THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs a Question, of which he had given him private Notice, with regard to recent events in Bulgaria. It was now some weeks since Europe was surprised by a sudden announcement that either the Bulgarian Constitution must be suspended, or the Bulgarian Throne declared vacant. As to the immediate causes which led to this sudden 956 announcement, they had hitherto received no official information; and, as a month had since elapsed, it was not premature to ask the noble Earl whether he could give the House any information which would throw light on the subject?
§ EARL GRANVILLEMy Lords, I can quite understand the wish of the noble Earl to receive information upon this important question. The feeling in this country is very naturally inclined to revolt at the idea of anything that looks like a coup d'etat, or the disruption of a Constitution by anything but legal and constitutional means. But I am desirous to state what I have to say in an impartial and practical manner. It should be remembered that the Constitution of Bulgaria was not provided in the Treaty of Berlin. One was drawn up by the Russian Commissary and presented, before the accession of the Prince, to the Assembly of Notables. Important changes were made in this Constitution by the Assembly; they struck out the clerical, judicial, and nominated members; they gave universal suffrage, and abolished the Council of State, which, I apprehend, was intended to act as a Second Chamber. It appears that the Prince thought this democratic Constitution unfitted to a population unaccustomed to political life, and of whom only a small number were educated. The Prince was much dissatisfied with the Constitution as it was then settled—so much so, indeed, that, looking at the Papers at the Foreign Office, it appears that the Prince was very unwilling to accept the Throne at all, and he only did so after receiving encouragement from some of the Great Powers. His Royal Highness has continued, from time to time, to complain of the inefficiency of this Constitution and of the impossibility of his usefully discharging the duties intrusted to him with such imperfect machinery. Very different accounts are given with regard to the working of this Constitution. Those who oppose it declare that the result has been no government at all; that the Assembly represents exclusively the peasants, who are ignorant of politics, impatient of any taxation, and are only desirous of opposing all authorities; that reforms of the Administration have been thus rendered impossible; that great injustice has been done to the Mussulmans, contrary to the provisions of the Treaty of 957 Berlin. The opposite party say there is a gross exaggeration in these complaints, and appeal triumphantly to the great increase of revenue under this Constitution. The English Representative at Sofia during the late Government recorded his opinion that there was no government at all, although he thought the Prince exaggerated to himself the difficulties created by the Constitution. Mr. Lascelles, whose excellent judgment and tact seem to have acquired for him the respect and confidence of both parties, and who has uniformly recommended prudence and moderation to both, has been of opinion that the Constitution does require revision, though he is opposed to any violence in effecting the change. A Report fully describing the working of the Constitution is shortly expected from him. I have been informed by Englishmen of great authority, but whose names I have not received permission to quote, that in their opinion the weakness of the Executive is such as to make good government almost impossible. I am bound to admit that I myself have observed that whereas it is so desirable that Bulgaria should act for herself, it was impossible to secure fair treatment of certain minorities without the undesirable pressure of ourselves and other Powers. The Prince claims the right, which every man has, to abdicate a position in which he feels he can be of no use. Such threats or offers of abdication have not been without precedent. The late King of the Belgians, a very sagacious Sovereign, at an important crisis at Brussels, made such an offer with success, and with general approval. But this claim is not one which can be universally recognized without any qualification. I remember the late Sir Robert Peel, when criticizing a fact of contemporary history, dwelling upon the duty of a Minister in ordinary times to be ever sensitively ready to resign; but in a time of crisis he maintained that the responsibility lay in the opposite direction. The Prince may be perfectly right to desire some revision of the Constitution as an alternative to his abdication; he may be perfectly right to appeal to the National Assembly itself to decide the matter. We have not yet had any full explanations of some of the steps he has taken. But I think it is clear that before taking the final step, which may plunge the 958 country which he agreed to govern into internal anarchy, and possibly into complications with powerful neighbours, he ought to try all he can to arrive at a satisfactory arrangement—I may almost say compromise—with the Assembly. On the other hand, it appears to me that it would be madness on the part of a population lately emancipated, with little political experience, of whom it is said that none but the schoolmasters and stationmasters have sufficient education to fill official situations, not to try to arrive at a friendly understanding with the Prince, and to agree to improvements and reforms which, while they did not sacrifice liberty, would also secure order and justice to all classes of the community. The matter is, no doubt, one of very great importance, and I hope it will be settled in a manner satisfactory.