Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-04-10

GE4 ' IA4N 4
had even twice attempted to forcibly pass
through the Afghan picke5 lines. After
one Of these attempts had failed to pro-
woke an Afghan attack, Capt. Yates met
the Russian chief Of staff and talked to
him about the conduct of the Russian sol
/ diers being an evident violation of the
Russlan agreement to not advance pend
ing the outcome OF negotiations.
CLAIMING IGNORANCE.
The Russian officer stated that he had
no knowledge thatany agreement existed
agalnsta Russian advance. Capt. Yates
referred to the official dispatch sent from
st. Petersburg on march II to London
assuring England that orders would be Mt
once sent to the Russian officers at.the
front directing them to forbid any adj
vance, and do all in their power to pre-
vent prov0cati0n of the Atghans. The
Russian officer declared that he knew
nothing whatever of any such arrange
! ment. Premier Gladstone, commenting
on this, said that England had kept her
| part Of this agreement. Up to March so,
at least, the Afghans had made no adj
vance, nor any forward movement of any
| kind.
THE ATTACK UNPROVOKED.
/ SO far as the Information possessed by
! the Ministers went, the government, Pre-
mier Gladstone stated, must regard the
! attack by the Russians upon Pendjeh as
/ unproVoked. The government had asked
for an explanation Of this attack from
| Russia, but Of course sufficient time had
not yet elapsed for the receipt Of an an
/ sWer to this request. Sir Edward Thorn
/ ton, the British Ambassador to ST. Peters
burg, had, however, last night tele -raph-
ed that Prince de Giers, the Russian
! Prime Minister, had expressed for him
self and for the Gar an earnest hope that
! this unhappy incident might not prevent
a continuation OF negotiations for peace.
! This remark was greeted with shouts of
derisVe laughter.
PENJDEH's OCCUPATION.
Sir Stafford Northcote, the Tory leader,
at this point arose, and recalling the
Premier's statement just made that the
! government believed that, after defeating
the Afghans at Pendjeb, the Russians had
retired, asked sarcastically if it was not
more reasonable to believe that after
/ driving the Afghans out of Pendjeh, the
Russians stayed and occupied the place.
To this Premier Gladstone said that of
course the natural inference would be
that the Russians now occupy Pendieh.
/ "COncerning this statement, however,"
! the Premier added, ,"sOme confusion exists
| because the statement that the Russians
4 occupy Pendjeh emanates from a British
officer who had left the spot at the time
of the tight, whilst sir Edward Thornton
reports, subsequently, to this. that Prince
de Giers had stated that the Russians af-
ter attacking the Afghans, did not occupy
P0ndjeh,"
FLOOD OF QUESTIONS.
Many questions were at once asked
Premier Gladstone about the ambiguity
| Of the expression used bv NJ. de Giers,
and as to whether the Russians miZht not
! have occupied Pendjen without having
occupied it Immediately after the battle.
Premier Gladstone evaded these ques-
tiOBs as idle, and to others said that the gov
} eFnment had no reason tObeheVe that any
aggressive act had been done by the Al
ghans to provoke the attack on Pendjeh.
This declaration caused sensation. and
/ for moment the House resONnded with
cries of hear" ''hear." Premier Glad
stone appeared anxious and care-worn.
LOr1 Randolph Chulchill, on entering the
House, was warmly greeted by both the
I Conservative ana Liberal members. The
general opinion expressed in the lobby
was that nothing can prevent war.
LUAIsDEN's STATEMENT QUALIFIED.
/ Later in theevening Premier Gladstone.
in the House of Commons, replying to "A
question asked by Sir Richard Cross, SAID
that the government had received another
/ telegram from Sir Peter Lumsden, whicn
tended to qualify the statement made by
him in reply TO Sir Stafford NOrthcote,
! which was based on Sir Peter Lumsden's
/ statement that the Afghans had made no
| advance, either before or after March
! IT. Sir Lumsden now says, continued Pre-
mier Gladstone, that when the Russians
threatened an attack on the Afghan po-
sition by advancing a force on Aktapa
the Afghans threw out Yldette5 and eX-
tended their pickets to Pul-i-Khilsi, on the
left bank Of the Kushk river, and gradu-
ally strengthened this position, until on
March 80 the bulk Of their force had been
transferred across the river. Sir Lums-
den is Of the opinion that the movement
does not constitute an actual advance on
the part of the Atghaus. but merely the
| occupation Of a more advantageous mill
tary position.
Nj. Lessar wishes to inform the govern
ment that the whole Of the facts known
in connection with the affair have been
stated by Premier Gladstone precisely as
received.
THE QUESTION IN A NUTSHELL,
LONDON. April 10, 1 A. M.-rhe Post,
in an editorial, says that 1t is almost i'm
possible 10 deal patiently with Premier
/ Gladst0ne's statement that he bad asked
Russia 70 explain the attack upon the
/ Afghans. and the additional statement
that VI. Giers hoped that the incident
/ might not interrupt negotiations. Even
those most deeirous of peace. the Post
SAYS, must fec that an negotiations are
now closed. The question lies IN a nut
| she'll: Russia either did or did not ac-
quaint Gen Komar0f with the agreement
Of March IL.
Tho Russian Government is giving or
ders for gunbOats 10 Swedish builders.
Most of the owners Of coliieries In Eng
! land and Wales have cancelled an orders
tor coal 90 be shirped 10 Russia at the
risk OF being -ued for breach Of contract.
The Russian forces in the engagement
vita the Alghaus consisted OF TWO bnt-
tall0ns Of REGULARS. some Coosacks and
Col Alikinons Turcoman militia, num-
bering IA an 1000.
INENLTAEhnNEss OLE WAR.