EARL GEANVILLEMy Lords, I too desire, by leave of the House, to 301 make a personal explanation. Owing to the conversational tone in which I answered the Question of the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess Salisbury) yesterday, two slight mistakes have been made reports. Your Lordships will remember that I stated that Her Majesty's Government had authorized my noble Friend the Secretary of State for India (the Earl of Kimberley) and myself to meet M. de Staal and M. Lessar on the delimitation of Afghan territory, and that we had come substantially to an agreement, which was satisfactory to Her Majesty's Government and to the Government of India, and had been submitted to the Russian Government. I find that the Russian Ambassador is doubtful whether the statements made in Parliament may not be construed as meaning that His Excellency had the power to conclude an agreement. Although I do not think this is the case, I willingly use his words as to what has taken place—
Lord Granville, Lord Kimberley, M. Lessar, and himself have agreed to a draft arrangement relating to the delimitation of Afghanistan. He has submitted this draft for the judgment of his Government, giving it his support.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI only wish to say that I am glad the noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville) has made the statement he has, because I most certainly understood the noble Earl in precisely the same sense as the Russian Ambassador. The explanation, therefore, is very opportune. I do not know whether the noble Earl will answer the Question, but I should like to ask him whether there is, in the recommendations sent to the Russian Government, any provision for an engagement that the Russian Government shall not hereafter transgress the line so delimited?
§ EARL GRANVILLEI do not think it is desirable, on a Question to go into any particular points with regard to this matter.