§ SIR R. ASSHETON CROSSasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Government are in possession of any despatches or telegrams from General Gordon to the Government at home, or to Sir E. Baring, other than those already laid before Parliament; if so, why they are not included in the Papers now laid upon the Table, and whether they will be at once presented; if not, whether they will at once procure from Sir E. Baring any such despatches or telegrams as may have been sent by General Gordon to Sir E. Baring, and lay them upon the Table without delay?
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Government will lay upon the Table of the House the full text of General Gordon's Despatch to Sir Evelyn Baring, dated April 8th, and referred to in Sir Evelyn Baring's Despatch of April 18th (No. 24, p. 12), in which he says, "Gordon evidently thinks he is to be abandoned and is very indignant;" and, the full text of General Gordon's telegram to Sir Samuel Baker referred to in No. 25?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThere are no despatches and telegrams from General Gordon to the Government at home, except those announcing his arrival in Egypt. All his despatches and telegrams to Sir Evelyn Baring are laid on the Table, with the following exception:—(1) Those which had been transmitted by Sir Evelyn Baring since March 25. These will be laid before Parliament in due course. As special interest attaches to the telegram referred to in Sir Evelyn Baring's telegram of April 18, mentioned in the Question asked by the hon. Member for Eye (Mr.
1162 Ashmead-Bartlett), that telegram has been laid to-day, together with the telegram of April 18, from Sir Evelyn Baring, which has been accidentally omitted. The other exceptions are (2) some telegrams relating to the alleged intention of General Gordon to visit the Mahdi himself. These also have been laid to-day. The third exception relates to information of a confidential character, which, it is believed, would, if published, be a source of military danger to General Gordon, or to other important public interests of an international character, and which it is, therefore, not intended to lay before Parliament. Inquiry has been made of Sir Evelyn Baring, and he has informed the Government that he has sent home all the telegrams and despatches received from General Gordon.
§ SIR R. ASSHETON CROSSHow soon will the telegrams be delivered?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI hope they will be in the hands of hon. Members on Monday morning.
§ MR. BOURKEAre we to understand that all the telegrams alluded to as having been received since the 25th of March will be laid on the Table, or have they been laid to-day?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICENo. Those will be laid in continuation of the Blue Book in the ordinary course; but I shall make every effort to avoid delay.
§ SIR R. ASSHETON CROSSWhy cannot we have all the telegrams by Monday morning?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThat is actually impossible; I cannot promise them.
§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORCan the noble Lord state the latest date within the knowledge of the Government on which a communication from the Government reached General Gordon?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI do not think that point arises out of the Question upon the Paper.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether information has been received that messengers have been despatched to General Gordon, as suggested in Earl Granville's telegram to Mr. Egerton of 23rd April; and, whether, should access to the General be possible, he will be distinctly informed that, the undertaking of military expeditions being beyond the scope of the commission 1163 which he holds, and at variance with the policy which was the purpose of his mission to the Soudan, Her Majesty's Government not only declines to furnish him with Turkish troops for such expeditions, but forbids them, as well as any attempt on his part to "settle the Mahdi power," as suggested in his telegrams to Sir E. Baring and to Sir 8. Baker of last month?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEMessages in keeping with the terms of telegram, No. 36, in "Egypt, No. 13," have been sent to General Gordon from Dongola and Suakin by two separate messengers in each case. There is no Report yet from Massowah, from which it was also proposed to act.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTI beg to ask the noble Lord whether it is not the fact that the instructions of Her Majesty's Government to General Gordon embrace not only the retirement of the garrisons from the Soudan, but also the establishment of alternative Governments there and the protection of the ancestral Sultans?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI think the hon. Member might satisfy himself with regard to a great many of his inquiries by turning to the Blue Books.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTI have asked the noble Lord a very simple Question with regard to the instructions on which the whole action of General Gordon rests; and I now ask you, Mr. Speaker, as a point of Order, whether I am not entitled to ask the noble Lord for a more direct answer to a Question of that kind; and whether it is in accordance with the practice of the House that a Member should be referred vaguely to a large number of Blue Books.
§ MR. SPEAKERIt rests entirely in the discretion of the Minister.
MR. ASHMEAD-BAETLETTasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he will state the reasons for which the Despatch of Sir Evelyn Baring, dated March 24th (No. 301), was not communicated to Parliament in the Ministerial Statements of April 4th, and especially the following passages: —
General Gordon is evidently expecting help from Suakin, and he has ordered messengers to be sent along the road from Berber to ascertain whether an English Force is advancing;1164Under present circumstances I think an effort should be made to help General Gordon from Suakin;General Stephenson and Sir Evelyn Wood, while admitting the great risk, are of opinion that the undertaking is possible?
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEThis and the following Question of the hon. Member for Eye ask for reasons, and involve matter of argument. They are, therefore, opposed to the practice of the House, and I must decline to answer them.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTI rise to Order. The noble Lord has indulged the House with a description of the position of these Questions as regards their right to be on the Paper. Now, Sir, they are on the Notice Paper by your authority; and I ask you whether the noble Lord is not bound to give some other answer?
§ MR. SPEAKERI understood the noble Lord, to reply to the Questions, to state that, in his opinion, they were of an argumentative character, and that he declined to answer them to the full extent to which they were put. In that proceeding the noble Lord is perfectly in Order.
LORD JOHN MANNEESDoes the noble Lord mean that the Questions are argumentative, or the answers the noble Lord might give? I looked at the Questions and thought they were very simple.
§ LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICEI am asked to state "the reasons" in one of the Questions, and the word "why" is used in the other. That involves matter of argument which is not customary at Question time; and I do not see how I can reply without going into greater length than would be proper in an answer.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTOn that point of Order, I would call to your recollection, Sir, the fact that; the noble Lord—
§ LORD GEOEGE HAMILTONMight I ask you, on the point of Order, whether, if a Member of this House asks a Member of the Government why some Papers are not produced, that can be considered an argumentative Question? If you will look at the Question you will see he asks merely why certain Papers are not presented.
§ MR. SPEAKERI did not understand the noble Lord to say that. I understood the noble Lord to say that the Question involved so much of argument that it was difficult to answer it within the limits of an answer to a Question. Acting on his own discretion, the noble Lord decided he could not answer the Question.
MR. MACARTNEYI would like to ask the noble Lord whether he considers that in the present state of intense interest and suspense with regard to the fate of General Gordon he thinks it proper, on the part of the Government, to take refuge in such a statement?
§ [No reply.]