[Black Sea.]

unreasonableness, on its own merits, of the desire of Russia to be released from the observation of the stipulations of the Treaty of 1856 respecting the Black Sea.

For the question is, in whose hand lies the power of releasing one or more of the parties from all or any of these stipulations?

It has always been held that that right belongs only to the Governments who have been parties to the original instrument.*

The despatches of Prince Gortchakoff appear to assume that any one of the Powers who have signed the engagement may allege that occurrences have taken place which, in its opinion, are at variance with the provisions of the Treaty, and, although this view is not shared nor admitted by the co-signatory Powers, may found upon that allegation, not a request to those Governments for the consideration of the case, but an announcement to them that it has emancipated itself, or holds itself emancipated, from any stipulations of the Treaty which it thinks fit to disapprove. Yet 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 efficacy of Treaties under the discretionary control of each one of the Powers who may have signed them; the result of which would be the entire destruction of Treaties in their essence. For whereas their whole object is to bind Powers to one another, and for this purpose each one of the parties surrenders a portion of its free agency, by the doctrine and proceeding now in question, one of the parties in its separate and individual capacity brings back the entire subject into its own control, and remains bound only to itself.

Accordingly Prince Gortchakoff has announced in these despatches the intention of Russia to continue to observe certain of the provisions of the Treaty. However satisfactory this may be in itself, it is obviously an expression of the free will of that Power which it might at any time alter or withdraw; and in this it is thus open to the same objections as the other portions of the communications, because it implies the Right of Russia to Annul the Treaty on the ground of allegations of which she constitutes herself the only judge.

The question therefore arises, not whether any desire expressed * See Declaration of 17th January, 1871. See also opinion of British Government of 23rd November, 1846, and Declaration of Russia and Turkey of 4th June, 1866, in Appendix.

[Black Sea.]

by Russia ought to be carefully examined in a friendly spirit by the co-signatory Powers, but whether they are to accept from her the announcement that, by her own act, without any consent from them, she has released herself from a solemn covenant.

I need scarcely say that Her Majesty's Government have received this communication with deep regret, because it opens a discussion which might unsettle the cordial understanding it has been their earnest endeavour to maintain with the Russian Empire; and, for the above-mentioned reasons, it is impossible for Her Majesty's Government to give any sanction on their part to the course announced by Prince Gortchakoff.

If, instead of such a declaration, the Russian Government had addressed Her Majesty's Government and the other Powers who are parties to the Treaty of 1856, and had proposed for consideration with them whether anything has occurred which could be held to amount to an infraction of the Treaty, or whether there is anything in the terms which, from altered circumstances, presses with undue severity upon Russia, or which, in the course of events, had become unnecessary for the due protection of Turkey, Her Majesty's Government would not have refused to examine the question in concert with the co-signataries to the Treaty. Whatever might have been the result of such communications, a risk of future complications and a very dangerous precedent as to the validity of international obligations would have been avoided. I am, &c.,

GRANVILLE.

P.S.-You will read and give a copy of this despatch to Prince Gortchakoff.

G.

On the 22nd November, 1870, the Prussian Government proposed the meeting of a Conference at St. Petersburgh to discuss the Black Sea question; the British Government objected to this proposal, but expresssed its readiness to meet Plenipotentiaries of the Treaty Powers in Conference either at Vienna, Florence, or London. London having been ultimately agreed upon as the place of meeting, Conferences were held at the Foreign Office, and a Treaty modifying the stipulations of the Treaty of 30th March, 1856, relating to the Black Sea, was signed on the 13th March, 1871.

[Neutrality of Luxemburg.]

No. 432.-PRUSSIAN CIRCULAR respecting the Alleged Violation of the Neutrality of the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg, during the War between Prussia, &c., and France. 3rd December, 1870.

(Translation as laid before Parliament.)

Count Bismarck to Count Bernstorff.

Versailles, 3rd December, 1870.

Ar the outbreak of the War the Government of His Majesty the King declared that it would respect the Neutrality of the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg (No. 421), on the presumption that it would also be respected on the part of the French, and, as a matter of course, would be maintained with earnestness and good will by the Grand Duchy itself.

The Royal Government has faithfully observed that promise, and has gone so far in its consideration that it has subjected itself to all the inconveniences in regard to the Transport of its Wounded which the protest of the French Government against the Transport of Wounded Men through Luxemburg Territory, proposed in the interest of humanity, imposed on it.

To its deep regret, however, neither on the part of France nor on that of Luxemburg have the proceedings corresponded with the presumptions that were entertained.

A number of cases, wherein a hostile disposition of part of the population went so far as even to actual ill-treatment of German Officials there, may be left unmentioned, so as not to make the Grand Ducal Government responsible for the offences of Individuals, who certainly deserved a stricter repression than they appear to have met with.

A striking instance of violation of the Neutrality occurred in the Provisioning of Thionville by Railway Trains at night from Luxemburg, so long as the Fortress remained in the hands of the French.

The Grand Ducal Government expressed its regret thereupon, and could not but admit the fact; it is proved beyond doubt that the dispatch of those Railway Trains to Thionville could not have taken place without the connivance of the Grand Ducal Police and Railway Officials. The Royal Government addressed its complaint to the Grand Ducal Government on that occasion,

[Neutrality of Luxemburg.]

and drew its attention to the consequences which must necessarily ensue from such conduct.

That warning has, unfortunately, not been attended to.

On the contrary, the violation of the Neutrality has lately extended so far that it is impossible for the Royal Government to overlook it.

After the surrender of Metz there was a transit of French Soldiers and Officers in masses through the Grand Duchy, for the purpose of entering France again, by evading the German Posts.

The French Vice-Consul residing in Luxemburg has established a regular Office at the Railway Station there, where the Fugitives have been provided with Means and Vouchers to enable them to continue their march into France to enter the Army of the North.

The number of Combatants added to the French Forces in this manner amounts, according to the statements before us, to more than 2,000 men.

No measures have been taken against this on the part of the Grand Ducal Government; the French Soldiers have neither been sent into the Interior nor prevented from returning to France with the notorious intention of taking part in the War against Germany. No difficulties have been put in the way of the French Vice-Consul in his just as notorious conduct in contempt of the Neutrality of Luxemburg.

That there is a flagrant violation of the Neutrality of the Grand Duchy in the transit through it for the purpose of entering the Active French Forces, in the official furtherance thereof by the Functionary of the French Government, in the toleration of such conduct by the Grand Ducal Government, there can be no doubt. Therefore, the premises with which the Royal Government was obliged to connect the Neutrality of the Grand Duchy no longer exist.

In consequence of this, I have to request your Excellency, by command of His Majesty, to inform the Government where you are, as one of the Signataries of the Treaty of 11th May, 1867 (No. 405), that the Royal Government can no longer consider itself bound to any consideration of the Neutrality of the Grand Duchy, in the Military Operations of the German Army, and in the measures for the security of the German Troops against the injuries inflicted on them from Luxemburg.

[Neutrality of Luxemburg.]

At the same time, the Government of His Majesty the King reserves to itself the prosecution of its claims against the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg for the damages done to it through the Non-maintenance of the Neutrality.

I respectfully request your Excellency to read this despatch to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and to leave a copy of it with him.

Receive, &c.,

VON BISMARCK.

[This Circular gave rise to explanations and much discussion, and the correspondence which passed upon the subject was laid before Parliament in February, 1871. On the 8th February, 1871, Count Bernstorff stated to Earl Granville that he had been instructed by Count Bismarck to express to him the satisfaction with which he had learnt that Her Majesty's Government were convinced that it was not his intention, in his Circular of the 3rd of December, 1870, to denounce the Treaty of 1867 (No. 405), by which the position of Luxemburg was defined and secured, but that he had merely been actuated by the desire to take precautionary measures of defence, necessitated by the Military position, against Military injury to the Prussian cause from violation of the Neutrality of the Territory of Luxemburg; and in allusion to Lord Granville's admission that an emergency might possibly arise which might justify, in some degree, the adoption of such measures, Count Bernstorff expressed his concurrence in the view that any such emergency must be judged upon its merits, and added that further discussion would be superfluous.]