No. 687. GROSSBRITANNIEN. Min. d. Ausw. an d. kön. Vertreter bei den Mächten, welche den Wiener Vertrag unterzeichnet haben. Mittheilung der nach St. Petersburg gerichteten Depesche und Aufforderung zu einem ähnlichen Schritte. Sir, Foreign Office, March 4, 1863. Gross 4. März 1863. Her Majesty's Government being deeply affected by the No. 687. deplorable acts of violence of which Poland is now the scene, and having britannien, reflected on the causes of these calamities, have addressed the accompanying despatch to Her Majesty's Ambassador at St. Petersburgh*). You are instructed to read this despatch and its inclosure to the Minister of Foreign Affairs at ¶ You will state at the same time that, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, a communication of similar views by the Representatives at St. Petersburgh of the Powers who were parties to the Treaty of June 1815, would tend to the cessation of bloodshed, and to the enjoyment by the people of Poland of those rights which were promised to them at Vienna, and which have been so long withheld from them. The peace of Europe would, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, be best assured by restoring to the Poles the privileges of a National Diet and a National Administration; and Her Majesty's Government, therefore, hope that the . . . . . Government will concur in making to the Government of Russia a representation which has for its objects the interests of humanity and security of the peace of Europe, and which cannot give any just offence to the Russian Government. I am, &c. No. 688. GROSSBRITANNIEN. Min. d. Ausw. an d. königl. Botschafter in Paris. Foreign Office, March 5, 1863. Gross britannien, 5. März 1863. (Extract.) There remain some facts and some remarks relating to the No. 688. conduct of Austria which I have not yet communicated. Before Her Majesty's Government had had any time to consider the French proposal of the 21st of February, and indeed almost at the same time that it arrived in this country, I received an intimation from Count Apponyi that his Government desired that no proposition of concert on Polish affairs should be made to them by France and Great Britain. Her Majesty's Government, therefore, came to the consideration of the subject, impressed with the conviction that Austria would not join in the proposed identic note. Her Majesty's Government thought also that, seeing her reluctance, it would be very unwise to urge her to a course she was *) Nro. 685. Gross 5. März 1863. No. 688. unwilling to adopt. Our impressions on this subject have been confirmed by britannien, a despatch from Count Rechberg to Prince Metternich, which Count Apponyi read to me yesterday. ¶ It is an answer to the French proposal. Mingled with some scruples against the principle of non-intervention, which belong to the traditional policy of Austria, are considerations which flow naturally from the position of Austria. The Cabinet of Vienna does not like to give even an appearance of encouragement to Polish insurrection, lest the lesson should cross the frontier, and the example be repeated in Galicia. The freedom of France and England from apprehensions of this kind is dwelt upon with marked distinctness. The inference to be drawn from this despatch is rather that Austria does not see her way clearly in the path pointed out to her by the French Government, than that she is altogether averse to the policy of which an outline is presented to her. Possibly, and indeed probably, the line to be adopted by the Emperor of Austria will draw gradually nearer to that of England and France. With respect to the Prusso-Russian Convention, its importance appears to be gradually diminishing. Count Bismarck, in reading it to Sir Andrew Buchanan, pointed out that no Russian troops could pursue insurgents across the Prussian frontier without the special permission or invitation of a Prussian officer. It is, of course, in the power of the Prussian Government to instruct its officers not to give that permission or invitation. ་ Prince Gortchakoff, on his side, declares to Lord Napier that the chief motive for agreeing to the Convention was that insurgents often cross the frontier to seize a Custom-house and carry off the money found in its chest. In such cases it may be convenient to call upon an armed body from the other side to retake the Custom-house and recapture the treasure. While the two Contracting Powers are thus endeavouring to diminish the gravity and scope of the Convention, the events of the insurrection seem to be carrying the war away from the Prussian and nearer to the Austrian frontier. It appears, therefore, to Her Majesty's Government, that as the Convention is falling quietly into insignificance, and in fact sinking to nothing, it is fortunate that the Governments of France and England have not roused in the Prussian Government a spirit of offended dignity, and thus created obstacles to their own success by presenting formally an identic note requiring a formal reply. ¶ Her Majesty's Government are of opinion that the next step to be taken is to invite all the chief Powers who signed the Treaty of Vienna to concur in advising Russia to recur to the stipulations, and to revert to the policy, of the Treaty of Vienna in regard to Poland. ¶ A copy of a communication intended for this purpose is inclosed in the present despatch. &c. To Earl Cowley, London. Russell. No. 689. GROSSBRITANNIEN. Botschafter in Berlin a. d. kön. Min. d. Ausw. - Unteriedung mit Herrn v. Bismarck aus Anlass der englischen Depesche vom 2. März (No. 686) über die Convention. Berlin, March 5 (received March 9), 1863. Gross 5. März 1863. (Extract.) Your Lordship's despatch of the 2nd instant was delivered No. 689. to me on the morning of the 4th, by the messenger Blackwood; and I lost britannien, no time in seeking an interview with M. de Bismarck, and reading it to his Excellency. When I had finished, M. de Bismarck asked whether I would give him a copy of the despatch; and on my replying that I was not instructed to do so, he proceeded to make some observations on its contents. He said that your Lordship spoke in one place of the events occurring in Poland as a contest between the Russian Government and Polish insurgents; and in another, as a war against the Poles, in which you accuse Prussia of having engaged to take a part; but in his opinion, the measures which the Russian Government are employing to suppress the insurrection cannot be properly described as a war in which two nations are engaged; and Prussia could not therefore have been said to have become a party to a war between Russia and Poland, if her troops had been ordered to act in concert with those of Russia on the frontier in the event of an insurrection having broken out in her own territory. I replied that I did not see how the name given to the conflict could in any way affect the responsibility which Prussia would in such a case have assumed. Excellency went on to discuss the paragraph in the despatch in which your Lordship states that you had reason to believe that the Convention signed by Prussia and Russia contains an agreement that Russian troops upon crossing the frontier of Prussia shall not be disarmed, as would be required according to international usage, but shall be allowed to retain their arms, and to remain and act as an armed body in Prussian territory. M. de Bismarck said there was no His such engagement in the Convention. Your Lordship, however, will probably consider that it is included in the stipulation mentioned by your Lordship, and which his Excellency admits that the Convention does contain, that Russian troops shall be permitted to pursue and capture Polish insurgents in Prussian territory. The interpretation of that stipulation, however, had been, he said, under negotiation; and it was to have been restricted and defined by instructions to be given to the military frontier authorities, when it was decided that it would not be necessary for the troops of either Government to cross the frontier at all, and that no instructions on the subject should be prepared. The Convention might therefore, he said, be looked upon as a dead letter, as the instructions necessary for carrying it into effect had never been drawn up. Your Lordship's observation that if Russian troops are to be at liberty to follow and attack Polish insurgents in Prussia, the Prussian Government makes itself a party to the war now raging in Poland, M. de Bismarck met by a denial that Russian troops have ever been allowed to do so; but he said, nevertheless, considering Gross 5. März No. 689. the reasons which the Prussian Government had at one time for fearing that the britannien, Prussian territory would be violated by the insurgents, and that Prussian subjects 1863. would be incited to revolt, he could not admit that the case of Russian troops acting in the manner contemplated by the Convention against insurgents in the Prussian frontier districts could be looked upon in the same light as a Federal ship of war attacking a Confederate ship in British waters; for any permission granted to Russian troops to cross the frontier into Prussia, or for Prussian troops to cross into Russia, would have been given solely for the protection of Prussian territory and of Prussian property, and for a purely defensive purpose, in the event of an insurrection existing on both sides of the frontier, as there was every reason to apprehend would have been the case before Prussian troops could have reached the frontier districts in sufficient number to provide for their security. I could not, of course, admit the distinction which M. de Bismarck wished thus to establish, as the motive for permitting an act cannot affect the character of its consequences; but M. de Bismarck maintained that considering the position of the Prussian Government, it could not fairly be said that they would have given, by carrying out the stipulations of the Convention, indirect support and countenance, as alleged by your Lordship, to the arbitrary conscription of Warsaw, for they could not have neglected to take such measures as they might have considered necessary, under the circumstances, for the safety and protection of their own territory. As to the request which I had been instructed to make to him for a copy of the Convention, his Excellency observed that he could not understand upon what grounds Her Majesty's Government could consider themselves justified in expecting the Prussian Government to communicate to them a copy of an incomplete document, which only formed, as he had already explained to me, the first step in a negotiation now suspended, and which must remain entirely inoperative unless it were rendered effective by instructions which had to be agreed upon, and which will not now be drawn up, as circumstances have rendered them unnecessary. It was, therefore, a Convention of which no ratifications had been exchanged, and it was not intended that it should be ratified. ¶ M. de Bismarck then repeated what he had formerly said to me, viz., that the Convention merely states that as the insurrection which has broken out in the Kingdom of Poland threatens public and private property and the peace of the neighbouring Provinces of Prussia, it has been agreed between the two Governments that assistance may be afforded to each other, and their troops be authorized to cross the frontier on the demand of either Government, and in cases of necessity, and that this agreement shall only last while both Governments shall deem it expedient. His Excellency said that the proposal to enter into the Convention was forwarded by telegraph from St. Petersburgh by General Alvensleben, who received authority on the same manner to sign it. That the King had at first hesitated to authorize its signature, as His Majesty considered the agreement of too elastic a nature, until it was suggested to him that the character of the engagement would entirely depend upon the instructions to the frontier and military authorities, which must be agreed upon with the Russian Government before the Convention could be Gross 5. März 1863. carried into effect, as to the circumstances in which, and the distance to which, No. 689. the frontier could be crossed by the troops of either party, and therefore on His britannien, Majesty's own appreciation of the cases of necessity in which Russians should be permitted to do so at all. His Excellency said that negotiations having been consequently opened for preparing such instructions, the Russian Government proposed that their troops should be allowed to cross the frontier when in actual conflict and in sight of an enemy, and to a distance from which they could return within the same day. His Excellency, however, did not explain to me by what authority permission to cross was to be given in such cases, observing, however, that arrangements for this purpose would have depended on the danger threatened in each district; but he said that even this restricted authority had never been conceded, and no action by Russian troops on Prussian territory, as far as he was aware, had ever taken place, although accidental cases may have occurred, but if so, this may have happened in Austrian as well as in Prussian Poland, nor had any occupation of Russian territory by Prussian troops ever taken place, although it had been attempted to represent as such the occupation of the bridge belonging to Prussia which connects the Prussian town Gollub, near Kulm, with a Russian town on the opposite side of the River Drewentz, when it was believed that insurgents in possession of the Russian town were about to make an irruption into Prussia. M. de Bismarck stated, however, that there have been several cases in which Russian Custom-house guards, when assailed by the insurgents, have crossed with the Custom-house chest into Prussia, and have been allowed to return without being deprived of their arms, not, however, in virtue of the Convention, but as a mere act of courtesy on the part of the King. &c. To Earl Russell, London. Andrew Buchanan. No. 690. GROSSBRITANNIEN. Botschafter in Berlin an d. königl. Min. d. Ausw. Berlin, March 14 (received March 16), 1863. Grossbritannien, 14. März 1863. (Extract.) I inquired of M. de Bismarck yesterday whether he had No. 690. replied through Count Bernstorff to your Lordship's despatch of the 4th instant relative to the affairs of Poland*), which I read to him last week, and whether Her Majesty's Government might hope that their representations at St. Petersburgh would be supported by the Government of His Prussian Majesty. M. de Bismarck said that he had not addressed any communication to Count Bernstorff in reply to your Lordship's despatch, and what he had already said to me with reference to the position of Prussia towards Poland, and the dangerous neighbour which an independent Polish State must prove to Prussia, ought to *) No. 687. |