§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the assent of the Sovereign of Egypt and of the other Great Powers has been obtained to the course of political intervention which the Government stated to have been agreed upon between France and England; and, if not, whether he can give the reasons? He did not refer to the despatch of the Fleet to Alexandria, but to the ulterior course of action that had been agreed upon.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEHer Majesty's Government are very anxious to give all information in their power with, regard to the affairs of Egypt, in order to put an end to the conflicting rumours which prevail on the subject. They do not, however, consider that it is for the public advantage to add at the present moment anything to the statements which were made in Parliament on Monday last. But they continue to entertain the favourable opinion and confident hopes which they then expressed in both Houses. With reference to the explanation given by the hon. Member of this Question, and to the Notice given publicly just now by my hon. Friend the junior Member for Greenwich (Baron Henry de Worms) as to an agreement between the Government and the Government of France as to what have been called eventualities, I stated on Monday last that such an agreement had been come to. With regard to the second portion of the Question just given, I fear I shall not be able to reply to it on Thursday next, or to lay the agreement before Parliament.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTasked if the assent of the Porte had been obtained?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, he would not be justified in answering that Question either in the affirmative or in the negative. He had already stated that, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, it would not be conducive to the interests of the Public Service that any further statements should be made at the present time, although they maintained the confident hope expressed by them on Monday last.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURasked if it was consistent with the public interests that the Government should state whether it was true that all the points in the Suez Canal were in the occupation of French gunboats?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that the report was not true.
§ MR. O'DONNELLinquired, in reference to a statement made in the House on Monday last that the measures of the Government would obtain the support of the Porte, whether it was true that the Porte had protested against the action of Her Majesty's Government?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, he had already stated that Her Majesty's 1260 Government entertained the belief which they stated on Monday last—namely, that the measures they proposed would be satisfactory to the Porte.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFasked whether Her Majesty's Government had taken steps to secure the safety and freedom of the traffic through the Suez Canal?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, it would not be right to say more than that the subject was receiving the earnest attention of Her Majesty's Government.
§ MR. ONSLOWasked whether the same instructions had been given as were given to the Naval Demonstration at Dulcigno—namely, that under no circumstances was a shot to be fired?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, no such instructions were given in the Dulcigno case.