PREFACE.

To those who direct the policies of nations, to the sovereigns and statesmen of Europe, it is unnecessary to say a word introducing the writer of these “Proposals for a New Departure.”

But, in accordance with the usage of this democratic day, a few words of introduction to the controlling many may not be out of place.

Madame Novikoff has long occupied the most influential, possibly the most useful, position of any uncrowned woman in modern Europe. For twenty years she has been for all practical purposes, and well accredited by her own work, representative of Russia in England. She undertook this very difficult task, at first, principally guided by a fervent desire to continue the Christian and patriotic work of her heroic brother, Nicholas Kireeff, after he was killed on the Servian battlefield in 1876. This is the modest way in which she refers to herself:—

“I have no authority to speak in the name of Russia. I am not, as your papers so kindly declare, ‘an agent of our Government’ (which sometimes I wish I were, because then, believe me, I should know how to make my voice not only heard, but attentively listened to!) But I am familiar with a little of our history, and with the opinions of many of our best Russians upon the subject. Under these circumstances one is allowed, perhaps, to speak with confidence as to the Russian views on these matters.”

Twenty years, in the course of which Russia and England were twice almost at the point of war, are a period sufficiently long to enable an editor to form a fairly accurate estimate of the comparative value of his contributor’s articles. I speak of Madame Novikoff as a contributor because her first articles in English appeared in a journal which I edited at Darlington, and until I ceased to have a newspaper under my control I had the honour of publishing in the first instance all the communications which she addressed to the British public. And after twenty years’ experience I can with confidence assert that far earlier, more authentic, and more candid expositions of the policy actually pursued by Russia were obtained from Madame Novikoff than were ever vouchsafed by the Russian Embassy.

At the very beginning of her brilliant career as an informal ambassadress of nations, Count Schouvaloff, the then occupant of the Russian Embassy, was totally out of sympathy with the real Russia. He made no secret of his disgust at the heroic volunteers who laid down their lives in Servia for the liberation of the Balkans; and, in short, represented faithfully enough official Russia, the Russia of St. Petersburg. But Madame Novikoff, who represented unofficial Russia, the Russia of Moscow, kept the British public in touch with the throbbing pulse of Slavonic enthusiasm, and by interpreting its aspirations with the utmost frankness and fidelity, contributed not a little to avert the war upon which Lord Beaconsfield had set his heart. Indeed, so notable was the help which she gave to the anti-Turkish cause, that a well-known M.P., quite fanatical in his devotion to the Sultan, told me that, in his opinion, Madame Novikoff had been more dangerous to his friends the Turks than an army of 100,000 men. No one has ever recognized her services in that memorable time more emphatically than Mr. Gladstone himself. Since that time, with the exception of the brief but alarming crisis of Penjdeh, there has been no occasion in which the relations of the two nations afforded the opportunity or created the necessity for any such active participation on her part in the discussions between the Courts and Cabinets of the two nations. Her pen was not idle, nor was her salon empty; and on more than one occasion she was able to render good service to the cause of national amity by her contributions to the press of both countries.

Her position has long been firmly established and recognized with envy or with pride, according to their standpoint, by the political people in both countries.

When in 1888 I had the honour of being received by the late Tsar at Gatschina, and discussed with him the future developments of Russian policy in Europe and in Asia, His Imperial Majesty opened the conversation by speaking very highly of the letters contributed by Madame Novikoff to the English press. Apart from his admiration of their style, he was evidently in thorough accord with the opinions she expressed, for during the whole of our talk, which ranged from Cabul to Constantinople, he never expressed a sentiment or declared a resolution that was not in absolute harmony with what I had previously heard from Madame Novikoff.

Many years later, when a Russian and an English diplomat were discussing a point of Russian policy, the Englishman quoted Madame Novikoff as against his Russian confrère’s view of the case. “Ah,” said the latter, “if Madame Novikoff said so, I may be wrong. You see,” added he with a smile, “they don’t tell us what they are going to do till the time comes for us to do it; whereas, with Madame Novikoff, they will tell her things when they are in the making.”

These are two of many instances that might be given to justify the importance which our governing people, the men who know the inside track of international politics, attach to the letters of this Russian lady, now republished in this pamphlet.

If anything more were needed to emphasize the significance of Madame Novikoff’s appeal, it would be supplied by the very remarkable conversation which she reports having had with Prince Lobanoff very shortly before his death.

I happen to know that Prince Lobanoff had read with profound interest the letters on Armenia which Madame Novikoff had contributed to the Daily Chronicle last autumn, and had made them the subject of more than one diplomatic conversation. To all outward appearance, her policy—not for the first time—seemed to be running directly counter to the policy of the Russian Foreign Office. Prince Lobanoff appeared to have arrayed himself in the cast-off rags of Lord Beaconsfield’s Turkish policy, and pinned them together with the Order of the Medjidie, with which he had been decorated by the Sultan. Madame Novikoff was then, as always, true to the traditional role of Russia as protector of the Christian East.

The conversation at Moscow, which gives the title and forms the text of this pamphlet, was of the first importance. Prince Lobanoff, instead of condemning her spirited advocacy of a policy in appearance opposed to his own, thanked her for her efforts to promote a better understanding between the two nations, and followed this up by declaring, as if it were a truism not needing demonstration, that if England denounced the Anglo-Turkish Convention and abandoned Cyprus, Russia would at once respond with proposals for a new departure.

There is every reason to believe that Prince Lobanoff therein expressed the real mind of Russia. Prince Lobanoff has gone, but his successor is not likely to depart from the policy which has given Russia the predominant position in Europe and in Asia.

Hence the importance of the present moment, and I hope the utility of this little book.

William T. Stead.

October 17, 1896.