4189282623

to thc Polcs thcir na ional Consti ution and thc usc of thcir national languagc. (Temp< rley and Pcnson, p. 235.)

The Russian failurc to carry out this promisc, to which he could make no public rcfcrcncc, profcably heightcncd Pilmcr-ston’s dciirc to sce liberał institutiors in Polar.d and m;v havc helped to dcterminc the strong stand he tcok in 1863 when Poland raised an insurrcction against Tsarist rulc which still lives in Polish hearrs and thc hearts of all lovers of frec-dom. It should not be thoughr, howevcr, that the pro-Polish policy of Grcat Britain was taken soldy on Palmcrston’s initiativc. Hc and his Primc Minister, Russell, had identical vicws on thc question, and they fclt so strongly that in certain circumstances they wcrc prepared to commit this country to war against Russia on bchalf of Poland.

“ The condition of things in Poland,” wrotc Palmcrston in a dispatch to Lord Napicr, “ is a source of dangcr, not to Russia Eiime, but also to the generał pcacc of Europę . . . which mighi, ** •Jfllder possiblc circumstances, producc complications of thc most serious naturc.” (Temperley and Pcnson, p. 236.)

Russell was not contcnt with suggesting that dcmocratic institutions should be granted to Poland. “ Why should they not be granted at one and the same timc to the Kingdom of Poland and to thc Empire of Russia ? ” (ibid., p. 237.) This was put to thc Russian Ambassador Brunnow, who asked “whether thc communication Mer Majesty’s Governmcnt were about to make at Si. Petersburg was of a pacific naturc.” Whilc assuring him that this was so, Russell fel; obliged to add : “ If thc Emperor of Russia wcrc to take no steps of a conciliatory naturc, dangers and complications might arisc no.t at present in con-tcmplation.” (ibid., p. 237.)

Furthcr initiatives by Palmcrston induded pressure on Russia to grant an amnesty to thc Polish rebcls and cven a suggestion that an independent Poland might bc ruled by an Austrian Archduke as King. After furrher cxchangcs, Russell warned thc Tsarist Governmcnt that “ it would not bc open to Russia to enjoy all thc benefits of a largc addition to her domirions and to repudiate thc terms of thc instrument upon which her tenure depends.” (ibid, p. 238.) Finally, hc asked the Austrian Ambassador, Apponyi, whether Austria would bc prepared to usc force against Russia to sccure her consent if a Europcan Congrcss dedded on the separaiion of Poland from Russia under a foreign or a Russian princc. Apponyi wanted to know^ł whether England would use force, and as Russell had to acknowledgc that this eventuality had nor yet bccn considered, hc begged that the que.^Łtion should be regarded as Comme non avenue.

Thcre arc somc who hołd that Palmcrston and Russell were