The Press.
London, England, 1854-02-18 00:00:00

FEBRUARY 18, 1854.

ample information that Russia was preparing military
forces to carry out her objects, whatever those objects
might be. They had similar advices in March, and
again in April. It was true that Count Nesselrode's
answers to representations on this subject were
evasive ; but there were the like accounts from our
own consuls and agents in or near the countries
where the forces were being collected. How was this
information received by the Government Merely
by sanguine hopes that the Emperor of Russia
would refrain from further increasing his forces or
abstain from using them. The Government, he
urged,
" had distinct intimation that the Emperor of Russia
was not likely to recede from the demands made by him,
and that he was about to march his troops into the 'wind-
pilities. But what was the language of the British Govern-
ment at the that moment, when the occupation of the princi-
palities was not a fait aeeumpli, but when it was stated that,
in the event of the rejection by Turkey of the demands of
Russia—demands which the British Minister at Ccmstan-
tinople, with his colleagues, was declaring to be derogatory
to the dignity and independence of Turkey—the Russian
troops would march into the principalities anti take posses-
sion of them as a material guarantee ' for the fulfilment
of treaties? Was there any language of remonstrance
heard from the British Government ? Was there any at-
tempt to point out the gross injustice which Russia was
&mut to commit, to throw the responsibility upon the
Emperor of measures which would inevitably throw Eu-
rope into collision, and to point out to him that, if he
drew the sword and took possession of territory which did
not belong to him, lie would be responsible for all the fatal
consequences that might ensue ? Not a bit of it. The Se-
cretary of Foreign Affairs on the tith of June wrote a des.
patch to the British Minister at St. Petersburg, in which he
said :

" The Eniperorteannot doubt the warm feelings of frienthihip
towards himself entertained by our Gracious Sovereign, and his
Imperial Majesty must be also aware that it is alike the duty and
the desire of her Majesty's Government to maintain the most
cordial relations with Russia, feeling how essential such vela-
Cons are to the pace of Europe, and viewing, as they do, with
alarm and abhorrence whatever may tend to the interruption of
that peace. Iler Majesty's Government do not believe that
Europe can be in danger of the terrible calamity of war from a
question such as that which is now pending at Constantinople:
they do not believe that the door will be finally closed against an
arrangement which to them appears to be still practicable ; and
they venture, therefore, to hope that the demands of Russia may
be confined to the recapitulation of existing treaties and their
tine fulfilment, but without seeking to extend that influence over
the Greek subjects of the Porte that Russia must always and ne-
cessarily exercise.'
It was upon language such as this that the Emperor of
Russia must have founded the conviction that he expressed,
that (treat Britain would never go to war upon a question
like the present. So far as their lordships' knowledge ex.
tended, the despatch he had just read was the sole re-
monstrance which at the outset of the dispute the British
Minister thought fit to make against the flagitious occupa-
tion of the Wallachia n and Moldavian principalities with-
out a pretext of excuse, except that the Emperor seized
them as material guarantees for the fulfilment of treaties
that he knew Turkey never would accede to, and which the
British Minister at Constantinople had encouraged Turkey to
resist and refuse, promising her in so doing the help of the
British Government. (Cheers.) Was that the tone and
language likely to act upon the Emperor of Russia or to
turn hint from his cherished purpose ? The language of
the Emperor had been consistent throughout. He had
taken up a position from which it was impossible for
him to recede, and which Count Nesselrode told Sir G.
Seymour he could not advise the Emperor to recede from.
No, he could not recede after taking the step of crossing
the Pruth ; but if the Government had pointed ont to the
Emperor of Russia that it was impossible that England
and France could suffer him to take possession of the
principalities, and that they were acting cordially together,
and would not witness a violation of the independence of
Turkey—if they had done this before the Emperor of Rus-
sia had committed himself, if such a representation had
been firmly and temperately made, it might, and he had
no doubt would, have had the effect of checking that inva •
sion of a neutral territory. ( Cheers.) If that had been the
language of the British Cabinet to the Emperor of Russia,
not concealing from him that a breach of treaty would
bring down upon him the united resistance of England
and France, the Government might have secured that
peace which they were so anxious to maintain. (Hear,
hear. )"
Looking towards the future, he saw no hope of
avoiding war. On what could Lord Aberdeen found
any such expectations? Could he hope that the
Emperor of Russia would suddenly recede from his
position ? If so, was it not the strongest condemna-
tion of the noble earl's former policy, by showing that
there were no grounds for not having earlier assumed
a firm and hostile attitude? He utterly disagreed,
however, with Lord Grey's opinion that Turkey ought
to be abandoned ; and, if the Government were in
earnest when embarking in war for her support, he
promised to waive all minor controversies and ques-
tions in order to support them in prosecuting a just
and righteous conflict.
The Earl of ABERDEEN remarked that whatever
course the Ministry had happened to pursue they
would have been equally certain of condemnation
from their opponents. As the case might be, they
would have incurred the reproach of rashness or of
timidity. He proceeded to contrast the speeches
charged with allegations that might provoke a vote of
censure, if not wanant an impeachment, with the
vague motion for some papers which was their in-
effectual conclusion. He reiterated his belief that