HC Deb 07 May 1885 vol 297 cc1863-5
MR. MONTAGU SCOTT

(for Mr. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT) asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether Her Majesty's Government have offered to allow the Russian Government to retain Ak Tépé and the Penj-deh oasis; and, whether an arbitrator has yet been found to adjudicate upon the breach of the sacred covenant?

MR. GLADSTONE

That is a Question with regard to particular communications now going on between the two Governments with respect to the Afghan Frontier, and I cannot enter into explanations while these negotiations are in progress.

BARON HENRY DE WORMS

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Commission for the Delimitation of the Afghan Frontier is still in existence or has been dissolved by the recall of Sir Peter Lumsden and Colonel Stewart; if it is still in existence why it is considered desirable, as stated by the First Lord of the Treasury on Tuesday, that these officers should come home to London forthwith; whether the settlement in London of the main points of the Afghan Frontier will be postponed until the arrival of Sir Peter Lumsden; whether the date of Sir Peter Lumsden's recall was prior or subsequent to the departure of Mr. Condie Stephen for England; and, whether such date was prior or subsequent to the receipt of Russia's acceptance of the proposal of arbitration?

MR. GLADSTONE

I think it has already been stated by my noble Friend, as to the first head of this Question, that the Commission of Sir Peter Lumsden is still in existence. With regard to the second head—if the Commission is still in existence, why it is considered desirable that these officers should come home to London forthwith?—the fact is this, that as negotiations are to be carried on here, and only details are to be examined on the spot, it is not considered that the examination of details is a proper employment for Sir Peter Lumsden, a functionary who was despatched to that country for a purpose of a much higher order, and that is the cause of the change which has taken place in the instructions to Sir Peter Lumsden with Colonel Stewart to repair to this country. In reply to the third head of the Question—whether the discussion of the main points will be postponed till the arrival of Sir Peter Lumsden?—there is no such intention. We are in full communication with Sir Peter Lumsden, and I am not aware that there is any necessity for a postponement. In regard to the fourth Question, the dates, I believe, are as follow:—The telegram requesting Sir Peter Lumsden to come to England was sent on the 4th; the acceptance by Russia of the reference proposed to a friendly Sovereign was received on the 3rd. As regards the priority between the instructions to Sir Peter Lumsden and the information from Sir Peter Lumsden about Mr. Stephen, that information made us aware that Sir Peter Lumsden had directed Mr. Stephen to come home. It did not state the date when the direction to Mr. Stephen was given; but the information to us was despatched on the 22nd, and I have no doubt that the direction to Mr. Stephen must have been either on the same date or a date immediately antecedent to it. I have no doubt that the latter gentleman left about the same date.

MR. LABOUCHERE

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the House may entertain the hope that the permanent presence of some Consular or Diplomatic Agent at Herat will form part of the contemplated arrangement with regard to the settlement of the Afghan north-western frontier, to whom the Russian Government may apply in case of any local disputes arising in connection with the frontier, and who will be in a position to advise Her Majesty's Government as to their merits?

MR. GLADSTONE

I take this Question to be in the nature of a friendly suggestion, which might well deserve consideration; but I think the hon. Gentleman will see that it would be too early to make any Parliamentary statement on the subject.