§
My Lord,—Upon communication to the MM. de Lesseps of the object of my coming to Paris, they stated in the most friendly terms that they thoroughly understood the situation, and that, so far as they were concerned, they regarded us as in no way bound under the existing circumstances to press the Agreement on Parliament.
There were, however, two parts of it, the spontaneous adoption of which, notwithstanding the abandonment of the Agreement (if such should be decided upon), they announced their determination to propose to their shareholders.
In the first place, immediate measures would be taken so that the second Canal during the greater part of its length might be rapidly constructed within the limits of the land already conceded, although they might at the proper time have to apply to the Egyptian Government for additional ground where the present width was insufficient.
Secondly, the proposed reduction of dues pari passu with the increased profits would be maintained.
117
As to all the other arrangements contemplated in the Agreement, both sides would be free.
Her Majesty's Government would be thus under no obligation to use their good offices to obtain for the Company the extension of the Concession beyond 1068, or any other privileges.
The capital required for the second Canal would be raised as the Company might determine, either by the issue pro rata of more shares, in which operation England would have the option of subscribing in respect of her 176,602 shares, or by way of debentures, with the like option.
It is my duty to observe that the former course would have the obvious effect of retarding the fall in the rate of dues.
The conversations with the MM. de Lesseps, like those which we had on former occasions, were of a confidential character, and I am, therefore, only able in this despatch to report their result.
I conveyed to M. do Lesseps the appreciation by Her Majesty's Government of his straightforward and friendly spirit during the negotiations, an assurance which he cordially reciprocated.
I have, &c.,
(Signed) "C. RIVERS WILSON.
Now, my Lords, this was the position in which we found ourselves. We considered that, although MM. do Lesseps would have had no right whatever to complain if Parliament had rejected the Agreement we have made, yet that they had claims upon Her Majesty's Government to take Parliamentary opinion before abandoning it; and we would not have consented to waive that application to Parliament if M. de Lesseps had chosen to hold us to our bargain. But your Lordships will see that the position is very different when we are left to take free action. Your Lordships will remember the time of the year in which we find ourselves. You are aware that there are a large number of orthodox Notices on the Paper, and you are aware of the difficulty that would exist in passing this scheme if it were seriously opposed. Your Lordships have also to remember the very great probability, in the long debates on such a question as this, of other irritating topics being introduced and other questions being raised, which I think might be very offensive, not only to France, but to other nations. I think it also clear that on a matter of this sort—a commercial matter of great difficulty, complicated with political elements, as it has been in the manner that I have described—it is very desirable that it should not be attempted to be forced
118
through Parliament unless there were a more or less general approval of it. Under these circumstances, I hope your Lordships will admit that the Government have not been ill-advised in coming to this decision, and in stating that it is not their intention to ask Parliament to assent to the Agreement.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, I cannot but congratulate the noble Earl on the wisdom of the course lie invites us to pursue. I am sure the news will be received with a feeling of relief, in all centres where the commercial and shipping interest is strong, that this disastrous scheme has been abandoned, and that England has abstained from raising up a barrier to her own commercial progress, which might, under the proposed Agreement, have extended to the term of a century. My Lords, I presume the noble Earl will lay on the Table some Papers with reference to this scheme—[Earl GRANVILLE: Hear, hear!]—and its abandonment. No doubt those Papers, when laid before us, will throw light on many dark places in the negotiations which have passed. Still, there are some things with respect to which I confess I should like to have heard a fuller explanation from the noble Earl. he says that M. do Lesseps proposes to cut a new Canal without the assistance, or, as I understand it, the sanction and countenance of the English Government; but to do that he must take Egyptian soil. He must take some land which has been, conceded to him for other purposes, and which, if I mistake not, he is precluded by the tenour of the existing Instruments from using, except for the purposes named in it. For that object he must obtain the consent of the Egyptian Government, and the consent of the Egyptian Government, in the view of most persons, under existing circumstances, will be held to pro-suppose the consent of the English Government. I shall be glad to know if the noble Earl has formed any conception in his own mind of the terms upon which that consent will be given? Shall we be prepared to give M. de Lesseps another Canal without taking any security that the passage of British commerce will be more free, the administration more impartial, and the facilities offered more complete than they are now? Shall we accept such bad terms as those which have driven the shipping interest to so marked a 119 demonstration of dissatisfaction at the present time? Again, I feel it will be necessary for us, after this strange history, to press the noble Earl rather more earnestly to be frank with us as to the intentions of Her Majesty's Government with respect to Egypt. Now that such doctrines have been advanced with respect to the power of piercing the Canal, such difficulties have been raised up to the future development of British commerce in that direction that the power which England holds on the Isthmus at this moment becomes to us an object of greater interest and significance. And the precise intentions of Her Majesty's Government with respect to the occupation of Egypt will become a matter on which, I think, Parliament will require to be informed before it separates. Those six months which Lord Hartington said would see the end of the British occupation are now nearly expired—we are in the sixth month. I presume that by this time the Government have come to some resolution as to the course they intend to pursue. Again, I should like to know precisely how all this history leaves the alleged and assumed right of monopoly of M. de Lesseps and his Company? I quite agree with the noble Earl that we ought to treat the Company with all good feeling and equity; but I do not agree with him in the reason he gave for that opinion. He spoke as if the Company was in some sort a representative of France. I cannot admit that doctrine for a single moment. It is a private Company, and nothing more—a private Company in which England is nearly as large a shareholder as France. But, of course, it is entitled, like every other Company, to just, equitable, and considerate treatment. But, hitherto, Her Majesty's Government have entertained what has seemed to me a strange idea—namely, that that considerate treatment involved the necessity of a recognition of monopoly, not justified certainly on the surface of the Instruments we possess, not assigned by any unanimity of legal opinion, refused to them by many distinguished authorities, and obviously inconsistent with the first interests of this country. I hope, now that this scheme has been abandoned, all that has happened in connection with the scheme is abandoned too; that we are to take the whole incident as not having occurred; 120 that all those gravely imprudent admissions which were made in the House of Commons are to be banished from our recollection as if they were a dream; that nothing which has been said, either hero or elsewhere, implies an admission of a monopoly which this country, by the authorized channels for the expression of its will, has never yet sanctioned; and that the admission of that monopoly shall not be held to have been established by the unfortunate expressions of certain Ministers of the Crown, especially as they themselves have said that those expressions were only drawn from thorn by the exigencies of debate. My Lords, these are important questions. I do not know whether the noble Earl will spontaneously give us any further information as to the intentions of Her Majesty's Government in this respect. At all events, when we see the Papers, and have fuller means of considering the history and incidents of this almost unexampled diplomatic transaction, we shall be able to judge how far it is our duty to take further measures for ascertaining, it may be, the views of Parliament, or of Her Majesty's Government, in respect to the interests of England, which appear, in this instance, to have been so severely compromised.