MR. OWEN LEWISasked the First Lord of the Treasury, If it is true that a menacing note has been addressed by the Prussian Government to the Belgian Government, referring, amongst other matters, to the liberty of the press in Belgium, and calling upon the Belgian Government to alter the laws of their country; if any communications upon the subject have been received from the British Minister at Brussels, or any instructions sent to him by Her Majesty's Government; and, if so, if he will lay such Correspondence upon the Table of the House; and, as Great Britain has formally guaranteed, in conjunction with the other great powers of Europe, the neutrality and independence of Belgium, what steps it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to take, diplomatic or otherwise, in fulfilment of that guarantee, should Belgian independence be imperilled in consequence of rejecting the demands of Prussia?
§ MR. DISRAELIMr. Speaker, I would venture to observe that, I think as a general rule, in Parliamentary Questions, and especially in questions connected with Foreign Affairs, we should be careful not to avail ourselves of the opportunity of using epithets entirely uncalled-for and unnecessary. Epithets in Questions are generally, I may say, always useless, and may lead to misconception. In the present case, Her Majesty's Government have no information whatever of a "menacing" Note having been addressed by the German to the Belgian Government. This is a subject, on which there is a great deal of misrepresentation and exaggeration. In the first place a considerable time has passed since a Note was addressed by the German Government to the Belgian Government. It was at the commencement of February—I think on the 3rd; and it was not a menacing Note, but a Note of remonstrance. Now, a remonstrance does not, I conceive, by any means involve menace. On the contrary, one element of remonstrance may evince a friendly disposition, and we all 719 know that a "friendly remonstrance" is a phrase often adopted in discussing subjects. This remonstrance was addressed by the German to the Belgian Government, on the 3rd of February, and it was replied to by the Belgian Government at the end of that month—I think on the 26th. Her Majesty's Government became acquainted with these two Notes, the Remonstrance and the Rejoinder, through the action of the German Government. The German Ambassador, by the instructions of his Government, made Her Majesty's Government, in confidence, acquainted with those two Notes, and we at the time appreciated that act, and still continue to appreciate it, as an evidence of the cordial and confidential relations which subsist happily between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of Germany. No answer whatever has been made to the Rejoinder by the German Government. The Rejoinder having been made on the 26th of February, we are now advanced in the month of April, and we consider, and I believe those who are competent to form an opinion upon this question also consider, and have considered for some time, that this is a question which is concluded. The hon. Gentleman continues by asking me whether—
As Great Britain has formally guaranteed, in conjunction with the other Great Powers of Europe, the neutrality and independence of Belgium, what steps it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to take, diplomatic or otherwise, in fulfilment of that guarantee, should Belgian independence he imperilled in consequence of rejecting the demands of Prussia?Now, Sir, as a general rule—and I think the House will support me in the position I take —it is not expedient or necessary that the policy of Her Majesty's Government, whoever forms that Government, should be declared upon a hypothetical statement. But I will so far deviate from the stric course taken on such occasions, certainly, as to say that if the independence and neutrality of Belgium were really threatened, we should do our duty to our Sovereign, and not be afraid to meet Parliament.