§ MR. DISRAELII wish, Sir, to ask, When the explanatory letter with regard to the proceedings before the Geneva Tribunal will be laid upon the Table of the House?
§ MR. PERCY WYNDHAMsaid, he desired, before the Question was answered, to put another, of which he had given private notice to the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Gladstone). They had no right to inquire the grounds upon which the Government based their hope of bringing this matter to a favourable 1267 conclusion, nor did they wish to know the arguments on which the Government intended to rely. What, however, the country desired to know, and had a right to learn, was the exact decision at which the Government had arrived. ["Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERsaid, that the hon. Gentleman was out of Order in employing arguments, and must confine himself to stating facts hearing on the Question which he desired to put.
§ MR. PERCY WYNDHAMthen asked, Whether Her Majesty's Government had presented the Counter Case, subject to the denial on the part of Her Majesty's Government that the Indirect Claims were either within the jurisdiction of the Arbitrators, or that they, the Arbitrators, had any power to determine whether the Indirect Claims were within their jurisdiction or not; or, whether the reservation made by Her Majesty's Government was limited to guarding the right to protest against any award made under the head of Indirect Claims, or on account of such Claims?
MR. GLADSTONESir, I may answer the last Question put by the hon. Gentleman the Member for West Cumberland (Mr. Percy Wyndham) by saying that, as I understand it, the reservation of Her Majesty's Government is a reservation of all their rights whatever, and is not limited to any particular points. But the substantive part of my answer to him will be my answer to the right hon. Gentleman opposite, who has asked me when the explanatory letter will be laid upon the Table of the House. By "explanatory letter" I presume he referred to what I call the Statement accompanying the Counter Case. It will be laid, together with the Counter Case, on the Table of the House, formally, to-morrow, although I am afraid that as one of the documents is very bulky, two or three days may elapse before the copies are actually placed in the hands of hon. Members.
§ MR. DISRAELII thought the expression "explanatory letter" was borrowed accurately from the right hon. Gentleman; however, I am perfectly willing to adopt it in the sense he uses it for the convenience of the moment. But what I wish to know is, whether this Note may not be in the hands of hon. Members without waiting for the Counter Case? It would be extremely 1268 convenient to the House—and I believe satisfactory to the country—that we should be in possession of the precise language used in that document.
MR. GLADSTONEThe Note is a very brief document, and I see no reason why it should not be in the hands of hon. Members on Wednesday morning. [Cries of "To-morrow."] I do not quite see how that can be done.
§ MR. DISRAELIThen it is understood the House will be in possession of the Note and the language in which the Counter Case is presented to the Council of Geneva certainly by Wednesday morning?