to extend our own territories, or to interfere unnecessarily with their internal affairs.

I will read the words used in 1869 by my noble friend (Lord Lawrence), then Viceroy of India, than whom no man was better able to form a judgment upon the military and political position of India.

"Should a foreign power," he wrote, expressing the deliberate opinion of the Government of India of which he was the head, "such as Russia, ever seriously think of invading India from without, or, what is more probable, of stirring up the elements of dissatisfaction or anarchy within it, our true policy, our strongest security, would then, we conceive, be found to lie in previous absence from entanglements at either Cabul, Candahar, or any similar outpost," --and entanglements at Cabul or Candahar would be trifles compared with those which may result from this Convention, -"in full reliance on a compact, highly-equipped, and disciplined army stationed within our own territories—in the contentment, if not the attachment, of the masses-in the sense of security of title and possession with which our whole policy is gradually imbuing the minds of the principal chiefs and the native aristocracy-in the construction of material works within British India which enhance the comfort of the people, while they add to our political and military strength-in husbanding our finances and consolidating and multiplying our resources-in quiet preparation for all contingencies which no Indian statesman should disregard, and in a trust in the rectitude and honesty of our intentions, coupled with the avoidance of all sources of complaint which either invite foreign aggression or stir up restless spirits to domestic revolt."

I wish that Her Majesty's Government had listened rather to the wise opinions of my noble friend than to the exaggerated views of the power of Russia which appear to have influenced them.

But, my Lords, is it supposed that the Treaty of Berlin and this Convention will be acceptable to the Mahomedan subjects of the Queen in India? If I am not greatly mistaken, the Mahomedans in India would have been delighted if Her Majesty's Government had given an effective support to the Porte and had undertaken the defence of Turkey against Russia; but is it conceivable that Mahomedans who are sincere in their religious convictions can be gratified at a treaty which is in effect, an act for the partition of the Turkish Empire? Is it likely that they will be pleased to hear that the dominions of Turkey in Europe have been reduced so as to comprise only six millions of people, or that they will contemplate with satisfaction the probable assumption by the British Government of the administration of the Asiatic Territories of the Sultan ?

My Lords, it is well to remember that no support which England can give to the Turkish Empire will conciliate the disloyal portion of the Indian Mahomedans to our rule. This is not mere theory; we know how little the expenditure of English blood and money in defence of Turkey influenced the disloyal Mahomedans a quarter of a century ago. It was not a year after the Crimean War when the Indian Mutiny broke out, and one of the main instigators of that mutiny was a Mahomedan who had just been to Constantinople, and had himself seen the sacrifices we had made for the Turkish Empire. The disaffected Mahomedans were not influenced for a moment by the sacrifices we made for the defence of Turkey.

My Lords, I have endeavoured to examine the dangers to India which may be supposed to result from the Russian acquisitions in Armenia, and I can come to no other conclusion than that the power of Russia to endanger India is a bugbear conjured up by Her Majesty's Government, and that no serious danger to India can result from those acquisitions.

I now come to the consideration of the Convention itself. Its objects are partly military and partly civil. It provides for the protection of Asiatic Turkey by England from Russian attack, and for the reform of the administration of the Asiatic dominions of the Porte.

It is somewhat remarkable that there are no stipulations for the purpose of carrying out the military objects of the Convention. If the obligation we have incurred is not to be a mere paper obligation-if we are not to trust to the chapter of accidents, and be liable at any time to be drawn into war under the greatest possible disadvantages-I presume the first thing to be done is that Her Majesty's Government should arrange with the Porte for the construction and armament of some fortified position, either at Erzeroum or elsewhere, to afford a basis for the defence of the Turkish frontier against an attack from the Russian force in the Caucasus. Her Majesty's Government must also, I presume, arrange for the organisation of a respectable Turkish force, say of 50,000 men, for the defence of the frontier. The Turks have proved themselves to be excellent troops, but they are badly officered, and their army is almost entirely deficient in the medical and supply services which are essential for operations in the field. My Lords, I find no stipulations of the kind in the Convention, and it seems that the only measure which Her Majesty's Government have taken to enable us to fulfil our obligations, is the occupation of the Island of Cyprus. I should have liked to hear some explanation of the value of Cyprus for the defence of the Asiatic frontier of Turkey. It seems to me to be very doubtful whether Cyprus is well situated to form the base of any military operations we may have to undertake for this purpose. It would rather appear that in the event of any such operations, as in the Crimean War, the natural base would be Constantinople, and that the force

would be despatched to Trebizonde, or to some point nearer the scene of operations than Alexandretta.

The noble Earl opposite (Derby), addressed some weighty observations to your Lordships on the subject of Cyprus; but the noble Marquis who spoke last (Salisbury), had no better answer to give to those observations than to say that as the noble Earl objected to the acquisition of Cyprus, it follows that if he had lived in the times of Clive or Warren Hastings, he would have objected equally to the acquisition of our Indian Empire. The noble Marquis apparently could give us no information whatever as to the advantages or disadvantages of Cyprus, otherwise than by referring your Lordships to the "Encyclopædia Britannica.” I wish the noble Marquis had been able to give us some assistance in this matter-that we might at least have had one half-pennyworth of bread to all this sack.

My Lords, I am so confident in the power and resources of England that I do not doubt that the undertaking given by Her Majesty's Government can be carried into effect. I do not say that this country has not troops enough and money enough to defend the Asiatic frontier of Turkey against Russia; but I contend that as regards the object which the Prime Minister has told us is contemplated by the Convention, namely, the maintenance of our Indian Empire, we have undertaken a liability which is unnecessary, which is certain to be inconvenient, and which may be dangerous. Your Lordships know well that England cannot maintain such armies as are at the disposal of the Continental Powers of Europe, without entirely altering our military system. Having undertaken this liability to protect the Asiatic frontier of Turkey, we may be called upon to fulfil it at a time when there may be some other demands upon our military resources, possibly really affecting the security of India; and it would be in the power of Russia,

by a menace of the Asiatic frontier of Turkey seriously to cripple our available military strength.

As regards the civil part of the Convention, your Lordships have heard more than once to-night of the engagements into which Her Majesty's Government have entered. By the 61st Article of the Treaty of Berlin, there is an undertaking on the part of the Porte to carry out without further delay the ameliorations and reforms required by the Armenians. But the improvement of the internal administration of the Asiatic dominions of the Porte has not been otherwise provided for by the Treaty of Berlin. It appears, however, that we have undertaken in the Convention to prevent misgovernment in Asiatic Turkey. I should like to have heard something from the noble Marquis or the Prime Minister, as to the manner in which this obligation is to be carried into effect.

I believe the condition of the Turkish dominions in Asia to be deplorable. As regards the cultivators of the soil, who, as your Lordships are aware, constitute the most important portion of the population in all Eastern countries, full information will be found in a report made in 1869 by Mr. Palgrave, who was then British Consul at Erzeroum. That report shews that by bad laws and bad administration the cultivators of the soil have been reduced to the verge of ruin, the old landed gentry have been swept away, and so long as Turkish rule exists, Mr. Palgrave can see no hope of a remedy. The corruption which extends throughout the whole administration-the want of means of communication-the neglect of education-the maladministration of justice-in short, the accumulation of every abuse and defect which is possible even in an Asiatic State has produced a condition of things which I believe does not find a parallel in any country in the East, unless, perhaps, in Persia. My Lords, we have heard from the Prime