§ LORD LYNDHURSTsaid, that in putting the question of which he had given notice to the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs respecting the Danubian Principalities, it would be necessary to say a few words to explain its purport and object. By the 23rd Article of the Treaty of Peace, it was stipulated that a Commission should be appointed for the purpose of regulating and reforming the laws 669 and institutions of the Principalities, and subsidiary to that Commission two representative bodies were to be appointed, which were to represent the feelings and wishes of all classes in the Principalities. The object of their appointment was to ascertain with as much precision as possible the wishes of the inhabitants with regard to the definitive organisation of the Principalities. These bodies were to report to the Commissioners, and the Commissioners were to report to the Powers who were parties to the Treaty of Paris. That course of proceeding would, If honestly pursued, have been most satisfactory, not only to the House and the country, but to the people of the Principalities themselves. But one of the most important things to secure was, that the persons who were to compose these representative bodies should be free from any extraneous influence; and therefore it was understood that they were not to commence their proceedings until the Austrian troops had been removed from the Principalities, or at all events to such an extent that their presence could exercise no influence on them. Another point which was considered equally important was, that the Hospodar, whose term of office would expire in June, should not be re-appointed to the office before the sittings of the representative bodies commenced. This was deemed essential both from the influence of the Hospodars and from the notorious connection which existed between Prince Stirbey, the Hospodar, and the Austrian Government—indeed, if he used the right term, he might say the notorious subservience to and absolute dependence of Prince Stirbey. Accordingly it had been arranged with great propriety that a council should be held at Constantinople, at which it should be determined when the Hospodar should be removed, and when the proceedings should commence. That, he was told, was most satisfactory to the population of the Principalities, but not at all to Austria, which, as he had been informed, had desired to vary the mode of proceeding for the purpose of producing an influence on the population. A council had, however, been held at Constantinople, at which it was determined that the Hospodar should be removed before the sitting of the representative body commenced; but the representative of Austria had exerted various means of influencing persons at Constantinople, and a second council was held, at which he 670 was led to believe that during the absence of the Grand Vizier in England the former decision had been reversed. That, as he had been informed, had been approved by Austria, and was not disapproved of by France; but our own Ambassador, Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, most distinctly disapproved of it. What he wished to know from his noble friend was, whether there was any foundation for this report, and whether any assurance could be given to the House that the proceedings under this Commission and the subsidiary representative bodies would take place without any undue influence over them, so as to realise the expectations that had been formed on the subject. This country, he could assure his noble Friend, felt a deep interest in the welfare of the Principalities.
§ THE EARL OF CLARENDONMy noble and learned Friend has correctly stated what took place at the Conferences in Paris with respect to the Principalities and with regard to the objects which the representatives of the contracting Powers had in view. We determined not to settle anything finally, because it was impossible to obtain sufficient information then to enable us to form new institutions; we therefore, as my noble and learned Friend has correctly stated, determined that two Divans should be formed for that purpose, which should act without cheek or control, and which should honestly represent all classes of the community. We made the condition that those Divans should not commence their proceedings while any foreign occupation of the Principalities existed, and that no influence should be held over their deliberations. We agreed that the firmans for convoking those Divans should be agreed upon by the representatives of the contracting Powers at Constantinople, in order that we might know that our object—namely, that of securing the free representation of the Principalities—was likely to be attained. I have no knowledge of the circumstance to which my noble and learned Friend has alluded, although yesterday I saw a similar account in a newspaper. The letter in which that account was contained was dated Constantinople, May 12. Now, we have despatches from Lord Stratford de Redcliffe up to the 15th, in which no mention is made of any circumstance of the kind, and I had last night an opportunity of inquiring of the highest Turkish authority now in this country as to the truth of the statement, and he informed me that he 671 was quite sure that no such arrangement had been made. The attention of my noble Friend our Ambassador at Constantinople shall be called to the subject, and I am sure that he will not allow any arrangement to be made which will defeat the intentions of the Conference without offering such protests as he is so well able to make.
§ THE EARL OF MALMESBURYinquired whether the arrangements regarding the Principalities included a provision that the fortresses in the territory to be ceded by Russia to Turkey in Bessarabia, should be given up in their present state. The fortresses of Ismail and Kilia were of very great strength. He had seen in the public papers that morning, that Ismail was about to be dismantled by the Russians. That might be a mere newspaper report; but he wished to know of his noble Friend what were the provisions of the Treaty with regard to these fortresses—whether they were to remain as fortresses, and if so, whether they would be garrisoned by Turks or Moldavians; or were they to be wholly razed and the territory merely given up to the Ottoman Porte?
§ THE EARL OF CLARENDONreplied that the territory in question was to form part of Moldavia, which was considered to be an integral part of the Turkish dominions. No stipulation was made as to whether those fortresses were to be dismantled or not. He scarcely thought the statement in question could be true, for if they were dismantled, there was nothing to prevent the Turks from re-erecting them.
§ LORD LYNDHURSTasked the noble Earl whether it was intended that the Hospodars should remain in office after the expiry of their present term, which would terminate at the close of next month?
§ THE EARL OF CLARENDONIt was proposed to the Turkish Plenipotentiaries that the Hospodars should not continue in office after the end of June. They agreed that that would be the proper course to take, but stated that it would be necessary to appoint Kaimakans in the place of the Hospodars. He felt that it would he impossible at that moment to say exactly what arrangement should be adopted, and resolved to leave it to the Porte to determine what should be done in order to secure the tranquillity of the provinces during a state of crisis.
§ LORD LYNDHURSTWill the noble Earl say whether, in the event of the Hospodars 672 being removed from their offices, they were likely to be placed in the situation of Kaimakans? That was an inferior office, but still one of considerable influence, and, filled by the present Hospodars, would be open to the same objections as the existing order of things.
§ THE EARL OF CLARENDONWhen the Hospodars' term of office expired it would be for the Porte to name the Kaimakans. It did not at all follow that the present Hospodars would be chosen. It would be open to the Porte to appoint whom it pleased.