§ BARON HENRY DE WORMSasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the assurance given by Her Majesty's Government that there is no apprehension at all of danger to General Gordon and the other Englishmen at Khartoum, it is a fact that General Gordon has requested Her Majesty's Consular Agent and Colonel Stewart to leave Khartoum, that measure being essential for their safety, and has stated that the only means of doing so would be by Equatorial Africa and the Congo?
MR. GLADSTONEWith regard to the particulars enumerated in this Question, none of them are accurately stated, although, no doubt, they are the result of the best information at the hon. Member's command. He asks whether it is a fact that General Gordon has requested Her Majesty's Consular Agent and Colonel Stewart to leave Khartoum. It is not a fact. Then he asks whether General Gordon gave as a reason that that measure was essential for their safety. That is not a fact; and it is not a fact that General Gordon stated that the only means of leaving Khartoum would be by Equatorial Africa and the Congo. This Question not being accurately framed, I would prefer to leave the matter there and refer the hon. Member to telegrams which will be 474 faithfully given to the House in the course of a very few days, and from which he will be able to form a much better judgment than I can convey to him across this Table. The hon. Member should observe, and the House should observe, that while we have reason to believe, through Sir Evelyn Baring, that General Gordon is not in receipt of some of our papers, and, indeed, of important telegrams of ours, on the other hand we have no reason to know that we are in receipt of all the telegrams that he has sent. For that reason, perhaps, it is that certain telegrams, particularly the telegram which the hon. Member has in mind, have to the Government an isolated appearance, and do not carry with them the full and precise signification of the documents now in our hands. I would, therefore, prefer that the hon. Member should wait for a short time until he can form his own opinion of the purport of the telegram, in which General Gordon certainly left it quite open to Colonel Stewart and the Consular Agent to leave Khartoum.
§ BARON HENRY DE WORMSasked when the Papers would be produced, and whether they would contain the telegrams referred to.
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI have said that I hope to lay before the House the Papers containing the telegrams early next week.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFMay I ask whether it is the intention of the Government to include in the Blue Book telegrams which have been sent to General Gordon, which they think he has not received?
MR. GLADSTONEWe shall not exclude them. The hon. Member will understand we shall be obliged to present the Blue Book with a degree of uncertainty as to what telegrams General Gordon has received, and the same degree of uncertainty as to the telegrams sent to ourselves; but we certainly will not withhold them.
§ BARON HENRY DE WORMSThe Prime Minister refers to a telegram as an isolated one. Would he lay it before the House at once?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThat Question was answered the other day. It is impossible to lay isolated telegrams on the Table. They would only mislead the House. As the Papers 475 will be ready next week, I think the House would prefer, when it has information, to have full information.
§ COLONEL KING-HARMANMay I ask who is responsible for the extreme delay in printing a few telegrams and a small number of despatches?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI cannot admit that there is, or has been, any delay, or that the information to be supplied is likely to be very small. I cannot see how the hon. and gallant Member can know anything about it, as he has not seen the Papers.
§ MR. BOURKEasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the fact that the inhabitants of Berber and Khartoum, under the impression that no relief is to be sent to them, may, in despair, submit themselves to the Mahdi, it is advisable to announce that a relief expedition will be sent as soon as the Military authorities think it feasible?
MR. GLADSTONEIn answering this Question I must carefully divide the two cases with which it deals conjointly, the cases of Berber and Khartoum. They are not, in our view, similar in a material respect. With regard to the case of Berber, we have already stated to the House that that place is, to all appearance, in danger. We have received communications with respect to its condition from Egypt, and we have made our reply to those communications; but we do not think it would be conducive to any of the interests involved to make any statement either as to the communications received, or the communications sent in reply—that is, as regards Berber. With respect to Khartoum the case stands thus. We see no reason to modify, in any respect, the statements previously made, that there is no military or other danger now threatening Khartoum. I will not refer to the speech of my noble Friend (the Marquess of Hartington), which was made almost immediately after the beginning of the Session, and which referred prospectively to the state of things before us. At the time it was quite natural to suppose that those who went to Khartoum might go into a position of peril; but I speak for my noble Friend and myself, according to the knowledge which we possess, and which the House will possess, I hope, in the course of three or four days, when we say that there is no military or other danger threatening Khartoum. The 476 Question assumes that there is danger and apprehension respecting Khartoum at the present time, and the right hon. Gentleman asks me whether it is advisable to announce that a relief expedition will be sent as soon as the military authorities think it feasible. I do not complain of that Question, and before Notice of it had been given by the right hon. Gentleman the matter had had our careful consideration. What we conceive to be the case is this—that the country feels a profound interest, and likewise a strong sense of obligation dependent upon it, with regard to the safety of General Gordon. That feeling of interest and that strong sense of obligation with regard to the safety of that gallant and heroic officer Her Majesty's Government have fully shared from the very first, and they have been careful to put themselves in a position to fulfil this obligation in the sense in which they believe the country, in common with themselves, recognize it. Having made that statement, which I hope is sufficiently explicit and significant, it would not be possible, consistently with my public duty, to enter upon any further explanations.
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLMay I ask the Prime Minister if he can inform the House whether the garrison of Berber is in peril of being taken by the Arab tribes acting under the orders of the Mahdi, and subjected to the same fate as the garrison of Sinkat was subjected to? I wish also to ask whether the Government can say what information they have with regard to Berber? And further—and this, I admit, is rather a hypothetical Question—if the garrison of Berber were to fall, whether the position of General Gordon would not become one of imminent peril?
MR. GLADSTONEI understand the noble Lord to ask whether, if Berber were to fall into the hands of the tribes around it, the position of General Gordon would not then become one of peril. We believe, according to all the information we possess, that there would be no essential change in the position of Khartoum in consequence of that change in the position of Berber. With respect to the important matter in the first part of the Question, we have no reason to believe that there is any risk at Berber of any such catastrophe as unfortunately happened at Sinkat.
§ MR. BOURKEWith reference to the last part of the answer of the right hon. Gentleman, may I ask him whether it is true that the Council of Ministers at Cairo yesterday decided that it was necessary to send an expedition, half English, I think it was, and half Egyptian, to Berber?
MR. GLADSTONEI must make two replies to what has been said by the right hon. Gentleman. The statement which he has embodied in the form of a Question, as far as my knowledge goes —and I think my knowledge is pretty direct and accurate—is widely apart from the fact. Secondly, I must refer him to the answer I have already made —namely, that I think that for us to describe the communications made from Egypt, or the replies we have made to those communications, would be prejudicial to the interests involved.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTsaid, when the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs answered his Question with respect to Berber, he stated the Prime Minister would deal with it in his reply; but the Prime Minister had not answered one point in his Question. He wished to know whether it was true that a telegram had been received by Sir Evelyn Baring from General Gordon, in which General Gordon had expressed his utmost indignation at the manner in which he had been abandoned by the English Government. He would also ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he still adhered to the statement he made yesterday with regard to the comparatively valueless character of Mr. Power's information, based on the alleged fact that he was merely a Consular Agent at Khartoum?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEsaid, he had answered the latter part of the hon. Member's Question by stating that full information would be given in the Blue Book, which would be laid on the Table early next week, while as to the former part he could say at once that the hon. Member's information was incorrect.
§ SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTI wish to ask the Prime Minister a Question, because I think in the answer he has given the country will hardly understand what the Government are going to do. I wish to ask the Prime Minister a plain Question—Whether the Government have made up their minds, while 478 there is still time, to endeavour to relieve, not only the garrison of Berber, but the 2,000 women and children who had been sent from Khartoum, and are now in Berber?
MR. GLADSTONEI am sorry the hon. and gallant Baronet should have put a Question which I have already answered in the most explicit terms by saying that we have received a communication with respect to the condition of Berber and have replied, but that it would not be conducive to the interests of those concerned that we should state the nature either of the communications or the reply.
§ BARON HENRY DE WORMSasked whether the noble Lord the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs could inform the House how many women and children who had left Shendy had been massacred?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICENo further information has come upon that subject. As I stated the other day, the only information we have was that sent by M. Cuzzi, General Gordon's agent at Berber, and his words were that they were believed to have been massacred.
§ MR. ONSLOWasked when it would not be detrimental to the public interest to give the information to which the right hon. Gentleman had alluded?
MR. GLADSTONEWhen it will not be detrimental to the interests involved, it will be our duty to give the information.
§ SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEI am afraid the question which is uppermost in everybody's mind has not been fully answered. It is this—Is it, or is it not, the intention of Her Majesty's Government to send an expedition or otherwise to protect and relieve General Gordon?
MR. GLADSTONEThat Question involves interests of a wider scope than perhaps the right hon. Gentleman intends, when he asks, Is it the intention of Her Majesty's Government to send an expedition to protect and relieve General Gordon—[Cries of"Or otherwise!"]
§ SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEI said "or otherwise to relieve" him.
MR. GLADSTONEWell, what I have said is this distinctly. We believe the country recognizes an obligation with respect to the safety of General 479 Gordon, and we have ourselves fully recognized, and do recognize, that obligation, and, recognizing it, it is our duty and care to put ourselves in a condition to fulfil it should the occasion arise. Beyond that it would be contrary to my functions to go.