harvest, the country was in a state of profound tranquillity. In many districts there was only one-third of the ordinary crop of rye, and the Russians had to import articles which they usually grow in their own country for export, such as grain, tallow, and wool. In order to alleviate the distress of the agricultural population, and to supply the deficiency thereby caused in the revenue, the new Minister of Finance, M. Abasa, who in November succeeded General Greigh, took off the duty on salt, and added ten per cent. to the duties imposed on all other goods, at the same time raising the warehousing charges and the licence duties on trades.

In foreign affairs the history of the year in Russia was comparatively uneventful. When the Empress died on June 3, it was rumoured that the Emperor would marry the Princess Dolgorouky, who had for some time been an inmate of the Winter Palace at St. Petersburg, and that he would then abdicate and be succeeded by the Czarevitch, whose views on foreign policy are believed to differ in some important respects from those of his father. But though the Czar married the Princess Dolgorouky in July, he did not abdicate, and no change took place in the relations of Russia with the other European Powers. Some anxiety was caused at the beginning of the year by the refusal of the Chinese Government to ratify the Treaty of Livadia, on the plea that its ambassador had exceeded his powers in leaving the most fertile portion of the Kuldja valley and some of the important passes over the Tian-shan in the hands of the Russians, and in imposing on China the payment of a large sum by way of indemnity. Chung How, the ambassador referred to, was degraded, but the Chinese Government showed its readiness to arrive at a pacific solution of the difficulty by despatching another envoy, Marquis Tseng, to St. Petersburg, where he arrived on August 3 to resume the negotiations on the subject. Meanwhile Russian troops were despatched by land and water to Eastern Siberia: it was evident, however, that neither Power wished to fight, and that each merely aimed at obtaining as much as it could from the other by a demonstration of military force. Russia, too, was concerned in maintaining her prestige in Central Asia, which had been considerably shaken by the victories of the British troops in Afghanistan. She gained her point so far that Chung How, who was imprisoned and sentenced to death by the Chinese Government, was liberated at her demand; the negotiations with Marquis Tseng, too, were concluded at the end of the year, and it was hoped at St. Petersburg that China would ultimately accept the Russian terms. The attempts of the Russians to subdue the Turcomans bad also as yet not produced any satisfactory result. There was no disaster such as that which occurred to the expedition of General Lomakin last year; but General Skobeleff, his successor, notwithstanding his high reputation as a dashing soldier, did not gain any important advantage over his adversaries. The active operations of the force under his command were at first confined

to an advance on the fortified position of Beourma, and a not very successful reconnaissance towards Geok Tepe, which was occupied by a large body of Turcomans. Several months were afterwards occupied in collecting stores, in strengthening the lines of communication by the Attrek valley and across the desert to Krasnovodsk, and in obtaining reinforcements from the Caucasus. A new feature in Central Asian warfare was the construction of a railway from Krasnovodsk to Kizil Arvat, and thence through the desert to the Kuren Dagh, in order to facilitate the conveyance of troops and supplies. By the end of November a considerable portion of this railway was completed, and on December 19 a further advance was made on the south by the occupation of Ketel-i-Nadia, close to the Persian frontier, after a severe engagement between the Turcomans and a body of Russian cavalry under Colonel Narotsky. The Russians had thus established a footing in the country, but their adversaries had also not been idle. Eight thousand Merv Turcomans, with two pieces of artillery, marched to reinforce the garrison of Geok Tepe, and the whole of the Akhal population was called to arms.

The only remaining important incident in the foreign politics. of Russia during the year was the acceptance by the Cabinet of St. Petersburg of the compromise signed on October 31 by the Russian ambassador and the Papal nuncio. Since the last Polish insurrection, in which nearly the whole of the Roman Catholic clergy in Poland was on the side of the insurgents, the Russian Government has refused to recognise the authority of the Pope even in the ecclesiastical affairs of its Roman Catholic subjects; many of the Polish clergy, including the Archbishop of Warsaw, were banished to Siberia; the affairs of the Roman Catholic Church in Poland were placed under the control of a commission at St. Petersburg, and an active propaganda was set on foot with the object of bringing the Roman Catholic population of Lithuania and the kingdom of Poland within the fold of the Russian Church. These measures, however, only increased the detestation still felt for the Russian Government by a large majority of the Polish nation, and the enthusiastic demonstrations of loyalty with which the Emperor of Austria was received by the Poles on his visit to Galicia seem to have induced the authorities at St. Petersburg to try the effect on its own Polish subjects of a policy of conciliation, at least so far as their religious affairs were concerned. The actual terms of the agreement were not made known, but it was understood that the vacant sees in Poland would in future be filled up by the Pope, as was the case before the insurrection of 1863.

CHAPTER IV.

TURKEY AND THE MINOR STATES OF EASTERN EUROPE.

Bulgaria-Servia-Turkey-Internal Condition-Mr. Goschen's Mission-The Albanian League-Roumelia-Montenegro-Greece-Armenia.

THE first events of the year in Eastern Europe showed how profound was the disorganization caused in that region by the Russo-Turkish war of 1878. In Bulgaria the National Assembly was dissolved by Prince Alexander, owing to the impossibility of obtaining a Ministry which should command a majority. A violent and prolonged electoral agitation followed, and the result of the elections, which terminated February 1, was that the "national" party, so called because the avowed object of its policy was the union of all the Bulgarians in a single state, obtained a large majority. The Prince, who seemed glad of an opportunity of obtaining a brief respite from the arduous duties of government, went on January 25 to St. Petersburg to attend the celebration of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the accession of the Czar, and on his return he appointed a Ministry, with M. Zancoff at its head, composed of men of the predominant party in the assembly, all of whom had received their education in Russia. In his speech from the throne on reopening the Assembly the Prince drew a very unsatisfactory picture of the state of the country. Brigandage was prevalent, he said, in the eastern districts; the finances were in a most unfavourable condition, 1,200,000l. being due to Russia, besides the as yet unfixed Turkish tribute, while the whole revenue amounted to 760,000l. only; and the sources of revenue were daily diminishing in consequence of the departure from the country of all Turks who could afford to do so. The new Bulgarian state, in a word, was far from being so prosperous as Bulgaria was under the rule of Midhat Pasha; and if the Bulgarians were certainly more free and less heavily taxed, their Turkish fellow-subjects were barbarously ill-treated. This intolerance of the Bulgarians towards other races was especially shown in Eastern Roumelia, which, like its neighbour, suffered from a chronic deficit in the treasury and disorder in the administration. On January 6, the Greek church of St. Petka, at Philippopolis, was seized by the Bulgarian militia, and was only restored to the Greeks after strong representations had been made to the East. Roumelian Government by the English and French consuls. Bulgarian priests excommunicated the Greeks from the pulpit, and cases frequently occurred of Greek traders and wealthy landowners being beaten and robbed by Bulgarians. Many of these outrages

were committed by the so-called "gymnastic societies,” which were really companies and battalions of volunteers under another name, their exercises being limited almost entirely to the use of the rifle. and military drill. These societies marched about in military squadrons, firing their rifles, and often displaying the Russian flag. As for the Mahomedan population, it was persecuted by the Bulgarians even more than the Greek. The Turkish mosques and schools were destroyed, and the East Roumelian Government seemed powerless to restrain even its own soldiers: in the Kirdjali district, where a Mahomedan rising took place in February, the movement was suppressed by the Bulgarian militia, led by Russian officers, with a savage cruelty which recalled the horrible details of the massacre of Batak. Twenty-four Turkish villages were plundered and partly destroyed, and of their inhabitants many men were killed and women outraged.

The external relations of the new Bulgarian principality were almost as unsatisfactory as its condition at home. Repeated complaints having been made by the Roumanian residents at Rustchuk of the treatment to which they were subjected by the Bulgarian authorities there, the Roumanian consul complained to the governor, who replied in an insulting letter, which was shown by M. Stourdza, the political agent of Roumania at Sofia, to Prince Alexander. The latter sharply reprimanded the governor, but no redress was given to the Roumanians at Rustchuk. This created a bitter feeling between the two peoples, which was still further increased by another incident. In May some armed Turkish bands appeared in Bulgaria, and it was alleged that they had come from the Dobrudja, and had been formed with the connivance of the Roumanian authorities. This produced so violent a display of hostility to Roumania, both in the Assembly and the press of Bulgaria, that the Roumanian agent threatened to break off diplomatic relations between the two countries. He was dissuaded, however, from taking this step by the Bulgarian Government; but seeing that the attacks upon Roumania continued, he left Bucharest, and the Roumanian Foreign Minister notified to the Bulgarian Government that the reason of M. Stourdza's recall "on leave " was "the continued hostility shown by the Government towards Roumania, which had necessarily created in that principality a feeling of very great dissatisfaction." A commission of inquiry was then appointed by the Bulgarian Government to investigate the matter, and it reported that the allegations of Roumanian complicity in the formation of the Turkish bands referred to were completely false. Soon after a third cause of quarrel arose through the Bulgarian Government having brought in a bill for the naturalisation as Bulgarian subjects of persons of the Bulgarian nationality residing in Roumania and Servia. The Roumanian Government having strongly protested against this bill, it was withdrawn by the Prince's order. M. Stourdza then returned, but the antagonism between the two principalities continued to manifest itself, and

forbade the hope, at one time entertained by some sanguine politicians, of any durable alliance between them.

The most important incident in Servia during the early part of the year was the final settlement of the Austro-Servian railway question on April 8. By a special convention concluded at Berlin on July 8, 1878, the Austrian and Servian Governments had pledged themselves to effect a junction between the railways of the two countries within three years, the Austro-Hungarian Government undertaking to lay down the lines on its own territory to the point of junction at Belgrade, while Servia promised to continue within the same period the line from Belgrade to Alexinatz, whence one branch was to proceed to the Bulgarian frontier, in connection with the line from Sofia to Constantinople, and another to the Turkish frontier, in connection with the line from Mitrovitza to Salonica. Difficulties were raised, however, by the Servian Government, which proposed that the matter should be referred to a conference of the four Powers interested in it, namely, Austria, Servia, the Porte, and Bulgaria; but this proposal was rejected by the Austrian Government. At length a special envoy, M. Marcic, was despatched from Belgrade to confer with the Austrian Ministers, and the result was the conclusion of a second convention, which the Servian Government specially bound itself to carry out. The term for the completion of the junction was at the same time advanced to June 15, 1883. On the Austro-Hungarian side railway communication was to be established between Buda-Pesth and the Servian frontier either by constructing a new line or extending the one already in existence, while the Servian line was to proceed from the Hungarian frontier near Belgrade through the Morava valley to Nisch, and thence on one side to the Bulgarian and on the other to the Turkish frontier. Both Governments were to use their influence to induce the Turkish and Bulgarian Governments to join. their railways to those of Servia. Thus a new step was taken for the improvement of communications with the East; and in Roumania the railway question was also placed on a more satisfactory footing by the acceptance of the railway purchasing convention, as originally concluded at Berlin, by the Chamber at Bucharest on January 27. The result of the latter measure was that Germany consented to join the other Powers in recognising the independence of Roumania on February 20.

A certain progress was made by the above arrangements towards the execution of the resolutions of the Berlin Congress; but some of the most important of these resolutions still remained unfulfilled. The questions of the Greek and Montenegrin frontiers, and that of the reforms in Armenia, the necessity for whose settlement had been repeatedly and strongly urged on the Porte by Lord Salisbury, were taken up with increased vigour by Lord Granville on his accession to office. When Mr. Goschen arrived at Constantinople on May 26, to take the place of Sir Henry Layard as special ambassador of the British Government