QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS. (Hansard, 23 May 1884)

THE EARL OF GALLOWAY
, in rising to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is the view of Her Majesty's Government that any news has been received direct from General Gordon since the 8th or 9th of April, and if there has been no more recent news directly from him; whether Her Majesty's Government are still prepared to decline making any public announcement as to whether it is their intention to send an expeditionary force for his rescue as well as for the relief of the beleaguered garrisons of the Upper Nile, said, that, from his Memorandum of the 22nd of January, General Gordon had evidently expected to be forced to military measures, and that preparation ought to have been made at home for the emergency that had arisen. He thought the time had arrived when the Government could no longer content themselves with verbal professions of a general nature as to their responsibility for the life of General Gordon. On the 28th of April he asked the noble Earl a Question as to the correctness of a telegram dated the 26th April, in reference to a proposal to send an expedition to Berber, and its being stated that it would be impossible for such an expedition to start for four months. He, by request of the noble Earl, postponed his Question for a day; and on the next day—the 29th of April—the noble Earl said that the Papers he had just laid on the Table would show what had been done on the subject. For some reasons, those Papers were not distributed till the 3rd of May, on which day he (the Earl of Galloway) came down to the House to give Notice of some Resolutions based upon matter contained in 1168 those Papers for the 8th of May; but, acting on advice, he, for two reasons— first, that there had been a Division on an analogous subject earlier in the Session in that House; and, secondly, because Notice of a Motion had just been given in the other House of a similar character—did not bring his Resolutions forward. His proposed Resolutions were, in effect, that the Papers showed that the several massacres which had been perpetrated in Egypt were the direct result of the absence of any well-defined or continuous policy on the part of Her Majesty's Government; that, in consequence, the honour of the nation rendered it incumbent upon Parliament to insist upon measures being taken to establish order in the Soudan, and to deliver General Gordon — that, with this object in view, it was essential to make an announcement that a military expedition would be sent to Berber and Khartoum—and that, in the interests of humanity alone, an assurance should be obtained from the Government that a military occupation should continue until a stable form of government had been established on a permanent footing. Those Resolutions would show the drift of his present Question. He contended that it was evident from the very first that General Gordon contemplated the possibility of having to fight, although, of course, his mission was intended to be a pacific one; and, secondly, that his policy of handing the country generally back to the old families of the local Sultans never, in his opinion, could apply to Dongola, Khartoum, or Kassala, more especially the latter two places, as they had but recently sprung up, in regard to which he had expressly stated in his Memorandum that no decision should be arrived at as to the mode in which they were to be dealt with until their inhabitants had made known their wishes. It was quite evident, from the terms of his Memorandum, that General Gordon was aware that he could not rescue the garrisons without the aid of troops; and if Her Majesty's Government had made up their minds definitely not to send him such aid, they should have informed him of the fact before he left Cairo. He did not want to press the Government to state the exact moment or the exact route at which or by which aid would be sent to General Gordon; but he 1169 did press them to state distinctly that aid would be sent to the rescue of that gallant officer and of the beleaguered garrisons. Such an announcement of their intentions would spread like wildfire through Egypt and the Soudan. He could not disguise from himself, however, that what would probably have cost thousands to effect a few weeks ago would now cost millions. He trusted that any plans for the relief of General Gordon would be framed in the most ample manner, with the view of dispelling the state of anarchy now prevailing, and rescuing that gallant General from the terrible fate which seemed to threaten him in his present perilous position. With these observations he begged to ask the Question of which he had given Notice.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
I am sure my noble Relative will readily believe me when I assure him that I have not the slightest ground to complain of his having refrained from putting to the House the Resolution which he has read to us to-night, and which he intended to put on a former occasion. I am bound, at the same time, to say that I cannot agree with all the assertions which he has made. I cannot, for instance, agree with him in thinking that General Gordon undertook his chivalrous expedition with the expectation of receiving military aid from this country; and I also disagree with his statement that it would have been wise to send a few hundreds of Cavalry to Berber as recommended by the noble Earl.

THE EARL OF GALLOWAY
I only said that, in my view, preparations should have been made in this country, upon the receipt of General Gordon's Memorandum, which would have enabled us to send such a force, if necessary, after the battle of the 12th of March, as six weeks' preparation would thus have not been thrown away.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
I was under the impression that the noble Earl cited, with approbation, the proposal to send a certain number of Cavalry to Berber; and I still less agree with him in thinking that it would have been judicious to prepare for a summer expedition six weeks ago, and that such an expedition would have been cheaper than an expedition undertaken in the cooler season of the year. I am sorry that, with regard to the last part of the Question, I can 1170 add nothing to what was said at the close of the debate in the House of Commons the other day by my noble Friend the Secretary of State for War. With regard to the previous part of the Question, as to whether we have received any further information from General Gordon since the 9th of April, I can only say that we received information as late as the 10th, and that that information has been published and is in your Lordships' hands. I may mention, as bearing on this subject indirectly, that we last night received a telegram, stating that the Mudir of Dongola believes that a messenger to General Gordon has entered Khartoum, but cannot leave it, and that the Mahdi is prevented by his followers from going to the White Nile. The Egyptian authorities have taken every possible means for conveying messages to General Gordon, and I have strong hope that they will be successful.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
May I ask which debate the noble Earl refers to, and what it was that the Marquess of Hartington said?

§ EARL GRANVILLE
I can quite understand the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury) not being able to distinguish between the numerous Votes of Censure which have been moved and debated on this question; but he calls on me at very short Notice to explain what was said at the close of the last debate in the House of Commons. The debate was closed by the Marquess of Hartington and Sir Stafford Northcote; and if he wishes me to read the speech of my noble Friend I will do so. The noble Earl, accordingly, having read a copious extract from the speech of the Marquess of Hartington, said: I could have given the words which I myself used; but, as my opinions are exactly those of my noble Friend, I thought in a matter of military operations it was better to refer to the utterances of the Secretary of State for War.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
The noble Earl need make no apology for the course which he has taken. The Marquess of Hartington has been an admirable pupil of the noble Earl in the art of answering Questions. He invariably says — "We are bound to consider;" "We are bound to inquire;" "We will give no decision if we can possibly help it;" and so on. The noble Earl referred to the debate 1171 as having been closed by the Marquess of Hartington; but, as a matter of fact, the debate was finished by Sir Charles Dilke, which was my reason for asking what speech and what debate he was referring to.