determined to give no excuse for hostilities, made no opposition. Their land batteries which might have disputed the entrance, were silent as the ships. When all was ready

the frigate Dartmouth ordered two Turkish fireships to raise their anchors and move to a greater distance-The Commander replied, that it was the custom in every harbour in the World that the ship last arrived should anchor where there was room and should not disturb ships already moored. The Dartmouth threatened to cut their cables-The Turk replied he would not endure it without exercising his right of firing on the boat that attempted it. The boat was sent the fire ship opened upon it with musquetry, the Dartmouth replied with cannon-Codrington gave the signal, and the attack began along the whole line. . . . The Turks fought with desperation, in spite of their confined position, their being surprised, and their want of men, besides they had only three line of battle ships against ten. The action began at 2-by sunset the destruction was complete. The Armida had taken three frigates, on board of which the Turkish wounded and prisoners were placed, but prisoners made in peace being looked upon as an embarrassment, orders were given to sink the three frigates, which was instantly done. During the night the Turks destroyed many of their own ships. The rising sun of the 21st shone upon wrecks and corpses, the remains of three line battle ships, three first-rate frigates and eighteen second-rate, the corvettes and six smaller vessels. The first blossoms of the Cairo schools, the Egyptian youth, was destroyed. The victors were embarrassed by no prisoners.

The news of this philanthropic battle reached us on the 27th. We warned the Pasha to prepare for the burst of fury which this treason would produce amongst the Turks both of town and country. The immediate effect was terrific, thousands of Christians, men, women, and children hurrying in wild panic to the ships, fearing that the 80,000 Turks in the city would rise to avenge their countrymen and their faith. The panic was felt through all Asia Minor, but no outrage occurred, and we observed with wonder and respect the bearing and self-restraint of the Turks.

Poor Greece, only a miracle can save thee! Abuse of power, bold arrogance, and the trampling under foot of all rights these are midwives which can bring nought but a

slave into the world. The independence which you had neither virtue nor courage to gain for yourself is lost for ever. Instead of a Turkish you will find yourself a Russian province, and a thousand times, with tears in your eyes and without hope in your heart, you will look back with regret to your former state. Europe looks on at your destruction and claps her hands, for by the bills posted on the walls the play is called "THE FREEDOM OF GREECE.”

CHAPTER III.

Library.

Of California.

Treaty with Austria for the Free Navigation of the Danube.

WHEN the first cargo which arrived under it was seized, this Treaty was discovered to be the "most extraordinary proceeding in the history of this or any other country."* Yet, to the sagacious mind of an Ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer the perusal of the subjoined clause ought to have suggested that conclusion long before.

"All Austrian vessels proceeding from the Harbours of the Danube as far as Galatz, inclusive, as well as their cargoes, may sail direct for the ports of Great Britain, and of all other possessions of her Britannic Majesty, as if they came direct from the Harbours of Austria; and, reciprocally, all English vessels, as well as their cargoes, shall be admitted into the Austrian Harbours, and depart therefrom with the same immunities as Austrian vessels."

If this age is modest as to diplomacy, it is somewhat confident in its geography. Was there no "Penny Cyclopædia" in the House?

Below Galatz the Danube flows between Turkish and Russian territories; above Galatz it flows through Turkish territory, up to the frontiers of Hungary, where the Iron Gate arrests the upward navigation as completely as if the height and foam of Niagara interposed. Neither above nor below Galatz is there an Austrian port.

This is a "Reciprocity Treaty," granting the faculty of importing the produce of their own territory, and the nonenumerated articles, the produce of other countries of Europe,

Mr. Herries.

on the payment of no higher duties than British vessels; but in this case the privilege is to extend to all ports of the Danube, as far as Galatz, that is, to ports not Austrian; yet the treaty is with Austria, and admits to these harbours English vessels as Austrian. Every man connected with commerce or politics knew that a Reciprocity Treaty could not have effect in neutral territory; but, to their minds, "the mistake was too gross to be committed in a Treaty," and credence grew from incredulity. The world is now at least six thousand years old; but there has never yet appeared, maturity such as this, of contemptuous inventiondotage such as this, of decrepit belief.

When people say that a thing is extraordinary, they would generally imply that to them it is incomprehensible. When, therefore, after the announcement from the throne or this Treaty and that with Turkey, they believe it to be deep as it was dark, it was only that they feared that any one should suspect they had not fathomed it. After a time, however, an adventurous spirit arose among the leaders of the people, and they approached the stream. They stripped and plunged in, and each in turn, baffled by his own lightness, rebounded to the surface, and back to the bank, dry. The darklyrolling Danube, the while, bore on to futurity, the mystery in its troubled breast.

The first who rushes in, of course, is Lord Aberdeen, who, on the 8th of February, 1839, sought to find "how under this Treaty British vessels could be admitted as Austrian into Turkish ports?

A voice like Lord Melbourne's answers from the waters: "That advantage must be procured by another Treaty.” I am ashamed, yet constrained, to explain.

The professed object was to admit into England Austrian. vessels bringing Turkish produce from Turkish ports on the same terms as if they brought Austrian produce from Austrian ports, that could be effected only by a concurrent Treaty with Turkey, and a Bill in Parliament. Lord Aberdeen does not ask how this is to be effected, but some

thing else which has no analogy to the Treaty, or the facts. Lord Melbourne's answer has as little to do with the question as the question with the Treaty. Indeed, he answers the question that Lord Aberdeen ought to have put, and for which he was prepared. However, the ex-foreign minister is perfectly satisfied, and believes he has suggested, or hastened, a negotiation to confer on English bottoms an Austrian nationality in Turkish ports!

Two days later in the Commons, Lord Palmerston states that the contemplated purposes are to be carried out by "MUTUAL CONSENT." If the omission of Treaties can be thus repaired, why treat?

What mutual consent could bring Austrian vessels in against the Navigation Laws. Now the "Austrian harbours " have dissolved into "Turkish ports."

Sir Robert Peel, after an eulogium on the document and negotiation inquires, "Whether another Treaty with Turkey was not necessary to secure the full advantages of the Austrian Treaty?" Lord Palmerston tells him that "Nothing of the kind is required, as to the footing on which ships coming from the Danube are to proceed, and no engagement necessary between Austria and England. Sir Robert Peel is refractory, and again asks, “whether TURKEY cannot impose restrictions on the Danube, unless she is a concurrent party in the Treaty? On Lord Palmerston's emphatic "she cannot," the matter drops.

But one unquiet spirit being settled, another rises: to the knight of Tamworth, succeeds the thane of Haddo, who rides fiercely in, and charges on his adversary unchivalrous tergiversation. But he himself has shifted his grounds, when he asserts that it is clear that without the concurrence of the Porte, British vessels could not be received into Turkish ports.

"By mutual consent the benefits of the treaty are to be applied to the ships of either country coming not direct from the ports of the other country, but from any ports above Galatz, that is, the Turkish ports of the Danube."