will answer that question. The convention of 1890 was repudiated by the Tibetans upon the ground that they had not been properly consulted with regard to it. As a matter of fact, I believe that a Tibetan official accompanied the Chinese Amban who negotiated the treaty, but they have persistently repudiated these obligations. We desire that a new convention should be entered into between the Government of India on the one hand, and the Tibetans and the Chinese, as the suzerain Power, upon the other. That is the object of this mission, and we intend to attain it. As to the aggressive tendencies which we are alleged to have exhibited, I cannot help thinking that we have a right to call, if I may say so, as witnesses to character, the representatives of the two adjoining States of Nepal and Bhotan, whose attitude has been referred to during the course of this debate. Bhotan is an independent State immediately adjoining the Indian frontier. I believe we pay a small subsidy to the Bhotanese Government, but we never interfere with them. In the same way Nepal is an independent State. We keep an agent there. But there is no interference with internal Nepalese affairs, with the result that we are on most friendly terms with that State, and we are allowed to recruit within it those gallant Gurkha soldiers who add so much to the strength of the Indian Army. It is perfectly clear that if we have been able to maintain this sort of relations with Bhotan and Nepal, it is not necessary to impute to us sinister designs upon our Tibetan neighbours.

The noble Lord who spoke first referred to the relations of Tibet with China, and quoted and condemned very roundly Lord Curzon's statement that the suzerainty of China over Thibet might be regarded as a constitutional fiction. Lord Curzon, in the words which follow, explains very distinctly what he meant by that statement. Lord Curzon says that what he calls this constitutional fiction-

"Has been maintained only because of its convenience to both parties. China is always ready to break down the barriers of ignorance and obstruction and to open Tibet to the civilising influence of trade; but her pious wishes are defeated by the short-sighted stupidity of the Lamas. In the same way Tibet is only too anxious to meet our advances, but she is prevented from doing so by the despotic veto of The Marquess of Lansdowne,

the suzerain. This solemn farce has been reenacted with a frequency that seems never to deprive it of its attractions or its power to impose."

That is a perfectly accurate account of the value for all practical purposes of the suzerainty of China when you come to attempt to make it a basis for dealing with the Tibetans. But such as the suzerainty of China is, we desire to respect it; we do not wish to minimise it. On the contrary, we have throughout these long negotiations constantly leant on the suzerainty of China, and spared no pains to carry the Chinese Government with us at every step. At this moment whatever is being done in Tibet is being done with the knowledge and concurrence of the Chinese Government. They are not always punctual in their arrangements; their representatives do not always arrive on the scene at the hour when they are most wanted. But that does not in the least affect the accuracy of my statement that the Chinese Government is a party to the transactions now in progress.

and difficult subject which has been I now come to a much more delicate touched upon by speakers to-night-I mean the relations between Tibet and Russia. The attitude of His Majesty's Government in regard to this question is, I think, explained with sufficient clearness in the despatches published in the Blue-book and giving an account of the communications that passed between the representative of the Russian Government and the representative of the British Foreign Office. I do not desire to add to or to take away from what was stated in these despatches. Our view is that the independence of Tibet should be recognised, but that if any other Power is to exercise a preponderance in that country, that Power can only be Great Britain.

We have made that suffi

ciently clear, and I will not attempt to labour the point; the more so, because, whether there had been any question of Tibet or not, it would, in my belief, have communications between Russia and been none the less necessary that some step should be taken to bring the Tibetan Government to reason. What seems to me to aggravate our difficulties in this Russian Government has done, as what the case is not so much anything which the

I can only say in conclusion that we have undertaken this Tibetan mission with the utmost reluctance, and that we determined to take it, not because we desired abruptly to change our policy or to abandon that which had been pursued by Lord Elgin, or even that which had been pursued by ourselves, as shown by the documents contained in the earlier part of the Blue-book, but because we were

Tibetans imagine the Russian Govern- to say how readily His Majesty's Government to intend or to have in contempla- ment would recur to the subject at some tion. The Russian Government have time happier and more opportune than given us distinct, and, I am bound to the present. say, in my opinion, satisfactory assurances with regard to their policy towards Tibet. I do not desire to call these assurances in question. Nor do I for a moment attach credence to the idle rumours which reach us from time to time as to the presence of large bodies of Russian troops or of Russians of any kind at that mysterious capital, Lhasa. But the evidence is indisputable to show that the Tibetans, who are a people very ignorant and very easily imposed upon, are deeply convinced that they may count upon Russian support, and it is that most unfortunate misapprehension-for I be lieve it to be an entire misapprehension which has so much intensified their opposition to us and added so much to our difficulties.

a

profoundly convinced that the other
policy, after a long and conscientious
trial, had completely failed, that China
had shown herself powerless to bring
about a more satisfactory condition of
affairs between ourselves and Tibet, that
the Tibetans were quite unable to under-
stand the complaisance and indulgence
with which we had treated them, and that
the policy which had been described as a
policy of patience and conciliation had
been exhausted. In these circumstances,
no other course seemed open to us but to
adopt the line of action recommended to
us by the Government of India; and your
Lordships may certainly depend upon it
that we shall pursue that line of action
with the caution and the discretion which
under any
circumstances it would have
been our duty to observe, but which, in
consideration of the present condition of
international affairs, it is doubly our duty
to keep strictly before our view. A

The noble Marquess asked me distinct Question arising out of the despatch written by myself to Mr. SpringRice on 17th November, and printed on page 298 of the Blue-book. He called attention to the fact that in this despatch the Russian Ambassador was said to have observed to me that it was most unfortunate that at the present moment, when the Russian Government were, as I was aware, disposed to enter into amicable discussion of our relations at various points where British and Russian interests came in contact, an event of this kind, meaning the Tibetan Mission, should have occurred. I understood the noble Marquess to invite me to tell him what it was that that observation pointed to. The observation had no reference to Tibetan affairs; but it had re- *LORD REAY: No. I understand there ference to conversations which had is no objection to giving further Papers. taken place upon more than one occasion | between myself and his Excellency, in the course of which he had dwelt upon the great advantage which would result to both our countries from a better and more frank understanding in regard to the numerous points at which, in different parts of the world, our interests come in contact. I need not say that I received that statement with the cordiality which

THE LORD CHANCELLOR (The Earl of HALSBURY): Does the noble Lord withdraw his Motion?

THE EARL OF HARDWICKE: The

I

Blue-book already published contains the latest Papers, and others will be given when they come to hand. think the noble Lord will be satisfied with that assurance.

*LORD REAY: Certainly. I beg leave to withdraw the Motion.

it deserved. I am glad to recall it Motion, by leave of the House, withnow, and I hope I may be allowed drawn.

GRIEVANCES OF RESERVE OFFICERS. LORD ROSMEAD: My Lords, I rise to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) Whether the Committee appointed by the late Secretary of State for War to inquire into the whole subject of the grievances of the Reserve officers who were called up for service during the late war in South Africa, has yet made its Report; and (2.) whether the said Report, if made, or when made, together with the proceedings, will be laid on the Table of the House. I have on two former occasions brought to the notice of your Lordships the decided disparity between the treatment of the two classes of Reserve officers called up for service in the late war, and therefore I need not now take up your Lordships' time by repeating what I have already said. My reason for asking this Question is that on 7th August last the noble Earl who was at that time Under-Secretary of State for War intimated to your Lordships, in reply to a Question which I submitted, that the Report of the Committee which the late Secretary of State for War had appointed to inquire into the whole subject of the grievances of Reserve Officers would shortly be published. The announcement of the appointment of this Committee was made to your Lordships on 11th May last by the noble Earl, but I have been unable to ascertain anything whatever about the Committee or its Report. There is a very strong impression prevalent among Reserve officers that the Committee in question has either unaccountably delayed its investigations, or that if it has made its Report it has done so without an exhaustive examination of the case. I attribute this view to the refusal of the War Office authorities to accept the evidence which many of the pensioned Reserve officers volunteered to give before the Committee.

future re-employment of Reserve officers in time of war. The Committee has made its Report, but no decision has as yet been come to as to whether the Report will be adopted or not. I am unable to say, therefore, whether it will be laid on the Table of the House, nor can I give any pledge to that effect. It may interest the noble Lord, however, to know that the Committee did emphatically report against making any of their proposals retrospective. As regards the proceedings of the Committee, they can never be laid on the Table, as no shorthand notes were taken.

House adjourned at a quarter past Seven o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, 26th February, 1904.

The House met at Twelve of the clock.

UNOPPOSED PRIVATE BILL

BUSINESS.

PRIVATE BILLS (STANDING ORDER 62
COMPLIED WITH).

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, referred on the First Reading thereof, Standing Order No. 62 has been complied with, viz. :-Barnet District Gas and Water Bill. Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.

PRIVATE BILLS (STANDING ORDER 63
COMPLIED WITH).

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table
Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the
Report from one of the Examiners of
case of the following Bill, referred on the
First Reading thereof, Standing Order
No. 63 has been complied with, viz.:-
Felixstowe Gas Bill. Ordered, That the
Bill be read a second time.

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (The Earl of DONOUGHMORE): My Lords, the noble Lord appears to be under a misapprehension as to the exact purposes for which the Committee was appointed. The Committee was not appointed to inquire into the grievances of Reserve officers during the late war. It was appointed to inquire into the whole Blyth and Cowpen Gas Bill; Whitby

LICENCES (RENEWAL).

a

Petitions against alteration of Law of the Commissioners appointed to carry Copy presented, of Fourteenth Report from Blaenau Festiniog; Llanfrothen; out & scheme of colonisation in the Trawsfynydd; Cambridge; Kentish Dominion of Canada of crofters and Town; Ilfracombe; Sheepbridge; Colly-cottars from the Western Highlands and hurst; Leigh; Neath; Bwlchgwyn; Islands of Scotland, with Appendices [by Stockton-upon-Tees; Bury; Selly Oak; Command]; to lie upon the Table. Bournbrook; Halesowen; Worcester; Everton; Putney; Dunstable; Compstall; Blænwenen; Blackwood; New Tredegar; Nantyglo; Abertillery; Maesteg; Peckham; Rhymney; Liverpool; Southgate; Shrewsbury; Middleton; Llanelly; and Bristol; to lie upon the Table.

MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S
SISTER BILL.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES.

Naval Gun Sights.

MR. HARMS WORTH (Caithness-shire): To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if

Petition from Gloucester, against; to he can state whether the sights of H.M.S. lie upon the Table.

MINES (EIGHT HOURS) BILL. Petition of the Mining Association of Great Britain, against; to lie upon the

Table.

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.

"Prince of Wales" proved satisfactory during this vessel's recent gun trials.

(Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) The sights of H.M.Š. "Prince of Wales" are quite satisfactory, but they were not tested for accuracy during the recent gun trials, the primary object of these trials. being to test the strength and working of the mountings. Accuracy tests of sights are carried out in dry dock, which affords a far better means for proving their accuracy.

EXPLOSIONS (NATIONAL EXPLOSIVES COMPANY'S FACTORY, UPTON TOWANS, CORNWALL). Copy presented, of Report by Captain J. H. Thomson, His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Explosives, to the Secretary Workmen's Compensation—Amendment of State for the Home Department, on the circumstances attending an explosion of nitro-glycerine which occurred in the precipitating and final washing houses of

of Law.

MR. J. F. HOPE (Sheffield, Brightside): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department' when he hopes to

introduce the Bill to' amend the law of 7,408,000 tons and in 1903 6,976,000 tons. workmen's compensation.