That was the language of Mr. Gladstone in 1856. There was no talk then of "bag and baggage." But what I wish to insist upon is this-that those Ministers who were responsible for maintaining the integrity and independence of the Turkish Empire by war maintained that policy through the 14 years that elapsed up to the time when the Franco-German War broke out, and they were called upon to examine the results of the Crimean War and the work of 1856. They then confirmed deliberately everything done and stipulated in 1856 without a single word about these reforms of Turkish institutions which, five years later, seemed to them so all-important. The noble Duke said it was the business of the Opposition to oppose. Of opposition in this House I should not complain; but what was the history of the year 1876? In June, 1876, if one of those dictionaries of contemporaries, which are published now-a-days, had occasion to describe the opinions of the noble Duke, it would have said that he was one of the authors of the Crimean War, the object of which was to defend the independence and integrity of Turkey against the designs of Russia: and that so far he had not altered his opinions. That was the case up to June, 1876; there was scarcely a hint given, either by him or by Mr. Gladstone, of any modification of "pinion until Parliament separated. But when Parliament separated, and it was no longer possible to summon it, then arose that tremendous "Bulgarian Atrocity" agitation, which was dictated, I fully believe, as regards those who were, in the first instance, responsible for it, by the purest and most unmixed feeling of philanthropy and humanity. But what was done by the Opposition of that day is something unique in our history. At the moment when this country seemed threatened by a foreign Power, and when it was impossible to ascertain by a Constitutional test what the opinion of the country was, they produced a false impression of that opinion by plunging the country into a tremendous agitation by which they tried, without success, to wrest the control of foreign affairs from the hands of Her Majesty's Government, and, unfortunately, with more success, to impress upon foreign Powers the conviction that the policy of the Crimean War was abandoned and that England would witness the destruction of Turkey unmoved. Mr. Fox was deeply blamed because he sympathized with and supported those who were in arms against his country; but, at least, Mr. Fox differed from some of his later disciples, in that in so doing he was supporting opinions which through his whole life he had maintained. We complain, not only of a conversion right round, and of a conversion at a critical moment, but of a conversion which was so timed that it produced a fatally misleading impression upon foreign Powers-an impression which it was materially impossible for the Government at that moment to counteract. I do not for a moment suggest that these things were intended by the noble Duke and the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Gladstone); but I do suggest that they allowed their Party passions utterly to blind their prudence as statesmen. I feel confident that, but for the unhappy part taken at that time, we had good hopes of persuading Turkey in the first instance, and Russia in the second, to a wiser course than that which they ultimately pursued. The noble Duke has seasoned his discourse with sundry flowers of oratory principally directed against me. I cannot entirely pass by the accusations he has made, although they refer to matters which are res judicata, which have been submitted to both Houses of Parliament, and decided over and over again in both Houses of Parliament, by overwhelming majorities. In the first place, the noble Duke, in reference to the Asiatic matter, accused us of deliberately insulting all the Mahomedan subjects of the Queen. I cannot conceive where he gets the foundation for that accusation. We distrusted undoubtedly-and we deeply distrusted-a particular Native Agent who was at that time employed at the Court of Cabul. I am not sure whether he is alive or dead; but he is, at all events, an absent man, and it is not necessary for my argument that I should explain why we distrusted him. It is sufficient for me to state that that was the case; but I never said anything to show that I distrusted the honesty of the other Mahomedan subjects of the Queen. There are two grounds on which Natives were unsuitable for Agents at such stations as Herat and Candahar. In the first place, they were not impartial. I do not mean that they were not impartial as between the Ameer and the British Go "British officers, with suitable establishments and orderlies, shall be deputed, at the pleasure of the British Government, to Cabul, or Kan. dahar, or Balkh, or all three places, or wheragainst the Persians."-[Afghanistan, No. 1 ever an Afghan Army may be assembled to act (1878), p. 2.] It is then said that a subsidy should be given to the Ameer, and that whenever the subsidy ceased the British officers should be withdrawn. THE DUKE OF ARGYLL: Withdrawn from what? SALISBURY: vernment, for I do not think there was | Well, it is said in that Treaty itself, much danger in that respect. They with regard to then pending negotiations were, however, placed on the confines of with Persia, thatAfghanistan, and, among other places, at Herat, which is on the confines of Persia and Afghanistan. As everyone knows, the Mahomedans are divided into two sects, who feel so bitterly towards each other, that a member of one sect would not be a very suitable Agent for the purpose of determining differences which might arise between them. I do not wish to dwell very much on that point, although it was a consideration which weighed with us. But there was a very much more important consideration. The principal danger which we wanted to avert by placing British Agents in Afghanistan was-and there is no reason to conceal it-connected entirely with the aggression of a European Power. Well, which was the most likely to act efficiently and intelligently to fulfil our orders as we desired them to be fulfilled and to obtain the information which it was valuable for us to secure-which was most likely-a European or an Asiatic? Obviously, it was only a European who could understand the position as it existed between England and Russia, and who could obtain for us the information and exercise the influence which would be a real security to us. Therefore, I repudiate as entirely unfounded the idea that, in preferring an English to a Native Agent at Candahar and Herat, we expressed any sentiments which were insulting to the vast majority of Her Majesty's Mahomedan and Hindoo subjects. I must further add that, unless such a charge was so absolutely certain as to make it necessary to bring it before Parliament, I cannot conceive any conduct less likely to be advantageous to the Public Service than that of the noble Duke in discussing such a matter in this House. The very considerations which ought to have prevented him from mentioning it prevent me from enlarging, as I should otherwise do, on what I regard as the dangerous tendency of his conduct. Then we are said to have "shuffled with Treaties," as the noble Duke described it in his mild language. The shuffling with Treaties arises from the fact, according to him, that we urged the admission of British Agents to Afghanistan, although we had, by the Treaty of 1855, promised Dost Mahomed that we would not do so. The Marquess of Salisbury THE MARQUESS OF From the Ameer's country. That was a provision made for sending British officers to the Afghan Army at one particular crisis when it was engaged in a campaign against Persia; and yet the noble Duke quotes it as a Treaty binding us for all time not to urge the admission of British officers as Agents within the dominions of the Ameer. If there has been any shuffling used in the course of this debate, I submit that it has been used by the wrong party. Then comes the charge of double-dealing with the Ameer. I am totally unable to understand on what that charge rests. The noble Duke cites my secret_Instructions to Lord Lytton, and says I desired him to give a dynastic guarantee" to Shere Ali. There is nothing about a dynastic guarantee in my Instructions. All I said was that we should be glad to make certain propositions for the purpose of assuring the Ameer with respect to the succession of his heir Abdoolah Jan. The proposition which was made was of a limited character. It was a perfectly straightforward and honest proposition, and I cannot conceive how it can be liable to the imputation of double-dealing. Again, I must protest againt the treatment which Lord Lytton has received tonight. Of course, I am not here to say that his conduct is not to be canvassed, that his acts are not to be examined, and that Her Majesty's Government are not to be censured if necessary. But to impute to him acts of a dishonourable character-for it is nothing less which the noble Duke did-in reference to a matter which has already been decided by both Houses of Parliament, and which has really passed into the domain of that the direct authority should still be left to the Sultan. What provisions did we make for that purpose? The whole mili history, can serve no possible purpose, except to wound Lord Lytton in the distant discharge of his difficult and delicate duties, and to injure the re-tary authority of the country is in the spect in which he is held by both Na- hands of the Sultan. The Militia is to be tives and Europeans in India. It seems commanded entirely by officers appointed to me that such a proceeding as that is by the Sultan, the gendarmerie is to be an abuse of the liberty of speech which commanded entirely by officers appointed the Houses of Parliament practice-an by the Sultan. If there is insurrection, abuse which is damaging to the reputa- the only troops which can be summoned tion of this country, and dangerous to are Turkish; these are to be summoned its greatest and highest interests abroad. only at the instance of the Governor I think there is nothing further for me named by the Sultan; and the Sultan to say in respect to India except this. has the absolute right of occupying both The noble Duke deprecated India being the littoral parts of the Province and asked to pay for any costs of the Afghan all its frontier. Therefore, for all exWar, because we had practically admit- ternal purposes, Eastern Roumelia is ted that Afghanistan was perfectly in- under the direct rule of the Sultan. I defensible, and we had shown it by the am aware that the Province will, as to inease with which it had been overrun. It ternal affairs, be largely self-governed— was not the military question of the de- but that was the distinction we desired fence of Afghanistan which was mainly to draw-the internal government is to in our minds when we adopted our recent be entirely in the hands of the people, policy. It was not on military grounds while the foreign, political, and military that we objected to the reception of the relations are entirely in the hands of the Russian Mission and the exercise of Rus- Sultan. That, as has been said, is a sian influence in Afghanistan. It was be- state of things precisely analogous to cause we were not prepared, if Afghan- the position of a British Colony. The istan were closed to ourselves, to see it same may be said of the other Provinces made the base for such diplomatic opera- which we have rescued by the Treaty of tions as those which have in recent times Berlin from the great Slav State. The been conducted in the Provinces of Tur- noble Duke appears to think that unless key. If such operations were conducted the Sultan is the absolute and despotic from a base upon our own borders, it would master, he can have no dominion worth have been an addition to our anxieties and speaking of either in Macedonia or in our difficulties, and a peril to the tran- Eastern Roumelia. That is not our quillity of India, which we should be jus- opinion. We feel that the Turkish tified in asking India to join with us in Empire may remain as a comparatively dissipating. With regard to Turkey, I limited Monarchy, although as an enmust say a few words as to the constitu- tirely absolute Monarchy it could not. tion of Eastern Roumelia, to which the The noble Earl who spoke last (the Earl noble Earl who spoke last (the Earl of Kimberley) referred to a matter which of Kimberley) referred. The noble is very germane to the present purpose, Earl ridicules the possession of poli- although it belongs to many years agotical and military authority there by the I mean the junction of the two PrinciSultan. The idea that we had in con- palities of Moldavia and Wallachia, and stituting Eastern Roumelia was that we he said that he was opposed to the should separate the internal government opinion of Lord Palmerston, who obof the country, which it was shown, jected to their union. I was surprised whether the Turks were wise or foolish, that the noble Earl mentioned that incould not be conducted by them with stance, and mentioned it especially in that harmony which was desirable-that reference to the creation of Native States. we should separate that from the func- I remember very well a very brilliant tions of government relating to military speech made by Mr. Gladstone-I have defence. We were anxious to enable the a lively recollection of it, because it people, as far as possible, to govern them- persuaded me to vote with him-in selves: but as regards all external matters, which Mr. Gladstone told us that the as regards the defence of the country, as breasts of free men were the surest regards the prevention of insurrections or defence of nations, and that if only the prevention of invasion, we thought we would meet the wishes of these people, and would allow them to combine, we should find this free, independent, healthy State the best bulwark against the aggressions of Russia. I am not here to discuss the conduct of Roumania; but I ask whether, on a review of the last three years, you are under the impression that Roumania has been an effective bulwark against the aggressions of Russia? I believe there is a great deal of loose talk about the power of these small States to resist the power of any great military neighbour. Many years must elapse before they can attain either the coherence or the actual material vigour which is necessary to enable them to fulfil any such function. And when I heard the noble Earl conclude his speech by telling us that we ought to have secured the gratitude of these people, and that we should be strong in their gratitude, I felt inclined to ask him to look back upon his own historical lore, and to give me any one instance--I have puzzled my brains to recollect one-in which a people have, moved by their gratitude for past favours, been led to take a political line against their own existing interests. I cannot remember a case of the kind. I do not speak of individuals. You may find Potentates who have it, but you will not find a people. I ask the noble Earl to look over the past century and to think who are the people who have fought with England, and who are those who have received gifts of blood and treasure from England for their defence-and then, glancing at the state of the world, to say whether those whom we have helped the most are now our best friends, or whether those whom we have opposed the most are now our most determined enemies. The whole idea is purely sentimental. It may animate poets and be a pleasant theme for historians; but to put it forward as a fact on which politicians and statesmen can found their calculations and confidently depend is, I believe, a mere chimera. With regard to the Ottoman Porte and the stipulations of the Treaty of Berlin, we were anxious to maintain the interests of the Porte, although it was not able to maintain its ancient boundaries. We felt that the surest hope of preserving its existence lay in placing a more limited strain upon its resources. We tried to preserve it, because it seemed to us to be one of the The Marquess of Salisbury most important barriers against a dangerous advance. And in desiring to place a bulwark against the increase of the Slavonic principle we thought we did wisely to look, not only to the Porte, but to Austria. I still entertain the opinion that that occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina-although there is much in it that excites regret is one of the most important results for the tranquillity of Europe which have been achieved. I believe the results that have been attained by the Treaty of Berlin have placed Turkey in a position in which, if she has still the elements of social vitality, as we think she has—if she has statesmen who are fitted to conduct her through this difficult crisis, are the arrangements which are best adapted to assure her a prolonged existence. We cannot revive the dead; and if the gloomy auguries that we hear on the other side are true, of course the efforts of diplomatists and statesmen are worthless. But we can at least give time for ascertaining whether these gloomy anticipations are correct, or whether there is not really that promise of the fulfilment of the brighter hopes that we have entertained, and, at all events, of postponing what will be one of the most terrible visitations that can befall the world whenever it shall occur. This result we believe the Berlin Treaty has achieved; and that it has been achieved without the shedding of a drop of English blood is a matter on which we may congratulate ourselves. EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, considering the thin attendance now in the House, as compared with the numbers who were present when my noble Friend the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) and the noble Earl at the head of the Government were speaking, I feel that it would be improper for me to occupy much of your time. The noble Marquess (the Marquess of Salisbury) thinks we are flogging a dead horse; but the objects we are flogging are Her Majesty's Government; and although I do not believe them to be immortal, I should certainly be sorry if they were already defunct. The noble Earl the First Minister administered a severe rebuke to the noble Duke for having alluded to past transactions in relation to Afghanistan, although the noble Duke had carefully avoided referring to matters bearing on the present negotiations-whereas the noble Marquess has himself been guilty of the very fault he corrected in the noble Duke. The noble Earl said it was impossible for the Government to meet the noble Duke on that ground, because their mouths were closed; but the noble Marquess, on the contrary, got up and rushed at once into the part of the question connected with the placing of British Agents on the Frontiers of Afghanistan. The noble Marquess held that the Article of the Treaty of 1857 with respect to that point has nothing whatever to do with the question; but an examination of its terms, although I am no lawyer, convinces me that it has everything to do with it, as your Lordships may see for yourselves by reading the Treaty. There has been a good deal of something like banter and I do not object to it-as to the violence of the language that has been used. All I can say is this-that when the noble Marquess described his own language in speaking of political matters, of political foes, and even sometimes of political friends, as mild, it takes from me all grounds of defence, either for the past or for the future, because it shows that in his remarkably clear head there is one deficiency-he is not aware of the value of the words in the English language. The noble Marquess said something about carrying out reforms in the Turkish Empire. It appears to me that if your Lordships were present here the other night when the noble Marquess disposed in the most complete manner of the chances of any such reforms by saying that the Turks had no money and no chance of getting any, and that without money reforms in Turkey were impossible, it will not seem so monstrous if we disbelieve in the reality of these reforms. With regard to the Berlin Treaty, I may say that I am not an opponent of it. I do not wish to see it remain unexecuted. I wish to see it carried out as far as possible so as not to embarrass or entangle us, while being of the greatest advantage to the Christian populations of Eastern Europe. I cannot help thinking the sort of vacillation that has gone on with regard to this Berlin Treaty must be, in some degree, owing to the absolute difference of opinion with regard to the Turkish Empire which has been consistently held by the Prime Minister and the noble Marquess. I trust this Treaty will be carried out; but I complain of the enormous |