LORD BALFOURsaid, that, though the matter with which his Question dealt had been made the subject of discussion in "another place," he ventured to think the information given by Her Majesty's Government with regard to it was not very great, nor very well calculated to allay the suspicion that had been aroused. As the matter was of some public importance, he desired to ask their Lordships' attention for a few moments while he stated the considerations which had induced him to put this Question on the Paper. As their Lordships were probably aware, in the year 1848 an Act of Parliament was passed authorizing the British Government to send a diplomatic Agent to the Sovereign of the Roman States. He was not aware whether that Act of Parliament was ever taken advantage of; but from a year or two subsequent to that time, down to 1874, he believed he was correct in stating that regular diplomatic intercourse was maintained with the Vatican, either by some agent of our own attached to the Legation at Florence, or in some other way. During that time this country was represented by various distinguished people, among whom were Lord Lyons and Lord Ampt- 767 hill. But in the year 1874 Mr. Jervoise resigned the appointment, and from that time to the present no other appointment of a similar nature bad been made. He was led to think that this mission of Mr. Errington seemed to revive that diplomatic intercourse with the Vatican in everything except the name. He certainly did not desire to draw from the noble Earl opposite, or from any of their Lordships, any information as to the abstract desirability of renewing or maintaining such diplomatic intercourse. He could easily imagine a variety of considerations to be urged on one side or the other. On the one side it would be gratifying to many Roman Catholic subjects of Her Majesty that we should have a diplomatic Agent accredited to the Vatican; and it also might be thought that, in consequence of the influence which the Vatican exercised, and which it was impossible to disregard, it would be for the advantage of this country that it should be properly represented at the Vatican. At the same time, there might be considerations on the other side. He did not profess to have any decided opinions on the subject. If their Lordships were ever called upon to give an opinion upon it, he had do doubt that, like himself, the majority of that House would be largely guided by the experience of the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and others who had held that Office. But they knew that at the present time Mr. Errington was staying in Rome, and was, he did not say the channel of negotiations, but, at any rate, the channel of communication or of conversation between the Foreign Secretary and the Vatican. He thought it would be very desirable that their Lordships should be informed exactly upon what footing Mr. Errington was now at Rome, whether on the footing indicated in the Question he had given Notice of or some other. One naturally inquired how long Mr. Errington was to be made an agent of communication between Her Majesty's Government and the Vatican. If it were not unduly trespassing on the patience of the House and the noble Earl opposite, he would like that the noble Earl should tell their Lordships what were the subjects of communication. They knew that Mr. Errington, a few years ago, was elected to Parliament in the interests of that Party known to be 768 in favour of Home Rule; but he had recently severed his connection with that Party in what he called himself "the interest of the tenant farmers." He was also known to be in favour of denominational education, whether for primary schools or Universities. It might be that his mission to the Vatican had reference to one or other of these subjects. He had heard, on what he believed to be good authority, that, through the good offices of Her Majesty's Government, a considerable sum of money, which was said to be impounded by the Italian Government, but really belonging to the Vatican, had been, or was about to be, repaid to the Vatican, and it might be that Mr. Errington's mission had reference to something of that kind. Again, he had heard, on what he believed to be very good authority indeed, that a Jesuit priest had been accredited by the Vatican to the noble Lord the Viceroy of India; and it might be that the question of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction which the Archbishop of Goa exercised there over Roman Catholic fellow-subjects was the cause of negotiations which were going on. At the same time, he did not ask to be informed of these things if the noble Earl said it was in any way inconvenient that the information should be given. But he understood, from the answer which had been given in "another place," that it was not that it would be inconvenient to give Parliament this information, but that this mission of Mr. Errington, being not an official mission, there was no official record kept of what he said and what he did. Now, it seemed to him that it was hardly possible for this Gentleman to be the channel of communication between the Foreign Office of Her Majesty's Government and the Vatican without his mission partaking more or less of an official nature; and, for his own part, he would look with much less distrust upon a mission which was said to be of an official character. And if it was said that it was not for the public interest that any information should be given to Parliament about it at present, he would wait patiently until such time as the noble Earl thought it convenient to make a communication on the subject. It seemed to him that matters of communication must be either important or of no great importance. If, on 769 the one hand, they were of importance, they should be made the subject of an official record which could be at the command of Parliament, should Parliament see fit to ask for it; and if the mission had reference to matters which were not in themselves of great importance, he did not see, though he spoke with all respect, why the communications and their nature should not be given to their Lordships. He had already said he had no desire to prejudge the question of whether or not it was desirable to resume diplomatic intercourse with the Vatican; and at the same time, he hoped he had justified the Question of which he had given Notice. He would now ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Mr. Errington has received any authority from him to enter into communication with the Vatican on matters of interest to Her Majesty's Government and to the Papal See; whether any letter has been addressed to Mr. Errington by the Secretary of State, with the view of being shown to the Cardinal Secretary of State, pointing out Mr. Errington as a gentleman who could treat confidentially with the Vatican on such matters, and whether Cardinal Jacobini has not in consequence received Mr. Errington as the recommended agent (agente raccomandato) of the British Government; whether any communication has been made by Mr. Errington to the Secretary of State as well as to Cardinal Jacobini as the result of such an arrangement; and, if so, whether those communications will be laid on the Table of the House?
§ LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, that, as he had addressed their Lordships at some length last year on the subject of being represented at the Vatican, he would not repeat what he then stated. He was agreeably surprised that the noble Lord had not raised any objection to the appointment of an accredited Agent to the Vatican, a fact which was of some significance. The Prime Minister said last year that they were within a measurable distance of civil war in Ireland. He thought he was justified in saying now that they were within measurable distance of martial law in that country. This circumstance was an additional argument in favour of having an avowed Agent at Rome, for if the Government had made representations to the Court 770 of Rome as to the conduct of any of the priests or Bishops, and if the Court of Rome failed to suspend or remove such priests, the Government would then be much more free to act towards them with the necessary severity, without its being possible to raise a cry in any part of Europe of religious persecution. That he might not be misunderstood, he wished to say that he was a personal friend of Mr. Errington, and thought that in the best of times he would have been a credit to any constituency in Ireland; and it was a mean thing of the Government to give him no remuneration at a time when all Irish gentlemen were in such straitened circumstances. But he thought that a Protestant was to be preferred to a Catholic as Agent of Her Majesty's Government at Rome, and the Foreign Office could not do better than go back to Mr. Jervoise. Now, some who objected to the presence, at the Court of Rome, of an Agent of the British Government, said that it was an exchange of spiritual matters for political support. He asked what was the chief bane of Ireland? Was it not the prevalence of murder, and the connivance and sympathy with it of the Irish peasants, which made it impossible to bring criminals to justice? Murder had nothing whatever to do with politics, which were debatable things. Every Government was equally interested in preventing murder. Murder and crimes of violence belonged to the domain of faith and morals. What had the Government done to check these crimes, or what could they do? Protestant preachers could do nothing to moralize the Irish peasants; they would not be listened to. Papal action alone would be efficacious as a remedy for this state of things. In other Catholic countries a cross marked the scene of a murder, and called forth from the wayfarers a prayer for the victim. If a Papal Rescript were issued, enjoining on the parish priests in Ireland to set up a stone cross at their own expense on the scene of every murder, and to bid their parishioners, whenever they passed by it, to recite the usual prayers for the victim, it would do much to moralize the Irish peasantry, and to eradicate the unhappy sympathy with murder and outrage. The law of the land already recognized this principle of invoking alien spiritual authority, when it ad- 771 ministered oaths, even in this House, to Hindoos and Buddhists according to Hindoo and Buddhist forms. He refused to believe that the hesitations of the Foreign Office were due to fears of Nonconformist electors, and he refused to believe that bigotry prevailed to such an extent. There had been evidence to the contrary from Ulster, for when the language and conduct of some priests in Ireland had exceeded all bounds, a cry went up from Ulster as to why they were not checked by Rome, thus proving that the people of Ulster believed that the Court of Rome, if appealed to, would not sanction such language. He believed that these hesitations to appoint an avowed Agent at Rome were rather due to the feelings which had dictated the pamphlet of the Prime Minister against the Vatican, and which had culminated in the defeat, by a majority of 58, at the commencement of this Session.
§ EARL GRANVILLEMy Lords, the two noble Lords who have just spoken have entered into the general question whether it is desirable or not that this country should renew its diplomatic relations with the Vatican. The noble Lord who spoke last is strongly in favour of that course; and the noble Lord who spoke first, with that moderation and reserve which he always observes upon all subjects, concurred in that opinion, or seemed to be rather in favour of than against it. Now, Her Majesty's Government have no proposal of this sort to make to your Lordships. I do not think it necessary to go at any great length into any academical disquisition upon the arguments for or against that course. The noble Lord who spoke first said that he put his Questions to me because the answers given in "another place" were unsatisfactory. What he meant by that statement is not quite clear. They could not have been perfectly satisfactory to the noble Lord, because I doubt his having read them, as, notwithstanding the declarations which have been made in the House of Commons, and that of Lord Hartington, for instance, with regard to the Archbishop of Goa, he says he knows, on excellent authority, that those representations had been made. Now, I do not gather from the statements of the noble Lord that the series of Questions which he has put to me is based upon any information which he has received, for it rather ap- 772 pears to be a copy of some which have already been put in "another place." I am afraid my answer to the noble Lord will be rather dull, as I have no changes or additions to make in the answers which have already been given, and with which your Lordships have probably, in an informal manner, become acquainted. Mr. Errington did not go to Rome at the request of Her Majesty's Government. He has received no appointment, nor any remuneration for services or for expenses. He has had no authority from me, or any Member of the Government, to negotiate with, or to make any proposal, or to proffer any request to the Vatican. He told me that he was going to pass the winter at Rome, and asked whether he could be of any use to Her Majesty's Government. After consultation with several of my Colleagues, I stated to him that a person of his standing in Parliament, who was well known in Rome, and who had the full confidence of the Government, would have great advantages in communicating authentic information on matters of interest to the Roman Catholic subjects of the Empire.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYAuthentic information to Rome or to the Government?
§ EARL GRANVILLETo the Vatican. This statement he was perfectly at liberty to communicate to the Cardinal Secretary. There are no official or diplomatic Papers. It is not usual to present any Papers which are not of that character. I may remind the House that it was on more than one occasion asked and refused in Parliament, that the instructions under which the paid diplomatic servants acted, who resided at Rome during a period of more than 40 years, should be presented. In the present case nothing could be more inconvenient than to answer in detail a string of leading Questions, pointing out which of the facts assumed were correct, and which were not so, about Papers which are not to be presented. There is an old French proverb—"Plead that which is false in order that you may learn what is true." I apply that most certainly not to the noble Lord, nor to any other person, but to the statements which are made, and which the Government have great difficulty in answering. But yesterday afternoon Sir Charles Dilke told me that in answer to his as- 773 sertion that Mr. Errington had received no remuneration, Sir H. Drummond Wolff had said that he knew as a fact that his expenses were paid out of the Secret Service Fund. Sir Charles Dilke in vain endeavoured to show that to give a negative answer was to create a most fatal precedent. Cheers showed the conviction of the House. There are some who object to Secret Service, and there are those who think that on certain occasions it is a very useful element, if limited in its operation. I am not going to argue that case; but, taking it as it is, evidently secrecy is one of its elements. And if anyone states that he knows certain things as facts, and they are to be taken as true, unless a distinct contradiction is given to them, the position would be almost intolerable. I think that Sir Charles Dilke acted with his usual judgment. After taking the opinion of one or two of his Colleagues, he replied by giving a complete denial; and he added—''I have not the authority of Lord Granville for making this statement"—wishing to cover me from exactly the precedent which such a statement might establish. Of course, I was perfectly conscious of the fact that not one shilling had been given, or authorized to be given, from the Department over which I preside; but, considering the fact that this was announced within the hon. Member's own knowledge, I thought it better to telegraph these words to Sir Augustus Paget—
''Sir Drummond Wolff has announced in the House of Commons that he knows Mr. Erring-ton's expenses have been paid out of the Secret Service Fund. Ask Mr. Errington if he has received any money in any shape from Her Majesty's Government in connection with his visit to Rome. Reply by telegraph.From Sir A. Paget, Rome, Feb. 16, 1882.—I have asked Errington the question in your Lordship's telegram of yesterday, and have received from him the following answer:—'In reply to your note, I beg to say I have not received any money, directly or indirectly, from Her Majesty's Government, or any Member of it, for any purpose whatever. I have incurred no expenses except in travelling for my own pleasure.'I really think it is right, my Lords, to state this; and I state it more especially, because if in the future assertions of this kind are made, I am not to be called upon to answer them on the ground that if I do not give a positive contradiction, I admit what is alleged to be true.
LORD BALFOURsaid, he hoped the noble Earl did not understand him to make any such assertion in the course of his speech.
§ EARL GRANVILLEI am perfectly aware that the noble Lord did not allude to it in the observations he made.
LORD ORANMORE AND BROWNEunderstood the statement which had just been made as an acknowledgment that Mr. Errington was an unofficial and unpaid agent to the Vatican.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI an not going to pass any criticism on the question as to any formal representation being made to the Court of Rome. It is impossible either to condemn or to approve a policy until you know upon what grounds it has been pursued. I can imagine circumstances in which it might be necessary, and circumstances in which it would be highly inexpedient. I rose to point out that the noble Earl used one word as to which I am not quite sure that he fully appreciated the meaning that might possibly be put on it. He said that Mr. Errington had the whole confidence of Her Majesty's Government; and, therefore, he would be in a position to give information to the Vatican. These words may be interpreted by some to mean that Mr. Errington did communicate with the Vatican on behalf of Her Majesty's Government as to the policy they desired to pursue—in fact, that he was an unpaid, unaccredited diplomatic agent. On the other hand, these words may simply be meant to convey that the Government hold in high esteem, which is no doubt justified, Mr. Errington's discretion and personal qualities, and with these qualifications they have full confidence in any information he may give to the Vatican. I do not in the least blame the noble Earl for such communications as he has thought fit to make; I am not in a position to do it; but my impression is that the reticence he has shown will rather tend to injure the object he has in view, and that people will attach more importance to this matter on account of the doubt and ambiguity hanging over Mr. Errington's position than they would if the noble Earl would tell us that Mr. Errington had a message to the Vatican and he had delivered it.
§ EARL GRANVILLEI agree with a good deal of what the noble Marquess has said.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYThe latter part of my observations?
§ EARL GRANVILLENo; certainly not.
§ House adjourned at a quarter before Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.