granted to tlie French government, and other powers, having been
in like manner granted to the English." See also Clauses 44, 48.
X " See this article cited at p. 376.
390 THE LEVANT AND BED SEA.
The object professed was to develope the resources of
Turkey ; if an equivalent in augmented duties was necessary,
surely it must have been laid on British imports. Why
invent a distinction between imports and exports to apply it
the wrong way ? The aggregate increase is ten per cent.; why
not halve it, and place five on imports, and five on exports ?*
The explanation oftered is that on no other terms could it be
obtained. " You cannot," said Lord Palmerston, on the 1st
March, 1847 ; "go to the minister of a foreign power with
a draft in one hand, and a pen in the other, and say, * there
sir, sign that or jump out of the window.' " This was said
in reference to the additional two per cent, on British goods;
there is no explanation for the burden on Turkish produce,
and for the best of reasons, for it was enforced by the process
above described.
Finally : the Treaty does not abrogate monopolies, nor being
abrogated does it prevent their reimposition. They were
abrogated by the act of the Turkish Goverament,f and the
wording of the Treaty, as we shall presently see, deprives
England of all powers under it, of resisting the imposition
of any and every tax ; and further deprives lier of those
rights which she possessed under the old Capitidations.
The negotiation, which commenced with the view of setting
free the ports of Turkey, has ended with sealing them up.
It has, at the moment when Turkey was about to abandon
its prohibitions, substituted for them prohibitory duties.
This is the measure for which the English minister has
* This was the original proposal of the Turkish government itself^
and which it gave up on my urgent remonstrance, adopting in lieu of
it that stiggestion of the distinction between exports and imports,
which will be hereafter explained, and which has been so artfully
perverted.
t " En effet, apres 1' abolition de tous les drois interieurs qui ont
ete remplace par le droit de 9 per cent., payable a I'exportation, et de
deux sur I'emportation, nous voyons resusciter tous les jours les
anciens droits qui etoiente tonibes en desuetude avant d'etre supprimes
par les traifes." — The Consul General of Mussia to the Fasha of
Beyrouth 26 Marcht 1850.
COMMERCIAL TREATY OF 1848. 391
claimed from applauding England and Europe, the credit of
having over-mastered and outwitted the cabinet of St. Peters-
burgh on the field of all its triumphs ; this is the Treaty
which all Europe has rushed to join, believing it to be a
masterpiece of commercial legislation and of political design.
I must now state what the principles of the Treaty were,
which I proposed and which the English Government adopted,
and sent out to Constantinople in 1837.
1st. The " most favoured nation '* clause.
2d. The privileges of the British merchants to be exten-
ded to subjects of Turkey.
3d. The duty on imports to be retained at three per cent. ;
those on exports to rise or fall on each 'article according to tJie
differ e^iice between its value in the marJcets of Turkey and
Europe : a commission of merchants at intervals of years to fix
the scale : in no case the sum to exceed that previously paid.
4th. Transit free.
5th. To come into operation only when all powers had
joined.
The negotiation was to have been secret, and when settled
between England and the Porte, they were conjointly to ad-
dress themselves to the other powers to obtain their adhesion.
No one would have gained by standing aloof.
The Treaty as signed stipulates,
1st. The '' most favoured nation " clause.
2d. Subjection of the English merchants in regard to
internal trade to the duties paid by the subjects of the Porte,
and not paid by other nations.
3d. The concession of the right of internal legislation as
against Treaties with foreign Powers.
4th. Imports raised from three to five per cent. Exports
from three to twelve : one and the same sum for all articles
whether they could bear it or not.
5 th. Transit charged at three per cent.
6th. To come into operation although no other nation
joined.
Such were the Treaties which, according toLord Palmci tton.
S92 THE LEVANT AND RED SEA.
"differed in no material respect." * The changes were
made under the pretext of securing additional advantages.
The British merchant is made to pay " as much " as the
Turkish subject, by means of the Avords lie shall pay " no
more :" appealing to gain the privileges of the mod favoured
auhject, he loses those of " the most favoured nation."
On the Treaty coming into operation, the Porte made
arrangements to indemnify the farmers of customs, imagining
that the English duties were to be reduced to the level of
those of Russia, according to the 1st Article. One of our
consuls fell into the same mistake, and demanded the repay-
ment of duties on a cargo already shipped, and obtained it.
The truly marvellolis portion of this negotiation is, after
all, the adhesion of the other Powers. The abolition of mo-
nopolies being effected, was effected once for all, why then
should France submit to a gratuitous charge on the ground
that it was the price of their abolition ? The French Am-
bassador had received instructions to negotiate a Treaty
similar to the English, but on a memorial from the merchants,
lie wrote home to say that he could obtain more favourable
terms. He was answered by peremptory orders, the reason
assigned being that the French Government, " had yielded
this point to England."
The French merchants, so soon as their Treaty was signed,
demanded the execution of the first clause. They were
answered that a " tacit agreement existed between the Powers
not to require in that respect the execution of the Treaty ! "
One of them exclaimed, " had Turkey no friend when she
signed that Treaty?"
Austria's repugnance was openly avowed, she indeed
yielded as regarded the trade of the Mediterranean ; but
retained her old rights for the trade of the adjoining provinces
as Serbia, Moldavia, and Wallachia.
Every cabinet of Europe was brought to suiTcnder its
rights, and betray its people's interest ; not a single power,
however great, or however small, stood out. Eussia was left
* Lord Palmerston's statement in Parliament will be fourd at
the end of tliis Chaptei-.
COMMERCIAL TREATY OP 184.3. 893
alone to play the part of antagonist, and to realise tlie profits
of their self-imposed disabilities.
It thus appears that whenever England takes a course,
supposed to have in view the maintenance of public law,
she is immediately followed by every state and government
of Europe. A iact like this shows that the originality of
design, or tlic hostility of dispositions, we lend to France, are
but supposititious ; and that the obstructions we there meet
with, or the dangers we may thence apprehend, are solely, in
as far as they may be or become real, of our own creating.
It will be recollected that this had been treated by Russia,
not merely as a hostile, but as a perfidious measure. She
coupled it with the occupation of Carack, as acts forcing her
to have recourse to arms, laying " on England the terrible
responsibility of such a conflagration." -''â– In her avowed, as
in her oflicial organs, she threatened to retrieve at Calcutta
the defeat she had experienced on the Bosphorus ; but in the
manner of these threats she could not suppress her exultation,
and on the very day that the Treaty was settled at the Board
of Trade, these words were published in the J^rauhjort
Journal —
*' We will make their profoundest combinations and
master-strokes of design, the pivots of our policy, and the
instniments of our greatness."
On the other hand the English Journals, and especially
those connected with the Foreign Department,! asserted that
* Odessa Gazette.
+ "It may bo assumed, without any iinseemly exaggeration of
Boll-deluding triumph, that by the prudence of Lord Pahnerston and
tlie efforts of Lord Ponsouby, seconded by fortunate dispositions in
the Court of Vienna and of the Porte, Russian influence has sustained
a signal defeat — a defeat whicli arms cannot retrieve, which bravado
cannot efiace, nor menace, nor perversion repaii*." — British and
Foreign Review.
" Lord Ponsonby, in a letter to me, quoted in the published cor-
respondence, says : — " I wrotd to you "when you wero away that I
was sure the agitation of it (tb« Treaty) would ler>' to nothing like a
•ettlement. I say, that I hay* not the smallest expectation of ita
3«4 THE LEVANT AND BED SEA.
it would transfer to Turkey from Russia that European
demand of raw materials by which she had been enriched
within the century to the amount of two hundred and sixty
millions sterling. When concluded, it was pompously
announced from the throne, extolled by the opposition,
rapturously hailed by the nation. Was it not then natural
for the statesmen of Europe, ignorant save in opinions,
blind save for print, to believe that England had taken the
lead in a great work which ^vas to secure pennanent tran-
quillity ?
If Eussia stood aloof, was it by mere indifference ? The
Treaty either served her, or threatened her. In the one
case, why did she not join — ^in the other, why did she not
oppose ? While any power stood out, the Treaty was in-
operative, because the merchants of the dissenting power, and
through them all other merchants, rode right over it. Had
she not influence with one ? If not one stood out, clearly
slie was not opposed. Why then did she not join ?
Because by her simulated opposition she ensured its success,
and justified the impression that the falsified Treaty was the
original one. When they had all joined, her position was
magnificent : her merchants could import at one quarter of
the duty paid by all others, and export at one quarter ; all
her triumphs had confeiTed upon her no privileges to be
compared with those which she reaped from a Treaty, levelled
at her existence.
A new administration comes into power in England;
remonstrances pour in from every quarter: the monstrous fact
was proclaimed of English Merchants being forced to borrow
the names of Eussian firms.* The necessity of a remedy was
being accepted. Russian interests would be deeply affected by it.
The Russians are not, I must presume, ignorant of the consequencea
of it ; and I know they are at this moment all poioerfuiy
* Col. Rose writes, on the Vth September, 1843 : — " An unan-
iwerable fact proves the superiority of the advantage which tho
Russian merchant now enjoys over the British merchant. I know
that a British merchant gave 1 per cent, to a person trading as a
COMMEECIAL TREATY OF 1848. S95
80 evident that the Turkish government prepared for it. * But
means were found to set them on a false track, that of devising
a process for equalising the duty between the British and
Russian by making the native dealei' who sold to or bought
from the Russian, 'pay an illegal tax. The plan is designated by
one of our own agents, " a bold and unexpected attempt :" he
attributed it to Turkey. It was met by a Russian " armed
janissary " being sent to embark the goods " by force." f
Sussian merchant, whom I ako know to trade as a Russian merchant
in his name ; and I fui'ther know, that a sort of national pride alone
has prevented the rest of the British merchants in Syria from doing
the same."
, * « Even the Custom-house appaltators here, sensible of the ad-
vantages enjoyed by the Russian trade, and forseeing the probability
in consequence of a modification of the EngHsh Convention, have
ftijmlated icith the Government that they are to he indemnified for
the loss they will sustain should the modification take place
*' Need a clearer proof be adduced of the advantages which Russia
has gained by the Treaty, than the fact that a crowd of nominal
Russian merchants has sprung wp one hardly knows froyn tohere, since
it came into operation." — Conjoint Despatch of Colonel Rose and
Mb. Mooee {Consul- General for Syria and Consul of Beyrout.)
t The Ambassadoe. — " Upon my inquiring of the Miiiister of
Foreign Affairs in what manner tlie really important difference
between 12 and 5 per cent, paid by British merchants on exports and
imports respectively, and the uniform duty of 3 per cent, paid on
both by Russian traders was removed, his Excellency assured me that
in both cases that difference (!) was levied upon the Turkish subject
—in the former as a seller, in the latter as a -^\xvchsiserJ''^Sir Stratford
Canning (18//* Nov. 1842.)
TuE Consul- Genehal. — " A Russian merchant, or at any rate
trading as sucli, purchased lately a large quantity of silk, but the
ftppakator having been unable to discover the sellers or producers
thereof^ in order to exact the 9 per cent, export duty from them,
objected to his so doing. . , . The cancellier proceeded to the
Cufltom-house with a janissary armed, and declared his determination
to embark the silk by force. , . . The Custom-house officer
applied to Assad Pascha for support, to prevent its embarkation ; but
in consequence of a communication from the Russian canceUier, his
Excellency ordered the appaltators to allow the embarkation of the
bales on the payment of 3 per cent, only!" — Col. Eose, 7th Sept.^ 1842.
396 THE LEVANT AND RED SEA.
Puzzled and confounded by the working of a measure
wliich, v»'hen in opposition, tliey had hastened to extol, the
new administration now sent about to the consuls and
merchants to ask their opinion ; this was the unanswerable
question which they put " Shall we keep the third clause,
or, abandoning it, take to the first ? " Here are the very words
of the inevitable Lord Aberdeen : —
" Whether the e?i.*advantages under which British mer-
chants labour are of such an extent as to render it more
advantageous to claim the benefit of the First Article, and
insist upon British merchants being placed on the same
footing with Russian merchants, although such a course
might lead to the sacrifice of ichatever advantages the British
trader now enjoys under the Convention, by the substitution
of fixed and for variable and arbitrary duties of import and
export, and by the abolition of monopolies and other ancient
sources of vexation and annoyance ? "
There can be no alternative between two clauses of a Treaty;
if you have something to choose between, you have nothing
to stand upon, for there must be contradiction. But you.
had none by the first article, for it is general, and the obli-
gations incurred by the third are special. The three volumes
of correspondence tally with their text. They contain, how-
ever, one passage of sense.
" We cannot see how our being placed ' on the footing of
the most favoured nation ' can in any way subject us to
* variable and arbitrary duties of import and export.' The
Russian IMerchants and others, under Russian protection, are
liable to no variable or arbitrary duty."*
When Lord Palmerston is at length charged in the House
vi'ith surrendering the rights of the " most favoured nation,"
he answers : —
" The hon. and learned gentleman really hds not read the
the Treaty. He may lift up his eyes at that statement ; but
I repeat that he cannot have read the Treaty, or, if he has,
* Mr. Scctt of Slumlan.
COMMEKCIAL TREi\.TY OF ]848. 897
he has not read it correctly. He stated, that by the Treaty
as signed, British subjects and sliips were not placed upon
the footing of the most favoured nation ; if the hon. Member
will only look at the Treaty itself, he will see that the first
Article states —
* All former rights and privileges are confirmed, and all rights,
privilege?, and immunities, which the Subhrae Porte now grants, or
may hereafter grant, to the ships and subjects of any other foreign
Power, or which it may suffer [not merely grant] the ships and sub-
jeets of any other foreign Power to enjoy, shall equally be granted,
exercised, and enjoyed by the subjects and the shipi of Great
Britain.'
If that is not securing to British subjects and ships all the
advantages enjoyed by the most favoured nation, I do not
know how the grant of those advantages could have been ex-
pressed in words more clear or more comprehensive. It is not
only so in the plain meaning of the words, But it has been so
acknowledged since hij both jjcwiles. JFe have acted upon that
interpretation. Indeed, there could have been no inter-
pretation required in the matter, because the words are 0.3
clear and as plain as words can be, and from them it is clear
that British subjects and ships are upon the footing of the
most favoured nation.'*
This statement was received with loud cheers. Good God !
why print volumes of correspondence ! Varro did not despair
after Cannae ; who can hope after this ?
The British officials put up their prayers for one, one only,
boon, — that Russia may join ; then would be covered all their
sin and hidden all their shame. Little did they see, and less
did they care, that her adhesion would withdraw one immunity
from British trade, for Russian subjects trafficked in our goods,
and lent their names to our merchants. When a favourable
reception was to be managed for the Czar in London, the
Russian Cabinet promised to gratify their wishes. Lord
Aberdeen solemnly announced the event to Parliament,
assuring it that " Her Majesty's government had not been
193 THE LEVANT AND RED SEA.
idle in this matter." The temporary end obtained, she
continued to adhere to her ^^base^ positive et intariahley*
through a fire of Blue Books, until in the midst of the din of
the Spanish marriages, and the annexation of Cracow, she
quietly, without the observation of a single soid, or the
comment of a single journal — ^joined the Treaty.
English Diplomacy now entered the haven of repose : the
English Merchants were contented : in what age do we live
when such a fact could not awaken even curiosity ? Could
stultification be more perfect, or demonstration complete ?
But already, in 1838, the Eussian Cabinet was preparing
the occasion to shift its ground. An elaborate exposee of
its ideas was transmitted to its ambassador at Constantinople
and communicated to the consuls. In this document the
same basis was assumed as that of the English Treaty, but
doubts were entertained in consequences of its " loose
wording," through which the Turkish Government might
slip : the " isolation " of Eussia is represented as a pause
until she has seen " what results shall manifest themselves.'*
In 1846 the desired results had consequently been mani-
fested — were they favourable or unfavourable ? If the first,
why impose on her trade a gi'atuitous burden of 12 per cent,
and sacrifice all her exclusive advantages ? In that year she
had usurped Cracow, while England and France were pro-
testing against each other about a Treaty (Utrecht) which had
ceased for fifty years to exist. If the second^-if, in tlie
words of one of her consuls " worse than the abuses were
now reappearing, which had fallen into desuetude even
before the Treaty was signed;" why give up the stringent
clauses of the Treaty of Adrianople ? If she who has pro-
claimed that clause the chief reward of her cami>aign of
1829, abandons the faculty it confers to interfere in the
internal administration of the Porte, it must be for something
even better still.
Against Eussia England will never strike a blow. Tlie
contest of the strong mind and the weak is not determined
by the relative power of their bodies or by their bodies at all.
COMMEllCIAL TREATY OF 1848. 899
Therefore did paramount importance attach to a mjeasure
-which would have altered the relative bases of the power of
!Russia and Turkey.
Every remarkable man for the last fifty years has prog-
nosticated the extinction of the Western States and the
triumph over them of Kussia. Several of tliese were them-
selves Sovereigns and Ministers, and had practical means of
working out their thoughts. Not one of them has succeeded
— not one of them has even approached towards the way to
success. Eussia owes infinitely more to the energy with
which she has been opposed by men of first-rate genius
and highest station, than to the devotedness with which
she has been served either by her own officials or by the
traitors whom she has at aU times had at her disposal in
foreign Cabinets. It is not the difficulty of the enterprise
that has caused these failures. I take an illustration from
the other hemisphere :
Fourteen years ago, the plains watered by the Parana and
the Plata, fertile as they are vast, where herds might multiply
like the sands of the sea, towards which a tide of emigration
had set in from Europe, gave promise of an enormous
supply of hides and tallow. Internal dissensions arose, and
England and France commenced thereupon a series of the
strangest freaks that have ever been seen. One of the
leading merchants was sent over in 1847 to see what could
be done. He came to me with liis case. After he had
concluded his naiTative, he asked me if I could explain the
Bource of the malignity of which they were the object. I
asked him in turn what were the articles of export — tp
what amount — what the probable increase without the in-
terference, Stc. ? He replied, that a million and a quarter
eterling worth of hides, tallow, &c., were exported, and had
they been let alone, or the matter once for aU settled, they
would be now exporting to the value of six, eight or ten
millions. I then asked him the amount and nature of
the exports from the Baltic. He commenced to reply, when
suddenly, he stopped, and after a pause, exclaimed, " Sir !
400 THE LEVANT AND BED SEA.
you have caused the scales to fall from my eyes." He
then informed me of a variety of circumstances which
had never struck him before, all indicating the connection
of Russia with those countries, and it even appeared that
the brig of war which had been captured by the blockading
squadron was a present from the Czar to Eosas. If a
merchant did not understand the diplomatic value of the
disturbance of the Plata, how should statesmen ?
Thus have Pitt, Napoleon, Talleyrand, Gustavus III, failed.
They knew nothing of commerce, and could not counteract a
system of which commerce fonned the basis. The proposed
Treaty met her on this ground.
i Let it not be supposed that any wrong was here intended
to Russia: there was no purpose to injure tlie legitimate
Baltic trade, and all that was proposed was, to allow the
English merchant to buy on the same terms as in Russia.
The project might have its political side : it had also its
commercial. It opened to England a new and a vast supply
derived from a country where om* export trade is only
hampered by our inability to obtain returns. From Syria,
we take one and sell forty. Russia, for her raw materials,
requires gold, and affords no market, far less a prospective
field for our wares. With Turkey the whole transport woidd
be effected in British bottoms.
Had the British Minister been constrained, in 1838, to
admit these high duties, he would subsequently have made
some endeavours to reduce them". Prance and Austria had
yielded nnwillingly : he was sure of their backing : Russia
assumed to be on the same line ; not only she professed to
desire unlimited freedom of trade, but she exacted it. How,
then, is it that England could never obtain a single reduc-
tion ? The little king of Greece was not so helpless.*
* The Britisli consul of Jauina (12th July, 1843) arguing that it
is easy to obtain reductions by taking advantage of concessions viadg
hy other States, mentions " a secret understanding come to with a
Hellenic merchant in 1841, for an abatement of duty on a cargo of
â– wool}" another reduction of the duty on wool iu favour of the in-
COMMERCIAL TREATY OF 1848. 401
The Governments of Europe have lost the tithes, so that it
is with the greatest difficulty that they can impose direct
taxes, and they are driven to tax trade. The Turkish
Treasury receives the tithes : what then would be its profit
^vere grain free ? Ten per cent, is paid in eveiy case on
.exportation, independently of any Customs' duty. The in-
terest of the Turkish Government is therefore that of pro-
prietor not of tax-gatherer ; the tax-gatherer stops demand,
renders unsaleable its goods and unrealisable its revenue.
The English Minister then could have no scniples in seeking
for a reduction which would have encountered no obstacle.