[Footnote 274:  L’Alliance Franco-russe devant la Crise Orientale, par un Diplomate etranger. (Paris, Plon. 1897).]

Both parties [France and Russia] have examined the course to be taken in the case of aggression by one or more members of the Triple Alliance; an understanding has been arrived at on the great lines of general policy; but of necessity they did not go further.  If the Russian Government could not undertake to place its sword at the service of France with a view to a revision of the Treaty of Frankfurt—­a demand, moreover, which France did not make—­it cannot claim that France should mobilise her forces to permit it to extend its territory in Europe or in Asia.  They know that very well on the banks of the Neva.

To this interesting statement we may add that France and Russia have been at variance on the Eastern Question.  Thus, when, in order to press her rightful claims on the Sultan, France determined to coerce him by the seizure of Mitylene, if need be, the Czar’s Government is known to have discountenanced this drastic proceeding.  Speaking generally, it is open to conjecture whether the Dual Alliance refers to other than European questions.  This may be inferred from the following fact.  On the announcement of the Anglo-Japanese compact early in 1902, by which England agreed to intervene in the Far Eastern Question if another Power helped Russia against Japan, the Governments of St. Petersburg and Paris framed a somewhat similar convention whereby France definitely agreed to take action if Russia were confronted by Japan and a European or American Power in these quarters.  No such compact would have been needed if the Franco-Russian alliance had referred to the problems of the Far East.

Another “disclosure” of the early part of 1904 is also noteworthy.  The Paris Figaro published official documents purporting to prove that the Czar Nicholas II., on being sounded by the French Government at the time of the Fashoda incident, declared his readiness to abide by his engagements in case France took action against Great Britain.  The Figaro used this as an argument in favour of France actively supporting Russia against Japan, if an appeal came from St. Petersburg.  This contention would now meet with little support in France.  The events of the Russo-Japanese War and the massacre of workmen in St. Petersburg on January 22, 1905, have visibly strained Franco-Russian relations.  This is seen in the following speech of M. Anatole France on February 1, 1905, with respect to his interview with the Premier, M. Combes:—­

At the beginning of this war I had heard it said very vaguely that there existed between France and Russia firm and fast engagements, and that, if Russia came to blows with a second Power, France would have to intervene.  I asked M. Combes, then Prime Minister, whether anything of the kind existed.  M. Combes thought it due to his position not to give a precise answer; but he