tions, but it is also motived (motive) with equal care, that all reasons for it may appear with the bill, and like it be subjected to criticism. It is from this "motive" of the French bill that I take the following extract. After alluding to the former bill introduced in 1877, which proposed legislation in the direction of lower duties, "because we at that time supposed the economic doctrines which had prevailed since 1860, in most of the great states, were still in favor," they proceed as follows:

6

"We hoped the commercial treaties to come would show fresh progress in the direction of free trade, would facilitate the extension of our export trade, and in accord with the Conseil Supérieur du Commerce,' which, as regards this rule, only made an exception to the advantage of the cotton industry, we submitted the duties of the conventional tariff as a limit only to be exceeded in the exceptional case provided for by article 5. But the reaction from the crisis from which the commerce of the world is so cruelly suffering, added to the demand for money by most states, has given a new direction to ideas. Recent significant facts give us reason to fear that our hopes will not be realized, and that most states will be drawn into increasing their tariffs. We had to struggle against this tendency in our recent negotiations with Italy. We shall, perhaps, have to do so again, when we have to treat with Switzerland, which is at this moment occupied with a bill for the increase of her tariff. Other states, large and small, seem to be going in the same direction. In presence of this new situation, just when the commercial treaties are all expiring, it would be imprudent for France to disarm her negotiators by spontaneously according the benefit of the conventional tariff to those who would not reciprocate it, who would make their markets less accessible to her manufactures and natural products, and render, by their demands, the conclusion of a 'commercial convention impossible.'”

The "motive" then continues with an assertion that the ministry, nevertheless, does not mean to go back to protection, but that their action proceeds from a desire to arm themselves in their intercourse with other nations with the power to put on a higher duty, if such nations shall refuse what France considers a satisfactory commercial treaty. My chief object, however, in transmitting this extract is to confirm by that high authority the statements already made by this legation, of the important change of commercial policy going on in Europe. Its results cannot yet be fully predicted. That a change of opinion and doctrine has already taken place is certain. It appeared to me anomalous, and possibly, in view of our great commerce with Europe, dangerous, that the United States should be in transition from protective legislation toward free trade at the same moment that Europe is in transition from free trade toward protection. With their own national markets secured to national industry against our competition, their surplus might, under such circumstances, be employed to the suppression of some of our industries which may not be equally well guarded.

I ought, perhaps, to add as an indication of popular views in France, that the French "general syndicate of textile industries," a few days since urged the government to proceed with this legislation, and "to raise the duties on importation, in order to afford suffering industries the relief indispensable to them."

Since the first part of this dispatch was written, the debate on the tariff bill in the Reichsrath has been finished, and the bill has passed to the third reading. There remain a few points of difference to be adjusted between Austria and Hungary, the former having changed some of the rates in the original bill, which the latter adopted without change. I have, &c.,

3 FR

JOHN A. KASSON.

No. 53.

No. 25.

Mr. Kasson to Mr. Evarts.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, Vienna, March 8, 1878. (Received March 25.) SIR: In view of the recent law of Congress proposing an international commission touching the relations between the values of gold and silver, I beg to submit a question incidental thereto for your consideration.

All intelligent economists, indeed all friends of progress, have long desired the establishment of a common international unit of money, at least for international account and use. The subject was specially examined and discussed in the report of the Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures which was submitted to the House of Representatives in 1866. It was also discussed informally in the International Postal Congress of 1863.

The enormous loss to commerce in the course of years, resulting from the brokerage in conversion of coins, demands a serious effort to provide a remedy. The inconvenience and liability to error in conversion of values in accounts between merchants, and in the service of the customs, also give great reason for a change.

Referring now only to the Congressional report above mentioned for reasons in detail, and for a discussion of the ways and means of the establishment of such a unit, I desire to ask your attention to the propriety of instructing the United States commissioners to the proposed money conference to sound the representatives of other countries upon this question. It may lead to very desirable results in the future. It will, in any event, serve to keep a subject of great international importance before the thoughtful and progressive statesmen of both continents. I have, &c.,

No. 26.

JOHN A. KASSON.

No. 59.

Mr. Kasson to Mr. Evarts.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES. Vienna, March 30, 1878. (Received April 15.) SIR: Herewith is transmitted a map just published, which may not otherwise come to your hands, showing the new frontiers of European Turkey, and of the independent and tributary principalities carved out of it by the treaty of San Stefano.

At the foreign office yesterday I encountered the Russian and German ambassadors, the Pope's nuncio, and others, all seriously impressed by the alarming news from England, involving the resignation of Lord Derby and the formation of an exclusively warlike cabinet at London.

There is at this hour no hope of a European Congress upon the San Stefano treaty. There is only one line of action by England which does not lead directly to war against Russia. Even this alternative indirectly leads to it, but allows the possibility of avoiding it. I said to a member of the English embassy here, last night, "I do not see exactly upon what you can base your proclamation of war against Russia. cannot declare war simply because Russia differs from you as to the

You

form of submitting questions to a European conference about her treaty with Turkey." He replied: 'I presume we shall make no proclamation of war, but proceed to take possession of what we believe necessary to protect our interests."

This conforms to my opinion that England will not rest content till she has acquired new possessions in the Levant, which will dominate the Suez Canal and the Eastern Mediterranean against all apprehended aggression by Russia coming through the Dardanelles. What England really wants is a position at the outlet of the Dardanelles (Gallipoli) if the slightest justification can be found for it, if not, something not far away.

Whether this is possible without somewhere striking the Russian interests and the Russian forces remains to be seen. Diplomatic opinion here deems it impossible. It is worthy of remark that while England holds herself justified in doing all to protect English interests, she fills Europe with an outcry if Russia dares anything for the protection of Russian interests.

I have, &c.,

JOHN A. KASSON.

No. 65.]

No. 27.

Mr. Kasson to Mr. Evarts.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Vienna, April 9, 1878. (Received April 24.) SIR: Your dispatch No. 24, covering the recent enactment of Congress respecting the coinage and use of silver money, was received on Saturday. On the following Monday (yesterday) I brought it to the attention of Baron Orezy, at the foreign office, in obedience to your instructions, handing to him the written invitation, of which a copy is herewith inclosed (A), and adding further verbal explanations of the policy adopted by the United States Government and the considerations which rendered an international conference expedient, and even necessary. As these remarks were only a development of the points made in my written note (A), it is not necessary here to repeat them. It should, however, be stated that the conversation touched one additional question, that of creating an international unit of money, containing an agreed quantity of the precious metal, (gold or silver,) and which should serve for all purposes of international commerce and account. He was most emphatic in the expression of his estimate of the immense economical advantages of such a standard unit.

Without committing himself upon the subject of the conference, he appreciated the views which are favorable to it, and remarked that according to usage the subject must be referred to the treasury department for their judgment. I expressed to him the gratification it would afford me to be able to give an early response to my government, and the interview was closed.

I have, &c.,

JOHN A. KASSON.

[Inclosure to dispatch No. 65.]

Mr. Kasson to Count Andrássy.

The undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States of America, has the honor to advise his excellency the Count Andrássy, minister of the imperial house and I. R. minister for foreign affairs, that he is instructed by his government to deliver to the Government of Austria-Hungary a copy of the recent law enacted by the Congress of the United States respecting the coinage and use of silver money; and especially to call attention to the provisions of the second section of that

law.

The experience of the United States of America in the use of gold as the only standard of metallic money has led their government to the conclusion that the use of both gold and silver in the business of the world, under proper relations of value, is more advantageous to the interests of international as well as national commerce than the use of either one of the precious metals as the exclusive standard of value. The recent law, of which a copy is inclosed for his excellency's information, rests upon the proposition that an increase of metallic money, of universally recognized value, will tend to lighten the public burdens, revive commerce when depressed, and maintain its solvency and activity in time of prosperity.

The same law recognizes the necessity, in order to maintain both metals in free circulation, that their mutual relations of value should be internationally adjusted in such a manner that neither coin may gain, through temporary fluctuations in local markets, such predominance in value and use as to exclude the other from circulation, and so defeat the object sought for by the constant employment of both. The most practicable if not the only means for the attainment of this important result, in which all the commercial nations are equally interested, appear to be found in a conference of the principal governments engaged in the commercial and financial exchanges of the world. It is, therefore, provided by this act of Congress, that whenever three or more of the governments of Europe shall have signified their willingness to unite in such a conference with the Government of the United States, the time and place of its meeting shall be determined by common consent, with a view to an early day for the commencement of its deliberations.

The undersigned, therefore, has now the honor, in the name of the Government of the United States, to invite the Government of Austria-Hungary to join the United States in a conference, to adopt a common ratio between gold and silver, for the purpose of establishing, internationally, the use of bi-metallic money, and securing fixity of relative value between those metals; such conference to be held at such place in Europe, or in the United States, at such time within six months, as may be mutually agreed upon by the executives of the governments joining in the same, whenever the governments so invited, or any three of them, shall have signified their willingness to unite in the same.

The undersigned allows himself to express the hope that the government of His Imperial and Royal Majesty will associate itself with this proposition, in order that the suggested conference may have the benefit of their experience in the use of the silver standard, and of their wisdom, in this effort to facilitate the restoration of commercial and industrial activity, and for the more secure maintenance of the public prosperity in the future.

The undersigned will also be glad to receive from his excellency Count Andrássy, in case of the acceptance by this government of the President's invitation, intimation of his views in respect to time and place of meeting of the conference.

And he avails himself of this occasion to renew to his excellency Count Andrássy the assurance of his most distinguished consideration.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

JOHN A. KASSON.

Vienna, April 8, 1878.

No. 72.]

No. 28.

Mr. Kasson to Mr. Evarts.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Vienna, May 8, 1878. (Received May 22.)

SIR: I am not able to communicate by this mail any decisive advance toward a definitive settlement of the war-breeding questions arising from the treaty of San Stefano. The evidences of an understanding between

Austria and Russia, however, appear to be increasing. This government has asked the legislative bodies to provide for the credit of sixty millions granted conditionally to the imperial administration, and of which they now propose to use a considerable part. Ostensibly it concerns the maintenance of a strong corps of observation along the Roumanian frontier, and an "escort" for the protection of Bosnian refugees who are to be repatriated. For a long time this government has supported perhaps 100,000 poor wretches who fled from Bosnia and Herzegovina to points within the imperial frontier, to escape the terrors of the internecine struggle going on between the Christians and Mussulmans of those provinces. The disbursements for that purpose already amount to several millions of florins, and have created so serious a charge upon the treasury that it was resolved to stop the supplies on the first of this month. The refugees were accordingly notified that they must prepare for a return to their homes. Turkey was also notified.

But the former object that the danger continues, and that they are likely to starve if they survive the other personal dangers to which they will be exposed. This government has desired of the Porte provision for their protection; but the demand has not been satisfied. It now appears to be the intention of Austria to escort them as peaceably as possible by a military force into their country, thus assuring them of protection against the dangers threatened by the Mussulmans.

Naturally, this force must remain in that country for this purpose till the questions of local government and protection are settled. Thus "occupation" takes effect, and with what ultimate result is beyond our forecast at this hour. You will readily observe that with some millions charitably expended for Ottoman subjects, and constituting an equitable claim on Turkey; with the plea of defending their own boundaries against a reincursion of refugees, and with the claim to suppress insurrectionary disorders along their frontiers when Turkey fails in the duty of govern ment, the Vienna cabinet have a "case" to which they may hereafter be disposed to apply the maxim of beati possidentes, while they hold as security for various interests the soil on which their muskets are stacked. To all this Russia opposes no objection.

Russia and Turkey: While the movements of Austria appear no longer to cause anxiety at St. Petersburg, new anxieties have been created on the side of Turkey.

The persistence of the British fleet inside of the Dardanelles, together with the threatening behavior of England, put a constraint on the Russians which prevented them from retiring their forces from Turkish territory within the time stipulated by the treaty. So when Russia demands the possession of Schumla, Varna, and Batoum, according to the treaty, the Porte, quite probably inspired by England, yet very properly, answers, "But when are we to have possession of our own territory, and especially of the suburbs of Constantinople, according to the treaty?" It goes without saying that the English saw their own advantage in this phase of the debate. They indicated war; they threatened Gallipoli and the Bosphorus; thus forced Russia to watch them from forbidden ground, and, while that ground is occupied, Russia is placed in the attitude of justifying Turkey in retaining the occupation and control of the three fortresses which are most needed by Russia in case of a war with England, in which Turkey would be the moral if not militant ally of the latter. Especially does Russia require Batoum and Varna. This embarrassment still continues. The insurrectionary troubles along the borders of the new Bulgaria have been exaggerated; still they are suffi