ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

the merits of the respective systems. THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. Later trials made in England have, how. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN): The facts are ever, led to the conclusion that it is as stated in the Question. The soldier's possible to obtain the results produced by the American pumps, with English apparatus which requires much less fuel.

ARMY-PRINCE HENRY OF

BATTENBERG.

MR. LABOUCHERE asked the Secre

tary of State for War, Whether he will inform himself if the appointment of Prince Henry of Battenberg to a Captaincy in the Regiment of the 1st Life Guards is contemplated; and, if so, whether the Prince Henry will be called upon to pass the usual examination; and, whether the rank will be honorary, or he will receive the pay attached to a Regimental Captaincy?

No

am

name was, however, Ennis, and the relatives who have applied have received their share as such. As to the other representatives, none others have made any claim, and there would be no motive for inquiry.

MR. O'KELLY: Could the right hon. Gentleman say how long it was since the money was paid, and whether there have been any appeals for the balance; and, also, whether the Statue of Limitations would not be a bar?

MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN:

It is not a bar.

POST OFFICE (IRELAND)—POST
OFFICE AT CLASHAGANNY.
MR. O'KELLY asked the Financial

THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN): It will be time Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it is enough to consider these Questions when true that, in October 1884, a guarantee any proposal on the subject is brought of £5 was paid for the establishment of before me. I informed my hon. Friend a post office at the Cross Roads of on Friday last, that no proposal on this Clashaganny for the accommodation of the householders of about twenty townsubject had been submitted to me. trace of any such proposal exists in the lands in that neighbourhood; whether, records of the War Office; and I on the receipt of the £5 so paid, the afraid I can hardly undertake, as he now authorities in Dublin established an suggests that I should, to inquire whe-office a half an English mile away in an ther this non-existent proposal is, or may borders of the waste farms of Roscominconvenient and unsuitable spot, on the have been, contemplated. I am at a loss to know how I should proceed, or where mon; whether seven-eighths of the houseI should stop, if I commenced such in-holders, including the original guaranquiries; and I think my hon. Friend will agree that it is better for me to content myself with the consideration of cases when they actually arise. I have, therefore, not considered the points of detail to which the latter part of his Question refers.

[blocks in formation]

MR. O'KELLY asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether Dennis M'Donnell, of the 37th Foot, died 19 years ago, leaving effects valued at £14 2s. 74d.; whether application was made by Michael M'Donnell, of Curgowan, Strokestown, for this property as next heir; whether he received the sum of £2 178. 6d. sixteen years ago; and, whether there is any other claimant for the balance; and, if not, why the sum still in the hands of the War Office is not paid over to Michael M'Donnell?

tors, protested by petition against the establishment of the office at any other place than the Cross Roads of Člashaganny; and, whether, under the circumstances, he will take steps to remove the post office to the Cross Roads?

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. H. H. FOWLER): Under a guarantee of £5 a-year a Post Office was opened on the 1st February, 1885, at the house of Mr. James Flanagan, in the centre of the townland of Clashaganny, at a distance of between 300 and 400 yards from the Cross Roads. No pledge was given that the office should be at the Cross Roads. On the contrary, the guarantor was expressly informed that the Department could not undertake to secure the appointment for his nominee. After the establishment of the office a Memorial was received praying for the removal of the office to the Cross Roads ; but nothing would be gained in point of public convenience by the removal of the office, and the application was not

complied with. I understand that the guarantee will not be continued, and in that case I fear there will be no alternative but to close the office altogether.

ADMINISTRATION AND
EXPENDITURE,

MR. RYLANDS asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether it is the intention of the Government, at an early period this Session, to take steps for the appointment of Select Committees to inquire into the Administration and Expenditure of the great Spending Depart

ments of the State?

THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. E. GLADSTONE), in reply, said, he had not abandoned the idea referred to in the Question of his hon. Friend; but he must take a week or two to consider whether they could carry out their intention during the present Session, having regard to the number of important Select Committees which either had been or were about to be appointed. Such a Committee, whenever it was appointed, should be of the strongest character.

PARIS INDUSTRIAL EXHIBITION.
MR. SPENSLEY asked the First

Lord of the Treasury, If Her Majesty's
Government propose to take part in
the International Exhibition which the
French Republic has announced its
intention of holding in Paris during

1889 ?

THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. E. GLADSTONE), in reply, said, that no communication with respect to the Exhibition had as yet been received from the French Government; and, therefore, the time had not yet come for Her Majesty's Government to decide whether they would take part in it.

IRELAND-LORD RANDOLPH
CHURCHILL AT BELFAST.

SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH: wish to make an appeal to the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister, with regard to a Notice of Motion which stands tenth on the Paper to-morrow, and which has been placed there by the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton). It relates to certain speeches of my noble Friend near me (Lord Randolph Churchill). I was unable to be in my place, unfortunately, when the right hon. Gentleman on Friday, as I under

Mr. H H. Fowler

stand, declined to afford facilities to the hon. Member for Sligo for the purpose of the discussion of the Motion. Sir, on behalf, not only of my noble Friend, but of his Colleagues in the late Government, I venture to ask the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider that decision. The charge made against my noble Friend is a very grave one-that he has attempted to intimidate this House, and been inciting Her Majesty's subjects to civil war. The circumstances of the case show that it is not merely a charge made by one private Member of this House against another private Member; and, therefore, what I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to do is this-to exercise his influence with those hon. Members on his side of the House who have given Notices of Motion anterior to the Motion of the hon. Member for Sligo, in order that the Motion of the hon. Member for Sligo may be taken as the first Business of the evening tomorrow. Of course, Sir, I may say we would use a similar influence on our side. I think, on reconsideration, the right hon. Gentleman will see that it is a matter which ought to be discussed without loss of time.

SURY (Mr. W. E. GLADSTONE): This is a matter which it is rather difficult to deal with in a way of Question and Answer, because it is almost inevitable that

THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREA

the Question and the Answer should assume more or less of an argumentative character; and I am not sure that me with sufficient my memory serves accuracy to enable me to give a positive reply to the right hon. Gentleman. There is much greater difficulty in the case, I think, than he appears to suppose. I am bound to say that, so far as I am aware, Notices of the kind have been given frequently by independent Members, but have not been permitted to cause any interference with the ordiInary Business of the House, in order that they should take precedence. A Notice of this kind, charging my right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board (Mr. Chamberlain) with very grave offences indeed, was given by the noble Lord who himself is the subject of this present Notice. If I remember aright, my right hon. Friend was content to take his chance, and no attempt was made to obtain any alteration in the course of Business in this

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

SUPPLY-CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.
SUPPLY-considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)

CLASS V.-FOREIGN AND COLONIAL
SERVICES.

(1.) Motion made, and Question proposed,

£25,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1886, for the Expenses of Her Ma

House. I may say, Sir, that in the wished to hasten on the discussion of last Parliament, stretching my memory a question affecting his public uttera little bit further back, I was myself ances. the object of a Notice of a similar character, given by a Member sitting upon the then Government side of the House. The terms of that Notice of Motion I am bound to say I have totally forgotten; but it was a Notice of a character which would have expelled me from this House if passed. At that time I had been a Member for more than 40 years, and for many years Prime Minister of this country; but I do not know that anyone attempted to interfere with the course of Business of the House in reference to that Notice. I should have thought it a great-well, I will not say what I should have thought it-because it would seem that I was finding fault with the right hon. Gen-jesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad." tleman and those who have pursued a different course. I do not know whether anything else is to be said of this matter which would throw further light upon it. I admit that it is one matter to ask that a Government night should be given for the discussion of a subject, and another to ask for such kindly intervention as the right hon. Gentleman has now asked for. Out of respect to the right hon. Gentleman, I should be willing to forward the matter as he desires; but it seems to me that to do a thing of that sort would be establishing precedents which might be the means of causing inconvenience to the House. We will take two or three hours to consider the matter, and I will inform the right hon. Gentleman as soon as I can. It is not, however, the plain and straightforward matter that it seems to be; for, of course, new cases of this sort may arise, differing from some that have occurred, and one must be cautious in establishing precedents.

SIR JOSEPH PEASE said, that as one of those who had Notices on the Paper having priority over that of the hon. Member for Sligo, he would be very glad to waive his right, in order to afford the noble Lord the opportunity of making the explanation he desired in reply to these charges, which he felt to be affecting his character. So far as he was personally concerned, he should be willing to waive his right to oblige the noble Lord, feeling sure that the noble Lord would act in a similar way towards him (Sir Joseph Pease) if he

MR. BRADLAUGH: In moving to reduce this Supplementary Vote of £25,000 by the sum of £12,500, I shall confine myself to such part of the Mission of Sir H. Drummond Wolff as relates to Constantinople, because it is only on that part that Papers are in the hands of Members. It is possible that, to some extent, I may misrepresent some of the facts, because I see that, having regard to the amounts spent in telegrams at Constantinople, it is quite evident that only part of the telegrams which passed between Sir H. Drummond Wolff and the late Government have been communicated to the House. My first point is, that Sir H. Drummond Wolff ought not to have been appointed to this Mission at all, and that, if he was appointed, a new Writ should have been at once issued in compliance with the VI. Anne, c. 8, s. 26, which provides that in the case of any person, after having been chosen a Member of the House of Commons, accepting any office of profit under the Crown, his election shall be declared void, and a new Writ issued as if such person were naturally dead. I contend that, in this case, Her Majesty's Government have been guilty of a clear breach of duty in not having at once moved for a new Writ directly they appointed Sir H. Drummond Wolff to this Mission. But I see, from the Convention set out on page 37 of the Papers, Egypt, No. I., that as late as the month of October Sir H. Drummond Wolff continued to describe himself as "Membre du Parlement." I maintain

that he ceased to be a Member in the | the Committee will refer to the instrucmonth of August, and I submit to the tions contained in the Papers, Egypt Committee that the Government ought No. I., page 1, they will find that Sir not to have allowed the law to be vio- H. Drummond Wolff was specifically lated. I further maintain that if it was charged to obtain a military co-operaintended that this Mission should have tion on the part of the Sultan in sending a good effect at Constantinople and out troops to the Soudan. But the Cairo, the choice of Sir H. Drummond Sultan would not give a single man. Wolff was a most unhappy one, unless The demand was insisted upon, and the happiness of the choice may be again refused, and ultimately abanillustrated by the need that was found doned. In the next place, the Sultan, to appoint to some places of profit the after having refused to send troops, was whole of the Members of the Fourth asked to allow recruiting. That was inParty, which determined the policy of sisted upon; but the Sultan's Advisers the Conservative Party. Sir H. Drum- would do nothing of the kind, and that mond Wolff, while in this House, sup- demand, too, was abandoned in turn. ported the express declarations of the At last words were introduced into the noble Lord the Member for Paddington Convention which were known to mean (Lord Randolph Churchill)., That noble nothing, but which enabled the late GoLord declared that the Egyptian Government, in a critical time, to announce vernment-I am now quoting the language of the noble Lord, endorsed as late as October, 1885, from an authorized version of his speeches-was a bad Government; that no worse Government existed on the face of the earth; and that Tewfik and the Turk ought to be compelled to take their departure bag and baggage out of Egypt. It is right to add that the noble Lord has since changed his views on these points, and the same authorized expression of his opinion explains why he has changed them. He says that since 1880 there have been many sudden political changes in this country, and that no fair-minded person would expect any politician to maintain anything like an approach to rigid consistency in political utterances. It may be thought that views so vigorously expressed, and still entertained, would not be calculated to aid any Mission from that quarter, and I think the Committee will see from the Blue Book that on every single point on which Sir H. Drummond Wolff received instructions he failed. Every point in turn was insisted upon and abandoned, and the total result of the Mission may be summed up in the word nil, except so far as it was a visit of pleasure, which we may all hope Sir H. Drummond Wolff enjoyed, but for which a sum of £25,000 is a little too much to ask this country to pay. I do not propose to reject the whole of the £25,000. My Motion is only to reduce the Vote by the sum of £12,500. There seems to be a wide margin in the charge for telegrams to cover many contingencies. If

Mr. Bradlaugh

to the country the great success of Sir H. Drummond Wolff's Mission, when they knew, and had the means of knowing, that not only had that Mission been attended with no success, but that there was no shadow of justification for sending it out. In the next place, Sir H. Drummond Wolff was told to ask that some stipulation in reference to the Slave Trade should be made. It is well known on both sides of the House that there are kind-hearted and philanthropic Gentlemen who would be induced to vote a good deal of money if they were told something about its being necessary for the abolition of the Slave Trade. But Sir H. Drummond Wolff yielded even upon that point. It did not mean much; but the Sultan refused to comply with the wishes of the late Government. The Marquess of Salisbury telegraphed that it must be insisted upon; but the Sultan still remained obdurate and firm, and said--"I have kept all your Conventions. If anyone has broken the Convention by dealing with slaves, it is you; and you did it by the hands of General Gordon." Finally, this point, having been strenuously insisted upon at first, was also abandoned. It would not be fair if I did not deal with the one point of success, and that one point of success I would commend to the attention of hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House, in view of many of the Election speeches which they have recently made. The one success is that the Sultan is recognized as Caliph of his religion and as spiritual Chief. [An hon. MEMBER: No.] I am sorry to disagree with the

House to the policy adopted by the then Conservative Government in regard to Egypt, when the late Khedive of Egypt was deposed. I pointed out that that policy was entirely opposed to the policy which had always been followed by Lord Palmerston and the Earl of Clarendon. Lord Palmerston always tried to limit, as far as possible, the power exercised by Turkey over Egypt. There are numerous despatches of Lord Palmerston in existence which prove that abundantly; but the then Conservative Government, instead of following that example, increased the power of Turkey by going with France to demand of the Porte the deposition of Ismail Pasha the late Viceroy of Egypt. That question is a large one, and I will not go into it now; but here, again, we have been endeavouring to enlarge the power of the Sultan by asking the Porte to send Turkish troops to the Soudan, and to interfere in the internal affairs of Egypt. Now, interference such as that contemplated in the internal affairs of Egypt is specially objectionable. Look at the despatches of 1869, when the Earl of Clarendon pointed out that the Egypt of that day was not the Egypt of 1841, and that since that date the Porte had made concessions to the Khedive, among which the one relating to hereditary succession must be considered the most effective. The Earl of Clarendon added that Her Majesty's Government would deeply regret if the Porte were to overstrain its legitimate prerogative and rights in regard to Egypt. Now, what I say is this, that in the present instance the late Government, through Sir H. Drummond Wolff's action, has again induced the Porte to overstrain its powers. It was expressly laid down. that the Porte should not interfere with the internal affairs of Egypt; but the very object with which Sir H. Drum

hon. Member who interrupts me; but if he will refer to No. 66 on page 39 of the Papers relating to this matter, he will see that I am guilty of no misrepresentation. It will be found that if there is any misrepresentation, it rests with Sir H. Drummond Wolff and not with me, because in this Paper, carefully prepared and intended to be pressed upon the notice of the English public, Sir H. Drummond Wolff says that Her Majesty's Government recognizes that the Sultan is Sovereign of Egypt and Caliph of his religion. Sir H. Drummond Wolff is very likely wrong-for he is wrong in so many things, and it is just possible that he may be wrong in thisbut, at any rate, that is what he says. Now, I submit that it is no part of the duty of this country to pay £12,500 for the services of a Gentleman, however able-and in this case I admit the ability-to go to Constantinople in order that the Sultan should be recognized as Caliph of his religion. It is true that a Special Commissioner was sent by Turkey to Egypt, and the circumstances attending that appointment deserve notice when you consider the bold way in which hon. Gentlemen opposite, in their Election speeches, asserted the supremacy of England abroad. In the Convention it was agreed that the Turkish Commissioner and the Commissioner of the Viceroy of Egypt were to settle everything by themselves, and then to communicate the result to the High Commissioner of England after an agreement had been come to, but not before. Thus, for £12,500, all you get is the right to be told what has been arranged, and of assenting to it if you like; but you have no power of dissenting from it if you do not like it. I submit to the Committee that the Mission of Sir H. Drummond Wolff has been a lamentable failure, and that this Vote is one which the Committee ought not not to pay. I beg, therefore, to move that the Vote be re-mond Wolff went to Constantinople was duced by the sum of £12,500.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £12,500, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1886, for the Expenses of Her Majesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad."— (Mr. Bradlaugh.)

SIR JULIAN GOLDSMID: In 1879 I ventured to call the attention of the

to induce the Porte to interfere not only with the internal administration of the

affairs of Egypt, but by sending Turkish troops to the Soudan, and possibly to Egypt, a thing which had not been done for many years-since the time of Mehemet Ali. Why was this course taken? I think the reason is perfectly clear. It is not desirable for us to day to go into all questions connected with Egypt. I shall only go into

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »