§ SIR WILLIAM HARCOURTasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, referring to the despatch of Lord Derby to the Marquess of Salisbury and Sir Henry Elliot, of the date of Jan. 19, 1877, stating that—
Musurus Pasha endeavoured to argue that the rejection of the proposals of the Powers need not entail the departure of the Ambassa- 386 dors from Constantinople; but I declined to enter into this question, as I said the course to be followed had been settled some time since and had been formally announced to the Porte;Whether there are any Papers showing such formal announcement to the Porte other than the Eighth Protocol of Jan. 15, 1877; and, if so, whether he will lay such Papers upon the Table; whether the simultaneous withdrawal of the Ambassadors from Constantinople was determined upon in concert by the six guaranteeing Powers; and, whether be will lay upon the Table any Papers relating to such concert and agreement amongst the Powers; whether it was intended by Her Majesty's Government that any different meaning should be attached to the departure of Sir Henry Elliot from Constantinople from that which was given in the Protocol of Jan. 15 to the withdrawal of the Ambassadors of Austria, Russia, Italy, Germany, and France; and if so, whether the intention to make such distinction was previously communicated to the Porte and the five Powers; and, whether Sir Henry Elliot left Constantinople on ordinary leave, or whether he was directed by Her Majesty's Government to depart in consequence of the rejection of the proposals of the Six Powers by the Porte, and in order to show displeasure on the part of England in like manner as in the case of the threatened withdrawal of Sir Henry Elliot on October 5th, as explained in the Despatch of Lord Derby to Lord Odo Russell of October 16th 1876?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERThe answer, in brief, to the Questions of the hon. and learned Gentleman is that there are no Papers upon any of those points beyond what are contained in the Blue Books. With regard to the first Question, the hon. and learned Gentleman asked whether there are any Papers with reference to the formal announcement to the Porte of the course which Sir Henry Elliot was to follow. The communication was made to Lord Salisbury, with a view to its communication to Sir Henry Elliot, by telegraphic despatch of December 22, and that was the foundation of the communication which was afterwards formally made to the Porte at the sitting of the eighth meeting of the Conference. That had occurred before the conversa- 387 tion between Lord Derby and Musurus Pasha, on the 19th of January. There ore no other Papers on the subject. With regard to the withdrawal of the Ambassadors from Constantinople, the hon. and learned Gentleman will see by looking at the different despatches in the Blue Book the exact course that was followed. The question, in the first instance, was put by Lord Salisbury on, I think, the 17th of December. He had his Instructions given to him on the 22nd of December, and then there were those proceedings at the Conference. With respect to the Question, whether it was intended by Her Majesty's Government that any different meaning should be attached to the departure of Sir Henry Elliot from Constantinople from that which was to be attached to the withdrawal of the Ambassadors of the other Powers, I can only say that there is no indication in the record of any intention to make such a distinction, and that the Instructions given and the intention manifested by the withdrawal of the Ambassadors will be gathered from what occurred in the Conference. The Instructions given to Sir Henry Elliot were those which are contained in the telegram to Lord Salisbury—that is to say, that he was to come to England and report upon the situation. That is the answer to the hon. and learned Gentleman's last Question. Sir Henry Elliot did not leave Constantinople on ordinary leave, because he was desired to come to England and report on the situation. Neither was he desired to depart from Constantinople in order to show the displeasure of England in like manner as in the case of his threatened withdrawance on the 6th of October, the circumstances being quite different from what they were at the time the Instructions were given to him when the subject of the armistice was under consideration. The whole of the information will be found in the Papers.