§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to enforce the fulfilment of those provisions of the Treaty of Berlin which ensure justice to Turkey and to the Mussulman population equally with those provisions which deprive the Ottoman Empire of portions of its territory; whether Her Majesty's Government will enforce the establishment of Batoum as a free port and the demolition of the new Russian fortifications, the removal of the Russo-Bulgarian flotilla from the Danube, the dismissal of Russian officers and soldiers from the Bulgarian forces, the demolition of the fortresses in Bulgaria, especially of Schunla, Varna, Rustchuk, and Silestria, the garrisonry of the Balkans by Ottoman troops; and, whether Her Majesty's Government will take effectual measures to restore the remnant of the Mussulman population of Bulgaria and of Eastern Roumelia to their homes and property, and to secure adequate protection for their persons and property?
MR.GLADSTONESir, I hope the hon. Gentleman, as he has only very recently entered this House, will excuse me if I suggest to him a change in the method of framing his Questions. It is very inconvenient to the House that a Minister who has to answer a Question should, instead of giving a direct and simple answer, be compelled to enter into explanations for the purpose of obviating inferences which otherwise must necessarily be drawn. In answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's Question, I have to say that Her Majesty's Government have never made any declaration whatever about enforcing any of the provisions of the Treaty of Berlin.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTI am quite willing to substitute the words "press for," in the place of "enforce."
MR. GLADSTONEIt is undoubtedly our intention to proceed with perfect impartiality as between Turkey and Russia, as between the Mussulman and Christian populations in regard to the provisions of the Treaty of Berlin. In the second paragraph of his Question, the hon. Member enumerates various particulars with regard to which I am not cognizant of the facts. There has been up to the 298 present time nothing like a violation of the Treaty of Berlin. No intelligence has reached me to the effect that Batoum is not established as a free port. I know nothing on the subject. It is our intention, with regard to the whole of these subjects, to adhere, as far as we are able, both in the letter and in the spirit, to the Treaty of Berlin. There is one point, I believe, provided for by the Treaty of Berlin with regard to the demolition of fortresses. That is a matter of some expense and difficulty, and there may be some pleas for time, which itself, in some respects, does the work of demolition. At the same time, I agree that the provisions of the Treaty of Berlin ought to be faithfully and fully carried out in that respect. As regards the last paragraph of the Question, I have to say that it is the business of the Turkish Government to send back to Eastern Roumelia and to Bulgaria the refugees whom, most unhappily, during the war the Turkish Government used the strongest measures to remove from the country. If Her Majesty's Government learn that the return of these refugees is unduly obstructed or resisted by the Governments of Bulgaria or Eastern Roumelia when they are duly sent back with proper provisions for their establishment, undoubtedly it will be the duty of the Government to use their best exertions to procure their return and their equitable treatment.
MR. J. COWENSir, the announcement just made by the right hon. Gentleman, that the Government would insist upon the Treaty of Berlin being carried out irrespective of nationalities and creeds, must have been received by the House with satisfaction. Now, I wish to ask this Question. Her Majesty's Government, with the other Powers of Europe at the Conference now sitting, are seeking to extend the territory of Greece and to confirm the boundaries of Montenegro. In doing so, they must necessarily encroach upon the nationality of Albania; and I should like to learn from the right hon. Gentleman whether the Government are prepared, in seeking to extend the territories of the Greeks and Montenegrins, to pay due regard to as distinct and as noble a State as now exists in Europe, and which has nothing in common in blood, language, or manners with its neighbours? ["Order!"1 I was only stating enough to explain my 299 Question. I simply wish to ask, Whether, in seeking to extend Montenegrin territory in the north and Greek territory in the south, regard will be had to the nationality in the centre?
MR. GLADSTONESir, I think the Question and criticism of the hon. Member really amounts to this—whether, in my answer to the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Ashmead-Bartlett), I meant what I said, or did not. Of course, if I meant what I said, we are bound to have the same fair regard to all the facts of the case, and to the element of nationality and to the peculiar circumstances of Albania, as we should do in reference to any other portion of territory.