§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Government have received any confirmation of the statement that the Mahdi has advanced to Khartoum, and that his adherents are in possession of Abu Hamed and of the wells at Murad; what is the position of Berber at the present time; and, whether any recent intelligence has been received from Sir William Hewett?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThe rumour that the Mahdi has gone to Khartoum has reached Her Majesty's Government; but they have no confirmation of it. The rebels are said to be in force at Abu Hamad; but though they are still to the east of Murad, Major Kitchener has reason to believe that the desert will soon be clear of them, and he proposes to go there himself. This news is dated yesterday. Berber is said to be still invested; but the accounts vary, some representing it as closely besieged, others giving an opposite account. The news of Admiral Hewett is satisfactory. A message from him was received at Massowah on the 26th ultimo, dated the 18th from Adowa, the capital of the King of Abyssinia. The mission had been well received, but the King's arrival had been delayed owing to his illness. He was expected about the 20th. The Admiral thought the negotiations with him would be successful, and that he will be able to arrange with him for the relief of Kassala.
MR. J. LOWTHERAm I to understand the noble Lord to say that what he has read from Major Kitchener is of more recent date than what appeared in the morning papers of yesterday, with regard to which he required Notice? Is that statement correct? That portion of Major Kitchener's Report, of which the noble Lord, strange to say, was ignorant, was to the effect that the Mahdi was reported to have gone to Khartoum or its neighbourhood, and that the fall of that place was shortly expected. Did Major Kitchener, in the Report now referred to by the noble Lord, corroborate or qualify that statement?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThe account I have just read was received later. It arrived at the Foreign Office at the same moment as the right hon. Gentleman was putting a Question on this subject yesterday. I have, therefore, no doubt it was of later date, but I have not the telegram here.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTThe noble Lord will, perhaps, remember that we have had no authentic communication with Berber for a long time, and I would ask him whether, from his reply, we are to understand that the Governor of Berber and a portion of the garrison are still holding out?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICECertainly. The accounts which we have at the Foreign Office would lead us to suppose that they are holding out.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTIs the Murad mentioned in the Question the Murad 400 miles north of Korosko?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEYes, Sir; the hon. Member correctly describes it. I understand it to be a place situated between Abu Hamad and Korosko, and about half-way from each.
§ MR. GIBSONasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If he would state to the House what is the date of the last communication received from General Gordon; have the Government received tidings that any messenger has succeeded in carrying their despatch of 23rdApril to Khartoum; and, what is the date of the last despatch sent to General Gordon?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThe date of the last communication from General Gordon, as I have already stated, was April 10. On the 22nd of May, Mr. Egerton telegraphed that the Mudir of Dongola thought a messenger to Gordon had entered Khartoum, but could not leave it. The date of the last despatch to General Gordon from Cairo is May 21st.
§ MR. ARTHUR ARNOLDHave Her Majesty's Government any information as to the report that General Gordon has left Khartoum?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICENo; the report which appeared in the papers this morning has not been received at the Foreign Office.
MR. J. LOWTHERI have not received any answer to the Question I have put—Whether Major Kitchener in his 1684 later Report qualifies in any way the statement made in the previous Report that the fall of Khartoum is shortly expected?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEIn the telegram to which the right hon. Gentleman refers there is no allusion to the subject at all. The right hon. Gentleman alluded yesterday and to-day to the report which he has read in the papers, purporting to give an account which had arrived at Cairo from Major Kitchener. I cannot undertake, without verifying each one of the statements which, according to the right hon. Gentleman, is contained in the telegram, to assume the accuracy of every statement contained in the report. If the right hon. Gentleman wishes for information upon any specific point, I shall be perfectly willing to give the information if he will put a Question on the Paper, and call my attention to the specific points.
MR. J. LOWTHEREvents pass so rapidly that it is absurd to give Notice. But what I want to know is whether the so-called Report of Major Kitchener which appeared in yesterday's papers is authentic?
§ MR. GIBSONWith reference to the answer to my Question, I understood the noble Lord to say that he had no means of knowing whether the Government despatch of the 23rd of April had reached Khartoum beyond the statement, not of a very clear character, contained in the despatch of the 22nd of May. Are we to understand that the date of the last despatch sent by the Government to General Gordon was the 21st of May?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEWhat I said was that the day on which it was sent was the 21st of May, and that is the important question. Naturally it would be a matter of calculating days, not from the date of the actual despatch, but from the day the messenger started.
§ MR. GIBSONI assume that the despatch of the Government on the 21st of May was the first despatch sent after the 23rd of April. Is that so, or was there any intervening despatch; and can the noble Lord say whether the despatch sent on the 21st of May qualified or altered in any way the previous despatch of the 23rd of April; and, if so, in what particulars? Will the noble Lord be in a position to state on Monday 1685 what was the effect of the despatch of the 21st of May?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEPart of the Question I am quite willing to answer now; in fact, I have answered it already. I stated, two days before the House rose, that a further message had been sent to General Gordon; but I cannot undertake to give a reply as to its purport and contents without communicating with the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
§ MR. GIBSONI beg to give Notice that I shall put a Question on the Paper for Monday in reference to this subject.
MR. J. LOWTHERI do not wish the noble Lord to misunderstand me, or the noble Lord to be misunderstood by the House. What I desire to know is, whether the Government have ascertained that the document which appeared in yesterday's papers, purporting to be an extract from a Report made by Major Kitchener in his official capacity, is a correct version or not; and I would further ask whether the Report, of which that purports to be a condensation, has reached the Government?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI quite understand the Question of the right hon. Gentleman, and I only wish to explain that my reason for not answering it, except upon Notice, is that the report which has appeared in the papers touches upon such a very great number of questions, and I think I should only be running the risk of misleading the House if I was to enter upon a reply to those questions in a general way, instead of on particular points upon which the right hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members might be interested.
MR. J. LOWTHERI admit the reasonableness of that, and I confine myself to asking the noble Lord—"Yes or No," has the Report reached the Government, an extract from, which appeared in yesterday's newspapers?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI have already stated that a Report from Major Kitchener has reached the Government. I did not understand that the right hon. Gentleman was under any doubt upon that subject, or else I would at once have made it clear.
MR. J. LOWTHERThe noble Lord misunderstands MR. [Cries of "Order!"] I am perfectly in Order. What I wish to know is, whether the report which 1686 appeared in the newspapers tallied, in its main features, with the Report which had reached the Government; in other words, whether the report sent by Reuter's Agency is practically accurate?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI really cannot answer that Question, except upon Notice, because the right hon. Gentleman is asking me to state off-hand, what I think it would be a rash thing to state, as to whether a certain report which has appeared in the newspapers tallies in its main particulars with the Report to which I have alluded. Naturally, I should like to give full and accurate information when I speak upon this subject, and I cannot undertake to answer the Question of the right hon. Gentleman off-hand.
§ SIR HERBERT MAXWELLI wish to ask the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any information as to the latest news from Suakin, and whether it is true, as reported in the newspapers, that an attack upon Suakin is imminent within the next few days? I should also like to know what troops are there, and whether a detachment of Marines has been despatched to Suakin? Considering the anxiety of many persons who have friends in that place at present, I must offer this as an excuse for asking the Question without Notice.
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThe accounts received by the Government in regard to Suakin do substantially tally with what has appeared in the newspapers, which may be taken as representing what has occurred there. The attacks do not seem to be of a very serious character, and they have been apparently easily repulsed by the Egyptian troops without assistance of any other kind whatever.
§ SIR HERBERT MAXWELLThe news in to-day's papers seems to point to a more formidable attack as imminent. Have Marines been despatched?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI think the Question with regard to the Marines should be put to my hon. Friend the Secretary to the Admiralty. The Question as to a further attack upon Suakin may be answered thus. There is apparently a probability of a renewal of the same kind of attacks which have already taken place. It is, of course, quite impossible to say what exact force may be used in the attack, because these 1687 are matters upon which the Foreign Office is not sufficiently informed.
§ SIR HERBERT MAXWELLIt would be satisfactory to the House if the Secretary of State for War would state what is the strength of the garrison at Souakin, and whether any troops have been despatched there?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONI cannot give an answer to that Question without Notice. The garrison at Suakin now consists of Egyptian troops and a force of Marines.
§ SIR HERBERT MAXWELLWith English officers?
§ SIR HERBERT MAXWELLAnd the Egyptian troops?