§ MR. LABOUCHEREasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether, as Mr. O'Kelly, M.P. is an accredited special correspondent of a London daily newspaper, and as he has been stopped at Dongola, on his way to the residence of the Mahdi, where he contemplated carrying out his instructions in regard to his correspondence with the aforesaid newspaper, he will telegraph to Dongola informing the Egyptian authorities there of the peaceful character of Mr. O'Kelly's intentions, and intimating to them that he ought not to be hindered from fulfilling his duties to his employers; and, whether it is to be understood that special correspondents of English newspapers may be prevented, by the Egyptian officials in the Soudan, from proceeding to the residence of the Mahdi?
§ BARON HENRY DE WORMSMight I ask whether Mr. O'Kelly is not the specially accredited correspondent of an American newspaper?
§ MR. LABOUCHEREIf the hon. Member asks me, I may say he is not. He is acting exclusively for a London newspaper.
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI have ascertained that, as I stated the 1040 other day, Mr. O'Kelly was not arrested; but that, on the 27th of March last, he was informed at Dongola by the Governor that he could not start for Obeid. It is believed he has started for Lower Egypt. The Egyptian Government, with our concurrence, acted entirely within their right in taking the above steps. The answer to the second part of my hon. Friend's Question would depend on the circumstances of each particular case. Mr. O'Kelly was not at all interfered with as a newspaper correspondent, and I need hardly say there is no intention of interfering with newspaper correspondents properly authorized.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREI did not gather from the noble Lord on what grounds Mr. O'Kelly was detained; whether he, being an accredited correspondent for a London journal, was rightly and justly stopped by the Egyptian authorities; and I, therefore, ask on what grounds he was stopped?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEHe was stopped on grounds of public policy, having reference to the relative positions of the Mahdi, Mr. O'Kelly, and the Egyptian Government.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREI have not yet gathered any answer to my Question why Mr. O'Kelly was stopped, because Mr. O'Kelly had not then made the acquaintance of the Mahdi; therefore, I ask on what specific ground was he stopped?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI am afraid I cannot give any clearer answer than I have already given.
§ MR. PARNELLI wish to ask the noble Lord, whether he has not been informed, on good authority, that the commission which Mr. O'Kelly received from the London newspaper was a commission to reach the Mahdi, and to act as the correspondent of that London newspaper in the camp of the Mahdi; and, if so, how can he say that Mr. O'Kelly has not been interfered with as a newspaper correspondent?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEIn answer to the first part of the hon. Member's Question, it was assumed in the Question of my hon. Friend (Mr. Labouchere) that Mr. O'Kelly was the j correspondent of a newspaper, and I answered it on that assumption. In regard to the latter part of the hon. Member's Question, it would be better if he would give Notice of it.
§ LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILLAre we to understand that the English Government is at war with the Mahdi, or is he at war with, any friendly Power; and, if not, will the noble Lord say whether any Englishman or Irishman could not proceed to his Court?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI think that Question involves matter of argument.
MR. O'BRIENMight I ask the noble Lord, whether he has any information that it was at the instigation of Mr. Clifford Lloyd that Mr. O'Kelly was stopped?