The New York herald., 1877-01-05
The Eastern Question.

| councils of the Sultan, Dut tne DIVISION
seems to be such that slight addition of
force on one side would, at any moment for
several DAYS past, have made war inevitable,
| while very earnest endeavors in the other
direction do not greatly assist the prospect
for peace. If the Sultan does not pos
itively reject the proposals of the Con-
ference it is because there are men
about him wise enough to warn their
Sovereign against the impolitic course Of de-
| fying the united recommendations Of Eu-
rope, and of thus forcing into one common
course of action with regard to him the gov
ernments by whose divisions he has sur
vived for so many years. If, on the other
hand, he does not distinctly indorse as
proper to be enforced in his dominions the
schedule of reforms drawn up by the pre-
liminary conference, it is because he is sur
rounded by reactionary element. which
plays upon his apprehensions with the bug
bear of an instruction of Moslem fanatics
and the loss of his throne, and even his
head.
This element is now more important in
shaping the policy of the Porte than it has
been before since the time of Mahmoud, and
it is, of course, opposed to any terms with
the European nations and attributes all the
misfortunes of the Ottoman Power to the
introduction of the Western ideas.
Naturally such an element refuses to
see that it was only by the ac-
ceptance Of European ideas that Turkey
secured countenance and any liberation for
her existence in Europe, and that it is only
by making this acceptance more complete
that she can now forestall common action
against her; for an influence like this is
sort of Rip Van Wrinkle in history and can
not enter into the spirit of any ideas
that have come upon the stage
while it has slept. General Ignatieff,
the Russian ambassador, seems to
err when he treats this Moslem revival as
mere piece of trickery-as thing that has
no substantial existence, but is only
fiction-a property of the theatrical states
manship of Constantinople. Perhaps the
extent Of it's power is exaggerated, but its
existence and activity seem to account en-
tirely for the total difference between the
Turkish disposition now with regard to re-
forms and that Of last May.
This difference touches an important point
with regard to the responsibility for the
danger to the peace of Europe. Perhaps
if the peace is to be disturbed it is of no i'm
mediate practical Importance who is to
blame. That is point of moral response
bility that will be very fully and properly
discussed by the future historian. Yet this
is evidently not the opinion on all hands; for
by those who have no great admiration for
the liberals in England it seems to be es-
teemed Of some consequence that the re-
proach of this rupture should be
laid at their door. Lord Beaconsfield
gave the keynote to this view in the sum-
mer. This theory is that if the liberals had
not denounced the butcheries in Bulgaria
Russia would have believed there-was no
other opinion in England than such as was
indicated in the sort of bravado paraded at
the Lord Mayors dinner, and would there
fore have believed England ready to sup
port Turkey in another war, and, believing
this, would not have ventured upon any
demand likely to induce hostilities. So
that the liberals did all the harm by simply
denouncing series of most revolving
cruelties.
Conjectural cases may be framed so rs to
make any party responsible for any act. 1t
is not at all certain that Russia would have
been ignorant of the real condition of British
opinion though neither Mr.. Gladstone nor
Mr.. Bright had spoken nor is it safe to
Al
there would be no war even though it were
fully believed that England would support
Turkey.
But it needs only slight reference to the
facts Of the case to show that if any party
in England is responsible for the present
danger it is the party in possession of the
government. Even tory opinion in Eng
land seems now to count upon the blunders
of the Premier as one of the elements that
have to be considered in the solution of the
problems of British politics. and that opinion
will eventually concede that the monumen-
tai blunder of his administration was the re-
lection Of the Berlin memorandum and that
that act was what really compromised the
peace Of Europe.
In May, when the Berlin memorandum
was drawn, Turkey was ready to assent to
precisely such programme of reforms as she
now refuses to accept There is no differ
ence between what is demanded now and
what was demanded then, except that in the
Berlin memorandum less was said of guar
antees than has been heard in the recent ne
gotiations; but it is to be remembered that
the Porte repudiates the proposed reforms
without really coming to the consideration
of the guarantees. 1t rejects the labors of
the preliminary conference, and that body
left entirely open the subject of the guaran-
tees. 1t is not, therefore. because of the