THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONSir, perhaps the House will allow me to say one word in explanation of the Question I am now about to put to the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In putting that Question, it is not in the least my desire to express any opinion whatever, with the information we possess, as to the policy which is now being pursued in Egypt; and I also wish to disclaim the slightest desire to embarrass in the smallest degree the action of Her Majesty's Government. On the contrary, I trust that the Question I am now putting, after what has occurred this evening, may not give rise to an irregular discussion. I hope that, by putting this Question, I am giving Her Majesty's Government an opportunity of making such a statement as will satisfy what, I think, is the legitimate desire of the House for information upon the matter. I hope to put them in a position to make such a statement as will enable us to postpone until what may appear to the Government a more convenient time any full discussion. I may add I did not state the other day that it was my intention to move the adjournment of the House; but only that it was possible I might do so, and, in saying that, I only wished to give the Government a fair warning of what was likely to happen if their answer was not satisfactory. I will only add, before putting the Question, that the Government will, no doubt, remember that most important events have been occurring in Egypt during the last three months, and that we have had very little information indeed with respect to what was going on, and none of that kind generally given to the House in authentic Papers. No Papers have been presented to the House since the end of December; and, in these circumstances, I think that the Government will see that it is right they should furnish to the House such information as they can. I wish to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, With what European Governments negotiations on 726 the subject of the abdication of the Khedive are in progress; whether he can state the grounds on which the recommendation to the Khedive to abdicate has been based; whether they relate to the failure of the Khedive to execute his engagements to his creditors or to Foreign States; whether any communication has taken place with the Government of the Sultan, and of what character; whether any answer has yet been received from the Khedive; and, whether the Papers relating to these transactions will shortly be laid upon the Table?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERSir, I can assure the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington) that the Government in no way whatever complain of, or express surprise at, the course which he has taken; on the contrary, we think it most natural that this Question should be asked, and we can only express our obligations to the noble Marquess, and the House generally, for the consideration they have shown in not pressing for any information at a time when the Government were obliged to say that it was inconvenient to give it. I would say that the answer which I had intended to make to the Question of the noble Marquess is, to a certain extent, modified by information which has reached us since the House met. That information is to the effect that the Khedive, Ismail Pasha, has, in obedience to orders which he has received from the Porte, abdicated in favour of his son, Prince Tewfik, and that the new Khedive, Prince Tewfik, was expected to be officially proclaimed as Khedive in Cairo this afternoon by 6 o'clock. Of course, in these circumstances, there is no longer any reason for delaying the presentation of the Papers and the discussion of the question which will be naturally raised. I believe I may say that Papers explanatory of the course which the Government has pursued will be laid upon the Table in the course of two or three days—not later, I hope, than Monday. That being so, I think it would be more convenient to the House that we should not enter into any premature discussion upon the question with the imperfect information that could be afforded by any answer that I could give. But I would say, with regard to the first part of the Question of the nobleMarquess—"With what European Governments negotia 727 tions on the subject of the abdication of the Khedive are in progress?"—that negotiations have taken place between Her Majesty's Government and all the Great Powers of Europe—France, Germany, Austria, Russia, Italy, and the Porte. "The grounds on which the recommendation to the Khedive to abdicate have been based" will be seen from the Papers that will be presented; but I may state generally, with reference to that and the next part of the Question, that the principal ground upon which that step was recommended was the misgovernment of Egypt, and the conviction of Her Majesty's Government and the other Powers that that misgovernment was not likely to be corrected under the administration of the Khedive, Ismail Pasha. Of course, from what I have now said, the next part of the Question as to reference to the Government of the Sultan is answered, and, also, whether an answer has been received from the Khedive. The abdication has taken place in obedience to orders received from the Sultan, and Prince Tewfik has, no doubt, by this time, been proclaimed.
§ MR. OTWAYI have no desire to open a discussion, now that we understand the Papers will be in our hands by Monday next; but I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman, Whether the French Government insisted that the Porte should nominate Prince Tewfik to succeed his father; and, whether the Government of Russia, as being one of the Powers with whom negotiations have been carried on, has approved the nomination of Prince Tewfik, and the stops taken to enforce it?
§ SIR JULIAN GOLDSMIDasked, Whether the Papers would explain to the House the right which the Government had to interfere, and whether the right hon. Gentleman would give the House an opportunity of discussing the subject after the Papers had been laid on the Table?
§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLasked, Whether Her Majesty's Government had recognized the power of the Porte to depose the Khedive of Egypt at its own will?
§ MR. FAWCETTThere is one part of the Question of the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Hartington) which does not seem to me to have been answered, and a reply to which will, I am sure, give considerable relief. The 728 noble Marquess asked whether the abdication of the Khedive had been recommended because of his failure to execute his engagements to his creditors or to foreign States? The Chancellor of the Exchequer did not answer that Question directly; but simply said that the recommendation was made in consequence of the misgovernment of Egypt. I should like to know, Whether the recommendation was given solely on that account, and had nothing to do with the failure of the Khedive to meet his engagements with his creditors?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERSir, with regard to the Question of the hon. Member for Rochester (Mr. Otway), I think he will see it would be inconvenient that I should state what are the views of the Government of Russia. If he waits until the Papers are presented, all that is known with regard to the action of foreign Powers will be communicated; but it is rather awkward to answer Questions with regard to the action of other States. If the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy (Sir George Campbell) will also wait until he sees the Papers and the precise way in which communications were made to the Porte, it would be more convenient. As to the respective rights of the Sultan and the Khedive, it is a delicate question, and it would be better we should not give imperfect answers which may lead to misconception, when the fullest information will be given in the Papers. With regard to the last Question of the hon. Member for Hackney (Mr. Fawcett) I should certainly say that the failure of the Khedive to execute his engagements to his creditors was not the ground on which the advice was given; but if the hon. Member asks whether the failure of the Khedive to execute his engagements to his creditors had anything to do with these proceedings, of course, it would be impossible not to say that part of the case which induced the Government to take these proceedings was the fact of the great complications which have arisen between the Khedive and his creditors. His arrangements had not proved successful, and considerable oppression had been brought to bear on the taxpayers of Egypt as the result of these complications with his creditors; and, moreover, still further complications were likely to arise owing to the judicial decisions in relation to his cre- 729 ditors. Therefore, it is impossible to say that the failure of the Khedive to execute his engagements to his creditors had nothing to do with the steps which have been taken; but, still, it would be incorrect to say that that was the reason of the action of the Government.
§ MR. OTWAYsaid, the Question he asked was a most important one, and he submitted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not answered it. His Question had reference to the action of Her Majesty's Government, and he would repeat it, and, in doing so, perhaps he might be permitted to explain that this was the first instance—if the Question was answered in the affirmative —in which any European Government had endeavoured to alter the Mohammedan law of succession in a Mohammedan country. ["Order, order!"] The Question was an important one, and if ho was interrupted he would do that which he should be sorry to do, and which he had never done in his life—move the adjournment of the House. ["Oh, oh!"] His explanation was necessary to make the answer intelligible. He, therefore, wished to know, Whether the Government had urged on the Porte and insisted that Prince Tewfik should succeed, instead of the legitimate heir according to Mohammedan Law?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERI do not understand that the law of succession with regard to Mohammedan Governments has been altered. I may say that there was no pressure put by Her Majesty's Government upon the Porte to alter the law of succession; but it is a matter of such delicacy that I think it is far better for the hon. Gentleman and the House to await the publication of the official despatches than to enter on a discussion which would be misleading in the absence of those documents.
§ SIR JULIAN GOLDSMIDasked, Whether the Government would give the House an early opportunity of considering the question after the presentation of the Papers?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, if the House, after receiving the Papers, should desire an opportunity of expressing their opinion upon them, there would be no objection on the part of the Government to provide a convenient day for the purpose. Indeed, it would be their duty to do so.