§ OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.
§ MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE, in rising to ask the Question of which he had given Notice, said, that as it concerned a concession of a most important character granted by the Shah of Persia to Baron Reuter, he had inquired of the Speaker whether, under the pressing and extraordinary circumstances of the case, and considering that they had arrived at nearly the end of the Session, he (Mr. Baillie Cochrane) might be allowed to take an exceptional course in moving the Adjournment of the House, in order to be enabled to enter into a statement upon the subject. The right hon. Gentleman, with his usual courtesy, assented to his doing so. Having, however, subsequently spoken to the noble Lord the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in relation to the matter, the noble Lord expressed the opinion that, inasmuch as the question was of an extremely important character, it ought not to be brought forward in the absence of the Prime Minister. Under those circumstances, he (Mr. Baillie Cochrane) must decline going fully into the subject until Friday next, when he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government would be present and be able to give the House a satisfactory explanation upon it. In the meantime the Speaker struck out of his Question as he had framed it two words—namely, "extraordinary" and "dangerous." He should be sorry to insert any words in his Question that would be deemed objectionable by the Speaker of that House; but as to the word "extraordinary," he had the high authority of Lord Carnarvon for its use, that noble Lord having used the word in "another place" in connection with the subject; and although he believed there was no man of higher honour or intelligence, or more thoroughly English in his principles than Baron Renter, nevertheless he considered the word "dangerous" applicable to the powers which the concession would confer upon that gentleman. [Cries of "Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERsaid, that the words referred to by the hon. Member were struck out of his Question by his au- 804 thority, as inconsistent with the Rules of the House applicable to Questions; consequently, the hon. Member could not then comment upon them.
§ MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEthen asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Her Majesty's Government had any knowledge of the negotiations entered into between the Shah of Persia and Baron Reuter before these concessions were granted to the latter; and, whether any Correspondence has taken place between the Foreign Office and Her Majesty's Minister at Teheran respecting these concessions; and, if so, whether it will be laid upon the Table in time to enable the House to consider it before the Prorogation?
§ VISCOUNT ENFIELDSir, Baron Reuter says in his letter of 12th September, 1872, just laid before Parliament, that about a month before that date he had privately communicated to Lord Granville the fact of a concession having been granted him. The concession in question bears date July 25th, 1872. The first intimation received by the Foreign Office of this concession being in agitation was contained in a despatch from Teheran, dated July 9th, and received in the Foreign Office, August 30th, 1872. A Copy of this concession was received at the Foreign Office on the 28th October, in a Despatch bearing date September 12th.