HC Deb 13 March 1854 vol 131 cc700-3
MR. DISRAELI

Sir, I wish to make an inquiry of Her Majesty's Ministers respecting some account of their conduct which has recently appeared in two newspapers. One of these journals is published at St. Petersburg; the other is published in London. The first journal is called the Journal of St. Petersburg, and the other journal is the Times newspaper. In a number of the Journal of St. Petersburg very recently published there is a statement that about this time last year, or even at an earlier date, communications took place between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of Russia, of a very confidential character, in which, according to the allegations in the Journal of St. Petersburg, the most frank and unreserved declaration was made by the Emperor of Russia of his views present and future with respect to the condition of the Turkish empire. I need not remind the House that any statement made in the Journal of St. Petersburg is always considered an authoritative and official statement. Sir, on Saturday last an article appeared—a leading article—in the English newspaper, the Times, and I believe I have a right to assume that that also was an authoritative and official statement, because it referred to circumstances which could only be known not merely to men who were privy councillors, but only to privy councillors who were Cabinet Ministers. In that leading article of Saturday last, in the Times, there is a notice of this statement in the Journal of St. Petersburg, namely, that in the early part of last year there was a lengthened correspondence between the Russian Government and Her Majesty's Government, in which frank and unreserved expositions of the sentiments and views of the Emperor of Russia, with regard to the state of the Turkish empire, was made. In the Times newspaper the authenticity of that statement is unequivocally admitted. It is not only admitted, but allusions are made to public despatches written by the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, the noble Lord opposite, in reply to those communications from St. Petersburg. More than that. In this authoritative and official article in the Times newspaper there is a reference to certain communications upon the same subject, namely, the condition of the Turkish empire, which occurred between Her Majesty's Government and the Emperor of Russia personally during his visit to this country in the year 1844, connecting these communications of the year 1844, in similarity of nature and identity of subject, with the correspondence referred to at the present moment in the Journal of St. Petersburg. The inquiry which I wish to make of Her Majesty's Government is this—whether they are prepared to lay upon the table of the House the correspondence which took place at the beginning of last year, and which does not appear among the papers which Her Majesty has graciously permitted us to see—this correspondence referred to in the Journal of St. Petersburg, and acknowledged in the Times as authentic? Further, I wish to inquire of the noble Lord if he can inform the House whether there was in the year 1844 any arrangement or understanding between Her Majesty's Government and the Emperor of Russia when he was in this country—reminding the House that the distinguished individual who is now Prime Minister of England was then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs—whether, if there were such understanding or arrangement, it was reduced to writing, and if reduced to writing, whether the noble Lord is prepared also to lay that document on the table of the House, if he be also prepared to lay on the table the correspondence to which I have referred.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL

Sir, with respect to the two articles in the newspapers, to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred, I have to answer, that I saw on Saturday the article in the Journal of St. Petersburg, to which he has alluded, containing the allegations which he has stated to the House. With regard to ano- ther article, which he attributes likewise to an official source, I did not see that article, nor any part of it, until I saw some extracts from it in a newspaper to-day; and I did not know, until the right hon. Gentleman mentioned it just now, that that article referred to a memorandum drawn up in 1844.

MR. DISRAELI

I did not say memorandum; I said communications.

LORD JOHN RUSSELL

Well, then, communications. Sir, so far as I am concerned, I have given no authority whatever to the Times newspaper to state what was my conduct when I held the office of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Now, with respect to the circumstances which did occur. It is the usual practice, I believe—it certainly has been the usual practice, so long as I have known anything of public affairs—not to lay before Parliament any communications which took place between Her Majesty's Ambassadors and Ministers abroad, and the Sovereign to whom they are accredited. It has always been the practice to consider these conversations of so confidential a nature as that they should not be laid before Parliament. Now, it is perfectly true, that, in the course of last year, the Emperor of Russia held a confidential communication with Sir Hamilton Seymour, with respect to the condition of the Turkish empire. That communication reached this country in the shape of a despatch from Sir Hamilton Seymour, and it was my duty as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to lay before the Cabinet a despatch in answer to that communication, which despatch was afterwards forwarded to St. Petersburg. Some further communications took place, and my noble Friend Lord Clarendon answered the next despatch of Sir Hamilton Seymour upon the subject. I have stated what I think is the usual practice, and what I think is the just rule on the subject, that such communications should not be laid before Parliament, because it is obvious that if they were laid before Parliament they might lead to dangerous consequences. But as the Journal of St. Petersburg, permitted and authorised, no doubt, by the Government of Russia, has alluded to these confidential communications, Her Majesty's Government can no longer have any scruple in laying all the correspondence upon the table of the House. I trust that that correspondence will show that, while we evinced every respect for the Emperor of Russia, we re- pelled every suggestion which would tend to the dismemberment of Turkey. With respect to the further question which the right hon. Gentleman asks, namely, as to the conversation that took place in 1844, it is certainly true that, when the Emperor of Russia was in this country in that year, he held a conversation, I believe, with the Duke of Wellington, with Sir Robert Peel, and with the Earl of Aberdeen, then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. I believe the substance of that conversation was consigned to a memorandum, and that the late Minister of Russia in this country, Baron Brunnow, was cognisant of and assented to the correctness of that memorandum of the conversation. With respect to that memorandum, I am not able to give so positive an answer relative to the production of it as I have given to the other question of the right hon. Gentleman. That memorandum has not been lately under the view of the Members of Her Majesty's Government, and therefore I wish to reserve my answer on that point. But with respect to the correspondence to which I have before alluded, namely, the correspondence which took place in the course of last year, I have no hesitation in laying it upon the table of the House.