The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-07-25
THE VIENNA CONFERENCE.


THE VIENNA CONFERENCE.
At length fortunately for the Of Truth and Of JUS
dce, have perception Of the authentic his
tory of the Vienna conference and we feel bound to say
that while the result is honorable the councils Of
Russia France and Ausria 1t is most dscreditable to
those England In order understand the precise posi-
ton of things must go back to the commencement Of
the great controversy which now convulses Europe.
When Louis Napoleon rising or had risen to mpc-
rial power be found for his interest perhaps ought
in candor say in conformity with his convictions
himself for the Of the religious authority
of the Roman See For this he maintained Rome
strong auxiliary French force which put down and
steadily kept down all revolutionary opposition to Plus
TX If he had stopped here it would have been question
between him and the revolutionary interests in Italy and
nothing But acting in the sense, Louis Ma
poleon sought enlarge the existing privileges Of the
Latin Christians in the LevanL Those privileges al
ready large and the Roman Catholic powers especially
France and Austria possessed in virtue of capulatons
all but unlimited power OF nterpostion in behalf of their
co-reigonaes in Turkey Nevertheless France thought
Gt TO make demonstration in their favor which consisted
in demanding from the Porte the concession to the Latin
Christians of additional privileges in the enjoyment of
TO the holy sepuche at Jerusalem. These
sons exorted from the weakness the Porte by the
verbal Of the French minister Constantnope
backed by military the part of the French
fleet in the Dardaneles
This incident causeless in its inception and violent in
its conduct constitutes the initiation and the
ment of all the calamities with which Europe OPP
pressed. For the privileges which, under the
of with France, the Porte thus compelled to
grant to the Latin Christians the primary nnova-
ton upon existing facts and in derogaon Of the priv
eges previously enjoyed by the Greek Christians There
upon Russia standing in the relation the Greek
Christians that France did the Latin Christians and
ing by treaty right nterpose in favor former
though in less degree than France had in favor Of the
attehereupon Russia despatched Prince Meuachikof to
Constantnople demand rights for Russia or new
privileges for the Greek Christians restoration of
The previous equality between tho Greek and Latin
Christians which had been disturbed by the movement
France 1t is imputed to the Russian minister that his de-
pertinent this occasion particularly disrespscu
to the Porte. That false his department was mild
compared with the action of the French minister
the constant action Of the British minister Lord Statford
de Radcliffe Thetruth is that Austria Russia France
Great Britain had acquired the habit in common Of
ing the Porte with natural consid-
ering the miserable condition of Turkey which existed
only by Of the mutual ealousies other powers
have settled the question amcably between Them and
without difficulty, this OCCASION but for the meddlng
of England and France who together bulied the Porte
into refusing satisfaction Russia and thus fretng and
irritating the controversy until ensued between Rus
STA and Turkey These the iucontrovertible facts Of
the commencement Of the in Europe They show that
the germ of trouble the unwarrantable act Of
France in compelling Turkey to innovate the cx-
listing relation Of her Greek and Latin subjects and
that the Of actual hostilities was due
to their vicious intermeddng in question between Tur
key and Russia and is by their in the
policy fnsoent meddlesomeness In other peoples affairs
that the world is indebted for all those horrors carnage
and of barbarc outrage which, under the odiously false
pretcxt of mission Of civilization and Of peace Great
Britain and France have enacted in the Crimea.
Who forget the long series Of socaed negotiations
IN the first conference Of Vienna in which France and
England labored to impose their passions their own
preudices their interests upon Russia2 the naughty
camness with which Russia baled and repealed their alb
surd attempts to control her action and dictate her policy
in her controversy with the Porter the pro-
tocos of infinite rgmaroe and with which England
and France sought to up their attempted usurpaon
OF dual dictatorship of Europe, and which, in
OF taonghtless presumption they avowed purpose Of
tending America At length this first series Of ncgot
tons was brought to head by means Of a proposition
drawn up Mr.. Drouyn de Lhuys, adopted by Austria
England and France and in their joint presented
Russia and Turkey solution of the difficulty. This
proposition declaration to be issued by the Sultan
conceding to Russia the right of protecting Greek
Christians that Austria and France enjoyed in respect
to Latin Christians. This proposition was at once
accepted by Russia and persevered in by England and
France would have been the end of the difficulty But the
Porte objected that this proposition gave to Russia
than had been demanded by Menschiko that is
say that Russia had exercised pretended
ercise right of interference in Turkey extensive
that exercised by France The French English min
listers threatened but the Sultan stood firm the very
despair Of finding himself used by his proesed al
lies and friends than by his actual enemy. At this point
strange thing happenedthe trangest in the annals Of d
pomacy and scredtabe to the intelligence the French
and English negotators asi their good faith They
disputed with Turkey the plain, obvious meaning Of their
own proposition They did understand, pretended
understand the very declaration which they them
had deliberately drawn up and carefully delibeaed
But the ministers Of the Sultan persisted that the language
OF the declaration explicit and precise that it had,
and could have possible meaning except that ascrbed
to it by the Sulan Upon this the allies applied to Russia
and said DO you understand this the Porte does