The Times publishes the reply of Prince Gortschakoff, dated Feb-
ruary 8th, to Lord Salisbury's despatch of January 26th. It is cold and brief, but polite. The Russian Chancellor refuses to enter into a polemic "in which he sees no practical utility," declares that while the Treaty of Berlin laid down certain principles, "their applica- tion may give rise to differences of opinion," and that Russian agents are "called upon to support, within the limits of the Treaty, the interests of the population for whose defence Russia made war." "We believe that a general understanding would be greatly facilitated, if these populations acquired the conviction that those interests will be defended by Europe." In other words, Russia, which under the Treaty of San Stefano had liberated the Christians, under the Treaty of Berlin is still forced to continue her role of protector. As it is quite certain that unless "Eastern Roumelia " is occupied by Christian troops, the Bulgarians of that province will be massacred, this statement is correct, and gives the key of the situation. The Russian Government has not the power, even if willing, to tolerate a second Batuk ; and Europe, if it desires peace, must either occupy South Bulgaria, or allow North Bulgaria to do it.
