The Express.
London, England, 1853-10-07 00:00:00

RUSSIA AND TURKEY.

Yesterday further despatches from Constantinople
via Trieate were received in London. Their date is
not later than that of advice, previously received,
viz., the 27th ult., which were expedited by special
Tatar to Belgrade and thence transmitted by the
Scullin telegraph. They confirm our earlier intelli-
gence. No declaration of war had been made by
the Porte ; but after the vote of the Grand Council
such an event was regarded ae highly probable.
The ambassadors were still seeking to retain the
Porto within the sphere of diplomacy, not altogether
without hopes of success. The Constitutionnel thus
states, probably by the aid of the French govern-
ment, the occurrences of the 25th and 26th ult. at
Constantinople "At the reiterated request of M.
de Bruck, the internuncio of Austria, the Divan
'vitt ou the Voth ult., to deliberate anew on the note
of Vienna. The Divan was unanimous in deciding
that the Porte could then lain than ever, in presence
of the interpretation given to that document by the
cabinet of St. Petersburg, accept it, without its
having first received the modifications indicated by'
Reschid Pacha. That determination was to be commu.l
nicated to the ambassadors of the Four Powers. The
Dime else decided that a grand council should he
convoked for the next day to examine the situation.
That meeting took place the next day, and this is
what is said to have been decided :—First of all, it
was resolved that the system of negotiations was ex-
hausted; next, all the measures necessary for the
last preparative' of defence were regulated; lastly,
it was declared that the moment had arrived for
making what was called at Constantinople the de-
claratiou of war."

From one of our German correspondents we have
the following:
BERLIN, Ocr. 4.
It is said, in the semi-official Austrian Correspon-
dence, that " His Majesty the Emperor of Russia is
solicitous for the maintenance of peace." This soli-
citude has been proclaimed a hundred times since the
outbreak of the difference with Turkey, and always
to delude Europe. It must be said that Europe has
exhibited a remarkable aptitude for its own delusion.
For whenever have these prolusions of peace been
aecompauicd by any renunciation of those pre-
tensions which have called two mighty armies to the
banks of the Danube, and outraged the feeling of the
whole civilised world ? And thus it is again. Look
at the language of the official organ of the Austrian
government, and you will find a glorification of the
Czar, his ardent desire for peace, and his readiness
to offer "an expedient" by which the Porte may
put an end to the present difficulties.
What is this expedient? In form—so we are
assured here, for the Correspondence does not en-
lighten us upon this point—it is a declaration to be
given to Turkey, not by the Czar, as would have
been natural and proper, but by the Four Powers, a
declaration whose only object is to induce the Porte
to sign away the sovereign rights of the Sultan and
the states. It is difficult to procure very ample in-
formation on the subject; but I may state, without
fear of contradiction, that the effect of the " expe-
dient," as intended by the Cur, and you may be
pretty sure that he will say to the Conference "Take
back your note" should its members not carry out
his ideas,—the expedient I say which the
Czar intends is not a declamtion which
would limit the extent or force of the
original Vienna note. It would, in fact, be little
more than a compliment, a gilding of the pin, and as
I learn from the best sources, would simply amount to
an assurance that in signing the original unamended
Vienna note, the Sultan surrendered none of his
Sovereign rights. Now a declaration is either true
or false. If such a declaration were made by the
Power!, it might be understood either as annulling
so much of the " note" as was inconsistent with the
Sultan's independence, and as restraining the powers
arising out of the document within reasonable limits,
which I will suppose is the view meant to be taken
of it by France and England—or the declaration
might mean that such were the notions of sovereignty
and independence held by the parties making it,
that they will not cease to treat the Sultan out-
wardly as a Sovereign power upon his signing away
the best half of his rights. This latter is what
Austria and Russia understand by the declaration
proposed. Thus the vaunted " expedient" of the Czar
is only a trick to restore the equivoque and paltering of
the exploded Vienna note. Me promoters say that
it offers to restore the common ground, which the
amendments of the Porte, and the explanations of the
Czar, destroyed. To my way of thinking, it would
restore a common hypocrisy, and perpetuate a com-
mon uncertainty. I know that in the eyes of many
persons, especially of the diplomatic class, it was con-
sidered a fine feature of the Vienna note, that it had
two meanings, sod I have read ingenious newspaper
articles in praise of its equivocal phraseology. The
act of drawing up a document, speaking with forked
tongue, is very well io its place, which I take to be
where mere personal feelings are in question. But
we all know right well, that the Czar wants the
Sultan's note for business purposes. Whatever right
it can be made to coney he will use, and use to the
subversion of the Sultans throne. . . .

I c.innot think that after its six months' experi-
ence, the British cabinet is to be duped into accept-
ing such an arrangement.
Thc following letter is from a correspondent who