§ BARON HENRY DE WORMSasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether Her Majesty's Government, by signing the "protocole de désintéressement," precluded itself from landing at Alexandria, immediately after the bombardment commenced, sufficient troops to prevent the terrible destruction of life and property which followed?
MR. GLADSTONEThis is a question upon a matter of opinion rather than a matter of fact; at the same time, it is a matter of opinion on which the House is entitled to be informed, and which is of considerable interest; therefore, I will state briefly the view the Government have taken generally on the subject of the instructions which they gave—the contingent instructions—for the bombardment. We founded that act entirely upon the principle of self-defence. Undoubtedly it is quite arguable that that principle might have justified any measure to provide against any probable or natural consequences of that bombardment. But it is not arguable, in our opinion, that it was a natural or probable consequence of the bombardment by the Fleet that an army estimated to number from 10,000 to 15,000 men should evacuate and burn and pillage the town. Our distinct judgment is this—and this is, I think, a substantial answer to the Question—that preparations adequate to cope with that army would most certainly not have been allowable under the instrument which is called the "self-denying" Protocol, or the Protocole de Désintéressement.
§ SIR HENRY TYLERasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he will state the present position of the Khedive of Egypt; and, whether he is now considered to be the virtual ruler of that Country; and, if so, as far as the public interest will allow, what steps are being taken to consolidate the Khedive's authority, and generally to enforce law and order, and to restore public confidence in that Country?
MR. GLADSTONEI do not think I can add anything to the information already given to the House by the telegrams. I am not quite sure that I know what is meant by the phrase "the vir- 719 tual ruler of that country." In the view of Her Majesty's Government the Khedive has been ruler of the country de jure all along, and he is now in a certain very limited measure ruler de facto, but only in a very limited measure; and all the steps taken to consolidate his authority, to enforce law and order, and to restore public confidence are really the substance of the questions which have been referred to the Conference at Constantinople, and with respect to which the Conference is now actively engaged?
§ SIR HENRY TYLERI ask whether the Government mean to take active steps to restore law and authority without waiting for the decision of the Conference?
§ [No reply was given to the Question.]
§ MR. BOURKEwished to ask the Prime Minister a Question arising out of the reply given by him to the hon. Member for Greenwich. Did the Government consider the Self-denying Protocol to be still in existence after the events in Alexandria; and what was the view taken by the Government of those events in relation to that Protocol?
MR. GLADSTONECertainly, in the view of Her Majesty's Government, that Protocol is in existence at the present moment, and is in no degree impaired by the action of Her Majesty's Fleet on Tuesday last at Alexandria.
MR. GORSTIn the absence of any Notice of Motion from any other Member of the House relating to recent events, I beg to give Notice that I shall, on the earliest possible occasion, move the following Resolution:—
That the failure of Her Majesty's Government to avert the pillage and destruction by fire of the city of Alexandria, consequent on the collapse of the de facto Egyptian authorities during the bombardment of the forts, earnestly demands the censure of the Imperial Parliament.
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLasked the Prime Minister, Whether, in view of the deplorable events alluded to by the Motion of which his hon. and learned Friend the Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorst) had given Notice, and the imperative necessity that the Government should, if possible, without loss of time obtain some indemnification from the House of Commons, he would arrange for the discussion of that Motion imme- 720 diately after the conclusion of the debates on the Arrears of Rent Bill?
MR. GLADSTONEI am glad to see the noble Lord sufficiently recovered to ask Questions; but the Question put by him is unusual, as coming from an individual Member of the House, and would be more usual if it came from some Gentleman speaking on behalf of the great body of hon. Members opposite. I may remind the noble Lord that we are under engagement to propose Committee of Supply shortly, which probably may afford some opportunity to individual Members for the expression of their opinions; but I am not prepared, as at present advised, to say that immediately after the discussion on the Arrears of Rent Bill we will proceed to make arrangements for discussing the Motion of the hon. and learned Member for Chatham.