should be placed before the Congress THE EASTERN QUESTION-THE CON- it is not said for discussion-but in order GRESS THE TREATY OF SAN STEFANO.- QUESTION.- OBSERVATIONS. EARL DE LA WARR: My Lords, I think it would remove some possible misapprehension with regard to the terms upon which the approaching Congress is about to meet, if the noble Marquess at the head of the Foreign Office does not object to answer the Question which I have placed upon the Notice Paper "Whether Her Majesty's Government consider the words in the invitation to the Congress, That in accepting it the Government of Her Britannic Majesty consents to admit the free discussion of the whole of the contents of the Treaty of San Stefano, and that it is ready to participate therein, equivalent to the stipulation made by the Earl of Derby when Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Her Majesty's Government must distinctly understand before they can enter into Congress that every Article in the Treaty between Russia and Turkey will be placed before the Congress, not necessarily for acceptance, but in order that it may be considered what Articles require acceptance or concurrence by the several Powers and what do not." By the words of the invitation to the Congress, it would appear that the basis upon which the Powers, including Russia, have arrived at some understanding is, "the free discussion of the whole of the contents of the Treaty of San Stefano." Now, I can hardly regard that as conveying the same limitations or as equivalent to the stipulation so strongly insisted upon by Her Majesty's Government in the communication of the Earl of Derby, then Secretary for Foreign Affairs, on the 21st of March to Count Schouvaloff, and referred to in the despatch of the noble Marquess on the 1st of April. Lord Derby said "Her Majesty's Government must distinctly understand before they can enter into Congress that every Article in the Treaty between Russia and Turkey will be placed before the Congress, not necessarily for acceptance, but in order that it might be considered what articles require acceptance or concurrence by the several Powers and what do not." Now, there seems to be a considerable difference between going into Congress, in the one case, on the basis of simply discussing the Articles of a Treaty, and in the other, making it a condition, not only that every Article of the Treaty that it should be considered what Articles required acceptance or concurrence by the Powers and what did not. Discussion was, doubtless, implied in both cases, but the object in the stipulation of Lord Derby went further. The Treaty was to be discussed with a view to consider which Articles required the acceptance or concurrence of the several Powers, who, as I understand, were signatories of the Treaties of 1856 and 1871. In the one case, the validity of the Treaty is virtually admitted; in the other, the acceptance and concurrence of the Powers are assumed to be previously requisite. If the noble Marquess can state that the conditions before entering into a Congress, as laid down by Lord Derby, are to be adhered to, any doubts which have been raised upon the subject will be removed. THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY : My Lords, I am not sure that I follow my noble Friend correctly, and whether I am able to grasp the idea which he wishes to place before the House; and, therefore, perhaps, my answer may not be satisfactory. I would call my noble Friend's attention to the fact that it is not the terms in which Her Britannic Majesty's Government accepted the invitation to the Congress which constitutes the point for which we are contending, but the terms in which the Russian Government have accepted it. Let my noble Friend substitute for the Government of Her Britannic Majesty," "the Government of His Majesty the Emperor of Russia," and then the passage will read "That in accepting it the Government of His Majesty the Emperor of Russia consents to admit the free discussion of the whole of the contents of the Treaty of San Stefano, and that it is ready to participate therein." It appears to me that this is an acceptance of a discussion of the totality of the differTreaty; and if there is really any ence between the two formulas, as it is an acceptance of the discussion of the whole Treaty, while the stipulation referred to my noble Friend is one for placing the Treaty before the Congress in order that it may be considered what Articles require acceptance or concurrence, then, the whole being greater than the part, I take it that the admission in the acceptance is larger than that required in the stipulation; but I freely admit that it requires a microscopic eye to discover the difference. THE EARL OF HARROWBY: I cannot allow this opportunity to pass without expressing my great satisfaction at the prospect which now exists of settling this question. It is not too late to secure the good-will of all the Christian populations of the East, and I am sure that the good wishes of your Lordships, and of the country, will accompany the Government in their endeavours to solve in Congress this great and difficult question, in which endeavours they have had to encounter difficulties exceeding those experienced by any previous Administration. There is everything to expect from a meeting like this, to which the whole of the Governments of Europe send the most eminent of their Ministers; and I trust that the results of the Congress will be to secure to Europe a lasting peace at least, like the Congress of Vienna, a repose of 30 years. The present and past condition of the Christian Provinces of the Turkish Empire has been a scandal to Christianity; and, looking to the advancement of knowledge which we all possess of the subject, I hope that there will be something nobler shown to the world than a struggle for superiority or the extension of dominion in the East. I hope, too, that the settlement of this question will induce those nations, who are armed to their uttermost and exhausting all their resources in preparation for war to the scandal of Christianity and civilization-to abandon this ruinous policy, and turn their attention to internal improvement, which is so much. wanted. now HOUSE OF COMMONS, Thursday, 6th June, 1878. MINUTES.]-NEW WRIT ISSUED-For South- * PRIVATE BILL (by Order)—Fraserburgh Har- Admiralty and War Office (Retirement of Officers) [169]; Statute Law Revision (Ireland) * [122]; Valuation of Property [94]; Inclosure Provisional Order (Llanfair Waterdine) [190]; Election of Aldermen (Cumulative Vote) [71]; TramCommittee-Report-Tramways Orders Confirways (Ireland) Acts Amendment [47]. mation (No. 1) (re-comm.) [194-207]; Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 2) (re-comm.)* [198]; Tramways Orders Confirmation (No. 3) (re-comm.) [195-208]; General Police and Improvement (Scotland) Act, 1862, Amendment* [148]; Dental Practitioners (re-comm.) [177]; Parliamentary and Municipal Registration (Consolidated) (re-comm.) [202]; Ancient Monuments [63-209]; Tenant Right (IreThird Reading-Conway Bridge (Composition land) [31]. of Debt) [150], and passed. * * IRELAND-BLACKWATER BRIDGE, YOUGHAL.-QUESTION. SIR JOSEPH M'KENNA asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Whether the Board of Works in Ireland has as yet secured their Valuator's Report as to the value of the Blackwater Bridge near Youghal, and has taken the requisite preliminary steps for bringing the same into the possession or under the control of the Grand Juries of the counties of Cork and Waterford, with the view to the erection of a new permanent bridge in lieu of the present decayed structure; and, if not, whether he will take steps to expedite the removal of the serious danger which threatens the 2 S population who still make use of the | it is impossible not to respect—of a desire bridge? MR. J. LOWTHER: Owing to the presentments made at the last Assizes by the Grand Juries of the counties of Waterford and Cork being informal, and I may say illegal, both in form and substance-for which state of affairs, of course, the Government are in no way to recover the bodies, if possible, of the officers and men who are still in the vessel. The whole question has our very careful consideration, and I am not without the hope that the next effort which will be made may be crowned with success. responsible-the Board of Works have THE EASTERN QUESTION—THE BER been prevented from carrying out the work of removal and re-construction. Until the Grand Juries concerned make legal presentments, the Government are unable to take any steps; but we are endeavouring to expedite a settlement of the difficulties. NAVAL COURTS MARTIAL. QUESTION. MR. HOPWOOD asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, If it is the invariable practice of the Admiralty to submit for the perusal and report of the Judge Advocate of the Fleet the Minutes and Sentences of Naval Courts Martial whenever the sentences involve the punishment of penal servitude or imprisonment? MR. W. H. SMITH: In answer to the hon. and learned Gentleman, I may say that it has never been the practice to submit the Minutes and sentences of naval courts martial to the Judge Advocate, unless, in the opinion of the Lords of the Admiralty, there should be a doubt as to the legality of the proceedings or the sentences. NAVY-H.M.S. "EURYDICE." QUESTION. MR. BATES asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether further attempts are still to be made to raise the "Eurydice?" MR. W. H. SMITH: Sir, the hon. Member asks if the time has not arrived when the attempt to raise the Eurydice should cease? The attempts made hitherto certainly have not been so successful as we could wish, owing in a very great measure to the most unfortunate weather, which has interfered with the operations of those who have been engaged in the effort; and I would say myself that the time has almost arrived when those attempts should cease, if it were not for the strong feeling-which Sir Joseph M'Kenna LIN CONGRESS-CORRESPONDENCE. QUESTIONS. MR. DILLWYN asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he will lay upon the Table of the House the Correspondence which has recently passed between Her Majesty's Government and the other European Powers relative to the assembling of the Congress at Berlin? MR.W.E. FORSTER: Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that Question, perhaps he will allow me to put one of which I have given him private Notice, and that is, Whether it is the intention of the Government to lay any further Papers on the Table of the House, or make any statement which would give any information to the House and the country as to the policy the Government go into the Congress with? MR. HAYTER also asked, Whether the right hon. Gentleman is now able to give to the House the names of the Plenipotentiaries selected to represent the Great Powers at the approaching Congress at Berlin; whether any Power other than England will be represented by its Prime Minister, its Foreign Secretary, and an Ambassador; and whether he can give the House any assurance that questions of the highest importance to this Country will not be finally decided in the Congress, except on the collective responsibility of the whole Cabinet? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I may, perhaps, be allowed to answer the Questions of the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Mr. Hayter) first, at least in part. We have not received full information respecting the Plenipotentiaries deputed by the various Powers to attend the Congress. We know that France sends M. Waddington, Foreign Secretary, and Count St. Vallier, Ambassador at Berlin; Italy, Count Corti, Foreign Secretary; Russia, Prince Gortchakoff, Chancellor; Count Schou THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, in reply, said, he could not name the day when the Bill referred to would be taken as the first Order. Much would depend on the progress of Business. He would, however, give due Notice as to when the Bill would be brought on. H.M.S. "BEAGLE" EXECUTION OF MR. GORST asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, When the further papers relative to the hanging of a native of Tanna, on board H.M.S." Beagle," will be laid upon the Table of the House? valoff, Special Envoy; M. d'Oubril, | be understood that that Bill will stand Ambassador at Berlin; and Turkey, as the first Order on that day? Sadyk Pasha, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Caratheodory Effendi. Austria and Germany will, of course, be represented by Count Andrassy and Prince Bismarck, who are Chancellors of their respective Empires. We have no information as to those who will be associated with them at present. The Times gave a long list of the Austrians yesterday or the day before. With regard to the Question which has been put to me as to the production of Papers, I have to say that it is not now possible to lay any further Papers on the Table; nor do I think there is occasion for any formal statement of the policy of Her Majesty's Government beyond that which is contained in the various Papers which have, from time to time, been presented to Parliament. I would refer especially to the Circular Despatch of my noble Friend (the Marquess of Salisbury), with regard to the Treaty of San Stefano, which Treaty will be the subject for discussion in the Congress. From that Despatch and from the statements which have, from time to time, been made in this House and elsewhere by Her Majesty's Government, its general views may, it seems to me, be sufficiently ascertained. The Plenipotentiaries who will represent England will be furnished with instructions drawn up by the Cabinet. In answer to the hon. and gallant Member for Bath, I may say that, undoubtedly, the questions to be decided in the Congress, so far as this country takes part in them, will be decided on the responsibility of the collective Cabinet. I do not know that I can say anything more, except that it would not be according to precedent, while it would certainly be inconvenient, to lay any further Papers on the Table at the present moment. When, however, the labours of the Congress have been brought to a termination, all the information which can properly be given will be laid before the House. CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) BILL.-QUESTION. SIR GEORGE JENKINSON asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, seeing that the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Bill is put on the Paper for Thursday June 20th, it is to MR. W. H. SMITH, in reply, said, that the Secretary to the Admiralty had already laid the Papers on the Table, and that he hoped they would be in print shortly after the House met after Whitsuntide. STRAITS SETTLEMENTS-THE PERAK EXPEDITION-THE EXPENSES. QUESTION. SIR CHARLES W. DILKE asked the Under Secretary of State for India, What is the date of the most recent disbursement made on account of the expenses incurred in the employment of troops, partly dispatched from India, during the operations in Perak in 1875 and the early part of 1876; whether there are still any further payments to be made for those expenses; whether any portion of them have been temporarily defrayed out of the revenues of India; out of what sources such expenses are to be ultimately defrayed; and, whether it is intended to come to Parliament for a money grant to meet the whole or part of those expenses; and, if so, when? MR. E. STANHOPE: Some disbursements are actually being made at the present time on account of this Expedition for personal allowances to officers and men, and there are still further payments to be made. The claims of the Indian Government against Imperial revenues on account of disbursements in connection with this Ex pedition amount to something less than the answer has arrived at the India £40,000, but this does not represent the Office, and will be at the Treasury towhole cost. These claims have not yet morrow. been adjusted with the Colonial Office and the War Office. Some portions of the expenses have, I understand, been already charged against Army Votes; and it is at present impossible to say whether any Supplementary Estimate for the Army charges will be necessary. POST OFFICE MAIL SERVICE THE PENINSULAR AND ORIENTAL COMPANY. QUESTION. MR. ANDERSON: As the Postmaster General is not in his place, perhaps the Secretary to the Treasury will allow me to put to him a Question which has been somewhat mutilated in the printing. It is, Whether he is aware that the great delay in advertising for tenders for the Mail Service to the East, which is at present in the hands of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, and soon to expire, is diminishing the chances of competition, and tending to continue the service in the hands of that Company; if he is aware that the Peninsular and Oriental Company is the chief of some associated Companies who by stringent rules among themselves are endeavouring to establish a monopoly of the carrying trade to India, and therefore not deserving of any special favour; and, whether, in the interests of the public service he will at once advertise for tenders for the Mail Service at present performed by the Peninsular and Oriental Company? SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON: In answer to the hon. Member, I have to say that, of course, I am aware that the delays in these matters are of very serious import, and my endeavour has been as much as possible to minimize these delays. It is not within the knowledge of the Post Office that the Peninsular and Oriental Company is connected with any other Companies in the manner to which the hon. Member refers. The question of advertising for tenders has been, as I explained on a recent occasion, delayed in consequence of its being thought necessary to consult the Indian Government in regard to certain points in the new tenders. I telegraphed the other day for the purpose of expediting the answer from India; and I am assured, though I have not seen it, that Mr. E. Stanhope TURKEY - THE BRITISH FLEET IN THE SEA OF MARMORA.-QUESTION. SIR JOHN HAY asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether it is the intention of the Admiralty to remove the British Fleet under the command of Admiral Hornby from its present anchorage before the season is further advanced? MR. W. H. SMITH: I am obliged to my right hon. and gallant Friend for mentioning this subject. We are fully Ismid is at this season of the year very insalubrious for the Fleet; and the Ad conscious of the fact that the Gulf of orders to seek a better anchorage. Acting miral has received, or is about to receive, on his discretion, he will, in all probability, remove the Fleet to Prince's Islands, in the Sea of Marmora, the anchorage which he selected on his own responsibility some time ago. ATTEMPTED ASSASSINATION OF THE EMPEROR OF GERMANY. QUESTION. MR. W. E. FORSTER: There is still so much anxiety throughout the country with regard to the Emperor of Germany, that I should like to ask Her Majesty's Government, Whether they have received any information to-day which they can communicate to the House in reference to His Majesty's condition? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I do not see my hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place, and I do not know whether there is any very recent telegram as to the Emperor's condition; but the latest communication which I saw was satisfactory. PARLIAMENT ARRANGEMENT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS.-QUESTION. MR. W. E. FORSTER: I also wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman a Question with respect to the Business of the House. Hon. Members will be separating to-morrow for the Whitsuntide holidays, and it would be a great convenience if we knew, What Business is intended to be taken on Thursday next week, when we re-assemble, and, if possible, on the following Monday? |