HC Deb 21 May 1885 vol 298 cc1034-6
MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the new frontier agreed upon between Baron de Staal and Earl Granville follows the southern limits of the zone asked by Russia on 7th April; and, whether it assigns Zulfikar and Penjdeh to Russia, and brings the Russian frontier close to Maimena and Audkoi?

MR. GLADSTONE

It is not in my power to enter into any discussion or a description of the frontier negotiations with Russia, and surely the hon. Gentleman must sec that inconvenience arises from the mere putting of these Questions. Suggestions are conveyed to the public mind—suggestions often inaccurate; but, at the same time, we cannot enter into details, and say that such and such parts are inaccurate without entering into the whole matter. This convoys a false impression, and that, I am sure, is far from the intention of the hon. Gentleman.

MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT

With regard to the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, I should like to ask him whether, if the despatch of the Russian Government of the 13th of October had been made known to this House and the country, it is not likely, in his opinion—

MR. SPEAKER

The hon. Member has asked a Question, and I understood the Prime Minister to say that he did not think it consistent with his public duty to give an answer. The hon. Gentleman is now arguing the question why an answer should be given.

MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT

No, Sir. I do not think you quite understand my object in putting it. The right hon. Gentleman stated that this Question was likely to have a deleterious effect. I wished to ask him whether it was not the fact that if the Russian despatch—e.g., of October 13—which stated that a certain frontier was demanded by Russia, had been made public at the time, the unfortunate events of March 13 and the Russian occupation of Penjdeh would never have occurred?

MR. SPEAKER

That is a matter of argument, which does not arise out of the answer.

BARON HENRY DE WORMS

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the terms of reference as to the proposed arbitration on the Penjdeh incident have been yet settled; and, whether, in view of the fact that, as appears from the Blue Book just issued, P. 166, No. 224, General Komaroff telegraphed to St. Petersburg, on the 13th of March, that it was "absolutely necessary that he should seize Penjdeh," and, on the 30th of that month, attacked the Afghans in that district, notwithstanding the agreement arrived at between Russia and England with the object of preventing such attack, Her Majesty's Government still proposes that the question to be submitted for the decision of the arbitrator should be the interpretation by the Russian Government of the agreement above referred to, and not the conduct of General Komaroff, who has now been presented with a sword of honour by the Czar as a reward for his conduct?

MR. GLADSTONE

The terms of reference have not yet been definitely settled for the arbitrator. But if the hon. Gentleman refers to No. 228, I think it is, in the Blue Book, he will see that it shows that M. de Giers has denied the truth of the statement that General Komaroff had telegraphed for leave to attack Penjdeh, a statement which had only been reported by Sir Edward Thornton as a rumour that had reached him, and not as a matter of positive information. The information on the subject was before Her Majesty's Government before the question of reference to the Head of a Friendly State was mooted; and it cannot, therefore, affect the question of the terms of the reference. With regard, Sir, to the interpretation by the Russian Government of the agreement, and not the conduct of General Komaroff, the interpretation by the Russian Government and by the British Government of that agreement does not mean a discussion of its verbal meaning—a mere grammatical debate—but it means an interpretation of it as implied in the conduct for which the respective Governments are responsible.

SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT

The right hon. Gentleman said that the agreement had been referred to an arbitrator. May I ask who that arbitrator is?

MR. GLADSTONE

That matter is not absolutely settled as yet.