Επιστολή ιδιωτική (private) του Lord Clancarty [Richard Trench, 2nd Earl of Clancarty] President of the Board of Trade (Λονδίνο - Whitehall, 2 Αυγούστου 1813) προς τον William Hamilton Esq. One of His Majesty’s Under Secretaries of State με την οποία τον ενημερώνει για την σχετική άγνοια που έχει η Βρετανία περί των ρωσικών εξαγώγιμων προϊόντων από την Μαύρη Θάλασσα (και από την Βαλτική) αλλά και περί των κανονισμών που διέπουν το ρωσικό εμπόριο, και περί της ρωσικής ναυτιλίας. Στην επιστολή του σημειώνει την αμφιβολία του ιδίου περι της σκοπιμότητας υπογραφής εμπορικής συνθήκης με την Ρωσία, τονίζει τον φθόνο της Ρωσίας απέναντι στην εμπορική ισχύ της Βρετανίας, ενώ αναφέρεται στις μεγάλες προοπτικές εμπορικής ανάπτυξης στην Μαύρη Θάλασσα, αλλά και στην Αδριατική (Αυστρία). Τέλος σημειώνει και την ανάγκη να υπάρξει διορισμός Γενικού Προξένου στην Μαύρη Θάλασσα χωρίς αυτό να θεωρείται κίνηση εις βάρος του Γενικού Προξένου στην Πετρούπολη. Βλέπε και την σχετική επιστολή του Henry Savage Yeames Γενικού Προξένου της Βρετανίας στα ρωσικά λιμάνια της Μαύρης Θάλασσας με έδρα την Οδησσό (Αγία Πετρούπολη, 15 Ιουνίου 1813) προς τον Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, στην οποία επιστολή και στα όσα εκεί αναφέρει ο Yeames απαντά ο Lord Clancarty [FO 65/88].

Συγκεκριμένα γράφει ο Lord Clancarty:

Dear Hamilton,

We are very little acquainted with the Russia’s commercial regulations as referable to the products and shipping of this country and it would be certainly highly advisable that we should procure the best information respecting the duties of all descriptions as well ordinary as extraordinary or local payable by British manufactures and produce and by British shipping in Russia ports both in the Baltic and Black Sea, and also respecting all British articles prohibited in Russia, and if possible the grounds of such prohibitions.

Both Robinson and I have great doubts of the policy of entering into a commercial treaty with Russia; there can be no doubt of her jealousy of our commercial prosperity, and that she is fully impressed with the extent of her own mercantile resources; and consequently that she will yield nothing to us, without requiring extensive advantages in return, and possibly after all fulfilling her stipulations with the same degree of loyalty and good faith with which the commercial treaty with Portugal has been so fully executed by our high contracting parts!

Robinson and I both think that a considerable benefit might result from a trade with the Southern provinces of Russia, but we both entertain doubts of the expediency of procuring an object of this nature through the medium of a treaty of commerce, more especially as this trade could not have guaranteed to us by Russia, but must still, and ever depend upon the good or ill humor of the Porte.

Upon the four points specified in Mr. Yeames’s paper of observations, our opinions are:

1^st. That however desirable it may be to procure convenient repairs for our mercantile marine in the Black Sea, a stipulation upon this head of the nature of that suggested by Mr. Yeames, might, if inserted into a treaty, lead to constant disruptions and ill humor. I cannot conceive that if a brisk trade shall once be established in those parts, all the conveniences of repair of ships, etc. which attend such trade in every other part of the world, will not grow up in those ports also.

Secondly – the port charges should certainly be ascertained and it is the object of the suit part of this letter to impress you into the expediency of procuring either from Mr. Yeames or from some other source as much information as possible upon this and other duties levied in Russian ports.

Thirdly – with respect to the transit trade with Austria, besides the immediate dependence of such a trade if carried on through Odessa, or Ismail, upon the Turks; the natural course of our trade with Austria, and which will doubtless revive upon the reestablishment of peace is surely through the Adriatic; till peace shall arrive the establishments are already formed and have to a considerable extent been put in action for pushing the trade from Salonika into Austria, certainly without the advantage of a ricer carriage and in some degree dependant on the Grand Senior’s will, but not so dependent on it as the one marked out by Mr. Yeames; and consequently with this, some steps have I believe been taken and successfully, for the same purpose, through Albania with the assert of the Pasha of Yannina, believed to be but little dependent upon Constantinople.

Representations might certainly be made upon the forth point mentioned by Mr. Yeames, and the Russian government would scarcely be averse to assist in the recovery of deserts, as far as it might be expedient to demand such assistance, but I doubt much whether we should claim this assistance to any considerable extent for the recovery of the description of persons named by Mr. Yeames. However this is an evil which would no doubt be palliated by the residence of a respectable Consul General on our part in these provinces.

Upon this, the last subject mentioned by Mr. Yeames and which forms the subject of his letter to Cooke, we are of opinion that it would be advisable to have a Consul General in those parts, and that such an appointment could not give reasonable umbrage to the Consul General at St. Petersburg. But that it seems right that the Consul General in the Black Sea should be subject to the same control of our ambassador with the Emperor of Russia, as all other consuls are and might to be.

Yours my Dear Hamilton

Very sincerely

Clancarty