Lords Sitting of 28 June 1889

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES BILL. (No. 108.)
Reported from the Standing Committee for Bills relating to Law, &c, with amendments: The Report thereof received; and Bill re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next; and to be printed as amended. (No. 121.)
ADVANCE NOTES TO SEAMEN BILL. (No. 93.)
Reported from the Standing Committee for Bills relating to Law, &c., without amendment; and re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.
FACTORS BILL (No. 27.)
Reported from the Standing Committee for Bills relating to Law, &c., with amendments: The Report thereof received; and Bill recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next; and to be printed as amended. (No. 122.)

COMMITTEE OF SELECTION FOR STANDING COMMITTEES.
Report from, That the Committee have added the Duke of Westminster and the Earl of Kimberley to the Standing Committee for Bills relating to Law, &c. for the consideration of the Reformatory Schools Bill [H.L] and the Industrial Schools Bill [H.L.], and the Earl of Brownlow, the Lord Clifford of Chudleigh, the Lord Ker (Marquess of Lothian), and the Lord Leigh for the
974
consideration of the Industrial Schools Bill [H.L.] Read, and ordered to lie on the Table.

ADVERTISEMENT RATING BILL.
Brought from the Commons, read 1a, and to be printed. (No. 124.)
BOARD OF AGRICULTURE BILL.
Brought from the Commons, read 1a, and to be printed. (No. 15.)
SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND BILL (No. 52.)
Returned from the Commons, agreed to.
HERRING FISHERY (SCOTLAND) BILL. (No. 94.)

  SECOND READING.
  THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill, said: My Lords, the object of this Bill is to alter and amend previous Acts relating to the herring fishery on the coasts of Scotland. The principal provision of the Bill is contained in Clause 6, the object of which is to close the territorial waters in Scotland against trawlers. In 1882 an Act was passed taking away the control of the fishery interests of Scotland from the Board of Manufacturers, and creating a Fisheries Board. In 1883 and 1881 a Commission, presided over by Lord Dalhousie, went most carefully through all the details of this question among others, and the result of their inquiry and Report was that an Act was passed in 1885 with reference to trawling in the territorial waters of Scotland. By that Act the Fishery Board was empowered to make bye-laws from time to time closing

  975
  various districts of the territorial waters of Scotland against trawlers under certain conditions, two of which were: first, that they should be satisfied that the trawling in the waters which they proposed to close was actually doing such damage to the line and drift net fishing as to justify their intervention; and, secondly, that it was necessary to close those waters for the purpose of experiment. Any order or byelaw made by the Fishery Board was subject, of course, to confirmation by the Secretary for Scotland. The result of the exercise of these powers by the Fishery Board up to the present time has been that nearly the whole of the east coast of Scotland has been closed against trawlers. Last year, it having been found that on the west coast of Scotland, in the Firth of the Clyde, considerable injury had been done by the trawlers, and the Fisheries Board proposed a bye law to close the Firth of the Clyde; but upon its being submitted to me for confirmation, I referred the bye-law to my legal advisers, and I found that as proposed by the Fisheries Board it was ultra vires, and therefore I was unable to confirm the bye-law, and at this moment the Firth of the Clyde is open to trawlers. Since that time the controversy between the trawling fishery and the other fisheries of Scotland has gone on, and I have referred this question, as a whole, to the Fisheries Board for their advice and opinion as to the propriety of closing the whole of the territorial waters against trawling; and after inquiry they recommended that that course should be taken. It is with that object that the present Bill was introduced into the House of Commons and now comes before your Lordships, and I trust that your Lordships will pass it practically with out Amendment. I am convinced that the measure will be of advantage to the fishing interest of Scotland generally. That interest is not in so flourishing a condition at the present time that it is not deserving of every encouragement that can properly be given to it. With regard to the east coast, there is no very great difficulty in fixing the limits of territorial waters, because between Her Majesty's Government and what I may call the riparian Powers on the North Sea, there is a Fisheries Con-
  976
  vention; but on the west coast there is no such Convention, and therefore it has been thought desirable to attach a schedule to this Bill in order to show exactly which are the waters closed against trawlers apart altogether from the general international rule as to the three-mile limit. I may add that power is given to the Fisheries Board, subject to the confirmation of the Secretary for Scotland, to re-open particular waters to the trawlers. That is found necessary, among other reasons, because there are certain classes of fish which cannot be taken except by trawlers, and by them only at certain seasons of the year. Those are the main principles of this Bill, but there are subsidiary clauses to which I would just like to refer for one moment, especially Clause 4. Clause 4 provides fur the use of cran or quarter cran measures. That does not apply in any sense to the measures for sale by the fish-curers to general customers; it simply refers to the measures to be-used in the sale by the fishermen themselves to the fish curers. The object of the alteration of the law is simply this: at present fish is generally in baskets containing crans of 37½ gallons, but it is found that these crans or baskets when they get old undergo a very great alteration in their size and capacity, and by this Bill a fixed and standard measure is provided, by which, under penalties, the sale of herrings is to be regulated. I do not propose to load this Bill with any clauses with reference to another matter, but I think I may find it necessary on a future occasion to ask your Lordships to deal with it—I mean the regulation of the measures under which the fish curers sell their fish into foreign markets. The question is a complicated one, and as it is not included in this Bill, I will not further refer to it now. Clause 5 has been put in entirely at the wish of those who are interested in the subject to which it refers. It renders illegal daylight fishing, and Sunday fishing. It has been found that the fishers of the Clyde district wish that there shall be no Sunday fishing, and the clause refers only to a limited district. I do not think there is any other clause to which I need call your Lordships' attention, and I will now ask your Lordships to give the Bill a Second Reading.
  Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(The Marquess of Lothian.)
  THE EARL OF WEMYSS: I do not rise for the purpose of in any way opposing the Second Reading of this Bill, which I hope will, on the whole, be of advantage to the fisheries of Scotland. There is a provision in this Bill which I shall ask you to resist when we go into Committee. I mean the 5th Clause, to which my noble Friend has referred, which provides for the infliction of heavy penalties for setting or shooting any herring nets between sunrise on Saturday morning, and one hour before sunset on Monday evening. I shall in Committee propose to omit that clause.
  THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN: I regret that the noble Lord has given notice of his intention to move the omission of this clause. I would like to point out to the noble Lord, in the first place, that as I said just now, the clause was introduced at the desire of those most directly concerned—namely, the Association of Fishermen in the Firth of the Clyde; and, in the second place, the clause is by no means a new one. In an Act of George III. herring fishing, or any fishing whatever, is prohibited between the hours of 12 o'clock on Saturday night and 12 o'clock on Sunday night. I hope that the Bill will be allowed to pass as it stands. I may say that when I first drew this clause I thought there would be some objection to it. I thought it was rather too arbitrary, but on finding that it was supported by the fishing people themselves, I thought that there could be no objection to it.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSS: I may say that I am not convinced by the argument of the noble Marquess, and I shall certainly endeavour in Committee to induce your Lordships to omit this clause.
  Bill read 2a (according to order), and committed to the Standing Committee for general Bills.

CONDITION OF ARMENIA.

  QUESTIONS—OBSERVATIONS.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON, in rising to call attention to the alleged outrages in Armenia, and to the serious state of affairs in that country, and to move for any reports and correspondence (or extracts) since the date of
  978
  the last issue of Parliamentary Papers on the subject, said: My Lords, this is a subject that requires a good deal of discretion to handle, and it was only a conviction in my mind that the present state of affairs is extremely bad, and that the continuance of that state of affairs is perilous to the peace and interests of Europe, that decided me to proceed with the question. My Lords, I need but very little preamble. My question refers to the Armenians, and your Lordships are aware that in the Asiatic provinces of Turkey there are estimated to be something short of a million and a half Armenians. They are an ancient people, a people with a history, a religion, a literature, a race of their own, who have been subjected through past generations to great and unmerited oppression, and who, by their industry and their continuity of purpose, have generally baffled the oppressions of their persecutors. The Armenian people have distinct treaty claims upon the Porte, upon Europe, and upon this country. The obligations which Europe and the Porte lie under to the Armenian people are contained din the 61st Article of the Treaty of Berlin. Under that article the Porte engages "to make Reports as regards the Armenian people, to guarantee them protection," (mark those words) "against the Kurds and Circassians; periodically to communicate to the different Powers the steps which it has taken for the amelioration of the Armenians' condition," and, lastly, the Powers themselves reserved power to superintend the execution of this Article. Those, in few words, are the engagements which the Pone in the year 1878 solemnly entered into as regards the Armenian people with Europe. On the other hand, we are bound to them by another Instrument—the Anglo-Turkish Convention—in which my noble Friend at the head of the Government has a special interest. By that Instrument England engages practically to defend the Eastern frontier of Turkey in the event of Russian I aggression; and in turn the Porte enters into an engagement with England that she will effect reforms in the condition of the Christian and other subjects, particularly in those territories and would secure for them protection against, I suppose, the Kurds and Circassians.
  THE PRIME MINISTER AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of SALISBURY): I do not quite admit the correctness of that supposition.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON: I have the precise words here, but I do not think my noble Friend will say that I have put any gloss upon them. I will quote the words of the Article. The exact words are—
  "That if Batoum, and certain other places, shall be taken by Russia, or any attempt shall be made by Russia to take possession of any further territories of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan in Asia, as defined by the Treaty of Peace, England engages, jointly with His Imperial Majesty the Sultan, in defending them by force of arms. In return His Imperial Majesty the Sultan promises to England to introduce the necessary reforms (to be agreed upon later between the two Powers) into the Government for the protection of the Christian and other subjects of the Porte in those territories."
  Those are the words of the Treaty, and in consideration of all this, and as part of the conditions, the Island of Cyprus was assigned under certain conditions to this country. Those, my Lords, are the obligations in reference to this important subject by which England is bound; and my noble Friend, as I gather from his interruption, means to imply that that Article did not cover the case of the Armenians, but only the other Christian subjects of the Porte.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: I did not say that. I say it covers them all.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVON: That is sufficient for my purpose. My Lords, there are a great many difficult questions that arise out of these engagements; but I wish to confine myself to a statement of the facts which are alleged with regard to affairs in Armenia. I say, the facts that are "alleged," because I am not in a position—and no man in this country is in a position—to affirm positively that what I am about to state has occurred; but there can be little doubt that a large part of those facts are correct, and it is for the Porte perhaps, in the first instance, and it is certainly also for Her Majesty's Government, to tell us how far, in their opinion, those facts are correct or not. What are they? I have dealt with them on a former occasion, and my noble Friend touched upon the outrages
  980
  committed upon the Armenian people by the wild and savage Kurdish tribes. It is true that those tribes did descend from the mountains. They overran the whole country, and they constantly committed atrocities; but the allegation now is that those atrocities and outrages have risen to an almost intolerable degree, that property is plundered right and left, that flocks are carried off, crops destroyed, churches desecrated, even villages ruined, and that men are made prisoners and carried off and tortured. There are cases which are alleged where they have been horribly burned alive. Further, it is alleged that women have been carried away and consigned to the worst fate. Years ago it was my fortune to travel through the whole of that country, and I saw it when it was revolting from a state of persecution as great at least as those which are now alleged. There was then a monster, a devil in human shape who made his name known far and wide through those regions, and who glorified in the infamies of which he was the author. That man was practically stopped in his career of crime by the action of my noble Friend Lord Stratford de Redcliffe. My noble Friend, at that time, made his name felt in the depths of the Kurdish mountains, and the wild mountaineers trembled at the name of England. The oppression came to an end. There is another man at this moment who seems disposed to re-introduce the part of that villian to whom I have alluded; and it is time, I think, that English influence at Constantinople should make itself felt as it made itself felt in the time of Lord Stratford de Redcliffe. But probably I shall be told that there is an appeal from these local miseries. There is an old Scotch saying, "It is a far cry to Loch Awe"; and so here it is a far cry to Constantinople. A cry has been made to Constantinople; but although officials are on the spot where redress is really needed no punishment, as far as I can understand, has ever taken place. It is alleged that there is a tacit acquiescence which is construed into encouragement. It has been even affirmed that arms have been supplied by the Turkish Local Authorities to the Kurdish police, the traditional enemies of the Armenians, and those arms could only be used in one particular manner. It is also affirmed that the

  981
  harems of the transgressors are at this moment filled with the unfortunate women who have been carried off. Complaint is represented as rebellion. The prisons are full, it is said, of persons who have the greatest cause of complaint. Do your Lordships ever try to imagine what an Oriental prison really is? I have seen many of them. The prison is a horrible hole, a dark noisome den; yet into those dens are thrust many of these unfortunate people who have committed no crime except to complain of the wrongs done to them. In those dens the people languish From those dens they sometimes never emerge; in them they perish, or are sent into exile. There is a case which has been cited far and wide, and which, as far as I know, has not been denied. It is that of a young Armenian 16 years of age, who was foolish enough to write a patriotic song. He did not publish it; he simply wrote it; but this young man was seized and committed to one of these prisons, where, after a few months, he died. The schoolmaster, too, from whose school this young man bad been taken, and who had seen the poem, but had not in any way, as I understand, assisted in making it, was punished, I believe, by being sent into exile. The fact is, that it is a great system of terrorism which is alleged to be going on in those distant parts. Domiciliary visits are being made everywhere. But it is not merely the property, the life, and the liberty of the people which have been thus dealt with, but even the literature and religion of these unfortunate people are now subject to oppression. It is said that their liturges are everywhere being hunted up and burned, that their religion is placed as far as it can be under a ban. It is also said that contrary to the articles have quoted in those treaties not only are the Circassians and the Kurds not restrained, but that the Circassians are at this moment being imported into the country and formed into settlements there. The report has gone far and wide through the province—I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the fact—that they are a doomed people, and that the authorities they should look to for protection have sworn to some plan of extermination against them. The Porte, as I. gathered horn my noble Friend the other night, denies these facts, but
  982
  it offers no evidence in support of its denial. They have repeatedly made assurances of reform. They have promised religious toleration, equality before the law, equality of taxation, admission to the Army and the police, and so forth. Yet your Lordships know, as all Europe knows, that those were idle words. They have never been carried into fulfilment. There is a system of venality; there is a total absence of justice; and practically, whatever the letter of the law may say, the testimony of a Christian is not received. The Prime Minister knows that not very long ago the Ambassador of the Porte came to him and preferred one of the most marvellous requests which have been made for many a long year to any English Minister. There is a newspaper, printed partly in French and partly in Armenian, in this town in which the grievances of this people are set forth. That paper has a considerable circulation, and the Turkish Ambassador was so ignorant of the English Constitution that he ventured to request my noble Friend to suppress that paper. My noble Friend, of course, could only return one answer—that the request showed gross ignorance of the laws and customs of England. My Lords, I maintain that proofs are easy. The Turkish Government could disprove every one of the facts, for which, of course, I do not vouch, but which have been alleged over and over again in a more or less authoritative form, and which have not been, so far as I know, denied. The Turkish Government refuse to prove their innocence. Her Majesty's Government can practically give the House those proofs. We have an able and competent Ambassador at Constantinople who, doubtless, has the confidence of Her Majesty's Government. It is time, therefore, that we should know whether what I have stated is correct or not, whether the engagements which this country has entered into have been grossly falsified by the action of the local and the central authorities in Turkey. There is discredit and danger in either silence or delay. There are the sounds of a great storm rumbling in the Eastern parts of Europe, but there is an equal provision of combustibles stored up in the Asiatic provinces of Turkey. Let us beware that our hopes are not rudely broken by finding

  983
  the existence of some Asiatic Bulgaria. In 1878 these words were written:—
  ''Her Majesty's Government intimated to the Porte that they were not prepared to sanction misgovernment and oppression, and it will be requisite, before they can enter into any agreement for the defence of the Asiatic territories of the Porte in certain eventualities, that they should be formally assured of the intention of the Porte to introduce the necessary reforms into the government of the Christian and other subjects of the Porte in these regions ….The Government of the Ottoman dynasty is that of an ancient but still alien conqueror, resting more upon actual power than upon the sympathies of common nationality … If the population of Syria, Asia Minor, and Mesopotamia see that the Porte has no guarantee for its continued existence but its own strength, they will, after the evidence which recent events have furnished of the frailty of that reliance, begin to calculate upon the speedy fall of the Ottoman domination, and to turn their eyes towards its successor."
  I can add nothing to those words. They are pregnant with meaning. They were written with a full sense of the difficulties of the time and the dangers of the future. They are the words of my noble Friend the Prime Minister on the 30th of May, 1878, to Mr. Layard, when my noble Friend was Foreign Secretary. I wish that the Porte had taken them to heart; but if it persists in closing its eyes and its ears, if it will neither learn nor forget, then it blinds itself to the great risk of a million of Christian inhabitants, ground down by misery and oppression, seething with discontent, on one side of the border, while, on the other side, there is an equal number enjoying, at all events, under a different Sovereign, comparative security for life and property. It is a dangerous contrast for Europe, dangerous for Turkey, and dangerous for ourselves, and it is the duty of Her Majesty's Government not merely to enlighten the country as to the real facts of the ease, but to use its influence in the interests of this down-trodden people in the redemption of the pledges given by this country, and in order to avert a general conflagration, the magnitude and outcome of which no man can foretell.
  THE ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY: The noble Earl has dealt with such fulness with this subject that I need not detain your Lordships by making many observations; but I do desire to urge that we are simply expressing, I believe, the feelings of the great mass of English Churchmen and of the English people
  984
  when we appeal to the Government to do what we believe they can do. I think I should be wanting in my duty and in my own sense of gratitude if I do not, in the first instance, express the obligations which we all feel to the Government for the effective help which it has given in the same province against the same system. The Province of Hakkiari was incorporated lately with the Province of Van, and forms now the southern part of that province. It is in Hakkiari chiefly that I am personally interested, because there is a quietly working mission in that part of the Province of Van which has abstained from all interference in public affairs, and which has leave, chiefly through the good offices of the Ministry, to promote the education of children and the education of the clergy. Under their oppressions they were rapidly falling so low that many of their priests could only read the Liturgy, and many could scarcely even do that. But I do not quote the Missionaries, because it is understood that they are not to take part in public affairs, and they faithfully fulfil that obligation even in the report to me; but there are published the reports of travellers who have recently visited those regions. The southern part of the province is not exactly on the same footing as the northern, for this single reason—that the Chaldeans or the Assyrians who inhabit the southern portion are a more martial people than the Armenians, and they are not quite so open to oppression. But the same system is brought to bear upon them, and there are eye-witnesses in England who describe the same occurrences in the southern part of the province as in the northern. It is related how the sale of villages is carried on, the inhabitants, who have lived there since the days of Nimrod, being asked to produce their title deeds. Failing to do so, the villages are put up for sale, and invariably sold to the Kurds, although higher prices are offered by the Assyrians. Churches are desecrated and ruined, and in December of last year an outrage of a most atrocious character was committed. Two or three men with several hundred women were on the upper pastures, when a raid was made. Many of the women were ravished, some were killed, and all were stripped, and those not killed wore driven back to their homes through the open country.

  985
  So outraged were the feelings of the Tyari, the tribe thus visited, that there was a great gathering of their men, provoking in turn the assembling of 6,000 or 7,000 Kurds. Representations were then made by Her Majesty's Government to the Porte, with the result that a few troops were marched through the province, and the Kurds dispersed in all directions. What has thus been done once can be done again. The same stories come from the northern part of the province, except that the oppressions are fiercer and stronger. There can be no doubt that the settling of Circassians is taking place among the Armenians, and that boys and girls are carried off under the pretence that they have embraced the Mussulman faith. Christian evidence is refused, men are tortured, and villages are burned, and there has been no contradiction of the story of a village having being burned and of the inhabitants having been driven hack into it. The sources of information at the disposal of the public are the accounts of travellers and of American missionaries, and of the Armenians themselves, and these sources agree in regard to the terror and the constancy of the outrages inflicted. But where are the Reports of the British Consuls from which, if the accounts already received are exaggerated, the truth could at least be learned? No Consular Reports from Armenia have been published since 1881. It has been urged, as a reason for their non-publication, that it would be unwise to expose the feebleness of the Turkish officials. But, when feebleness results in the miseries of hundreds of people, that is a feebleness which needs bracing, and which I believe can be best braced by the influence of public opinion. The state of things is such that the Pope of Rome has addressed the Armenian Church through its authorities asking that it should be placed under the Church of Rome. There has never been a nobler answer than that of the Armenian Bishop to this tempting proposal. He declined to purchase even an absolute protection at the price of the surrender of his faith and his Church. My Lords, there is such a thing as a Christendom still, and Russia, and Italy, and France, too, recognize that Christendom in all parts of the world; and surely the Christen-
  986
  dom which dwells in Armenia ought to be recognized by us. I believe that of all Churches the Armenian is the nearest to the English; and by reason of their virtues the Armenians are increasing in spite of their oppression, while their masters are decreasing. Humanity as well as Christendom calls upon the English people to speak. The Turkish Government have reported no improvement in the treatment of these subjects during the 11 years which have elapsed since the Treaty of Berlin; on the contrary, there has been a slow decline from worse to worse. This country can bring great influence to bear, and any success, however small, would be better than a perpetual retrogression, I know the difficulties that exist in dealing with such a Power as Turkey; but, at least, in this matter there are no difficulties within, there are no difficulties on account of Party feeling or differences of opinion, for all the people of England are of one mind upon this subject.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, the speeches of my noble Friend and the most rev. Prelate, which express the sentiments that animate them in bringing forward this subject, cannot fail to create sympathy in every breast for those who are the victims of any such horrors as the two speakers who have addressed your Lordships have described. Whether their colours are too vivid or not I will speak of in a moment; but it is impossible not to feel moved by the recital of sorrows such as they have spoken of, even if that recital is not fully sustained by the facts; and the emotions which we feel will be intensified when we recollect, as the most rev. Prelate has impressed upon us, that the victims are fellow religionists of our own, belonging to an ancient people who have shown remarkable steadfastness in adhering to their nationality and their faith. But, standing in the position I do, to me the first subject of consideration is whether these facts can justly be brought forward as any reproach to Her Majesty's Government. Unhappily, the world is full of spots where similar horrors to those which have been painted are enacted. It is not only in Turkey that such prisons as my noble Friend has described in such gloomy colours are to be found. In the east and in the west we shall find, if we choose to look for it, abun-

  987
  dant cause for our sympathy, abundant subjects for eloquent and mournful descriptions, such as those to which we have listened. But the question for us here, forming part of the governing machinery of this country, is how far this country can accept any responsibility for such events? Now, there was a fallacy which seemed to me to pervade the speech of my noble Friend against which I am bound to protest. He recited two Instruments in which certain engagements were made with Her Majesty's Government, and he proceeded in the rest of his speech to speak of these as if they were engagements made by Her Majesty's Government. The Porte, no doubt, has made to us and the other Powers certain engagements. I cannot admit—although, of course, we should wish that those engagements should be fulfilled, and under certain circumstances might go further than wishing—that the fact that we have accepted such promises from the Porte constitutes an obligation on us to see that these promises are fulfilled, or makes us guilty if they are not fulfilled. Such a doctrine would lay an intolerable burden upon this country. It would make it impossible for us to accept from any Power assurances of any improvement or any reform in administration, for we should immediately cast upon this country the responsibility of seeing and insuring by the use of all its force that those promises were fulfilled. That is an obligation which it is impossible for us to accept. Then, my noble Friend impliedly laid upon us another obligation by the tale he told of the success of Lord Stratford de Redcliffe's intervention a great number of years ago. He implied that the influence of this country was so great at Constantinople that if anything went wrong there we were participators in the crime and were parties to all that was done by the Turkish Government. I cannot accept such a description of things as to this country. Turkey is not a ward under the guardianship of England. Before the war of 1877, undoubtedly our influence was very considerable. It was an influence earned, as all such influences by payment in acts of protection. It was earned by what we did in the Crimean War. In 1877, however, we adopted a different policy. My noble Friend was as responsible for that policy
  988
  as I was. We did not protect Turkey when she was attacked. The consequence is that there is not the slightest ground for saying that we now possess the influence which, in consequence of a totally different policy and line of conduct, Lord Stratford de Redcliffe possessed in past time. I have no doubt we possess at Constantinople such influence as other friendly Powers possess—the influence of, a friendly Power; but we cannot say that we are the protectors of Turkey, or that the influence of a guardian over his ward is one that we can claim to exercise. I repudiate, therefore, most distinctly any responsibility on the part of Her Majesty's-Government for these matters which may have taken place in the East. Of course, I do not repudiate our common duty to Christianity and humanity—our duty to make every effort we can in any part of the world in which we have the opportunity and power in order to ameliorate the condition of our fellow Christians or our fellow men. That is a duty which must always lie upon us. But what I am denying, is that there is any special duty lying upon us with respect to the populations of the interior of Asiatic Turkey. Now, with reference to the facts of the case, I speak with much more hesitation. The Turkish Ambassador has denied most categorically, and he has repeated that denial, some of the accusations that have been made. But my noble Friend says that it is open to the Turkish Government to repudiate those charges and that they must prove their innocence. I am glad that my noble Friend does not preside over the system of justice in this country. I always imagined that it was the business of the accusers in this country to prove their case, and to show that there is primâ facie ground for believing the thing they state to have happened. The Turkish Government repel these accusations of terrible, horrors with indignation. They do not deny, they cannot deny, that the territories of which we are speaking are subject to the scourge of lawlessness, to the invasions of mountaineers who are mere brigands and caterans, who have no object but the satisfaction of their own passions and their own greed, and who are unrestrained by any scruple. Such men as these Kurds would be a scourge to any country. No doubt the ravages of

  989
  these men occur, and you may, if you please, blame the Turkish Government because it does not take more effective means for protecting its subjects from these attacks. Undoubtedly, no Government which fails to do that fulfils all the duties of its position. But you must remember in the case of the Turkish Government that it is a Government which is feeble and poor—feeble and poor not exclusively by its own fault. It has been made feeble and poor by the action of others; and if throughout the Turkish dominions men suffer because there are not sufficient resources to carry on the duties of government, I do not think the historian will say that the responsibility is exclusively to be attached to the Turkish Government. My Lords, the most rev. Prelate has asked for the Consular Papers. It is a very reasonable request, and I hope to be able to give him a considerable number of Papers. I do not doubt that they will show the existence of considerable lawlessness. I am afraid the Government of Turkey is not destitute in its lower branches of agents of oppression; but I do not think they will show any complicity by the Central Government in any of these acts. They will show an indignant repudiation of the grosser accusations, and they will lead mainly to the conviction that the sorrows, deep and real as they are, of the subjects in the interior of Asiatic Turkey, are due more to the feebleness of the Government than to any which can be laid to their charge. On the contrary, I think it is obvious, if you consider all the circumstances which preceded the last war—the enormous interest which Turkey has in preventing the growth of any such causes of attack as existed 12 or 13 years ago—I think on grounds of mere common sense you will acquit the Turkish rulers of any desire to create a state of things that may result in a similar calamity. My Lords, the question is, what is the remedy to be applied? My noble Friend and the most rev. Prelate spoke much of the fanaticism of the Kurds and Turks and Circassians, as though that wore the fault of the Turkish Government, and they had created these people and made them fanatics. Should they not invert the process, and recognize the fact that it is the nature and passions of these people
  990
  which are the important circumstances of the case; and that the authority and power of the Turkish Government are as nothing compared with these steady tendencies of races which for centuries past have been brought up in all the traditions of race and religious animosities. The curse which applies to all these countries is the complete division which separates the populations. It is not only a division of creed, it is a division of race, and it is a division aggravated by the traditions and the recollections of long years of struggle and of sufferings mutually inflicted; and it is because I think more of the effect that our action and policy and discussions here may have upon these poor people than they may have upon the Government—it is became I recognize the inhabitants of these countries as the important agents, and look upon any scheme of the Government as a matter of comparatively light moment, that I rather regret the policy which my noble Friend and the most rev. Prelate have adopted. Remember, you have not only Christians to deal with. I believe in these provinces the Christians are by very far the minority of the population. You have by their side a Mahomedan population fanatically attached to their religion and to their Sultan — believing that the Christians are engaged in a conspiracy for bringing them under the rule of an alien and Christian Power. They will make any exertion and will shrink from no measures of severity in order to avert what would be to them a calamity so terrible. The Christian and Mahomedan populations are not only separated by race and religion, but while the Turks are regarded by the Christians as oppressors, by the Turks the Christians are regarded as the conspirators who are slowly eating out the strength of the Empire and are bringing province after province under the rule of a Christian Power. There are those two sections of the population standing face to face, with their suspicions and their hatreds and their distrusts, and the more you make them the subject of public discussion, the more you encourage the one side and bring reproach upon the other, the more the effect will be that you will exasperate these divisions to which all these calamities are due, and that you will really lend force and fire and fury to,

  991
  this fanaticism and these outrages which are mainly the result of creed, and the only consequence of your interference will be that while the Government is powerless to offer any genuine remedy the Christians and the Turks will hate each other more and more, and will inflict upon one another all the evil they possibly can. I urge therefore, my Lords, that you should rather trust to the slow action of time, to the very beneficent action of those devoted Christians who from this country and from America have adventured themselves into those regions, and to the slow and gentle action of public opinion; but that you should not urge the Government or urge Parliament by loud and unmeasured expressions of horror which are not always justified by the facts, you should not rouse and exasperate the very passions which have led to the mischiefs you so much deplore.

THE ASTRACANA IN COWES ROADS.

  QUESTION.—OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD COLVILLE OF CULROSS, in rising to ask whether the Board of Trade will take the steps necessary to require the Trinity Corporation to remove from Cowes Roads the remains of the hull of the ship Astracana, 1,400 tons burthen, which was towed in by their officials from the Channel, and deposited there on the; 3rd January last, the said hull being a danger to navigation, and occupying a large portion of the best anchorage for trading and small vessels in Cowes Roads, said: It will be known to most of your Lordships that the vessel to which my question relates was sunk in a collision with another vessel about mid-channel with her keel up and all her masts standing under water. She became a standing danger to the navigation of the Channel, and the Corporation of the Trinity, as in duty bound, proceeded to try to get hold of the wreck and destroy it. They found her, I believe, off Beachy Head, and they commenced to try to destroy her by dynamite. They partially succeeded, but they only blew her stern out. Unfortunately, instead of completing the act of destruction in deep water, the Trinity towed the vessel into Cowes Roads on the 3rd January, and deposited her in the most sheltered and convenient passage for vessels of
  992
  moderate draught in that harbour. I am told that the Trinity have been offered £400 for the wreck and the cargo, but they have refused to accept it. After discharging the cargo the Trinity recommenced the work of destruction; but in consequence of the absence, through illness, of their principal diver, the work was suspended. By this time the Local Board of Cowes petitioned the Board of Trade that they should have this wreck removed. Perhaps I may be anticipating the answer that I shall receive from my noble Friend who will reply for the Board of Trade; but I will read the letter which the Trinity House addressed to the Board of Trade, who had forwarded a complaint from Cowes as to this wreck—
  "I am directed by the Board to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated 29th ultimo (H 4253) transmitting a copy of a letter from Messrs. Winther and Co., of Cowes, on the subject of the wreck Astracana, and requesting that the Board of Trade may be furnished with the observations of the Elder Brethren thereon. In reply, I am to state that, as soon as the wreck could be secured and the cargo recovered there from, steps were taken to disperse the hull of the vessel without loss of time; but some delay occurred through the sudden illness of the diver employed upon the work. As the result of the operations undertaken, no part of the vessel is now more than two feet above the ground, while there is 14 feet of water over the outside, and 11 feet over the inside portion of the wreck. A wreck buoy has been laid over the centre of the remains, and a cautionary notice to mariners (No. 15) issued against anchoring within a space of thirty fathoms there-from. No doubt inconvenience may be felt from the restriction thus imposed as to anchorage in a locality so frequented by yachts and other small craft, and this circumstance the Elder Brethren much regret. There is, however, every reason to suppose that even the portions of the vessel standing above the mud are sinking quickly into it, the ground being already perfectly level over the wreck in some places. Looking at the manner in which the vessel has been already dealt with, and the large expenditure incurred, as well as to the fact that a very considerable sum might yet be spent in rendering the spot absolutely free for anchorage, the Elder Brethren do not feel justified in putting the Mercantile Marine Fund to further expense, being advised, in fact, that all that is reasonably necessary in the matter has been done."
  When the Trinity abstained from further attempts to remove the wreck they placed a buoy over her, and published a cautional notice, which I hold in my hand, "that no vessels were to anchor within the range of 30 fathoms of the buoy." Now,

  993
  my Lords, that is all very well in daylight, but there is no light over the wreck at night, and any vessel going into Cowes Roads, and anchoring in what is considered to be the best anchoring ground in the harbour, would probably find her anchor fouled, and never recover it again. I demur to the statement in that letter that the wreck is sinking into the mud. Those who know the locality far better than the Trinity do consider that a shoal is being formed over the wreck and over the two or three hundred tons of stone which formed the ballast of the vessel. I observe that last night in another place the President of the Board of Trade, in answering a question upon this subject, said that there was nothing of the wreck above the level of the sand. This is in direct contradiction with the notice issued by the Trinity, in which they say that a small portion of the wreck is in some places two feet above the mud. This very caution issued by the Trinity against vessels anchoring within 30 fathoms of the buoy indicates that an area of about 2½ acres of the very best anchorage in Cowes Harbour is rendered dangerous and useless. The President of the Board of Trade said in answer last night that he had recently seen the spot, and that he did not think trading vessels would be inconvenienced, although a few yachts might be at certain states of the tide. I speak from upwards of thirty-five years' experience of Cowes, where I have a residence. At this time of the year no doubt there are a great many yachts to be seen there, but if you go there in the winter you will probably not see one; but this particular anchorage is much used by coasting vessels, because they can there have shelter in all weathers, and lay out for the strong tide which runs through Cowes Roads. I think the noble Lord opposite (Lord Brassey), who is a great authority on such matters, will bear me out that the anchorage which has been destroyed is the best anchorage in Cowes Harbour for coasting vessels in bad weather. The upshot of the matter is that the Trinity Corporation, the supreme power to protect our harbours, have by their own act in not destroying this derelict in the English Channel, but depositing her in a much frequented anchorage, created an obstacle which it is their bounden duty to remove. Had this happened in
  994
  the Thames or in the Mersey, I ask your Lordships how long they would have been suffered to let that wreck remain there? Notwithstanding the unsatisfactory answer given last night by the President of the Board of Trade, I do trust that my noble Friend who represents that Department in this House will say that it is the duty of the Board of Trade to compel the Trinity to restore the anchorage which they have destroyed into its wonted condition.
  LORD BRASSEY: Before the noble Lord replies, I think it my duty to say that the question which the noble Lord has brought forward is not a question which mainly affects yachtsmen. In the stormy months of winter the Cowes Roads are very much frequented by small coasting vessels—a class of vessels which well deserve consideration and protection.
  LORD BALFOUR: The day after my noble Friend put this question on the Paper, a communication was addressed to the Trinity House, enclosing a copy of the question, and asking to be placed in possession of the views of Trinity House upon the subject. I am authorized to read, for the information of the noble Lord and of the House, the following communication, which has been received in reply:—
  "The duty of removing wrecks dangerous to navigation is laid on the Trinity I Louse by an Act passed in 1877. The wreck Astracanca was reported floating bottom up in the English Channel, a most serious danger to life and property. Trinity House vessels were sent in search, found it on 30th December, and tried to sink it in deep water, but being laden with oil in casks, the vessel would not sink. Waterlogged and unmanageable, it was with great difficulty, and after several days' work, towed out of the way of navigation on the 3rd January into Cowes Roads, that being the nearest place suitable for operations of breaking up and salvage. These were carried on with all possible diligence, although under great difficulties, and it is now (25th June) ascertained that nothing remains of the wreck which could occasion damage to passing navigation, there being 17 feet clear all over her at low water spring tides, and nothing above the level of the sand. To remove the buried remains would be a very costly proceeding, and although for a time the anchorage for a space of about 70 feet by 30 feet will be to some extent foul, only small vessels could anchor there, and a buoy is placed to warn them."
  I am instructed also to add that in cases where, as in this case, the proceeds of the

  995
  sale of the cargo are sufficient to meet all the expenses incurred by Trinity House, the Board of Trade has no authority or control in the matter. The question seems to imply that the wreck was deposited voluntarily in the place where it now unfortunately lies. It was, in fact, not the intention of the Trinity House, or its officers, to place the wreck there. They were endeavouring to take the wreck to a more suitable place, and to their regret it became unmanageable and sunk in the Cowes Roads. In consequence of the concluding remarks of the noble Lord, I am bound to point out that the discretion in this matter does not rest with the Board of Trade, but lies upon Trinity House. The Act of 1877 distinctly places all responsibility for the removal of wrecks upon one of two bodies. Where the wreck is lying in a place which is under the control of the Harbour or Conservancy Authorities, the responsibility is placed upon the Harbour or Conservancy Authorities. Where, as in this case, there is no Harbour or Conservancy Authority responsible for the particular spot in question, the duty of removing the wreck is, in the words of the 5th section of the Act, "placed upon the Lighthouse Authority of that part of the United Kingdom," and that for England is, as your Lordships know, the Trinity House. The authority of the Board of Trade only comes in if the proceeds of the sale of the material of the vessel or the cargo recovered is insufficient to meet the cost of the operations. The Trinity House is the authority for saying whether those operations are necessary; but if money is required in addition to the value of the salvage recovered, the Authority of the Board of Trade is called in to sanction an application from the Mercantile Marine Fund. I very greatly regret that this vessel should be lying where it is; but I hope that after what I have said the noble Lord will understand clearly that in this matter the responsibility rests not with the Board of Trade, but with Trinity House, to take whatever steps are necessary.
  LORD COLVILLE OF CULROSS: Am I to understand from my noble Friend that the Board of Trade cannot put any pressure whatever upon the Trinity to enforce them to remove the obstruction which they themselves have placed in Cowes Harbour?
  LORD BALFOUR: The Board of Trade have no authority under the Act to deal with such a matter at all, unless and until a demand is made upon them by the Trinity House for authority to apply some portion of the Mercantile Marine Fund for the purpose. Any pressure which has to be brought in the matter ought, therefore, to be brought upon the Elder Brethren of Trinity House.
  LORD NORTON: As I take a great interest in Trinity House, I asked for particulars from them of this subject, and their Report to me to-day is that since that Report of the 23rd of May they have been continuing to clear the place, and the whole obstruction will be cleared away as quickly as possible. The space of foul anchorage is now reduced to 70 feet by 30.

BRIBERY (PUBLIC BODIES) PREVENTION BILL. (No. 90.)

  SECOND READING.
  LORD HERSCHELL: I need detain your Lordships but a very few moments in moving the Second Reading of this Bill. Circumstances, which will be fresh in the recollection of your Lordships, have shown that bribery, or the attempts to corrupt the members of Public Boards or officials connected with them, have been a source of very considerable evil. This Bill attempts to deal with the matter by rendering either a bribe or an attempt to bribe a member of any Public Body or an official of such body a misdemeanour, and making it punishable accordingly with fine or imprisonment or both. I do not think your Lordships will entertain any doubt that it is right that such a punishment should be inflicted, and that an attempt should be made to deter in future persons committing acts of the kind, which has been proved to be extremely mischievous in the past. I need not trouble your Lordships by entering upon any of the details of the Bill. I think myself there are some small amendments of it which will probably be necessary; but it is not needful for me to enter upon these in moving the Second Reading.
  Bill read 2a (according to order), and committed to the Standing Committee for Bills relating to Law, &c.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (No. 3) BILL. (No. 117.)
Read 2a (according to order), and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.
House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.