§ MR. E. JENKINSasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether there is any truth in the report, stated to have come from the Mediterranean Fleet, that orders sent to the Fleet on or about January 23rd were to the effect that if the Turks refused to allow the Fleet to pass, the Fleet were to "silence the forts and fight their way up;" whether it is true that ac- 1622 cordingly preparations were made by the Admiral and orders issued for that purpose; and, whether as a matter of fact any orders were sent to the Admiral commanding supplementary to those read by the Eight honourable Gentleman to the House on the 28th of January?
§ MR. W. H. SMITHIt is the wish of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer that I should answer the Question, as it falls within my Department. I produced to the House the orders which were given to Admiral Hornby on the 23rd, and I trust I shall not be deemed guilty of discourtesy to the hon. Member or any Member of this House if I state that I do not think it to be consistent with my duty, under the present circumstances, to answer a Question of such a character as that which the hon. Member has addressed to me.
§ MR. E. JENKINSI beg to give Notice that in consequence of the Answer of the right hon. Gentleman, I shall repeat the Question to-morrow, with this addition—
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, What construction is to he placed upon his statement made in this House on the 28th January before reading to the House the instructions sent to the Fleet?—' It has already been stated by the Prime Minister that the Government have ordered a communication to be made not only to the Russian Government, hut also to the other European Governments, as to the object for which the Fleet is to be sent. As to the manner in which the Fleet is to be employed, I will read the telegram sent to Admiral Hornby.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it is in his power to give any information to the House with reference to the movements of the Mediterranean Fleet, and also with reference to the negotiations with the Porte on the subject of the passage of the Fleet through the Dardanelles, which, I believe, he stated on Monday last were in progress?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERI stated—I think, or, at all events, referred on Monday last to the fact—that communications had been made to the Porte to ascertain whether permission would be given, or a firman be granted, for the British Fleet to enter the Dardanelles. That permission was refused; but Her Majesty's Govern- 1623 ment thought it right to direct the ships to proceed, and they have proceeded accordingly. The Governor of the Straits protested against their passing; but, in compliance with their orders, the ships passed on. No material opposition was offered, and they are by this time, I presume, anchored in the neighbourhood of Constantinople. I may, perhaps, mention that a communication has been made by the Russian Government to the effect that, in view of the intended sending of the Meet by Her Majesty's Government to the neighbourhood of Constantinople, it would be a matter for the consideration of the Russian Government whether they should not themselves occupy the city. In answer to that Her Majesty's Government have sent a communication, which will be laid on the Table of the House to-night, in which they protest against that view, and state that they cannot acknowledge that in the case of the two countries the circumstances are parallel, or that the despatch of the British Meet for the purpose indicated justifies the Russian Government in the step which they announce it to be their intention to take.
§ SIR LAWRENCE PALKasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether Her Majesty's Government adhere to their repeated declarations to the effect that this country would not view with indifference even a temporary occupation of Constantinople by the Russian troops; and, whether Her Majesty's Government has given it to be distinctly understood by the Russian Government that they cannot admit in any way the validity of the alleged protest against the entry of the British Fleet into the Bosphorus as absolving the Russian Government from its promises and pledges on the subject?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERSir, I think that the Answer I have just given to the noble Lord is practically a reply to the Question of the hon. Baronet. The Government, of course, adhere to the declarations they have made.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONPerhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be able to state whether any other European Power has sent any ships to the neighbourhood of Constantinople; or if he is aware whether it is the intention of any other Power to do so?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERNo other Power has at present sent any of its ships. I am not in a position absolutely to state what the intentions of the other Powers are. It will be more convenient to state that to-morrow.
§ MR. LOWEThe right hon. Gentle: man stated that no "material" opposition was offered to the Fleet passing through the Dardanelles. I wish he would, if it is convenient, explain the meaning of that phrase, and state what opposition was offered?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERSir, I am sorry if I used a wrong epithet. What I meant was that nothing in the way of force was used, but that simply a protest was made—a verbal protest on the part of the Governor of the Dardanelles.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKECan the right hon. Gentleman inform the House whether the lines of Gallipoli were included within the neutral zone?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERSir, we have no information on the subject.