§ MR. CALLANasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he can submit to the House the calculation which the Bight honourable Member for Ripon, about October 1876, showed to the Khedive, purporting to demonstrate that the application to the reduction of the Egyptian Debt of the yearly proceeds of the Moukabala; viz., £1,500,000 yearly for nine years, would reduce said debt from £90,000,000 to £35,000,000, i.e. by the year 1885; whether it is not the fact that, though said proceeds of the Moukabala were duly applied to the reduction of said debt, it was never appreciably reduced at all; and, whether, in fact, the said calculation did not show the foresaid favourable result by omitting altogether from the account of the necessary charges against the Re-venue, both the principal of the floating debt amounting to (say) £20,000,000, and the interest thereon at about £25 per cent., which the Khedive had to pay to keep it floating?
MR. GLADSTONEI may answer this Question very briefly, to the effect that all the facts bearing upon this question are, I believe, contained in a document before the House.
§ MR. GOSCHENI wish, by the kind indulgence of the House, to be permitted to answer the Question in further detail. If this calculation submitted to the Khedive is not in the hands of the Government, it can easily be obtained by reference to the archives in Egypt; and, if not, I shall be happy to place my copy, if I can find it, in the hands of the Government, to make such use of it in the matter of publicity as they may think fit. The document is falsely described in the Question as—
Purporting to demonstrate that the application to the reduction of the Egyptian Debt of the yearly proceeds of the Moukabala would reduce the debt from £90,000,000 to £35,000,000.The fact is that the document did not deal with the sum of £90,000,000, but 403 with £59,000,000, and the error in the Question is only one of £31,000,000. In the next place, the Question suggests that the reduction of the Debt was to be obtained only by the yearly application of £1,500,000, as representing the Moukabala, the fact being, on the contrary, that the Moukabala is only to be applied in part for this purpose. The main Sinking Fund for the extinction of the Debt was to be obtained by the reduction of the interest on the Debt from 7 to 6 per cent, the difference of 1 per cent on the nominal amount being added to the Moukabala to create the Sinking Fund. The hon. Member then asks whether, notwithstanding the application of the Moukabala, the Debt was appreciably reduced at all? During the two years during which the Decree in question was in force the aggregate reduction of the Funded Debt, Unified and Short Loans together, was £5,000,000. Whether that was an appreciable amount or not I leave to the House to judge. Lastly, I am asked—Whether the said calculation did not show the foresaid favourable result by omitting altogether from the account of the necessary charges against the Revenue both the principal of the Floating—say, £20,000,000—Debt and the interest thereon?Again, the Question suggests the very contrary of the fact. It was the consolidation of the largo Floating Debt of upwards of £20,000,000 which led to the whole re-arrangement of the Debt in 1876, and the Floating Debt of £20,000,000 is included and not excluded from the £59,000,000 of the Unified Debt. I trust I have answered this Question clearly and categorically. I would conclude by asking whether it is fair that Questions of this nature, suggesting the grossest laches on the part of an hon. Member of this House, should be put without such reference to the original document as would show that such suggestions are baseless?
MR. T. P. O'GONNORasked whether the Prime Minister, in accordance with the advice of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Courtney), that the bondholders should pay a portion of the War Debt they had done so much to create, would recommend the Khedive to reduce the sums payable to the bondholders represented by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ripon?
§ MR. GOSCHENPerhaps I may at once repudiate the suggestion which the hon. Member makes, that I am a representative of the bondholders. I undertook an honorary mission in 1876. My connection with the bondholders was closed shortly after, and I no more represent the bondholders than any other Member of this House.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, he did not say that the right hon. Gentleman represented the bondholders now, but when he went to Egypt.
§ MR. O'DONNELLasked whether the Prime Minister would grant facilities for the discussion of the circumstances under which the arrangement of 1876 was concluded; and, in particular, for the discussion of the manner in which the Finance Minister of Egypt disappeared during the negotiations between the Khedive and the representatives of the bondholders?
MR. GLADSTONENo, Sir; I do not think the granting of those facilities, as far as they depend upon the Government, would be desired by the House, or would be advantageous.