The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-28 00:00:00

to the belligerents and procured fer commerce this interval
of security and repose.
After having obtained this first result, the Plenipoten-
tiaries of Great Britain proposed to proceed in the next sit-
ting to the discussion of the prelimiharies of pease.
With this object Lord Russell, on the 12th of May, after
having referred to the adhesion of the Court of Vienna and
Berlin to the proposal to assemble in Conference in London,
in order to devise means tor the restoration of peace, recog-
nised that it belonged to the Plenipotentiaries of Austria
and Prussia to explain the motives which induced their
Governments to occupy a large portion of the Danish terri-
tory, and to make known the intentions of their Courts with
a view to the re-establishment of a solid peace.
In reply to this appeal, the first Plenipotentiary of Prussia
thought it his duty to declare that the German Powers,
before entering into a discussion on the condition for the
re-establishment of peace with Denmark, think it right to
observe that they consider " the ground of discussion as
entirely free from any restriction resulting from engage-
ments which may have existed before the war between their
Governments and Denmark. While thus claiming for
themselves full liberty of discussion, and the power of mak-
ing such proposals as they may
consider to be of a nature
to insure a solid and lasting pacification, the German Go-
vernments do not mean to exclude any combination which
may tend to attain that object, without prejudicing acquired
rights."
The explanations which were given by the Plenipoten-
tiaries of the German Courts on this subject in the sittings
of May 12 and 17 clearly brought to light a complete diver-
gence of opinion existing between all the members of the
Conference with regard to the validity of the engagements
resulting from the Treaty of London of 1852.
The Plenipotentiaries of GL 14.4cau ...i.ko;n.d the re-
spect due to tne sess,s.e.l obligations contracted by all the
Powers who were parties to that treaty. They observed that
though, strictly speaking, war may put an end to a treaty
between two Powers who have become belligerents, yet it
cannot release those Powers from their obligations to the
other Powers who joined in the signature of the same treaty.
They showed that before destroying this act that decision
ought to be justified by satisfactory reasons. In short, be-
tore abandoning an agreement, it ought to be understood
what was intended to take its place.
The Plenipotentiary of Russia expressed himself exactly
to the same purpose. "He maintained that before abandon-
ing a treaty which has been ratified by the Powers who
signed it in the general interests of Europe, it would be
necessary to bring forward reasons which should be gene-
rally agreed upon as satisfactory, These reasons must be
very grave ones. The Treaty of 1852 was concluded with
the objects of consolidating the peace of the North, and pre-
serving the balance of power in Europe. It was concluded
not only between the Powers actually at war, but also be-
tween all the Powers who were parties to it. Their represen-
tatives, now met in Conference, are assuredly at liberty to
exchange their ideas as to new combinations to be adopted,
provided that they are of a nature to offer guarantees for the
peace of Europe equivalent to those on which the system
of the balance of power now rests."
The Minister of Sweden, while adhering to the line of
argument of the Plenipotentiary of Russia, observed that,
as the Plenipotentiary of one of the Powers who signed the
Treaty of 1852, he must maintain that basis of negotiation
until it should been proved that it was insufficient to enable
them to attain the object of the present Conference; that,
before abandoning it, i; was at least necessary to be ac-
quainted with the exact nature of the arrangements which
it was proposed to substitute for it.
The Ambassador of France, animated by the same conci-
liatory disposition, asked ;he German Plenipotentiaries if
in case the arrangements of 1851 and 1852 should not admit
of being maintained, it would not be possible, in their
opinion, to substitute for them fresh combinations without
departing from the circle :raced out by the stipulations of
the treaty.
M. de Quaade maintained that his Government considered
the Treaty of 1852 as being still in force. Baron de Beust
observed that its validity had never been recognized by the
Confederation.
In the presence of such divergent doctrines there was
little expectation of being able to arrive at a result at all
in conformity with the thoughts of conciliation and peace
with which her Britanni3 Majesty's Government had in-
vited the Cabinets to cause themselves to be represented in
a Conference in London.
Nevertheless, however uncertain the hope of arriving at
a satisfactory conclusion appeared from the beginning, the
Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain, in entire accord with
the Plenipotentiaries of the neutral Powers, did not the less
persevere in their efforts to bring about an agreement be-
tween the two belligerent pal tics.
Anunasees se—. es.. se, 7,5.1
stwee,
of May 17, by recalling the engagement entered into by
Count Bernstorff to announce the bases of pacification which
the Courts of Austria and Prussia proposed to submit to the
Conference.
Protocol No. 5 sets forth the means which the German
Plenipotentiaries considered as the best adapted to bring
about a solid and durable pacification. To use the words of
Count Bernstorff, "it is a pacification which assures to the
Duchies absolute guarantees against the return of any
foreign oppression, and which, by thus excluding for the
future any subject of dispute, of revolution, and of war,
guarantees to Germany that security in the North which
she requires in order not to fall periodically into the state
of affairs which brought on the present war. These
guarantees can only be found in the complete political in-
dependence of the Duchies and their close connexion by
means of common institutions."
The Plenipotentiaries of the neutral Powers did not con-
eider this programme as positive, clear, and satisfactory.
They deemed it necessary to invite the German Plenipoten-
tiaries to bring forward their plan in a more precise form.
Count Apponyi replied "that the proposal comprises the
complete autonomy of the Duchies, with common institu-
tions and entire independence in their political and admi-
nistrative relations, in order to avoid the complications
which have hitherto taken place. As to the question of the
succession it remains open, the Diet having
only suspended
its solution without pronouncing on the rights of the King
of Denmark.
The Earl of Clarendon could not refrain from observing
that the proposal of the German Plenipotentiaries was so
vague that no member of the Conference could understand
its bearing.
The language of the Plenipotentiary of the German Con-
federation was more explicit—
" He thought it right to remark that he had not joined
in the proposal made by the Plenipotentiaries of Austria and
Prussia ; and that, although not directed to do so by his in-
structions, he cannot help affirming
officiously that the Diet
will not consent to an arrangement which, even under an
eventual or conditional form, would restore the union be-
tween the Duchies and Denmark."
What was to be concluded from the sum of these explana-
tions ? It resulted from them that the idea of the Courts of
Vienna and Berlin was to make the Duchies entirely inde-
pendent in political and administrative matters, to allow a
dynestic tie to subsist between the Duchies and the Danish
Monarchy, but to make that tie dependent on the decision
the titles of King Christian X. in his quality of Duke of
Holstein.
hteitnh Frankfort Diet might give as to the validity of
.e
To complete the description of the merits of this plan, put
forward in the name of Austria and Prussia, it must be
stated that the Plenipotentiary of the Germanic Confedera-
tion did not feel justified in joining in it. Finally, that
Minister affirmed that the majority of the Diet would
refuse its adhesion to an arrangement which, even under a
condition of form, would re-establish a union between the
Duchies and Denmark.
These explanations did not enable the Danish Plenipoten-
tiaries to give their assent to such a plan. They had no
hesitation in declaring it entirely inadmissible.
This refusal put an end to the first combination proposed
by the German Plenipotentiaries, With a view to the re-
establishment of a solid and durable peace.
The sitting of the 28th of May opened with a second pro-
posal brought forward by the Plenipotentiaries of Austria
and Prussia. This plan, still more unexpected than the
first, had for its object to demand a complete separation of
the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein from the Kingdom
of Denmark, and their union in a single State under the
Sovereignty of the Hereditary Prince of Schleswig Holstein
Sonderburg Augustenburg.

Protocol No. 6 gives the reasons which determined the
Ambassador of Russia to express his dissent with regard
to the proposition of the Plenipotentiaries of the German
Courts to detach from the Danish Monarchy the whole of
Holstein and Schleswig., and to place that State under a new
dynasty.
In the first place, he said, by what right were those coun-
tries to be disposed oft They are occupied in fact by the
allies. By right they do not belong to them.
In regard to the dynastic combination mentioned in the
proposal of the German Courts, the Ambassador of Russia
be decided alone, and which was not yet open for those
poboswerevrsedwthhoat it
conwsioduelrdedprtejhuedgea question which could not
Treaty of London as binding.
Further, in his opinion, the Prince of Augustenburg was
not the only one who had claims to assert. When the
question of the succession of Holstein came to be opened,
other rights would be entitled to serious examination.
Especially the Grand Duke of Oldenburg would have just
claims to assert. The Plenipotentiary of Russia considered
it his duty to reserve them.
The refusal with which the Plenipotentiaries of Denmark
met the plan proposed by the German Plenipotentiaries was
expressed in the following terms :
" If the Danish Government considered the proposal of the
preceding sitting inadmissible, so much the more it is im-
possible for them to discuss this one."
Two combinations brought forward on the 17th and 28th
of May had thus been, one after the other, rejected, without
the negotiation having advanced a single step, while the eta.

pension of arms was approaching its termination. In this
state of things, the Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain
thought that the moment had arrived when there should be
no further delay in opening to the belligerents the path
which might lead them to an honourable arrangement.
They recognized that unless the foundations of a solid and
durable peace were laid it was not for the neutral Powers
to renounce the Treaty of London. Neither could they
agree to a new arrangement insufficient for Germany or un-
satisfactory to Denmark. Finally, the Plenipotentiaries of
Great Britain showed that they were deeply imbued with
the conviction that on the one hand respect must be paid to
the national sentiment with which the Danes know how to
maintain the independence and honour of their ancient
monarchy; and, on the other, fair satisfaction should, as
far as possible, be given to the sympathies which from time
immemorial have united the populations of German origin
who inhabit the two banks of the Eider.
Lord Russell sought in these elements of conciliation and
concord the means of effecting between the belligerents the
desired reconciliation. With this object he read the follow-
ing declaration—
" The Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain have seen with
deep regret that the last sitting of the Conference has not
resulted in the establishment of the bases of an agreement
between Germany and Denmark.
" In our opinion the elements of a solid and durable peace
can neither be found in the engagements of 1851, which
during 12 years have borne no other fruit than dissensions
and troubles, nor in the analysis of an obscure and compli-
cated law.
" But unless it is possible to lay down the bases
of a solid and durable peace, it is not competent for
the neutral Powers to renounce the solemn treaty
ty wnicn tney- reous.ioed the ;.togrity of the
Danish Monarchy, neither could they concur in a
new arrangement which would be insufficient for
Germany or humiliating for Denmark.
" The elements of a solid and durable peace must
therefore be sought elsewhere.
" For many years a lively sympathy for their
brethren who are subject to the King of Denmark
has animated the Germans of the Germanic Con-
federation. The Danes, on their side, are inspired
by the love of independence, and the desire of main-
taining their ancient monarchy. These sentiments
on either side deserve the respect of Europe.
"In order.to prevent a future contest and to satisfy
Germany, it would be necessary, in our opinion,
entirely to separate Holstein, Lauenburg, and the
southern part of Schleswig from the Danish
Monarchy.
" To justify so vast a sacrifice on the part of Den.
mark, and to maintain the independence of the
Danish Monarchy, it is desirable, in our opinion,
that the line of the frontier should not be drawn
more to the north than the mouth of the Schlei and
the line of the Dennewerke.
"It is also necessary for the security of Denmark
that the Germanic Confederation should not erect
or maintain fortresses, nor establish fortified ports
in the territory ceded by Denmark.
"An equitable arrangement of the public debt,
and the renunciation by Austria, Prussia, and the
Germanic Confederation of all right of interference
in the internal affairs of Denmark, would serve to
complete the friendly relations between Germany
and Denmark.
" A question remains which would not form the
object of the Treaty of Peace, but which interests
Germany, and cannot be passed by in silence. In
the opinion of the plenipotentiaries of Great Bri-
tain, it should be understood that the future destiny
of the Duchy of Holstein, of the Duchy of Lauen-
berg, and of the southern part of the Duchy of
Schleswig which will be annexed to the Duchy of
Holstein, shall not be settled without their consent
" If the King of Denmark consents to the sacr

flees of territory which are required of him in the
name of peace, it would be just that the indepen-
dence of his kingdom should be guaranteed by
the great European Powers."
This plan, which had b?en previously communi-
cated to the representatives of the neutral Powers,
rcoaived thc.ir most cordial support in the Confer-
OD CC.

Tho adhesion of the:Plenipotentiary of France
was expressed in the following terms :
" The ideas which the Principal Secretary of
State has just expressed with regard to the prin-
ciples according to which the Dano•German affair
should be settled are in full accordance with the
views which I was myself instructed to maintain
in the Conference. After having studied the causes
of the present conflict my Government have re-
mained convinced that they were attributable to the
improper division of the different groups of popula-
tion of which the [Danish Monarchy is composed,
as well as to their incessant rivalries, and that it
was from that moment necessary to seek for the
basis of an agreement in new arrangements more in
harmony with the national sentiment of the two
races. The arrangement of which the Principal
Secretary of State has pointed out to us the bases,
consisting i❑ dividing, as far as possible, the two
nationalities in Schleswig, incorporating the Danes
with Denmark, and uniting the Germans more
intimately with Holstein and Lanenburg, could not
fail therefore to receive the adhesion of the Govern.
ment of the Emperor. Moreover, it does not seem
that the application of this principle can give rise
to any difficulty as regards the two extreme parts
of Schleswig, where the nationality is clearly deter.
mined, As to the mixed districts of the centre, in
whatever manner their fate may be determined,
there will always be Danes subject to a German
country, or Germans subject to Denmark in them•
Considering the absolute impossibility of taking
nationality as a rule on this point we think that it
would be just to decide the difference in favour of
the weaker party, especially when she is under-
going the sacrifices which this rule imposes on her
in all the points where it is manifestly against her.
My Government equally consider it as essential
that the frontier should be traced in conformity
with the necessities of the defence of Denmark, for
these necessities must be taken into consideration
by the Conference, whose mission is, while satisfy
ing the legitimate claims of Germany, to take care
that the new arrangements should sufficiently
guarantee the independence of Denmark and the
interests of the balance of power in the north of
Europe."
The assent of the Plenipotentiary of Ruseia was
expressed in the following manner :
" In the opinion of the Cabinet of Russia, it is for
his Majesty King Christian IX. to pronounce him-
self the first as to what is expedient for the interests
of his country. If that august Sovereign approved
the bases of the pacification to be concluded, the
Imperial Cabinet would not refuse its assent to a
transaction which the Court of Copenhagen had
freely accepted.
" But, so long as the stipulations of the Treaty of
London preserve their binding force for Denmark,
as well as for the neutral Powers, the Plenipoten-
tiary of Russia must decline a deliberation, which
in his opinion is premature, as to the future fate of
the territories which his Majesty the King of Den.
mark has not surrendered.
" If, subsequently, his Majesty King Christian
IX. were to surrender the Duchy of Holstein, the
question of the succession would be open. In the
opinion of the Plenipotentiary of Russia, it could
only receive a legal solution by paying due respect
to the justice of the cause of the parties interested,
who would have to assert their titles, in conformity
with the principles of international law."
The assent of the Plenipotentiary cf Sweden was
contained in the following declaration :
" Count lVachtmeister declared that, like Great
Britain, his Government recognise that if the
Treaties of 1852 must be abandoned, no solution
could be found except on the principle of separation
of the two nationalities—Danish and German.
Starting from this point of view his Government
would have considered it more natural that the new
frontier of Denmark should have been established
on the Eider, as this river has always separated
Denmark and Germany.
" He is, however, authorised to adhere to the pro-
posal put forward by Lord Russell, on condition
that the frontier of Denmark shall not be drawn
more to the north than the Schlei and the Danne•

werke—that the part of Schleswig situated to the
north of this line shall be completely incorporated
with Denmark—that Germany shall in future have
no right of interference in the internal affairs of
that monarchy—and that the new frontier to be esta-
blished shall be placed under a European guarantee.
"As to the provinces which in the aforesaid even-
tuality would be ceded by the King of Denmark,
his Government expect that their future destiny
will not be decided without their cement, and that
the freedom of the choice of the population will be
protected by sufficient guarantees."
The German Plenipotentiaries accepted the prince
ciple of Lord Russell's plan, reserving to their Courts
the right of making counter-propositions on the
various questions of detail of which the projected
arrangement was composed.
The Plenipotentiaries of Denmark undertook to
bring this project to the knowledge of their Court,
having no doubt of the serious attention with which
it would be received.
This expectation was justified.
The Protocol of the 2d of June, No. 7, contains
the declaration made by M. Quaade by order of his
Court. This document evinces such noble and
exalted intentions, that we think it right to pre-
serve its text in full in this record of the delibera-
tions of the Conference of London :
" When, at the time of the conclusion of the
Treaty of London, the present King of D4nroarig
accepted the choice which had breu made of his per-
son to succeed eventually to the King then reigning,
the principal and decisive motive for his Majesty's
resolution was the firm hope that Europe would
know how to maintain what she had recognised and
resolved by that solemn treaty. His Majesty would
not by his refusal prevent the Danish monarchy
from receiving a further pledge of stability, and he
knew, thanks to the renunciations and sacrifices
made by the rightful claimants, that he infringed
the rights of no one by accepting the offer which
had been made to him.
" Since then things have changed, and his Ma-
jesty has been subjected to a most cruel disappoint.
meat. Notwithstanding his own efforts and those
of his devoted people, his sole support in carrying
out a work in which almost all Europe had con-
curred, his Majesty has been compelled to consider
the possibility of his hopes being realised.
" If such is to be the case, if really the Powers
of Europe wish to abandon the Treaty of London,
his Majesty, to prevent the resumption of hostili-
ties, will not oppose a territorial cession, provided
always that he obtains thereby, not only peace, but
also an independent and perfectly autonomous
existence as regards the remainder of his States,
and on condition that the future destiny of the
territories ceded be not decided without their

consent.
" The Danish Government accept, therefore, in
principle the proposal made in the last sitting by
Earl Russell for the re-establishment of peace be-
tween Denmark and the two great German Powers.
" But in order that this peace, so earnestly de-
sired by us, may bring with it a true reconciliation,
it is necessary that it should be in every respect
adapted to secure to Denmark the independence
which belongs to her of right, the political inde•
pendence which the Treaty of London was meant
to guarantee to her, and for the preservation of
which the Danish people have not hesitated to en-
gage singlehanded in a sanguinary conflict with
forces far superior to their own.
"The Danish Plenipotentiaries must, therefore,
at once observe that there are limits to the sacrifices
which it is desired to impose upon Denmark which
the Danish Government cannot exceed.
" Thus the new frontier of Denmark is a vital
question for that country. She requires a frontier
which shall provide for both her military cud her
commercial interests, cud that frontier must be pre-
" There is another point on which the Danish
Government reserve to themselves full liberty.
"It is only on special conditions that his Ma-
jesty the King of Denmark will consent to the
cession of the Duchy of Lauenburg. That coun-
try was acquired at the time by the King of Den-
mark in exchange for a part of Pomerania, to serve
as an equivalent for the Kingdom of Norway, which
was sacrificed for the re-establishment of the peace
of Europe, and it is essentially unconcerned in the
dispute which has caused the present war.
"Finally, the Danish plenipotentiaries must claim
for their Government full liberty to resume the po-
sition which they have invariably maintained until
now on the ground of the Treaty of London as soon
as they may find that the provisional and condi-
tional abandonment of that position will not conduce
to a just and equitable arrangement adapted to re-
place the provisions of that treaty."
The Ambassador of Russia, in the name of the
other Plenipotentiaries of the neutral Powers, has.
tened to render on this occasion just homage to the
intentions of his Majesty the King of Denmark. To
replace the facts exactly as they stood, Baron de
Brunnow called attention to the fact that the com-
plaints made on the part of Holstein and of Lauen.
berg, &c., do not date from the present reign, but
from a previous period. Scarcely had King Chris.
tian mounted the throne when he found himself
surrounded by difficulties becoming more threaten-
ing from day to day. Time was not left to him to
repair the faults of the past, or to calm the antipa-
thies dating from a very distant period. It would,
then, be unjust to throw upon his reign the respon-
sibility of misfortune which are in no degree its
work.
The Protocol of June 2 contains also the declara-
tion by which the Ambassador of Russia announced
to the Conference that the Emperor, desiring to
facilitate as far as depends on him the arrangements
to be concluded between Denmark and Germany
with a view to the re-establishment of peace, has
ceded to Monseignor the Grand Duke of Oldenburg
the eventual rights which section 3 of the Protocol
of Warsaw of May 24 (June 5), 1851, reserved to
his Majesty as chief of the elder branch of Holstein
Gottorp.

The said protocol was deposited iu the archives of
,he Conference.

All the Plenipotentiaries assembled in Conference
hastened to render homage to the spirit of concilia-
tion which dictated the declaration of the Court of
Russia.

Baron de Beust, while joining in the expression of
these sentiments, thought it his duty to make, in
the name of the Confederation, the reservations
which the Diet might consider necessary relative to
the effect of the Protocol of Warsaw, and to the
pretensions Which might be founded on that
document.

The Prince de la Tour d'Auvergne, while render-
ing entire justice to the intentions which dictated
the declaration of the Court of Russia, seized the
opportunity to maintain formally the views of his
Government, according to which no new etate of
things could be established in a detached territory
of the Danish monarchy without the concurrence
and consent of the populations, loyally consulted.

M. de Qaade observed that, as the Government
regard the Treaty of London as being still in force,
the combination settled by that treaty has not yet
failed.

The Ambassador of Russia recapitulated the con-
siderations under the influence of which the Empe.
ror of Russia has resolved to transfer the eventual
rights of the elder branch of Holstein Gottorp, of
which he is the chief, to the younger branch, repre-
sented by Monseigneur the Grand Duke of Olden-
burg. His Majesty has reserved to this Sovereign
to establish their joint titles, whenever he may con-
sider that the moment far it should have arrived.
As a member of the Germanic Confederation, that
Prince would be called on to assert his claims him-
self in the legal course, before the Federal authority
on which ho depends. The Emperor of Russia will
remain unconcerned in this suit. He is henceforward
free from any direct intervention in a question of
contested succession in Holstein—a question