Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

Nor am I here to vindicate the honour of Lord Palmerston; but I may make one observation with regard to that distinguished man, because it may throw some little light on these painful disclosures which have agitated and surprised so many persons. We have also had it stated in another place' that Lord Palmerston made some light observation to a diplomatist who spoke to him on the subject of our policy with regard to the Black Sea. Now, everybody who knew Lord Palmerston well, knew this of him-that with a smiling countenance he often evaded inconvenient discussions on serious affairs. Lord Palmerston was a man who, when most serious, availed himself very often of the weapon of banter; and not merely the diplomatist in question-and I do not seek to inquire who he is-but many diplomatists, if they would only acknowledge it, would confess that when they have wearied Lord Palmerston with their grave assiduity, or have attempted to pump Lord Palmerston with their practised adroitness, he has often unsheathed his glittering foil and has soon disarmed and disabled inconvenient opponents. Lord Palmerston was a master of banter, and disliked discussion of grave matters when not in his cabinet or in this House. But I cannot refrain from recording my solemn conviction that the policy of Lord Palmerston with respect to maintaining the neutrality of the Black Sea never wavered for a moment, and that nothing but securing that great condition of the Treaty of Paris would have reconciled him to the comparative leniency of the other

terms.

Now, Sir, I hope I have vindicated myself from the charge that I was not authorised in the description which I gave the first night of the session, of the importance of the neutrality of the Black Sea; that I was not justified in saying that it was the cardinal principle of the settlement of 1856; that these were the opinions of Lord Palmerston, Lord Clarendon, and Lord Russell; that they broke up the negotiations at Vienna; and that the war was renewed, or rather continued, solely with the view to maintain that condition. I think I have shown that the policy then adopted by Her Majesty's Government was the policy not only of Lord Clarendon, but that it must

also have been that of Lord Granville up to a very recent period. Now, Sir, I have only one observation to make upon the Conference. Why a Conference was called is to me a matter difficult to comprehend, and I hope we shall learn clearly to-night what its object is. I think myself that, under any circumstances, a Conference would have been a mistake. But if the Conference had been called to vindicate the honour and the rights of England and of Europe, I should have thought it, though a hazardous, at least a bold and loyal course. But why a Conference should be called-a Conference which Russia did not require-for Russia only really initiated an abstract outrage of public morality, and only theoretically violated a treaty, and therefore it was quite unnecessary to do anything, even if you felt you were not prepared to resist her when she put her policy into practice-I say why, under such circumstances, a Conference should be called merely to register the humiliation of our country passes my understanding.

But there was one declaration made by the Secretary of State1 which may, perhaps, have some light thrown upon it by that consummate master of language who has several times contradicted me in the course of this speech, and who will very likely follow the same course when he rises on his legs. The declaration was made by a Secretary of State who was at one time ready to go to war with or without allies, but whose policy changes in a moment, and the policy being changed, a satisfactory and plausible reason is offered to the British people. The Conference is to be held, but upon this understanding-there is to be no foregone conclusion '3 on the subject. That statement was generally accepted. What was the weight and value of that condition I will not now attempt to ascertain; but, at any rate, it meant something. If it was not to influence events, still there was a semblance of dignity about it. And now, if the Conference was to be held without any foregone conclusion by any of the Powers upon the question of the neutrality of the Black Sea, I want to know how the right honour

'Lord Granville.

2 Mr. Gladstone.

* Words used by Lord Granville at the Conference, Jan. 17, 1871. They are to be found in the first Protocol.

able gentleman reconciles that position with the statement he made the first night that Parliament met, in which he proved that there was a foregone conclusion-a foregone conclusion in the mind of the Prime Minister, and that, a foregone conclusion against the honour and interests of his country?

151

BULGARIAN ATROCITIES. August 11, 1876.

[In the summer of 1875 disturbances broke out in the province of Bosnia and in the Herzegovina occasioned by the exactions of the tithe farmers. News reached this country in the following year that great outrages had been committed by the Turkish soldiers in the suppression of the insurrection. And on April 10 Mr. W. E. Forster asked Mr. Disraeli in the House of Commons whether it was true 'that a large number of Bulgarian girls had been sold publicly as slaves, and also that a very large number of Bulgarians were then undergoing torture in prison.' Mr. Disraeli, in the course of his reply, said he doubted whether many prisoners were undergoing torture, as the Turks were an Oriental people, who 'generally terminate their connection with culprits in a more expeditious manner.' This sentence was imputed to him as 'levity,' and was made the foundation of many most impassioned attacks. On August 11 the subject was renewed by Mr. Evelyn Ashley, when Mr. Disraeli spoke as follows:- -]

SIR,

IR,-The honourable gentleman the member for Poole (Mr. Evelyn Ashley) has called attention to an important and interesting subject to-night in a manner very irregular, I think, not to say unprecedented. If the honourable gentleman really believes that the conduct of Her Majesty's Government with respect to these transactions and of the Queen's ambassador is deserving of censure and disapprobation, I think he ought to have come forward with a distinct motion on the subject. Although we are on the point of prorogation, he knows enough of me to know that my advice to the Sovereign would be not to prorogue Parliament if he desired to challenge our policy; and even in a House like this, if he had given notice, the opinion of the House of Commons might be taken about it. It appears to me to be a course scarcely, I should think, pleasant to a man of a mind such as I believe is possessed by the honourable gentleman, to avail him

self of a parliamentary privilege, which I do not care to admit or deny, to insinuate an offensive opinion upon the advisers of the Crown and upon the conduct of absent ambassadors, when he knows we have no means, in the present state of affairs, of testing the opinion of Parliament or of the country upon the subject. Let me at once place before the House what I believe is the true view of the circumstances which principally interest us to-night, for after the Rhodian' eloquence to which we have just listened, it is rather difficult for the House to see clearly the point which is before it. The Queen's ambassador at Constantinople, who has at all times no easy duty to fulfil, found himself at the end of April and in the first three weeks of May in a position of extreme difficulty and danger. Affairs in Constantinople never had assumed at least in our time, certainly a more perilous character. It was difficult to ascertain what was going to happen. But that something was going to happen, and something of a character which might disturb the relations of the Porte with all the Powers of Europe, and might even bring about a revolution, the effect of which would be felt in distant countries, there was no doubt. The House is well acquainted with the train of strange incidents which occurred, all of them events that tried the intelligence, the vigilance, and the thought of our ambassador there to the utmost; and, in circumstances of great difficulty, I think he showed an intelligence, a courage, and a calmness which were highly beneficial to the course of public affairs. The honourable and learned gentleman who has just addressed us in so learned and powerful an oration (laughter); well, I speak what I feel; I look upon him as one of the chief orators of the House-although he sometimes lavishes, as he has done on this occasion, his great powers upon subjects which are not quite adequate to the treatment. In the present instance the honourable and learned gentleman has made one assumption throughout his speech-that there has been no communication whatever between the Queen's ambassador at Constantinople and Her Majesty's ministers upon the subject in discussion; that

1 From Sir W. Harcourt, who had just sat down. The Rhodian school of rhetoric was more florid than the Attic.

« VorigeDoorgaan »