HC Deb 08 June 1899 vol 72 cc667-99

Motion made and Question proposed, That the thanks of this House be given to Major-General Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, G.C.B., K.C.M.G., for the distinguished skill and ability with which he planned and conducted the campaign on the Nile of 1896–7–8, which culminated in the battle of Omdurman, the capture of Khartoum, and the overthrow of the power of the Khalifa."—(Mr. Balfour.)

DR. FARQUHARSON (Aberdeenshire, West)

I am very unwilling to stir up any opposition to the unanimity with which this Vote will be passed, and I yield to no one in my appreciation of the brilliant services which have been rendered; but I should be wanting in my duty to the profession to which I still have the honour to belong, and the Army Medical Department, if I failed to direct the attention of the House to a conspicuous omission.


Order, order! The hon. Gentleman cannot do that upon this Resolution. Any observation which he desires to make upon the point will come on the next Resolution.

MR.DAVITT (Mayo, S.)

Any opposition to a motion of this kind, which will be accepted with unanimity by the great bulk of the British people, must appear an ungracious act upon my part. I acknowledge it frankly, and 1 assure the House that it is only with a deep sense of conscientiousness and as a matter of duty that I take this step. 1 am not responsible for that system of rule which compels me, an Irish Nationalist, to come here, where I find myself in opposition to the bulk of the British nation. I cannot agree to this Motion, for several reasons. In the first place, a very serious step has been taken in moving a vote of thanks to the Egyptian Army, which means that this House of Commons claims to exercise sovereign rights over a country believed by other Powers of Europe to be independent.


Order, order! If the hon. Member is going to confine his remarks to the Egyptian Army, that will come on the next resolution.

MR.DILLON (Mayo, E.)

On a point of order, Sir, are you going to put each Resolution separately, or are we going to discuss the resolutions as a whole; because a question will arise as to the conduct of the Soudanese troops?


They will be taken separately, and any question relevant to a particular Resolution must be raised upon that Resolution. Otherwise confusion may arise.

Question put.

The House divided: Ayes, 321; Noes, 20. (Division List No. 178.)

Acland-Hood,Capt.SirAlex. F. Compton, Lord Alwyne Hill, Sir Edward Stock(Bristol
Allan, William (Gateshead) Cooke,C.W.Radcliffe(Heref'd) Hoare,EdwBrodie(Hampstead
Allen, W. (Newc.underLyme) Cox, Irwin Edw. B. (Harrow) Hoare, Samuel (Norwich)
Allhusen, Augustus Henry E. Cranborne, Viscount Hobhouse, Henry
Allsopp, Hon. George Cripps, Charles Alfred Holland,Hon. Lionel R. (Bow)
Anson, Sir William Reynell Crombie, John William Hornby, Sir William Henry
Arnold, Alfred Curson, Viscount Horniman, Frederick John
Ascroft, Robert Dalkeith, Earl of Howard, Joseph
Ashton, Thomas Gair Davies,SirHoratioD.(Chath'm Howell, William Tudor
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John Davies,M.Vaughan-(Cardigan Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn
Austin, Sir John (Yorkshire) Denny, Colonel Humphreys-Owen, Arthur C.
Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P. Hutchinson, Capt. G. W. G.
Baillie,James E. B.(Inverness) Disraeli, Coningsby Ralph Hutton, John (Yorks., N.R.)
Baird, John George A. Dorington, Sir John Edward Jacoby, James Alfred
Balcarres, Lord Doughty, George Jebb, Richard Claverhouse
Baldwin, Alfred Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- Jeffreys, Arthur Frederick
Balfour, Rt.Hn.A.J.(Manch'r) Doxford, William Theodore Jessel, Capt. Herbert Merton
Balfour, Rt. Hn. G.W.(Leeds) Duckworth, James Johnson-Ferguson, Jabez Edw.
Banbury, Frederick George Dunn, Sir William Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex)
Barlow, John Emmott Elliot, Hon. A. Ralph Douglas Jolliffe, Hon. H. George
Barnes, Frederic Gorell Fardell, Sir T. George Jones, D. Brymnor (Swansea)
Barry, Rt. Hn.A.H.S.-(Hunts) Farquharson, Dr. Robert Kearley, Hudson E.
Bartley, George C. T. Fellowes, Hon. Ailwyn Edw. Kenyon, James
Barton, Dunbar Plunket Ferguson, R. C. M. (Leith) Kimber, Henry
Beach,Rt.Hn. SirM H.(Bristol) Fergusson, Rt. Hn.SirJ.(Man) King, Sir Henry Seymour
Begg, Ferdinand Faithfull Finch, George H. Kinloch, Sir John George S.
Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne Kitson, Sir James
Bentinck, Lord Henry C. Fisher, William Hayes Knowles, Lees
Beresford, Lord Charles Fison, Frederick William Lafone, Alfred
Bethell, Commander FitzGerald, Sir Rob. Penrose- Lambert, George
Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond Laurie, Lieut.-General
Biddulph, Michael Flannery, Sir Fortescue Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.)
Billson, Alfred Fletcher, Sir Henry Lecky, Rt. Hn. William E. H.
Blakiston-Houston, John Flower, Ernest Leese, Sir J. F. (Accrington)
Blundell, Colonel Henry Folkestone, Viscount Leighton, Stanley
Bolitho, Thomas Bedford Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co. Leng, Sir John
Bond, Edward Fry, Lewis Llewelyn, Sir D.-(Swansea)
Boulnois, Edmund Gedge, Sydney Lloyd-George, David
Broadhurst, Henry Gibbons, J. Lloyd Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R.
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John Gibbs, Hn. A.G.H. (City Lond. Loder, Gerald Walter E.
Brookfield, A. Montagu Gibbs,Hon.Vicary(St. Albans) Long, Col. C. W. (Evesham)
Brown, Alexander H. Giles, Charles Tyrrell Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverpool)
Bryce, Rt. Hon. James Gladstone, Rt. Hn. Herbert J. Lopes, Henry Yarde Buller
Brymer, William Ernest Goddard, Daniel Ford Lorne, Marquess of
Bullard, Sir Harry Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk. Lough, Thomas
Butcher, John George Gold, Charles Lowe, Francis William
Buxton, Sydney Charles Goldsworthy, Major-General Lowther, Rt. Hon. J. (Kent)
Caldwell, James Gordon, Hon. John Edward Lowther,Rt.Hn.J.W.(Cumb'd)
Campbell,Rt.Hn.J.A.(Glas.) Gorst, Rt. Hn Sir John E Lucas-Shadwell, William
Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. Goschen,Rt.Hn.G.J.(St. Geo's Lyell, Sir Leonard
Carlile, William Walter Goschen, George J. (Sussex) Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred
Cavendish, R. F. (N.. Lancs.) Goulding, Edward Alfred Macartney, W. G. Ellison
Cavendish, V.C.W.(Derbysh.) Gourley,SirEdward Temperley Macdona, John Cumming
Cawley, Frederick Graham, Henry Robert MacIver, David (Liverpool)
Cayzer, Sir Charles William Green, Walfrd D. (Wedn'sb'y) Maclure, Sir John William
Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East) Griffith, Ellis J. M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool)
Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) Gunter, Colonel M`Calmont, H. L. B. (Cambs.)
Chaloner, Captain R. G. W. Gurdon,Sir WilliamBrampton M'Iver, Sir L. (Edinburgh, W.)
Chamberlain, Rt.Hn.J.(Birm.) Hall, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles M`Killop, James
Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r.) Halsey, Thomas Frederick M'Laren, Charles Benjamin
Channing, Francis Allston Hamilton,Rt.Hon.LordGeorge Manners, Lord Edward W. J.
Charrington, Spencer Hardy, Laurence Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe
Chelsea, Viscount Hare, Thomas Leigh Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire)
Clarke, Sir Ed. (Plymouth) Harwood, George Mellor, Rt. Hn. J. W. (Yorks.)
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo. Melville, Beresford Valentine
Coddington, Sir William Hayne, Rt. Hon.CharlesSeale- Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand
Coghill, Douglas Harry HedderwickThomasCharles H Middlemore, J. Throgmorton
Cohen, Benjamin Louis Helder, Augustus Mildmay, Francis Bingham
Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse Hickman, Sir Alfred Milward, Colonel Victor
Colston, Chas. Edw. H. Athole Hill,Rt.Hn.A.Staveley(Staffs. Monk, Charles James
Colville, John Hill, Arthur (Down, West) Montagu, Sir S.(Whitechapel)
Moon, Edward Robert Pacy Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) Thomas, David A. (Merthyr)
Moore, William (Antrim, N.) Robertson,Herbert (Hackney) Thorburn, Walter
Morgan, Hn. F, (Monm'thsh.) Robinson, Brooke Thornton, Percy M.
Morgan,W Pritchard (Merthyr Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye Tollemache, Henry James
Morley, Charles (Breconsh.) Rothschild,Hon.LionelWalter Tomlinson, W. E. Murray
Morton, ArthurH. A. (Deptf'd) Round, James Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Morton, E. J. C. (Devonport) Royds, Clement Molyneux Tritton, Charles Ernest
Moulton, John Fletcher Russell, T. W. (Tyrone) Ure, Alexander
Mount, William George Rutherford, John Usborne, Thomas
Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute) Ryder, John Herbert Dudley Valentia, Viscount
Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) Samuel, Harry S.(Limehouse) Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H.
Newdigate, Francis Alexander Samuel, J. (Stockton on Tees) Wallace, Hobert (Perth)
Nicol, Donald Ninian Sassoon, Sir Edward Albert Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)
Norton, Capt. Cecil William Scoble, Sir Andrew Richard Warr, Augustus Frederick
Nussey, Thomas Willans Scott, Chas. Prestwich(Leigh) Wedderburn, Sir William
Oldroyd, Mark Seely, Charles Hilton Wharton, Rt. Hon. John L.
O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens Seton-Karr, Henry Whiteley, George (Stockport)
Orr-Ewing, Charles Lindsay Sharpe, William Edward T. Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)
Parkes, Ebenezer Shaw, Charles Ed. (Stafford) Williams, Joseph P.- (Birm.)
Paulton, James Mellor Shaw, Thomas (Hawick, B.) Willox, Sir John Archibald
Pease, Alfred E. (Cleveland) Shaw-Stewart,M.H.(Renfrew) Wilson, John (Govan)
Pease, Joseph A. (Northumb.) Simeon, Sir Barrington Wilson, J. W. (Worces'e, N.)
Percy, Earl Sinclair, Capt. J. (Forfarshire) Wilson-Todd, W. H. (Yorks.)
Perks, Robert William Smith, James Parker (L'n'rks) Wodehouse,Rt.Hn.E.R.(Bath)
Pierpoint, Robert Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand) Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm
Platt-Higgins, Frederick Soames, Arthur Wellesley Woodall, William
Pretyman, Ernest George Spicer, Albert Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. S.-
Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk) Wyndham, George
Purvis, Robert Stanley, Edward J. (Somerset) Wyndham-Quin, Maj. W. H.
Pym, C. Guy Stanley, Henry M.(Lambeth) Young, Comm'nd'r (Berks,E.)
Quilter, Sir Cuthbert Stanley, Lord (Lancashire) Younger, William
Rankin, Sir James Stevenson, Francis S. Yoxall, James Henry
Rasch, Major Frederic Carne Stirling-Maxwell, Sir J. M.
Reckitt, Harold James Stone, Sir Benjamin TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Richardson, J. (Durham, S.E.) Strachey, Edward Sir William Walrond and
Richardson, Sir T. (Hartlep'l) Sturt, Hon. Humphrey N. Mr. Anstruther.
Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W. Tennant, Harold John
Ritchie, Rt. Hon. Chas. T. Thomas, A. (Glamorgan, E.)
Austin, M. (Limerick, W.) M'Ghee, Richard Tully, Jasper
Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.) Morris, Samuel Wilson, H. J. (York, W. R.)
Dillon, John O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork) Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)
Doogan, P. C. O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) Woods, Samuel
Fenwick, Charles O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)
Healy, Thomas. J. (Wexford) Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) TELLERS FOR THE NOES—Mr.
Lawson, Sir W. (Cumberland) Steadman, William Charles Davitt and Mr. James
MacAleese, Daniel Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath O'Connor.

1. Resolved, That the thanks of this House be given to Major-General Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, G.C.B., K.C.M.G., for the distinguished skill and ability with which he planned and conducted the campaign on the Nile of 1896–7–8, which culminated in the Battle of Omdurman, the capture of Khartoum, and the overthrow of the power of the Khalifa.

Motion made, and Question proposed— That the thanks of this House be given to:— Major-General Sir Archibald Hunter, K. C. B., D.S.O.; Major-General Sir Henry MacLeod Leslie Rundle, K.C.B., C.M.G., D.S.O., R.A.; Major-General Sir William Forbes Gatacre, K.C.B., D.S.O.; Major-General the Hon. Neville Gerald Lyttelton, C.B.; Major-General A. G. Wauchope, C.B., C.M.G.; Major and Brevet Colonel Sir Francis Reginald Wingate, K.C.M.G., C. B., D.S.O., R.A.; Lieutenant-Colonel and Brevet Colonel C. J. Long, R. A.; Major and Brevet Colonel J. G. Maxwell, D.S.O.; Major and Brevet Colonel H. A. Mac-Donald, D.S.O.; Lieutenant-Colonel D. F. Lewis, C.B.; Major and Brevet Lieutenant-Colonel J. Collinson, C.B.; Captain C. R. Keppel, C.B., D.S.O., R.N.; and to the other Officers and Warrant Officers of the Navy, the British and the Egyptian Army, and the Royal Marines, for the energy and gallantry with which they executed the services which they were called upon to perform."—(Mr. A. J. Balfour.)


I should like to direct the attention of the House to an omission in this list, which, from my point of view, is important, and to be deeply regretted. While I appreciate the services of the distinguished officers mentioned in the Resolution, I do not see in the list the name of a man to whom I think a great portion of the success of the campaign is due, namely, Surgeon-General Taylor, whose distinguished and admirable conduct of the medical part of the service called forth the emphatic admiration of his chief. I do not propose to move anything, but I think it my duty to raise a protest against this omission. I understand there is no precedent for the inclusion of medical officers in such a vote of thanks; but I should have thought the House might have made a precedent. I hope the omission was not made in deference to the foolish bogie about combatants and non-combatants. There was a notion in the old days that the officers were combatants, but that the medical officers were not so; but now we know that in campaigns the doctors are called upon to expose themselves as much as, if not more than, other officers, and the distinction has been practically abolished. I hope that in any answer that may be made to me that will not be brought up again. It is practically admitted that success in modern warfare depends largely on engineering skill and medical science. I know that Lord Kitchener would be the first to recognise the great services rendered by the medical officers throughout the campaign and in the action in Omdurman, for in his despatch he gave a noble and generous tribute to the medical officers. His lordship said: The medical arrangements were so conducted as to afford the maximum of comfort with the minimum of suffering. I do not think that any higher compliment than that could be paid by a commanding officer. Not only do the medical officers take a full share in the risk of battle, but when the actual campaign is over, when the fighting has terminated, and the other officers have retired to their tents, the doctors' work is practically beginning. They have to sit up long hours treating the sick and the suffering and wounded through perils and dangers. We should also remember that, when the ambulance work is over, they are fre- quently called upon to fight pestilence. I emphatically say that the medical officers in this campaign accomplished their work with skill, bravery, and success, under a variety of the most unpromising conditions, and I express my disappointment that the name of not one of these medical officers appears in this Motion. It is unfortunate, because by a wise provision of the Secretary for War medical officers have now been given definite rank; and it is a great misfortune, when their services have been so singularly successful, and when it is important that our Army Medical Department should be made more popular in the medical schools, that this recognition was not given. I want to know why this inclusion was not made, and I hope it may yet be done.


I cannot support this Resolution for many reasons. First, there is no expression of regret, either in the terms of the Motion or in the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, for the killing of the wounded, on the orders of these officers, at the battle of Omdurman. I feel that their action towards helpless enemies on the field of battle was a disgrace to our modern civilisation, and yet we are asked, lower down in this Resolution, to declare that the conduct of the officers and men in this respect was worthy of admiration. I would not be an Irishman if I could give my assent for a moment to the laudatory terms of the Motion to the officers and Men to which I have referred. We are called upon to vote this thanks for the mowing down by machinery of thousands of people who, whatever were their faults, never inflicted any injury or injustice upon my country. Hon. Members may laugh, but I am not aware that they have ever even thought in their wildest moments of desert warfare of invading the shores of England, and I cannot understand how, for the killing of thousands of these people by machinery while helpless on the field of battle, we are asked now to give these officers and soldiers this meed of praise. Sir, what were the casualties at this so-called great battle of Omdurman? What was the real bravery for which this Vote is to be given? I find, according to the statements made by correspondents who were on the field of battle, that there were about 100 Anglo-Egyptian soldiers killed. I am sorry—as sorry as any bon. Member opposite—for the, families of those men who died on the field of battle in carrying out a policy for which they were not responsible. But at the same time my sympathies go out to the widows and children, and the tens of thousands of the poor Soudanese who lost at that battle their bread-winners. I say that the loss on the Anglo-Egyptian side was so trivial that it takes away altogether from the action at Omdurman the character of a real battle. There is one regrettable fact about this whole discussion which I deeply regret, and that is the studied silence of the speakers on both sides of the House with reference to the desperate bravery of those savage warriors in defence of their country. Sir, there have been English soldiers and English statesmen who were not ashamed in this House to bear testimony to the bravery and courage shown by their foes on the battlefield. I say it detracts from the character of present-day statesmen and soldiers that not a single man was found in tins House to bear testimony to the pluck and courage of these Soudanese warriors, which was recognised by the English war correspondents.


On the Vote to Lord Kitchener, I, in the very strongest way, paid a warm tribute to the extraordinary courage of the Dervishes.




I at once withdraw. I was not in the House at the time, I regret to say, when the right hon. Gentleman spoke. I was travelling from Belfast in order to take part in the Division against the Vote to Lord Kitchener. Had I heard the right hon. Gentleman make the statement I would have cheered it heartily, because I must recognise that no one, so far as my experience in this House goes, is ever more courteous and generous to his opponents than the right hon. Gentleman. Therefore, I shall pass over what I had intended to say if the right hon. Gentleman had not corrected me upon that one point. But, Sir, what was the conduct of the soldiers in the Anglo-Egyptian army as compared with the bravery and heroism displayed by the Dervishes? I do not want to go over the ground travelled the other night by some hon. Members; I do not wish to bring up gruesome details. But we do know that the Dervish wounded were slaughtered while lying helpless on the battlefield at Omdurman, and after this horrible slaughter I find, from the testimony given by one Corporal Rawlinson in a letter sent to his relatives in Wales, and published in the Morning Leader of January 12, 1899, that the Soudanese and Egyptian soldiers went into the city of Omdurman and slaughtered women and children. ("Oh!") According to this corporal several children were tossed on the bayonets of Soudanese soldiers under British and Egyptian officers. ("Oh!") Well, I do not accuse hon. Members of making mockery of this—I am sure they would protest against this as much as 1 do: their jeering so, I understand, signifies that they do not believe this statement. (Ministerial cheers.) Yes, but I am not the witness. I give you the name of the corporal who made the statement, and, to his credit be it said, it caused a feeling of unutterable disgust in his mind. Well, Sir, we are called to vote praise to men who have been capable of performing acts of cowardly barbarism of this kind. Sir, I for one will not support this Motion. I oppose it as an Irishman, simply because it would be impossible for me to condone in any way the killing of helpless wounded foes on the battlefield of Omdurman, or to support, directly or indirectly, the conduct of Soudanese and Egyptian soldiers under the orders of British officers in perpetrating nameless outrages inside the city after the battle was over.

*MR. CHANNING (Northamptonshire, E.)

It is with the utmost reluctance and only from a sense of duty that any one would enter on the topics raised by my hon, friend the Member for Mayo. I cannot but think that the point might have been more properly raised on the next Resolution, that relating to the conduct of the troops, as I do not think the officers are responsible for some of the things that occurred. I voted against the grant to Lord Kitchener on Monday, not, because I did not recognise his splendid services in organising the Egyptian Army and in carrying out the work began by a friend of mine on the opposite side of the House, whose friendship I much valued—the late Colonel Duncan. We are glad that the Egyptian Army has been made so efficient, and recognise the splendid services of Lord Kitchener and of the officers named in the resolution in carrying out this campaign. I, for one, feel the most profound doubt as to whether any justification could be offered for the charge that any officer, whether Lord Kitchener or an officer below him, could be found guilty of any formal order or any direct authorisation for the butchery of the wounded that occurred after the battle. The reason why I gave my vote against the grant on Monday, and the reason why I feel so profoundly on this occasion, is that I do think it is a national duty to face such facts as were laid before the House by my hon. friend the Member for the Leigh Division of Lancashire On Monday night, making up a body of evidence as to which there can be no doubt, to which no answer whatever has been given in these debates, and which is not seriously challenged by anyone, making it certain that terrible acts were committed On that battlefield, and have been committed again and again in these Soudanese campaigns. I do think it would be a cowardly neglect of duty, while expressing our warmest thanks to the officers who have carried out their duty nobly and effectively, if we were not to make an effort to make such acts as these impossible in the future. I am not going into the evidence adduced by my hon. friend the Member for the Leigh Division, but I should like to read a few words from the book of Major De Cosson, a distinguished officer who served under Sir Gerald Graham in the Suakim Campaign in 1885, and, upon these specific points, ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether those words do not justify us in asking that there should be some further inquiry into the conduct of these campaigns, so that, as far as possible, we should introduce the principles of Christianity and humanity into every detail of warfare as far as possible. In his book on the campaign of 1885, Major De Cosson says: One thing has troubled my mind much, and that is the knowledge that some of the enemy's wounded have been shot in cold blood, though I could scarcely credit, it of English troops; but it was unfortunately too true, and I was told by those I could not doubt that the same thing was repeated during the skirmishes with the convoys, and that even an officer had been seen to empty his revolver at a man writhing on the ground. It is most painful for me to allude to the subject, but I do so that we may never have to reproach ourselves with anything of the kind again. And then he says that in acts of self-defence the killing of even wounded men who attack those who are living may be justifiable. No sane man could dispute that fact. Then he goes on to say: It should be the earnest endeavour of every civilised Power to introduce as much humanity as possible into its treatment of a fallen adversary, even though their chivalry may occasionally cost a life. … Such acts should be rendered impossible by the most stringent regulations promulgated throughout, the length and breadth of the land, and I feel that it is only necessary to allude to the matter for the remedy to be found. This is the opinion of a British officer which confirms the view I have laid before the House. It may be urged that it is impossible, and that the wounded will act with treachery, but I would venture to lay before the House the remarkable evidence given by Mr. Winston Churchill as to the way in which Lord Tullibardine, to his infinite honour, went among the wounded and gave them water, without a single one of them seeking to injure him. I say that that is a proof that if yon meet these poor creatures in a Christian and generous spirit, if you convince them that you do not intend to deny them quarter, they will not inflict any injury; and this will prove the advisability of introducing a higher standard into our warfare with them. To his honour, Lord Kitchener, after the battle of Atbara, gave the order that if the enemy would throw down their arms and raise their hands, they were at once to be passed through the ranks to the rear, and actually sonic of these men were enlisted in Lord Kitchener's army and loyally served at the battle of Omdurman. That shows that a higher standard of warfare can be introduced into these campaigns by treating these savage tribesmen with humanity. I hope the opportunity will not be lost of enforcing that lesson upon those who have the conduct of these campaigns ill the future, so that the horrible events on that ghastly field of Omdurman shall never be repeated, and that England will not tolerate such conduct as has been complained of towards the wounded.


Before dealing with the more important topic raised, and unfortunately raised, by the hon. Member who has just spoken, I must say one word in answer to the hon. Member for West Aberdeen. He has reproached us for not having included, in the list of those who are thanked by name, some member of that great and distinguished profession to which he belongs. Sir, I can assure him that this omission does not indicate on our part any desire to underrate the eminent services rendered in war as well as in peace by the medical profession. But, Sir, the hon. Gentleman will feel with me that in these lists of names you must have some principle, you must draw a line in some place, and it is inevitable that beyond that line there will be names of men whose special services we should be glad to recognise. On that principle one name that I personally should like to see in the list is that of Lieutenant Girouard, who did such distinguished service in organising the railway. But, Sir, we have gone on the principle that you should not go below the rank of general of brigade, or some rank equivalent to that. We have included generals of divisions, all generals of brigades, naval officers commanding, and commanding officers of artillery, who practically do rank as generals of brigade, and there we have stopped. It would be impossible to add to the list without making it enormously, inconveniently, and impossibly lengthy. We have proceeded as near as we can in letter and spirit according to precedent, and while I entirely recognise the value of the services of many departmental officers, without whose assistance neither this nor any expedition could have been successfully conducted, I do not think it can be said that we convey any slight upon a great profession, or make an omission which we ought to have avoided, by not specially including these officers.


May I point out that I referred to the name and rank of Surgeon-Major Taylor?


Yes, but, I am not talking of the rank in the Army List; I am talking of the actual work done in the field. Some of it, I think, was done by captains and majors, hut on the field of battle they had, of course, the practical rank of general of brigade. Now, Sir, I leave that comparatively uncontroversial topic for the one raised by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mayo, and by the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire. The Member for Mayo does not profess, and has never professed, any interest for or sympathy with British soldiers, the British Army, or British institutions. He virtually comes here, I had almost said as an enemy of our country.


Of the Government of Ireland.


I do not in the least wish to press the matter too far, but the hon. Gentleman has with perfect candour—and I must say always with tact and moderation, considering the substance of his speeches, for the form of his speeches is somewhat in contrast to their occasional substance—he has always let us clearly understand that, after all, a British success gave him no satisfaction, and that a British reverse would not break his heart. But, Sir, I do regret that the hon. Gentleman should have thought it necessary to cast perfectly unwarranted aspersions on the character for honour and humanity of British officers. I am sure that, as he stated that British officers had given orders that the wounded should be killed, he believes it.


I believe it on the testimony of Englishmen who were on the spot, and who gave their evidence in English newspapers.


Well, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that it is my firm belief there never was a legend more absolutely devoid of any species of foundation, and I do not believe the most critical examination could extract a scintilla of evidence showing any condition of things so horrible as that in the story to which the hon. Gentleman has too easily given credence. Then he was followed by the hon. Gentleman the Member for East Northamptonshire, whose speech I confess I liked much less than that of the hon. Gentleman the Member for-Mayo. The hon. Member for Mayo was perfectly frank; he spoke in a sense and in a degree, as I indicated, as an enemy; he spoke plainly and openly. The hon. Gentleman the Member for East Northamptonshire thought it desirable and appropriate to read out some story of what happened in 1885, and he told us that it is our business to see that such proceedings never occurred again. Of course, it is our business to see that the laws of humanity are preserved, in war as well as in peace. No doubt that is our duty, and neither we in this House nor the generals and officers of the Army have ever for a moment thought it was not a duty which we and they should earnestly and sedulously pursue. But to suggest, as the hon. Gentleman the Member for East Northamptonshire has suggested, that our soldiers are inhumane, and that our officers do nothing to discourage or to temper their inhumanity, is truly to put a libel upon a great and honourable profession, which, although no doubt the work of destruction is its primary business, has always had the tradition of carrying out its duties in a manner as consistent with the diminution of human suffering as is possible.


The right hon. Gentleman has wholly misrepresented what I said. I quoted a well-known and very distinguished British officer who served in the campaign of 1885, and I gave his opinion as to these facts rather than my own. I expressly excluded, in t he beginning of my speech, any belief in the responsibility of the officers for the acts which unfortunately took place.


I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I have no desire to misrepresent him. I judged from the general tone and tenour of his speech. If I judged him unjustly, I am sorry for it, and I am glad that he should have an opportunity of explaining that in rising to carry out what he justly described as a most painful task he did not, at all events, intend to cast any slur 011 the officers and men of the British Army. I have only one word more to say about this question of the wounded. I believe the whole of these legends have been exploded by a multitude and host of eye-witnesses. But, of course, it is the fact—nobody has ever disguised it or pretended to disguise it—that there have been wounded in these battles who have, though wounded, remained combatants, and, being combatants, had to be treated as combatants. The laws of civilised warfare are sometimes represented as if they stated that the wounded were always to be spared. The laws of civilised warfare are that non-combatants Ore always to be spared, and it would be impossible to carry on war under any principles by which one side was allowed to fight and the other side had its hands tied behind its back. Sir, the hon. Gentleman tells us that his evidence goes to show that any attempt to help these poor, unfortunate, wounded men on the field of battle was never made impossible by any hostile action on their part.


I did not say that at all; I said that Lord Tullibardine's experience showed that it was not always the case.


No, it certainly was not always the case—I quite grant that. But that is not the point; the point is, if you show, as I am told is the fact, that there were wounded who had to ho killed, were they ever killed except in self-defence? As long as the wounded are combatants they must be treated as combatants, and, disguise it as we may, that is the inevitable result of war. The fact that in civilised battle such incidents are never heard of is because in civilised battle a wounded man always is a non-combatant. For my own part, I think the humane attempts of our men, the humane and persistent attempts of men like Lord Tullibardine and others, to carry succour and assistance to these poor wounded soldiers, though they knew that in doing so they carried their lives in their hands and ran the risk of a treacherous attack from the very men whom they attempted to assist, speak volumes for the humanity of that Army which hon. Members in their speeches have so cruelly traduced. I earnestly hope, Sir, under these circumstances, that neither the speech of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mayo nor that of the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire will move a single Gentleman in this House to abstain from recording his vote of thanks and giving his assent to the resolution which you, Sir, have just read from the Chair.


It was not to be expected that the cause we advocate in this House would be a popular one, and the most we can ask for, and, I think, have a right to expect, is that the great majority who are bound to vote in favour of this Resolution will give a fair heating to the reply to the speech made by the right hon. Gentleman. Sir, what is it that has been alleged? And what is the evidence upon winch the charge has been made? It has not been alleged by anyone, as the right hon. Gentleman sought to make it appear, that the charge is made against the whole body of officers in the British Army, or even the Egyptian Army. No such charge was ever made, and when the right hon. Gentleman triumphantly instanced the case of Lord Tullibardine and other officers who humanely, and unquestionably at the risk of their lives, offered assistance to some of those wretched wounded men, he undoubtedly did allude to facts which reflected infinite credit on Lord Tullibardine and other officers on that occasion. I have not the slightest doubt that they acted as humane and civilised soldiers ought to act. The charge has not been made by Irishmen, but by British soldiers and officers who took part in the campaign and were eyewitnesses, according to their statements, of what they stated. The charge that has been made is, substantially, that of the 16,000 men estimated to be wounded at the battle of Omdurman the great majority were ruthlessly slaughtered after the battle. ("Oh!") Of course I am no eye-witness. I have no knowledge—did I ever pretend to have any knowledge?—of these unhappy things, except what I derive, in common with the public of this country, from the evidence afforded by the letters of British soldiers and officers published in the newspapers, and the evidence of military correspondents. The right hon. Gentleman did not seek to deny for a moment that a great many of the wounded were slaughtered. Everybody who is not a fool admits that on a field of battle, particularly when engaged in war with such people as the Dervishes, a certain number of the wounded have to be killed. But my conviction is that certainly the Soudanese—to an enormous extent, and to a much less extent the British troops—went out of their way to seek the wounded and kill them. Now I have the strongest objection to this Resolution because it includes an expression of thanks to the Soudanese troops. Sir, I have read with much interest an article written on the subject by Major-General Gatacre. That officer served for a long time in India, and most successfully conducted the operations against the plague in India, and it was only when he was removed in the ordinary course of duty that difficulties arose. I am informed that he is an extremely humane man, and a man who undoubtedly has had great experience of savage warfare. He, very naturally, defends the British officers, but in the course of his article he does not attempt to deny that the Soudanese did commit most painful atrocities; and, after all, it must he remembered that we have the authority of Gordon himself, Soudan, had a long experience of wars in the Soudan, that it was a fixed practice to give no quarter on either side. It is not very much to be wondered at that the Egyptian troops did commit dreadful atrocities, all the more, perhaps, because several tribes had old scores to wipe off, What I object to in this Resolution is that, without any expression of regret from the Government, without any promise of inquiry to satisfy the conscience of this country, and without any indication that there is even a doubt as to the transactions with reference to the wounded, we are called upon to vote the thanks of this House, not only to the British troops, but also to the Soudanese and Egyptian troops—the forces of a foreign country. Under those circumstances I, for one, will vote against this Resolution. The right hon. Gentleman endeavoured to make the case against my hon. friend the Member for South Mayo that he spoke on this question as an enemy of the British power, and that he would rejoice in a British defeat if it occurred; but I have endeavoured to address myself to the question simply from the point of view of humanity, whatever my feelings towards British power may be. It may be—I think it is—that from the peculiar position we Irish Members hold in this House we are the most impartial. [Laughter.] Do you pretend to he impartial? You know perfectly well you are not. It is very hard for Englishmen to sit in judgment on their own victorious officers and troops, and to have any consideration for their defeated enemy. You are not quite so generous a people as that, and it is therefore no harm that there should be men in this House who can feel even for those savage tribes, who are God's creatures, and have a right to, at least, humane and merciful treatment, and to be looked upon as human beings, and not as noxious animals, as those who are sent to fight them too often come to regard them. I wish that the effect of this debate and the debate on Monday Will be to moderate and temper the savagery of war. Although this is on a totally different blanch of the subject, I desire also to support I he contention put forward by the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire. Why should not the names of the officers of mercy who accompany the army he joined in the vote of thanks to the combatant officers? It would be a good thing, if these votes of thanks are to be passed at all, that they should include the names of some men whose duty it was to save life, while thanking those whose duty it was to destroy life; and, belonging myself to the same profession, I desire to concur entirely with the view of the hon. Member that these votes should record the names of representatives of the healing and merciful side of war, and that we should register our conviction that, while war may be necessary, yet it is to civilised nations, or ought to be, a horrible evil, and that the moment victory is won it ought to be the duty of every soldier to help to succour and assuage the sufferings of those who have fallen by the strength of his right arm.


It is difficult to see for what section of the public the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire holds his brief. It seems to me that they are the people who in the last century would have prosecuted Warren Hastings and Clyde, who twenty years ago would have attacked General Eyre, and, later, the men who won Rhodesia for the British Empire. They are the people who always find Englishmen in the wrong all over the world, and find foreigners right. They have friends in every country in which this nation has enemies. They are the people who wish to support, and did support, the reverend gentleman who talked at the Conference at Birmingham about the "filthy rags of Imperial policy." They rejoice in the name of "Little Englanders"; all the same they do not disdain the use of the Army and Navy when they want to bolster up a political party in the country. They sent Gordon to Khartoum, and deserted him when he got there. They sent Lord Wolseley up the Nile, and when he came back they had very little thanks for him. They were ready to use the Sirdar, but having used him they throw him away like a squeezed orange. All I can say is I hope the hon. Member for East Northamptonshire will take a division; if he does he will probably have a greater record than even that achieved by my hon. friend the Member for King's Lynn the other night.

*MR. H. J. WILSON (York W.R.,Holmfirth)

I desire to make an appeal to the First Lord of the Treasury. There are two things about which we are all agreed—one is the bravery of the English officers and soldiers wherever they are, and the other that the vast majority of them are naturally humane men. Notwithstanding what the First Lord of the Treasury has said, I want to put it to him that all the stories referred to have not been exploded. I desire to support the appeal of my hon. friend the Member for East Northamptonshire (who does not deserve the language which has been applied to him) that there ought to be searching investigation into the matter. The proceedings of forteen years ago, which have been referred to, throw a great light on this question, because the misbehaviour of the black troops then should show that these events were not unforeseen. If not unforeseen, precautions ought to be taken against them; and if such precautions were not taken, how then can we support this vote of thanks? I have here an account worse than anything that has yet been read. It bears every evidence of authenticity, and it shows how officers were implicated. I will not read it, but I will take the liberty of sending it to the First Lord of the Treasury in support of the plea of my hon. friend. I can assure him that nobody would be more thankful than we should if these stories could be entirely refuted; but if these methods of war are considered necessary, let us know who says so, and in any ease let us know what has been done and who is responsible. Until this has been done I am obliged to vote, by my conscience, against all the Resolutions except the last.

MR. BRYN ROBERTS (Carnarvonshire,) Eifion

It may appear somewhat ungracious to vote against this resolution, and I desire to explain why I am compelled to do so. In the first place, I have all along felt strongly opposed to the passing, in modern times, of resolutions of this kind after every sort of campaign. I had almost said that this was a prostitution of the usages and functions of this House. I do not think that "prostitution" is the correct word—it is too strong a term; but I do think that we are passing these resolutions on very much too trivial occasions. It is far better we should reserve them for some great occasion. This House formerly never dreamt of passing a resolution of this kind except on an occasion, such as Waterloo or Trafalgar, which was equivalent to the saving of the Empire. Then the thanks of the House were given, and so important was it regarded that history recorded the fact as exceptional. But now every small campaign, if it happens to be successful—and it always is—is brought before this House, and we have a peerage given for such a matter as the bombardment of Alexandria. I object altogether to that; we ought not to throw away such an important honour, and, of course, it lessens the honour when it is given on every occasion. Suppose we were engaged in war with a European Power, with an army equal in numbers to our own and equally equipped; suppose we won a brilliant victory, which saved the reputation and possibly the existence of this country, what honour would there be left for the General who achieved such a feat? None, except to persuade the reigning monarch to go on his bended knees and hand over his crown. I am unwilling to believe the stories of cruelty on the part of our officers and men; but we must bear in mind that English officers and men have the weaknesses of humanity, and they may, on occasion, in the excitement of the moment, have allowed their feelings to carry them further than they ought. But where we find letters published in the local Press from private soldiers, in which the names of the men are given, and in which it is stated that the wounded were killed, and that it was done by order, it is a very serious thing indeed. I do not believe for a moment that it was done by order, but these men were evidently under the impression that it was. A private in the Lancashire Fusiliers writes: As we advanced we were ordered to kill all the wounded we met. A corporal of the Grenadier Guards writes: We had to march with orders to kill all. A soldier who was present at the battle writes: The ground was strewn with bodies, and the order was given that all the wounded Dervishes were to be shot or bayoneted. A private in the 2nd Fusiliers says that the order was conveyed to bayonet everyone, dead or alive. General Gatacre and Lord Kitchener have denied that any such order was given, and I accept their denial, but some inquiry ought to be made as to how came such an impression to be so general among the troops. Until some inquiry is made and the character of our men completely cleared, I certainly will not join in this Vote of thanks.

*MR. LEES KNOWLES (Salford, W.)

I have received a letter which appears to me to be a complete answer to the statement which has been made by the hon. Members opposite. It will be remembered that two foreign military attaches accompanied the Anglo-Egyptian Army. One represented Germany, and he wrote a letter, which appeared in The Times on the 16th of January, refuting these calumnies. The other, Major Luigi Calderari, represented the great military nation of Italy. Last December I had the honour of meeting him a few days after his return from the Soudan, and he was full of praise of our magnificent Anglo-Egyptian Army. He had been with the Staff, and therefore in a position to be able to see everything that went on. He subsequently wrote me the following letter, which I read in the House on Monday night, but as many hon. Members were not then present it may be desirable to read it again:— Caserta, February 28th, 1899. "Dear Mr. Lees Knowles,—I am very glad to have an opportunity to put in writing what I stated to you verbally in Milan as to the manner in which the Dervish prisoners at the battle of Omdurman were treated, and to deny in the most absolute way that any cruelty was practised towards the prisoners. I rode on the field of battle in various directions, and everywhere I saw hundreds of wounded lying alive, notwithstanding that the ground had already been traversed by the Anglo-Egyptian troops. I happened to be for a while at the head of the troops in their advance after the attack on the zariba had been repulsed, and then again I was able to convince myself that the wounded were not in any way molested. If an occasional wounded man was killed it was only in legitimate defence, because, as is well known, it is a custom with these peoples to pretend to be dead and then to fire on the enemy as he passes, or, worse still, to ask for water and help, and then treacherously to kill those who are succouring them. I do not write these things in order to defend Lord Kitchener: he is so far above such accusations that merely to waste words in denying them would be an insult to him. I can only repeat that I am very happy that an opportunity presents itself for me to give a denial to statements which are untrue. It was, moreover, my duty to do so, especially as some Italian newspapers have copied and republished such statements. Believe me, etc., etc., etc.,


That, I think, is an important letter, and adds considerably towards the refuta-

tion of these calumnies. Coming from a foreigner, it may be appreciated by hon. Gentlemen from Ireland.

Question put.

The House divided: Ayes, 347; noes 18. (Division List, No. 179.)

Knowles, Lees Newdigate,Francis Alexander Stanley Edward J. (Somerset)
Lafone, Alfred Norton, Capt. Cecil William Stanley, Henry M. (Lambeth)
Lambert, George Nussey, Thomas Willans Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)
Laurie, Lieut.-General Oldroyd, Mark Stephens, Henry Charles
Lawrence, Wm. F. (Liverpool) O'Neill, H. Robert Torrens Stevenson, Francis S.
Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.) Parkes, Ebenezer Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart
Lecky,Rt.Hn.WilliamEdw.H. Paulton, James Mellor Stirling-Maxwell, Sir John M.
Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) Pease, A. E.(Cleveland) Stock, James Henry
Leighton, Stanley Pease, A. E. (Cleveland) Strachey, Edward
Leng, Sir John Pease, H. Pike (Darlington) Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
Lewis, John Herbert Pease, Joseph A.(Northumb.) Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
LlewelynSirDillwyn(Swansea) Pender Sir James Start, Hon. Humphry Napier
Lockwood,Lt.-Col. A. R. Penn, John Talbot, Rt.Hn.J.G. (Oxf'd U.)
Loder, Gerald Walter Erskine Percy, Earl Tennant, Harold John
Long,Col.CharlesW.(Evesham Perks, Robert William Thomas,Abel(Carmarthen,E.)
Long,Rt.Hn. Walter (Liverp'l) Pierpoint, Robert Thomas, A. (Glamorgan, E.)
Lopes, Henry Yarde Buller Pirie, Duncan V. Thorburn, Walter
Lorne, Marquess of Pretyman, Ernest George Thornton, Percy M.
Lowe, Francis William Price, Robert John Tollemache, Henry James
Lowther, Rt. Hn. J. (Kent) Priestley,SirW.Overend(Edin Tomlinson, Wm. Ed. Murray
Lubbock, Rt. Hon. Sir John Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Lucas-Shadwell, William Purvis, Robert Tritton, Charles Ernest
Lyell, Sir Leonard Pym, C. Guy Ure, Alexander
Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred Rasch, Major Frederic Carne Usborne, Thomas
Macartney, W. G. Ellison Reckitt, Harold James.
Macdona, John Cumming Rentoul, James Alexander Valentia, Viscount
MacIver, David (Liverpool) Richardson, J. (Durham,S.E.) Vincent,Col.Sir C.E.Howard
Maclure, Sir John William Richardson, Sir T. (Hartlep'l) Wallace, Robert (Perth)
M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) Rickett, J. Compton Walton, Joseph (Barnsley)
M'Arthur, William (Cornwall Ridley, Rt. Hon. Sir M. W. Warr, Augustus Frederick
M'Calmont, H. L. B. (Cambs.) Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson Wedderburn, Sir William
M'Iver, Sir L. (Edinburgh, W) Roberts, John H. (Denbighs.) Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon.
M'Kenna, Reginald Robertson, Herbert (H'ckney) Wharton, Rt. Hn. John Lloyd
M'Killop, James Robinson, Brooke Whiteley, H.(Ashton-und r-L
M'Laren, Charles Benjamin Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Maple, Sir John Blundell Rothschild, Hon. Lionel W. Williams, Col. R. (Dorset)
Mappin, Sir Frederick T. Round, James Williams, Joseph P.-(Birm.)
Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire) Royds, Clement Molyneux Willox, Sir John Archibald
Mellor, Rt. Hn. J. W. (Yorks. Russell, T. W. (Tyrone) Wilson, J. (Durham, Mid.)
Melville, Beresford Valentine Rydey, John Herbert Dudley Wilson, John (Govan)
Wilson, J. W. (Worcestsh, N.)
Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse) Wilson-Todd, W. H. (Yorks.)
Middlemore, John T. Samuel, J. (Stockton on Tees) Wodehouse,RtHn.E.R.(Bath)
Milbank,Sir Powlett Chas. J. Seely, Charles Hilton Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm
Milward, Colonel Victor Seton-Karr, Henry Woodall, William
Monk, Charles James Sharpe, William Edward T. Woods, Samuel
Montagu, Sir S. (Whitechapel) Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford) Wortley, Rt.Hon.C.B.Stuart-
Moon, Edward Robert Pacy Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B) Wyndham, George
Moore, William (Antrim, N.) Shaw-Stewart,M. H. (R'nfr'w) Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.
Morgan, Hn. F. (Monm'thsh.) Simeon, Sir Barrington Young, Commander(Berks,E.)
Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr) Sinclair,Capt.John(F'rf'rsh'e) Younger, William
Morton, Arthur H.A.(Deptf'd Smith, Samuel (Flint) Yoxall, James Henry
Moulton, John Fletcher Smith, Hon. W. F. (Strand)
Muntz, Phillip A. Soames, Arthur Wellesley TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Murray, Rt.Hon.A.G.(Bate) Spicer, Albert Sir William Walrond and
Murray, Charles J.(Coventry) Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk) Mr. Anstruther.
Carvill,Patrick Geo.Hamilton O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork) Tully, Jasper
Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.) O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) Wilson, Henry J.(York,W.R.)
Dillon, John O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool)
Doogan, P. C. O'Malley, William TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Lawson, Sir Wilfrid(Cumb'l'd) Pickard, Benjamin Mr. Davitt and Mr. James
MacAleese, Daniel Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) O'Connor.
M'Ghee, Richard Steadman, William Charles
Morris, Samuel Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath)

2. Resolved, That the thanks of this House be given to—

Major-General Sir Archibald Hunter, K.C.B., D.S.O.;

Major-General Sir Henry Macleod Leslie Rundle, K.C.B., C.M.G., D.S.O., R.A.;

Major-General Sir William Forbes Gatacre, K.C.B., D.S.O.;

Major-General the Hon. Neville Gerald Lyttelton, C.B.;

Major-General A. G. Wauchope, C.B., C.M.G.;

Major and Brevet Colonel Sir Francis Reginald Wingate, K.C.M.G., D.S.O., R.A.;

Lieutenant-Colonel and Brevet Colonel C. J. Long, H.A.;

Major and Brevet Colonel J. G. Maxwell, D.S.O.;

Major and Brevet Colonel H. A. MacDonald, D.S.O.;

Lieutenant Colonel D. F. Lewis, C.B.;

Acland-Hood,Capt.SirAlex.F. Brymer, William Ernest Dixon-Hartland, Sir Fred. D.
Allan, William (Gateshead) Buchanan, Thomas Ryburn Dorington, Sir John Edw.
Allen, Wm. (New. u. Lyme) Bullard, Sir Harry Doughty, George
Allhusen, Augustus Hy. E. Butcher, John George Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers-
Allsopp, Hon. George Buxton, Sydney Charles Doxford, William Theodore
Anson, Sir William Reynell Caldwell, James Duckworth, James
Arnold, Alfred Cameron, Sir Chas. (Glasgow) Duncombe, Hon. Hubert V.
Ascroft, Robert Campbell, Rt.Hon.J.A.(Glas.) Dunn, Sir William
Ashton, Thomas Gair Campbell-Bannerman, Sir H. Elliot, Hon. A Ralph Douglas
Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbt. Hy. Carlile, William Walter Fardell, Sir T. George
Atkinson, Rt. Hon. John Carmichael, Sir T. D. Gibson- Farquharson, Dr. Robert
Austin, Sir John (Yorkshire) Carson, Rt. Hon. Edward Fellowes, Hon. AilwynEdward
Bagot, Capt. J. FitzRoy Causton, Richard Knight Ferguson,R. C. Munro (Leith)
Bailey, James (Walworth) Cawley, Frederick Fergusson,Rt.Hn.Sir J. (Man.
Baillie, Jas. E. B. (Inverness) Cayzer, Sir Charles William Finch, George H.
Baird, John George Alexander Cecil, Evelyn (Hertford, East) Finlay, Sir Robert Bannatyne
Balcarres, Lord Cecil, Lord Hugh (Greenwich) Fisher, William Hayes
Baldwin, Alfred Chaloner, Captain R. G. W. Fison, Frederick William
Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J. (Man.) Chamberlain, Rt.Hn.J.(Birm.) FitzGerald,SirRobertPenrose-
Balfour,Rt. Hon.G. W. (Leeds) Chamberlain, J. A. (Worc'r.) Fitzmaurice, Lord Edmond
Banbury, Frederick George Chaplin, Rt. Hon. Henry FitzWygram, General Sir F.
Barnes, Frederic Gorell Charrington, Spencer Flower, Ernest
Barry, Rt.Hn.A.H.S.-(Hunts) Chelsea, Viscount Folkestone, Viscount
Bartley, George C. T. Clough, Walter Owen Forster, Henry William
Barton, Dunbar Plunket Cochrane, Hon. T. H. A. E. Foster, Colonel (Lancaster)
Beach,RtHn.SirM H.(Bristol) Coddington, Sir William Foster, Sir Walter (Derby Co.)
Beach, W. W. B. (Hants.) Coghill, Douglas Harry Fry, Lewis
Beaumont, Wentworth C. B. Cohen, Benjamin Louis Gedge, Sydney
Begg, Ferdinand Faithfull Collings, Rt. Hon. Jesse Gibbons, J. Lloyd
Bemrose, Sir Henry Howe Colston, Chas. E. H. Athole Gibbs, Hn.A.G.H.(C.ofLond.)
Bentinck, Lord Henry C. Colville, John Gibbs, Hon. V. (St. Albans)
Beresford, Lord Charles Compton, Lord Alwyne Giles, Charles Tyrrell
Bethell, Commander Cooke, C. W. R. (Hereford) Gilliat, John Saunders
Bhownaggree, Sir M. M. Corbett, A. C. (Glasgow) Gladstone, Rt. Hon. H. John
Billson, Alfred Cranborne, Viscount Goddard, Daniel Ford
Birrell, Augustine Crippe, Charles Alfred Godson, Sir Augustus Fredk.
Blakiston-Houston, John Crombie, John William Goldsworthy, Major-General
Blundell, Colonel Henry Cross, H. Shepherd (Bolton) Gordon, Hon. John Edward
Bolitho, Thomas Bedford Cubitt, Hon. Henry Gorst, Rt. Hon. Sir. J. Eldon
Bond, Edward Curzon, Viscount Goschen,Rt.Hn.G.J.(StG'rg's)
Boulnois, Edmund Dalkeith, Earl of Goschen, George J. (Sussex)
Bousfield, William Robert Dalrymple, Sir Charles Goulding, Edward Alfred
Bowles, Capt. H. F. (Middlx.) Dalziel, James Henry Gourley, Sir Edw. Temperley
Broadhurst, Henry Davies, Sir H. D. (Chatham) Graham, Henry Robert
Brodrick, Rt. Hon. St. John Davies, M. V. (Cardigan) Gray, Ernest (West Ham)
Brookfield, A. Montagu Dickson-Poynder, Sir John P. Green, W. D. (Wednesbury)
Bryce, Rt. Hon. James Disraeh, Coningsby Ralph Greene, W. Raymond-(Cambs)

Captain C. R. Keppel, C.B., D.S.O., R.N.;

and to the other Officers and Warrant Officers of the Navy, the British and the Egyptian Army, and the Royal Marines, for the energy and gallantry with which they executed the services which they were called upon to perform.

Motion made, and Question put— That this House doth acknowledge and highly approve the gallantry, discipline, and good conduct displayed by the Petty Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and men of the Navy, the British and Egyptian Army, and the Royal Marines during the campaign."—(Mr. Balfour).

The House divided; Ayes. 355, Noes 16. (Division List No. 180).

Griffith, Ellis J. MacIver, David (Liverpool) Royds, Clement Molyneux
Gunter, Colonel Maclure, Sir John William Russell,Gen.F.S.(Cheltenh'm)
Gurdon, Sir Wm. Brampton M'Arthur, Charles (Liverpool) Russell, T. W. (Tyrone)
Haldane, Richard Burdon M'Arthur, William (Cornwall)
Hall, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles M'Calmont, H. L. B. (Cambs.) Samuel, Harry S. (Limehouse)
Halsey, Thomas Frederick M'Iver, Sir L. (Edinb'rgh, W.) Samuel, J. (Stockton on Tees)
Hamilton, Rt. Hon. L.d. Geo. M'Killop, James Seely, Charles Hilton
Hardy, Laurence M'Laren, Charles Benjamin Seton-Karr, Henry
Hare, Thomas Leigh Maple, Sir John Blundell Shaw, Charles Edw. (Stafford)
Harwood, George Mappin, Sir Frederick Thorpe Shaw, Thomas (Hawick B.)
Hatch, Ernest Frederick Geo. Maxwell, Rt. Hon. Sir H. E. Shaw-Stewart,M.H.(Renfrew)
Hayne,Rt.Hon. Charles Seale- Mellor, Colonel (Lancashire) Simeon, Sir Barrington
Heath, James Mellor, Rt.Hon.J.W.(Yorks.) Sinclair, CaptJohn(Forfarsh.)
Hedderwick, Thomas C. H. Melville, Beresford Valentine Smith, Samuel (Flint)
Helder, Augustus Mendl, Sigismund Ferdinand Smith, Hon. W. F. D. (Strand)
Henderson, Alexander Middlemore, J. Throgmorton Soames, Arthur Wellesley
Hermon-Hodge,RobertTrotter Milbank, Sir Powlett C. John Spicer, Albert
Hickman, Sir Alfred Mildmay, Francis Bingham Stanley, Hon. A. (Ormskirk)
Hill, Rt. Hon. A. S. (Staffs.) Milward, Colonel Victor Stanley, Edw. Jas. (Somerset)
Hoare, Edw. Brodie (Hamps.) Monk, Charles James Stanley, Henry M. (Lambeth)
Hoare, Samuel (Norwich) Montagu, Hon. J. S. (Hants.) Stanley, Lord (Lancs.)
Hobhouse, Henry Montagu, Sir S. (Whitechpl.) Steadman, William Charles
Hornby, Sir William Henry Moon, Edward Robert Pacy Stephens, Henry Charles
Horniman, Frederick John Moore, William (Antrim, N.) Stevenson, Francis S.
Houldsworth, Sir Wm. Henry More, R. Jasper (Shropshire) Stewart, Sir M. J. M'Taggart
Howard, Joseph Morgan,Hon. F. (Monm'thsh.) Stirling Maxwell, Sir John M.
Howell, William Tudor Morgan, W. P. (Merthyr) Stock, James Henry
Hozier, Hon. James Henry C. Morrell, George Herbert Stone, Sir Benjamin
Hubbard, Hon. Evelyn Morton, A. H. A. (Deptford) Strachey, Edward
Hughes, Colonel Edwin Moulton, John Fletcher Strutt, Hon. Charles Hedley
Hutchinson, Capt. G. W.Grice- Muntz, Philip A. Sturt, Hon. Humphry N.
Hutton, John (Yorks, N.R.) Murray, Rt. Hn. A. G. (Bute)
Jackson,Rt. Hn. Wm. Lawies Murray, Charles J. (Coventry) Talbot,Rt.Hn. J. G.(Oxf'd.U.)
Jacoby, James Alfred Tennant, Harold John
Jebb, Richard Claverhouse Newdigate, Francis Alex. Thomas, A. (Carmarthen, E.)
Johnson-Ferguson, Jabez Ed. Nicholson, William Graham Thomas, A. (Carmarthen, E.)
Johnstone, Heywood (Sussex) Nichol, Donald Ninian Thorburn, Walter
Jolliffe, Hon. H. George Norton, Capt. Cecil William Thornton, Percy M.
Jones, William (Carnarvons.) Nussey, Thomas Willans Tollemache, Henry James
Kay-Shuttleworth,RtHn.SirU Oldroyd, Mark Tomlinson, WM. E. Murray
Kearley, Hudson, E. O'Neill, Hon. Robert Torrens Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Kenyon, James Tritton, Charles Ernest
Kenyon-Slaney, Col. William Parkes, Ebenezer
Keswick, William Paulton, James Mellor Ure, Alexander
Kimber, Henry Pease, Alfred E. (Cleveland)
King, Sir Henry Seymour Pease, H. Pike (Darlington) Valentia, Viscount
Kinloch, Sir John Geo. Smyth Pease, Joseph A. (Northumb.) Vincent, Col. Sir C. E. H.
Kitson, Sir James Pender, Sir James
Knowles, Lees Penn, John Wallace, Robert (Perth)
Lafone, Alfred Percy, Earl Walton, J. Lawson (Leeds, S.)
Lambert, George Perks, Robert William Warr, Augustus Frederick
Laurie, Lieut.-General Pickard, Benjamin Wedderburn, Sir William
Lawrence, W. F. (Liverpool) Pierpoint, Robert Wentworth, Bruce C. Vernon-
Lawson, John Grant (Yorks.) Pirie, Duncan V. Wharton, Rt. Hon. John L.
Lecky, Rt. Hon. Wm. E. H. Powell, Sir Francis Sharp Whiteley, George (Stockport)
Lees, Sir Elliott (Birkenhead) Pretyman, Ernest George Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Leighton, Stanley Price, Robert John Whitmore, Charles Algernon
Leng, Sir John Priestley, Sir W. O. (Edin.) Williams, Colonel R. (Dorset)
Lewis, John Herbert Priestley, Sir W. O. (Edin.) Williams, Jos. Powell-(Birm.)
Llewelyn, Sir D.- (Swansea) Pryce-Jones, Lt.-Col. Edward Willox, Sir John Archibald
Lockwood, Lt.-Col. A. R. Purvis, Robert Wilson, John (Durham, Mid.)
Loder, Gerald W. Erskine Pym, C. Guy Wilson,J.W.(Worcestersh,N.)
Long, Col. C. W. (Eversham) Rasch, Major Frederic Carne Wodehouse,Rt.Hn.E.R.(Bath)
Long, Rt. Hon. W. (Liverp'l) Reckitt, Harold James Wolff, Gustav Wilhelm
Lopes, Henry Yarde Buller Richardson,J. (Durham,S.E.) Woodall, William
Lorne, Marquess of Richardson, Sir T. (Hartlep'l) Woods, Samuel
Lowe, Francis William Rickett, J. Compton Wortley, Rt. Hon. C. B. S.
Lowther, Rt. Hon. J. (Kent) Ridley, Rt. Hn. Sir Matt. W. Wylie, Alexander
Lowther,Rt.HnJW(Cumb'l'd) Ritchie, Rt. Hon. C. Thomson Wyndham, George
Lubbock, Rt. Hon. Sir John Roberts, John H. (Denbighsh.) Wyndham-Quin, Major W. H.
Lucas-Shadwell, William Robertson, Herbert(Hackney)
Lyell, Sir Leonard Robson, William Snowdon Younger, William
Lyttelton, Hon. Alfred Rollit, Sir Albert Kaye Yoxall, James Henry
Macartney, W. G. Ellison Rothschild,Hon.LionelWalter
Macdona, John Cumming Round, James TELLERS FOR THE AYES—
Sir William Walrond and Mr. Anstruther
Austin, M. (Limerick, W.) Morris, Samuel Tully, Jasper
Curran, Thomas (Sligo, S.) O'Brien, James F. X. (Cork) Wilson, Hy. J. (York, W. R.)
Dillon, John O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny)
Doogan, P. C. O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) TELLERS FOR THE NOES—
Lawson, Sir W. (Cumb'land) O'Malley, William
MacAleese, Daniel Roberts, John Bryn (Eifion) Mr. Davitt and Mr. James
M'Ghee, Richard Sullivan, Donal (Westmeath) O'Connor.

3. Resolved,—That this House doth acknowledge and highly approve the gallantly, discipline, and good conduct displayed by the Petty Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and men of the Navy, the British and the Egyptian Army, and the Royal Marines during the campaign.

Motion made, and Question proposed— That the thanks of this House be given to Lieutenant-General Sir Francis Grenfell, G.C.B., G.C.M.G., for the support and assistance which he afforded to the forces employed in the operations in the Soudan."—(Mr. Balfour.)


I do not intend to divide the House upon either of the two remaining resolutions, because they do not raise the question upon which we desired to protest, more especially when one of these resolutions amounts to an expression of sympathy with those families who have lost their sons. I trust that in this connection the House will remember the family of an hon. Member of this House who was universally respected, and who died on Monday night in the performance of the manly duty of protesting against all this butchery.*

Question put and agreed to.

4. Resolved,—That the thanks of this House be given to Lieutenant - General Sir Francis Grenfell, G.C.B., G.C.M.G., for the support and assistance which he afforded to the forces employed in the operations in the Soudan.

Motion made, and Question proposed— That this House doth acknowledge, with admiration, the distinguished valour, devotion, and conduct of those other officers and men who have perished during the campaign in the Soudan in the service of their country, and feels deep sympathy with their relatives and friends."—(Mr. Balfour.)


I wish to make a request to the Government, and, whether it will be complied with or not, I am sure I shall have the sympathy of the First Lord of the Treasury. It came to my knowledge, when a similar vote of condolence to the relatives of the men who were killed in the last Soudan campaign was passed in this House, that many of the widows and relatives of the men never knew at all that such a vote had been passed, as far as any official intimation was concerned, and they would not have known anything about it if I had not taken the trouble to write to them. I therefore ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can see his way to order a memorandum to be sent to the relatives of those who fell in battle, in order that they may know that the gallantry of their relatives has been fully appreciated by the representatives of the country in this House. Many of them are very poor people, and they never see a newspaper at all, and a great many of them would have no idea that this vote has been passed unless they receive an intimation to that effect. I am sure that these poor people would greatly appreciate an official intimation that the devotion and gallantry of their relatives has been acknowledged in this House.


May I suggest that on future occasions when this House votes large sums of money, honours, distinctions, and sympathy with the relatives of those who fall in battle, the latter, who are often reduced to poverty by their loss, should receive a year or two's pay along with the resolution of sympathy.


I think the suggestion of my noble friend the Member for York is worthy of consideration. I do not know whether machinery exists for carrying out the suggestion, but I conjecture that no great difficulty need be found in doing so. On that point I can hardly pledge myself without consulting the officials concerned; but I can give the noble Lord the assurance that anything that can be done in the direction he has indicated will certainly be done.

Question put and agreed to.

5. Resolved,—That this House doth acknowledge, with admiration, the distinguished valour, devotion, and conduct of those other officers and men who have perished during the campaign in the Soudan in the service of their country, and feels deep sympathy with their relatives and friends.—(Mr. Balfour.)

Ordered,—That the said resolutions he transmitted by Mr. Speaker to Major-General Lord Kitchener of Khartoum, G.C.B., K.C.M.G., and that he be requested to communicate the same to the several officers and men referred to therein.—(Mr. Balfour.)