TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1908. A TREATY IN TATTERS. The Advocate. [Established 1888.]

Bush Advocate, Volume XXI, Issue 136, 8 December 1908, Page 4

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1908. A TREATY IN TATTERS.

The Advocate. [Established 1888.]

[PUBLISHED DAILY.] OLDEST ESTABLISHED PAPER AND OUAKANTXED LABGHST OIBOULATION IN THM V DISTRICT. ' . . CIR6ULATES IN Dannevirka . Mangatoro Tamaki Ngapaeruru ■' Mangahe Weber Ti Tree Point ' Waione • Wimbledon Herbertville Akitio Horoeka Oringi ' ■ Kiritaki . Maharahara Woodville , Umutaoroa Matamau Piripiri • . : ■ Matotuku ' Ormondville' Norsewood Takapau Wbetukura Awariki Otanga Kumeroa . Rangitane Raumati . Tamaki No. 3 S.Norsewobd ■''; Tiratu ' Tipapakuku Mangapuaka, .i Mangatuna Makaretu

The recent trouble in the Balkans, and the attitude of Austria, in tearing into tatters the Berlin treaty, continues a fruitful them© of writing for the British newspapers. It is claimed that two offences are disclosed. (1) There is the virtual annexation by Austria of Bosnia and Herzegovina. (2) There is the declaration of independence by <Bul- ( garia. These matters are dealt with in a very fine and dignified manner in the Times and the Telegraph. Austria, by virtue of treaties signed by the Powers of Europe, had the^ ancient provinces of Turkey, Bosnia and Herzegovina, under her protection. She was under solemn treaty obligations with Turkey never to sever them from Turkey. But her action to the contrary, says the Telegraph, means that "Austria's intention is to assure and regularise her position in the two provinces; which she has administered with such brilliant success, and to prevent their possible •reversion "to Turkey, " ■wlis.'i-otr-er ma-y Ijq the, 'future of the Ottoman Empire under the new regime. She means their destiny to be Austrian, not Turkish. They have for thirty ' years been administered by Austria, with' 1 the consent of Turkey and the Powers, but always "nominally anS theoretically they have" remained Turkish territory. Austria, in fact, pledged herself that her administration should not derogate from Turkish .rights." "The stilted and hollow phraseology, by which the Emperor Josef seeks to disguise the real nature of the naked violation of law and right which he is committing, cannot for a moment conceal the es--1 sential immorality of the act that he i has sanctioned," declares the Times. " 'We extend the. rights of our suzerainty,' he declares, 'to Bosnia and the. Herzegovina.' That is the pith of the Rescript. The rest is. verbiage that is neither dignified nor i sincere. It embodies two pretexts for this arbitrary attempt to set aside, on the mere motion of a single signatory to an international convention, one of its essential provisions. The first is that AustriaHungary promised the inhabitants of the two provinces good administration, and that she has given it to them. That is not denied, though this administration has been, and is, disliked by the great majority of those who live under it. The Eescript deduces from these propositions the conclusion that the moment has come for the Emperor-King to

confer upon .them a .. new proof of his trust in their political maturity. That may be, as between "the monarch and the populations, but it does, mot excuso his proposal to confer this boon upon them ; at'"tho expense ''of a friendly Po.wer^ - with which he is at peace, and /whose rights- in these provinces he is explicitly pledged to preserve".. 1 ■ The second pretext is even more..sham^less than. the first.! The Emperor-Sling defends- his appropriation of. Turkish territory in violation of his word to Turkey ajid of his engagements; to Europe dn the plea >thatu ties formerly existed between 'his. glorious ancestors and itffoese lands? If memories of that kind are to avail in the mouth of the Habsbiirgs' as valid : - exdiises for the contempti^pus disregard of recent and solemn obligations, a .great many rights would ■ be exposed to aggression. Our Paris correspondent^" says .'the Times, "is able to make a disclosure which shows that AustriaHungary is not only breaking the clauses of the Treaty of Berlin, but that' she is also breaking a specific engagement with Turkey. At ,the time when that treaty' was negotiated Count /AndTassy, it appears, and his colleagues also signed a secret, agreement with Turkey. By this document they declared in the name of their Government that the sovereign rights of Turkey in the two provinces should not suffer any infringement, and that the Austrian occupation of them should be considered as temporary. . The Turks were pledged not to divulge this agreement, and it is not from -Turkish 'official sources that our correspondent has learnt its contenfe. ; B\rfc Vhe assures us that it exists, and its .e^wtence deepens the baseness of Austria-Hungary's present action." The second of these deeds of perfidy is that Bulgaria has proclaimed, itself an independent kingdbmr— free from the ..control of the Turks. "The act is, of course, absolutely lawless from every possible point of view, and an audacious violation of the Treaty, of Berlin," writes' the Times. : "We in this country have always acted as the sincere friends of Bulgaria, and. we 'have proved our friendship by our attitude at times when others were but little disposed to show consideration or indulgence ior her claims. We do not at this moment condemn her aspirations to independence as unnatural or unreasonable, in themselves, though, we see very plainly the hollowness of the pretexts by which her official spokesmen, . and those under .their, influence, are v seeking to excuse her present action. But the Bulgarian ■ Government, while paying lip service, have by- "'their acts done their best to make its realisation in the near future hopeless. They have gone out of their way to pick a quarrel witfh Turkey on a series of flimsy pretexts, none of which will bear examination. No : explanations or assurances will convince the world that they had not made up their minds to assert their' independence the moment that t-he reform movement threatened to restore new vitality and strength to the Ottoman Empire." The solemn nature of treaties is insisted on by both the Times and the Telegraph. "We admit to the full that neither the H independence of Bulgaria nor the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina will make any material change in the present situation. But for that very reason we regard both steps as entirely unnecessary. The blow they will inevitably deal to public belief in the good faith of Exiropean statesmen and to the general respect for solemn treaty rights constitutes a mischief altogether out of proportion to any advantages which the two offending Governments can hope to gain from their action. Nor can we disguise from ourselves the effect w&ich -these wanton and \inpr v OT'OIS«(3 acta of aggression, may have in Turkey," adds the "Times. A caustic remark is added by Public Opinion: "Without the backing of Austria Bulgaria would not have dared to declare its independence. And if war be the issue of this larceny in high places the guilt will lie on the aged head of 'his Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Bohemia, King Apostolio of Hungary;' • who 'in the name of Almighty God' signed tJie Berlin Treaty and in the name of the devil tore it up."