§ MR. WHALLEYasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether there is any ground for the statement in "The Ruski Mir" (Russian Journal), that "there is reason to believe that the new French Cabinet have agreed with England as to naval operations in the East;" and, whether, if not now convenient to reply to the Question as to which, if any, European Power, except the Papacy, approves or will support the policy of Her Majesty's Government in restricting the operations of Russia in this war, he will reply thereto before the end of the Session; and, if so, when?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERMr. Speaker, I hardly know how to look upon Questions of the sort which the hon. Gentleman puts. I cannot help thinking that Questions put in this House are really of an important character, and that they attract some attention both at home and abroad; and, therefore, it would be desirable that hon. Members who have Questions to put should take some little trouble to ascertain whether there is ground for putting those Questions, and should not, whenever they see anything in the newspapers, put it upon the Paper in this House in order to ask Questions of the Government. With regard to the first Question of the hon. Gentleman, I feel some difficulty in answering it. He wants to know whether there is any ground for a statement by a Russian journalist that "there is reason to believe" so and so. Well, I do not know what ground the Russian journalist may have had for having "reason to believe "what is here stated; but I can only say that, so far as the Government here are acquainted with the subject-matter, no communications of the character that seem here to be glanced at, have taken place. There have been no agreements with either the new French Cabinet or the late French Cabinet with regard to naval operations in the East. These are matters which appear in newspapers as surmises, guesses, or conjectures; and I do not think there is any ground for them at all. At all events, there is 1045 no ground for the allegation of such an agreement as is here spoken of. With regard to the second Question, I really must decline again to enter—at all events in the form of an Answer to a Question put in this way—into a discussion of the policy of Her Majesty's Government and the views which other Governments may take upon the subject.