The Sun.
London, England, 1855-07-25 00:00:00

..././
I I -
-----,
---..„
.. , . .
. ,
' /05 18
• ..t.'
- r
*., ~,-, a , -
.. , 0.--..
i -
- q 0,,1
, ?4 I: ---°-
• 4,0„,:, ~„ .
cal 1 Aril
A :it
..________
.m. I' ..i,,;:. .
,„.......
~,,,,..
~ '7
''?,.,---77--•.
4 ,' 4 .
----, ) -,;,:*;
~..,..:...._................,-
r.,
..
lk : -11,
11....41,.
,e" r '7;':
xi
N4'''l'3'''''
'17.:- 1.-t''. I :4--;;,-\,:6 . . -',H..;:,.$ 1 :/,....„71
, 4, ' --s
- '''
'''''4,,,,,,,, .
/....—.15..i'0s 4...ziC .------.::-z,_,___1,..:
Y -;?2,
\'
4'1,1`., , ....\.,,,\,....;.. r
.12,3:,.., , ...... ,
' ,,...i..50,..." 4c.,... ,„. ~ l—:?4,
4..,,,,
~t,,-(-M,...,,,,,,z.5.
t5,,,,t.5.;-' :
.. D p
oL .1,
.)„.. '43 p..-i\'''-,,,...%.,
11 •• I ..:. r.;
~..)'.
'!II/Lliv..,_ cfet.,,:, 1 ..r ..,,,,,,,,,„.,,, _*„...4 . . , , —
::,„,,,p:,-,--it;;;,,,;,„,--.....,, ~„„„..,,.. . ~,..,,,‘Tryi,y
\-„--_—_,—, ,-., ‘ ...,........„..,12,_,:n„
.c.,.,
. Ap.
i ...,A4O" •,...,_
66 1.

LON D 3N, WED

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

(From the Morning Post of this. day.)

It bas been well remarked that the innumerable
sorties of the garrison of Sebastopol are explicable
only by the fact that the fortress has remained unin-
vested from the beginning. Restricted to no parti-
cular amount of reinforcements, unfettered in draw-
ing them along its line of communications, and plac-
ing them successively upon its ramparts —with a
blank cheque-book, in short, upon the whole
Scythian race—the town has been as prodigal in the
expenditure of blood as in that of ammunition. It
was never forced to live upon its own means—never
confined to its own resources. Relieving armies
would be a misnomer for the procession of hosts
who have proudly marched to the last bourne of
their stratagetic wanderings and removals in that
devouring gulph of war. They had nothing to
" relieve," in the_ military sense of the word,
but much to ro—ce. They came but to sink
with a clash of arms into that huge, ever-
open pit, which still cried to all Russia for
more=hiore ! Sebastopol is still besieged, if be-
sieged be the word ; it is not shut away, but it is
still assailed on the front originally selected ; and
as its outworks fall, and its defences recede inwards,
it displays, under the most advantageous circum-
stances under which a.city ever yet defended itself,
theinadequacyof resources far different from its own,
and far greater, to meet indefinitely the fierce, the
increasing, the persistent movement which is steadily
eating, as it were, through those bulwarks. The
meat service which Sebastopol has rendered to
Russia, the great experiment for which it has af-
forded fair and full scope, is this—that it has given
time for more than half of that empire to come into
collision with the besiegers of a single one of its for-
tresses. No besieged city could ask from time itself
to effect more for it ; yet, though all this has been
effected for Sebastopol, the result is that every por-
tion of that time, every month, week, day, and almost
each hour, shows that the attack gains instead of
losing strength, and that the position of the de-
fenders is worse in comparison, at each of these in-
tervals, than at the preceding. Sebastopol can no
more free itself from the augmenting stringency of
the siege than a nut can free itself from the nut-
cracker ; on the other hand, all the efforts to wrench
our vantage-ground from us have been frustrated;
all the sallies of the defenders have been defeats ;
army after army has crowded into the town to
choke it up with their dead ; and now, as we re-
cently pointed out, the last desperate efforts to
answer the incessant drafts on the empire portend
a sort of military insolvency. Our Paris corres-
pendent may well pause to reflect upon the deso-
lating march, at this time of year, over the water-
less Steppes. But what is the direction, and what
the length of this march ? Dreary is the
expanse of burning tracts over which a '
panting and diseased colliery are now hurried
towards the provinces of Kherson, from Pultava,
from Kieff, from Tchernigoff, from Minsk, and
Smolensko, and even from the Valdai Hills and
the fine forests of Ingria. They come fewer than
of old—they come more slowly, more painfully—
the need of them is greater—the enemy they will
encounter is more numerous, better equipped—
more terrible. The allies are indeed in a state
which, in every respect, presents an extraordinary
contrast to the hardships of their former situation.
All necessaries and all reasonable or attainable
comforts are theirs. The railway literally bears
" the sea's wealth" from the secure and now cheer-
ful-looking emporium of Balaklava to the very
bosom of the armed leaguer. The electric tele-
graph shoots the intelligence of its most casual or
most unexpected wants to the distant seats of
empire ; ready and resolute, and able to supply
all these demands as fast as they can arise. The
encampment of the allies is really like the home of
their country—it is the devoted city beneath them
which resembles an abode of intruders a
place filled, like a charnel-house, with the misery,
the necessity, and the despair of a sojourner and
the stranger.
Nor is the comfort of their present posture more
remarkable in the Allies than the tenacious vigour
of their grasp. While every sally against them, as
it has been truly noticed, is invariably knocked down
the steep hills again, like a drunkard who is hurled
back reeling and discomfited from some mighty arm
against which he had flung himself, only two of

their own innumerable offensive or extraneous move-
ments of a precisely analogous nature have been suc-
cessfully resisted, and one of these was victoriously
renewed the next day, with complete and bloody
compensation for that solitary and temporary failure;
all the rest—all the other attacks (sallies, let us call
them, since the allied camp has itself undergone, it
is represented, a sort of counter-siege), all the other
sallies, then, from the beleaguering lines having
been so many distinct, permanent, and firm ad-
vances, from which there has been no retreat or
retirement ever afterwards. Had the measure of
success attending the Russian defence been at all
similar to that which has crowned our attack with
continually renewed victories, and led it onwards in
slow, indeed, but undeviating, unintermitted pro-
gress, our forces would long since have been lying
many a fathom deep in the Euxine. They are
otherwise circumstanced. And shall it be said—
will such men as Mr. Bright and Mr. Gladstone cause
it to be said—that our enemies persevere amidst re•
verses, and that we falter in a career of triumph ?
that these barbarians, as some of us love to designate
them, can exhibit to us in their misfortunes a lesson
and an example which we have not the spirit to
emulate in our prosperity ?—that they bear a brave
heart through the still gloomier and gloomier sha-
dows of their truly awful situation, and that we sink
exhausted and dismayed under the light and encou-
ragement of advantages incessantly brightening ? If
so, the Russians have vanquished us already in all
the noblest qualities that war ever demanded or
warfare ever elicited. The question is now, as it
always is in such encounters, not merely which side
can inflict the severest pressure upon the other, but
also which side can bear the same amount of pres-
sure with greater constancy and more unyielding
faith.
We recoil from pursuing the obvious train of the
argument. It would lead us, were we to take a
wretched minority for the exponents of any consi-
derable portion of our community, to the most
humiliating conclusions. Doubtless it would be
more pleasant to achieve definitive success with-
out perseverance than with it. But we did not
go to war to consult what would be pleasant-
est. We have everything to cheer us. Never
was there a stronghold which has enjoyed such
means of throwing off its assailants ; never was
there, in all history, a defence of any fortress
made under more favourable circumstances ; yet,
despite of all these things, and—far more—despite
of all our own mistakes and errors, we have
now to look back on a continuous course of triumph.
We are not far from its crowning attestation. If,
under such auspices, we do not stand to this work
like one man till it be thoroughly done with, we
are unworthy of the associates by whose side we
fight—nay, unworthy even of the very enemies
against -whom we contend.

(From the Morning .Herald of this day.)
Yesterday Lord Palmerston took an affectionate
farewell of the Tenant Compensation Bill. The
curtain dropped—trhs. T
e anghueishfaorfeethheandobgleenleorednwtoars
daystoo burningand
nights
for tea
; deputations and divisions made an
agreeable interlude ; " the Irish members" had
established their claim to retrospective compensa-
tion for their deeds of
patriotism on the recent
divisions ; and the wrongs of Ireland have been left
as fresh as before the noble lord entered upon the
office of Premier. Was there ever such a mockery
and delusion practised on a British Parliament ?
" I must yield" (said the noble lord) " to the force
of circumstances. Time, and time only, compels
me to abandon this most important measure."
To estimate the candour of this announcement
it is but necessary to refer to the simple facts of the
case. The bill was compounded of two bills ; one
of which had been much disapproved by the
House of Commons in 1853, and was unanimously
condemned and rejected by the House of Lords in
1854 ; the other was the Leasing Powers Bill,
which passed both houses, and was generally ac-
cepted as a valuable and useful measure. Sergeant
Shee stitched the two together, and introduced the
compound as his bill, and after some coquetting,
left it in the arms of Lord Palmerston, to be dan-
dled and nursed. What was the duty of the Go-
vernment on accepting the charge ? Plainly this—
to revise the entire, to reduce it to a shape in
which they could stand by it as safe and useful,
and so that it might fairly be expected to pass the
Rouse of Lords. _

_
So long as the first seventeen sections remained
its rejection by the House of Lords was secured ;
for the Duke of Argyll, as chairman of the com-
mittee of 1851, had pronounced on this portion
the sentence that it was mischievous and absurd,
and therefore it had been rejected by the committee
and the house. The Government, however, now
proceed with these very sections, and these only,
on most of which, in 1853, in the House of Com-
mons, the Conservative party had voted in mord.

~'

[PRICT,4DiI STAMPED SD•

RUSSIAN ACCOUNT.• OF THE MASSAGER

AT HANGQ-UDD.

(Prom 'thiJoirnizlde St. Peter,ihottry, )
The Govermneut of .her Britannic Majesty ilas published
the despatches of Vice-Admiral Dundas and Capt. Fanshawe,
relating to the loss of the officers and crew of a boat belong-
ing to the Cossack mazy-of-War, This beat was captured on
the sth of June, at Ringo, on the coast of Finland.
The circumstances connected ctith this incident require a
most serious examination on the part of the Imperial Govern-
*lent, because publid oldnion, the press, and the English Go-
vernment, trusting to afn incorrect representation of the facts,
have formed a most erroneous judgment on the affair. We
are bound in honour to expose the falsity-of this jndgment.
For this purpose we shall commence by correcting the
errors of the version given by Captain Fanshawe' to the
Coinmander;in-Chief of the naval forces of her Britannic
Majesty.
This officer was not present at the action. He was out at
sea, at a distance of 2.1 miles from Hauge.. The account which
he delivered to Admiral Dandas on the 6th of June, the morn-
ing after the event, does not contain, therefore, any relation
of facts attested by himself of his own-private knowledge.
This version depends solely on the verbal deposition of John
Brown, a cemmon sailor, who was the only witness of .what
took place.
.According to his testimony` 50`0 Russian chasseurs, armed
with muskets, appeared on the landing-place at the moment
when Lieutenant Geneste, with a flag of truce in his hand,
stepped op shore to explain the object of his mission. The
first allegation is false. This is contradicted by Lieut.Geneste
himself. We shall prove this in a way that cannot be disputed,
inasmuch as the testimony is derived from a written commu-
nication by the lieutenant himself.
The second assertion of the sailor Brown is as much a fabri-
cation as the other. He affirms that the English officers were
all killed by the discharge of musketry. Of this fact he de-
clares himself certain, Fortunately the falseness of this de-
claration is established by a proof which cannot be contro-
verted, for it depends upon living testimony. Lieut. Geneste,
Doctor R. Easton, and . Mr.• Sullivan are neither killed nor
wounded. All three are safe and sound. Four other persons
of the crew were taken unhurt. Four were wounded. One
of this number is a man named Gliddon, who, according to
Brown, was killed by the bayonet beforehis eyes.
Allowing that the incorrectness of the first deposition of the
sailor is excusable, inasmuch as it was taken clown the morn-
ing after the action, when he returned wounded from the con-
test of the morning of the 6th of June, still we have a right to
expect that a second declaration made deliberately op the 11th
should have been more truthful, inasmuch as he had then re-
covered from his wound. Nevertheless, he for the second time,
positively swore to the death of Lieut. Gefteste, of Doctor
Easton, and of all the boat's crew. He declared that he saw
them all, without any exception, fall one after the other.
On the faith of this deposition, brought forward for the
second time, Captain Fanshawe, we cannot doubt, thought
that he was only fulfilling his duty in laying before his com-
mander the facts as they had been represented to him.,
These facts, transmitted to the Admiralty, without any
previous verification, have acquired in 'England the odious
name of " the Massacre at flange."
We abstain from passing any opinion on the commentaries
which, at a Parliamentary sitting, conferred on a narration,
unsupported by any proof, the dignity of a question of inter-
national law.
We might content ourselves brmeeting this narration by a
simple denial. But we cannot stop here when a question
arises concerning the military honour of our officers, who are
called upon to fulfil their duty in all due faith in the defence
of their country, invaded by the enemy. We consider, more-
over, that, out of respect for the opinion of all friendly
powers,• ws are bound, to defend the true principles upon
which reposes—according to the Law of nations—the impre-
scriptible right of a legitimate defence.
In the fulfilment of this duty, we will specify the facts ac-
cording to the exact truth.
For this purpose let us first confront the version of the sea-
man Brown with the account given to Captain Fanshawe by
Lieutenant Geneste himself. This •officer, after being made
prisoner, placed a written account, unsealed, in the hands of
our authorities, in order to be transmitted to his commander
at the first convenient opportunity.
The following are the details contained in this account :
The ostensible object of the mission entrusted to this officer
was to land five Finlanders belonging to our merchant navy,
and taken prisoners by the English cruiser. •
With this intention he directed his course, on the 12th of
June, to the landing-place at Hango-Udd. He sailed, ac-
cording to his own account, in a cutter, bowing a flag of
truce. Having arrived at the landing-place, " he saw no ;
persons on the shore, with the exception of two or three
women, who kept close to the houses." Here, then, is a
proof, by the lieutenant's own testimony, that the deposition
of the seaman Brown was false. The latter declared that the
boat on its arrival was attacked by 500 armed men.
After having put the Russian prisoners on shore Lieut.
Geneste, instead of terminating thus the object of his mission,
without meeting any opposition, went beyond this. He went,
he says, towards the houses, in order to communicate with
the people and with the officer of the telegraph.
He then set out with Dr. Easton and several of the crew
" to buy, if possible, fresh provisions." This recital, which
we reproduce word for word, proves incontestibly that there
was no question of a " parley." In other words, there wan
no official -propnsition to be transmitted from one militant,
authority to another, in war time, under the protection of a
white flag. The object, to say the least, was to forage in an
enemy's country, find it might have been to push forward a
reconnaissance, either for the purpose of becoming acquainted
with the ground or surprising an advanced post near the
telegraph.
Whatever was the object of this enterprise, in no case could
it or' ought it be supposed to be under the protection of a flag
of truce, which can only be legally employed for an avowed
purpose in official parleys. In spite of this role, which is,
universally recognised, Lieutenant Geneste declares that he
caused one of his crew to carry a flag of truce attached to ai
staff.
Having advanced in this manner in a hostile country, this
officer, at a distance of 50 yards from his own boat, accord-
ing to his own confession, was surprised by our soldiers, of
whose presence be was ignorant, as they were in ambush
behind the rocks. To defend himself from this unforeseen
attack he endeavoured to shelter, himself under the protec-
tion of the white flag. But by this strategem he could not
repair the fault he had committed in advancing into a hostile
country, without having previously, as he ought to have done,
made himself certain that his flag of truce was. legally recog,
nised and admitted by our authorities. Surrounded on all
sides, he surrendered. Dr. Easton, Mr. Sullivan, -and eight
of the crew shared his captivity. Six persons died. in thin

-- •
wo campaigns in the Black Sea and the Baltic that on more
"than one.occasion the officers- of the English navy have made .
use of the stratagem of hoisting a white flag, either for ,34:
purpose of taking soundings, or of capturing our n/rehaut ztl
vessels. We will not, lit of the employthent, of
stratagems in war time. • t on our part,
on the incoutestible right o power to preH.
vent the success of these stratagems, a o turn them, if pos.
sible, against tbe, enemy which makes use of them, bis rule
of precaution, and, in case °trim], of repression, comes with"
in the limits oflegltimate defence, which is the supreme lave
when the safety of states is concerned. In this way the law ,
of nations has put certain limitations to the immunities en-
joyetillay a-flag of. truce, limitations clearly defined by custom,
and which no one must transgress with impuPitY7•T Applying
this rule to the circumstances which have justhappened at
Hango, we vvid appeal to the maxims consecrated by the law
of nations, according to the acknowledged authority of
Vattel.

" I speak, now,"..he says, " of herald's trumpeters, drum-
mers, who, by the law of nations, are sacred' arid inviolable
when they make themselves known, and as long as they keep
within the terms of their commission, the functions of their
employment. This must of necessity be the case ; for with.
out dwelling upon what we have just said, that means must
always be reserved to bring about peace, there are even
during the continuance of hostilities a thousand occcasious in
which.thapublie safety.and the advantage of the two parties _
make it necessary that! they should have the power of com-
municating messages and propositions." Book iv. chap. vii.
sect. 87.
" The prince, the general of the army, and each commau-
der-in-chief in his own department, have alone the right of
sending a-trumpet or a dram, and they can only send it to
the commander-in-chief. If the general besieging a town
undertakes to send a trumpet to a subaltern, to the magis-
tracy or the citizens, the governor of the place may justly
treat the trumpet as a spy." Sec. 94.
These quotations are sufficientto settle that question, which
was specially the object of this explanation. Had Lieutenant-
Geueste any proposition to make ? He had none to transmit.
He was ordered to land the five Finland seamen. When he
bad put them ashore his commission was terminated. Foraging
in a hostile 'country is not delivering a message- It is au 01:1a-
ration performed by every one at his own risk. The whits
flag cannot be used to protect an employment of this nature..
To use the expression of Vette], " it does not enter into the
functions of the employment of the messenger."
Did Lieutenant Geneste make himself known? Did he sig-
nal his approach by firing a blank shot before landing, as Ad-
miral Dundas inquires No such thing. The white flag was
not perceived by our people either on board the English crui-
sing steamer, nor on the boat which came up to the landing-
place. The English officer did not assume the character,
since pretended, of a bearer of a flag of truce until he had
fallen into an ambuscade by his own want of caution. Finally,
we ask, was he sent in a regular manner by an English Com-
mander-in-Chief to a Russian Commander-in-Chief ! No. He
says-he was sent by Captain Fanshawe to communicate with
the people of Hango, or else with the subaltern officers
stationed at the telegraph. Was that a true message parle-
mentaire, regular, legal, avowed, and such as the law of
nations requires? Nothing could give it such a character,
under the circumstances which caused this officer to fall
into the hands of the detachments that surprised him on our,
territory, where be had landed as an enemy, without having
asked, waited for, or obtained authorisation. •
It -is not our intention to magnify the fault of this officer
in the eyes of his superiors. Having been charged with a
hazardous, compromising, ill-conceived commission, he has
paid the penalty by falling into the power of a superior force
of whose presence he was ignorant. Surrounded on all sides,
he suffered. the .fortune of war. As a prisoner of war, the
uniform he bora renders him inviolable ; but as a non-avowed
parlementaire he was not according to the laws of war. The
white flag is in our eyes too sacred to be degraded so far as
to cover with its protection any abusive stratagem by sea or
by land.
The_ Emperor, iii defending_ his country against universal
aggression which he has not provoked; loyally sustains,
sword in hand, the dignity of his crown and the honour of
Russia in a fair war, relying on the help of God, If the
enemy resort to artifice, it is for us to destroy its effect by
every means in our power consistent with the law
of nations. We hav3 just done so at Hango. We say
this fearlessly. The enemy has a right to regret his want
of success, when ho sees fail an enterprise which he thought
might be attempted with impunity under the white flag.
But he has no right to take a revenge by using injurious
language, and accusing Russia of having violated the laws
of war, which he is the first to transgress. Language so
insulting needs no reply. The same may be said of the
menace of reprisals, which we have heard with regret has
been employed in the English Parliament. We have 'been
astonished that, before hearing legal evidence, without veri-
fication, and on the word of a sailor, since denied by the tes-
timony of• his commanding officer, the word reprisals should
have been pronounced, and this at a moment when the Eng-
lish press publishes the misdeeds done at Kertch under the
eyes of a general officer of her Britannic Majesty, to a popu-
lation without arms. Certainly, in presence of such cruelties
exercised on our soil by an army of invasion under the British
flag, it is not necessaryto remind Russia that in the disastrous
code of war there exists the blood-stained word " reprisals."
We hurl back the reproach of this word to those who have
had the rashness to pronounce it first.
[The Journal adds to those observations the letter of the
Russian Minister of War to Admiral Dundas, limiting the
number of ports at which flags of .truce will be received, as
well as the reply of Admiral Dundas, pointing out the in-
convenience of such a measure. Both of these letters have
appeared in the Daily News. A third letter from Prince
Dolgorouky announces that the Russian Government has
added Libau, Windau, Wasa, and Torneo, to the number of
places whither flags of truce may be sent. A fourth letter
follows, the connection -of which with the foregoing is not
obvious : we however, append it.]
I•
Extract from a communication addressed to ;the Minister of
War, Prince Dolgorouky, by the Governor-General of Fin.
land. - - -

Helsingfors, July 2, 1855•

The English journals publish that the allied fleet spares
private property in the Gulf of Finland and Bothnia. This
is so little true, that, on the contrary, Me enemy's cruisers
destroy daily not only large and small coasting vessels at sea,
but even those which are at anchor and without masts, in the
Scheres, and at the extremity of creeks and gulfs furthest re-
moved from the coast. These little vessels constitute for the
most part the sole fortune of families in but moderate cir-
cumstances, and even poor.
At Nystadt, an open city, and without garrison, an Eng-
lish cruiser has burnt 14 ships and some private property.
These vessels were at anchor in the port without masts and
unladen. Eleven rotbers were greatly damaged by the flames.
At Puterlax, not far from Wyborg, the enemy burnt 30
coasting vessels; 'not content with this exploit: the enemy
proceeded to land little detachments of sailors upon different
parts of the coast, who entered isolated hamlets and plan•
dered the poor fishermen.

ill-advised expedition.
We need not say that the wounded obtained all the assist
ante which they wanted. Lieut. Geneste does justice to the
care and attention paid to him, as well as to his crew. I
This confession releases us irom the necessity of saying a
single word more for the purpose of denying the lying recite{
of Brown as to the pretended massacre of the English officers
and sailors, all of whom, he asserts, he saw killed one after
the other without exception.
After having confuted the verbal version of the sailor by
the written testimony of the English officer, it is our duty to
affirm that, on the arrival of the news of the incident at.
Hango, the Governor-General, Commander-in-Chief of th'r
Imperial Troops in Finland, without waiting for direct ordeip
from St. Petersburg, hastened to institute an inquiry on th
spot, in order to make himself acquainted with the exact
truth.
General de Berg entrusted this mission to Captain Tcher4-
koff, an aide-de-camp of his Imperial Majesty. The report
of this officer, dated the 30th of May (11th of June), is now
lying before us. The following is an abstract of the report
" The flag of truce was not seen either on board the Cossaqk
or on the boat which made for the landing-place, or in the
hand of the officer who landed and advanced into the Russian
territory. This declaration has been unanimously confirmed
by all the witnesses of the action.
" During the engagement the sailors who remained in the
boat had time to throw into the sea a gun of small calibre.
Among the muskets taken in the action, there were three
which it is certain, in spite of assertions to the contrary, had
been discharged. Three others, loaded with ball, fell into
our hands. In addition to this the crew were found to hare
360 cartridges, 400 caps, and two explosive tubes, with
matches. These warlike implements taken on the enortiy
are sufficient to prove that the expedition of Lieutenant
Geneste, although ostensibly under the protection of a flag
of truce, was not intended merely to put on shore the Fin-
land sailors who had been made prisoners.
This circumstance was not forgotten by General De Berg
in his answer to the official communication addressed to him
on the 15th June by Admiral Dundas. The Journal de St.
Petersbcntry having been authorised to publish these dodu-
ments, we content ourselves with referring to that pub4a-
tion.
However, we think it our duty to add a few reflections,
which appear to us to be the more valuable, inasmuch as
they are suggested by the experience of Admiral Dundas
himself. In a document addressed to Captain Fanshawe,
bearing date the Bth of June, published afterwards in Eng-
land, he thought it necessary to ask the following questions
" What means were afforded the enemy of accepting or
refusing a flag of truce before the crew landed ?
" At what distance from shore was the flag of truce hoisted
Was a blank shot fired as a signal ? Had the officer in com-
mand of the vessel sufficient reason for believing that the
enemy recognised the flag ? Lastly,
" Did the disembarkation of the prisoners take place with
the consent of the Russian officer on the coasts, or had they
grounds for supposing that this consent was granted or un-
derstood ?"
To these questions Captain Fanshawe has absolutely no-
thing positive or conclusive as a reply. The fact is that he
possessed no other information on what had passed than the
verbal testimony of the seaman Brown, and we have shown
above what was the value of that testimony.
When the report of Lieutenant Geneste comes before Ad-
miral Dundas, we are certain that this document will be suffi-
cient to enlighten him as to the nature of the facts. The
answer to the questions proposed by himself will show that
all the precautions, the necessity of which he has assert,
were neglected. No signal was made to give proper warninng.
to oar authorities of the approach of a flag of truce. Bon.
sent was asked or obtained to authorise the disembarekan;:.
The boat approached the shore ; the crew landed ; John,
advanced into a hostile territory without explallO _f truce.
out permission, without any recognition of fluesi fell in our
In a word, he came at his own risk. This crew to the
power, exposing his own life and that 0
hazard of a surprise. .• of vrhat passed.
Such is the pure and simple narra.uoto the false user-
This also is the only answer to be au°
im;Bngiflaanndgwo.i,t,h relation
tions which have obtained currency
to what has been called " the motherefrstp:oariadiircdeacubtefnuranetsdpcecurcnstts,aidneedvriend
As governments should pa
vra;:mthpincosed upon it. It was bound
although they may b© at
that a serious obligations
prevent all theegr
to seize upon tilts of the Natvoal F
manner ioees
occasion to co
with the COMmandetrh-ao -
Baltic, in order
whichof her
Britannic Majesty
mug
t
mistakes which Its aorfisaefifargomof the manner
(Prince Dol
Dundas
English navy Tn.
view the Minister of War
With this
was ordered by the Emperor to address to Admiralg
the communication published below. It bears date the 28th
We
the add to this the answer of the admiral, received
of June.
3 nth o f Jun o.
The publicity which we give by these documents will at-
test loudly to all friendly powers the care with which the
Imperial Government watches over the preservation of the
principles which international law prescribes to nations un-
happily engaged in a war which humanity deplores.
Russia will always respect these principles in the same way
as it will cause them to be respected, without allowing any
deviation
Ofromthcm under any subterfuge whatever.
Now w
_ 11_11o
._yu,l)y ezporionco acquired dudes the mail If