The bombardment of Odessa, so many times performed by a 
boastful imagination, has at length been realized. But the 
telegraphic dispatches hitherto received are too meager and 
deficient in detail to deserve a commentary. According to the most 
trustworthy news, the bombardment began on the 22d, was 
suspended on the 23d (a summons to surrender being sent to the 
Governor of the place’*’), and recommenced on the 24th April. 
On one side, it is affirmed that a great portion of the town was 
laid in ruins; on the other, that only the forts were destroyed by 
rockets and shells. In some quarters it is even asserted that the 
bombardment had remained without any effect whatever. Several 
dispatches announce the destruction of eight Russian vessels — 
merchant vessels, of course, as there were no Russian men-of-war 
at Odessa. The latest dispatch—dated Odessa, 26th April—states 
that the whole of the combined fleet had taken its departure on 
that morning.* 

In order to prepare the public mind for this event, the French 
Government had just published in the Moniteur an extract from 
Admiral Hamelin’s latest report to the Minister of the Marine,” in 
which he states: 

“The English steam-frigate Furious had gone on the 6th of April to Odessa, in 
order to claim and take on board the Consuls and such French and English 
subjects as might wish to quit that town on the approach of hostilities ... that, in 
spite of the flag of truce which she had hoisted, and which her landing-boat also 

bore, the Russian batteries treacherously fired seven shots upon this boat a few 
moments after it had left the pier. ..Admiral Dundas and himself were 
deliberating on the measures of retribution required by such a_ barbarous 
proceeding.” * 

The Russians give a different version of the affair. They allege 
that the sending of a flag of truce was only a pretext for 
examining their works of defense. The fact of the ship Retribution, 
having entered the port of Sevastopol, some time ago, under 
pretext of remitting dispatches, but with the real object of making 
drawings of the interior batteries, had highly irritated the 
Czar—the more so, as the noise made about this achievement by 
the English press had confirmed this supposition. Orders had 
consequently been given to the effect that in future all vessels 
presenting themselves before a Russian port should be received 
with cannon-shots. The Indépendance belge publishes a_ letter 
illustrating these circumstances, apparently by a Russian officer at 
Odessa, but probably having no other author than M. de Kisseleff 
himself. 

“On the 27th of March (8th of April) at 6 o’clock a.m., the Furious, a steamer of 
the English royal fleet, approached the pier of the quarantine-port of Odessa 
without hoisting the flag of truce. Although the captain of the port had orders to 
fire a rocket over any English man-of-war, he resolved nevertheless to abstain from 
executing his orders at once, admitting that the steamer might not yet be aware of 
the English declaration of war. The Furious cast anchor, lowered her boat, and sent 
it on shore with a flag of truce. The captain of the port immediately dispatched his 
aide-de-camp to meet the officer of the boat. This officer declared that he came 
with the mission to fetch the Consuls of France and England. He was answered 
that these gentlemen had quitted Odessa a long time since, and was consequently 
invited to remove instantly; whereupon the boat was taken on board the 
pyroscaphe, the flag of truce being removed. But instead of weighing anchor, the 
officers of the steamer set about taking drawings of the batteries. It was then that, 
in order to prevent the Furious from doing this, blind shots were fired over her. 
The Furious taking no notice of them, a ball was sent into one of her wheels. The 
Furious immediately withdrew.” ? 

It is certainly ridiculous that the English and French fleets had 
to wait to be furnished with “reasons” by the Russians before 
entering upon the hostilities now directed against a Russian port, 
and not then even to take it but merely to launch a few broadsides 
into it. 

About the same time when the Furious was dispatched on her 
mission, the letters received from Odessa at Constantinople 

universel, No. 120, April 30, 1854.— Ed. 

P L’Indépendance belge, No. 121, May 1, 1854.— Ed. 

affirmed that the Russian Government had seized all grain in 
bond, without any respect for the private property of foreign 
merchants. The quantity confiscated amounted to 800,000 chet- 
verts."'*° Besides, the Russian Government had enjoined the 
foreign merchants to supply 150,000 sacks and 15,000 waggons 
for transporting to the interior the confiscated grain. All 
reclamations were met by the Governor” with the declaration that 
the policy of the western powers reduced the Russian Government 
to such extremities, and that in seizing their property they only 
saved it from the plunder of an exasperated population. On the 
reclamations of the neutral consuls remaining at Odessa, the 
Governor at last consented—not to pay for the seized goods—but 
to issue simple receipts to the owners. 
The following is an extract from a Stockholm paper: 

“The whole town swarms with fugitives from Finland; many, too, come from 
Aland,” (which seems to be still occupied by the Russians,) “in order to escape the 
Russian press-gangs. The Russian fleet is in great want of seamen, and the 
authorities lay violent hands on young and old. In the dead of the night fathers of 
families are hurried off without a moment’s grace, and the result is that whole 
households fly to Sweden, with bag and baggage, in order to escape from such 

re 

tyranny. 

The Journal de St.-Pétersbourg of the 23d ult. contains a 
proclamation from the Czar to his subjects, representing the war 
against the Occidental powers as a war of the orthodox church 
against the heretics, and aiming at the liberation of its suppressed 
brethren in the Ottoman Empire.‘ 

The Paris Presse of to-day has the following article: 

“One of our correspondents at Constantinople has sent us important details on 
the Russian complot which was discovered some time ago, and the inquiry into 
which has just terminated. This inquiry clearly proves that Russia has long been 
preparing the crisis which was to carry off the sick man under the very hands of 
his physicians. The inquiry proves that Baron Oelsner had feigned to place himself 
at the service of the Turkish Police in order the better to deceive his surveillants. He 
was in the receipt of 1,000 piasters per month. Notwithstanding his astuteness, his 
double game was detected in the following manner: He had entered into relations 

item “Sweden” in The Times, No. 21723, April 24, 1854.— Ed. 

with Mr. Aska, a physician in the Turkish service, and believing that he could trust 
him, he avowed to him that, although paid by the Turkish Police, he had never 
ceased to serve Russia. According to Mr. Oelsner, Russia proposed to recruit 
among the Greeks and the Slavs in Turkey an army of 60,000 conspirators ready 
to rise at a given signal. The decisive blow was to be struck at Constantinople. The 
chief of the complot in that city was an Englishman, a certain Plantagenet 
Harrison. Mr. Aska feigned to enter into the views of Oelsner, and gave a hint to 
the Turkish Police. The police, having suspected Oelsner for a considerable time, 
caused him to be watched with increased care, and discovered that he was in the 
habit of sending regular reports to Prince Gorchakoff. Finally they succeeded in 
intercepting one of these reports. Oelsner, though very cautious on the whole, had 
the unlucky idea of showing the above report to Mr. Aska, who immediately 
informed Mr. Palamari, the secret agent of the Turkish Police, and contrived to 
give it in his presence to Radschiskz, an Austrian Slavonian who was in 
communication with Oelsner and his accomplices. The letter was seized upon this 
individual and forms one of the pieces of conviction. It was also averred that 
Oelsner had established a concert with Constantinos, captain of a Greek merchant 
ship, and that they had arranged for the affiliation of forty other captains of Greek 
ships who, at a given day, were to arrive at Constantinople, provided with 
ammunition and furnishing the materials for raising in rebellion the Greek 
population of the metropolis. Constantinos was in permanent relation not only with 
Oelsner, but also with Mr. Metaxas, the Greek Embassador at the Porte. 
Bodinaroff, a Russian Colonel, afforded the means of communication between 
Oelsner and Prince Gorchakoff.” 

There has appeared in the Augsburger Zeitung a series of articles 
extremely hostile toward Russia, which have created a great 
sensation in Germany, as that journal was, until now, the most 
ardent partisan of Russian interests, and is known, at the same 
time, to receive its inspirations from the Austrian Cabinet. Austria 
is represented in these articles as released from her obligations 
toward Russia, in consequence of the revelations contained in the 
confidential correspondence of Sir H. Seymour. In one of these 
articles it is said: 

“When the proceedings of Russia rendered it necessary to make representations 
at St. Petersburg, they were received in so peremptory a manner, and the Vienna 
Cabinet was treated so unceremoniously, that every new dispatch from Constan- 
tinople evoked painful presentiments. This want of respect, of consideration, 
engaged Count Mensdorff to ask for the command of a brigade, in order to be 
relieved from his post at St. Petersburg, although personally he had no cause for 
complaints.” 

Consequently he was replaced by Count Esterhazy. In another 
article there occurs this passage: 
“When the Emperor of Russia came to Olmütz,!2° his conduct toward Count 

Buol-Schauenstein was so improper, not to say offending, that it was remarked by 
everybody, and that Nesselrode and Meyendorf were embarrassed by it.” 

Let me remind your readers that it is a habit of Nesselrode to 
provoke such arrogant behavior of his august master in order to 
deplore it afterward. 

“The young Emperor,’ witnessing these proceedings against his minister, has not 
forgot[ten] them. The letters of Sir H. Seymour could only accelerate the fixed 
resolution of His Majesty” 

to oppose the encroachments of Russia upon Austria herself. 

“During his stay at Vienna, Count Orloff refused to engage himself, in the 
name of his sovereign, to respect under all circumstances the integrity of the 
Ottoman Empire.” 

The Constantinople correspondent of The Times lays a special 
accent upon the statement that the Greek insurrection would 
infallibly lead to a revolution in Greece, that is, a struggle between 
the national party and the partisans of Russia. On the other hand, 
it appears that the cruelties of the Pasha’s bayonets in Bulgaria are 
disposing the population in favor of Russia. Let me illustrate by a 
few facts the position of Greece toward the Occidental powers. We 
read in the Nouvelliste de Marseille, dated Constantinople, April 17: 

“The European residents at Athens have to undergo all sorts of insults. They 
are even assailed with sticks, no obstacle being opposed by the Greek gendarmerie. 
On the 15th ult. Mr. Gaspari, a member of the French Embassy, and the son of an 
old French Consul at Athens, received blows and was knocked down in the 
presence of three gendarmes, who remained indifferent witnesses of this scene. On 
the same day other Frenchmen received warnings that a list of ninety-six Franchi 
destined for ‘chastisement’ had been drawn up. In consequence of these excesses a 
collective note of the French and English Representatives was addressed to the 
Government of King Otto, informing him that any violence committed against the 
persons of French and English residents would immediately give occasion for an 
indemnity of 25,000 drachmas. On the 12th of April a new ultimatum was 
transmitted to the Greek Government, in which a delay of only five days was given, 
expiring on the 17th. This ultimatum calls upon King Otto to redress the wrongs 
suffered by the French, to pronounce in a categorical manner against the 
insurrection, and to retrieve the evils done and permitted. No satisfactory answer 
was expected on the part of the King. In case of a negative answer, the 
Embassadors had resolved to break off completely all relations with the 
Government, and at the same time to constitute themselves, in the collective name 
of France and England, as the Administrators of Greece, according to the provisions 
of the protocol establishing that kingdom. ~~” 

Moniteur universel, No. 122, May 2, 1854.— Ed. 

The Greek Government has addressed circulars to its foreign 
agents, in apology of its conduct during its recent quarrel with the 
Porte, the latest measures of which, against Greek subjects, says 
Mr. Paikos, arise from the resentment of Turkey at having no 
longer the privilege of considering Greece as a Turkish province, 
and which form merely the keystone of twenty years’ intrigues 
against Greece, with the insurrections in Thessaly and Epirus as 
pretexts. 

The Wiener Presse* of 28th April publishes the following 
proclamation of Prince Daniel” to the Montenegrin chiefs: 

“I wish that you, too, Czernogoras (Montenegrins), now as before prove 
yourselves as heroic as the Greeks and other nations, after the example of our 
victorious ancestors who bequeathed us the liberty of which we are so proud in the 
eyes of the world. It is, therefore, that I desire to address the soldiers who have 
already entered their service, in order that I may know whether I can depend 
upon them, and I order the chiefs to assemble each his tribe. Each soldier is to 
declare spontaneously whether he is ready to march with me against the Turk, the 
common enemy of our faith and of our land. You, Captain, are to receive every 
volunteer, and: report to me at Cettinie. But I conjure all those who are not ready 
to brave death, to stay at home. Whoever wishes to march with me must forget his 
wife and his children, and all he loves in this world. I tell you, my brave people, 
and you, my brethren, that whoever desires not to die with me, need not stir; 
because I know that whoever marches with me into war is worth more than fifty 
cowards. Thus I invite all gallant men whose hearts are not cold, and who do not 
hesitate to spill their blood for their country, the orthodox church and the holy 
cross, to share with me in the glory and the honor. We are, indeed, the sons of the 
old Montenegrins who vanquished three Turkish viziers, defeated French troops, 
and stormed the fortresses of the Sultan. Let us not betray our fatherland, nor 
disown the glory of our ancient friends, and let us meet to fight, in the holy name 
of God. 

“Cettinie, March 16, 1854 
* Daniel”’ 

We read in the Agramer Zeitung that in consequence of this 
appeal to the pious freebooters of Montenegro, the chiefs called 
together, in each of the Montenegrin clans, the young warriors 
and communicated this proclamation, when 4,000 men swore, at 
the altar, to conquer or die under the flag “For Faith and 
Fatherland.” It is impossible not to recognize the interesting 
affinity of this movement with the phrases and hopes of the 
Prussian war of independence, whose memory is so faithfully kept 
up by Gen. Dohna at K6nigsberg, and the Prussian Treubund'*° 
generally. The attack of the Montenegrins against Herzegovina, 

by way of Nixitshy, will be commanded by Prince Daniel himself. 
The attack in the south (toward Albania), by way of Zabliak, will 
be led by the Woywode George Petrovic. 

“The mountaineers,” says the Agramer Zeitung, “are well provided with 
ammunition, and each of the two corps will have twelve three-and-a-half-pounders 
at their disposal.” * 

The signal for opening the hostilities will be given by Col. 
Kovalevsky, who receives his instructions direct from St. Peters- 
burg. 

Herr von Manteuffel, having got his $30,000,000,” has sent the 
Chambers home with a speech from which I extract the following 
eminently characteristic passage: 

“Gentlemen: By granting the credit you have given the Government the means 
to proceed on the way it has hitherto pursued, in entire union (in voller Einighkeit) 
with Austria and the whole of Germany, and in concert with the other great 
powers, and to preserve to Prussia the position due to her in the solution of the 
great European question of the day.”© 

Let me observe, that [in] the telegraphic report of this speech, 
given by the English papers, the ‘“‘concert with all the other great 
powers” was falsely translated into a “concert with the Occidental 
powers.” Prussia has chosen a higher aim. She wants, in concert 
with both parties apparently at war, to arrange measures of 
peace—with whom? 

Herr von Manteuffel, on the same day on which he dismissed 
the Chambers, had the good fortune to deliver a second speech, in 
a réunion of his party, a speech far more precise and eloquent than 
the above official slang. That speech is the most eminently 
Prussian production of modern times. It is, as it were, Prussian 
statesmanship in nuce: 

“Gentlemen,” said he, “there is a word which has been much abused — this 
word bears the name of liberty. I do not disown the word, but my motto is another 
one; my motto is the word service. (Dienst.) Gentlemen, all of us who meet here 
have the duty to serve God and the King, and it is my pride that I am able to serve 
that King. That word service holds together the Prussian State, scattered as it lies 
throughout German lands (in deutschen Gauen). This word must unite us all in the 

April 29, 1854.— Ed. 
different situations we hold. The word service to the King is my standard, it is the 
banner of all those who have met here, and in this lies the salvation of these times. 
Gentlemen, the service of the King shall live.” 

Manteuffel is right: there is no other Prussia than that which 
lives upon service of the King.