party-divisions during the last few months, and too reluctant to seem to hamper the Government. Perhaps, he said, if he had foreseen what was to happen, he might have thought so too; but now, at any rate, peace having been coucluded, and any danger of Russian misinterpretation being out of the question, there was no longer any reason for reticence, and a strong protest against "the most unwise and most reckless act which any Government has ever committed" had become essential. Mr. Forster insisted powerfully on the madness of turning England into a great Continental Power,-Continental, as regards the real effect of what had been done, not merely in relation to Asia, but to Europe; of giving England a long land frontier, conterminous with Russia, across which Russia could move troops at any time, and compel us to go to war; of obliging us to choose between a guarantee of its possessions to the worst Government of the world, or annexation on a vast scale; and last, not least, of the complete contempt evinced by Government for Parliamentary privilege. He believed that if we did our duty under the Protectorate, we must come to an army of conscripts, and he would even prefer that, to relying on Asiatic armies of other and dependent races. Mr. Fawcett, who was present as a guest, took the opportunity of congratulating Mr. Forster with great emphasis on his remarks concerning the duty of boldly facing Parliamentary majorities, and hoped that the Liberal leaders would stand by that policy much more in the future than in the past. He also described Lord Beaconsfield's language concerning Greece, in the House of Lords, which we have quoted, as language of "contemptuous insolence," and declared that the Greeks, "relying on the promises of a great and magnanimous people, had been grossly and basely deceived."

Thus broadly did opinions differ on the policy of the day. The Houses were glad to unite in granting the usual provision on the announced marriage of the Duke of Connaught with the Princess Louise of Prussia; and the appointment of the Queen's son-in-law, the Marquis of Lorne, to succeed Lord Dufferin in the Viceroyalty of Canada, was received with some pleasure. The presence of a Princess of the blood-royal in the great colony promised to knit yet closer the bonds between her and the mother-country, which the ablest and most popular of Canadian viceroys had welded so well.

CHAPTER IV.

Banquet at Knightsbridge-Lord Beaconsfield and Mr. Gladstone--Lord Rosebery-Lord Hartington's Motion-Debate upon the Motion-Mr. Gladstone's Speech-Great Majority for the Government-Freedom of the City of London presented to Lords Beaconsfield and Salisbury-Ceremony at the GuildhallConservative Deputation-Supplementary Estimates-Education Estimates -Russian Mission to Cabul-Close of the Session-The Queen's Speech-Domestic Legislation of the Session-The Indian Budget-Mr. Fawcett's Amendment-The Spectator on the Session-The Bradford Liberal Association -Rule 15-Mr. Forster and Mr. Illingworth.

On July 27, pending the debate on Lord Hartington's resolution, a congratulatory banquet was given to the two British Plenipotentiaries, in the Duke of Wellington's riding-school at Knightsbridge, by the Conservative members of both Houses of Parliament, "long to be remembered," said the Standard, "as one of the most interesting incidents in our recent party history." The guests numbered five hundred, as many as the hall would hold. The Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry presided, and in proposing the health of the Premier spoke of him as a "conqueror who had conquered war and brought back peace." In returning thanks for the Duke's speech, Lord Beaconsfield said that his colleague had pulled the labouring oar, and to him chiefly was the English share in the result of the Congress due. He described Lord Hartington's resolution as "a string of congratulatory regrets." Of the Government policy towards Greece at the Congress he said, "it is charged against them that they have particularly deceived and deserted Greece. Now, this is a subject which is, I think, capable of simpler treatment than hitherto it has encountered in public discussion. We have given at all times, in public and in private, to the Government of Greece and to all who might influence its decisions but one advice that on no account should they be induced to interfere in those coming disturbances which two years ago threatened Europe, and which concluded in a devastating war; and we gave that advice on these grounds, which appear to me incontestable. If, as Greece supposed, and as we thought erroneously supposed, the partition of the Ottoman Empire was at hand, Greece-morally, geographically, ethnographically — was sure of receiving a considerable allotment of that partition when it took place. It would be impossible to make a resettlement of the East of Europe without largely satisfying the claims of Greece; and great as those claims might be, if that were the case, it was surely unwise in Greece to waste its treasure and its blood. If, on the other hand, as her Majesty's Government believed, the end of this struggle would not be a partition of the Ottoman Empire, but that the wisdom and experience of all the Powers and Governments would come to the conclusion that the

I

existence and strengthening of the Ottoman Government were necessary to the peace of Europe, and without it long and sanguinary and intermitting struggles must inevitably take place, it was equally clear to us that when the settlement occurred all those rebellious tributary principalities that have lavished their best blood and embarrassed their finances for generations would necessarily be but scurvily treated, and that Greece, even under this alternative, would find that she was wise in following the advice of England and not mixing in a fray so fatal. Well, has not the event proved the justice and accuracy of that view? At this moment, though Greece has not interfered, fortunately for herself -though she has not lavished the blood of her citizens and wasted her treasure, under the Treaty of Berlin she has the opportunity of obtaining a greater increase of territory than will be attained by any of the rebellious principalities that have lavished their blood and wasted their resources in this fierce contest. should like to see that view answered by those who accuse us of misleading Greece. We gave to her the best advice; fortunately for Greece she followed it, and I will hope that, following it with discretion and moderation, she will not lose the opportunity we have secured for her in the advantages she may yet reap. It has been said we have misled and deserted her, because we were the Power which took steps that Greece should be heard before the Congress. Why did we do that? Because we have ever expressed our opinion that in the elevation of the Greek race-not merely the subjects of the King of Greece-one of the best chances of the improvement of society under the Ottoman rule would be found, and that it was expedient that the rights of the Greek race should be advocated by that portion of it which enjoyed an independent political existence. All this time, too, let it be recollected that my noble friend was unceasing in his efforts to obtain such a settlement of the claims, or rather, I should say, the desires, of Greece with the Porte as would conduce greatly to the advantage of that kingdom. And not without success. The proposition of Lord Salisbury for the rectification of the frontiers of Greece really includes all that moderate and sensible men could desire; and that was the plan that ultimately was adopted by the Congress, and which Greece may avail herself of if there be prudence and moderation in her councils."

With respect to the convention with Turkey, Lord Beaconsfield denied that the responsibility of England was increased by it. On the contrary, he maintained that the convention diminished our responsibility, because whatever Ministry might be in power it would eventually see the necessity of preventing the conquest of Asia Minor by Russia; but there might have been hesitation for some time, and want of firmness and decision. Now there could be no doubt as to the policy of England. He had ascertained at Berlin as an absolute fact what he had always suspected, that neither the Crimean war nor the war which had just terminated

H

[1878. would have taken place if England had spoken with the necessary firmness. Lord Beaconsfield continued:

"I was astonished to learn that the Convention of Constantinople has been described as an insane convention.' That is a strong epithet, but I do not pretend to be as competent a judge of insanity as the right hon. gentleman who used it. I will not say to the right hon. gentleman what I had occasion to say in the House of Lords this year, Naviget Anticyram;' but I would put this issue to an intelligent English jury-Which do you believe most likely to enter into an insane convention, a body of English gentlemen, honoured by the favour of their Sovereign and the confidence of their fellow-subjects, managing your affairs for five years, I hope with prudence and not altogether without success, or a sophistical rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity, and gifted with an egotistical imagination that can at all times command an interminable and inconsistent series of arguments to malign his opponents and to glorify himself? My lords and gentlemen, I leave the decision upon that Convention to the Parliament and the people of England. I believe that in that policy we have deeply laid the seeds of future welfare, not merely for England, but for Europe and Asia, and, confident that the policy which we have recommended is one which will be supported by the country, I and those who act with me can endure these attacks."

Lord Salisbury, in his turn acknowledging the toast of his health, said it was owing to most earnest importunity on his part that Lord Beaconsfield undertook the office of chief Plenipotentiary, and he said that the Premier's presence at the Congress produced an effect such as no other living man could have produced.

"When the Congress was approaching its termination (continued the speaker), when the prospect of separating was near, it was the favourite subject of conversation what sort of reception the various Plenipotentiaries would get in the countries to which they were about to return. I am sorry to say that the surmises were generally gloomy; but these sad anticipations were not shared by the English Plenipotentiaries. They knew they had to deal with a people who judged those who served them earnestly with indulgence, and they knew that there were many instances which would tend to bias that judgment in their favour. In the first place, probably no Ministry has ever passed through a difficult crisis of foreign affairs amidst such a storm of abuse as we have encountered. Every calumny, every misconstruction that malignant ingenuity could invent was paraded forth in order to lessen our influence ani hinder our efforts; and at the precise moment when it was of vital importance that Europe should understand England was in earnest, every nerve was strained to make England seem infirm of purpose and impotent in action. We in our diplomacy had to struggle against a loud-mouthed diplomacy, struggling in another

direction out of doors. There is another reason which, apart from any details of these negotiations-apart from the details of the settlement which we have arrived at-has, I think, predisposed the English people in our favour. They have felt that, however imperfectly, we were striving to pick up the thread-the broken thread-of England's old Imperial traditions. For a short time there have been men eminent in public affairs who have tried to persuade you that all the past history of England was a mistake— that the duty of England, the interests of England, was to confine herself solely to her own insular forces, to cultivate commerce, to accumulate riches, and not, as it was said, to entangle herself in foreign politics. They were men who disdained empire, who objected to colonies, and who grumbled even at the possession of India. Even for their own low purpose the policy of these men was a mistake. The commerce of a great commercial country like this will only flourish-history attests it again and againunder the shadow of empire, and those who give up empire in order to make commerce prosper will end by losing both. I do not know, gentlemen, if you observed it, but it struck me with a thrill of congratulation when I saw that, in taking possession of Cyprus, not one voice, not one hand, was lifted up to resist that transfer, and the proclamation of Queen Victoria's name was everywhere received with enthusiasm; while other nations, perhaps militarily more powerful than ourselves, have to struggle with the deep reluctance of the peoples whom they profess to free. What is the reason of the difference? It is that we, at all events in the cause of civilisation, have won our spurs before the world. We have shown, in governing India, that where English rule and English interest exist, peace, order, and prosperity are the result, and therefore it is that the prospect of English rule was welcomed by men of every race and of every creed. Have we a right to throw away, to hide under a bushel, to conceal in a corner, such power and influence as this, merely because we might at some distant time, and in some conceivable circumstances, add to our responsibility? I am told that, in the task of aiding and counselling the Ottoman Empire to bring the blessings of civilisation to some of the fairest portions of the earth we shall be hampered by the jealousy of other Powers. I utterly refuse to believe it. When they find what our policy really is, that we are there merely to extend to others the blessings we ourselves enjoy; when they find that we welcome their competition, that we invite every trade, that we grudge success to no nationality; that the one object we have in view is that peace and order should be maintained, and that races and creeds, which for centuries back have lived in feud, should henceforth live in amity and goodwill, then I believe all idea of jealousy will vanish, and that they will heartily co-operate with us in our civilising mission. At all events we will not recoil from such a task because it may seem to add to our responsibility and to increase our labours; and if we are able in ever so small a