Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 1899. THE CZAR ON DISARMAMENT.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXVI, Issue 8413, 12 January 1899, Page 2

Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 1899. THE CZAR ON DISARMAMENT.

In political and diplomatic circles in England, when the last mail left, speculation was busy with the identity of the " English politician, writer, and diplomatist" whose deeply interesting interview appeared in the Paris Matin. Mr W. T. Stead, whose name was of course mentioned, repudiated all responsibility for the statements published in the Matin. Obviously, however, the disclaimer did not involve a denial of tlio assertion that it was he who drew out the young autocrat in the Imperial study at Livaclia. It amounted only to a repudiation of all responsibility for Hie manner in which the interview was given to the public. The report of the conversation lias a familiar look to students of Mr Stead's style, and it bears the stamp of his confessed and notorious Russophilism. These and other indications, states an English contemporary, have convinced many whose opinion carrries weight that it. is Mr Stead who has had the distinction of being the first Englishman to get the Czar to bare his heart on the subject of disarmament, though why good man Stead, who is by no means lacki 113 in egotism, should wish to hide his identity is one of those things that no fellow can understand. The question of identity apart, however, the interview carries with it every characteristic of authenticity, and is undoubtedly a momentous revelation to the world of the reat sentiments of the young Russian ruler. The interlocutors, according to the account in the Matin, conversed entirely in English, which the Czar spoUe with perfect purity. _ The interviewer expressed his opinion that England would loyally support His Majesty's disarmament conference, and there was at last some hope of universal peace. " A hope !"' replied the Czar somewhat abruptly ; " I have enough hopes; I am getting tired of hopes; I want something more tangible and practical." He then proceeded to develop his ideas on disarmament, and explained the nature of the solution which he thought possible in the circumstances. " There are," he said, " three points on which an entente of the various Powers could be realised. First they might bind themselves until further notice to make no iiicreaso in existing armaments; they would decide only to maintain their existing armaments, and even to perfect them, but not to increase them. Secondly, this state of things could be maintained for five years, at the end of which the Powers could' meet again and discuss afresh whether these restrictions should be maintained or abandoned, and they would fix the duration of the new period for which they would make a similar engagement. Thirdly, they would settle their attitude in case of mcnaceorprospectivehostilities." "What I would like," proceeded His Majesty, "is that they should proceed as in a duel. When two men are on the point of coming to blows, before anything else they discuss the importance of the offence and the conditions of the fight. Each man chooses his seconds, and sometimes these seconds appeal to an arbiter. Very well; it would be the same for the Powers. For instance, take the Fashoda affair, now just settled. England would have taken as second the United States, and France would have taken Russia. The United Statesand Rnssiawould have heard the reasons and explanations of the two parties. The two seconds would have examined and weighed them in their prudence and justice, and then given their verdict, If by chance they did not come to an understanding they would have recourse to an arbiter—the Emperor Francis Joseph, for instance—and he would have given the casting vote. Per-1 haps the verdict would not always be accepted, perhaps, in spite of all efforts, war might ensue; but, in any case, while the seconds were discussing the affair a, certain period of time would have elapsed, and the two parties in dispute, calculating the consequences of hostilities, would finally lean towards peace rather than war." The conversation, it is stated, turned on the relations between England and Russia. The Czar did not conceal from tha interviewer, that they were net what they ought to be. "For two years," he said, with a certain sadness in his voice, " your papers, and especially the Times, have constantly sought to embitter the differences which have occurred between the Queen's Government and mine. But what grieves me is that your statesmen themselves seem to wish to follow in tho steps of your journalists, and lately Mr Chamberlain did not appear to me to be a very enthusiastic Russophil." Finally the Czar protested in indignant terms against the idea recently imputed to him of urging France and England into a conflict. " I am aware," said he with emotion, "that certain French and English papers have recently declared that Count Muravieff encouraged France to take an uncompromising stand, and that we urged her not to recoil before hostilities. This is monstrous. How could I have done this three months after my circular on disarmament ?" The Czar on disarmament is extremely interesting, but his recent orders to greatly supplement the Russian navy and the feverish activity that is being displayed in strengthening the defences at Port Arthur seem to be hardly consistent with his peaceful utterances.