§ MR. FAWCETTsaid, he had placed a Motion on the Paper to the effect that, considering it was stipulated by the Anglo-Turkish Convention that reforms, to be agreed upon later between the two Powers, should be introduced into the government, and for the protection of the Christian and other subjects of the Porte in Asiatic Turkey, the House was of opinion that before such Agreement was finally concluded, Parliament should have an opportunity of expressing its opinion on these reforms, and on the guarantees to be provided for their execution. Though he was precluded by the Forms of the House from moving his Resolution, as one Amendment to the Motion that the Speaker leave the Chair had been already negatived, he was very anxious to state some reasons that might be urged in justification of it, and he still hoped that he would receive from the Government an assurance which would render it unnecessary if he had had the opportunity of taking the sense of the House upon it. He stated the other day that nothing could be further from his intention or desire than to revive the discus- 1556 sion which took place in the protracted debate last week, and to that promise he should now most rigorously and scrupulously adhere. The past had been sufficiently complained of, and his observations should now be directed to the future. A misapprehension prevailed in certain quarters that in bringing forward this Motion, he desired to make a complaint against the Government, because they were not ready to state to the House the reforms which they thought should be introduced into Asiatic Turkey, and also the guarantees which, in their opinion, would be necessary for the execution of those reforms. Nothing would be more unjust and contrary to common sense than to make such a complaint against the Government. He was willing to leave it to their discretion as to the time when they should make a statement respecting those reforms and guarantees. All he asked was that whenever the time arrived, the English people, through the House of Commons, should have an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon the subject. He had heard the remark repeated since the debate of last week—"What is the use of talking any more about this question? The Government are supported by an overwhelming majority, and there is no good in crying over the past." But it was a mistake to suppose that everything connected with the Anglo-Turkish Convention had been concluded. A sort of partnership had been entered into, Taut the terms of it were left to be determined in the future. The Anglo-Turkish Convention stated that the Sultan promised England to introduce reforms, to be agreed upon later between the two Powers, in the government and for the protection of the Christian and other subjects of the Porte in Asiatic Turkey. The whole of that language showed that the Convention was prospective so far as the reforms were concerned, and surely it was not an unreasonable proposal that the Parliament of England should have some voice in determining their adequacy or inadequacy. The Chancellor of the Exchequer and other Ministers had repeated the determination of the Government that this Convention should not be a sham, but a reality. It was their avowed intention, not simply to protect English interests in the East, but to introduce 1557 good government for these unfortunate people in Asiatic Turkey, in place of misgovernment. So far as the Government effected that object, they would find in him a willing and humble supporter. Referring to one of the Blue Books on Turkey, issued last year, he found there the declared and emphatic opinion of the Government on this subject. It was to the effect that the whole history of the Ottoman Empire, since it had been admitted into the European concert by the Treaty of Paris in 1856, showed that the Porte was powerless to guarantee the execution of reforms in its Provinces by Turkish officials, who accepted them with reluctance and neglected them with impunity. If that was the settled opinion of the Government 18 months ago, what had happened since to give them any greater confidence in the ability of the Porte to guarantee the execution of reforms? The conclusion at which he arrived was that one might as well whistle to the wind or talk to the tide as to attempt to reform the Government of Turkey, unless guarantees were provided outside of Turkey. In a remarkable despatch of January, 1877, Lord Salisbury said that the happiness of the people in the Turkish Provinces absolutely depended on the personal fitness of their local governors; that the system of Turkish government, as recently administered, gave little chance of securing the personal fitness of local governors in an emergency; and that capable men might occasionally be appointed; but it almost invariably happened that favouritism and corruption wore the means for securing patronage. The noble Lord then went on to observe that if, by chance, a capable man should be appointed, he was certain to be removed, unless he was willing to pay a higher bribe for his continuance in office than the bribe offered from head-quarters for his removal. It was, said the noble Lord, perfectly vain to expect any improvement in the condition of these Provinces, unless you removed these abuses, and obtained some guarantees as to the character of the local Governors. Winding up with a significant and important sentence, the noble Lord stated that it was absolutely hopeless to expect to find any remedy for these abuses which was not external to the Turkish Government. 1558 After that despatch from one of Her Majesty's Ministers, it might fairly be put to the Government—"If you mean to be satisfied with reforms without outside guarantees, there never was such an idle sham or mockery as this Anglo-Turkish Convention, so far as it can secure better government for Turkey." They were thus brought face to face with this dilemma, from which they could not escape. If they wished to give reality to these reforms, they must be prepared to apply external pressure on the Porte; or, in other words, to adopt a policy of coercion, heard of so much last year. His contention was that the Government ought not to adopt such a policy, without the people of this country having an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon it. Would the Government be able to displace local Governors, appointed under a system of corrupt favouritism, without such officials struggling to maintain their privileges? Was England prepared to incur the responsibility of sanctioning domestic slavery, which was engrained into social life in Asiatic Turkey? By the 61st Article of the Treaty of Berlin, Europe, and not England alone, made itself responsible, in a certain way, for the good government of a great part of Asiatic Turkey—Armenia. That Treaty specially guaranteed the Sultan against the raids of Kurds and Circassians, and in return the Sultan promised to introduce reforms, the carrying out of which Europe promised to superintend. But, by an Act subsequently made known, the English Government separated themselves from the rest of Europe, and made themselves responsible for good government in Asia Minor. It seemed to him that if we were going to undertake a work which might be as great in its proportions as administering another India, the people of this country had at least the right, before the terms on which that work should be undertaken were finally decided, to have an opportunity of expressing an opinion, not only on what was going to be done, but on the manner in which it ought to be done. The people had also a right to demand an opportunity of seeing whether the reforms, finally agreed upon between England and Turkey separately, would work harmoniously with that understanding arrived at by all Europe to 1559 guarantee reforms as far as Armenia was concerned. Ho had kept his promise of not making any reference to the past, and he had confined his remarks entirely to the future; but he thought that, now peace had been concluded, and there being no longer any cause for further secrecy, it was a most reasonable request that the Government should take Parliament into confidence before it resolved to enter upon an act which might vitally affect the future of this country. The Privileges of Parliament were at stake on this question; for did not its control over expenditure become simply a farce when it was called upon to vote money and deprived of any power of controlling the causes which rendered the expenditure of money necessary? He therefore appealed to the Government to return to the good old practice of taking the House into their counsels, and to undertake that they would not enter into engagements which would throw upon Parliament and the country great responsibilities, without first having obtained their sanction and approval.
§ MR. E. JENKINSwould venture to address a few words to the House in the same spirit which had animated his hon. Friend the Member for Hackney. He admitted that last week an amnesty had been granted to the Government for all past offences, and their policy must now be taken to be accepted by the House and adopted by the country; but Parliament was now all the more entitled to call on the Government to explain the manner in which they proposed to carry out that policy. He complained that there had been a misunderstanding out-of-doors as to the object of those who in the House asked for information from the Government on this subject. They did not want the Government to lay the complete scheme before the House; but they were anxious to know exactly to what extent the Government had pledged this country in regard to the good government of so enormous a country. It was not fair to charge those who chose to criticize the manner in which the Government had carried out what they called their Imperial policy with a connection with the Manchester school of politicians, which was just now in deserved disgrace. The Convention itself was also thoroughly misunderstood in the country. It was over-estimated. A 1560 constituent of his had written to him describing the occupation of Cyprus as one of the grandest events in Lord Beaconsfield's career; but, so far from it being a grand event, in the sense of a great Imperial annexation, it was nothing of the kind; and it was a thing full of nothing but danger, obligation, and expense. If the language, as set forth in one of the despatches of Lord Salisbury to Sir Austen Layard, suggesting the Convention, really meant anything, it was that it was in the contemplation of the Government to supply the Sublime Porte with that force which it did not itself possess. The noble Lord pointed out that the Ottoman Government was incapable of enforcing in Turkey that organization which was essential to the stability of the Government of the country, and that an external force should come in and guarantee that stability. Therefore, he (Mr. E. Jenkins) must ask, what did the Government mean to do? It would seem that their design was not only to introduce external force, but that the exercise of it was to preserve the power of Ottoman rule in Turkey. But what a useless and untrustworthy guarantee that would be! As the matter stood at that moment, he would ask whether the Government had any idea of supplying that external force, and through the medium of Ottoman organization? He was willing to consider first the scheme of the Government in reference to Turkey in Asia, and they were entitled to criticize it. They found that the Convention did express, in a loose way, that scheme, and, therefore, he must ask the Government how they proposed to carry it out, and, first, to what extent had they pledged the resources of this country? The Government had stated that they had not added to our responsibilities in the least; but when they read the terms of these despatches, how could the House reconcile the one with the other. He would not ask the Government to go into the details of the scheme, but to give the House some notion of the principles of the policy which they proposed to carry out. The only thing which they knew at present was that the Government had Undertaken the duty of fighting Russia when she next invaded Turkey. Did not that involve an enormous obligation? The Government ought to explain what they meant to do. He would refer 1561 to the Reports of Sir William Barron and Mr. Rumbold, to show that the financial condition of Turkey was frightful; there was absolute chaos in the administration. In a country of 660,000 square miles, and with 6,050,000 inhabitants in 1867–8, the whole amount collected in tithe—the principal source of revenue—was 1s. 5½d. per head. All the schemes for reforming the system of collecting the tithes had utterly failed, and no means had been devised for superseding the old method of farming the revenues. This system enabled the farmers of the tithe to oppress the people by demanding the payment of increased amounts, and it was well known that a system of absolute corruption existed throughout the country. "Were the Government going to introduce a new system, or to compel the Sublime Porte to make reforms, not only in regard to taxation, but in the administration of justice, upon which the future welfare of the country would depend? Did the Government intend to undertake the administration of a bankrupt country, and to enforce the carrying out of reforms; or had they simply entered into a paper contract for the effecting of reforms which the Porte never intended to carry out? That was a question which might fairly be asked of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who ought to state frankly what were the intentions of the Government.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERI cannot wonder at the anxiety which all hon. Members of this House must feel as to the position in which we stand in regard to the Anglo-Turkish Convention and the agreements into which we have entered on a very important and difficult question. I should be the last person to complain of either of the hon. Gentlemen who have addressed us to-night for expressing their opinions on the subject. At the same time, I am bound to say that during the whole of their addresses, and especially that of the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. E. Jenkins), I could not help asking myself, cui bono this discussion at the present moment? Our position, I think, is a tolerably intelligible one, and I must say I had some difficulty in understanding the precise questions which the hon. Member for Dundee wished to put. He has raised a great many difficulties, and has stated with great truth a number 1562 of the obstacles inseparable from any attempt to improve the administration of any portion of the Turkish Empire— I have not a word to say against his description of the innate difficulties with which we have to contend. And when it was asked how this and that is to be done, and when it was argued that the task is impossible, I think that the hon. Member is conceivably right, and that the task may, after all, prove above our strength; but, at any rate, the possibility of its accomplishment is not advanced by a discussion on details such as the hon. Member has mentioned. We have entered into a perfectly intelligible agreement, and we have undertaken certain obligations towards Turkey in respect of her defence of her Asiatic Provinces from future attacks by Russia, and as the consideration or complement of that undertaking, Turkey has promised to enter into an agreement with us as to the carrying out of certain reforms. That Agreement of itself shows that these reforms will require very great care, and they will have to be elaborately discussed between the two Powers; but there is no good in the world in beginning by saying they are things that cannot be done. The arguments of the hon. Member, that particular reforms can never be effected, reminds me of the old puzzle of Achilles and the Tortoise, in which it was proved that, under certain conditions, Achilles would never overtake the Tortoise; the answer to such a contention was solvitur ambulando; the result will expose the hon. Member's fallacy. We have hope of a certain amount of success; and we are already in communication with the Porte in regard to various points of detail which are well understood, and have already been the subject of a good deal of examination in the Congress, in the Andrassy Note, and in other ways. What we hope to do is to induce the Porte to enter into an agreement to effect such reforms as we can persuade them is desirable; and they will give specific guarantees for the carrying out of those reforms. To say that by any possible reforms we could at once put the Turkish Empire into the position of countries like Prance or Germany would, of course, be absurd. What we hope to do, and what there is a probability of our doing, is to materially improve the administration of those Provinces in cer- 1563 tain particulars which are of a vital character. There are, in particular, three great departments to which we intend to direct our attention — the revenue, the judicial system, and the police. Our object will be to bring about practical improvements which will be guaranteed by treaty, and not by a mere general promise. I do not think we can do more; and I do not think anyone has a right to blame us because now, within a month of the signing of the Treaty, we are not able to come down and put a cut-and-dried scheme on the Table.
§ MR. FAWCETTsaid, he certainly did not expect them to do that.
§ Mr. E. JENKINSsaid, he had distinctly stated that they could not expect a cut-and-dried scheme. What he wanted to know was whether they were simply relying on the promise of the Porte in this matter?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERThat is just the point. It is on the face of the Agreement that the reforms are to be specified and guarantees given. But the precise details of those guarantees it is impossible for the Government at this moment to state, unless, indeed, we intended to make the undertaking a sham one; for in that case it would be the simplest thing in the world to say that this or that was the way in which we intended to administer the Turkish Empire. We mean business. We mean to endeavour to bring about specific reforms, and they will be made the subject of a specific agreement, which could not be conducted and brought about without communication and correspondence, which must take time. The hon. Member for Hackney (Mr. Fawcett), I understand, admits the general principle that the matter is one which must be deliberately and seriously looked into; that it cannot be disposed of in a moment; and that he is not disposed to put merely captious questions or to raise captious objections; but he wants to know whether we are going to give fresh guarantees, and whether we will undertake that no agreement shall be made without this House being consulted? Well, I would be sorry to give any pledge of that kind. We have no motive to maintain any secrecy, or show any want of confidence towards the House; but, on the other hand, it is important that we should proceed with 1564 our negotiations and arrangements as quickly as may be, and that we should not have to delay their conclusion in order to wait for a discussion in Parliament. I think the hon. Gentleman himself will see that a discussion in Parliament might possibly prevent the conclusion of really good arrangements, such as the House would like to see concluded. In this country we are in the habit of discussing matters freely, and as if entirely English interests were concerned, and it can hardly be otherwise than that expressions should be used and criticism passed which might cause embarrassment, and might prevent us coming to any proper understanding. Of course, we do not intend to pledge the House or the country to anything in the nature of expenditure of money without the concurrence of Parliament; but supposing we come to some arrangement with the Porte, say as to the mode in which her functionaries shall be appointed or the revenues administered, to delay that until the terms could be discussed by Parliament would, I think, be unwise. At the same time, we are glad of all the counsel we can got. We do not at all underrate the difficulties we have to contend with; in fact, it is because we know they are great, and because we are anxious to overcome them, that we ask the confidence of Parliament in our endeavour to carry out the Agreement.