The Sun.
London, England, 1854-03-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH 14, 1854.

journal ; but all his disclaimer cannot persuade me, or
any other human being, I believe, in the country, that
the Times newspaper could convey such information, or
insert such an article as I have just read to the house,
without being informed by some person who had official
information on these matters, and one who, in convey-
ing such information to the Times newspaper, betrayed
that which ought to be considered as a Cabinet secret.
(Hear, hear.) The leading article in the Times, as well
as the article taken from the St. Petersbourg Journal, re-
ferred to the correspondence carried on between the Em-
peror Nicholas and the British Government, but in very
different tones. It goes back to speak of former periods,
and says :
" We have not now to learn for the first time that before
the Emperor Nicholas engaged in these extraordinary trans-
actions he had attempted at various times and iu different
forms to lure almost every Court in Europe to share in the
plunder of Turkey. As long ago as his own visit to this
country he held the same language, and it may have been re-
peated in greater detail in the course of last winter."

Now, mark, the Times newspaper refers to previous and
present transactions, with evident full knowledge that
the Emperor did entertain most ambitious views, and
express himself most explicitly to Government relative
to the dissolution of the Turkish empire. The article
then goes on to say :--
" But what answer did he get to these overtures? What
answer did he get when he sounded Lord John Russell, of all
meu in the world, on the subject of au eventual partition of
Turkey ?"

So, then, it appears that the Times not only is acquainted
with the fact, and the nature and character of the com-
munications which had been made by the Emperor of
Russia to the Government of this country, but it goes
on to tell us the nature and spirit of the answer that was
sent :

" We [that is to say, the nines newspaper] confidently re-
ply, that he was met by an indignant refusal on the part of
the British Government. He was told, if we are not greatly
mistaken, that this country could entertain no proposal in
any form which presupposed the dismemberment of an empire
the integrity of which we had frequently engaged to respect
and even to protect ; that the British Government strenu-
ously opposed any change in the status quo of Turkey, as a
source of danger and difficulty to the world ; and that, as this
communication had been made in a friendly spirit, England
strongly recommended the Emperor of Russia to abstain alto-
gether and scrupulously from any interference in the affairs
of Turkey, which must be productive of great perils to the
world."

How did the Times know anything about this, I should
ike to know. The article then proceeds :

" As these communications were of a confidential nature,
and wholly anterior to and unconnected with the affair of the
holy places and Prince Menschikoff's mission, the Govern-
ment appear to have thought that they did not properly form
part of the correspondence recently laid before Parliament,
but constituted a separate transaction. This challenge of the
Russian Government relieves them from all further uncer-
tainty on that point. Lord John Russell's answer to the
Russian overture will do him no dishonour."

Again, I ask, how can any newspaper in this country
know what were the particulars of a confidential over-
ture made by a foreign Sovereign to certain members of
the Britfsh Government, or how could the Times or any
other paper know what was the confidential answer of
Lord John Russell, a Minister of the Crown, to such a
communication ? (Hear, hear.) Or, how did such
newspaper come into possession of documents of so con-
fidential and exclusive a nature that the Government
had thought it their duty to withhold them from either
house of Parliament ? But it is not to what has appeared
in the Times newspaper that I wish to call the attention
of your lordships, but to a subject of a much more grave
and serious importance. I will assume that the Times is
well informed with regard to the nature of the communi-
cation, and the character of the proposition of the Em-
peror of Russia ; and I will assume, also, that the answer
of the noble lord referred to is correct—an assumption
which I have the more pleasure and the less hesitation
in admitting, because such an answer appears to me to
be a very proper one, and just such a one as ought to
be made. (Hear, hear.) But this is what I require an
explanation of. These communications took place during
the time that the noble earl held the seals of the Foreign-
office ; afterwards full discussion takes place upon the
question in dispute between Russia and Turkey ; the
official correspondence is submitted to both houses ;
I and others, who have afforded to Government every
assistance that we could to prosecute this war—
which we believe might have been avoided, but which is
now inevitable—l and others, having been challenged
by Government to discuss the blue-books put into our
hands--after we bad commented upon them freely, and
temperately stated where it appeared to us that the
Government was entitled to censure or animadversion
(hear, and a laugh)—after we had pointed out that the
Government bad shut their eyes to the dangers that were
imminent and impending—after Government had been
warned, by the gathering of the forces in the principali-
ties, by the tone of the Menschikoff Note, by the re-
monstrances of Colonel Rose and the warnings of Lord
Stratford de Redcliffe—after all these opportunities of
knowledge, freedom of discussion, and warnings no less
frequent than timely—what was the answer of Govern-
ment ? " True, we had these facts before us, but still
we had assurances given us, with so much force and
solemnity, of the apparent sincerity of the Emperor of
Russia, and that the only question was one of the Holy
places ;--true, we admit we have been deceived, but
how are we to be blamed for having been so in the face
of such strong and positive assurances of good faith on
the part of Russia ?" But what became of these as-
severations when all the time the Government were in
possession of the secret and confidential designs of the
Emperor of Russia, of the aggressive nature of the policy
of which he had unbosomed himself —(hear, hear),—and
of his ultimate designs relative to the partition of the
Ottoman empire : in regard to which, it was said, the
noble lord (Russell) ha been compelled to write an
answer in terms of indignant refusal. (Cheers.) I can
understand not producing these private and confidential
letters for the perusal of Parliament ; but I cannot
understand how, with such correspondence before them,
Government could come forward with the assertion
that they had received repeated and absolute assurances
from Russia that her policy was not intended to assume
an aggressive character. (Cheers.) How can these things
be reconciled ? There is one other circumstance to which
the Times newspaper referred, and apparently with some
knowledge of tne facts. The statement to which I allude
is, that on the Emperor of Russia's visit to this country,
which took place when the noble earl (Aberdeen) was
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, communications
of a precisely similar nature were made by the Emperor.
If this were so, and if, when the noble earl succeeded to
the head of the present Administration, the designs of
the Emperor were being put into execution—if this were
so, I say, I want to know what confidence could Govern-
ment possibly have in the professed absence of aggressive
designs in the Emperor's policy ? (Cheers.) The ques-
tions which I wish to ask the noble earl are—firstly,
whether he believes the document to which I have re-
ferred to be an authentic document, and, if so, secondly,
whether the correspondence therein referred to did take
place between the _Emperor of Russia and her Majesty's
Government ? thirdly, if such correspondence did take
place, whether the noble earl, being now challenged by
the Emperor of Russia, will satisfy the people of this
country by producing the whole of such correspondence ?
and, fourthly, whether there is any authority for the
statement made by the Times newspaper of similar com-
munications having been made to the noble earl while
Foreign Secretary by the emperor of Russia during his
visit to this country in 1844, and whether such commu-
nications ever assumed the form of writing, and, if so,
whether the noble earl will produce them ? (Hear.)
The Earl of ABERDEEN— The statement to which
the noble earl has referred is one of considerable interest
and importance, and, finding it in the paper as we do,
it may be considered as possessing a sort of official
character. More than this I know nothing, and the
noble earl is quite as well able as lam to form an
opinion on the subject. I have seen the statement no
where else but where it is ; and, as I said before, I
know no more about it. The communications to which
the noble earl referred, and which took place between
his Majesty the Emperor of Russia and some of her
Majesty's Ministers, were, as the noble earl has stated,
and not disapproved, retained by her Majesty's Govern-
ment and not printed with the papers laid on the table
in consequence of the confidential character which was
considered to be in some degree attached to them.
(Hear.) It has not been usual, under circumstances
similar to those under which these communications were
made, to lay upon the table of Parliament a statement
of familiar conversations, such as those described, be-
tween a Sovereign and a Foreign Minister, and for this
reason her Majesty's Government did not think it proper
or consistent with that respect or delicacy which was
due to a Prince with whom we were on terms of alliance
to produce papers which had a somewhat private and
confidential character. (Hear.) This statement in the St.
Petersbourg Journal, and which must be considered as in
w
some degree official, and by which it appears that there
is no reluctance on the part of Russia that her Majesty's
Government should produce and make public all com-
munications which had passed on the subject, relieves
her Majesty's Ministers from much difficulty in treating
with the matter, and removes any reasonable scruple
they might have entertained relative to the production
of the papers to which the noble earl refers. (Hear,
hear.) I can assure the noble earl that, if he had not
made the observations which he has, I should still have
laid these papers bn the table, and stated these commu-
nications to your lordships—the object to retain them
and to consider them as private having now ceased. The
whole of this correspondence will therefore be laid on
the table, and I think, upon a perusal of the same, the
noble earl will find that there has been little occasion for
those observations which he has somewhat hypothetic-
ally applied to her Majesty's Government to-night.
(Hear, hear.) It will be found, my lords, I feel assured,
that her Majesty's Government will have no reason to
regret the position they will occupy with reference to
this correspondence, and I think the noble earl will
find himself egregiously mistaken in endeavouring to
cast either blame or imputation of any kind on her Ma-
jesty's Government for the part they have taken in this
transaction. (Cheers.) I have nothing more to say
upon the subject, and the papers will speak for them-
selves. The noble earl referred to the commentary made
in the Times newspaper upon the article copied from
the St. Petersbourg Journal. The noble earl will prob-
ably be surprised to learn, considering what he calls our
connexion with that newspaper, or rather what he seems
better pleased to call my connexion—(laughter)—with
that paper, that untilthis morning I never recd the article
or the comments to which he alludes, nor had I heard
of them either directly or indirectly. In making this
statement I find, my lords, some advantage in a man's
having a character for truth and honour • and I again
repeat that until this morning I never had the most re-
mote conception of the article fu question, or the origin