§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in the autumn of last year, addressed a letter to Mr. Errington, intended to be shown to Cardinal Jacobini, and designating Mr. Errington as a gentleman through whom confidential communications could be made on public affairs to Her Majesty's Secretary of State, or containing words to that effect; whether, in acknowledging this letter in a reply intended to be shown to Lord Granville, Cardinal Jacobini declared himself ready to confer with Mr. Errington as the recommended agent (agente raccomandato) of the British Government; whether, since then, Mr. Errington has been the channel of communication between Lord Granville and Cardinal Jacobini; and, whether, if so, Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs will, according to constitutional practice, place on record in the Foreign Office his letter to Mr. Errington, and any other correspondence with that gentleman on the subject of his communications with the Vatican, and lay them upon the Table? The hon. Member said, that since his Question had been put on the Paper, he found that the letter of Cardinal Jacobini was written before the letter of Lord Granville to Mr. Errington.
MR. GLADSTONEThe House is aware that it is contrary to the usage of Parliament—there may be exceptions, but they are exceedingly rare—to produce or lay upon the Table Correspondence or a single letter which are not of an official or diplomatic character. That being so, the question is open to another Parliamentary objection upon the details of such Correspondence, because it is well known that the House takes objection—it is an established rule to take objection—to accounts given by Ministers of public documents, which they were not prepared to produce. I am afraid, therefore, I have no course but to decline to go further than the statement already made by my hon. Friend near me (Sir Charles W. Dilke) on this subject; but I will endeavour to convey to the mind of the hon. Member, with perfect clearness, the nature and the aim of such communications as have taken place between 641 Lord Granville and Mr. Errington. I will not enter into the subject as to whether this question is accurate or inaccurate in all its statements—because there are both. It has been said by my hon. Friend near me, as I shall state in the most distinct terms, not only that there has been no appointing of Mr. Erring-ton, and, of course, no remuneration, but that there have been no negotiations with Mr. Errington, no proposal made to him, and no request tendered to Mr. Errington. The purport of any intercourse with Lord Granville by Mr. Errington has been exclusively with reference to his being a channel or medium of information. Mr. Errington is not exclusively the medium of information, because on any occasion of any other gentleman as well qualified as Mr. Errington by character and intelligence to convey just and accurate information to Rome, Lord Granville might, in the same manner, have been induced to think it well to supply him. or permit him to be supplied, with information of that character. The purpose has been entirely to convey information, and information upon matters interesting to the Roman Catholic subjects of Her Majesty and naturally, as connected with them, to the public at large. That is the purpose, aim, and limit of these communications; and I may say that the journey of Lord O'Hagan to Rome, which was, like Mr. Errington's, a private journey, taken entirely on his own motion, might as well have been made the subject of a Parliamentary inquiry as that' of Mr. Errington. It was a journey for private objects, with which we had nothing to do; but, with respect to the journey, we did think it useful—and we do think it useful—that many matters of great interest with respect to the question of the Roman Catholic subjects of Her Majesty should be made known at Rome in conjunction with the very best information that is to be had on the subject.