I have shown how numbers of generously-minded Russians disavowed and
repudiated the methods of repression which had been adopted, especially
in Lithuania. None the less was all Russia of one mind as to the
imperative necessity of putting down the insurrection. Every thinking man
knew that it was a matter of life and death to his country; in a despatch
from which I shall quote presently Prince Gortchakoff showed that very
clearly. If the Poles were to become dominant there would be a repetition
in provinces largely inhabited by Russians of the horrors which took
place two centuries earlier when they were in possession of Moscow, and
of which a foretaste had already been given in the murders and attempts
to murder of the last few months. Austrian Poland and Prussian Poland
must be drawn into the furnace and a general conflagration ensue.
But Lord Russell “cared for none of these things.” Here was a rare
opportunity for him to give effect to his favourite policy of “meddle and
muddle” (I do not know who invented the phrase in his honour, but how
good it was!) and he availed himself of it freely.
The state of public feeling in England and France fully justified a
friendly intercession by the Governments of both countries, praying the
Tsar to exercise his clemency on behalf of the rebellious Poles. But it
did not justify Lord Russell in adopting the hectoring language which
he used, language not only reading Russia a lesson as to how she should
govern in her own dominions, but even conveying threats as to what might
happen if his advice were not followed. His conduct of the affair not
only infuriated the Russians, but also alienated the French Government,
who were greatly displeased at having been brought into a ridiculous
position.
On the 2nd of March, 1863, Lord Russell wrote a despatch to Lord Napier,
of course for presentation to Prince Gortchakoff, in which, on the
strength of the fact that “the Kingdom of Poland was constituted and
placed in connexion with the Russian Empire by the Treaty of 1815, to
which Great Britain was a contracting party,” he claimed the right of
Great Britain “to express its opinion upon the events now taking place,”
and in rather slipshod language, such as might be adopted by a schoolboy
mediating in a football squabble, went on to offer his amiable advice
to the Emperor: “Why should not His Imperial Majesty, whose benevolence
is generally and cheerfully acknowledged, put an end to this bloody
conflict,” etc., etc.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account