minions between them. I cannot by any means adopt this sentiment, conceiving it to be inconsistent with the interest of either of them. The manner in which that unfortunate country is treated on both sides shows that they are as much absolute masters of it as possible, and that without awakening the jealousy of their neighbours. Russia is inattackable on that side at present, which she would not be if she appropriated to herself that barrier. I can easily imagine Polish Prussia and the town of Dantzig to be tempting objects to the King of Prussia, but would even Russia, on whatever amicable footing she may be, permit him to make so formidable an acquisition on that side and so dangerous for the Baltick Navigation when in the hands of so great a Prince?

By bribery and persuasion, and by ruthless intimidation, supported by the threatening presence of a large body of Russian troops brought into the Polish capital, the Russian and Prussian Ambassadors secured in 1764 the election of Count Poniatowski to the Polish throne. He reigned in the name Stanislaus Augustus. Soon after his election the Empress Catharine, supported by Frederick the Great, demanded that the dissenters of Poland should be given equal rights with the Roman Catholics, and these demands were backed by force.

In his Memoirs' Frederick the Great described this as follows:

Towards the end of 1765 the Polish Diet came again together. The Empress of Russia had declared herself Protectress of the Dissenters, part of whom belonged to the Greek religion. She demanded that they should be permitted to exercise their religion freely and to obtain official positions on a footing of equality with the other Poles. This demand was the cause of all the disturbances and wars which soon broke out. The Prussian Ambassador handed to the Polish Diet a memoir demonstrating that his Master, the King of Prussia, could not view with indifference the abolition of the Liberum Veto, the introduction of new taxation, and the increase of the Polish Army, and the Polish Republic acted in accordance with Prussia's representations.

The Dissenters were hostile to the ruling Poles. In view of the existence of the Liberum Vote, by means of which a single dissentient could bring the machinery of Parliament and Government to a standstill, the demands made by Russia and Prussia could be fulfilled only if the Liberum Veto was replaced by majority rule. However, acting in accordance with their secret treaty, Russia and Prussia opposed that most necessary reform. The demands made by Russia and Prussia on behalf of Dissenters were particularly unwarrantable if we remember that even now Poles cannot obtain 'official positions on a footing of equality' either in Prussia or in Russia. However, notwithstanding the unreasonableness of the request, the new King, who possessed far more patriotism than Frederick the Great and Catharine the Second had believed, promised to fulfil their demands if he was given sufficient time. Sir G. Macartney, the British Ambassador in St. Petersburg, reported on November 28 (December 7), 1766:

The King of Poland five months ago declared to Mr. Panin by his Minister that if Russia would act moderately he would undertake in this Diet to obtain for the dissidents the free exercise of their religion, and in the next he would endeavour, nay promise, to render them not only capable of Juridicatory Starosties, but of being elected to the Nunciature. Unfortunately this proposal did not content the Court of Petersburg. She [the Empress] thought it possible to obtain everything she demanded, and did not comprehend the difficulty, the impossibility, of persuading a Great Assembly [the most august part of which consists of Ecclesiasticks] to grant all at once without hesitation free participation of their privileges to a set of men whom they have been taught to look upon as equally their spiritual and temporal enemies. The King of Prussia by his minister here endeavours by all methods, per fas et nefas, to irritate this Court against the Poles, and as an indiscreet zeal for religion has never been reckoned among that Monarch's weaknesses, his motives are shrewdly suspected to be much deeper than they are avowed to be.

Driven to despair by the threats of armed interference, made by the Russian and Prussian Ambassadors, King Stanislaus Augustus appealed on October 5, 1766, to Catharine the Second in a most touching private letter, which, alluding to their former intimacy and love, ended as follows:

Vos armes.

Lorsque vous m'avez recommandé au choix de cette nation, vous n'avez assurément pas voulu que je devinsse l'objet de ses malédictions; vous ne comptiez certainement pas non plus élever dans ma personne un but aux traits de Je vous conjure de voir cependant que si tout ce que le prince Repnin m'a annoncé se vérifie, il n'y a pas de milieu pour moi: il faut que je m'expose à vos coups, ou que je trahisse ma nation et mon devoir. Vous ne m'auriez pas voulu roi, si j'étais capable du dernier. La Foudre est entre vos mains, mais la lancerez-vous sur la tête innocente de celui qui vous est depuis si longtemps le plus tendrement et le plus sincèrement attaché? Madame, De Votre Majesté Impériale le bon frère, ami et voisin,

STANISLAS-AUGUSTE, roi.

The King pleaded in vain. Catharine the Second and Frederick the Great were freethinkers. Their championship of the rights of the Dissenters was merely a pretext for crippling Poland completely and for interfering in that country with a view to partitioning it. Mr. Thomas Wroughton, the British Ambassador in Poland, sent on October 29, 1766, a despatch to his Government, in which we read:

I had another long conversation with the King, who represented to me in the most touching colours the situation of his affairs and the manner in which he thinks himself and the nation treated. He saw himself, he said, upon the brink of the most serious danger; that he was determined to suffer all rather than betray his country, or act like a dishonest man; that Her Imperial Majesty had never pretended to more than procuring the Protestants the full exercise of their religion, and that he had laboured for many

months past on that plan; that this sudden and violent resolution of the Empress to put them on a level with his other subjects convinced him that religion was only a pretext, and that she and the King of Prussia, repenting of having placed a man on the throne that worked for the elevation of his country, were taking measures to overset what they themselves had done; that he awaited the event with the utmost tranquillity, conscious of having ever acted on the principles of Justice and Patriotism.

The British Ambassador in Berlin, Sir Andrew Mitchell, confirmed in his despatches the views of his colleagues in Petersburg and Warsaw as to the ultimate aims of Russia and Prussia in Poland. He wrote, for instance, on November 22, 1766:

Neither the Empress of Russia nor the King of Prussia would wish to see such an alteration in the constitution of Poland as could not fail to render the Republick more independent, more powerful, and of more weight and importance than it has hitherto been in Europe.

Before the first partition of Poland the Province of East Prussia was separated from the rest of the Kingdom of Prussia by Polish territory. The present Province of West Prussia, with Thorn, Dantzig, and the mighty River Vistula, formed then part of Poland. Frederick strove to acquire that province, and with this object in view he had advocated the partition of Poland with Russia. However, an event occurred which seriously affected the King's plans. In 1768 war broke out between Russia and Turkey. It was long drawn out and, to Frederick's dismay, Russia proved victorious. The King strongly desired the existence of a powerful Turkey friendly to Prussia, which, in case of need, might afford valuable support to Prussia by attacking Russia in the flank or Austria in the rear. The King wrote in his 'Memoirs':

It was in no way in Prussia's interest to see the Ottoman Power altogether destroyed. In case of need excellent use

could be made of it for causing a diversion either in Hungary or in Russia in the event that Prussia was at war either with Austria or with the Muscovite Power.

Germany's traditional philo-Turkish policy was originated not by Bismarck and William the Second, but by Frederick the Great.

During a long time Frederick strove to bring about a war between Russia and Austria by telling the Austrians that if Russia should conquer large portions of Turkey she would become too powerful, and would become dangerous to Austria herself, that Austria should not tolerate the Russians crossing the Danube. As his attempts at involving these two States in war proved unsuccessful, he resolved to divert Russia's attention from the Balkan Peninsula to Poland, and for greater security he wished to make use of Austria as a tool and a partner in his designs. As Maria Theresa, the Austrian Empress, refused to take a hand in the partition of Poland, he began to work upon her son and successor. Joseph the Second, born in 1741, was at the time young, enthusiastic, inexperienced, hasty, vain, and he thirsted for glory. He envied Frederick's successes. Playing upon his vanity and upon that of Prince Kaunitz, the leading Austrian statesman, Frederick the Great obtained their support for partitioning Poland. After a long but fruitless resistance against her son and her principal adviser, Maria Theresa signed, it is said with tears in her eyes, on March 4, 1772, the Partition Treaty. However, in signing it, she expressed her dissent and disapproval in the following prophetic phrase:

Placet, puisque tant et de savants personnages veulent qu'il en soit ainsi; mais, longtemps après ma mort, on verra ce qui résulte d'avoir ainsi foulé aux pieds tout ce que jusqu'à présent on a toujours tenu pour juste et pour sacré.

To preserve the appearance of legitimacy the partitioning Powers wished to receive the consent of the Polish Diet to