had been expressed in the House with of fact, Ireland was not as much inregard to the propriety of any expendi- terested in this expenditure as other ture upon Dover, and he thought some parts of the Empire, and it was a mere idea ought to be given to the House of what the ultimate limit of that expenditure would be. Before proceeding further, he should be obliged if the Speaker would kindly inform him whether he should be in order in discussing the object of an Amendment he moved in Committee, and on which he took a Division. playing with words to say that it was. What interest had Ireland in England retaining the command of the sea? Ireland lived on the produce of Ireland, and sent a good deal of it to England and Wales. ["Hear, hear!"] Ireland could manage to get on fairly well even if there were a few foreign ships about. There could be no fair comparison be*MR. SPEAKER: I think that would tween the circumstances of Ireland, a be quite out of place on the Third self-supporting agricultural country, and Reading of this Bill. The Amendment the circumstances of Great Britain, a referred, as I understand, to a particular manufacturing country, living on food port, and was not carried, and it obtained from abroad, and sending would be quite out of order to go into manufactured articles abroad. He therethese details. fore protested against the theory that MR. H. LEWIS said, that under Ireland was as much concerned as Great those circumstances, he would only draw Britain in this naval expenditure. If the attention of the House to the fact Great Britain were going to double or that they were contemplating an enor- treble her naval expenditure every demous expenditure upon the southern cade she must come to some terms by ports, that that expenditure would in which Ireland, who was not interested, all probability be very largely exceeded, should not contribute to the increased and that, whereas the expenditure was outlay. Ireland must be put in the about to be made upon ports in regard same position as other parts of the to which the gravest doubts had been Empire that we did not dare to ask to expressed, there were other ports as to contribute. The second objection was, which no doubt whatever had been that Ireland received no part of the expressed, and upon which no works of actual expenditure. The First Lord a permanent character were to be had laid it down that the expenditure erected under this Bill. In urging that there should be a greater expenditure on the western coasts for the protection of the commerce of the Clyde, the Mersey, and the Bristol Channel, he did so solely upon grounds of national and naval policy, and upon strategic grounds. should be regulated mainly by strategic reasons; but he would probably admit also that some weight should be given to economic reasons, such as the obtaining of cheap and efficient labour. The south of England was not chosen by commercial men for the erection of great works. MR. VESEY KNOX (Londonderry) Of course, we could not surround our said, the right hon. Gentleman the coasts with docks as France was doing, Member for St. George's had asserted and we ought to be governed by business that Ireland had as much interest as reasons. The Government had not any other part of the Empire in this chosen for shipbuilding purposes the naval expenditure. In the first place, same places that business men had the whole of the Empire was not being chosen-Belfast, the north-east of Engasked to pay its share of the expendi- land, and the Clyde ; but they had kept ture. They did not dare to ask Canada, to the south coast, where there was not or New Zealand, or Australia to pay a single shipbuilding yard set up by their share. They were proposing to private enterprise. The setting up of build docks at Hong Kong, and works works at Gibraltar might, perhaps, be at Gibraltar, which were at least as defensible on strategic grounds, and at much for the advantage of New Zealand Hong Kong because cheap labour was and Australia as they were for Ireland, obtainable there; indeed, Messrs. Armto put the case on a very low ground, strong were going to start a shipbuilding but they did not dare to ask anything yard in Japan; but was there a Govtowards those expensive works from the ernment shipbuilding yard in this counother parts of the Empire. As a matter try the location of which could be Mr. Herbert Lewis. *MR. GIBSON BOWLES moved : "To leave out from the word 'That,' to the end of the Question, in order to add instead thereof the words 'It is the duty of Her Majesty's advisers to take such steps as may be required to fulfil Her Majesty's treaty engagements relative to the Ottoman Empire, Oriental possessions." entered into for the security of Her Majesty's defended on commercial principles ? In their policy the Government were more anti-Irish than commercial. The port of Derry was eminently suitable for shipbuilding, and cheap labour was to be had there. All our defensive expenditure was being lavished on the south coast. Captain Mahan, in his book on the Sea Power of Europe, showed that even if England beat an enemy and He said that no doubt there was implied maintained command of the sea, her in his Motion the suggestion that Her commerce would still be subject to the Majesty's Government had not adhered operations of the privateers of other to their treaty engagements, and that Powers. No feature of that book was suggestion he thought he would be able more interesting than that in which the to make good. No doubt also there was author pointed out that, after the battle implied the suggestion that the Governof Trafalgar, the loss to British com- ment should amend their ways in the merce was enormous, because privateers future, and should more strictly observe were sent out by France. Assuming engagements entered into by Her that England could keep command of Majesty the Queen. That also he the sea, still we should find it impossible thought he would be able to make to maintain our commerce as in time of good; but, having made those two peace through the English Channel, and points, he could scarcely conceive how much of it would be forced to go by the any Government could resist his Amendnorth of Ireland and the north of Scot- ment. That Amendment dealt with land. If a war was to happen, where the treaty engagements relative to the would the protection of our commerce Ottoman Empire. By Article 7 of be under the present scheme of naval the Treaty of Paris, 1856, the six defence? Belfast, Derry, and the Clyde Great Powers of Europe engaged to were, for economic reasons, suited for respect the independence and territorial dockyards, and places to which a large integrity of the Turkish Empire; while, part of our commerce could go; but we by Article 9 it was stipulated that there spent no money on these places. If was no right of interference, whether Derry and Belfast were not Irish we collectively or individually, in any one should be spending money there. For of those Powers with regard to relations these reasons, he joined in protesting of the Sultan with his people. By the against the Bill, against enormous out- Tripartite Treaty (1856), England, lay which was not for the benefit of Ireland, and which was carefully distributed to do her as little good as possible. France and Austria guaranteed jointly the independence and the integrity of Turkey, and undertook to regard any infraction of the Treaty of Paris as a casus belli. The denunciation by Russia of that part of the Treaty of 1856 which related to the Black Sea led to the Conference of London of 1871, at which it was agreed that : "It is an essential principle of the law of nations that no Power can liberate itself from the engagements of a treaty, nor modify the stipulations thereof, unless with the consent of the contracting Powers by means of an amicable arrangement Then came the Treaty of Berlin. By Article 9 of that Treaty, England and the Powers of Europe engaged that Bulgaria should pay tribute to the Porte, and that Bulgaria should assume a portion of the debt of the Porte. By Article 11 the Powers of Europe, Eng--that of the binding force and sanctity of land amongst them, agreed that Bul- International engagements. Great Britain is garian fortresses should be razed within ready at all times, and in all seasons, to uphold that principle, and she cannot palter with it in a year; by Articles 33 and 42, that the present instance. Her Majesty's GovernMontenegro and Servia should assume ment cannot, therefore, consent to recognise or their share of the Turkish debt; and by associate themselves in any shape or form with Article 59, that the port of Batoum this proceeding of the Russian Government. should be a free commercial port; and, view that it constitutes a violation of the Treaty They are compelled to place on record their finally, under the Cyprus Convention, of Berlin unsanctioned by the signatory Powers; 1878, England engaged to join with the that it tends to make future conventions of the Sultan in defending the territory of kind difficult, if not impossible, and to cast doubt, at least, on those already concluded." Turkey in Asia Minor by force of arms against Russia. Every one of these con- He could not conceive plainer or more ditions was binding on the Government proper language with regard to the highof this country at the present moment. handed action of Russia in throwing What were they? First, they had guaran- over the engagement. But the protest teed the independence and the integrity of Lord Rosebery ended with that lanof Turkey; yet the whole of their recent guage. Under the Cyprus Convention policy with regard to Turkey was an they undertook to defend Turkish terriattack upon her independence and a tory in Asia by force of arms, and here threat as to her integrity. They had he might express his astonishment at undertaken not themselves to interfere the way in which the Convention was nor to permit interference with Turkey. thrown over by the First Lord of the Yet they had interféred, and for that Admiralty, whom he regretted not to credit had been claimed. As to the see in his place. He asked the First Danubian fortresses, when he asked Lord whether he had stated that they about them he was informed by the were free from any engagement as to the Minister that he did not know whether maintenance of the Turkish Empire, and they were razed or not, but that if they on the 13th of February he replied that, had not been razed, then he presumed speaking of the Cyprus Convention, he they had fallen into decay. They had expressed his belief, which he held, that engaged that tribute should be paid by the Sultan, not having carried out the Bulgaria and a share of the debt should reforms promised, we were relieved of be assumed by Bulgaria, Servia, and any responsibility as to defending Montenegro; yet not one penny had been the Sultan's dominions in Asia Minor. contributed of tribute or one penny Here was a declaration from one assumed of debt by either one of them. Minister, and the responsibility of Then as to Batoum, it was the conditions one was the responsibility of all. as to that port which reconciled England If the First Lord of the Admiralty to the concessions made to Russia. It spoke simply his private opinion about would be in the recollection of many the Cyprus Convention, he might pass Members of that House that in 1886 it by without comment; but the right Russia suddenly announced that she no longer intended to be bound by this Article in the Treaty of Berlin. She said that the conditions had changed, and that she intended to abrogate that particular portion of the Treaty which referred to the maintenance of Batoum as a free commercial port. Lord Rose bery wrote 13th July 1886 : "In the first place, it must be understood that Her Majesty's Government cannot accept the view that this step on the part of Russia does not constitute an infraction of the Treaty of Berlin." He added: "One direct, supreme, and perpetual interest, however, is no doubt at stake in this transaction Mr. Gibson Bowles. The hon. Gentleman, speaking as the First The object, therefore, was to avoid the pressure by a great Power on the Turkish Government, which had SO large a dominion over countries in which England was interested. In the course of the negotiations which preceded the final settlement of the Treaty of Berlin, Lord Salisbury again expressed his views, and again it was made apparent that it was not for the benefit of Turkey that we agreed to safeguard Asia Minor, but still for the interest of India. Lord Salisbury wrote: the two Powers. Hence the engagement Canal. It cannot be otherwise than a matter was said to be conditional. Yes, but of extreme solicitude to this country that the the condition itself was Government to which this jurisdiction belongs conditional. should be so closely pressed by the political The condition did not arise until the outposts of a greatly-superior Power, that its agreement was come to between the two independent action, and even existence, is almost Powers as to the kind of reforms to be impossible." introduced. So true was this that Lord Salisbury in forwarding this Convention explained that it was purposely avoided making any definite arrangements as to the reforms, inasmuch as time was required to consider them, and that time had not been given. The essence of the promise of the reforms lay in the fact that an agreement was to be come to between Turkey and England as to what the reforms were to be in their nature and character. Until such an agreement had been come to, therefore, the promise of the Sultan was inoperative. ["Hear, hear!"] The Sultan was not bound to carry out any reforms not agreed to by England. Articles 9, 33 and 41 of the Berlin Treaty had avowedly not been executed by us, and the reason given was because the Powers had been unable to agree as to the exact amounts of the debt to be apportioned. Because of that failure to come to an agreement it was impossible to carry out the articles. He applied the same argument, or the same treatment, to the Cyprus Convention. But he denied altogether that our engagement to protect Asia Minor from Russia by force of arms was really conditional on the introduction of reforms by the Sultan. The reforms were not the consideration for which England undertook the engagement, for the keeping of which he was now pleading. The Lord Salisbury, again writing to Sir consideration was not the benefit of Henry Layard on May 30th, 1878, Turkey, nor for the security and good government of the Armenians; it was the interests of the Oriental possessions of Her Majesty and the safety of India. This was shown to be the case by the Circular of Lord Salisbury to Her Majesty's Embassies, dated the 1st of April 1878, in which, speaking of the Government of Constantinople, he said: "The formal jurisdiction of that Government extends over geographical positions which must, under all circumstances, be of the deepest interest to Great Britain. It is in the power of the Ottoman Government to close or to open the straits which form the natural highway of nations between the Ægean Sea and the Euxine. Its dominion is recognised at the head of the Persian Gulf, on the shores of the Levant, and in the immediate neighbourhood of the Suez which have for some time past been in progress "The progress of the confidential negotiations between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of Russia make it probable that those Articles of the Treaty of San Stefano which concern European Turkey, will be sufficiently modified to bring them into harmony with the interests of the other European Powers, and of England in particular. There is, however, no such prospect with respect to that portion of is sufficiently manifest that, in respect to Batoum the Treaty which concerns Turkey in Asia. It and the fortresses north of the Araxes, the Government of Russia is not prepared to recede from the stipulations to which the Porte has been led by the events of the war to consent. Majesty's Government have consequently been forced to consider the effect which these agreements, if they are neither annulled nor counteracted, will have upon the future of the Asiatic provinces of the Ottoman Empire and upon the interests of England, which are closely affected by the condition of those provinces. said: Her "Even if it be certain that Batoum and As Ardahan and Kars will not become the base a monument of feeble defence on the one side means by and sure base of operations in direct communication by the Caspian Sea and by Batoum, with the heart of the Russian Empire. Then he said that the only "The moral effect of the conquest of Armenia upon our Mohammedan fellow-subjects, and upon the population of Central Asia, cannot be overlooked by a statesman who attaches any value to the retention of India as part of the British Empire." He thought he had shown-if extracts and the considered opinions of Statesmen were of any value whatever-that the Cyprus Convention was made for the sole purpose as every other Convention with regard to Turkey had been--for the sole purpose not of assisting Turkey or showing any great affection for Turkey but of safeguarding the interests of England and the security of the Oriental Empire of Great Britain. If this were so, surely it behoved the Government to adhere to the engagement undertaken. India had always been the prize of Empire and subject to the attack of aggressive conquerors from Mahmoud of Ghuzni to Nadir Shah. It had been exposed to invasion after invasion, and not until the occupation of the English had it begun to enjoy anything like comparative peace. He did not know whether it would be held by any Member of the House that the Oriental interests of England were in less danger than ever they were or that they were less in importance than ever they were. To his mind they were more in importance and in greater danger. The various outworks by which 50 or 60 years ago they were defended had disappeared, and at that moment Russia, which a few years ago was 1000 miles from the frontiers of land would be alone concerned. It would probably signify little to the rest of Europe India was within striking distance of whether Russia retained Armenia or not. But Herat. If so engagements entered into England has to consider the effect of annexa- for the protection of British India and tion to Russia of this important province upon the Oriental interests of India were of the British possessions in India. Russia would not less but greater importance than ever, and it depended on the attitude of England now what the attitude of India and of Asia might be in the future. : "As regards the acquisition (by Russia) of territory in Asia Minor, the interests of Eng then command the whole valley of the Euphrates and Tigris, which would inevitably fall into her hands in the course of time. Persia, moreover, would be placed entirely at her mercy. The possession of the entire coast of the Caspian Sea, and the direct road through a rich and wellinhabited country to Herat and Afghanistan, and ultimately to India, is a matter of vast political importance to Russia. India was hesitating, Asia was doubtful, not because they had any doubt of our power, but because they doubted our will, our courage and honesty. It was "It must not be forgotten that the possession by this test they would try us. By testing of Armenia by Russia as regards any designs she may have upon India would be very different our fidelity to the engagements we had from that of any part of Turkestan or Central undertaken would they try and deal Asia. In Armenia and the north of Persia she with us in the future. The question would have a hardy and abundant population, was whether we were to be true to our affording her excellent materials for a large army, ready at any time to advance upon our Indian frontier, and resting upon a convenient Mr. Gibson Bowles. He called engagements or false to them. upon the Government to declare whether |