HC Deb 30 March 1896 vol 39 cc386-7
*MR. JAMES BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.)

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether it is the fact, as stated in a telegram from Cairo published in The Times newspaper of 27th March, that the Egyptian Government have informed the Sultan of Turkey that the object of the movement of Egyptian troops up the Nile from Wady Haifa is to recover provinces formerly held by Egypt in the Soudan?

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. GEORGE CURZON,) Lancashire, Southport

Her Majesty's Government understand that, the Sultan having requested the Khedive to express his views with regard to the advance of Egyptian troops in the Valley of the Nile, the Khedive, in reply, stated that the British and Egyptian Governments have agreed that the movement is opportune for endeavouring to bring back Dongola, which is part of a province formerly held by Egypt in the Soudan, under Egyptian administration, and that an Expedition, accordingly, has been dispatched thither.

MR. W. REDMOND

asked, whether the explanation given by the Khedive was not altogether a different explanation from that given by her Majesty's Government?

MR. CURZON

No sir, the two explanations are precisely identical. [Laughter.]

MR. W. REDMOND

asked whether it was not the fact that Her Majesty's Government stated as the reason for the expedition the necessity of repelling an attack on the Egpytian frontier?

*MR. SPEAKER

The hon. Member is pursuing in an argumentative way the Question which has been answered.

MR. J. M. PAULTON (Durham, Bishop Auckland)

With reference to the last answer, may I ask whether the House is to understand that the object of the present expedition is strictly limited to the re-conquest of the province of Dongola?

MR. CURZON

No, Sir; the House is to understand what is the object of the expedition, in the eyes of the Government, from the various speeches which have been made by Ministers. [Laughter.]