§ MR. DISRAELISir, seeing the noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonial Department once more among us, I take the liberty of inquiring whether it is the intention of the noble Lord to lay any papers upon the table with respect to his late mission, or to make any statement to the House with regard to it, and, if so, when? And whether it is his intention, by any other means, to afford the House any information as to the proceedings of the last two months at Vienna? I should be glad to hear from the Government what their intentions are on this subject.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONSir, before my noble Friend replies to the question, I wish to correct an answer I gave to the hon. Member for Manchester (Mr. Bright) the other evening in reply to his question whether the Russian Plenipotentiaries had made any counter proposals to the Conference after the rejection of the proposals made by the English and French Plenipotentiaries. I then answered from a telegraphic message, and such messages, the 1952 House is aware, are generally rather short; but from despatches subsequently received, it appears that counter proposals were made by the Russian Plenipotentiaries: those counter proposals, however, were not deemed either by the British, the French, the Austrian, or the Turkish Plenipotentiaries, as calculated to produce a satisfactory conclusion of the question in dispute.
§ LORD JOHN RUSSELLIn reply, Sir, to the questions which have been put to me by the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Disraeli), I have to state, in the first place, that I do not think it is for me to decide what papers shall be laid upon the table of the House. I may say, however, that I believe Her Majesty's Government intend very shortly to lay upon the table the protocols of the conferences which have taken place at Vienna. Those protocols will convey to the House information of the substance of the negotiations that have taken place. Perhaps I may say a few words more, without intending to go into any detail as to the negotiations. The first meeting of the Conference was on the 15th of March. The negotiations with respect to the first two of the four points with which the House is acquainted lasted until the 26th of that month. On the 26th of March the third point came under consideration. It was suggested by the Plenipotentiaries of Austria that the Plenipotentiaries of Russia should themselves make a proposal calculated to satisfy the demands of Russia and the exigencies of the case. The Plenipotentiaries of Russia replied that they had no instructions to do so, but they asked for time to refer to their Government. The consequence was that the Conference was then adjourned, and that no meeting for the transaction of business took place until the answer was received from St. Petersburg. On the 17th of April another conference was held, when the Plenipotentiaries of Russia informed the Conference that they had received instructions from their Government not to take the initiative of any propositions, but that they were ready to hear and discuss any proposal which might be submitted to the Conference. The Representatives of the allied Powers then requested forty-eight hours to consider the form in which they should make their proposal, and on the 19th of April the Plenipotentiaries of France and of Great Britain, supported by the Plenipotentiaries of Austria, laid their proposition before the Conference. The Russian Plenipo- 1953 tentiaries, on their side, asked for forty-eight hours in order to prepare their answer to this proposition. Accordingly, on the 21st they gave their answer, totally rejecting the propositions which had been made to the Conference. They stated to us, however, that they had propositions to make on the part of their Government, which they conceived would be in accordance with the demand that Turkey should be united more closely with the maintenance of the balance of power in Europe, and that some restriction should be placed upon the preponderance of Russia in the Black Sea. The Plenipotentiaries of Austria, France, and Great Britain found those proposals of Russia entirely unacceptable, and refused to consider them in detail. The Plenipotentiary of Austria then said that, although these propositions had been rejected, he trusted that all the means of reconciling the belligerent parties by peace were not yet exhausted. To this the Plenipotentiaries of France and of Great Britain replied that their instructions were exhausted, and that they had no powers to consider any further propositions. I then considered that the best way of performing my duty would be to repair to my own Government, and to lay before them the whole state of the case with respect to the negotiations at Vienna, and the manner in which the conferences had been suspended. Two or three days afterwards the Minister of Foreign Affairs of France, having requested the orders of the Emperor, came to a similar determination. I believe he was expected to arrive in Paris last night, and I have no doubt he will lay before his Government his account of the occurrences that have taken place in the course of these negotiations.
§ MR. DISRAELII wish, Sir, to inquire whether, before the protocols of the conference are laid upon the table—and I trust they will be produced with all possible despatch—Her Majesty's Government have any objection to give us some preliminary papers—for instance, despatches of our Ambassador or Plenipotentiary at Vienna, which will afford us an authentic and official description of what the four points are? The noble Lord will perhaps recollect that at the present moment we have not the four points on the table of the House in an official form. I think, therefore, it would be very much for the convenience of the House if, without loss of time, we were put in possession of these preliminary papers, so that, before the pro- 1954 tocols of the conferences are in our hands, we may clearly understand what were the data and the bases upon which those conferences took place, and why they were brought to an end.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONI think, Sir, the protocols themselves will pretty clearly explain what the four points were, but if the protocols do not afford sufficient information there can be no objection to laying some paper on the table that will give the requisite explanation. With regard to papers belonging to the long course of negotiation that preceded the conferences, I think there might be great objection to their production; but I will take care that the House shall be in full possession of a knowledge of the four points that were brought under the consideration of the conferences.
§ MR. DISRAELII am afraid, Sir, I did not make my question sufficiently clear to the noble Lord. I have no doubt that when the protocols are in our possession we shall clearly understand the nature of the four points; but, as the Government have only given a vague promise to produce the protocols, and have not fixed any time when they will be placed on the table, what I wished to know was, whether the noble Lord would have any objection to afford the House at once some authentic knowledge of what time four points of which we have heard so much consist? I should not, of course, press the Government for any private despatches; but if they would lay upon the table the single despatch in which the nature of the four points was communicated to Her Majesty's Government, so that the House may at once be placed in possession of that information, I think such a course would be highly satisfactory to hon. Members generally, and could not be attended with any inconvenience to Her Majesty's service.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONWhatever papers can be produced will be laid before the House as soon as possible, and I do not think their production will be delayed so long as the right hon. Gentleman supposes.
§ MR. DISRAELII wish only for complete and satisfactory information. The noble Lord repeats that he will lay before the House as soon as possible the protocols of the conferences, but does he mean at the same time to produce the correspondence which took place between our Plenipotentiaries at Vienna and Her Majesty's Government in pursuance of the treaty of December 2, which in fact led to these 1955 conferences? That is the information the House would be desirous of having.
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONI cannot at present say what papers beyond the protocols will be laid upon the table, but the Government will consider the subject.
§ MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, he understood news had been received from Vienna that negotiations had been opened between Russia and some of the gentlemen or Ambassadors who had been left behind by the Plenipotentiaries. He wished to ask whether any negotiations of any sort or kind had been resumed at Vienna since the departure of the noble Lord opposite?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONSince my noble Friend left Vienna, some proposals have been made by Russia which were not deemed likely by any of the representatives of the other Powers to lead to satisfactory results.
§ LORD JOHN RUSSELLI cannot go into details, but the Turkish Plenipotentiaries were of the same mind as the Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain, France, and Austria.
Subject dropped.