§ 54. Mr. KINGasked the Prime Minister whether the intended visit of two hon. Members of this House to Petrograd was frustrated, though the visit had been approved by His Majesty's Minister, through telegraphic instructions sent to the chief naval officer of the port from which the hon. Members were to sail; whether he will give the terms of those instructions; and whether the Government has withdrawn the passports granted?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThe Admiralty instructions were that the vessel was to sail as arranged, even if this involved leaving certain of her prospective passengers behind. The object of these instructions was not the frustration of anybody's passage, 1791 but the avoidance of serious inconvenience which would have resulted from the arrangements for the vessel's return voyage being upset. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.
§ Mr. KINGIs it not the fact that the instructions were to prevent these hon. Members from going on board the ship that was to sail, and, if so, was not the Government, through the Admiralty, doing the very thing which they had said they would not do, namely, frustrate this business?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThe hon. Member cannot have been present when the subject was debated in this House.