The Perrysburg journal. [volume] (Perrysburg, Ohio) 1853-1861, 1854-04-10
Czar Nicholas,s Reply to Louis Napoleon.


with which your letter terminates, " our re-
lations ought to be sincerely amicable, and
should be based upon the same intentions
the maintenance of order, the love of peace,
respect for treaties, and reciprocal good feel
ing" Your Majesty, in accepting this pro-
gramme, as had traced it, says that you re-
main faithful to it. | dare believe. and my
conscience tells me so, that | have not eX-
ceeded its limits; for, in the affair which has
excited division between us, the origin of
which is not to be attributed to me, have
always sought to maintain friendly relations
with France, and have always endeavored
to avoid anything which might clash with
the religion professed by your Majesty.
have made, for the maintenance of peace,
all the concessions, both of form and sub
stance, compatible with my honor and, in
claiming for my coreligionists in Turkey the
continuation of the rights and privileges
which they have long acquired at the price
Of Russian blood, claimed nothing which
was not confirmed BY treaties. If the Porte
had been left to himself, the difference which
has so long kept Europe in suspense would
have been solved. A fatal influence has
thrown everything into confusion. BY pro-
voking gratuitous suspicious, by exciting the
tanaticism Of the Turks, and by deceiving
their government as to my intentions, and
the real scope of my demands, it has so ex-
aggerated the extent of the questions, that
the probable result seems to be war. Your
Majesty must allow me not to enter too
much in detail into the circumstances as
they present themselves to you III your let
ter, IN which those circumstances are mark
ed out. Several acts on my part, appreciated
with little accuracy, according to my opln-
ion, and more than one fact perverted, would
require, in order to be properly rectified, at
least as conceive, long developments, into
which it would not be proper to enter in a
correspondence between sovereign and sove-
reign.
For instance, your Majesty attributes to
the occupation Of the Principalities the evil
of having suddenly transported the question
from the region of discussion to that of fact
but your Majesty leaves out of view the cir
cumstance that this occupation, still purely
conditional, was preceded, and in great
measure caused, by very important previ-
Gus tact-the appearance of the combined
fleet in the vicinity of the Dardanellee; and
besides this,much before the period ,whenEng-
land hesitated to assume hostile attitude
your Majesty took the initiative in sending
your fleet as far as Salamis This wounding
IOAIullly ChIllulICu lAIIlC NOil
fdence in me. 1t was calculated to encour
ege the Turks, and to paralyze beforehand the
success of negotiations, by giving them the
idea that France and England were ready tC
support their cause under all circumstances
In the same way your Majesty makes i
appear that the explanatory commentaries O.
my cabinet upon the Vienna note rendered
it impossible for France and England to re-
commend its adoption by the Porte; bu
your Majesty may recollect that our com
mentaries followed, and did not precede, the
pure and simple non-acceptance of the note
and believe that the Powers were so little
seriously desirous.of peace that they confined
themselves to the claims of the pure anc
simple adoption of that note, instead Of al
lowing the Porte to modify what he had pre-
viously adopted without change. Besides
if any point of our commentaries had giver
rise to difficulties, | offered satisfactory so
luton to them at Olmutz, and such was i
considered by Austria and Prussia Unfor
tunately in the interval, part of the Anglo
French fleet had already entered the Darda
nelles, under the pretext of there protecting
The lives and properties of English AM
French subjects; and in order to allow th
whole to enter, without violating the treat,
of lS4l, it was necessary that the Ottoman
government should declare war against us.
My opinion is, that if France and England