The Eastern Question

THE antagonism of Asiatic interests between Russia and England, mainly aggressive on the part of Russia, is evidently the mainspring of English interference in the affairs of Turkey.

But from whatever motive, according to a recent issue of the Toronto Mail, "the necessity of maintaining, at all costs, the integrity of the Turkish Empire, and 'of propping up the 'sick man' as often as the need arises, has long come to be regarded as one of the most binding and imperative obligations of English statesmanship." This necessity under the premiership of Disraeli impelled England to engage as an ally of Turkey in the great war of the Crimea.

But under different administrations she has assumed new attitudes, or, in part, resumed the old, as the exigencies of the case have demanded. This may be seen by comparing the recent order to fortify Sigri, and the foregoing quotation from the Mail with the following, which is part of a cable dispatch to the Province (R.I.) Journal of Sept. 13, 1886, introduced in that paper under a heading containing these words: "The Road clear for Russia; British Backdown on the Eastern Question; Sea-coast for the Czar, and Egypt for England: "—"LONDON, SEPT. 12: Lord Churchill and Lord Salisbury have adopted a bold scheme for dishing Gladstone on the foreign side of imperial policy. A powerful party, every day growing in influence, led by men whose names are a tower of strength, has commenced an agitation for the reversal of England's traditional Turkish policy. The platform of the new party is the withdrawal from the Turkish alliance, and the establishment of close relations with Russia. English policy in the East pivots on the defense of Constantinople by the British, and the exclusion of Russia from an outlet into the Mediterranean. This policy is now vigorously attacked. The promoters of the pro-Russian movement boldly assail the Turkish government in both Europe and Asia, as fatal to human progress and injurious to British interests. England is shown to be the only power that thinks it worth while to bolster up the vicious rule of the pashas. The great powers, without an exception, are willing to see the question of the future ownership of Constantinople and the partition of the Turkish Empire, settled and done with."

In the same paper is an editorial on the subject, from which is the following:— "We can begin to appreciate the change that has come over British public opinion in the last decade, when we see a newspaper so thoroughly imbued with the Toll, doctrines, and so conversant with the purposes of the Tory government, as the London Standard, declaring that England can well afford to let Russia and Austria fight out the Turkish problem for themselves. Yet Disraeli was given a coronet a few years ago, because he preferred to see his country undergo the horrors of a terrible war rather than allow Russia a foothold south of the Danube. And England resounded with the praises to his name. Disraeli seems to be forgotten already. No voice, even among his most zealous followers, is raised in advocacy of his dearest theory and the traditional policy of his party. Even the Marquis of Salisbury seems willing to forget the share which he took in carrying out Disraeli's projects. Englishmen are beginning to see at length, that they have no real interest in this quarrell or, if they do not, they appreciate that their hands are tied, and that as a result of their own mistaken states manship, they are left in Europe virtually friendless. Constantinople is of no more importance to her than Jerusalem. In Egypt, not in Turkey, is to be found the key to her Asiatic possessions.

On the whole, the evidence shows a weakening of England's interest in Constantinople, and is indicative of the near fulfillment of the Scripture prophecy concerning the king of the North. "He shall come to his end, and none shall help him."

The existing alliance of France with Russia necessarily withdraws that power from the support of the tottering Turkish throne, and apparently constitutes an indirect challenge to England not to interfere, lest, in turn, she should obliged to cope with the allied powers in defense of her interests in the Suez, and in India.

On this question the Toronto Mail has the following:—"In her [Russia's] present efforts there appears to be no ground of doubt that she has the assistance of France whose Eastern ambitions are directed toward compelling the withdrawal of the English from Egypt. On that point the London Times has lately reminded France that the one thing necessary to make England "sit tight" in Egypt would be the presence of Russia's war ships in the Dardanelles. If the French and the sultan desire that, adds the Times, significantly, and as if with a full sense of the reality of impending danger, "they cannot do better than open the Dardanelles to the fleet which silently and swiftly, Russia is constructing in the dock yards of Sebastopol."

THE APPROACHING END.

In Bible prophecy, events in the political world affecting the interests of God's people, run parallel with the history of the church. This has been true of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Grecia, and Rome; and it is also true of the Ottoman Empire as a factor in the closing drama of the world's history;

In the Bible the Ottoman Empire is termed "the king of the North," in contradistinction to "the king of the South," or Egypt. The concluding portion of the prophecy relating to this power is as follows: "And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him." Dan. 11:45. As early as 1842, in a work written by Charlotte Elizabeth, entitled "Principalities and Powers" p. 103, appears the following comment on Dan. 12:1—"This is mentioned as taking place at the time of the destruction of what we have every reason to believe is the Turkish Empire."

It is well known that for many years our people have taught and published the belief, based upon the prophecies, that the Turk would, in the near future, be obliged to abandon his throne on the Bosporus, and transfer his seat of empire to Jerusalem; and that this transfer would be followed closely by the close of probation, the time of trouble among the nations, the seven last plagues, the coming of Christ in his glory, and the battle of Armageddon. (See Dan. 11:45, 12:1.) This is a point in the Eastern question, that is watched with great interest by many who have become acquainted with our views on this subject; and doubtless the event will give it great interest to the closing, mighty appeal of the third angel's message. (See "Early Writings," p. 27.)

The hasty removal of the seat of the Ottoman Empire is a predicted event, the certain fulfillment of which is of deep interest to this generation, inasmuch as it constitutes one of the most important tokens, and the last token, of the close of probationary time to our world. A survey of the situation in the East, compels the belief that the long pent-up forces that have accumulated round the Bosporus, in the jealousies of the European nations may, at any time, explode into fragments the Ottoman power, and precipitate the time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation.