perfectly able to make this Treaty with Mediterranean, and had forced the un them ; but if Tunis was independent in fortunate Bey of Tunis to sign a Treaty 1881, she was equally independent in at the point of the bayonet. He recom1871, and able to make the arrange- mended the Government to join Italy ment she had made with the Porte by the in making a most determined protest Firman of that year. What was the posi- against the course that had been taken. tion of the Bey at the present moment? He apologized to the House for having France had annexed the country, and he occupied so much of their time on this should like to know, in the event of any occasion; but he felt that the subject question arising between this country was one on which that House and this and Tunis not of a commercial nature, country should speak out, in order that whether the Government would pay the public of Europe might know what attention to the Firman of 1871, the their feelings were in reference to it, and authority of which they said they recog. that France-with whom we were on the nized, or to the Treaty which had just most friendly terms-should be made been concluded with France ? For his aware without delay that her proceed. own part, notwithstanding the high-ings in this matter did not commend handed proceedings of the French in themselves to us. The fact was that, overrunning a friendly country, he hoped led on by Germany and Prince Bismarck, the Government would stick to the fir- France had fallen into a trap, although man of 1871. He was aware that it she was, for the moment, as proud as was said that Lord Salisbury had made if she were marching on Berlin. He an arrangement with France in 1878. | begged, in conclusion, to move the ad. He would ask, however, what power journment of the House. Lord Salisbury had, after the Berlin

Motion made, and Question proposed, Treaty, to make such an arrangement? " That this House do now adjourn." Lord Salisbury had, he believed, denied that he had made any such arrange

(Jr. Jontague Guest.) ment as that attributed to him. [“Oh, MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, it is not for oh!”] He was willing to abstain from me to animadvert upon the use which going into the question whether Lord my hon. Friend the Member for WareSalisbury had or had not made such an ham (Mr. Montague Guest) has made of arrangement, because it was probable his power to move the adjournment of that the House would hear some autho- the House, nor on the rather full and ritative statement on the point before animated and pointed statement which the discussion closed. For his own part, he has delivered upon that Motion, enhe thought it was impossible that antering into the whole question of Tunis. English Minister could have agreed to But it is for me, in the responsible hand over to the Government of France position that I hold, in the first place, any portion of the Ottoman Empire. In entirely to associate myself with the any case, however, it had been thrown answer which was previously given to in the teeth of the Liberal Party that, the Question by my hon. Friend the in everything they had done since they Under Secretary of State for Foreign had come into power, they had attempted Affairs (Sir Charles W. Dilke); and, in to reverse the policy of their Predeces- the second place, to represent to the sors in Office; and even assuming that House in the most earnest and strongest Lord Salisbury had made the arrange- manner that justice, policy, and I would ment attributed to him, was it to be con- almost say decency, require that this tended that on this question alone the discussion should not now be continued. present Government were bound to On one point only can I refer to the abide by and carry into effect the policy statement of my hon. Friend the Memof their Predecessors ? In his opinion, ber for Wareham, because it is an hisHer Majesty's Government were bound torical point which while confirming to protest against this high-handed-he does not touch any of the matters which was almost going to say this outrageous ho probably may desire, and may very -attack which had been made by France legitimately desire, to bring under the upon Tunis. They had marched into a notice of the Ilouse. It is the statement friendly country a force of some 30,000 which he has made that up to the year or 40,000 men, and had taken possession 1863 France recognized the connection of one of the most important ports on the between Tunis and the Ottoman Empire.

Mr. Montague Guest



Now, that point has been a subject for any country, that when we have very very many years of correspondence, if strong charges to bring against her not of controversy, between the Foreign policy and conduct, we should take care Office of this country and the French that the House is placed in possession of Government from time to time. I would authentic information before

anyobserve, with regard to these recogni- thing in the way of bringing such charges. tions, that they are made a good deal to My hon. Friend the Under Secretary of depend upon convenience by this Power State has stated that this information is and that; and if my hon. Friend is pre- being pressed forward with all speed, pared to go all lengths in the assertion and that in the course, I hope, of two or of the measures which this country ought three days, it will be in the possession to take in cousequence of our recognizing of the House. I put it to the House, as the suzerainty of Turkey over Tunis, the first of the two propositions I wish whilst France does not recognize it, he to make, that if there is a disposition, will feel that we are open to the question and evidently there is, in the mind of whether we ourselves have acted upon some~I now give no opinion upon the that principle, and admitted the suze- matter to arraign the conduct of the rainty of Turkey in cases where she has French Government, it is but right and claimed it. I believe I am quite accurate just~and I will add but decent—that in saying that Turkey claimed the suze- we should have that authentic informarainty over Algiers, before the French tion which is on its way to us in our came into the possession of it; but we, hands before we proceed to consider the considering ourselves to have a cause of form and extent of the arraignment as quarrel with Algiers, bombarded the to their conduct. With regard to the town without asking leave of the Porte. Other question, which is a most legiti. It will, I believe, be necessary to consider mate one for my hon. Friend the Memthe principle upon which we have our ber for Wareham to raise, the conduct selves acted in laying down the law for of Her Majesty's Government, I have no other people's grievances. In the view doubt that conduct will be closely and of our Foreign Office, this matter has carefully scrutinized, as it ought to be. long been a matter of correspondence My hon. Friend says that we have been and controversy, and the British Govern- hoodwinked and deluded, and betrayed ment has always contended that Turkey into a false position. Well, those are exercised a power of suzerainty over assertions which I only name for the Tunis, while the French Government purpose of showing that if I do not now has as steadily denied it. Moreover, contest them, I may not be held to overthe French Government was supported look them, or subscribe to them, or in that denial by the Government of any other. But the claim I would make Italy down to a very recent period. Do on this portion of the question_namely, not let the House suppose for a moment the conduct of Her Majesty's Governthat I mention this as a point determin- ment, is really one that I would venture ing, or even having any bearing upon, to place quite as high as the claim I have the merits of this question; but I merely just made in respect of our obligations wish that the matter of fact should not towards a friendly and neighbouring be omitted or misinterpreted. I pass, country. My claim is that you cannot Sir, to the earnest representation I have judge the conduct of Her Majesty's made, and for which I will now state Government until you have the Papers the grounds. My hon. Friend the Mem- before you. Nay, more, you ought not ber for Wareham has, undoubtedly, in to attempt so to judge it, even if it were the strongest terms, arraigned the policy true that this was a question on which and conduct of the Governmentof France. their conduct had exclusively turned Well, let us consider what are the titles upon proceedings of their own. But it of a friendly nation upon our courtesy is right I should say that when the and consideration. France is a country Papers are produced, the most important with wbich for more than a generation portions of the Correspondence that we of men we have been in close and uit shall lay before the House, so far as they broken alliance; and I must say I think s involve the proceedings of this country, it is not stating too high the obligations are portions which belong, not to the that we ought to observe towards such a time of the present, but to the time of country, and, indeed, I will say towards the previous Administration. My hon. Friend the Member for Wareham has popular rights at present ? Surely the referred to something which he supposes House ought to know whether Her Mato have been stated or done by Lord jesty's Government had assented to an Salisbury. I am quite sure that my hon. annexation of Tunis. [Great interrupFriend will feel with me that there could tion here ensued, upon which the hon. not be a more gross deviation from Par. Member resumed his seat, saying he liamentary etiquette, and there could not must decline to continue his speech.] be a more gross deviation from the rules MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT:I rise of substantial justice, than I should be to Order, Sir; I beg to direct your atchargeable with if I were in general tention to the fact that the hon. Member terms, and without the production of the for Wolverhampton (Mr. H. II. Fowler) documents, to enter upon a discussion of is interrupting the hon. Member for the conduct of Lord Salisbury. I state Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell) by inco. Lord Salisbury personally, because my herent cries. hon. Friend mentioned Lord Salisbury; MR. H. H. FOWLER: I rise, Sir, to but I have not the smallest reason to give a most distinct denial to that statebelieve-on the contrary, my belief is ment. exactly the opposite one that Lord Mr. O'DONNELL resumed by assurSalisbury, with regard to these proceeding hon. Members opposite that it was ings on this important question, was in only from a conviction of the importance any manner separated from the general of the subject that he had ventured to action of the Government of which he address any observations to the House. was a Member. Under these circum- Hon. Members had asked for informa. stances, my hon. Friend and others will tion again and again. Had Her Ma. see that though the time may be very jesty's Government made up their minds, close at hand when this subject should or did they intend to spring a surprise be discussed, yet that it would not be on the House this day week ? Could right that we should attempt to discuss they have been in communication with it in the absence of the Papers now in the French Government all these weeks preparation. It would lead to no benefit and months, and not have arrived at any whatever; it would conduct us to no policy on the subject? Had they consolid conclusion; and I do not hesitate sented to a hauling down of the British to say that it might be productive of flag? Speaking as an Irishman, he very serious inconvenience and difficulty. I thought he had a right to plead for a

MR. O'DONNELL said, he felt very recognition of national rights. strongly the appeal by the Prime Minis- MR. J. COWEN said, he quite agreed ter to the House to wait for further in- with the Prime Minister that any discus. formation. At one time Her Majesty's sion of the Tunisian question at the preGovernment professed to have knowledge sent time would be inconvenient and unon the subject. He admitted that the just. They ought not to condemn the House ought not in a hurry to enter into a French Government until they had had discussion; but, assuming that there was an opportunity of being heard. But it ground for the appeal, he thought the was only fair to say that if his hon. House ought to know what was the Friend (Mr. Guest) had been precipipolicy of Her Majesty's Government. tate in bringing the matter before the Surely there could be no objection on House, the French Government had the part of a patriotic Administration to been equally, if not a good deal more, inform the House what was their policy. precipitate in the course they had purThey knew that some time ago Her Ma- sued. He feared there was little chance jesty's Government believed that the of their explaining away the action that Regency of Tunis was an integral por- had been taken. The English and tion of the Ottoman Empire. Did Her Italian Governments had every reason Msajesty's Government believe that, or to believe that the French simply medihad they given up their contention in tated punishing the Kroumirs for their the face of the arms of France ? In fact, raids on Algerian territory. It was but were they in the presence of another sur too evident now that the Kroumir incurrender? They knew it was a cardinal sions had merely been made a pretext principle of Her Majesty's Government for an annexation that had long been to defend popular rights and the rights contemplated. At least, that was the of nationalities. Had they maintained only view it was possible to take upon

Mr. Gladstone

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

the case as it stood. He would be glad / would be given in the Papers. The
if subsequent intelligence justified him communication with the Italian Govern-
in altering his opinion. He had no de- ment would be given. In answer to
sire to further prolong the discussion; the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr.
but he wished to ask this question. The Bourke), he thought his Question had
Tunisian Government owed a debt of better be put to the Admiralty.
some £5,000,000. A few years ago it MR. BOURKE gave Notice, that he
was upwards of £6,000,000. The Bey would, to-morrow, ask a Question about
was unable to pay the interest, and an the Papers to which he referred.
International Financial Commission was MR. MONTAGUE GUEST said, he
established for collecting the taxes and was willing, after the statement of the
taking charge of the Debt. This Com- Prime Minister, to withdraw his Motion.
mission consisted of one Englishman,

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
one Frenchman, one Italian, and two
Tunisians. It had been in existence MR. MONTAGUE GUEST asked the
now for some time, and its operations Under Secretary of State for Foreign
had been highly successful. The inte. Affairs, Whether, with regard to a
rest had been regularly paid, and the threat made by the French in 1864 to
Debt had been gradually but substan- fire on any Turkish ironclads that might
tially reduced. Now, he understood, by attempt to proceed to Tunis, upon which
the Treaty just concluded, that this In- the honourable Member for Rochester
ternational Commission had been an- asked for Lord Palmerston's answer at
nulled, and a French Commission had | that time, if he did not say that "there
been substituted for it. That was an was no answer whatever to it;” if he is
important matter. A good deal of the aware that in 1864, on the arrival of the
Tunisian Debt was held by English French and Italian Fleets in Tunis, Ad-
people, and it was only right that they miral Yelverton was ordered to that place
should be represented on the Commis- with the English Fleet, and that the Porte
sion. What he wished to ask the Go-sent likewise a squadron under Mustapha
vernment was, whether the Papers they Bey, with the Sultan's Commissioner,
were about to submit would enlighten Haidar Effendi; and, if he will lay upon
Parliament on the part the French Ca- the Table the Papers referring to that
binet had taken in destroying the old transaction ?
International Commission and supplant- SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: Sir, my
ing it by a French Commission ?

hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth Sir H. DRUMMOND WOLFF asked (Sir H. Drummond Wolff) having asked whether the Papers to be laid upon the me whether the French Government had Table would include the Treaty said to threatened to forcibly prevent a Turkish have been signed within the last few naval force from visiting Tunis, I incidays; and, also, whether the Govern- dentally stated in my reply that the ment would produce any communica- French Government had so acted in 1841 tions which might bave passed with the and in 1864. My hon. Friend the Member Italian Government with respect to the for Rochester (Mr. Otway) then asked action of the French Government ? me what answer Lord Palmerston made,

MR. BOURKE also wished to ask, and I replied that the French Governwhether any Papers would be included ment not having asked his consent to relating to Biserta Bay which were at their proceeding, he had made none. My the Foreign Office ? He believed that hon. Friend then observed that he had there were some Papers at the Admiralty sent the British Fleet, and my hon. also, in relation to that matter, which Friend the Member for Wareham (Mr. the House would like to see.

Guest) now asks me if that is so. On SIR CHARLES W. DILKE, in reply the former occasion, in 1841, the French to the hon. Member for Newcastle (Mr. Government despatched to Tunis a fleet J. Cowen), said, there were points con- carrying 438 guns. Lord Palmerston nected with the International Financial sent a far smaller force to protect British Commission on which information would life and property, and with distinct orders be given in the Papers to be laid before " to take no part in the dispute.” On the House. In answer to the hon. Mem- the later occasion, in 1864, on the ocber for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drummond currence of riots in the Regency of Tunis, Wolff), he had to say that the Treaty in the course of which the houses of some


[ocr errors]

British merchants were pillaged, Lord MR. MUNDELLA, in reply, said, he Palmerston sent one large and one small had endeavoured in his former answers ship to protect British life and property. to state there was no justification for the When France interfered in the matter, a alarm which existed as to the importafew weeks later, the French Government tion into this country of cattle disease sent a large force, which was ultimately from Ireland. The foot-and-mouth increased till it numbered five unar- disease had ceased to exist in Ireland moured ships of the Line, two iron-clads, since October, 1879. There was the and five other steam men-of-war; and residuum of pleuro-pneumonia, butit was the Italian Government, who had at not much less than in this country. He that time an understanding with the only wished the English cattle were in French Government with regard to as good a sanitary condition as the Irish Tunis, sent four unarmoured frigates, cattle at present. one iron-clad, and one corvette, the Italian ships having also troops on board for POOR LAW (IRELAND-BANBRIDGE disembarkation. There never were more

WORKHOUSE. than two British ships at Tunis at any MR. A. M. SULLIVAN asked the one time in the course of 1864, and their Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant mission was to protect British life and of Ireland, Whether, in view of the property.

MR. OTWAY asked, whether the correspondence which has recently passed Papers to be laid on the Table relating Banbridge, and the Local Government

between the Very Rev.John O'Brien, of to Tunis would include the negotiations Board in reference to some orphan chilof 1868 and 1869 in regard to the Finan- dren, recently inmates of the Banbridge cial Commission ?

Workhouse, the Government will take SIR CHARLES W. DILKE, in reply, steps to enable Boards of Guardians in said, that the Papers relating to Tunis such cases to exercise some more efficient were almost of incredible bulk, and it guardianship over orphans, the custody would be impossible to include in those of whom may be obtained from the about to be produced the Papers refer- Guardians by persons of a different ring to the negotiations of 1868 as to the Financial Commission.

religious persuasion ?

MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, MR. MONTAGUE GUEST asked the that the children in question were given Under Secretary of State for Foreign up to a relative--the aunt, he believed Affairs, Whether, in view of the concert by the Board of Guardians. The Board stated to have been established between of Guardians had already ample power the Great Powers with the especial ob

to exercise sufficient guardianship over ject of regulating the affairs of the East orphans. The 8th section of the 25 & and maintaining the Peace of Europe, 26 Vict, only required Guardians to give France consulted the other Powers who were parties to the said concert before up orphans to relatives if the Guardians

were of opinion the relatives were fit invading Tunisian territory, and is now acting with their concurrence and sanc- dren.

persons to be entrusted with the chil. tion ?

SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: Sir, the French Government did not consult the



MR. NORTHCOTE asked the Under CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, ACTS-IMPORTATION OF CATTLE On what day Her Majesty's Government FROM IRELAND.

telegraphed to St. Petersburg for perMR. LEA asked the Vice President of mission to publish Lord Dufferin's De. the Council, If there is any justification spatch of 8th March, and the Papers for the alarm which exists as to the im- referred to in his speech of the i3th portation into this Country of cattle from instant ? Ireland alleged to be diseased, and which SiR CHARLES W. DILKE: Sir, is acting so prejudicially to the interests Lord Dufferin's despatch of the 8th of of the farmers and graziers ; and, whe- March relating to a conversation with therany contagious disease exists amongst M. de Giers was received on the 14th of cattle in Ireland ?

that month. Lord Dufferin was in. Sir Charles W. Dilke

« ForrigeFortsett »