general, from what was apprehended would be a general massacre. This refusal of England, and the demonstration of its Fleet, led practically to the withdrawal of the "Berlin Memorandum ;" and, despairing of a pacific solution, the Servians and Montenegrins (incited, no doubt, by Russian Panslavists, and supported by Russian gold and Russian officers), soon afterwards declared war against Turkey, which banished all hopes of peace in the East being maintained.

Towards the end of April the insurrection, fomented by foreign emissaries, spread to Bulgaria; but it was characterised by such barbarous atrocities that naturally aroused a storm of public indignation in England against Turkey, and a strong demand was made that England should separate herself from a nation which perpetrated such cruelties; that a stop should be put to Turkish rule in Bulgaria, Bosnia, and Herzegovina ; a demand which compelled the Porte to take vigorous measures to stamp out the rebellion.

Mr. Richard and the friends of Peace were placed in a difficult position, for on the one side they had to contend with the traditional policy of England to maintain what was euphemiously called the integrity and independence of the Ottoman Empire in Europe, allied with which was the jealousy and hatred of Russia, and on the other side was the outburst of indignation against Turkey for the hideous outrages perpetrated by the Moslems upon the Slav and Christian population in various parts of her Empire, which called forth throughout Europe angry protests, and a demand for armed intervention against the Government of the Porte.

Between the horns of this dilemma, both tending or pointing in the direction of war, the Scylla, of hatred to Russia, and the Charybdis, of hostility to Turkey, Mr. Richard endeavoured to hold an even keel, and in such a peculiar crisis his calm judgment, and his courage for consistency did not forsake him throughout, though tried as it must have been, even to a hair's breadth, whilst his energy of resource,

and marvellous activity and zeal was seldom, if ever, so conspicuously displayed.

The first prominent action taken by Mr. Richard at this early stage of the crisis was in reference to the important Deputation of the 14th July, 1876, to present a Memorial to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Earl Derby, for although the originators and promoters of the Deputation hailed from Birmingham, yet Mr. Richard welcomed the proposal, and prepared the way for its adoption, for it expressed the earnest hope that the Government would observe a policy of strict neutrality, except where it may be able to interpose its friendly offices to mitigate the horrors, and to hasten the close of the conflict then raging in the European provinces of Turkey.

This Memorial, drafted by Mr. Richard, was largely and influentially signed, and was supported in its presentation by Mr. Bright, Mr. Chamberlain, and upwards of 40 Members of Parliament, and 250 representative men from all parts of the country, and in reply to this Memorial and the speeches delivered, nothing could have been more excellent in manner, or more re-assuring in tone, than Lord Derby's speech, as to the views and policy of the Government, and which were clearly set forth in the following terms:

"The policy of Her Majesty's Government will be a policy of strict neutrality, except where it may be able to interpose its friendly offices to hasten the close of the war.

*

*

*

*

*

"We have done what was in our power to prevent this war breaking out. In that we failed. We shall now do what is in our power to keep it within certain limits We shall not intervene, we shall do our utmost, if necessary, to discourage others from intervening.

"If an opportunity of mediation should offer itself, we shall gladly avail ourselves of it; while we retain, as we are bound to do, our own freedom, and our own independence of action and of judgment, we attach quite as much importance as those others with whom we have acted to that general understanding among the great European States, which is the best and surest guarantee of peace."

These declarations of the Foreign Minister were received

with genuine satisfaction, and produced a salutary and tranquillising effect, not only in this country, but throughout all Europe.

Upon the first symptoms of alarm and danger at the course events in the East were taking, especially directed against Russia, Mr. Richard re-published a pamphlet, which has been previously referred to, on the History and Origin of the War with Russia in 1853-4, that thus, as he stated in the preface:

"By throwing light on the causes of that War, an opportunity should be afforded to the young generation that has come into political life since those days, to judge for themselves what really was the nature and amount of those Russian demands in 1853-4, which were swollen to such portentous dimensions by the jealousies and fears of the moment,"

for he feared that attempts were being made in 1876 to reproduce the same state of feeling towards Russia, which hurried England into that disastrous conflict in 1853.

This succinct and remarkably able pamphlet had, as it deserved, an extensive circulation. Copies were sent to the members of both Houses of Parliament, to editors of the Press, and public men throughout the country; and its value and usefulness at that critical time was considerable, for it helped with other circumstances to awaken in the public mind a consciousness of the great blunder of the Crimean War.

At this juncture, whilst danger of war on behalf of Turkey was lessening, there was steadily rising a tide of furious indignation, stirred by the infamous and execrable horrors in Bulgaria, not confined to an armed intervention against Turkey, but a clamour, loud and deep for a war of vengeance and of extermination "bag and baggage" of the unspeakable Turk from the soil of Europe.

Against this war of vengeance, as a punishment for the cruel crimes committed by England's former ally, Turkey, Mr. Richard vigorously and justly denounced, equally as he had in 1853, that in fighting for the Turks we were fighting the

battle of freedom, justice, and civilization, for he considered such a war would drive Mahomedan fanaticism to desperation, and "scenes would be enacted throughout Europe and Asia, wherever the Ottoman dominions extend, which would be an imitation on a large scale of the very worst of the iniquities at which the world is now so loudly expressing its indignation."

To stem this rolling wave of popular fury, Mr. Richard issued a powerful appeal, bearing his signature alone, a masterly review of the deplorable result of the Crimean War, which he summed up by the declaration of the Times, "that never was so great an effort made for so worthless an object ;" and he earnestly exhorted his countrymen to make their voices heard, that on no pretext whatever should England again enter into partnership with Mahomedan fanaticism.

The next important step undertaken by Mr. Richard, in conjunction with some of the foremost men of the day, was the formation of the Eastern Question Association, which may be described as the outcome of the influential deputation to the Foreign Minister, Earl Derby, previously referred to; as its inception dates from that event, and was the direct result of the important declarations of the Noble Lord, in reply to the Memorial presented on that occasion.

It would be impossible to over-estimate the great value of this important and diplomatic move at this critical moment; for, looking back on the stirring events of that day, there can be but one opinion, that by virtue of its eminently influential and representative character, and its vigorous action, it decided for England the great issues of peace or war in the East, and that issue was Peace. For what at that supreme crisis was the attitude, what the policy, of the Government of Lord Beaconsfield? For many weary months, in fact from the day of the outbreak of the insurrection in Herzegovina, through all that dark and dismal period of the reign of terror, and the orgies of

blood and carnage in Bulgaria, the responsible members of the Government in both Houses of Parliament, and their official organs in the press, steadily and stubbornly withheld - whether from High State reasons of diplomatic reticence, or some hidden and settled design to bamboozle the country into war, it is difficult to say-all information, all despatches, and all declarations of opinion or policy, from the ear and eye of the Representatives of the people.

Moreover, it was obvious from the important speech delivered by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Earl of Derby, to the Deputation at the Foreign Office on the 14th July, and reading between the lines, that within the Councils of the Crown, there had been and still remained two policies, and probably two powerful factions; the one favouring a benevolent neutrality, a dignified policy of nonintervention, and the other gravitating and drifting towards an armed intervention in the East; whether for Turkey or against Turkey, whether for Russia or against Russia, was not clear, but an armed intervention in the name, for the interests, the honour, and the prestige of the British Flag, which were in no manner or degree in peril.

To meet therefore this emergency, to sustain and strengthen in the Councils of the Crown the Ministers of Peace who were firmly resolved on England's neutrality, and to counteract and withstand the Ministers of War, who were determined on England's active intervention in the East, was the one aim of the friends of peace and non-intervention, and by marshalling their widely-scattered forces, Members of both Houses of Parliament, the Clergy of all denominations, Mayors and Magistrates, members of the Universities and other public bodies and representatives of the people, and uniting them in one compact and powerful National Union, to stimulate and arouse such an overwhelming volume of public opinion that no Minister, or Parliament, or Cabal, dare to resist.

This Eastern Question Association was launched into existence by, it is no exaggeration to say, the most remark