of England already, in the absence of any such step, and in the maintenance of friendly relations with Russia, notwithstanding her open support of Servia and Montenegro, and of the Bulgarian as well as of the Herzegovinian insurrection.

Russia at once lost her control at Constantinople when her creature MAHMOUD fell. There was but one means of regaining it, and that was to put England into her place.

The title placed at the head of this article has been suggested by the words of Lord PONSONBY during the Crimean War, to the effect that we were sending our fleets and armies into the Black Sea for the protection not of Turkey but of Russia.

Russia's "War" upon Turkey.

THE Times correspondent from Berlin wrote on the 17th of May in reference to Turkey :

"That Russia will be content to let things take the same course for another twelvemonth that they have been doing the last year, may be regarded as certain. No precipitate measures need be apprehended from her. She is quite satisfied to maintain peace by the peculiar process of enabling Servia and Montenegro to exhaust the Turk without let or hindrance from any one else."

To what extent has gone the means by which she has been preparing Servia to act as her instrument against Turkey, was described by the correspondent of the Standard a few days ago.

The regular army in that country is very small; when the militia were called out there were no officers to be found.

"The obstacle seemed insuperable, but it was got over, and eighty-three most experienced Russian officers found their way to Servia and instantly obtained high posts in the irregular army. In the same way twenty-four German officers were secured, and about fifty other officers of various nationalities-chiefly Italian-came in In round numbers, the Servians have thus the aid of about two hundred and fifty good officers, which the help of the best officers already in their own militia, has enabled them to put their whole force into excellent hands About six weeks ago the Servian Government managed to get into Belgrade sixty thousand Snider rifles, with a very large store of ammunition for them. Where these came from, or who paid for them, I do not know, though I might make a near guess That the Servians have artillery more than sufficient for an army of double their force is

a mystery, for in the winter all officers were bewailing their fate that they could no act, as they had not sufficient guns for a single division. Now they have, if anything, a trifle too many, but how they were come by nobody knows, or at least professes to know."

These preparations are for the present rendered unavailable by the prompt putting down of the Bulgarian insurrection, which was intended to prepare the way for a Servian invasion. It has turned exactly the other way, as it was the news of the outrages committed by the organised bands of foreign adventurers, round which were grouped the robbers and outlaws of the Balkan, by whom the insurrection was begun, which gave the immediate impulse to the popular demonstrations of Constantinople.

"Reform" in Turkey.

IN what is Turkish "reform" to consist? That is the question on which really hangs the fate of the world at the present moment. It matters not what Conferences may propose, what Congresses may decide, what ambassadors or admirals may order, what clubs may discuss or printing presses pour forth, all these being appearances only and not reality: Governments being without rules for their conduct, Senates without wisdom in their deliberations, the Press without knowledge for its guide, and the "modern man destitute of integrity "and judgment."

The whole question reduces itself to this single point; what will be the judgment of the Turks upon the REFORMS proposed to them from Europe. These so-called reforms are dislocating wedges driven into Turkey. The danger that she is exposed to is doubtless very great. Everything in Europe is false, and all Europeans are fanatical for their own ideas. Those who sincerely wish to uphold the Ottoman Empire will be the most dangerous councillors of all, because they will be those_most likely to be listened to. In his naïve self-sufficiency, what European is there who thinks that he has to understand something about Turkey before he can safely advise the Turks; or who does not think that he knows all about the East if ever he has had the misfortune to set his foot in Constantinople and to converse with a few Consuls and Dragomans?

Besides the well-intentioned councillors there are the designing; such as those who, during the Candian insurrection, put MUSTAPHA FAZYL PASHA (brother of the Pasha of Egypt) forward as the proposer of a plan for the regeneration of Turkey, and wrote for him a letter to the Sultan, in which he laid down as the basis of his reform that religion should no longer be allowed to have anything to do with public affairs. The scheme was in reality one for making FAZYL PASHA Grand Vizier, and for getting money from him. The programme of "Young Turkey" was published at Paris in 1867, in the Tablettes d'un Spectateur, which is a correspondence carried on by the writer of MUSTAPHA FAZYL'S letter, Mr. GANESCO, a Wallachian. But he omitted to publish one article which contained the pith of the matter, and was thus worded:

"Art. 13. The undersigned (MUSTAPHA PASHA) President of the

"Committee of Direction, engages to pay annually to the account "of the said Committee the sum of three hundred thousand francs."

A correspondence was afterwards intercepted and published between this MUSTAPHA FAZYL and the Russian Ambassador, in which he asked the latter to obtain for him the post of Grand Vizier. Upon this he fell into disgrace, and the party disappeared. It is only now that we hear of it again. Those who are supposed to have been the leaders in the late events are given that name by newspaper correspondents. But then the late Grand Vizier is called by them the head of the "Old Turkish Party." It is not, therefore, on such information that we can rely. The real state of the case can only be understood by the study of the documents contained in this number. They consist in an address to Mr. URQUHART from the Ulemas and Primates of Phillipopolis, and a petition to the Sultan from Adrianople for the restoration of the Great Council, which is given as a specimen of many similar ones from all parts of the Empire. The address from Phillipopolis was called forth by having read the letters of Mr. URQUHART, which appeared in the January number of this Review, on the Turkish debt and insurrection, and to which our readers ought to refer. They are principally occupied with the financial and diplomatic part of the subject, showing how the Turks had to get rid of their debt, how they had sinned against their own religion and laws by incurring it at all, and how they had been misled as to their own strength, and been made the dupes of Europe, when they suffered foreign advice to prevent them from putting down insurrection.

The effect produced by these letters is shown by the way they were received at Sophia, in Bulgaria, which is thus described in a private letter from one of the Turkish officials of that town, written to a friend in Europe :

"You cannot imagine the effect which has been produced here by "the Letters of DAOUD BEY.* Not only here, but in all the villages "between this town and Phillipopolis, you may see copyists occupied in "copying them at each corner of the street, for the thirty-five copies "disappeared in an instant, and we could not be content with so few."

A remarkable series of letters on Turkey also appeared at the beginning of the year in the Pall Mall Gazette, in which the people, their character, manners, and institutions were spoken of as an example to Europe. These were by Mr. BUTLER-JOHNSTONE. Their general sense may be summed up in the words written by Mr. URQUHART to this Review in 1867 from Florence, when he called our attention to the letter of MUSTAPHA FAZYL, already referred to, and ended with these words:

"In the actual condition of Europe the Turkish character is the "only point upon which the mind can rest without pain for the present, or fear for the future."

The object of Mr. BUTLER-JOHNSTONE was to show that Turkey was inherently strong because of the character of the Turkish people, and that while that remained unchanged, there was no need to

* Mr. Urquhart's Turkish name.

despair. He urged on them the necessity of restoring their old constitution, and traced all their difficulties and dangers to the fact of its abeyance.

We have it on the faith of the Times Pera correspondent, that these letters were translated into French and Turkish, and that they produced a great enthusiasm at Constantinople, he showing his sense of their importance by trying to turn them into ridicule.

We thus see what was the European influence that was brought to bear upon the Turks, not in the sense of European revolution, but of Turkish restoration. That ignorant newspaper correspondents should bo unable to distinguish between the two is quite natural.

The petition to the Sultan, which we publish in this number, for the restoration of the old institution of the General Assembly and the issue of a Fetva by the head of the law following upon its deliberations, is the proof what is the nature of the "reform" that the Turkish people desire.

With these, which are the sound elements that exist in Turkey, are, however, mingled other influences, derived from the false European instruction which has come in with the study of the French language. The danger is that these last should prevail among the men in power, partly on account of their having themselves lost the old Turkish simplicity, and partly from the effect of diplomatic pressure. If Turkey emerges with safety from this crisis, it will be from the restraint which the legal body and the people will bring to bear upon the innovating tendencies of men in office.

A Turk of the old school has written on this subject the following consolatory words :

"As to the rumours which appear in journals and letters from Con"stantinople in reference to changes in the form of Government, too "much importance must not be attached to them. The Ministers "cannot really change anything. They may write Constitutions on paper, they may publish them, but to put them into execution is " what they cannot do."

The new ideas have taken shape in two forms. A "manifesto" has been published in the Constantinople papers, and reproduced in European journals, which is said to emanate from the "Young Turkey" party, and to have been sent anonymously to the foreign Governments. Judging by the abstract which has appeared of it in England, there is nothing very alarming in it, though drawn up by a European, a Pole, as it is said. The worst part of it is the request with which it ends, that the European representatives should ally themselves with the party for which it speaks.

The document complains of separate legislation in favour of Christians, and declares that the evils their country suffers from are caused by the violations of law by the Sultan, and the absence of all control over his ministers. It complains of the debt incurred, and the way the money has been squandered, and asserts their right to depose a wrong-headed Sovereign. The weak part of it is in the remedy proposed, which is spoken of as "representative institutions." It is the Koran that is appealed to in support of their demand, as