The Sun.
London, England, 1855-08-07 00:00:00

PRINCE DOLGOROUKY TO DICE•ADMIRAL DUNDAS.

St. Petersburg, July 12.
I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your
letter of the 4th. It nattrally divides itself into two
distinct part.. Iu the first place it informs me that you
are instructed to demand the liberation of the English
officers and sailors made prisoners at Hangoe on the sth
of June. Afterwards it denies the accuracy of the infor-
mation furnished by our authorities in Finland respect-
ing the abusive employment of the flag of truce attri-
buted to officers of her Majesty's navy. Permit me, M.
l'Amiral, to reply explicitly to these two questions in
that spirit of frankness which is necessary in order to
arrive at a correct appreciation of the facts.
We possess three versions of the transactions at Han-
gne-Udd. The first is that of the, seaman Brown. It
affirms as a matter of certain knowledge the fall of Lieut.
Geneste, Dr. Easton, Mr. Sullivan, and the men of the
craw, all of whom Brown affirms were killed before his
eyes.

The falsehood of this version is demonstrated toy the
evidence of the persons Faid to have been killed. I have
nothing further to say on that subject. You, M. l'Ami-
ral, will have been the first to regret having given credit
to a report which Captain Fanshawe accepted without
sufficient verification.

The second version is that of Lieut. Geneste. It is
contained in a letter which he has addressed to Captain
Fanshawe. He gave the letter open to General Moller,
with a request that it might be forwarded as speedily as
possible. I hasten to send it to you herewith, in order
that you may not be ignorant of any allegation which
this officer may have thought proper to make in order
to justify himself in the eyei of his superiors.
The third account is the result of an official inquiry
made on the spot by order of General de Berg, governor-
general of Finland.
A comparison of all these statements authorises me to
consider as fully proved the facts which I am about to

repeat.
An armed boat was steered in time of war towards
the landing place at Hangoe-Udd. The officer who
commanded the boat came on shore, having neither
asked nor waited for nor obtained permission to do so.
He landed five captive Finlanders, whom he set at
liberty. If this was what he came for his business was
at an end when he had done thus much. Having landed
the men without encountering resistance he should have
left the share at once and returned on board the ship
Cossack. Far from doing this he left his boat and ad-
vanced upon the territory of an enemy. He was not
alone ; he was accompanied by several men of his crew.
With what intention l He says he wanted to communi-
cate with the man at the telegraph and to buy victuals
if he could. But these are not things which can be re-
gularly done under a flag of truce. An official message
is delivered by a military authority to a military autho-
rity. The people and the employe at the telegraph have
nothing to do with it Whatever may have been the
aim of Lieut. Geneste's expedition on the Russian terri-
tory—and I abstain from qualifying its object—it was
neither regular nor avowed. That is evident.

After leaving his boat considerably in his rear at his
own risk and peril, this officer fell into an ambuscade.
He did not at all suspect it, as he had'only seen two or
three women on the shore. Through his own want of
caution he was surprised- by a superior force. Then to
make himself safe he professed himself the bearer of a
flag of truce. Was iie entitle,' to do so ? Had he em-
ployed the precautions required of one who desires to be
recognised in that ebaracter before descending upon an
enemy's territory ? Not at all, Surrounded on all
hands, he surrendered himself a prisoner of war. Dr.
Easton, Mr. Sullivan, and the seamen shared his fate.

While this was going on the men left on board threw
into the sea the gun with which the boat was armed. In
the boat was found 300 cartridges, 400 caps, and two in-
cendiary tubes, wish their matches. Among the muskets
which fell into our hands several bore proof of having
been just fired.

The facts which I have stated were proved by the in-
vestigation which an aide-dc-camp of his Majesty the Em-
peror was commissioned to undertake immediately on
the receipt of General de Berg's account of what bad
occurred at Hangoe. This inv,stigation clearly established,
by the depositions of all the witnes,es of the occurrence,
that the flag of truce was not seen either on board of the
Cossack, or on the bhat sent to the chore, or in the hands
of the officer who landed. After this stltement, I would
ask, admiral, whether this officer bad any claim to be
treated as the bearer of a flag of truce, even if he had
hung, as he says, a white flag on a boat-hook ?
Is it to be said that any officer may forage an enemy's