THE EARL OF BECTIVEasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If he is aware that Count de Camondo entered into negotiations for the purchase of an estate in Tunis from Ben Ayad, a British subject, and that he was induced to do so by its being contemplated to sell to Baron Gustavus Rothschild another estate of Ben Ayad's in the vicinity; if he is aware that Baron Rothschild retired from the negotiations for political reasons; but that, on the conditions of sale having been settled with Count de Camondo, M. Roustan stated that no real property in Tunis could be sold without his consent; and, if Her Majesty's Government will draw the attention of the French Government to this gross violation by M. Roustan of the British Conventions of 1863 and 1875, which the French Government have promised to respect? The noble Earl said that on the 13th of June he asked a similar Question to this, and received a very unsatisfactory answer, the hon. Baronet the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs insinuating that he (the Earl of Bective) had not sufficiently investigated the facts. He had been, therefore, compelled to repeat the Question, because he had received information which confirmed him in the opinion that the facts were based on sufficiently trustworthy grounds. [Cries of "Order!"]
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL (to the noble Earl)Move the adjournment of the House.
§ MR. SPEAKERThe noble Earl is entering on a debate on a matter of controversy, and is not confining himself to the explanation of the Question.
THE EARL OF BECTIVEI do not wish to move the adjournment of the House; but will satisfy myself by simply putting the Question.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE,in reply, said, he was very sorry if he had said anything to hurt the feelings of the noble Earl; but on the former occasion, perhaps, he did insinuate that the noble Earl had been imposed upon in putting the Question, and he feared that was still the case. The most careful inquiry had failed to satisfy him (Sir Charles W. Dilke) of the truth of the facts of the case. M. Roustan had stated that there was no foundation what- 856 ever for the story, as far as he was concerned; and M. Gustav de Rothschild informed him that there was no ground for the use of his name. He really thought the noble Earl had been imposed upon.
THE EARL OF BECTIVEsaid, the hon. Baronet had not answered his inquiries in the least. Had he communicated with Count de Camondo?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE,in reply, said, he communicated, with reference to the Question, with Mr. Reade, at Tunis, and he said that he was informed by M. Roustan that there was no foundation for the story as far as he was concerned; and, in addition to that, he had received a private letter from M. de Rothschild, who also disavowed any knowledge of the matter. He knew nothing about Count Camondo, or where he was to be found. He had invited the noble Earl to give him any facts he might possess, in order that further inquiries might be made; but that he had failed to do.