LORD CAMPBELLwished to ask the noble Earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Whether the place at which the Conference was to be held had been determined upon? The Question did not spring from curiosity, but from a view that some places ought to be avoided, and from a hope that none would be chosen without the sanction of Her Majesty's Government.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYMy Lords, in answer to my noble Friend, I have to state that the place at which the Conference is to be held has not yet been determined upon. The Austrian Government initiated the proposal, and they naturally proposed Vienna as the place of meeting. We had no objection to offer to that selection, nor, so far as we know, had any other Power, with the exception of Russia. The Russian Government raised certain objections which I have not seen in detail, and I 1599 believe the matter is still under discussion. I do not, however, think the difficulty is one which is likely to continue long or to stand in the way of the meeting of the Conference.
§ EARL GRANVILLEMy Lords, on Tuesday evening I put a Question to my noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs which he—I think with some reason—described as rather vague and indefinite. There is no doubt whatever that there are a large number of questions of great interest and importance connected with Eastern affairs at this moment, to which answers would be of much interest; but great responsibility attaches to Her Majesty's Government in consequent of recent proceedings, and they must judge what information they can with propriety give. I shall therefore merely repeat the Questions which I put on Tuesday evening. In the first place, I wish to know whether our ships of war are at this moment at Gallipoli or Constantinople? Secondly, if they are there, whether it is at the invitation or with the permission, or against the permission, of the Turkish Government? Thirdly, I wish to know whether Her Majesty's Government have received any further information as to the likelihood of the Russians carrying out their announced intention of, in that event, occupying Constantinople? Fourthly, I shall be glad if the noble Earl will state whether the other Powers which he stated had applied for firmans have given any assurance as to joining in the measures which Her Majesty's Government have adopted?
§ THE EARL OF DERBYMy Lords, in the first place, let me state that I did not at all intend to complain or object to my noble Friend on Tuesday night for putting his Questions in a very general manner. On the contrary, I can quite understand his motive in having so framed them; but it is not easy, when Questions are put in general terms, to know the particular points to which the Answers should be directed. My Lords, the Questions which the noble Earl has put to-night are of a very precise and definite character, and I am prepared to Answer them—but I believe that in the present state of affairs it is better that I should do so briefly, avoiding statements of detail which will be found in the Papers which will be shortly laid on the Table of your Lordships' 1600 House, and avoiding, also, explanations of an argumentative character or which may lead to discussion. In answer to the first Question of my noble Friend, I have to state that the ships sent up are at Constantinople—or, to speak more correctly, they are, as we understand, at anchor at Prince's Island, a few miles below the city. Full discretion has been given to the Admiral to place the ships in the position that might appear to him most conducive to their security; but the anchorage which was suggested by the naval authorities at home as the most convenient has, I believe, been taken up. In answer to the second Question, whether the ships have gone up at the request of the Sultan or against his wish, I have to say that, on hearing the objections taken by the Porte, we at once communicated with that Government on those objections; and I telegraphed to Mr. Layard explaining the absolute necessity, in our judgment, for the ships going up, and I also communicated in the same sense with the Turkish Ambassador in this country. The result of those communications is that, although the Turkish Government has offered a formal protest against the passage of the Dardanelles by the Fleet, it took no step to oppose, or attempt to oppose, its passing. I am bound to add that, while under ordinary circumstances we should, as a matter of course, have respected the objection taken by the Porte, we could not but think that, in present circumstances, the Government of the Porte could hardly be considered a free agent, and that, without any feeling of hostility or jealousy towards this country, the Sultan might naturally, and not unreasonably, have felt a reluctance to incur towards Russia the responsibility which he might apprehend he would incur by granting the permission for which we asked. We therefore thought it better to take the responsibility on ourselves. With regard to the Question as to the course taken by other European Powers, I am afraid I have nothing to add to what I stated on Tuesday. The French and Italian Governments, as I then said, had authorized their Ambassadors to apply for firmans; but subsequently suspended action in the matter. With regard to the course taken by the Austrian Government, I am not yet in a position to speak with certainty. Now, my Lords, as to the Russian intention of occupying Con- 1601 stantinople, your Lordships will have seen the Circular Telegram of Prince Gortchakoff which has been published in all the newspapers; and I yesterday received another, which your Lordships will perhaps wish me to read. It is to this effect—
The English Government has announced to us that they are going to send a portion of their Fleet to Constantinople for the protection of the life and property of their subjects whose safety was threatened, according to the reports that reach them. We have in view the temporary entry of a part of our troops into Constantinople with exactly the same object, with the distinction that our protection, if required, will be extended to all the Christians. The two Governments would thus be fulfilling a common duty of humanity. It follows that this task, being of a pacific nature, could not assume in any way the character of mutual hostility."— [Turkey, No. 14 (1878). No. 5.]My Lords, that telegram is conciliatory and not unfriendly; but I am bound to say we do not admit that the case of a military occupation of the city itself and the case of sending men-of-war into a harbour below the city are parallel cases, and that opinion I have expresssd in a despatch written in reply to the telegram I have just read, which despatch I shall lay upon the Table. That, my Lords, is the position of affairs.
§ THE EARL OF DERBYNot the whole.