§ LORD ROBERT MONTAGUasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, in regard to the following passage of the instructions of Lord Salisbury to Lord Odo Russell, dated June 8,
There is no ground for believing that Russia will willingly give way in respect to Batoum, Kars, or Ardahan; and it is possible that arguments of England urged in Congress will receive little assistance from other Powers, and will not be able to shake her resolution in this respect. You will not, on this account, abstain from earnestly pressing upon them, and upon Russia, the justice of abstaining from annexation, and the expediency, in regard to the future tranquillity of Asia, of forbearing to shake so perilously the position of the Government of Turkey,whether this passage is intended to imply that Lord Odo Russell, one of the English Plenipotentiaries, was kept in ignorance of the article of the secret agreement of May 30th between Lord Salisbury and Count Schouvaloff, by which Lord Salisbury "consented not to contest" the acquisition, by Russia, of Batoum, Kars, and Ardahan?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERSir, Lord Odo Russell, our Ambassador at Berlin, was cognizant of the confidential Correspondence which had taken place between the Government of England and Russia. I may point out to the noble Lord that the form of these instructions, which is that of an Address from the Marquess of Salisbury as Foreign Secretary to Lord Odo Russell as third Plenipotentiary, was, in fact, the most convenient form to be adopted for putting on record the instructions given by the Government at home to the Plenipotentiaries. There was no secrecy observed in the matter.
§ LORD ROBERT MONTAGUI have another Question to put to the 219 right hon. Gentleman, which is, Why a Despatch of instructions, dated June 8th, from Lord Salisbury to Lord Odo Russell, and laid before Parliament, was written in contradiction to the secret Agreement between Lord Salisbury and Count Schouvaloff dated May 30th, and which was surreptitiously obtained from the Foreign Office?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERPerhaps the noble Lord will give Notice of that Question. I may say that it seems to me that the matter is one very much better suited to argument than to the form of a Question.
§ LORD ROBERT MONTAGUI will repeat the Question to-morrow evening.
MR. C. BECKETT-DENISONasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If there is any Correspondence in the archives of the Foreign Office in connection with the Tripartite Treaty between Great Britain, France, and Austria, of 15th of April 1856, guaranteeing the independence and integrity of the Ottoman Empire, either prior to or immediately after the date of the said Treaty? The hon. Member added that if there was any such Correspondence he intended to move for it.
§ MR. BOURKESir, in reply to my hon. Friend, I have to state that there is a despatch from Lord Palmerston in the Foreign Office on this subject, giving the assent of the Cabinet to the Treaty, and discussing the form of the Treaty; but there is no despatch or other document at the Foreign Office which explains the reasons that Lord Clarendon had for proposing the Treaty, or the reasons which the Cabinet had for assenting to it.
MR. GLADSTONEasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is intended to present to Parliament a Copy of the Agreement between the Marquess of Salisbury and Count Schouvaloff, dated May 30th, 1878?
§ MR. BOURKESir Her Majesty's Government are of opinion that the Paper surreptitiously published could not be laid on the Table of the House officially by the Government unless it was accompanied by other documents which are necessary fully to explain it. These documents, however, the Government is not at liberty to publish without the consent of other Powers.
MR. GLADSTONEIf Her Majesty's Government will give me an opportunity, or if I can find one to-morrow evening, on the Motion to go into Committee of Supply, I will move for the production of that Paper.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONWith reference to the answer given by the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, I wish to ask him—or, if he is unable to answer it, perhaps some other Member of Her Majesty's Government will be able to give an answer—Whether any steps have been taken by Her Majesty's Government to obtain the consent of the other Powers to the publication of these despatches, which, as he stated, are necessary for the full explanation of the Memorandum of Agreement between Lord Salisbury and Count Schouvaloff?
§ MR. BOURKEYes, Sir; we have received an answer from one of those Powers, and we are not at liberty to furnish the document in question.