§ Sir J. D. REESasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he was aware that the Viceroy of India on 25th March stated in Council that in the south of Persia anarchy reigns supreme, the Persian Government having neither power nor authority while order in the Gulf ports is maintained solely by the British East India Squadron in the Gulf, that British and Indian trade interests have suffered severe losses, that no caravans can now proceed in safety up the main trade routes, that Indian troops have been landed at Lingah to protect British and Indian lives and property, and escorts have been strengthened at Bushire, Shiraz, and Ispahan, that the Central India Horse were attacked by Persian troops, that our resident at Bushire is negotiating directly with the tribes for securing the safety of British and Indian caravans; and whether, in view of the collapse of the parliamentary expenditure in Persia, he will now consider the advisability of securing the integrity and independence of that kingdom by policing the ports on the northern shores of the Gulf by and with the aid of Indian officers and Indian troops and police?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Acland)I have seen the newspaper reports of the speech in question. Since 25th March, however, there has been some change in 6 the situation, and it has been found possible to withdraw His Majesty's forces from Lingah. As regards the second part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer returned to his question on the 25th instant, to which I have nothing to add.
§ Sir J. D. REESMay I ask whether since the principle of non-intervention has been given away, it is not worth while, in the interests of trade, to make protection effectual?
§ Mr. ACLANDThe hon. Member might put that question down.
§ Mr. LLOYDWill the hon. Gentleman tell us what is the present state of the roads? Is there still serious interruption?
§ Mr. ACLANDThat, too, I think would be an appropriate subject for another question.