The Sun.
London, England, 1856-01-23 00:00:00

THE PROSPECTS OF PEACE.

A private letter from Brussels contains the fol-
lowing remarks on the great question of the day :

" The bases of the treaty, such as they have been sent
to Vienna, contain one word to which great importance
is attached, and which I confess I do not understand
—it is the neutralisation of the Black Sea, and which
forms the first article. It is not the novelty of the
expression which alarms me, but the real sense that✓
we ought to attach to it. What does neutrality mean
time of peace ? It is evidently nonsense, or rather a
contradiction. Can it be that there is an intention to. Te.
peat the fault committed with regard to Belgium, when it
was understood that Belgium should remain neutral in
any wars which might take place between the different
nations of Europe. That treaty was undoubtedly made
against Louis Philippe, and took from his natural
ally ; but it is equally known that this sort of
neutrality is only respected when a Power does not find
it to be its interest to violate it. If by neutralisation of
the Black Sea is meant that no ship of war shall
be allowed to enter the Dardanelles, it is precisely
what existed before the war. If by it is meant the
convention made between Russia and Turkey under
the guarantee of the other Powers, which provides that
neither of those States shall have ships of war ill the
Black Sea, it cannot be termed a neutralisation. If,
then, this word had a meaning, it would be necessary to
believe that even in time of war Turkey could not make
use of her marine, neither to annoy the coasts of Russia,
nor succour her maritime provinces should they be in-
vaded by land armies—which would be absurd. If
Russia wished to attack Germany, or taking advantage
of the little energy put forth by the German States,
wished to excite them against France, France would
then not have the right to profit by her alliance with
Turkey, and to transport her fleet and her troops to the
Black Sea. It would be the same if British India were
to be menaced by Russia. We are then justified in de-
manding that the word neutralisation shall be effaced ;
for on concluding peace it is absurd and dangerous to
anticipate cases of war.
" The Western Powers have reserved to themselves
the right, independently of the four articles, to require
from Russia guarantees for the maintenance of peace. It
is quite evident that these exigencies ought to be ex-
tremely moderate ; but it is equally evident that no one
can pronounce that to be exorbitant that is indispensable
for the security of Europe, that is to say, the re-establish-
ment of the treaties of 1815, and such as they existed in
1830. It was for the equilibrium of Europe that the pro-
vince taken by Russia from Prussia, her ancient ally,
bad been constituted as an independent kingdom, on
the soil of which a Russia❑ army should never
place it foot. Now, what is the consequence of the
present state of things ? It is this—that Russian armies
to the amount of from 300,000 to 400,000 men can
occupy Poland, that they can i❑ a few days march into
Eastern Prussia, invade Silesia, Brandenburg, and enter
Berlin ; that they can by a flank march invade the
whole of Gallicia, and reack Vienna in eight days, and
thus the masters of the whole of Germany, they can
advance to the Rhine, and in less than one month invade
France.

" It is then for the common advantage of Europe to
demand the execution of the treaties which have never
been abrogated, and the re-establishment of those re-
mains, poor as they are, of Polish nationality. If Russia
refuse, on the ground of the insurrection of 1830, she
can be answered that all should not be punished for one
fault, and that at all events that bag been sufficiently
expiated."

AMSTER DA AI _HILL WATER COMPANY.

Yesterday the Board of Commissarieß held their pre-
liminary meeting at the London Tavern, Mr. L. Schuster
in the chair, to receive a report from them on the state
of the company's affairs.

The report, which was read by Mr. ADAMS, the Secre-
tary, stated that since the last general meeting held in
May last, 23 crossings of canals within the city of IA m-
sterdam had been completed, and 21,462 yards of pipes
laid down. In the Downs 2,600 additional of canal had
been commenced, .of which about 1,500 had been com-
pleted. Since that period 016 new contracts for the
supply of water had been completed. The city of Am-
sterdam contained 27,500 houses, but as yet only about
1,600 had been connected with the mains. The proxi-
mate receipts for water supplied during the past year
amounted to about 4,7501., and the expenditure charge-
able against revenue to about 2,5001., leaving a balance
out of which it was anticipated the full dividend for the
past six months upon the capital called upon the new
shares could be paid. The report, at great length, re-
ferred to the charges that had been brought against the
directors by Mr. Croker, the late engineer. First, that he
hail been removed from his office by the influence of
Mr. Barrow, the contractor, whose he had incur-
red. Secondly, that the cause of his dismissal was also
to be attributed to his opposing the construction of a
high level reservoir in the Downs, a scheme which he
stated had been concocted for the purpose of using a
portion of the pipes that had been sent over to Amster-
darn by the contractor, contrary to Mr. Croker's orders.
Thirdly, that the Commissaries hadlallovred Mr. Barrow
to carry out his contract in an improper manner ; and,
fourthly, that at the last preliminary general meeting,
the Commissaries nominated four directors contrary to
the recommendations of that meeting. To these charges
the Commissaries gave a denial, as well as to another
that Mr. Croker was ordered back to Amsterdam pre-
vious to the last meeting, that he might be deprived of
attending that meeting.
The CHAIRMAN, in moving the reception and adoption
of the report, adverted to the prosperous state of the
pamphlet.as
ked the
inanad
tuLdterhtaadk ibnege,nr anda
daet ga
gr eaai tn
slength
boardreferredbytomt hr.e
Cc hraerkgeers,
Iwtheic
chi
ehad
iea been
the pt ur
ob
tl
hi shedof
meeting not to press the board then for an explanation,
thoseatid circulated
s
because the question of Mr. Croker's dismissal was now
the subject of a judicial inquiry in this country and also
in Holland. lie defended the conduct of the board of
director/. and also the board of commissaries.
Mr. lIORSFALL said he recollected meeting Mr. Creker
on the morning of the London meeting, who informed him
that the commissaries had told him (Mr. Croker) that
it would be worse for hith if he remained and attended
the meeting.
The CHAIRMAN denied that he had done any-
thing to compel Mr. Croker to leave. That gentleman
left Amsterdam at a critical time against the wish of the
directors, and he (the Chairman) told him he had done
wrong in leaving. At a subsequent meeting at Am-
sterdam, where he and Mr. Croker were present, the
latter made no charges against him.
Mr. CHOKER-1 most solemnly protested against your
mode of proceeding.
A very lengthened and animated discussion ensued, in
the course of which various charges were made against
the directors, the authenticity of which were denied by
the Chairman
Mr. MoIoN afterwards suggested that an investiga-
tion should be made by a committee into the truth or
falsehood of the charges that had been brought against
the directors by Mr. Croker. It was to the interest of
the directors to clear themselves of the charges, and of
equally great importance to Mr. Croker, whese profes-
s affected by it. Re moved a reso•
ls oanl rtoeptuhtaattieoffn wecta.
A SHAREHOLDER seconded the re ol
sution.
The CHAIRMAN resisted the appointment of such a
committee. It would be the means of discovering to
Mr. Croker the points they relied on to defend the
actions that gentleman had brought against them.
The motion was rejected.
Mr. Cnogun addressed the meeting in vindication of
his conduct, and in support of the statements he had put
forth affecting the management of the company and the
manner he had been treated by the directors. He pro-
ceeded to refute the statements that day made to the
meeting, and referred to documents in corroboration of
his assertions, but the meeting betrayed an indisposition
to hear him, and after several interruptions that gentle-
man had to desist from addressing the shareholders.
The CHAIRMAN then put the motion for the reception
and adoption of the report, which was carried by a large
majority.
Thanks were then voted to the chairman, and the
meeting separated.