My Lord,

No. 200.

Earl Granville to Lord Lyons.

Foreign Office, February 2, 1871. IMMEDIATELY on the receipt of news of the capitulation of Paris, I requested Mr. Odo Russell to ascertain whether M. Jules Favre intended to come to London, and if such was not his intention to suggest that he would name some one to represent France in the Conference.

Mr. Russell informs me, however, that M. Favre regrets that, for reasons which he is not able at present to explain, he cannot send a substitute to attend the Conference in his place.

I have, &c.

(Signed)

GRANVILLE,

No. 201.

My Lord,

Earl Granville to Lord Lyons.

Foreign Office, February 4, 1871.

I HAD some conversation with M. Tissot on the 25th ultimo with regard to the Conference, when he again urged the importance of the French Plenipotentiary bringing before it the question of peace and war. I repeated the statements which I had previously made to him. France had agreed that the Conference was desirable, and that it would be an advantage for her to be represented. No one could pretend that it was not an object of importance to find, if possible, a satisfactory solution of the question affecting the Black Sea and the interests of the Powers who were co-signataries of the Treaty of 1856.

There might be other subjects which it was desirable to consider in a similar Conference, but the present one had been agreed upon for a particular object, and it was certain that if any other subject was forced upon it, not only such new subject would not be considered, but it would put an end to the consideration of the questions for which the Conference had been summoned.

If the French Plenipotentiary wished to bring the question of peace before the Conference I should be obliged, as President, to object to his so addressing the Conference. But if at the end of the Conference, or even after one of its sittings, he wished to take advantage of the presence of the Plenipotentiaries to bring any subject before them, in that case it would not be my duty to interfere. Each Plenipotentiary would act individually as his sense of duty or his instructions bound him to do, and I, for one, should certainly listen respectfully to anything which was stated to me by the French Plenipotentiary.

(Signed)

I am, &c.

GRANVILLE.

LONDON:

PRINTED BY HARRISON AND SONS.

DESPATCH

FROM

MR. ODO RUSSELL

RESPECTING THE

TREATY OF MARCH 30, 1856.

(In continuation of Papers presented to Parliament, February 9

1871.)

Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty.
1871.

LONDON:

PRINTED BY HARRISON AND SONS.

[C.-265.] Price 1d.

Despatch from Mr. Odo Russell respecting the Treaty of

March 30, 1856.

My Lord,

Mr. Odo Russell to Earl Granville.—(Received March 2.)

Versailles, February 27, 1871. I SEE by the Parliamentary Reports in the "Times" of the 17th and 25th instant that a question has arisen in regard to the argument used by me and published in the correspondence respecting the Treaty of 1856, page 45, No. 76, of the 22nd of November last, to the effect that the "question raised by Prince Gortchakoff was of a nature in its present state to compel us, with or without allies, to go to war with Russia."

As it may be convenient that I should place on record for future reference the reasons which induced me to use that argument, the responsibility of which must rest on me and on me alone, I have the honour to state

1st. That we are bound by the Tripartite Treaty of the 15th of April, 1856, to consider any infraction of the Treaty of the 30th of March, 1856, as a casus belli.

November

2nd. That Prince Gortchakoff's notes of October and of beer, assuming the right to renounce the stipulations of that Treaty which directly touched her interests, appeared to me to involve the assumption of a right to renounce the whole of the Treaty.

3. That Her Majesty's Government had declared on the 10th of November last that it was impossible on their part to give any sanction to the course announced by Prince Gortchakoff.

4th. That this renunciation by Russia, which Her Majesty's Government could not sanction, of a portion of the Treaty of March 30, 1856, opened a discussion which might unsettle the cordial understanding between the two Governments, because it was of a nature in its present state, that is, in the state it was in on the 22nd of November last, to compel us to go war in virtue of the Tripartite Treaty of the 15th of April, 1856, by which we had bound ourselves to consider any infraction of the Treaty of the 30th of March Russia was then renouncing, as a casus belli.

5th. That France being then otherwise engaged and Austria unprepared, we might be compelled to go to war with Russia, even without our allies, having bound ourselves on the 15th of April, 1856, to guarantee, jointly and severally, the stipulations recorded in the Treaty of the 30th March, 1856, threatened by the assumed right of renunciation by Russia, which Her Majesty's Government declined to sanction.

6th. That not having been instructed to state that the question I had been sent to submit to the Prussian Government was not, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, of a nature to compel us ever to go to war, notwithstanding our Treaty engagements, I used the arguments which I believed in my conscience to be true.

I have, &c.