The Hawaiian gazette., 1870-12-21

]
There has been great excitement but no panic
to-day over the Russian news, in the Stock Ex-
change and elsewhere. This Russian step was
50 long expected that the public was partly pre-
pared for it. 1t is the form and peremptoriness
of RusSia's declaration which has created sur
prise rather than the demand itself Notwith-
standing the warlike tone Of the Times to-day.
great doubt was felt whether the English Gov
ernment would repel Russas pretensious to ab-
rogate by her own act, the treaty of 1856. The
/ Times was believed to be attempting to take the
rens Of Government as in 1884, but all doubt
will be dispelled tomorrow by the publication of
Granvilles reply. The views expressed in this
note are shared in and will be supported by Aus
tria, Frauce and Italy. each of which sends re-
! ply substantially Identical. and will follow the
same line of policy in this and all which follows.
/ 1t is stated on authority that Prussias attitude
remains unknown, or at least the English Foreign
Office is unable to say what declaration may be
expected Russell's mission was to hold di-
rect communication with Bismarck /; but Russell,
when last heard from, had reached no further than
Sedan, having, by Burnside's advice, sought to
come to Versailles ria Belgium. At Sedan he
was buying horses and a carriage to proceed on
his journey. Communications with other Govern
ments have been free and cordial. There is moth
ing yet like talk about war, but the English Cab
met is in no mood 70 be deferred by the pros
pect of collision, in which however,'it does not
believe. There is nobody here who says Eng
land will not, in any case, go to war and per-
/ haps still more in the Continental Cabinets
sense of the impossibility of permitting open die
tation by Russia is uppermost -Four days ago
Gortschakoffs circular was unknown at the Amer
lean Legation at St. Petersburg. The following
correspondence has passed:
| "FoREIGN OFFICE. November TO- 1870.
Earl Granville to Sir A. Buchanan, British
Ambassador to St Petersburg
/ Sir Baron Brunnow made to me Yesterday
communication respecting the conversation be-
tween the Emperor of Russia aud the Sultan
with regard to tue limiting of their naval forces
in the Black Sea by the treaty signed at Paris on
the Both March, 1856, to which You alluded in
your telegram of yesterday afternoon. In my
what passed between us, and now propose to
allude to Prince Gortscbakoffs dispatches on the
10Th and Goth ult., communicated to me by the
Russian Ambassador. On that occasion Prince
GOrtschakoH declared on the part of his Imperial
Majesty that the treaty of 1856 had been in,
fringed on in various respects, to the prejudice
of Russia and more especially in the case of the
Princpalities. against the explicit protest of his
representative, and that in consequence of these
iniractions Russia is entitled to renounce those
stipuatons of the treaty which directly touch
her interests 1t is then announced that she will
no longer be bound by the treaties which restrict
her rights of sovereignty in the Black Sea We
have here an allegation that certain facts have
occurred which in the judgment of Russia are at
variance with certain slipulations Of the treaty,
and the assumption is made that Russia upon the
strength Of her own judgment to the character
Of those facts, Is entitled to release herself from
certain other stipulations of that instrument.
This assumption is limited in its practical appli-
cation to some Of the provisions Of the treaty. but
the assumption of right to renounce any one of
its terms, involves the assumption of right to
renounce the whole. This statement is wholly
independent of the reasonabeness or unreasona-
bleness. on its own merits, Of the desire of Rus
sia to be released from the observance OF the
stipulations of the treaty of 1856, respecting the
Black Sea for the question is in whose hands
lies the power Of releasing one or more of the
parties from all OF any of these stipulations 1t
has always been held that right belongs only to
he Governments who have been parties to the
original transaction.
The communication Of Prince Gortsch1koff ap-
pears to assume that any one Of the Powers who
have signed the engagement may allege that oc-
currences have taken place which, in its opinion,
are at variance with the provisions of the treaty,
and although this view is not shared nor admit
ted By the Cosi gnatoTy Powers it may found up
on that allegation, not request to those govern
ments for the consideration of the case, but on
announcement to them that it has emancpated
itself or holds itself enancipated from every stip-
ulaion of the treaty which it thinks ct to disap-
prove But it is quite evident that the effect of
such doctrine and Of any proceeding, which,
with or without avowal, is founded upon it, is to
bring the entire authority and efficiency Of treat
les under the discretionary control Of each one Of
the Powers who may have signed them the re-
suit Of which would be the entire destruction Of
treaties in their essence; for whereas the whole
object is 10 bind powers to one another, and for
this purpose each one Of the powers surreHders a
portion Of its free agency by the doctrine and
proceeding now in question: one Of the parties ia
Its separate and individual capacity. brings back
the entire subject into its own control and re-
mains bound only to itself. Accordingly Prince
Gortschakof has announced in those dispatches
the intention Of Russia to continne to observe
certain ofthe provisions of the treaty. However
satisfactory this may be in itself 1t is obviously
an expression Of the free will of that Power which
i; might at any time alter or withdraw, aud in
this it is open to the same objections as the other
portions Of the communicate because 1t implies !
the right Of Russia to annu d, treaty on the |
ground Of allegations of which she constitutes !
herself the only judge. The question, therefore
arises. not whether any desire expressed by Bus
sia ought to be carefully examined in friendly |
spirit by the eosignatory Powers. but whether