§ LORD CHARLES BERESFORD (York)I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether on 16th March on assurance was given by the Russian Government that, in the event of the Chinese Government consenting to lease to the Russian Government Talienwan and Port Arthur, both ports would be open to foreign trade like other ports in China; (2) whether there was a further assurance on 29th March, in which the Russian Government declares that Port Talienwan will be open to foreign trade and that the largest measure of hospitality will be extended there to the ships of all friendly nations; and (3) whether there is reason to suppose that the omission of Port Arthur from the circular dispatch of the Russian Government on 29th March was merely a clerical error?
MR. CURZONThe answer to the first two Questions is in the affirmative, with the exception that the later assurance was in a note dated March 28th, not March 29th. The attention of the Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs was at once called to the omission of Port Arthur from this note, and he replied to Her 28 Majesty's Ambassador that he held to the assurances which he had given on 16th March.
§ MR. T. C. H. HEDDERWICK (Wick Burghs)I beg to ask the Under Secretary whether the recent acquisition of Port Arthur by Russia as a fortified naval base modifies to any extent the assurance the right hon. Gentleman recently gave the House as to the right of free access to that place of British warships?
MR. CURZONI think the hon. Gentleman had better—if he will allow me to say so—wait for the answer to that Question for the full discussion which will take place to-morrow.