§ Mr. O'GRADYasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the Russian Consul-General at Resht, in a letter dated 23rd March addressed to the Sipahdar, stated that the road from Resht to Tehran was the property of the Russian Government; will he say if this is the case; and, if so, does any provision exist in the Anglo-Russian agreement giving Russia the right to guard the road by the armed force of her own troops?
§ Sir E. GREYI have no information as to such a letter. The road in question was constructed by, and is the property of, a Russian company. The Anglo-Russian Agreement has been published as a Parliamentary Paper, so that the hon. Gentleman can satisfy himself at any time as to 1833 the nature of its provisions. There are numbers of contingencies for which the Anglo-Russian Convention does not provide and was not intended to provide.
§ Sir E. GREYIt was made by Russian money.
§ Mr. REESIs it not a fact that there are only two roads in Persia. One was made by the Russian Government and the other by the hon. Member for Ripon?
§ Mr. O'GRADYIs it not a fact that one of the provisions in the Convention says that it is the special interest of the two Powers to maintain peace in certain parts of Persia itself, and that all this has taken place in parts not provided for by a Convention?
§ Sir E. GREYWhat parts are not provided for in the Convention? I do not understand the hon. Member's question.
§ Mr. O'GRADYThe passage in the Convention I refer to is——
§ Mr. SPEAKEROrder, order. That is not a question.