which the honourable and learned gentleman has adverted to, would be solved either for the general welfare of the world or for the interests of England, which after all must be our sovereign care. The Government of the Porte was never for a moment misled by the arrival of the British fleet in Besika Bay. They were perfectly aware when that fleet came there that it was not to prop up any decaying and obsolete Government, nor did its presence there sanction any of those enormities which are the subjects of our painful discussion to-night. What may be the fate of the eastern part of Europe it would be arrogant for me to speculate upon, and if I had any thoughts on the subject I trust I should not be so imprudent or so indiscreet as to take this opportunity to express them. But I am sure that as long as England is ruled by English Parties who understand the principles on which our Empire is founded, and who are resolved to maintain that Empire, our influence in that part of the world can never be looked upon with indifference. If it should happen that the Government which controls the greater portion of those fair lands is found to be incompetent for its purpose, neither England nor any of the Great Powers will shrink from fulfilling the high political and moral duty which will then devolve upon them.

But, Sir, we must not jump at conclusions so quickly as is now the fashion. There is nothing to justify us in talking in such a vein of Turkey as has, and is being at this moment entertained. The present is a state of affairs which requires the most vigilant examination and the most careful nanagement. But those who suppose that England ever would uphold, or at this moment particularly is upholding, Turkey from blind superstition and from a want of sympathy with the highest aspirations of humanity, are deceived. What our duty is at this critical moment is to maintain the Empire of England. Nor will we ever agree to any step, though it may obtain for a moment comparative quiet and a false prosperity, that hazards the existence of that Empire.

161

SPEECH ON CALLING OUT RESERVE FORCES. April 8,

1878.

MESSAGE FROM QUEEN.

[By the Treaty of San Stefano, concluded between Russia and Turkey in the spring of 1878, the latter Power was reduced to a cypher in the hands of Russia, and the position of England in the Mediterranean seriously imperilled. Russia was required by the British Government to submit the treaty to a Congress; and her refusal to do so was the signal for Lord Beaconsfield to advise Her Majesty to call out the Reserve Forces.]

THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD: My lords, in moving an

war.

humble address to Her Majesty to thank the Queen for the gracious message which we have recently received from Her Majesty, I think it will not be considered unusual that I should make a few remarks on the circumstances in which that message has been addressed to Parliament. I assure your lordships I shall not ask you to follow me in a narrative of the war which has occurred between Russia and Turkey, or of the course which has been pursued by Her Majesty's Government during that When last I had the honour of addressing your lordships on this subject, which was on the occasion of the meeting of Parliament, I said that during that war no noble lord opposite had challenged the policy which we had pursued, and I thought, therefore, I was entitled to assume that the policy on which we had acted had been generally approved, and I believe I may infer from what passed on that occasion that noble lords opposite assented to my statement. But it so happened that at almost the very moment I was then speaking circumstances were occurring which gave quite a new aspect to affairs, and I think that upon those circumstances and upon all the conduct of Her Majesty's Government subsequently to those circumstances

your lordships have a legitimate, constitutional, and Parliamentary right to declare your opinion. With one exception, I will ask your attention only to what has occurred from the moment to which I have been alluding. My lords, before I enter into the details with which I shall have to trouble your lordships, I ask permission to read an extract from an important despatch, which extract it seems to me to be necessary you should have in your minds before you can form an impartial judgment on the statement which I am about to submit to your lordships' House. In that paper, which was an answer to Prince Gortchakoff announcing and vindicating the commencement of the war between Russia and Turkey, the Secretary of State (the Earl of Derby) argued with great ability the many reasons why we could not agree with His Highness. Having given many reasons for this, the Secretary of State concluded:-

"The course on which the Russian Government has entered involves graver and more serious considerations.' (That is, graver and more serious than those which he had already alleged.) 'It is in contravention of the stipulation of the Treaty of Paris of March 30, 1856, by which Russia and the other signatory Powers engaged, each on its own part, to respect the independence and the territorial integrity of the Ottoman Empire. In the Conference of London of 1871, at the close of which the above stipulation with others was again confirmed, the Russian plenipotentiary, in common with those of the other Powers, signed a declaration affirming it to be "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 parties by means of an amicable arrangement." In taking action against Turkey on his own part, and having recourse to arms without further consultation with his allies, the Emperor of Russia has separated himself from the European concert hitherto maintained, and has at the same time departed from the rule to which he himself had solemnly recorded his consent.'

My lords, the reply from which I have read that extract is dated May 1, 1877; and it is of the greatest importance that the House should bear in mind that, at the commencement of the

deplorable war which I trust has now ceased, this announcement was so deliberately made and this principle was vindicated in a manner so distinct by Her Majesty's Government. My lords, the extract which I have read conveys the keynote of our policy; it is the diapason of our diplomacy; upon it our policy was founded; and had not those engagements been entered into by Russia, and had we not held her bound by those engagements in the face of Europe, no policy of neutrality would have been sanctioned by this country. I believe, my lords, I may say that not alone for this, but for other countries which adopted the same policy.

Well, since I had the honour of addressing your lordships at the beginning of this session, circumstances which were just then occurring and which continued afterwards have given a new aspect to the state of affairs. Those circumstances were as follow:-About that time Her Majesty's Government received private information that negotiations were commencing or were about to commence between the belligerent Powers. No sooner had that information reached us than the Secretary of State addressed to Her Majesty's ambassador at St. Petersburg, Lord A. Loftus, instructions which were as follow, and were dated January 14 :

'Her Majesty's ambassador has been instructed to state to Prince Gortchakoff that, in order to avoid possible misconception and in view of reports which have reached Her Majesty's Government, they are of opinion that any treaty concluded between the Governments of Russia and the Porte affecting the treaties of 1856 and 1871 must be a European treaty, and would not be valid without the assent of the Powers who were parties to those treaties.'

My lords, on January 23, having received no answer from Russia with respect to those representations, the Secretary of State, pressing for an answer, telegraphed in these terms:

'Have you received an answer from the Russian Government to the communication which you made on the 15th inst. respecting the validity of any future treaty ?'

On January 24, ten days after the original representations,

Her Majesty's ambassador writes to say he had received no answer himself, and adds:

'I presume Prince Gortchakoff regarded the communication as a statement to record the opinion of Her Majesty's Government which required no answer. If an answer was to be given, it would probably be made through the Russian ambassador in London.'

Accordingly, my lords, on the day after that message was received, Count Schouvaloff read to my noble friend the following extract of a telegram from Prince Gortchakoff :—

:

'We repeat the assurance that we do not intend to settle by ourselves (isolément) European questions having reference to the peace which is to be made (se rattachant à la paix).'

Meanwhile, my lords, information reached us that negotiations were now being carried on between Russian and Turkish delegates at Kezanlik, and that those negotiations were being conducted with the utmost secrecy, I may say mystery, which secrecy was held as against those who had religiously and honourably observed that policy of neutrality which had been promised by the Secretary of State. In consequence of this, my lords, on January 29 the Secretary of State addressed the following despatch to Lord A. Loftus:

I have to instruct your Excellency to state to the Russian Government that Her Majesty's Government, while recognising any arrangements made by the Russian and Turkish delegates at Kezanlik for the conclusion of an armistice and for the settlement of bases of peace as binding between the two belligerents, declare that in so far as those arrangements are calculated to modify European treaties and to affect general and British interests they are unable to recognise in them any validity unless they are made the subject of a formal agreement among the parties to the Treaty of Paris.'

At the same time, my lords, the Secretary of State sent the following circular in identical language to Her Majesty's ambassadors at all the Courts of Paris, Vienna, Berlin, and Rome. Your lordships will perceive that it contains an additional paragraph, but in other respects is substantially the same as the communication to Lord A. Loftus of January 29.