The Press.
London, England, 1855-12-22 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 22,1855.

LONDON,ISATURDAY, DECEMBER 22, 1855.

THE negotiation in progress has advanced one
considerable stage. Prince ESTERIIAZY has
left Vienna for St Petersburg, hearing the
conditions which France and England have
agreed to accept as the basis of a treaty of
Peace, and which Austria has engaged that
she will urge Russia to accept by every
means in her power short of actual hos-
tilities. We suppose therefore that we shall
hear no more denials of the fact that negotia-
tions have been opened, and no more of " the
canards of THE PRESS," in communicating to
the public a knowledge of that fact.
A. week or ten days must elapse before an
answer can be received from St. Petersburg,
and that answer may not be decisive. in the
meantime, the great alternative of Peace or
War continues to tremble in the balance.
There are persons who think it wise and
patriotic in this interval of suspense to declare
their hope and belief that the negotiation will
come to nothing, and that the terms are so
framed as to exAide any rational expectation
that Russia will accept them. There are other
persons who deem it their duty at this parti-
cular time to express their predilection in
favour of a war policy ; to declare that hostili-
ties have not gone far enough; and to assert
that no peace can be what they deem "just and
honourable " which is not founded on a total
prostration of Russian Dower, and the accept-
ance by her—as matter of compulsion—of
whatever terms the Allies may choose to
dictate. With neither of these parties can we
profess any kind of sympathy. We think that
the moment of negotiation is not the moment
for the expression of mistrust, of bluster, or
of defiance. When we make war, let us war
with all our heart and energy—when we nego-
tiate, let us negotiate with perfect good faith.
Let our action be sincere in both cases. It
would be nothing less than hypocrisy of the
, grossest kind to offer terms to an enemy
which we were perfectly sure beforehand that
enemy would not or could not accept : and it
would be a flagrant breach of the courtesy
which should regulate the intercourse of
nations, to offer conditions of Peace to our
foe, through our Government, while we seize
every possible opportunity of declaring that
nothing short of his total prostration will
satisfy us. On the conditions that have been
offered we must of necessity remain silent
until we know what they are. But we have
no hesitation in reiterating our opinion that a
Peace which shall secure the direct tangible
objects of the War ought to be acceptable to
all this country, and

conceive that our enemy is to be crushed in
Asia Minor, in the Baltic, and in Southern
Russia, in one campaign more. We have
suffered enough from underrating the re-
sources of Russia. Through that error Kars
has been sacrificed. We do not doubt the
ability of the Allies to exhaust Russia should
they set themselves to the work. But let us
not close our eyes to the cost of such an
achievement, to the waste of blood it must
entail, to the woeful destniaties it must occa-
sion. And if there he not Peace now, or rather

if it be impossible now to conclude Peace on
satisfactory conditions, nothing short of the
exhaustion of Russia will enable us to extort
them.
The difference between the policy which
THE PRESS has advocated, and that proclaimed
by some speakers and writers professing to
represent Conservative sentiments, amounts
to this—that we believe a solid and satisfac-
tory Peace may now be effected by treaty with
Russia. while they believe it can only be
effected by the annihilation of her power.
Reason as we may, the difference returns to
this. They have no faith in those principles
of policy and those mutual guarantees and
engagements upon which the division of
European power and the integrity of the
boundary lines of States depend. A treaty is
with them but a bit of paper, a seal but a
morsel of wax. We believe, on the contrary,
that it is those principles and guarantees
which preserve the peace of the world ; that
without them there would be perpetual war;
that the progress of civilisation is towards
a more solemn recognition and sacred mainte
nance of treaties ; and that as they extend wider
and take in outlying nations (as unhappily
Turkey has been until this day). and as they
are joined in by a greater number of States,
there is less probability that they will be
invaded, and stronger assurance that the State
which attempts to violate them will be
promptly restrained in its aggressive course.
The parties who are forward in reproaching
THE Panss for its advocacy of a pacific policy
would do well to recollect that the Eastern
Question never can be settled by arms alone.
When arms have done all they can, we shall
have to revert to pacific arrangement still. It
is not as if the War concerned only a parti-
cular patch of territory. Arms might then
solve the dispute, by the stronger party seizing,
retaining, and fortifying it. But the present
War concerns the navigation of a sea of most
peculiar configuration, of which the gates are
in the possession of Turkey, and of which the
shores are nearly divided between her and her
opponent. It concerns the freedom of a river,
of which Austria holds the upper part, and
of which one bank at its mouth is the
territory of Turkey and the other of Rus-
sia. It concerns the internal regulations of
the Ottoman empire itself, and the amount
of protection and privilege which shall
be accorded to the Christian populations
dwelling within its borders, far exceeding in
number the dominant Ottoman class. It con-

arranged with strict regard to the policy most
equitable to the contending Powers, and most
likely to preserve the peace of Europe. We
think that the time for such settlement has
come, if it is ever to take place, without resort
to a ‘,ar of extermination.
ln favour of such a war it may be said, that
it will bring our enemy to our feet, that it will
make him sue for peace, that it will enable us
to dictate our own terms. Let us grant all
these hopeful anticipations—let us suppose
them realised ; and we are still prepared to
contend that a Peace is much more likely to
be durable which is effected by Powers meet-
ing on terms of equality, than a Peace which
is " dictated " by one party, and accepted
only through dire necessity by another.
The milers at Tag PaEss do not seem to
understand the ridiculous position in which
they place themselves by accusing it of being
actuated only by hostility to the Government.
Why, so far as principles and policy are con-
cerned at this time, THE PRESS gives powertul
support to the Government. With the Cabinet
individually it has nothing to do ; but it is
extremely doubtffil whether the Government
would ever have assumed the attitude it has •
done. had not THE Passs previously declared
that terms of Peace might now be considered
with due regard to the honour and interests of
the country, and that the opportunity appeared
favorable for attaining the objects of the War
without further prolongation of it. THE
PRESS is to be decried, and the Government is
to be supported.! Do the people who exclaim
thus, understand what is passing before their
eyes? Do they know that the Government in
opening pacific negotiation have acted as if
they obeyed the promptings of THE PRESS ?
But there is the hope that the Government
may be insincere! They must have the benefit
of the doubt while it lasts ; it will be time to
turn against them when they are convicted of
insincerity ! Their failure would be held as
evidence of their capacity. It' it can be shown
that they conducted the negotiation without a
thought or wish for its success, they will earn
the cordial support of the parties who now
draw a distinction between the honest. advo-
cacy of !peace by THE PEERS, and what in
their cunning they tak • to be the dishoneat,
action of the Governme' tto disconcert,it.
The recommendation. of a pacific policy
would no doubt be not oily unwise, but culpa-
ble, if it tended to impede preparation for
war, or in any way to impair or mar its efficient
prosecution Some mit. Is may be incapable
of understanding a policy which would always
keep peace in view as the end of war, but
which would at the same time collect all the
agencies of war in irre:,i -tible strength as the
means by which peace at, to bo attained. But
that is the policy, we venture to say, which is
best for the interests, and most conducive to
the honour, of this country. it is the policy
which we shall never cease to advocate. And
whatever may be our state of preparation, or
whatever advantages certain pers, among
us may expect from a continuance
lr of glory

I

until we know wnat tney are. .uto, 1. .....s. ....... —........._ ___,.._ _ .
no hesitation in reiterating our opinion that a of protection and privilege which shall which wo shall never cease Lo auvocto,c. num
Peace which shall secure the direct tangible be accorded to the Christian populations whatever may be our state of preparation, or
objects of the War ought to be acceptable to dwelling within its borders, far exceeding in whatever advantages certain persons among
all parties and classes in this country, and number the dominant Ottoman class. It con- us may expect from a continuance of war—or
would be of an essentially Conservative charac- cerns the settlement of that wide and ill- whatever lures of glory and succeworici -of
ter. It cannot be our policy to hazard even defined frontier in Asia Minor where the passion and ambition, may be thrown nut, igs ~ ,
one more campaign for the attainment of empires of Turkey and Russia are brought face tempt us onward—we shall still sax.
I.lsss ~..I.:' 7 ..s,
objects which are now within our grasp; nor to face, and where the Turkish power is cannot cease too soon when its objeffis . :77 -.,
to prolong hostilities for an indefinite pur- naturally so weak that no security exists obtained, and
thattt it is impossiWe.4o :, "'
I' ' 7:,
pose. But if Peace be not concluded now, against a hostile irruption, which might carry to be otherwie han honouratire-efato • ..., . . ....
from any radical opposition between the views the foe within sight of Constantinople. The what the attitude of the belligeffhteit4 '^•;,'"%,', ;;;'.
of the Allies and of Russia, it is not one more inherent difficulties attending the solution of when the side which haa taken ni) 1
campaign which will decide the contest. The these several points are so great that arms I right and sound policy concludes the eu .. , , cr,
blindest piejudic,e, er grossest folly, can alone alone can never settle them. They must be I without advantage to itself, aintenti' ;.• -' • m.l
1
. - ---- -- - - ---- - - _.
. _
. a