During the year only seven American vessels cleared from the port of Constantinople, as against no less than 2,134 British vessels, 1,732 of which were steamers.

On January 31st the Russian Government issued a circular note to its representatives at the courts of the other guaranteeing Powers. After recapitulating the diplomatic efforts at pacification, extending from the outbreak of the insurrection in 1875 to the convening of the Constantinople Conference, the note continues:

This conference in its preliminary deliberations arrived at a complete understanding, both respecting the conditions of peace, and the reforms to be introduced. It communicated the result to the Porte as the firm and unanimous wish of Europe, but met with an obstinate refusal. Thus, after more than a year of diplomatic efforts, demonstrating the value the Great Powers attach to the pacification of the East, and the right they possess of insuring it, because of the general interests involved, and their firm desire to obtain it by means of a European understanding, the Cabinets again find themselves in the same position as at the commencement of the crisis, which is further aggravated by the blood that has been shed, the passions that have been raised, and the indefinite prolongation of the deplorable state of things which weighs upon Europe, and justly preoccupies public opinion and the Govern

ments.

In March, General Ignatieff set out on a tour to the different capitals, in order to propose a protocol to the signatory Powers. The proposal met with opposition from the British Government only, as several parts of it were considered derogatory to British interests. After considerable negotiations the Protocol was finally signed on March 31st.

Previous to the signing of the Protocol a meeting of the different embassadors was held in the British Foreign Office. The minutes of this meeting were as follows:

Count Munster, Embassador of Germany; Count Beust, Embassador of Austria-Hungary; the Marquis d'Harcourt, Embassador of France; the Earl of Derby, her Britannic Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs; General Count de Menabrea, Embassador of Italy; and Count Shuvaloff, Embassador of Russia, met together this day at the Foreign Office for the purpose of signing the Protocol proposed by Russia, relative to the affairs of the East.

Count Shuvaloff made the following declaration, placing at the same time a pro-memoria of it in the hands of her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State:

"If peace with Montenegro is concluded, and the Porte accepts the advice of Europe, and shows itself ready to replace its forces on a peace footing, and seriously to undertake the reforms mentioned in the Protocol, let it send to St. Petersburg a Special Envoy to treat of disarmament, to which his Majesty the Emperor would also on his part consent. Bulgaria with blood take place, this would necessarily put a stop to the measures of demobilization."

"If massacres similar to those which have stained

The Earl of Derby read and delivered to each of which is annexed to the present procès-verbal. the other Plenipotentiaries a declaration, copy of

General Count de Menabrea declared that Italy is only bound by the signature of the Protocol of this day's date, so long as the agreement happily established between all the Powers by the Protocol itself is maintained.

The signature of the Protocol was then proceeded

with.

The following declaration was made by Earl Derby:

The undersigned, her Britannic Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, makes the following declaration in regard to the Protocol signed this day by the Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain, Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, Italy, and Russia: "Inasmuch as it is solely in the interests of European peace that her Britannic Majesty's Government have consented to sign the Protocol proposed by that of Russia, it is understood beforehand that, in the event of the object proposed not being attained-namely, reciprocal disarmament on the part of Russia and Turkey, and peace between them-the Protocol in question shall be regarded as null and void.

66

LONDON, March 31, 1877. (Signed) DERBY."

The conference became a failure, and the embassadors departed, leaving the embassies in care of chargés d'affaires.

latter country a strong feeling existed against disarmament. The Protocol was fully discussed in the Council of Ministers, and on April 10th the Porte sent its reply to the Powers, declining to receive it.

The concluding and most emphatic section of the Turkish answer brings back to the eyes of the Powers the Treaty of Paris, which the Protocol treated rudely. The portion of that document to which especial reference is made is the latter part of article 9, which says: "It is well understood that it [the firman promising amelioration of the condition of Turkish subjects without distinction of religion or race] could not give the right, in any case, to the aforesaid Powers to interfere either collectively or separately in the relations of his Majesty the Sultan with his subjects, nor in the interior administration of his Empire."

This answer of the Porte breathed a spirit of defiance to Russia, and seemed to make war inevitable. Active preparations were now made by both Governments for the coming struggle. The Russian forces in Bessarabia and Southern Russia were concentrated along the line of the Pruth, while the Turkish forces gathered on the Danube. On April 18th, the Russian Chancery in Constantinople was closed, and about the same time the Czar set out for Kishenev, the headquarters of the Russian army, accompanied by the Minister of War. On April 24th, the Czar issued his proclamation to the nation.

The text is as follows:

Our faithful and beloved subjects know the strong interest we have constantly felt in the destinies of the oppressed Christian population of Turkey. Our desire to ameliorate and assure their lot has been shared by the whole Russian nation, which now shows itself ready to bear fresh sacrifices to alleviate the position of the Christians in the Balkan Peninsula.

The blood and property of our faithful subjects have always been dear to us, and our whole_reign attests our constant solicitude to preserve to Russia the benefit of peace. This solicitude never failed to actuate us during the deplorable events which occurred in Herzegovina, Bosnia, and Bulgaria. Our object before all was to effect amelioration in the position of the Christians in the East by means of pacific negotiations; and in concert with the great European Powers, our allies and friends, for two years we have made incessant efforts to induce the Porte to effect such reforms as would protect the Christians in Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Bulgaria from the arbitrary measures of local authorities. The accomplishment of these reforms was absolutely stipulated by anterior engagements contracted by the Porte toward the whole of Europe.

Our efforts, supported by diplomatic representations, made in common by the other Governments, have not, however, attained their object. The Porte has remained unshaken in its formal refusal of any effective guarantee for the security of its Christian subjects, and has rejected the conclusions of the Constantinople Conference. Wishing to essay every possible means of conciliation in order to persuade the Porte, we proposed to the other Cabinets to draw up a special Protocol comprising the most essential conditions of the Constantinople Conference, and to invite the Turkish Government to adhere to

this international act, which states the extreme limits of our peaceful demands. But our expectation was not fulfilled. The Porte did not defer to this unanimous wish of Christian Europe, and did not adhere to the conclusions of the Protocol.

Having exhausted pacific efforts, we are compelled by the haughty obstinacy of the Porte to proceed to more decisive acts, feeling that our equity and our own dignity enjoin it. By her refusal Turkey

places us under the necessity of having recourse to

arms.

and humbly submitting ourselves to the grace and Profoundly convinced of the justice of our cause, help of the Most High, we make known to our faithful subjects that the moment foreseen when we pronounced words to which all Russia responded with complete unanimity has now arrived. We expressed the intention to act independently when we deemed it necessary, and when Russia's honor should demand it. In now invoking the blessing of God upon our valiant armies, we give them the order to eross ALEXANDER. the Turkish frontier.

[old style], in the year of grace 1877, and the 284 Given at Kishenev, this the 12th day of April year of our reign.

The formal declaration of war was handed to the Turkish chargé d'affaires in St. Petersburg on April 24th. It declared that, as the negotiation between the Porte and Russia had not led to the desired result, the Czar, to his regret, saw himself forced to take up arms. Russia would therefore from that day be at war with the Porte. The diplomatic relations were interrupted, and the members of the Ottoman embassy would receive their passports, as likewise the Ottoman subjects in Russia who might wish for them. Those who wished to remain would enjoy the protection of the laws.

In the mean time a strong feeling in favor of peace began to make itself manifest in Servis and Montenegro. On January 25th, Midhat Pasha addressed a friendly note to the two provinces, which was favorably received. With Servia, peace was finally concluded on March 1st. (See SERVIA.) The negotiations with Montenegro continued until the middle of April, but without any result, as the two Governments could not agree on the territory to be ceded to Montenegro.

In the beginning of February an important change took place in the Government of Turkey. Midhat Pasha was deposed and banished, and Edhem Pasha made grand-vizier in his place.

On March 19th the first Turkish Parliament met, which had been elected in accordance with a clause of the new constitution. It was opened by the Sultan in person. In the speech from the throne he returned thanks to Providence for having been able to open the first session of his Parliament, and he then enumer ated the principal laws which the two assemblies would be called upon to discuss during this session. These were an electoral bill, a provincial bill, a bill on commercial regulations, a code of civil procedure, measures for the reorganization of the tribunals, the promotion and retirement of public functionaries, a press bill, a bill for the organization of a court account, and finally the budget law. The Sultion of the financial bills, and he stated that tan specially recommended the study and adopmeasures would be taken to offer the creditors of Turkey, with the concurrence and consent of their representatives, the most solid guarantees for the execution of the engagements of foreign creditors, while at the same time reconciling them with the urgent necessities of the