Eugene Schuyler to Hamilton Fish, November 5, 1874

No. 485. Mr. Schuyler to Mr. Fish.

Sir: I have the honor to inclose to you herewith two copies of a leading article in the “Journal de St. Petersbourg” of the 20th October, (Nov. 1,) and a translation of the same.

I also send you two copies of the “project of an international declaration regarding the laws and customs of war,” as agreed upon by the Brussels congress, and a translation of the same.

T also send to you in the original, as documents, separately, the full protocols of the proceedings of the congress, which are too long for me to translate.

I have, &c.,

The Brussels conference.

[From the “Journal de St. Petersbourg,” 20 October, (1 November,) 1874.]

We publish to-day, as a supplement, the complete collection of the acts of the Brussels conference.

In the interest of those of our readers who follow this question and wish to study it thoroughly, we have preferred to delay this publication in order to give it entire, rather than in parts.

The reading of the protocols will show how inexact was the impression produced by the premature and abridged revelations of the French press. Not only were the opinions uttered misrepresented by incomplete quotations, but the very character of the conference was gravely altered in its purpose and aim, as well as in its results. Although the protocols with their conciseness give only a restricted idea of the deliberations, it is nevertheless felt how serious, honest, and profound they were. The first uncertainty on the reciprocal dispositions once having been dissipated, it is seen that all the delegates entered into the discussion without foregone conclusions, and with the desire of sincerely and loyally studying the questions, the gravity of which was revealed at every step, and of seeking in common the solutions which were conformable to the general interest.

The very divergences of opinions which were produced there, are the best proof of the urgent necessity there was to submit such questions to a collective deliberation.

This character of investigations is very clearly defined by the conference itself. It could not have any other character, and in keeping itself on this ground it has certainly better fulfilled its mission than if it had desired to formulate decisions which could have conciliated in appearance the divergences’ of opinion only at the expense of truth and realty.

It is this same thought which has determined the governments to bring these debates to the light of publicity and public discussion.

There is no question of passing laws, of imposing regulations by authority. The sad necessities of war being given, the question is to know if, and by what means, they can be restricted to the greatest advantage of humanity by the definition and observance of certain rules which ought to be accepted by all, since they have in view the interest of all.

It belongs, then, to public opinion to declare itself. The governments will naturally be inspired by the rational convictions which will be set forth on all these grave questions of general interest. This is, too, one of the essential traits which distinguished the Brussels conference. It has set out in full the questions, precisely stated the difficult and painful points. It has opened a way where progress is without limits. By degrees, as the problems shall be elucidated by discussion or experience, all the points which are gained will be added to those consecrated by time, custom, and tradition.

Little by little they will complete the work sketched out to-day, and we can only congratulate ourselves on it, since in reality this work is undertaken for the profit of humanity. The Brussels conference has prepared the field; the governments, aided by public opinion, will sow there the grain; time will ripen the harvest.

These considerations appear to us to define as well the part which belongs to the Imperial government of Russia in this enterprise, which it initiated. This part has been very variously and very imperfectly appreciated. There has been a desire to represent the Imperial government as more directly interested than it really is, and to attribute to it the success according to some, or the failure, according to others, of the Brussels conference, as a merit on one side or as a check on the other. It is very evident that the Imperial government has no other merit to claim than that of having stated questions and having provoked a discussion in a general interest. As to the result, it is no more interested than any other government.

If war can be rendered less onerous by certain regulations universally accepted, Russia will profit by it like the rest of the world; if it must continue to be carried on without rules and limits, Russia, like other states, can only guarantee herself or defend herself as she best can, and as far as that is concerned she is not the least favorably placed. Whatever may come of it, the imperial government is entirely disinterested, or rather its interest is not different from that of all. The conciliatory attitude of the Russian delegates has been in this respect the faithful reflection of the intentions and views of their government.

As to the further progress which this question will probably follow, we learn that the governments which took part in the Brussels reunion have been invited to examine the acts of the conference and transmit to St. Petersburg their conclusions, observations, and propositions.

When once these materials are reunited the question will be raised whether to formulate the points admitted in an act, the form of which shall be determined by common agreement, or to call a new conference for the discussion and adoption of a new and final project of such a nature as to conciliate all opinions.

So far as we are informed, most of the governments have already shown to the Imperial cabinet their best will to develop in a general understanding the thought of humanity, the initiative of which is due to His Majesty the Emperor.