; LIBRARY OF CONGRESS.; 
 
 s # 
 
 ^UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. J 
 
-:V l^^y^ ^l . O ^^^>3^^^^ 
 
 Wfic-o^^^y'^i^ 
 
 "t)\\t %^t^m pW'^fi ^\ |^«0lm|il" 
 
 
 3;*j< 
 
 A SPEECH 
 
 • DELIVERED BY 
 
 MR. COWEN, M.P, 
 
 IN THE 
 
 TOWN HALL, NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE, 
 
 ON 
 
 SATURDAY, JANUARY 31st, 1880. 
 
 Reprinted from the "Newcastle Daily Chronicle,' 
 February 2nd, 1880. 
 
 :pi^ic£! t-woipibiltoe. 
 
 .Hewcastle-upoa-Tijtte : 
 A. REID, PRINTING COURT BUILDINGS, AKENSIDE HILL, 
 
 AND 22, COLLINGWOOD STREET. 
 1380. 
 

^ 
 
 V/^3entral,Asia, 
 
 /^^^ 18 80. 
 
 sCiiptioR oi Map see other sido. 
 
CENTRAL ASIA. 
 No region on the earth's siirface is commanding at the present 
 time more attention among civilized communities than that 
 which stretches eastward from the confines of Europe towards 
 China and India. The north-eastern portion of the chart depicts 
 the vast territory bounded on the west by the Ural River and 
 the Caspian Sea, and known indifferently by the na]ncs of Middle 
 or Central Asia, Turkestan, Tartary, Turan, and Turkmenia. 
 The two gi'eat rivers of Central Asia are the Jaxartes or Syr 
 Daria and the Oxus or Amu Daria. From the time that 
 Alexander the Great led his armies across the Oxus down to the 
 recent advance of Russia, of all the lands on the earth's surface 
 Tnrkestan was the one most imperfectly i-Bpresented on the map; 
 and even now, to a great extent, rivers, mountains, and cities 
 are to be traced only in vague outlines. The greater portion 
 of Turkestan is one vast plain extending in a south-westerly 
 direction from the limits of Siberia to the mountains bordering 
 the plateau of Iran. At all tunes geographical knowledge has 
 followed in the wake of the conquering host ; and the Asiatic 
 wars of Russia have done more to rescue from obscurity the 
 northern part of Central Asia than did all previous researches. 
 The southern portion — the country of the Tckko Turcomans, and 
 the chief scene, for the moment, of the Russian operations- 
 retains much of its ancient mystery, as there are no books 
 or writings of trustworthy authority about tliat region. The 
 shaded portion to the north indicates the enonnous territories 
 absorbed by Russia within the last quarter of' a century, and 
 the dotted lines mark the successive stages of her conquest. 
 Between 185C and 1803 the Czar's armies had mn.de their own 
 the M'ide-spreading region lyiug between the old Siberian 
 frontier and the course of the Syr Daria. After seizing the 
 country of the Kirghises, the conquest of Klwkand was begun, 
 and by 1863 the Syr Daria frontier was secured by a chain of 
 fortresses, which were readily supplied with provisions and the 
 
 of war by the steam vessels of the Aral fleet. Prom 
 the year 18G4 the operations against Khokaud liegan to receive 
 a greater development. In the summer, of that" year the com- 
 mercial town of Turkestan-- anil the sm-rtmnding country were 
 taken possession of by the Russians, and. by the middle of 
 September Chemkend was iti the liaiids of Cbcrnyaev's army. 
 In the summer of 1805 the rich aiul fevtile'Taslikend, with its 
 commercial city and strong fortress, became Russian territory. 
 After this Kokan and Samarcand, Tai]nur's ancient capital, fdl 
 in turn ; and the conquest of Khiva, in 1873, brought Russia to 
 the banks of the Amn Daria, The actual encroachments on the 
 Turkomans began only in 1875, and up to that time the Tekkes 
 and Akhals were almost unknown even to the Russians. The 
 basis of tlie Russian operations against those tribes is in the 
 newly-formed Trans-Caspian Government, and chiefly in the two 
 military settlements on the Caspian — Tchikislar and Krasna- 
 vodsk — the latter situated to the north of the former at the 
 mouth of the old Oxus Channel. 
 
 The map also gives an outline of Asia Minor, witli the new 
 and proposed routes to India. The passage by the Suez Canal 
 takes us to India in seventeen days — an immense saving of time 
 and money when compared with the long and weary route by the 
 Cape. The projected Indo-European Railway along the valley of 
 the Euphrates and the shores of the Persian Gulf would lessen by 
 one-half the time now occupied in the journey to India by the 
 way of the Suez Canal. This railway, it is said, would be of still 
 greater value politically ; for, in case of a Russian attack on India, 
 we would be able to throw ourselves between her base of opera- 
 tions in the Caucasus and her point of objective in the direction 
 of the new seientifio frontier. Such a railway, too, would bring 
 us in direct communication w'ith some of the most fertile soil in 
 world — that now lying waste in Syi-ia and Mesopotamia, which, 
 under her protectorate, might, like Eastern Europe and the 
 United States, become granaries for England. 
 
nccessarioB of war l)y the steam vessels of tlic ATal fleet. From 
 the year 18i;4 the operations a^Miiist KliokancI ]»egaii to receive 
 a »,Teatfr development. Tn the summer of that year the com- 
 mercial town of Turkestair-an!l ^the suritmndinir country were 
 takeu possession of by Ihe Russians, and. by the middle of 
 September Chemkend w;;.s in tlp' hands cf Cliernyai'v's army. 
 In the summer of ISGo the rich and firtile Tashlcend, with its 
 commercial city and stron^,' fortress, became Riisgiiin territory. 
 After this Kokan and Samarcand, Taimur's ancieirt capital, fdl 
 in turn; and the conquest of Khiva, in ISTO, brought Russia to 
 the banks of the Amu Daria. The actual encroachments on (he 
 Turkomans began only in IS 75, and up to that time the Tekkes 
 and Aklials were almost unknown even to the Russians. The 
 basis of the Russian operations against those tribes is in the 
 newly-formed Trans-Caspian Government, and chiefly in the two 
 military settlements on the Caspian— Tchikislar and Krasna- 
 vodsk— the latter situated to the north of the former at the 
 mouth of the old Oxus Channel. 
 
 The map also gives an outline of Asia Minor, with the new 
 and proposed routes to India. The passage by the 8uez Canal 
 takes us to India in seventeen days— an immense saving of time 
 and money when compared with the long and weary route by tiie 
 Cape. The projected Indo-European Railway along the valley of 
 the Euj.lirates and the shores of the Persian Gulf would lessen by 
 one-half the time now occupied in the journey to India by tiie 
 way of the Suez Canal. Tins railway, it is said, would be of still 
 greater value politically ; for, in case of a Russian attack on India, 
 we would be able to throw ou)-pelves between her base of ojjera- 
 titms in the Caucasus and her point of objective in the direction 
 of tlie new scientific frontier. Such a railway, too, would bring 
 us in direct communication with some of the most fertile soil in 
 woild — that now lying waste in Syria and ^lesopotamia, which, 
 under her protectorate, might, like Eastern Euroi)e and the 
 United States, become granaries for England. 
 
MR. COWEN, M.P., 
 
 ON 
 
 At a Public MEETika held in the Town Hall, Newcastle- 
 on-Tyne, on Saturday, Jan. 31st, 1880. 
 
 Councillor H. W. NEWTON in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, Ladies, and Gentlemen, — 
 
 I have rarely addressed a meeting with more misgivings 
 than I do this one. My hesitation does not arise from any doubt 
 I entertain as to the correctness of the statements I am about to 
 make, of the strength of the argument I purpose sustaining, or 
 of the soundness of the deductions I intend to draw. (Hear, 
 hear, and cheers.) On all these points I am thoroughly per- 
 suaded in my own mind. My reluctance to speaking springs 
 from the conviction I entertain that anything I can say will be 
 valueless, and may be locally mischievous. (" No, no.") Inter- 
 national problems of great intricacy and importance have come 
 up for settlement since the last general election. Many of the 
 issues started are old ones, some of them centuries old, but they 
 were not then before the electors. The Liberals, as a body, have 
 assumed towards them an altered attitude. They have aban- 
 doned, no doubt for reasons which appeared to them good, the 
 historic policy of the country, if not the traditional principles of 
 the party. There is necessarily difficulty in fixing with preci- 
 sion the position of a complex body in a state of change. But 
 no injustice will, I think, be done to anyone by saying that many 
 
Liberals, on foreifrn questions, have espoused in spirit, if not in 
 substance, the doctrines which were held with such tenacity and 
 expounded with such earaestness by that band of capable men 
 who made the world their debtors by their labours for free trade. 
 I have not been able to become a convert to this new faith. 
 I am not, and never was, an adherent of what is popularly 
 known as the " Manchester School." On this subject there is 
 between myself and some of my friends a distinct divergency, 
 which I have no desire either to minimise or ignore. I am in 
 favour of an European and national, as against an insular and — 
 I use the word in no offensive sense — a parocliial policy. It 
 may seem somewhat hard to dismiss a member because, in the 
 course of a Parliament, he has not been able to change his creed. 
 I recognise, however, the right of the constituency to demand 
 uniformity of view from their representatives. I also feel that 
 in my present position I am a source of embarrassment to many 
 and of annoyance to some; and I have repeatedly expressed my 
 willingness, and I do it again to-night, to solve all difficulties by 
 quietly retiring. It has not been thought desirable that an 
 election should take place in Newcastle at this time; and although 
 my immediate retirement might meet with the approval of some, 
 I understand that it would not meet with the general approval 
 of the electors. Such being the case, in my judgment it would 
 have been wise not to have re-opened troublesome topics, which 
 may add possible irritation to honest difference by promoting a 
 discussion that can be fruitful of no good results. I do not 
 object, without further hearing, to be tried, condemned, and, if 
 you decree it, dismissed. There is nothing that I have said on 
 this question that I wish either to modify or retract. There is 
 nothing that I have done which I regret. I may be mistaken ; 
 I am not infallible; but I believe that the course of policy I have 
 supported has been the best for England and the best for liberty. 
 (Cheers.) I fear my convictions are too strongly fixed to be 
 
shaken. I am not either so sanguine or so egotistical as to sup- 
 pose that anything I can say will turn my friends fi'om the faith 
 they have accepted with so much devotion. Apart from political 
 considerations, party passions and personal predilections and pre- 
 judices have been imported into the controversy, and in some 
 instances these have been intensified by religious animosities. 
 It is hopeless to reason against such a combination of active and 
 angry sentiments. But the blast that blows loudest is soon over- 
 blown; and having lodged an earnest protest in support of my 
 opinions, I am willing to bend to the storm and wait for the 
 se)bering effects of experience and the modifying influence of time 
 to wear out the asperity of the political jehad which is now being 
 preached against doctrines that, to my mind, have the semblance 
 at least of truth and justice to sustain them. (Cheers.) But if 
 I am to speak I will do so frankly, without reservation or equi- 
 vocation. In a country where unfortunately speech is so much 
 controlled by, and so much based on, party interest, little favour 
 is shown to the politician who ignores its consideration and ven- 
 tures upon the dangerous practice of striving to be impartial. 
 If he speak the unbiassed sentiments of his own mind he secures 
 the opposition of his former supporters, the slanders of his atra- 
 bilarious opponents, and the sneers, if not the suspicions, of some 
 of his associates. (Hear, hear.) But sincerity of utterance is 
 the only channel of truth, and I believe that my fellow- townsmen 
 wiU Listen to declarations of opinion which may involve opposi- 
 tion, and possibly censure of some of them, if these declarations 
 are untainted, as I trust in my case they will be, with either 
 levity or ignorance. (Applause.) I cannot cite a new fact, and 
 no one can adduce a new argument either for or against the 
 policy that this country has recently pursued. The subject has 
 been written about and spoken of so often, and at such length, 
 that every argumentative thread is worn thin and bare. The 
 literature on the interminable theme is a veritable kaleidoscope. 
 
in ^vhiili every form of thought, every shade of opinion, is pre- 
 sented in till shapes of attraction and repulsion. But if what I 
 say is not new, it will only be in keeping with the sixjcches of 
 more distinguished persons. We are not philosophers specula- 
 ting upon what might be, nor philanthropists dilating upon what 
 ought to be, nor poets chanting the dirge of a brilliant but 
 buried past. We are matter-of-fact politicians, talking of the 
 prosaic present. And politics, I fear, are too often controlled 
 more by self-interest than by sentiment. We are not dealing 
 with an ideal State. If we were, the fragmentary and composite 
 Empire of Britain would not realise my Utopia. Greece, whose 
 name has been for centuries a watchword upon earth, whose fame 
 will never fade, from whose history mankind have derived insjjira- 
 tion and guidance, and which still rises upon our intellectual sight 
 like a mountain-top gilded with sunshine, amidst the devasta- 
 tions of a flood — Greece, I say, rather than law-giving, 
 conquering, imperial, splendid, but savage Rome, would be my 
 model. (Cheers.) I would have a State in which every man is 
 free, and where every man is fortified against superstition by 
 education, and against oppression by arms ; where the arts and 
 graces of Athens, and the martial independence of Sparta, would 
 commingle with the mercantile and industrial enterprise and the 
 naval prowess of Britain; and in which, while influence and 
 authority are won by intellectual strength and moral worth, a 
 proud defiance could be bid to despotism's banded myriads. 
 (Cheers.) But these are the dreams of the idealists. We belong 
 to the real and the active, and not the imaginary world. We are 
 to deal with things as they are, and not as we can sketch them 
 in our fancy. We are the inheritors of a colonial empire, the 
 most widespread, scattered, and extensive ever known. It 
 reaches to every region, and has its feelers and its feeders in 
 every comer of the ghjbe. Some of these possessions came to us 
 in a questionable shape, and by means that no one can justify. 
 
and that I, at least, have no desire either to palliate or excuse. 
 (Cheers.) But the present generation of Englishmen are guilt- 
 less of the crime attending their acquisition. Our colonies 
 cover an area of three millions of square miles, and have a 
 population of fourteen million persons following diverse pursuits, 
 but all animated by one mind, aim, and tradition. In India we 
 have a frontier of twelve thousand miles, an area of one-and-a- 
 half million square miles, and 240,000,000 of people under our 
 sway. Our insular position frees us from many of the dangers 
 which surround Continental States, but om' external empire makes 
 us at the same time one of the most sensitive and assailable of 
 nations. Xo serious movement can take place in any part of the 
 earth without our feeling its influence. (Hear, hear.) No 
 country ever occupied such a peculiar position as Britain and her 
 daughter empires now hold. It is not egotism to say that, not- 
 withstanding all our shortcomings, power so vast was never 
 wielded with so sincere a desire to use it beneficially. Every 
 tribe we touch acknowledges our supremacy, and looks to us 
 either in conscious fear of weakness, or with brightening hope of 
 participating in our elevation. (Cheers.) To secure the existence, 
 to rivet the cohesion of this vast dominion, blest with one of the 
 highest forms of freedom that the world has ever seen, to carry 
 to distant countries and succeeding ages the loftiest form of 
 ci\ahsation, is oiu* mission. (Cheers.) To abandon the oppor- 
 tunity of usefulness thus conferred, to throw aside the hope of 
 securing equal rights and impartial freedom, to destroy the 
 means of establishing a feeHng of fraternity and consciousness of 
 common, material interests amongst so many millions of our 
 fellow-beings, would be a narrow, a niggardly, a short-sighted, 
 and a selfish policy for a great nation to pursue. (Cheers.) If 
 we left South Africa, what would be the result ? There are 
 350,000 British bom men and women — our own kith and kin- 
 living there. AYithout some protection from the Home Govern- 
 
ment, the homesteads they have erected by years of patient toil, 
 the centres of civilisation and of commerce that they have 
 created by their enterprise, would be endangered, if not des- 
 troyed. Tlieir assaihmts would not be the natives of the soil, 
 who are friendly and inoffensive, but savage invaders from the 
 North, who are as much alien and aggressors as the English. 
 (Hear, hear.) If we abandoned India, a like, but more 
 disastrous result would ensue. The scores of different races and 
 nations into which the population of that country is divided 
 would fly at each other's throats. In the earliest encounters 
 probably the fierce, courageous, unteachable, and intractable 
 Mahomedans, who are forty millions strong, would re-assert 
 their supremacy, but after years of internecine war and social 
 disorder the country would eventually fall a prey to a foreign 
 invader— possibly Russia. (Hear, hear.) The 8,000 miles of 
 railway, the 18,000 miles of telegraph, the canals, and other 
 creations of EngUsh capital, would be destroyed. The machinery 
 for the administration of justice, and the protection of life and 
 property, which England has created, and which has assured to 
 the common people of India more security and greater personal 
 freedom than they ever enjoyed under former rulers, would be 
 upset. (Hear, hear.) This country would suffer equally 
 with the Indian people; the £128,000,000 of Indian debt 
 would have to be provided for; civil servants and officers 
 whose careers would be destroyed would require their |jen- 
 sions, and compensation would possibly be demanded by 
 traders who would be ruined by our change of policy. (Hear, 
 hear, and applause.) India, England, and the world would all 
 be injured. (Applause.) No Englishman could contemplate 
 such a contingency with approval, or acquiesce in it with satis- 
 faction. Xow that we possess it, we are bound to protect and 
 defend India — to hold it against any enemy as stoutly as we 
 would hold Cornwall or Caithness. (Cheers.) England is not 
 
so many square roods of land, but a nation whose people are 
 united in love of soil and race, by mutual sympathy and tradition, 
 by character and institutions. It is not a fortuitous concourse 
 of individuals merely bound over to keep the peace towards each 
 other, and, for the rest, following their own selfish objects, 
 and crying outside their own cottage, counting-house, or country, 
 let everything " take its course." Our country is something 
 more than the mere workshop of the world, a manufactory for 
 flashy clothing, and a market for cheap goods. We are pledged 
 to each other as citizens of a great nationality, and by solidarity 
 of life. We owe a duty to ourselves, to our families, and to our 
 country, and also to our generation and to the future. We have 
 grown great, not merely by the extent of our possessions and the 
 fertility of our soil, but by the preservation of our liberties and 
 the energy and enterprise of our people. The present generation 
 is the outcome of centuries of effort. The history of England 
 is woven and interwoven, laced and interlaced with the history 
 of Europe and the world for a thousand years. Wherever liberty 
 has struggled successfully, or wherever it has suffered in vain, 
 there our sympathies have gone. (Cheers.) There is nothing 
 in human affairs that can be foreign to us. Wealth almost be- 
 yond the dreams of avarice, territorial possessions, and education 
 bring with them heavy responsibilities. Power, to the very last 
 particle of it, is duty. Unto whom much is given, of him much 
 will be required. As we have inherited so we have to transmit. 
 No one can look slightingly on the results which rest upon our 
 national resolves. But if ever a nation, drunk with the fumes 
 of power and wealth, makes an apotheosis of gold and material 
 pleasure, jDrefers riches to duty, comfort to courage, selfish en- 
 joyment to heroic effort and sacrifice, it sinks in the respect of 
 others, and loses the first and strongest incentive to human effort. 
 (Cheers.) Great work demands gi-eat effort, and great effort is 
 the Kfe and soul both of individuals and nations. I contend, 
 
therefore, for these two principles— the integrity of the empire, 
 and the interest, the rij^ht, and the duty of England to play her 
 part in the great battle of the world, as did onr illustrioug 
 ancestors, the forerunners of Eiiroi>ean freedom. (Cheers.) Let 
 me apply these principles to the recent controversies in the East 
 and the action that has been taken by this country. India 
 is one of our most distant, as it is one of our most im- 
 portant dependencies. We hold it more as conquerore than as 
 colonists. There are urgent and obvious reasons why our 
 communication with it should be rapid, easy, and expeditious. 
 Nature, mechanical science, and commercial enterprise, have 
 contributed to make the best route to it through the Isthmus 
 which unites the continents of Asia and Africa. The Egyptians, 
 the Pha3nicians, and the Carthagenians, before the Christian era, 
 travelled to India this way. In the middle ages the Danish and 
 Venetian merchants went by the same road. The first envoy 
 whom England ever sent to India also jounieyed by this ])ath— 
 Bishop Sherborne, who was deputed by good King Alfred to 
 undertake a mission to the people on the coast of Coromandel 
 and Malabar. As before the Christian era, so to-day— the most 
 direct rout« to the East is by the Isthmus of Suez and Asia 
 Minor. The canal is the link which unites our Eastern and 
 Western Empires. Through it we not only reach India but our 
 dependencies in the Chinese Seas, our Australian colonies, the 
 Mauritius, and the British settlements on the East Coast of 
 Africa. It is the neck which connects the head with the ex- 
 tremities of our Empire. (Cheers.) It has been suggested that 
 if we lost it we could resume our old road by the Cape of Good 
 Hope. It is quite true that this could be done. It is equally 
 true that we might return to pack-horses and stage wagons as a 
 means of transit, but it is not likely that we shall do so; it would 
 be contrary to the genius of civilization and the spirit of our 
 times thus to recede. We have got the Canal, and in the 
 
9 
 
 interests of ourselves and of the world we will hold it free for 
 every one at all hazards. (Cheers.) If Russia were to obtain 
 political supremacy on either side of the Bosphorus, she could 
 «top the Canal or intercept our way to India by the Euphrates 
 Valley. North of the Danube she is comparatively harmless ; 
 but with the Black Sea, the Sea of Marmora, and the Straits, * 
 she would have at her command a position unequalled in the 1 
 world for commerce and for war. She could barricade the Dai'- ' 
 danelles, and behind it she would have two island seas, which 
 would be at one and the same time harboiu', arsenal, dockyard, 
 and naval station. She could there with security and ease equip 
 and arm her ships, and train her sailors, and manoeuvre her 
 fleet. (Hear, hear.) In the numberless islands and roadsteads 
 of the Archipelago she would have protection for conducting 
 either offensive or defensive warfare, such as is to be found 
 in no other part of the globe in equal space. This position is 
 the key to Europe — one of its life arteries. (Hear, hear.) Its 
 occupation by a conquering, ambitious, and despotic Power would 
 be a danger to England, to Europe, and to liberty. >( Cheers.) 
 The aspirations of the Russian peasant are southward. He 
 yearns to be clear of the Boreal regions of snow and sohtude in 
 which he is enveloped for the greater part of the year. As 
 naturally as the sap rises in the vine, so naturally does the desire 
 of the Russian rise to reach more genial regions, and to burst 
 the political and frozen cerements which rob him of life and of 
 development. It is only the force of the iron yoke that makes 
 him a labourer. By choice and by taste he would be a wanderer, 
 a boatman, a pedlar, or a travelling mechanic. (Hear, hear.) 
 Russia is not a nation like France, or Italy, or Spain ; it is not 
 a dynastic aggregation of States like Austria ; but it is a crushing 
 and devouring political mechanism, which has annihilated full 
 fifty distinct nationalities. It kills eveiy spring of indepen- 
 "dence ; it intercepts and has covered whole continents A\'ith 
 
10 
 
 the melancholy moiiuinents of nations. Poland, the Niobe 
 of nations, whose gallant sons have been the knights-errants of 
 liberty the world over, has been all but interred by her in 
 Siberia. (Cheers.) Circassia, the cradle of the human race, 
 whose people ai-e the manliest and handsomest in the world, has 
 been converted into a tomb. (Cheers.) And she is now seeking 
 to engulph the desert steppes, the briny waters, and the shilling 
 burning sands that lie between the Caucasus, the Caspian, and 
 the Afghan Table Land. (Cheers.) The interest, the instinct, 
 and, to some extent, the necessity, of the Russian people, urge 
 them to seek " fresh fields and pastures new" away from their 
 biting north winds, their icy frosts, their bleak and limitless 
 plains. (Cheers.) The government, which is Asiatic rule, 
 bastardized by German beauocracy, with appropriating frenzy 
 has striven to annex territory in all directions ; while the Em- 
 perors, animated by an ambition akin to that of " Macedonia's 
 ^ladman and the Swede," have been dazzled by a dream of 
 universal empire. To find a foothold for their power in the 
 unrivalled natural resources which Turkey affords, has been 
 their aim. The defeat of Russia in the Crimea modified for a 
 time her external and internal policy. To soften the dis- 
 content created by the surrender of Sebastopol liberal legal 
 changes were instituted, and a decree emancipating the serfs 
 was promulgated. The benefits confeiTcd by this instrument are 
 more apparent than real. By it the peasants were relieved 
 from some claims to the landlords, but they were charged with 
 equivalent burdens for the national revenue ; and the imperial 
 functionary is often a harder taskmaster than the local lord of 
 the soil. M. Walewski calculated that the emancipation of the 
 serfs doubled the direct taxes of the empire. Repulsed in the 
 south and west, Russia sought an outlet for her stream of con- 
 quest in Central Asia. Unnoticed, to a large extent unknown, 
 she has, in that quarter of the globe during recent years, absorbed 
 
11 
 
 a territory nearly equal in extent to Continental Europe, and she 
 has now a bristling array of bayonets in threatening proximity 
 to our Indian Empire. (Hear, hear.) Although popular feeling 
 and historical recollection have always favoured a campaign for 
 supplanting the crescent by the cross, there is a small but intel- 
 ligent and influential party in Russia who are adverse to this 
 tempting and treacherous cry of " To Constantinople !" They 
 contend that if the seat of Government were removed from the 
 banks of the cold and misty Neva to those of the brilliant 
 Bosphorus, the Empire would perish through the effeminacy 
 generated by residence in the sunny and seductive South. 
 (Hear, hear.) Hardy Northmen would be replaced in the 
 councils of the Czar by the intrigues of Greeks and Bulgars. 
 This would lead to divisions in which the unwieldly dominions 
 would be split in twain through the struggles for supremacy 
 that would ensue between the genuine Slav and the idle mon- 
 grels that would flutter round the Court of the new Byzantium. 
 This view has been maintained not only by authors hke Gurow- 
 ski, and by soldiers like Fadeof, but by many Russian Liberals. 
 Tliree of the most remarkable men that the revolutions in the 
 East sent into Western Europe were Bakunin, whom the Em- 
 peror Nicholas, after an interview with him, described as a 
 •*' noble but dangerous madman;" Mr. Alexander Herzen, one of 
 the most fascinating of men, who combined the philosophy of 
 Germany, the politics of Republican France, and the practical 
 good sense of Englishmen, with the native Russian character ; 
 and Mieroslowski, the brilliant and eloquent Polish leader. I 
 have heard all of these gentlemen contend that Europe would 
 not see for many years — probably not for generations — another 
 effort made by Russia to obtain Constantinople. They held 
 this opinion not because they all approved of it — Bakunin cer- 
 tainly did not — but their belief was that the German party in 
 Russia had so realised the hopelessness of a struggle with the 
 
12 
 
 Western Powers that tlicy would not resume it. The nervous, 
 hesitating, indolent, but kindly man who is now at the head of 
 the Russian people, has always, until recently, been credited with 
 a settled determination not to renew the entcr]-)rise that ended 
 so disastrously for his father. The idea was general that India 
 and China, rather than Turkey, would be threatened by Russian 
 advaiico. I own that T largely shared that opinion. But events 
 have shown that this was an error, and tliat the passion for accom- 
 plishing what the people of Russia believed to be their manifest 
 destiny was not dead but only slumbered — the leopard had not 
 changed his spots nor the Tartar his skin. (Laughter and 
 cheers.) The first pronounced intimation of the retention of 
 this old faith was seen in the course pursued by Russia during 
 the Franco-German war. Immediately our friend and ally 
 France was worsted in that disastrous conflict, the Czar inti- 
 mated that he intended no longer to comply with the clauses of 
 the Treaty of Paris that neutralised the Black Sea. He did 
 not invite the other Powers of Europe who, along with himself, 
 were parties to that treaty to meet and discuss the reasonable- 
 ness of his request for an alteration, but, with autocratic pride 
 and despotic imperiousness, he proclaimed his determination to 
 look upon that portion of that treaty as null and void. He 
 had observed it as long as France was in a position to unite 
 with FiUgland for its maintcuance, but when she was tempo- 
 rarily disabled, he seized the opportunity to break an engage- 
 ment which he had solemnly entered upon. This was the first 
 sign of the change, the effects of which Europe has just wit- 
 nessed. Russia, in her attacks upon neighbouring States, follows 
 an unif(jrm and unvarying plan. She begins usually by pro- 
 fessing an interest in their welfare. (Laughter.) At one time 
 she is moved by sympathy for her brethren in bonds as if there 
 were no person in bonds in Russia. At another time she is 
 roused to fervour for her co-religionists, as if there were no 
 
13 
 
 persons suffering for their religious opinions within her own 
 borders. She knows how to lure adjoining rulers to destruction 
 by encoui-aging them in every frivolous expense, every private 
 vice, and every public iniquity, as she did Abdul Aziz and many 
 an unfortunate Asiatic Khan. She can compass the destruction 
 of popular liberty by Jesuitical intrigue, as she did in Poland. 
 She can engage in plots and conspiracies, as she did more 
 recently in Bulgaria. Ignorance, ambition, coiTuption, are all 
 made in turn to minister to her designs. The cupidity of Turkish 
 pashas, who too often obtained their positions by bribery, and 
 held them by oppression and extortion, and the hopeless confu- 
 sion into which the ministers of the Sultan had allowed affairs to 
 drift at Constantinople, formed a favom-able field for the work 
 of Eussian emissaries. The stereotyped process was followed. 
 There was first complaint, then suggestion, and then the in- 
 evitable conference, and the equally inevitable war. The Tm-kish 
 people, both Mahomedan and Christian, suffered under solid and 
 serious grievances. They had been oppressed and outraged by a 
 system of administration that was outrageous and indefensible ; 
 but they sought redress of their grievances at the hands of their 
 own rulers, and not fi"om a foreign Power. This was shown by 
 the stubborn resistance that was made to the advance of the 
 Austrian troops into Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Hungarians 
 are the truest friends the Turks had in Europe, and if they 
 fought so stoutly to oppose theii* entrance to their provinces they 
 would have fought with greater resolution against the admission 
 ■of the troops of any other country. After the war the Russian 
 diplomatists and generals succeeded in getting a band of trem- 
 bling palace pachas around them at Adiianople, from whom they 
 -abstracted a treaty that unmasked their designs, and placed them 
 in a broad and startling light before the world. If there had 
 been any doubt before as to the aim Russia had in commencing 
 the war, there could be none then. Before she started on the 
 
14 
 
 campaign the Czar declared— first, that he did nut intend tit- 
 enter Constantinople ; second, that he did not seek territorial 
 ac(iuisition; and third, that his sole object was to ensure the 
 Ireedoni of the oppressed nationalities. He kept the word of 
 promise to the ear, but broke it to the hope. He did not enter 
 Constiintinople it is true, but he surrounded it, and his troopa 
 would have entered it, if the English fleet had not been in the 
 Sea of Marmora, and the English soldiers within call at Malta. 
 He broke the second engagement by annexing Bessarabia and 
 the territory around Batoum, Ardahan, and Kara. By the 
 Treaty of San Stefano he proposed the creation of what he 
 euphemistically described as a " big Bulgaria," in other words, a 
 huge Russian province was to be created, whose borders were to 
 extend to the shores of the ^gean. If the treaty had remained 
 as drawn by Russia, she would have had a port at Kavala in the 
 south, she would have had another in the Adi'iatic at Antivari, 
 and she would have been left in command of two-thirds of the 
 shores of the Black Sea from Midia, twenty-five miles north of 
 Constantinople, round to some miles beyond Batoum. There 
 would have been left around Constantinople a few acres of 
 ground, little more than half the size of the County of Durham; 
 then the new Russian State, like a wedge, would intervene ; and 
 beyond that there would have been Macedonia, Albania, and the 
 north-western provinces. Turkey, left without frontiers and 
 without fortresses, would have fallen a ready and easy prey to 
 Russia whenever she felt herself strong enough and Europe was 
 indifferent enough to allow her to resume her crusade. By this 
 treaty Russia not only took territory in Armenia and Bessarabia, 
 but she proposed also to subject the entire Balkan peninsula 
 to her authority. She kept her third engagement by ignoring 
 the nationality of the Roumanian inhabitants of Bessarabia, 
 separating them from a free and uniting them to a despotic 
 State. She despised the religious and race leanings of the Maho- 
 
15 
 
 medans near Batoum, and treated ^v^th contempt the nationality of 
 Mahomedans living in the southern provinces of Turkey. She 
 in this way either broke or evaded every engagement she made. 
 To have allowed Russia to retain the position she projected for her- 
 self at San Stefano would have destroyed the balance of power i n 
 Europe, to have put the fate of Asia in her hand, and placed in her 
 grasp the virtual dictatorship of two continents. The main pur- 
 pose of international arrangement is to secure the freedom and safety 
 of smaller States, and to enable them to live their own lives while 
 surrounded by Powers which could annihilate them without such 
 protection. The law of nations prevents grasping, greedy Govern- 
 ments crushing weaker ones. If it were notsustained, the marauders 
 of the earth would be let loose to prey upon their poor and feeble 
 neighbours. It is no childish dislike of Russia that leads me to 
 contend for the maintenance of this law and this policy. National 
 enmity is no sound or permanent ground of either duty or policy. 
 It is the defence of England and of Eiu*ope, the assertion and 
 maintenance of the principles of free government as against a 
 despotism — England and the Western Powers representing the 
 one and Russia the other — that leads me to resist the advance of 
 the Muscovites to the Bosphorus. In what way has the recent 
 policy of this country contributed to the defence of the Empire, 
 the maintenance of the way to India, and the upholding of the 
 authority of this country in the councils of Europe? Let us look 
 fairly at the facts as they are, and not as they are painted by rival 
 partisans. To the jaundiced eye everything is yeUow. By the 
 fortunes of war — a hypocritical war it is true, but still by 
 the fortunes of war — Russia had Turkey at her mercy. She had 
 fought and she had won. She did not occupy Constantinople, but 
 she commanded it, and to the \'ictors belong the spoil. It is true, 
 as I have just explained, she made certain promises before com- 
 mencing the conflict which she either evaded or broke. But that 
 is not remarkable. It would have been more remarkable if she 
 
16 
 
 had kept them. (Laughter.) The Treaty of San Stefano did not 
 fully exjjrcss her desires, but it did express the extent to which slie 
 l)elieved she could with safety go in the })re6ence of the indiffer- 
 ence of other Powers, and the assumed incapacity and unwilHng- 
 ness of England to oppose her. The Treaty of Berlin did not 
 fully express what this country wanted, but it did express the ex- 
 tent of the concessions that it was possible to obtain. A com- 
 parison of what was dictated by Russia at San Stefano, and what 
 was accepted by her at Berlin, will show the measure of change 
 made mainly at the instance of this country. The Russian troops 
 have evacuated Turkish territory. This may appear a simple 
 statement, but it is not unimportant. Every effort was made by 
 her to retain possession of the provinces she had conquered. She 
 strove to promote discord between the Mussulman and Christian 
 inhabitants, hoping that that discord could be made a pretext for 
 her remaining. Failing in that, she propounded the Jesuitical 
 plan of a joint occupation of Eastern Roumelia by herself and 
 other Powers. These schemes, however, were baffled; and there 
 is now not a single Cossack trooper west of the Pruth. If the 
 Treaty of San Stefano had stood as it was drawn, Turkey would 
 not only have been dismembered but destroyed. She has now 
 the opportunity of making a fresh start in national life. She can, 
 if her rulers choose, rehabilitate herself in the estimation of Europe 
 and of the world. There is little evidence as yet, I am bound to 
 say, of this disposition. The incorrigible pashas who control her 
 policy seem to have learned nothing and forgotten nothing by the 
 cruel experience of the last three years. The Government is us 
 rotten as the portals of the Porte are wormeaten. These men 
 have most of the vices of both Eastern and "Western j^eoples, and 
 few of their virtues. These are persons high in the confidence 
 of the Sultan who are as completely under the contrcjl of the 
 enemies of their country as Faust was under the control of Mephis- 
 topheles. But though the Porte perishes Turkey will remain. The 
 
17 
 
 Empire vanished, but France was left. (Cheers.) There is, and 
 has been for years, an active and patriotic party in Turkey, who 
 have been striving to adapt their institutions to Western modes 
 of Hfe and to European requirements. The simple progi-amme 
 of this party is the fusion of the various races in the peninsula 
 into an united State, based upon the equality, religious and 
 political, of all. Fuad Pasha and Ali Pasha laboured long and 
 earnestly for these principles, and they are advocated with equal 
 sincerity by Midhat and his supporters. Men of all creeds and 
 all races will be placed on a common level. This programme 
 has the support of Christians and Mahomedans alike. One of 
 the most painful and regretable incidents of this controversy was 
 the disparaging way in which the honest efforts of these Turkish 
 reformers were spoken of by Liberal pohticians in England. 
 Whoever else cared to sneer at the Turkish Constitution, it 
 certainly was no part of the duty of professed advocates of liberal 
 government to take up their parable against it. It is certainly 
 not impossible to conceive of the establishment of a Government 
 in which both Mahomedans and Christians may be united, and 
 the pei'nicious influence which now predominates at Constan- 
 tinople be exorcised from Turkish political life. By the Treaty 
 of San Stefano injustice would not only have been done to the 
 Greeks, but that country would have been condemned to sustain 
 an exhausting conflict for its bare existence. By the extension 
 of a Slav State to the ^gean, Greece would have been denied 
 development. With resources limited and population scanty, 
 she would have been stripped of the elements of growth. She 
 might have been an independent State truly, but so weak that 
 she would have been unable to fulfil the purpose of her foun- 
 dation. She has now the opportunity of working out her 
 redemption — she is the nucleus, the preparatory agency for the 
 enfranchisement of a Hellenic State. (Cheers.) Greece has a 
 lofty mission to fulfil, and, despite ])rcsent unfavourable sigus, I 
 
18 
 
 do not despair of seeing her accomplish it. (Cheers.) She is 
 something more and better than when Byron moumftilly de- 
 scribed her {IS " Greece, but living Greece no more." She does 
 live ; she has sustained a soul almost " within the ribs of death." 
 (Cheers.) 
 
 " The Spartan blood that in her veina yet throbs at freedom's call :— 
 Every stone of old Greece— had it not its hero-tale ? 
 Where they fought, where they fell, 'twas on every hill and dale. 
 The dead are but the hero seed that will spring to life again." 
 
 (Applause.) By the Treaty of Berlin Greece gained but little, 
 but at least she was not by it " cribbed, cabined, and confined" 
 to the narrow limits of her too restricted territory. The idea of 
 most European Liberals has been that Russian aggression could 
 be stayed only by the creation of a l)elt of free States between 
 the Danube and the Balkans. The different nationalities would 
 be there grouped in distinct organizations, and, combined, they 
 would be a more effective barrier to Muscovite progress than an 
 effete and receding empire like Turkey. Many Liberals who 
 agreed with this principle saw difficulties to its practical realisji- 
 tion. The inhabitants of this region are chiefly members of the 
 Greek Church. The Czar is the head of that Church, and he 
 holds them in a state of political as well as theological tutelage. 
 Russia has often professed to assist at the birth of a new nation, 
 but she has always managed to keep her thumb upon its throat, 
 so that it could be destroyed if it became troublesome. (Cheers.) 
 It was a common saying of the Russian troops in Bulgaria, 
 " We have now got these Bulgar pigs, and we will drive them." 
 Apart, however, from these speculative objections to the project 
 of distinct nationalities— the oft-declared policy of the Czars— 
 when the Emperor Nicholas proposed to Sir Hamilton Seymour 
 that England and Russia should divide between them the posses- 
 sions of the Sick Man, he said there were many points in his 
 proposed scheme which he was willing to yield to the wishes of 
 
19 
 
 England, but there was one point on which he would never 
 yield. Whatever else he consented to, he would never consent 
 to the establishment of a number of small and independent States 
 on the Russian frontier. These would be, he said, nothing but 
 nurseries in which a perpetual crop of Mazziuis and Kossuths 
 would be raised; their opinions would penetrate into his do- 
 minions and endanger the necessary authority of his government. 
 This was then the settled policy of Russia, and has been authori- 
 tatively expressed repeatedly since. Bulgaria, as created by the 
 Treaty of San Stefano, would have been little more than a Russian 
 Principality ; but by the Treaty of Berlin the Bulgarian people 
 had had afforded to them the opportunity of winning for them- 
 selves an independent national life. (Cheers.) Some few years 
 ago the Bulgarians were held up in this country as models of 
 Ohristian meekness. Recently they have been condemned with 
 almost equal vigom-, and their character has certainly developed 
 some not very loveable attributes. They profess to be Christians, 
 but they have scarcely acted upon the Christian principle of doing 
 unto others as they would like to be done by. They complained 
 loudly and justly of the oppression they suffered from the Turkish 
 pashas ; but now, when they have the power, they have mani- 
 fested toward their Mussulman neighbours a more arbitrary and 
 tyrannical spirit than these Mussulmans ever showed towards 
 them. But I have no wish to judge them harshly. A nation 
 that has for generations been sunk in ignorance and vice cannot 
 be expected all at once to realize the enlightened magnanimity of 
 philosophers. People who have been trampled on will remember 
 it ; those who have been injured will retaliate, and those who 
 have been oppressed will not all at once forget. But the 
 Bulgarians in time will take their place amongst the European 
 family of nations, and shake off some of the oppressive charac- 
 teristics that have recently distinguished them. (Cheers.) The 
 most gratifying and encouraging intelligence that has come 
 
20 
 
 from the Eiist of Europe recently is that these independent States 
 had realised their position. They have learned that Russia's 
 interest in their behalf was certainly not disinterested. The 
 liouraanians remember with bitterness that although they came 
 to the assistance of their big neighbours when they were in sad 
 straits before Plevna, their reward has been the loss of one of their 
 most important provinces. (Cheers.) The entire tone of feeling 
 throughout these regions is a determination on the part of these 
 States to assert their independence and shake themselves clear of 
 Kussian influence and direction. But the most important event 
 that has taken place in Turkey has been the occupati<m of Bosnia 
 by Austria. This action cannot be justified on the grounds of 
 national right or justice. I certaiuly have no wish to exUjnuate 
 or defend it. (Cheers.) It is understood that the clause in the 
 Treaty of Beriin, which assured these provinces to Austria, owed 
 its authorship to Prince Bismarck and Count Andrassy. Ger- 
 many contends that the Danube is a Girman stream— that as she 
 controls its source so should she command its mouth. German 
 colonists are planted along its banks, and their statesmen are un- 
 willing to allow it to pass under the control of Russia. Austria 
 objects to the creation of an independent Slav State on the west, 
 as she has already on her eastern borders. For these dynastic' 
 and State reasons, the occupation, or rather the annexation, of 
 these proviuces by Austria has been assured. I am not justifying 
 what has been done, and am dealing only with the facts as they 
 are. Tne occupation of Bosnia by Austria renders the advance 
 of Russia to Constantinople all but impossible. Both political and 
 military reasons combine to prevent her achieving her designs on 
 the great city of the East. The case may be put in a sentence. 
 The design of Russia, as revealed by the Treaty of San Stefano, 
 was to obtain a preponderating influence in the Balkan peninsula. 
 The object of England was to prevent her doing this. Tlie result 
 is that Russia is now further from the Bosphorus, and less likely 
 
21 
 
 to get there, than she has ever been ; and this has been accom- 
 plished chiefly by the action taken by this country. It has been 
 achieved, too, without the loss of a single English life, or without 
 ■our setting a single regiment in line of battle. (Cheers.) Of all 
 the strange things that I have heard during this controversy, the 
 strangest is that Kussia has achieved a victoiy, while England has 
 sustained a defeat. We were told this in varying forms almost 
 daily. I do not think anyone else in Europe says so except some 
 English politicians. It is a fact beyond dispute, that the military 
 and aggressive party in Russia are loudly proclaiming that the 
 victories they won with so much difficulty in the field have been 
 abstracted from them in the Council Chamber. They were dis- 
 satisfied with the mode in which the war was commenced and for 
 some time conducted, but the advance of the troops to the neigh- 
 bourhood of Constantinople consoled them for a season. The 
 Treaty of San Stefano, objectionable as it was regarded by Eng- 
 land, was considered by the active party in Russia as incomplete 
 and unsatisfactory. Their complaints against it, however, were 
 mollified by the assurance held out to them that it was only 
 temporary. But when even that unsatisfactory treaty had to be 
 ■subjected to the revision and alteration of the other European 
 States at Berlin, their discontent assumed an active and threat- 
 ening attitude. The promulgation of the Treaty of Berlin cor- 
 responds with the recommencement of a period of political 
 assassinations and plots. This reveals popular discontent, 
 while the marching and counter-marching of Russian troops, 
 and the massing of such numbers on the German and Austrian 
 frontiers, reveal the state of feeling which pervades the 
 governing class. It is indisputable that, in the estimation 
 of men familiar with Russian society, the Treaty of Berlin 
 has shaken the system of government to its foundation ; 
 while the war which Englishmen are so fond of regarding as a 
 triumph for Russia and a discomfiture for this country, is looked 
 
22 
 
 u|H.n by Russians as havin- entailed upon their country a harvest 
 of disomfvnt and disappointment. (Hear, liear, and cheers) 
 To Ulance the territorial advantages gained by other Powers, 
 we have obtained a more assured position in the Levant. I will 
 not enter into the rather pitiful squabble about Cyprus-whether 
 that island is what the poets of the past have painted it "the 
 blest, the beautiful, the salubrious, the happy, the dream and the 
 desire of man," or as it is drawn by partisan politicians in this 
 country, a fever bed and chamel house. That it is advantage- 
 ously situated for guarding the Suez Canal from any danger from 
 the North, and that it affords a favourable starting point for 
 advancing to the East through the Euphrates Valley, will scarcely 
 be denied by anyone who has impartially examined the subject. 
 Military and naval men maintain that it can be made not only 
 a wati-h-tower but a depot for arms and a safe naval station. 
 It IS only twenty hours from Port Said, nine from Acre, and six 
 from Beyrout. It is near enough to watch, and close enough to 
 strike, if we required to strike, in defence of our road to the Red 
 Sea and to the Persian Gulf. By the Anglo-Turkish Conven- 
 tion, England has taken upon herself heavy responsibilities. 
 But if we had not effected that an-angement, the Sultan, like 
 Shere Ali, despairing of help from England, would have thrown 
 himself— reluctantly, no doubt, but still he would have thrown 
 himself— into the arms of Russia ; and whatever the result of 
 such a bargain would have been to the people, the greedy pashas 
 would have been secured in their pleasures and possessions. We 
 had, therefore, either to accept the position or permit it to pass 
 into the possession of a rival who, with such a leverage in the 
 centre of two continents, could not only have im})erilled our 
 Empire in India, but our authority in Europe. "We have often 
 entered into treaties with other nations entailing equally onerous 
 obligations. We are bound to defend Greece against Turkey; 
 I 'oruigal against Spain; Belgium against France and Germany. 
 
23 
 
 AVe were bound to defend Denmark, and with culpable cowardicer 
 we evaded the responsibility. (Cheers.) Under a stringent 
 treaty we are bound to maintain the independence of Sweden 
 and Norway. If Russia should attempt to lease the fisheries in 
 Swedish waters or the pasturage on Norwegian soil, this country 
 is to be informed of the fact, and any attempt on her part to 
 infringe upon the Scandinavian territory we are under engage- 
 ment to resist by force of arms. We are parties to other treaties, 
 many of them quite as risky as the one we have recently entered 
 into with Turkey; and few of them offer such prospect of achiev- 
 ing such beneficial results as may spring from the Anglo-Turkish 
 Convention. In Asia Minor there are 700,000 square miles 
 of some of the finest land in the world, washed by three seas, 
 watered by large ri^'ers, and possessing spacious ports and har- 
 bours. The soil is capable of producing grain, fruit, and cotton 
 in abundance, while the hills and the valleys abound in copper, 
 lead, iron, and silver. Much of this fair and fi'uitful region on 
 which the seasons have lavished all their beauty, and nature all 
 its fragrance, is given over to malaria and to wild beasts — is the 
 gathering gi-ound of predatory Kurds, and the camjDing place of 
 wanderiug Arabs. The spot fi'om which the first enterprise 
 of man started — the land around which such a wealth of the 
 romance, the poetry, and the mystery fastens, which has in- 
 fluenced the destinies and formed the characters of not one, 
 but many peoples — is now, from causes partly local and partly 
 foreign, doomed to endure a system of rule which is little less 
 than organised anarchy. We send our sui-plus population across 
 the Atlantic or to the Antipodes. There is no reason why they 
 should not find a field for their labours, and an outlet for their 
 skill, in a luxuriant land, rich ^ith golden grain and an infinite 
 variety of plants and fi"uit, and minerals, within a few hours of 
 our own shores. (Cheers.) AVhat has hitherto been wanted is 
 security for life and property. Under the protection that might 
 
I't 
 
 be, that onjrht to be, and I trust will be, given bj this treaty, 
 these obstiicles to colonisation would be removed. English 
 capitalists and the En-lisli GoTernment have always retbsed 
 seriously to consider tlie project of a railway through the 
 Euphrates Valley, because they declined to risk such large 
 investments in a country over which they had not sufficient 
 control. This treaty ought to, and I think will, dispense 
 with this difficulty. The railway scheme is described by 
 partisans as Utopian and visionary, but that is a kind of 
 opposition which has grown stale and obselete. It is not many 
 years ago since the construction of the Suez Canal was, with the 
 approval of English engineers, demonstrated by our townsman, 
 Mr. Rol)ert Stephenson, to be an impossibility, and it wa-s 
 laughed at in the House of Commons by Lord Palmerston as 
 the dream of a crack-brained Frenclmian. But the canal is, 
 nevertheless, a great fact. Last year there passed through it 
 between sixteen and seventeen hundred ships with a tonnage of 
 nearly three raiUion tons, and thirteen hundred out of the six- 
 teen were English vessels— a proof of the importance of this 
 water-way to this country. (Cheers.) When the scheme oi' 
 making a railway across the American continent was first pro- 
 mulgated, it was met with characteristic derision, and yet now 
 the line between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, a distance of 
 nearly 2,800 miles, caiTies thousands of people in the course of a 
 year. (Cheers.) Russians in these matters are somewhat bolder 
 and more enterprising than some Englishmen are. By the com- 
 bined efit'ct of river and railway, canal and lake, they have nearly 
 united the basins of the Baltic, the Black Sea, and the Caspian. 
 They have revived the old project of diverting the course of the 
 Oxus, and by their system of land and water carriage, commencing 
 at Riga and Warsaw, and terminating not far from our Indiaii 
 frontier, they hope to secure a preponderating influence in Cen- 
 tral Asia. The Euphrates Valley Railway would be l,i>00 miles 
 
25 
 
 long, and the cost of its construction is estimated at £12,000,000 
 — a comparatively small sum when the amounts invested in rail- 
 ways in this country are considered. I know no more of the 
 future than a prophet, but I think it wotdd be no great venture 
 to hazard the prediction that the railway will be made, and made, 
 too, through English enterprise ; that this work will not only act 
 as a breakwater against Northern aggression, and a bulwark for 
 the Indian Empire, but will be made the fulcrum for raising 
 jX)litically and socially an unfortunate people, and making the 
 early seat of arts and refinement, the theatre uf some of the most 
 momentous events in history, once more bloom and blossom as 
 the rose. (Loud cheers.) My contention, in a sentence, is that 
 our external empire should be maintained and defended, as much 
 in the interests of freedom and civilisation as in the interests of 
 England and its distant dependencies; that we cannot honourably 
 and without danger shrink from the responsibilities that our 
 history and our position as the oldest, and one of the chief of 
 free States in the world, entail upon us; that the seciu^ty of our 
 dominions in the East and the equilibrium of Europe were 
 threatened by the advance of Russia on Constantinople; that the 
 action this coimtry took, although it was open to objection in 
 its details, was nece^sar}', and in the main judicious ; that it 
 largely contributed to thwart the dangerous, the aggressive 
 designs of Eussia; has protected oiu- present, and made pro- 
 vision for our obtaining an improved way to India, may help to 
 secure better government for Ttu-key; and has strengthened 
 the influence of England in the councils of Europe. (Cheers.) It 
 is impossible now to discuss at length the policy pm*sued in 
 Afghanistan, but I wish to express shortly the views I entertain 
 on the action that has been taken in that country. Our Indian 
 possessions are encircled by the ocean on the south, the south- 
 east, and south-west. On the east they ai-e protected by high 
 ranges of mountains and all but impenetrable forests. These 
 
26 
 
 111 
 
 loiintains and these forests are occupied by sava-c tribes, wlio, 
 although capable of great annoyance, as the Xagas are now, are 
 incapable of inflicting any real political or military injury upon 
 us. On the north and north- west our frontiers are the bases of 
 the Himalaya and the Sulieman Mountains. It is an accepted 
 •canon in military science, that a Power which holds the moun- 
 tains and possesses what in soldiers' parlance is called the " issues 
 of the frontier," has an enormous advantage over the Power 
 which occupies the plains. This is an opinion which will 
 scarcely be contested. These mountains are peopled by fierce, 
 warlike, and turbulent tribes, who have no special love for Eng- 
 land, but have just as much dislike to each other. They hve 
 partly by pasUirage, partly by plunder. They fight for their own 
 hand. The only State that has an organised Government of any 
 strength is Afghanistan. As long as these passes and mountains, 
 and the country generaUy, were occupied by tribes of this charac- 
 ter, no danger to India was to be anticipated. Partly brigands, 
 partly soldiers, they could annoy us, and levy blackmail on the 
 adjoining inhabitants, yet they could not seriously disturb or 
 threaten our authority. But it is the accepted opinion of men of 
 all parties— statesmen and soldiers alike— that should this strong 
 military position ever pass into channels of a powerful Goveni- 
 ment, our exposed frontier would lay us open to serious danger. 
 For years Afghanistan, if not friendly, has at least been neutral j 
 and there was an understanding between Russia and England 
 that that country should be considered as outside of their 
 nnitual interest and influence— that it should be regarded as a 
 neutral territory, both being concerned in upholding its indepen- 
 <lence and neutrality. The advance of Russia,^ however, to 
 the East so alarmed the late Ameer that he urged, some yeai-s 
 <igo, the English Government to enter into closer alliance 
 with him than then existed. (Cheers.) He pointed out that 
 Russia was advancing, and did not conceal his fear that, unless 
 
27 
 
 he were protected by England, the same fate would overtake hini 
 that had overtaken many another Asiatic ruler. Our Govern- 
 ment at that time did not share Shere All's fears, and refused to 
 comply with the requests that he preferred. He became discon- 
 tented; and from having a friendly leaning towards England, he 
 now began to lean towards Russia, and to open negotiations with 
 the Russian commanders in the adjacent provinces. When 
 Russia's objects in Turkey were thwarted by this country, she 
 retaliated by striving to set our Indian frontiers in a blaze. No 
 one can complain of her doing so; it is what we would have done, 
 probably, in like circumstances. She objected to our fleet being 
 in the Sea of Marmora, and she thought she would disturb us 
 and distract our attention by assuming a threatening attitude in 
 Afghanistan. A Russian mission was sent. It was received with 
 ostentatious displays of sympathy by the Ameer, and, as far as he 
 was able, he proclaimed that in future he would be the firm friend 
 and ally of Russia, and if not the enemy, at least not the fi-iend, 
 of this country. If not in words, the substance of his declaration 
 and his action at the reception of the Russian mission amounted 
 to this. Our Government required that, as he had received a 
 mission from Russia, he should also accept one from England. 
 He refused to do it, and we attempted to force the mission upon 
 him. It is unnecessary to repeat the facts which are in the re- 
 collection, no doubt, of all present. Shere All's reftisal led to war, 
 and after a small show of resistance he fled from Cabul, and 
 shortly afterwards died. With his son, who was made his suc- 
 cessor, we concluded peace, and entered into a treaty. By that 
 treaty England got the right of sending agents to certain 
 specified districts in Afghanistan, and also obtained an important 
 frontier. Instead of having the base of the mountains as a border, 
 we had the mountains themselves. By that treaty the country 
 should stand. (Cheers.) The frontier secured to us by it should 
 be maintained. A most lamentable, melancholy, and disastrous 
 
28 
 
 incident occurred in the autumn — the murder of Sir Louis 
 Cavaj^ari and his suite. But that ought not to divert us from 
 the settled puhey that was developed and expressed by the Treaty 
 of Gandamuk. I am in fovour of holding the possessions that 
 we have, but we want no more. We have provinces plenty and 
 to spare. Even if we possessed Afghanistan, it would be only a 
 perplexing ac(piisition ; but sui)posing it were a profitable one, 
 it would be contrary to the wishes and feelings of the Afghans 
 to come under British rule, and I am altogether opposed to 
 enforcing it upon them. (Cheers.) The Treaty that Yako(jb 
 Khan entered into embodies the policy of the country, and it 
 should be upheld. (Cheers.) I have discussed principles and 
 not personalities. I am not interested either in defending or in 
 decrying any body of men. All I have been concerned for is to 
 state the grounds on which I have been led to support the 
 assertion of what I believe to be Liberal principles and the 
 maintenance of a national policy. (Cheers.) It is easy to find fault, 
 and easier still to impute bad motives to your opponents. 
 
 " A man must serve his time to every trade 
 Save censure. Critics all are ready made." 
 
 The shortcomings of the Government are as api)arent to me as 
 to the fiercest opponents of their foreign policy. They have 
 often been weak, sometimes vacillating, not unfrequently wrong; 
 but I wish to judge them as I would like them to judge me, or 
 the party with which I urn identified, under like circumstances. 
 They have been beset by a succession of difficulties and dangers 
 fiuch as never before encompassed an Administration in our times. 
 Apai-t irom the inherent intricacies of the questions they have 
 had to deal with, they have had to contend with the rival iuter- 
 €sts of other powei*s, a strong opposition at home, and some 
 divisions in their own party. It is not generosity, it is siin])ly 
 justice, to rememljer this. We should also recollect that, in 
 
29 
 
 dealing with foreign affairs, there are always some matters that 
 cannot be explained. All ^[inistries are called npon at times to 
 act upon information that they cannot make public. 
 
 " What's done we partly may compute, 
 But know not what's resisted." 
 
 It is possible, even in party warfare, to drive your attacks too 
 far. Unqualified denunciation usually provokes reaction. The 
 Goveriunent, which has had the support of large majorities in 
 both Houses of Parliament, is accused of not only being wTong, but 
 of being criminal — not only of being mischievous and mistaken, 
 but of being malevolent and malicious. They are charged with 
 having roamed round the world with incendiary designs, bent 
 upon turning our frontiers into blazing bastions fi'inged with fire. 
 The accusation is, in my judgment, not only incon'ect but foolish. 
 The indictment I would prefer against them would be of the 
 very opposite character. I think they have acted with tameness 
 and timidity. They have been six years in office, and the first 
 half of that time presented them in their normal and natural 
 character. An entire absence of political legislation, some mild 
 l)ut useful social measures, a fi-ee and easy administration 
 \\'ere their characteristics. Taking warning by their prede- 
 cessors, their great effort was to avoid needlessly offending 
 anyone. Events that they could not foresee, circumstances 
 which they could not control, have diiven them into warlike 
 action. People are easily misled by a cry, but no man who 
 has examined the facts for himself can contend that the 
 English Government started the conflict in Eastern Europe. 
 "Whoever began it — whether it was the Russian emissaries or the 
 Turkish people themselves — certainly Lord Derby, who was then 
 the Foreign Minister of this country, did not do so. He pressed 
 the Sultan to settle the dispute ^\iih his subjects, and if that 
 could not be done, he urged him, with somewhat cynical in^ 
 
30 
 
 difference, to suppress the insurrection. Wlien that failed, he 
 «trove to lottilize the war. It might he said that En<rhmd 
 should ha\e ok'ved the three Emixjrors, and signed the ukase 
 which the imperial league issued from Berlin, and if Turkey 
 refused to comply with their demands she should have been coerced 
 —in other words, that we should have gone to war against her. 
 It is a matter of opinion, but, in the judgment of men familiar 
 -Nvith the East, had such a course been pursued, the Turks 
 would have turned their bac;ks to the wall, and with all the 
 <liscii)lined fanaticism of their race, they would have fought 
 against Christian and coalesced Europe for their country and 
 their faith. The resistance that was given in Bosnia to the 
 advance of a ft-iendly Hungarian army strengthens this view. 
 But if the Berlin Memorandum was refused, England assented 
 and took part in the Conference of Constantinople. However 
 we may condemn the course taken by the Government on the 
 Eastern difficulties, no man can fairly say that they caused 
 them. The Afghan war, for which they are more directly respon- 
 sible, was the outcome of the action of Russia in Turkey. We 
 may fairly criticise the policy of the Government, but no one, I 
 think, can say that they sought a cause of quarrel. I do not 
 contend that foreign politics are outside the domain of popular 
 and Parliamentary criticism. On the contrary, I regret that for 
 many years the English people have given so little and such 
 fluctuating heed to foreign questions. But I do say that such 
 delicate topics should not be made the battle field of party. 
 There are two modes of conducting a discussion — one to elicit 
 information, to sustain, to direct and guide the Executive; 
 another to win a party victory out of Government troubles. If 
 the Government of the country is in difficulties abroad, the 
 nation is in difficulties, and it grates as much against my national 
 pride as against my sense of justice to go hunting for arguments 
 against my political opponents amongst the stiffening corpses of 
 
31 
 
 jour fellow-countrymen. (Cheers.) On this subject I will quote 
 the opinion of the late M. Thiers, when discussing the attitude 
 taken in France by the Orleanists and the Legitimists during 
 the Crimean "War. The veteran French statesman, speaking to 
 Mr. Nassau Senior, said : — 
 
 "The rules of party warfare allow me to call my opponent a villain, 
 though I know him to be honest ; to abuse his measures though I know them 
 to be useful ; to attack his arguments with sophistry and even with falsehood ; 
 all this my opponent may do to me, and therefore it is fair that I should do it 
 to him. But we must both of us abstain from using as our battle-field the 
 foreign relations of our country. In these relations an error may be fatal. 
 We may quarrel amongst ourselves ; we must be united against the foreigner." 
 
 (Hear, hear, and cheers.) T am not insensible to the benefits of 
 party government. English liberty, in a large measure, owes its 
 stability to such organisation. Successes won by serious and pro- 
 longed struggles have been retained by party vigilance. The 
 education gained in such struggles has made the victories per- 
 manent. It would be difficult, too, to replace a system that has 
 become so acclimatised to our constitutional life. But party 
 spirit, pushed too far, crushes individuality of thought and cripples 
 independent energy. It impairs the disciplinary value of the 
 suffrage by destroying the voter's sense of responsibility. It 
 lowers the character of the Pai'liament by converting independent 
 representatives into political automatons, whose value consists in 
 the unreflecting vigour with which they shout the party shibbo- 
 leth. On points of procedure and of detail, a member may obey 
 the party managers without injury or disadvantage ; but when 
 great national issues are at stake, a man forfeits his own respect, 
 and becomes a recreant to his country who ignores his convic- 
 tions, and submits to think by deputy or to act by order. (Cheers. ) 
 Some of our friends, I think, act somewhat inconsistently on this 
 subject. One of their chief causes of complaint against the pre- 
 sent Parhament is its want of independence. They charge it 
 
with beins: an unthinking party machine, and they applauded the 
 action of Lord Derby and Lord Carnarvon when they separated 
 themselves from their colleagues and announced their dissent 
 frcm their policy. But when Liberals on the other side, acting 
 from equally high motives, separate themselves from their 
 leaders, they are censured, and in some instances, ostracised. 
 What is accounted as commendable independence on the one side, 
 is condemed as an exhibition of fractious self-will on the other. 
 (Cheers.) There are in the House of Commons some thirty or 
 forty members who, more or less, had supported the i)olicy the 
 (Tovernment had pursued on foreign questions. But their 
 numbers possibly would have been larger if vote by ballot had 
 l)een in operation in the House. (Laughter, hear, hear, and 
 cheers.) Their action, however, in this Parliament is only in 
 keeping with the action of other sections of the Liberal party in 
 previous Parliaments. In the last Parliament the Nonconformists 
 and Radicals were dissatisfied with the way the Government dealt 
 with elementary education. The Irish members were discontented 
 with the manner in which they dealt with university education. 
 The hostility of the Irish representatives to the Irish Universit^- 
 scheme of the Ministry led to their defeat in Parliament. The 
 opposition of Nonconformists did not cause the defeat, but it cer- 
 tainly contributed to it at the poll. Yet the Ministers who were 
 responsible for this educational legislation are to-day amongst the 
 ti-usted leaders of the party. In the Parliament before'' that, 
 stronger differences were developed. Lord Russell introduced a 
 Reform Bill, proposing to give a vote to every man who lived in 
 a house of the value of £7. This moderate proposal was objected 
 to by a section of Liberals, who denounced it as revolutionary. 
 Their opposition led to the defeat of Earl RusseU's Government, 
 and the subsequent resignation of his Government. Lord Russell 
 In'mself describes this party as consisting of three gangs— the 
 timid, the selfish, and those who were both timid and selfish. 
 
33 
 
 (A laugh.) For the first, he said, he had pity ; for the secoud 
 indignation ; for the third contempt. During all his long career, 
 he declared that he never encountered a body of politicians so 
 little influenced by principle or animated by a patriotic spirit. 
 The leader of the party he described as a man " sagacious, bold, 
 and turbulent of wit." (Laughter.) Yet this same leader was 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer in the last Ministry, and is now one 
 of the ablest of the Liberal leaders in the House of Commons. 
 Another difference took place in the same Parliament which had 
 more beneficial results. The Conservative Government proposed 
 that household suffrage should be made the basis of the Reform 
 Bill. This was objected to by the official Liberals of the day, 
 who wished to have a ratepaying fi-anchise instead of a house- 
 hold. A number of Radicals met in the tea-room of the Parliament 
 House declared that they approved of the principle of the 
 Government Bill, and resolved that if the Ministry would give 
 them an assurance that they would stand by that princi])al they 
 (the Radicals) would support them. The ^linistry did give the 
 assurance, the Radicals did stand to the arrangement ; and the 
 result was that household suffrage became the law notwithstanding 
 the opposition of the official Liberals of the time. The AduUamite 
 •defection drove the Liberal Government fi'om office, and the tea- 
 room defection succeeded in making a household suffrage the 
 law of the land. There has never been a Parliament since the 
 Reform Bill where instances of the kind have not occurred. 
 The policy on foreign questions that I and others in the House 
 of Commons have defended is the old policy of this country. 
 I have no wish to shelter myself behind big names or to shake 
 myself clear of the slightest responsibihty. I have too often been 
 in a minority to be afraid of being in that position again. 
 (Laughter and cheers.) I know what it is to be in the right 
 with two or three. (Loud cheers.) But the policy I have ex- 
 pounded to-night and which 1 have supported in Parliament, 
 
is the policy that was advocated by Mackintosh and Brougham^ 
 Horner and Lord Durham; it is a policy that received the 
 approval of the philosophic Liberals, Molesworth, Mill, Grote, and 
 Hullcr. It is the old Radical policy that was expounded by 
 Major Cartwric,rht, Lord Dundonald, William Cobbett, and 
 Oeneral Thompson ; and it was the common faith of Radicals 
 when r first became interested in political affairs. It is not 
 the faith, I know, of the Manchester School; but it is 
 certainly, of the early Radicals. I would quote from the 
 speeches and writings of the men whoso names I have cited 
 nnmeroas extracts to confirm my statement ; but I will content 
 myself with citing, in support of my position, a few words from 
 a statesman whose name will, in every Liberal assembly, be 
 received with favour. Earl Russell for over fifty years played 
 a leading and important part in the history of this country. No 
 one has rendered the Liberal cause more effective service than 
 he has done. He has not boxed the political compass and served 
 all sides in turn. He ended as he began— a moderate and con- 
 sistent advocate of Liberal principles. In his last work Lord 
 Russell expressed the strong regret he felt at having retired, as 
 he did, from the leadership after the defeat of the party in 18G7. 
 The reason why he regretted having retired was the policy the 
 party was led to pursue on foreign matters. The policy that the 
 present opposition has- supported is the policy of the late Govern- 
 ment. Lord Russell commenced their domestic legislation, but 
 censured in very strong and very emphatic terms their action 
 in foreign matters. These are his words — 
 
 I had no reason to suppose, when I surrendered the leadership of the 
 party, that he (the Liberal Prime Minister) was less attached than I was to 
 the national honour, less proud than I was of the achievements of our nation 
 by sea and land, that he disliked the extension of our colonies, and that the 
 measures he promoted would tend to reduce the great and glorious empire of 
 which he was put in charge to a manufactory of cotton and cloth, and a 
 
35 
 
 market for cheap goods, that the army and navy would be reduced by paltry 
 savings to a standard of weakness and inefficiency. By his foreign policy he 
 has tarnished the national honour, injured the national interests, and 
 lowered the national character." 
 
 These are not my words. I never used language anything like 
 so strong, but they are the words of the honoured and trusted 
 leader of the Liberal party for the better part of half a century. 
 I am not a conventional adherent of the fashionable Liberalism 
 of the hour, but I am a life-long Radical by conviction, sympathy, 
 training, and taste. (Cheers.) I am concerned for something 
 more and higher than the transference of the offices of State 
 from one set of men to another. I will not trim my political 
 faith to catch the passing breeze, however pleasant. " Unplaced, 
 unpensioned, no man's heir or slave," I neither look for nor care 
 for the honours, the favours, or the patronising approval lisped 
 ''in liquid Hues mellifluously bland" of any party. (Cheers.) 
 Their is only one consolation for a public man, and that is the 
 approval of his conscience and a sense of duty done. I will not 
 knowingly or consciously offend any man by either word or 
 speech, but if I am placed in a position where I must speak, I 
 will speak what I believe to be the truth, temperately, kindly, 
 but plainly. (Cheers.) Whatever my lot in life may be, whether 
 I may be a member of the British Parliament again or not, I 
 will labour for the advancement of Eadical principles, and serve 
 the Liberal cause according to my lights and to the best of my 
 ability. But while I wear the party uniform I will never wear 
 its plush. (Loud Cheers.) I will take any position, however 
 humble, in the ranks, but it will be as a volanteer and not as a 
 lackey. (Cheers.) With me the people's welfare is the supreme 
 law, and our country's honour and safety the first consideration. 
 But I prefer national interests to the triumph of a faction. I am 
 weak enough to own that I believe in the now derided obligation 
 of patriotism and the duty of the individual to the State, as one 
 
;>() 
 
 of the first principles planted in the human breast. I know mj 
 country's defects, but I cannot join with those who exag<j;erate 
 and parade them. The land of Michael An«(elo and of Dante 
 was not destitute of ener«j:y ; but when she persistently pro- 
 claimed herself to be miserable and infamous through the mouth 
 of Machiavolli, the world took her at her word and trod upon 
 her. Englislnnen disjxjsed to decry their native land may 
 remember with advantage the experience of Italy. It is ours 
 to hand down to postenty, undimmed and undiminished, the 
 priceless heritage of a free State, the imi)erceptible aggrega- 
 tions of centuries, won by the struggles of a heroic national life. 
 It was planted, has been reared and watered by the sweat, the 
 tears, the blood of some of the noblest of men. She has carried 
 liberty and laws, art and thought, in triumph round the globe. II' 
 England is old she is not decrepid, and has still within her daring 
 and elasticity. (Loud and enthusiastic cheers.) 
 
 NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNK : A. RKID, rRINTINO COURT BCILDINQS, AKEN8IDE HILL. 
 
^