§ MR. T. R. BUCHANAN (Aberdeenshire, E.)I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he will lay upon the Table Papers and Correspondence relating to the Agreement respecting Siam recently concluded with France, and will include in them the communications on the subject with the Government of India?
§ MR. E. H. PICKERSGILLasked whether the right hon. Gentleman would include a copy of the Convention between China and France of the 20th of June 1895, which was material to the appreciation of the agreement between France and this country.
MR. CURZONMay I ask hon. Members, where possible, to help me to give them a proper answer by giving at least one day's notice of their questions? ["Hear, hear!"] It is 563 not proposed to lay Papers and correspondence relating to the recent agreement with regard to Siam.
§ MR. PICKERSGILLasked whether the right hon. Gentleman was not aware that the new agreement between France and this country referred specifically to a convention which was made between China and France on the 20th of June, 1895. It was impossible to appreciate the effect of the agreement without having a copy of that convention.
MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the papers have already been laid before the French Parliament in the form of a Yellow-book, and that they might be quoted from?
MR. CURZONNo, Sir, I am not aware of it, because it is not a fact. The Papers laid before the French Parliament in the form of a Yellow-book are the same Papers that have already been published in this country, and consist of a declaration agreed upon by the two Governments, with the addition of a letter from the Foreign Minister of France to the French Minister for the Colonies. This letter corresponds with the letter from Lord Salisbury to the Marquess of Dufferin.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESasked whether it was not a fact that the agreement had been published in France in the form of a Yellow-book?
MR. CURZONsaid that was so, but what he said was that no correspondence connected with the agreement had been presented.
§ MR. BUCHANANasked whether the right hon. Gentleman could lay on the table the correspondence between the Home and Indian Governments, as Lord Salisbury had stated in the House of Lords that the Government of India had given its assent to the arrangement that had been made.
MR. CURZONsaid it was not usual to lay on the table of the House such correspondence as that referred to. He hoped, however, to have an opportunity of speaking upon the agreement, and he should then be ready to give the hon. Member and the House all information possible as to the attitude of the Indian Government on the matter.
§ MR. PICKERSGILLasked what objection there was to lay a copy of the convention on the Table of the House.
MR. CURZONsaid there was no objection whatever to do so, and it would shortly appear in all probability in the Treaty Series.