because they believe themselves to be threatened by a European coalition, and therefore must be in a state of preparation which would enable them to meet this _alone_. “Since therefore, for me, the premises in your memoranda fall to the ground, namely, that owing to the danger threatened from Russia we should give up the policy we have hitherto pursued in our relations with that country and not only seek but actually conclude a European coalition of a defensive nature against Russia, I cannot lend myself to this project in its present extension. In view of the explanation given by the Emperor Alexander of his letter to me, which _I_ originally did not regard as a threat but only as a desire to see the existing good relations between our States maintained by means of restrictions upon the press, it could _only be a source of satisfaction to me_ to see the milder tone which prevailed in your answer sent by me to the Emperor, the moderate pressure and the truths which it contained being sufficiently intelligible _and also understood_. The words ‘une entente séculaire, les legs de nos pères de glorieuse mémoire’ were written according to my own heart, and went to the heart of the Emperor, so that he repeated them to me twice. I could not therefore understand your hostility to Russia, which increases with each memorandum, nor could I see how the expressions quoted above could be interpreted as a mere empty phrase! I was just as deeply affected by the words that we should outwardly maintain a friendly attitude towards Russia while at the same time concluding a coalition against her with Austria, with England, and perhaps with France. And you have its conclusion already so fixedly in view that you have not only communicated your whole project to Count Andrassy, but have also permitted him to speak of it to his Emperor (seinem Kaiser), who also immediately accepts it. Then you invite me to send you instructions, on your way back through Vienna, to conclude a defensive alliance there with Austria against Russia, which would be followed by the larger coalition. Put yourself in my place for a moment. I am in presence of a personal friend, a near relative and an ally, in order to come to an understanding as to some hasty and indeed misunderstood passages in a letter, and our interview leads to a satisfactory result. Shall I now at the same time join a hostile coalition against this sovereign, that is to say, act behind his back in a manner contrary to that in which I spoke to him?