§ THE EARL OF HARROWBY
, in rising to call attention to the dangers which 537 threaten British commerce and British missionary enterprize in East Central Africa in connection with recent events at Zanzibar and on the Zambesi and with the alleged spread of the Slave Trade; and to inquire, What steps Her Majesty's Government are taking to protect the great interests involved; also to ask whether a map can be presented to Parliament showing the exact boundaries of the various territories on the East Coast of Africa which have been recently assigned by international agreement to the influence of Great Britain and certain other European Powers? said, that in consequence of the events now in progress in that part of the world our efforts for civilizing and Christianizing the Native Tribes were in great peril, while our commercial enterprize, which it was so important to encourage in all parts of the globe, and our great Imperial interests were also seriously threatened. Events were hastening on rapidly, and it was necessary that the people of this country should be aware of what was going on, and should strengthen the hands of Her Majesty's Government to deal with the most difficult problem which had presented itself for a long period of years. Having described the geographical features of the vast region, he said that Zanzibar, the seat of a Mahometan Power, represented the only civilization known to the millions inhabiting that region. England had been on terms of the most cordial friendship with the Sultan of Zanzibar. She had had her Slave Squadron there, and had been able to exercise a most healthy influence over vast districts, an influence all the more important because it came through the hands of a Mahometan Sovereign. Up to 1884 our exertions in stopping the Slave Trade had been very successful, as was shown by the testimony of Sir John Kirk. How was it that so deep an interest was excited in England about this question of Central Africa? The first cause was that remarkable book of Livingstone's, with the description of all his wanderings from 1840 to 1856. The effect was so great that the English Government of that day actually sent Livingstone out again, with Consular authority, in this comparatively unknown region. They sent him out to the Zambesi with an Expedition which cost £30,000, and which lasted from 538 1858 to 1864, an Expedition which settled the position of England for a long time in those parts, and brought English power home to the mind, to the eyes, and to the feelings of the wild tribes. Livingstone described the instructions given to the Expedition in these words—The main object of the Zambesi Expedition, as our instructions from Her Majesty's Government explicitly stated, was to extend the knowledge already attained of the geography and mineral and agricultural resources of Eastern and Central Africa, to improve our acquaintance with the inhabitants, and to endeavour to engage them to apply themselves to industrial pursuits and to the cultivation of their lands, with a view to the production of raw material to be exported to England in return for British manufactures, and it was hoped that, by encouraging the Natives to occupy themselves in the development of the resources of the country, a considerable advance might be made towards the extinction of the Slave Trade, as they would not be long in discovering that the former would eventually be a more certain source of profit than the latter. The Expedition was sent in accordance with the settled policy of the English Government; and the Earl of Clarendon, being then at the head of the Foreign Office, the Mission was organized under his immediate care. When a change of Government ensued we experienced the same generous countenance and sympathy from the Earl of Malmesbury as we had previously received from Lord Clarendon; and, on the accession of Earl Russell to the high Office he has so long filled, we were always favoured with equally ready attention and the same prompt assistance. Thus the conviction was produced that our work embodied the principles not of any one Party, but of the hearts of the statesmen and people of England generally. Though collections were made, it was always distinctly understood that, however desirable these and other explorations might be, 'Her Majesty's Government attached more importance to the moral influence that might be exerted on the minds of the Natives by a well-regulated and orderly household of Europeans setting an example of consistent moral conduct to all who might witness it, treating the people with kindness, and relieving their wants, teaching them to make experiments in agriculture, explaining to them the more simple arts, imparting to them religious instruction as far as they are capable of receiving it, and inculcating peace and goodwill to each other.'The Expedition spent six years in the country, and met with a cordial reception from many Native Chiefs. When Livingstone's second book was published a great enthusiasm sprang up in this country. Many leading men at the two Universities of Oxford and Cambridge took part in the movement, with the result that the Universities' Mission was founded, which had spent some 539 £46,000 in the district, having established schools and centres of work in the Island of Zanzibar. In 1875 the Church of Scotland came forward and established a mission on the highlands between the Zambesi and Lake Nyassa, where a large number of European agents were engaged. The cost to the Church of Scotland was already some £35,000, £4,000 a-year being regularly subscribed. They had a most important boarding school, with 75 scholars, among them being 25 sons of the principal Chiefs in the neighbourhood; besides a day school and a medical mission. The Free Church of Scotland equally came forward and had founded five mission stations on Lake Nyassa, with 25 agents, and a very good mission school. They had also spent £75,000 on the work. The importance of the district commercially had been early recognized, and the African Lakes Company, which was largely supported by Glasgow capital, had established 12 stations in the district, and had now 25 European agents and four steamers plying on the river and lake. They educated the Natives, and paid regularly for their labour, and the Natives eagerly responded. Beyond that, individual enterprize had already touched the country. Traders were settling there, and Natives were willingly coming forward to work for wages. He thought that was a picture of which all British subjects might well be proud. Since the opening of the Suez Canal, Europeans had been scrambling for territory in East Africa. The Berlin Conference in 1885 set up the curious modern Congo Free State. That Conference did not actually touch the East Coast; but it expressed the wish of all the Powers that the Zambesi should be brought into the scheme—that was to say, that it should be open to all nations, that slavery should be abolished on its banks, and freedom of religion secured. Another diplomatic act took place later; Lord Iddesleigh, in October, 1886, signed a diplomatic instrument with Germany with regard to 1,200 miles of coast, when it was settled that certain portions of that district should be marked out as coming within the sphere of certain European countries. Under that instrument Germany secured a territory with a coast line of some 500 miles, which was likely to amount to about the size of the whole German Empire in 540 Europe. It was, however, only fair to say that country in Africa could not be valued by miles. It was possible that 100 miles of good territory might be more valuable than 300 miles of inferior territory. England had hitherto never thought of acquiring any territory in this neighbourhood, and there had been no question of territorial acquisition; but he could not but think that many of our difficulties might be traced to the Natives and Arabs having taken alarm at the idea of territorial annexation. There had also been another recent change. Formerly Germany only stipulated with regard to a north and south limit of its sphere of influence; but in a recent despatch representations had been made as to a western boundary, and Germany might now be considered as in contact with the Congo district. Other Treaties had also been made, and by one of these Portugal was assured by France that she was quite free to take a country of about 200 miles, the effect of which would be to extend the territory of Portugal from the Indian to the Atlantic Ocean. Germany had also assented to this, politely adding, however, "provided that no one else objected." But Portugal had no title whatever to this country. Hitherto she merely possessed the territory along the coast, which was utilized as a convict settlement to the great detriment of the Natives. The Portuguese convicts had generally developed into slave dealers, and had been a great source of suffering to the Natives. He could not find that Portugal had the shadow of a title to this territory, which it now claimed from Mozambique to the Zambesi. As a general rule original discovery gave a title, but this country was discovered by the heroic Livingstone; it was then occupied by English and Scotch settlers, and it had been hallowed by the graves of Englishmen of all sorts and conditions. The title to this territory belonged, therefore, if to anyone, to us. Nor had Portugal the least claim on moral grounds, for such power as it had had in this region it had used, not to civilize, but to lower the state of the Natives. In September, 1884, Sir John Kirk sent home a despatch reporting the existence of a large Slave Trade from the Portuguese Possessions to the French Colonies in Madagascar and the Comoro Islands. The hands of Portugal were by no means clean in this matter. Did their 541 Lordships fully realize what the Slave Trade in Central Africa really meant? He had recently seen a Slave Trade map, showing the districts in which it prevailed, and showing the parts of that Continent which had been entirely depopulated by that iniquitous traffic. Districts of 200 and 300 square miles, which at one time contained numbers of populous villages, had been completely depopulated and left in ruins by the Slave Traders. A traveller in the last few years, passing by the southern end of Lake Tanganyika, near Lake Nyassa, found the district studded with large and prosperous villages. Returning a year later he found only the ruins of burnt houses and human bones. Similarly he found villages to the north of Lake Nyassa, which had been peopled by a prosperous community, with flocks and herds swept away. The Slave Trade of Central Africa was one of the most cruel in the world. Livingstone, who was very careful as to all his statements, stated that only one out of every ten Natives captured was brought alive to the coast; nine out of every ten succumbed to the sufferings of the journey and to their ill-treatment. The Arabs took up their abode in some peaceful village, and being supplied with firearms they some night set the village on fire, shot down those of the inhabitants they did not want, and carried off the remainder to the coast, making them bear the ivory that they had accumulated. It was impossible to speak too strongly of the horrors of this Slave Trade carried on by these Arabs employed by the Portuguese outcasts on the coast. Up to 1884 the trade seemed to be dying out, but lately it had shown increased vitality. Possibly this was due to certain events that had lately happened and which had not been without their effect upon the minds of the Natives, inducing them to think that England had ceased to be the Power that it was. Last year the town of Minengani, inhabited by British subjects, was bombarded by the Portuguese without any declaration of war. The bombardment was insulting to the English Government, and the Portuguese still remained in occupation of that portion of the coast, and as far as he knew Portugal had not yet paid any compensation for this high-handed act. Then, according to the Royal Scottish Geographical Society, the Portuguese had raised their tariff on the Zambesi, 542 thereby shutting out our trade and impeding our communication with the great lakes, and had even threatened to close the Zambesi to steamers not owned and manned by Portuguese subjects. The Portuguese Parliament, after a five days' debate, had claimed to hold the whole of the Zambesi for themselves. On the north of Lake Nyassa there was an important British Settlement, which had been besieged by the Arabs for several days, at the end of which the place was relieved by an Englishman and 5,000 Natives who came willingly to the help of the English against the Arabs. Within the last few months our Acting Consul, that remarkable man Mr. Buchanan, and a clergyman who was with him, had been stripped of their clothing and publicly insulted in the grossest manner by an Arab Chief dwelling near Lake Nyassa, who had up till then always treated Englishmen with respect and consideration. Mr. Buchanan, he should add, was only released after the Chief had received as ransom 200 bales of calico. From the University Mission established on the coast above Zanzibar the information had come that the country was very unsettled, that the acquisition of territory by Germany was exciting the Native mind, and that there was much talk about sweeping away all Europeans. Archdeacon Farler, in a letter dated May 27, 1888, said—I find much bitterness among the Natives about the new German spoliation. Arabs are suggesting that all the Native tribes should join and make a grand smash of all Europeans in East Africa. I fear troubled times are before us.When all these circumstances were considered, how England had apparently been insulted by the Portuguese, how the way to her Settlements on the lakes had been barred to Englishmen, and how Germany was advancing, it could not excite wonder that England was looked upon in that country as a retreating Power. That was a fact well worthy of serious consideration. All foreign political interests seemed to be against our maintaining our position in Eastern Central Africa. France did not wish to have us close to Madagascar; Germany was clearly desirous of having as much of Africa to herself as possible; and Portugal was most anxious to oust us from Central Africa. On looking at the latest maps, it seemed as if there were a paper blockade against England. 543 But not only were all political interests against us, but powerful commercial interests also. Enormous plantations were being reared by the Portuguese and the Arabs along the coast, and the owners of almost all these plantations depended for their success upon slave labour. They naturally, therefore, looked with no favouring eye upon the enemies of the Slave Trade. Then the interest of the traders in drink was involved. England had hitherto done her best to shut out from Eastern Africa spirits and firearms and powder; but the German territory, unfortunately, was already being flooded with vile spirits. Political interests and commercial interests were thus united in the desire to expel the English from this part of the great Continent; and if they had their way what was to become of England's missions of civilization and Christianity? He felt sure that matters would not be allowed to drift by the noble Marquess at the head of the Government, who had always shown extreme regard for the honour and welfare of his country. If matters were allowed to drift, there could be only one termination, and that was that those grand Englishmen and Scotchmen who had laboured so hard amongst the Natives would be swept away by force. He could not think that the conscience of the country would sanction England's withdrawal from Central Africa, for it would be a withdrawal from that part of the country which was the nest and home of the Slave Trade, which would flourish luxuriantly if we were to abandon the Natives. Better never to have explored that country, never to have made friends with the Native Chiefs, if we were now to abandon them to their greatest foes. He suggested that the question ought to be faced boldly, and that we should either say at once that Lake Nyassa and the ways of access to it must remain within the sphere of British influence, or, if that was impossible, that we should negotiate with the other European Powers and induce them to place the Zambesi and the chain of the lakes in the same position as the Congo State. He might be told that England had plenty of territory already, and that it would be wise to diminish her responsibilities. But could anybody really think that the retreat of England from Central Africa would have good results? Would such a course 544 have no effect upon her interests elsewhere—in the Victoria Nyanza district, for example? Would her task in Egypt be made easier? Would it be easier to deal with Turkey after surrendering to France, Germany, and Portugal? Should we find it easier to deal with Arabia and Persia, with South Africa and the Zulus, and with India if the impression spread that we were a retreating Power, and that we were deserting our Indian fellow-subjects on the East Coast of Africa? The policy of retreating from a position we had once taken seemed to be a most fatal one. It might be thought he was exaggerating the knowledge of what went on, and the effect that knowledge would produce; but on that point be would quote what Sir John Kirk wrote to Lord Granville in November, 1884. Sir John Kirk said—I was thinking that it would be well to ask the Sultan to ignore slavery as a legal status at Zanzibar. Unfortunately, just at present distorted accounts of our action in Egypt and of recent events in South Africa, maliciously circulated through the Arab Press, especially through an Arabic paper published in London, have made it more difficult for a Native Mahometan Ruler to take the initiative in such a measure.Their Lordships could have no idea how complete the communication was; everything that passed in Egypt and in Zululand, everything that was going on as to our political position was made known in East Africa, partly through Native journals and partly by an Arab journal published in London. Our position, therefore, was one that we must consider with the greatest care. Far be it from him to object to Germany co-operating with us, if she would, in the civilization and regeneration of Africa. Far be it from him to suggest that we should be jealous of other nations getting territories as we had done. But we must not allow any great blow to be struck at our power, good faith, and persistency. But we could not maintain our character unless we supported it from time to time by action. The whole story was a warning to us that we must show that we were not only united at home, but that we were thoroughly strong abroad.
§ THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY on STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY)
My Lords, in the course of the interesting statement of my noble Friend he 545 dwelt a great deal upon the vast size and enormous distances of the continent which he discussed; but I think that in the arrangement of his subject he somewhat forgot the consideration which he exhorted us to dwell upon so much. I think he has confused, or rather mixed up, transactions which took place at enormous distances on the East Coast of Africa; and I think your Lordships will hardly get a clear view of what has taken place, and is taking place, unless you separate the consideration of transactions which took place in various parts of that enormous territory. In the first place, there is a misapprehension on the part of my noble Friend which I must correct. He speaks of England having retreated from that Coast, and talks of our being dethroned and of our power declining. Well, I can only say I do not know to what state of things he refers by way of comparison. Before the year 1884, which he has selected as marking an epoch, England had, as far as I know, no possessions whatever upon the East Coast of Africa and no territorial position in Zanzibar. All the power that England had may be summed in the one name of Sir John Kirk. He was a man of great ability and experience, and he had undoubtedly great influence with the Sultan of Zanzibar. Beyond that secondary and indirect influence which we may have obtained in the Council Chamber of Zanzibar we had no power or position on the East Coast. It was about 1884 the Germans proposed certain arrangements by which they should be allowed to occupy and to administer certain parts of the East mainland of Africa that was supposed to be in the dominion of the Sultan of Zanzibar. The coast line undoubtedly was under the Sultan; but how far inland his Dominion extended was a matter of controversy upon which it was very difficult to decide. Germany proposed that the claim of Zanzibar should not be left in an undecided and obscure position, but that it should be distinctly ascertained what Zanzibar really possessed, and that the territory which was outside the possession of Zanzibar should be occupied for the purposes of trade and influence by some European nation or other. Negotiations followed, and an arrangement was ultimately made on the principle of dividing English and German influence on the East Coast of Africa 546 behind the coast line which represented the genuine Dominion of Zanzibar. That arrangement had, I think, the sanction of four successive Foreign Secretaries. It commenced under the noble Earl opposite (Earl Granville); the noble Earl opposite, who was six months at the Foreign Office (the Earl of Rosebery), took a part in these negotiations; I took a part in them during the first period I acted as Foreign Secretary; and they were concluded under Lord Iddesleigh. I venture to think that the arrangement was absolutely good; it was the very best arrangement for humanity and civilization we could possibly adopt. What advantage does my noble Friend think could be derived by humanity, civilization, or commerce from leaving the vast tracts of territory which he has described to be simply wandered over by naked savages or to be the hunting ground of slavers? You have one hope of stopping slavery in Africa, and that is, that by stopping its outlets from that vast continent, you will stop it at its source. You will never be able to dispute with the Arab slaver in every mountain, lake, and plateau of the interior, the bloodthirsty operations by which slavery is recruited; but what you can do is to make his operations unprofitable for him by preventing his having his issue from the coast by which alone his market can be reached. If your object is to arrest the Slave Trade, what more effective plan can be devised than that the most progressive nations of Europe should send their subjects to develop the territory, to increase trade, and plant settlements along the East Coast, through which the slave trade must be carried and across which the profits of the Slave Traders must be found? These things take time; you must not expect that the seed will grow up to a tree in a day. I believe the Germans are as heartily anxious to stop the Slave Trade as we are, and that the public opinion of Germany is as determined on that point as the public opinion of England. I think the result of the arrangements that have been made, by which German and English settlements will in due time be made on the whole East Coast of Africa, will be to give a heavier blow to the Slave Trade than could be given by any other arrangements. My noble Friend talked of Germany having annexed the whole 547 interior—the valley of the great lakes; but I do not recollect the instrument by which it was done, and I think my noble Friend has rather exaggerated in the language he has used. Germany and England have never affected to do more than to mark out the countries in which their influence will be exercised, and it is undoubtedly best that they should keep separate, if only for the purpose of not wasting force; but I do not think that any international right has yet been established over those marvellous waterways which my noble Friend so eloquently described. I have spoken of the arrangements between Germany and England with regard to Zanzibar, and I deny entirely that they have resulted in diminishing the influence of England upon that coast or diminishing the influence of England with Zanzibar. I believe that our influence is as great as or greater than it has been at any previous time. But I do not deny that in our relations with Portugal we have not been so fortunate. Matters are still in negotiation. I must speak with reserve upon many subjects on which I should like to speak fully if negotiations were not going on. Portugal claimed a strip of territory near Cape Delgado, on which there was a settlement of coloured merchants, many of them from Bombay. My noble Friend represented this claim as an insult to Great Britain, on the ground that the merchants were under British protection; but that protection existed only in his own imagination, for they had no British protection at all; they were simply subjects of the Sultan of Zanzibar on a narrow strip of land in the Bay of Tungi, which was claimed by Portugal, and had been claimed for many years. An examination of the Papers which have been laid on the Table of your Lordships' House will show that England and Germany have maintained that Portugal was in the wrong; still, it was by no means a case in which you could say that Portugal had no ground to go upon. The strongest point in favour of Portugal was a certain Treaty made with this country at the beginning of the century, in which Cape Delgado was actually named as the northern limit of Portugal's possessions. But if there was a good deal to be said for the claim of Portugal, it was a question that might very well have been submitted to arbitration, and I think that the action 548 of Portugal in the matter was hasty and rash, for, without giving notice to the Sultan of Zanzibar beyond hauling down the Consular flag, a Portugese man-of-war appeared, summoned the Governor to surrender, and when he refused bombarded the place. We do not think, after having taken advice, that International Law is broken, but it was very harshly tried indeed. We submitted a case for compensation to the Government of Portugal, but we have not yet received an answer. That being so, I will discuss the matter no further. But I want to impress on my noble Friend that there was no case of British protection, and that International Law was not broken. But after making those reservations I say that the conduct of Portugal could not be spoken of without considerable blame. Now, it is claimed that Portugal had the right to all that zone of territory stretching from the Zambesi to Mozambique on the Indian Ocean, and to Angola on the Atlantic; but the claim could only be made by some extraordinary doctrine of constructive acquisition. I believe it rests upon a decree of Pope Alexander VI. of saintly memory, but how far that can be admitted as an international ground I will not discuss. France and Germany had admitted the claim of Portugal, subject to any rights which other Powers might have. We have not admitted it. But upon that claim Portugal builds a further claim that the Zambesi is hers also, and undoubtedly if this zone of territory belongs to her there would be a fair contention to that effect. There is territory beyond, however, which is not Portugese, and with which we have some connection—namely, the district known as Matabeli's land, and also we have interests of an undefined, though very interesting character, with respect to those splendid monuments of British energy and enthusiasm shown on Lake Nyassa. We have informed Portugal that we absolutely cannot admit this claim to the possession of the Zambesi. The matter is still under discussion. The local authorities attempted to exclude the supply of the necessary ammunition to those now living on the Nyassa lake by way of the Zambesi; but we made representations to Lisbon, and I am happy to say that orders have now been given for the supply of ammunition, I do not like to pursue this 549 theme too far, because it would be very easy for language to drop from my mouth which would retard rather than advance an understanding. But I agree with my noble Friend in thinking that the possession of a vast natural highway like the Zambesi, under the peculiar circumstances of its history, cannot be claimed by Portugal. After all, it was discovered by Englishmen, and it is now principally used by Englishmen. It leads to settlements wherein Englishmen are conducting their operations, religious and commercial; and I think that, even according to the strictest doctrines of International Law, it is a matter of the greatest doubt whether a nation in full possession of the two sides of the Zambesi river has a right to exercise any jurisdiction to bar access to territories which lie beyond. The Rhine, the Danube, the St. Lawrence, the Congo, and other rivers have been declared free, and that being the case, and especially considering the very peculiar circumstances in which the Zambesi is placed, I am convinced that the opinion of the civilized world will be on our side when we say that the Zambesi must be a route open to all and not confined to one. I think that the religious and commercial operations on Lake Nyassa form a spectacle upon which Englishmen can look with pride, yet it is one of those achievements which our race has formed and will sustain rather by the action of the individuals of whom the State is composed than by the political machinery of the State. Some of the noblest things England has done in the world have been done in that way, by the initiative of individuals and not by the action of the Government. The only note in my noble Friend's speech that jarred on my ear was when he seemed to point to action, which means military action, on the part of England to assure the possession to these communities of Lake Nyassa. Has he really formed any idea of the task he is laying out for the Government of this country? If he proposes to send an Expedition which can subdue all this territory, according to our ideas of how Expeditions should be organized and what they should cost, I think he would find that the Expedition to Egypt of a few years ago would melt into the faintest insignificance compared with the task to which he has 550 invited this country. I will not use any language to encourage the belief that the Government will make any attempt, by military action, to support the commercial and religious efforts of the missionaries there. It is not our duty to do it. We should be risking tremendous sacrifices for a very doubtful gain. It is one of those tasks which must be and will be carried through by the individual Englishmen who have undertaken it. All that the Government can do on the sea coast, all that we can do diplomatically within the sphere of political efforts in this country, we will do. But we are certain that we should only injure instead of promote these great civilized and missionary efforts if we were to convert them into a cause of war, of war the most exhausting, the most terrible, the least remunerative in any sense—war with the countless savages who fill these territories; because it is not a civilized Power with which we have to fight; it is a collection of all the scum of humanity that is found over that vast territory which is governed principally by Arabs of the sort with whom we have dealt in the Soudan, who combine the grossest cruelty with a species of fanaticism. We must leave the dispersal of this terrible army of wickedness to the gradual advance of civilization and Christianity, which in these countries, though slow, seems now to be sure. And we may be convinced with my noble Friend that this country will not abandon the task to which she has once put her hand, but that she will carry it through successfully and to a triumphant issue by the proper action and the enthusiasm of her individual citizens.
§ THE EARL OF HARROWBY
My Lords, I desire to disclaim any wish for British military intervention in East Central Africa. I suggested that the Shire river and Nyassa Lake district should be placed, as has been done with the country assigned to England by the Treaty of 1886, north of German East Africa, under the sphere of British influence, or included in the Congo international arrangement. Both the existing Scotch trading Companies and Scotch and English missions would consider such intervention the greatest misfortune and hindrance to their work.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY
My Lords, I do not endorse all the state- 551 ments of the noble Marquess. I confess I was amazed to hear him say that there never had been any direct British influence in Zanzibar.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY
The noble Marquess has associated that power with Sir John Kirk, and I am far from saying that his influence has not had a great deal to do with it. But that, I think, affords some slight justification for the general assertion of the noble Earl (the Earl of Harrow by) that as the noble Marquess had substituted another agent for Sir John Kirk he has had something to do with the diminution of British influence in Zanzibar.
THE EARL OF ROSEBERY
As to the voluntary nature of that retirement I am not quite certain. But the noble Marquess has associated two Foreign Secretaries on this side of the House with his policy in Zanzibar. It is true that under both my noble Friend who preceded me and myself there was a Commission of Delimitations carrying on the task in Zanzibar of inquiring into what were the exact limits of the Dominion of the Sultan. That is a very different thing from the Treaty which was signed by the Government of the noble Marquess, and which, so far as can be ascertained, actually limited the influence of the Sultan to a very material extent and practically confined his authority to the Island of Zanzibar itself. I am not fond of discussing questions of foreign policy in this House, but I should be wanting in duty and sincerity to your Lordships' House if I were to accept any association with the Treaty made by the noble Marquess in 1886.