No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 December 2010
The future of Morocco was not an issue which suddenly began to agitate international politics at the beginning of the twentieth century, as a sort of left-over of imperialism belatedly brought to mind. ‘We are living… on the crater of a Volcano’ was neither a new, nor untypical view of the situation as seen from Tangier in 1881. Britain had already made an attempt to regenerate the ‘sick man of the West’, before he could cause as many complications as the fellow Muslim invalid to the East, by taking the initiative which led to the Madrid Conference respecting the right of Protection of Moorish Subjects in 1880. But this was not a success. Nor did the attempts which followed to persuade the so-called Shereefian Empire, in its vital strategic position at the entrance to the Mediterranean, to provide itself with the revenue, tools and incentive necessary for reform by the conclusion of a liberal commercial treaty, gain their objective. France also was concerned with Morocco, and the Algerian military point of view, which stressed the security danger of allowing any other power to establish preponderant influence there, was gradually gaining ground. One French minister at Tangier, Ordega, had gone as far as to try and present his government in 1884 with the fait accompli of a revolution in Morocco, with a French protégé on the Moorish throne. But the Paris authorities were not willing, or at this stage even able, to sanction such a forward policy. Spain was the power which, at official level, had long considered it had the right of reversion to the Moorish heritage. But internal weakness precluded direct action, and Spanish governments were reduced to other approaches. The negative one, associated with the conservative statesman Cánovas del Castillo, stressed the need to ‘prolong the dying agony of Morocco’, until Spain had recovered sufficiently to claim her rights. Others, however, argued for a more active policy, and they had an opportunity in the ‘Liberal’; ministries of the 1880's. It is in this context that the activity of Segismundo Moret, Minister of State from November 1885, was of relevance in bringing Morocco further into the international arena.
1 Hay, no. 77 Conf., 27 Aug. 1881 [Public Record Office], Fforeign] O[ffice] 99/198.
2 Cruickshank, E. F., Morocco at the Parting of the Ways (Philadelphia, 1935)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Medlicott, W. N., Bismarck, Gladstone and the Concert of Europe (1956), pp. 122–32Google Scholar.
3 F.O. 99/244 and 245, passim.
4 Parsons, F. V., ‘The Morocco Question in 1884: An Early Crisis’, in English Historical Review, LXXVII, 659–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 , Cruickshank, op. cit. pp. 68, 98–104Google Scholar; Diosdado (Tangier), priv. to Benomar (Berlin), 14 Feb. 1886, quoted in Reemtsen, R., Spanisch-deutsche Beziehungen…1882-1887 (Berlin, 1938), pp. 89–90Google Scholar.
6 P. Cambon (Madrid), no. 18, 25 Feb. 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913), quoting Cánovas. (All French diplomatic documents cited are from the Archives des Affaires Étrangères, Paris.)
7 Spain's foreign policy in the 1880's, and relations with the Triple Alliance, will be dealt with in a separate article.
8 , Reemtsen, op. cit. pp. 88–99Google Scholar; Falkenstein, H. Trützschler von, Bismarck und die Kriegs-gefahr des Jahres 1887 (Berlin, 1923), pp. 71–2Google Scholar.
9 , Cruickshank, op. cit. chs. 1-2Google Scholar; Miège, Jean-Louis, La Maroc et l'Europe (1961), 11, 401-9, 549–60Google Scholar; (1962), III, 263-77.
10 Statement of 13 Feb. 1880 in Congress of Cortes: , Cruickshank, op. cit. p. 102Google Scholar.
11 Ford (Madrid), no. 95, 16 July 1887, F.O. 99/257.
12 Ford, no. 37, 4 April 1886, F.O. 72/1735; , Reemtsen, op. cit. p. 88Google Scholar; Curato, F., La questione marocchina e gli accordi italo-spagnoli del 1887 e del 1891 (Milan, 1961), I, 62Google Scholar.
13 , Curato, op. cit. pp. 80–3Google Scholar; Laboulaye (Madrid), no. 17, 18 Feb. 1886 (Espagne, vol. 908); Moret to Benomar (Berlin), 24 May and 12 June 1886, cited , Reemtsen, op. cit. pp. 90–1Google Scholar; Laboulaye, no. 63 Conf., 15 July 1886 (Espagne, vol. 910).
14 Di Rascón (Rome) to Moret, 3 Dec. 1886 and 15 April 1887, cited , Curato, op. cit. pp. 120, 151Google Scholar; verbal communiqué by Plessen (German embassy, London), 25 May, and Salisbury to Scott (chargé Berlin), no. 329, 6 July 1887, recording information from German embassy, F.O. 99/257.
15 Ford, no. 95, 16 July 1887, F.O. 99/257; Hay (Tangier), no. 49, 13 June 1883, F.O. 99/256.
16 Gharnit (Moroccan Vizir) to Diosdado: Spanish, Italian and English translations in Documentos diplomáticos presentados à las Cortes (1888), p. 72Google Scholar; , Curato, op. cit. pp. 296–7Google Scholar; and Green (Tangier), no. 107 Conf., 4 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/243.
17 Pauncefote (Permanent Under-Secretary), minute of 6 Aug. on Green, no. 63 Conf., 12 July 1887, F.O. 99/257.
18 Plessen, 25 May and Salisbury to Scott, 6 July, as p. 74, n. 14 above; Salisbury to Hatzfeldt (German ambassador, London), 14 June 1887, F.O. 99/357.
19 Di Robilant, no. 253 to Scovasso (Tangier), 2 Sept. 1886, and di Rascón, 15 April 1887, quoting Depretis: cited , Curato, op. cit. pp. 131, 151Google Scholar.
20 Ford, no. 95, 16 July 1887, F.O. 99/257.
11 Green, no. 66 Conf., 18 July 1887, F.O. 99/257.
22 Moret to Benomar, no. 182 Conf., 31 Aug. 1887, concerning ‘la negociación dificil e importante’ to follow: copy in German Foreign Ministry material on microfilm in Public Record Office, GFM 16, Job 88. (These German documents will be given their original classification in the volumes on ‘die Marokkanische Frage’, a series which dates from Sept. 1887.)
23 Moret to Benomar, no. 181 Conf., 31 Aug. 1887, communicated ‘vor einigen Tagen’ according to memorandum by German Foreign Ministry official Raschdau, 18 Sept. 1887, vol. 1; Scott, no. 357, 27 Sept. 1887, F.O. 99/257, reporting conversation with Herbert Bismarck.
24 Austrian memorandum of Spanish conversations at Vienna, 12 Oct., received at Berlin 22 Oct. 1887, vol. 1.
25 di Rascón to Crispi, 15 Sept. 1887, encl. Gharnit's Note of 17 Aug. 1887, cited , Curato, op. cit. pp. 246–7;Google ScholarMemoirs of Francesco Crispi (1912-1914), 11, 256–7Google Scholar.
26 ‘Pauncefote, minute of 29 Sept. 1887, F.O. 99/257.
27 Apart from the minor misdemeanours of disobeying instructions and trying to force a forward policy on his government, Ordega had later been found out in peculation and retired from the diplomatic service. But in 1889 he was again officially employed as President of the Commission on the Pyrenees.
28 Becker, J., Historia de las relaciones exteriores de Kspana durante el sigh XIX (Madrid, 1924-1926), in, 643–4Google Scholar; Scott, no. 357, 27 Sept. 1887, F.O. 99/257 (information from Benomar); Ford, no. 116, 2 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/257 (information from Moret).
29 Documentos diplomáticos presentados à las Cortes (1888), pp. 53–4Google Scholar.
30 Salisbury, priv. to Lyons (Paris), 5 Feb. 1887, quoted in Newton, Lord, Lord Lyons (1013), II, 386Google Scholar.
31 Green, no. 37 Conf., 12 March 1887, F.O. 99/241; , Curato, op. cit. p. 293Google Scholar.
32 Satow (Tangier), priv. to Currie (Permanent Under-Secretary), 25 Oct. 1893, P.R.O. 30/33/4/14.
33 Green, no. 83 Conf., 21 Aug. 1887, F.O. 99/236; , Curato, op. cit. pp. 294–5Google Scholar.
34 See p. 75, n. 17. But by 22 Aug. 1887 Pauncefote (no. 63 Conf. to Green, F.O. 99/257) conceded that a conference might be necessary to deal with Protection.
35 Hansard's Debates, 3rd series, vol. 322, 1212-14, House of Lords debate on Bulgaria of 23 Feb. 1888; Salisbury, priv. to Malet (Berlin), 12 March 1890, F.O. 343/3.
36 SirWebster, Charles, The Art and Practice of Diplomacy (1961), ch. 4Google Scholar; Hinsley, F. H., Power and the Pursuit of Peace (1963), ch. 11Google Scholar; Gooch, G. P. and Temperley, H. (eds.), British Documents on the Origins of the War, 1898-1914 (1926-1938), III, 93Google Scholar.
37 Lytton, Bulwer to Gladstone, 9 Oct. 1858, ‘The Ionian Islands under British Administration’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge University Library, 1953), p. 299Google Scholar, by J. J. Tumelty, to whom I owe this reference.
38 Minute of 31 Aug. on Green, no. 84 Secret and Conf., 24 Aug. 1887, F.O. 99/236, embodied in no. 68 Conf. to Green, 5 Sept. 1887, F.O. 99/234. This comment was an ironic one, designed to quieten down Sir William Kirby Green at Tangier, who ‘…seems to be disposed to fuss a little too much’.
39 Salisbury to Catalini (Italian chargé, London), 4 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/257; to Mazo (Spanish minister, London), 14 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/243; to Malet, 47s Conf., 21 Oct. 1887, F.O. 64/1154; to Queen Victoria, 15 Oct. 1887, quoted in Cecil, G., Life of Robert Marquis of Salisbury (1921-1932), IV, 54Google Scholar.
40 Minutes by Pauncefote and Salisbury, 27 Oct., on Ford, no. 129, 20 Oct., and tel. no. 19 to Ford, 28 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/257. (The two Moorish Notes on neutralization and Protection were dated 16 and 17 Aug. in British circles. Italy's interpretation of the Muslim calendar resulted in their being dated 15 and 16 Aug. respectively. The Spanish contribution was to refer to them both as of 17 Aug. In order to avoid the original confusion, the British dating will be used throughout.)
41 Scovasso, 471 Conf. to Crispi, 23 Aug., communicated to Salisbury, 16 Sept. 1887, translation in F.O. 45/588, and to German Foreign Ministry, 13 Sept. 1887, copy in vol. 1. (The evidence does not allow a final decision on who recommended the Moorish reply asking for neutralization. Diosdado claimed he had helped draw up this note of 16 Aug. while at Rabat, and Green, in no. 128 Conf., 24 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/243, thought he may have done so on his own initiative, ‘to keep his…superiors on the path which he thinks the safest for Spain’. But in the German Foreign Ministry Holstein, in a memorandum of 20 Sept. 1887, vol. 1, thought it was Scovasso who had told the sultan he must declare himself neutral, while State Secretary Herbert Bismarck, as reported in Scott, no. 357, 27 Sept. 1887, F.O. 99/257, said that the suggestion that Morocco declare its own neutrality and then invite the powers to respect it came from the Italian ambassador Launay. Italy tried to convince Britain that Herbert Bismarck himself had mooted this latter idea. F. Curato has had access t o both the Italian and Spanish archives, but does not resolve the question. But he does show that Diosdad o and Scovasso had already discussed the issue of Moroccan territorial integrity at Tangier in July 1886. Both men had also, in 1886, stressed the need for a revision of the Madrid Convention.)
42 Crispi to Catalini, no. 404, 7 Sept., communicated to Salisbury, 16 Sept. 1887, copy in F.O. 45/588; Malvano (Italian Foreign Office) to Launay (Berlin), 17 Sept., communicated to German Foreign Ministry, 24 Sept. 1887, vol. 1.
43 Salisbury, priv. to Malet, 24 Jan. 1888, F.O. 343/2. Crispi to Launay, 7 Sept., communicated to German Foreign Ministry, 13 Sept. 1887, vol. 1; Crispi-Bismarck interview at Friedrichsruh of 3 Oct. 1887, recorded in Crispi, Memoirs, II, 222 and Bismarck, marginal note on memorandum of Benomar-Herbert Bismarck conversation, 3 Oct. 1887, vol. 1.
44 Salisbury, minute of 10 Feb. on Green, no. 16 Conf., 2 Feb. 1887, F.O. 99/241; Malet, tel. no. 10 and no. 60 Conf., 19 Feb. 1887, F.O. 99/241.
45 Scott, no. 302, 11 Aug. 1887, F.O. 64/1158, recording conversation wit h Under State Secretary Berchem.
46 Malet, priv. to Salisbury, 5 May 1888, F.O. 343/9.
47 Malet, priv. to Salisbury, 22 Oct. 1887, F.O. 343/9; also no. 394 V. Conf., 22 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/243.
48 Malet first mentions Holstein priv. to Salisbury in a letter of 15 Oct. 1887, F.O. 343/8: ‘a man of great ability who is completely in the confidence of the Chancellor and… is willing o t talk, but I should not feel justified in using all his talk as material for official dispatches”.
49 Memorandum on the Madrid Conference, 12 Nov. 1887, vol. 11.
50 Bismarck, marginalia on memorandum, as p. 80, n. 49: ‘ja’, on Holstein's remark re mistrust of France, and ‘richtig’ on ‘…während das Odium für das Scheitern der Neutrali-tatsidee auf Frankreich allein fällt’.
51 Minute on Hatzfeldt (London), no. 413, 17 Nov. 1887, vol. 11.
52 Malet, tel. no. 55, 2 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/258, and no. 404 Conf., 29 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/257. The attempt to use Morocco as evidence of ‘the excellence of relations now existing between England and Germany’ (The Times, 13 10 1887Google Scholar, report from Berlin of 12 Oct.) was not particularly successful. Note Salisbury to Malet, Secret, 11 April 1888, F.O. 343/2: ‘… friendship with Germany is a more uncertain staff to lean upon than friendship with France. The Chancellor's humours are as changeable as those of the French Assembly: and you can never be certain that he will not try to levy a sort of diplomatic blackmail. …’
53 Bismarck, no. 323 to Solms (Rome), 4 Nov. 1887, vol. 1.
54 Marginal note on Stumm (Madrid), no. 187, 9 Nov. 1887, vol. II.
55 Biegeleben (Austrian embassy, London) to Salisbury, 2 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/258; Kalnoky to Reglia (Tangier), 15 Oct., copy communicated to German Foreign Ministry, 21 Oct. 1887, vol. 1.
56 Conversation of 12 Oct. with Austrian charge1 d'affaires Zichy, reported in Miinster (Paris), no. 327, 13 Oct. and Zichy to Kalnoky, 15 Oct., communicated to German Foreign Ministry on 21 Oct. 1887, vol. 1; also Paget (Vienna), no. 363, 20 Oct. 1887, F.O. 7/1118.
57 Egerton (chargé Paris), no. 425 Conf., 28 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/241.
58 Schoen (chargé, Paris), no. 373 Secret, 2 Nov. 1887, vol. 11, quoting Egerton.
59 Egerton observed, as in n. 58 above, that, during his dealings with Flourens, ‘… einzelne Fragen aus de m Bureaux des Ministeriums des Äussern zuweilen in einer Form herauskämen, welche mit den mündlichen Áusserungen des Ministers nicht im Einklange ständen’.
60 Laboulaye (Madrid), no. 63 Conf., 15 July 1886 (Espagne, vol. 910); Féraud (Tangier), no. 159 Conf., 23 July 1886 (Maroc, vol. 51).
61 ‘Diplomate’ (Henri Cambon), Paul Cambon (1938), pp. 105–6Google Scholar.
62 Cambon, no. 69, 8 Dec. 1887 (Espagne, vol. 912).
63 Cambon, no. 18, 25 Feb. 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913), printed in D[ocuments] D[iplo-matiques] F[rançais, first series], ix, appendix, no. xi.
64 Moret to Benomar, 24 March 1887, quoted in Reemtsen, op. cit. p. 98, is not recorded i n Espagne, vol. 911; Cambon, priv. to Flourens, 1 Nov. 1887 (Espagne, vol. 914), refers t o conversations with Moret of Aug. 1887, which had also not been reported.
65 Cambon, no. 55, 26 Oct. 1887 (Espagne, vol. 912), printed in D.D.F., IX, appendix, no. VII.
66 Ford, no. 156 Conf., 23 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/258. Cambon, however, did not disguise his distinction between a ‘Revisionskonferenz’; on Protection, which might be acceptable, and a congress to ‘disposer du sort du Maroc’, which was not: Stumm, no. 191, 11 Nov. 1887, vol. II; Ford, no. 156 Conf., 23 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/258.
67 Féraud, no. XVI Conf., 25 Nov. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 54); no. X Conf., 23 Sept. 1886 (Maroc, vol. 51); nos. I Conf., and IV Conf., 17 and 27 Jan. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 52); no. 231, 10 Aug. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 53).
68 Lytton (Paris), no. 158 Conf., 23 March 1889, F.O. 27/2953.
69 Tel. to Belle (charge', Madrid), 7 Oct. 1887 (Espagne, vol. 912), which actually refers to ‘les arrangements pris, en 1883’. The Spanish fears were genuine. Cf. Taylor, A. J. P., ‘British Policy in Morocco, 1886-1892’, English Historical Review, LXVI, 346–7:Google Scholar ‘Cambon, no doubt, hit on the truth, when he remarked… the Spaniards were building up alarms in Morocco “in order to hold out hopes of their over-officered army of the near prospect of a campaign”.’
70 Parsons, F. V., E.H.R. LXXVII, p. 679, n. 2Google Scholar. Egerton, in no. 426, 30 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/241, noted that France tended to treat Spain like a ’poor relation’. Neither government had kept to the 1884 understanding.
71 , Newton, Lord Lyons, II, 376, 387Google Scholar.
72 Cambon, no. 55, as p. 83, n. 65 above; Ford, no. 135 Conf., 28 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/241, giving informatio n from Moret.
73 Telegram from Paris, 11 Oct. 1887, in Madrid newspaper Impartial, copy in German Foreign Ministry archives, vol. 1.
74 Journal des De'bats, 12 10 1887Google Scholar.
75 Féraud, no. 249, 7 Oct. 1887; Charmes to de Corcelle (sous-directeur, Midi et l'Orient division), 22 Oct. 1887, Maroc, vol. 54.
76 Information from Moret, in Cambon, no. 55, as p. 83, n. 65 above, and in Ford, no. 137 Conf., 28 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/257. Not recorded in French archives.
77 The Moorish Note of 17 Aug. was annexed to Moret's dispatch to Albareda (Paris) of 19 Oct. 1887.
78 Flourens, tel. no. 45 to Cambon, 3 Nov. 1887; Albareda to Flourens, 8 Nov. 1887; Flourens, tel. no. 46 to Cambon, 8 Nov. 1887: Espagne, vol. 912. (Flourens, tel. no. 46 is printed in D.D.F. IX, appendix VIII.)
79 France never did learn of these Notes. Nor did the editors of the French diplomatic documents. On several occasions when an agreement made by Moret with Italy and Britain on Morocco is mentioned, they refer (e.g. D.D.F. IX, 516, n. 1) to the first Mediterranean Agreement of 12 Feb. 1887 and the Spain-Italy exchange of 4 May 1887. But it is the Collective Note of 12 March 1887 which is really under discussion, and its existence had been revealed in , Gooch and , Temperley, op. cit. VIII, 18Google Scholar.
80 Green, no. 127 Conf., 23 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/241; Travers (Tangier), no. 144 to Bis-marck, 30 Oct. 1887, vol. 11.
81 ‘M'en parler’ is normally all that is written on French incoming dispatches.
82 Green, no. 64 Conf., 12 July 1887, and priv. to Pauncefote of same date, F.O. 99/257:. ‘…the difficulties of Feraud and the French Government in casting off… the Shereef of Wazan and his followers appear to be so great that I do not believe in their being honestly met’.
83 Ford, no. 121 Conf., 16 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/241; Stumm, tel. of 16 Oct. 1887, vol. 1; Stumm, priv. to Holstein, 25 Oct. 1887, copy in vol. 1, translation in Rich, N. and Fisher, M. H. (eds.), Holstein Papers (1955-1963), III, 226–7Google Scholar. There is no need to assume that Moret was ‘telling… lies’ (Taylor, as p. 84, n. 69), or that he deliberately invented a ‘Plan Cambon’; ( Diplomate, Paul Cambon, pp. 106–7Google Scholar). The circumstantial evidence is confirmed by Cambon himself, who says (priv. letter to Flourens, 1 Nov. 1887, in error in a vol. for 1888, Espagne, 914) he told Moret ‘que nous pouvions, en notre nom personnel et sans engager nos Gouv-ernements, causer d'une facon toute acadéique des affaires du Maroc et faire des projets d'avenir’.
84 Cambon, no. 69, 8 Dec. 1887 (Espagne, vol. 912): no. 39, 29 Aug. 1887 (Espagne, vol. 911).
85 Delia Valle (Madrid) to Crispi, 28 Sept. 1887, referred to in Italian instructions communicated to Salisbury, 17 March 1888, F.O. 99/260; Holstein, memorandum of 12 Nov. 1887, vol. Ii. Salisbury does not seem to have realized this point, but he was misled by Mazo and Diosdado, who both implied the contrary.
86 Malet, 394 V. Conf. 22 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/243.
87 Vivian (Rome), no. 258 Conf., 7 Dec. 1892, F.O. 99/296, giving information from Benomar; Bismarck (at Friedrichsruh) to German Foreign Ministry, 18 Oct. 1887, vol. 1, instructing that Spain be advised to sound out French intentions.
88 For one of several incidental developments that gave a contrary impression, see Parsons, F. V., The Historical Journal, 1, 2 (1958), 149–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
89 Hatzfeldt, no. 425, 9 Dec. 1887, vol. II.
90 Ford, tel. no. 22, 3 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/298.
91 Minutes by Pauncefote, 9 Nov., and Salisbury, 10 Nov., on Ford, no. 141 Conf., 3 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/258.
92 Ford, no. 141 Conf., 3 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/258; similarly Stumm, no. 40, 9 Feb. 1888, vol. iv.
93 Ford, no. 142 Conf., 5 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/243.
94 Ford, no. 164, 2 Dec. 1887, F.O. 72/1787.
95 Ford, no. 8, 22 Jan. 1888, F.O. 99/259; Ford, no. 18, 1 Feb. 1888, F.O. 72/1811.
96 Green, no. 151 Conf., 31 Dec. 1887, F.O. 99/258; Maissa (Italian chargé Tangier) to Crispi, 30 Dec. 1887 and 2 Jan. 1888, communicated by Catalini, 17 and 27 Jan. 1888, ‘very able reports’, as Pauncefote noted, F.O. 99/259; Feraud, no. XVII Conf., 29 Dec. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 54); Travers, no. 8, 15 Jan. 1888, vol. 3.
97 Italian instructions, 5 March, communicated to Foreign Office, 17 March 1888, F.O. 99/260.
98 No. A24 to Travers, 26 Dec. 1887, vol. III; Malet, no. 30 Conf., 31 Jan. 1888, F.O. 99/259; Hatzfeldt, no. 20, 20 Jan. 1888, vol. III, and no. 53, 16 Feb. 1888, vol. IV; , Crispi, Memoirs, II, 279Google Scholar.
99 Italian inquiries of 3 Feb. 1888, F.O. 99/259, and 21 March, 12 April, and 12 May 1888, F.O. 99/260; Salisbury to Catalini, 22 March and 21 Ma y 1888, F.O. 99/260.
100 Minute on Ford, no. 49 Conf., 24 March 1888, F.O. 99/260.
101 Ford, no. 48 Conf., 24 March 1888, F.O. 99/260.
102 Cambon, no. 75, 10 Dec. 1887 (Espagne, vol. 912).
103 Cambon, no. 77, 24 Dec. 1887; cf. tel. no. 59 to Cambon, 21 Dec. 1887 (Espagne, vol. 912).
104 Féraud, no. 263, 2 Dec, and priv. to Charmes, 26 Dec. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 54).
105 He was replaced in April 1888 by Goblet, who made no personal contribution.
106 Flourens to Leon y Castillo (Spanish ambassador, Paris), 4 Jan. 1888, communicated by Mazo, 24 Jan. 1888, F.O. 99/259; Cambon, no. 6, 23 Jan. 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913); , Curato. op. cit. p. 298Google Scholar.
107 No. 89 Conf. to Feraud, 30 Dec. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 54).
108 Féraud, no. XVII Conf., 29 Dec. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 54). Naturalization, being hereditary, was in many ways a more serious problem than Protection.
109 Féraud, no - 269, 26 Dec. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 54). Diosdado apparently thought, incorrectly, that this arrangement would mean withdrawal of Protection from the Shereef of Wazan (Green, no. 150 Conf., 30 Dec. 1887, F.O. 99/258).
110 Cambon, no. 1, 11 Jan. 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913); no. 2 Conf. to Fe'raud, 17 Jan. 1888 (Maroc, vol. 55).
111 Tel. 16 to Cambon, 11 Feb. 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913).
112 Féraud, no. 101 Conf., 18 March 1886 (Maroc, vol. 50); no. 151 Conf., 30 June 1886 (Maroc, vol. 51): ‘Le Maroc fermé hermétiquement c'est la tranquillité et la sécurité à notre frontière occidentale d'Algérie’.
118 Cambon, no. 20, 10 March 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913).
114 No. 6 to Cambon, 5 Jan. 1888; similarly tel. 20 to Cambon, 29 Feb. 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913).
115 Tel. 16, as p. 89, II. in above.
116 The explanatory footnotes in D.D.F. IX, 696, n. 3, and vn, 9, n. I, are not noticeably more helpful. Taylor (as p. 84, n. 69) adopts this D.D.F. interpretation in saying ‘The British Government wished to add the question of commercial relations generally; the French government insisted on a defined programme’, and in implying that Moret's transfer from the Ministry of State was the culminating factor. He also states that the neutralization proposal ‘was not raised again’ after 7 Sept. 1887: this ignores the evidence in print, and in F.O. 257, 258, 259 and 260. These last volumes, under the innocuous heading ‘Irregular Protection in Morocco’, contain the essential British material from all diplomatic posts on this abortive conference issue.
117 Malet, tel. no. 4, 14 Feb. and Salisbury, no. 30 to Ford, 18 Feb. 1888, F.O. 99/259; Benomar, priv. to Herbert Bismarck, 14 Feb. 1888, vol. IV.
118 Ford, no. 49 Conf., 24 March and tel. no. 3, 28 March 1888, F.O. 99/260.
119 Cambon, no. 6, 23 Jan. 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913).
120 Flourens to Feraud, no. 8 Conf., 16 Feb. 1888 (Maroc, vol. 55); , Crispi, Memoirs, II, 287Google Scholar; Salisbury, minute on Ford, no. 47 Conf., 24 March 1888, F.O. 99/260, ‘…it is always safer to say nothing’.
121 Bismarck, marginal note on Stumm, no. 187, 9 Nov. 1887, vol. 1; , Crispi, Memoirs, II, 258Google Scholar; Phipps (Vienna), tel. no. 72, 12 Nov. 1887, F.O. 99/258.
122 Reed Lewis (Tangier), no. 87, 31 Dec. 1887, Consular Letters, Tangier, vol. xvi, National Archives, Washington, could not ‘conceive any useful purpose being served’ from a conference ‘unless those taking part have personal experience of Morocco’. Lewis had arrived in Morocco in 1887, and was dismissed for corruption in 1890. The State Department, however, did go as far as sanctioning expenses for the forthcoming Madrid meeting.
123 Ford, no. 56 Conf., 11 April 1888, F.O. 99/260; Stumm, no. 89, 12 April 1888, vol. v.
124 Damiani (Italian Foreign Ministry) to Catalini, 5 May, communicated 12 May 1888, F.O. 99/260.
125 No. 47 to Stumm, 21 April 1888, vol. v.
126 Pauncefote, minute of 19 April on Ford, tel. no. 4, 16 April 1888, F.O. 99/260. Salis-bury slightly amended this minute before it was embodied in tel. no. 6 to Ford, 11 April 1888, but did not comment on the lack of reference to the territorial question.
127 Cambon, no. 25, 24 April and no. 30, 16 May 1888; Goblet, tel. and no. 57 to Cambon, 29 May 1888 (Espagne, vol. 913).
128 Mazo to Pauncefote, 21 April 1888, F.O. 99/260.
129 Minute on Ford, tel. no. 7, 24 May 1888, F.O. 99/260.
130 Green, no. 54 Conf., 27 April 1888, F.O. 99/260; Ford, tel. to Green of 5 June, replying to tel. of 4 June 1888, F.O. 174/101; Feraud, nos. IX Conf. and 59, 11 and 21 May 1888 (Maroc, vol. 56).
131 Green, no. 58 Conf, 3 May 1888, F.O. 99/260.
132 Green, no. 71 Conf., 30 May 1888, F.O. 99/260; Feraud, no. 37 Conf., 17 March 1888 (Maroc, vol. 55), reporting he had instructed Dr Linares to warn the sultan against a conference by snowing him London Chamber of Commerce propositions reprinted in the Times of Morocco, as evidence of ‘visées anglaises sur le Maroc’ and the dangers of ‘une nouvelle Egypte’.
133 Ford, no. 148 Conf., 14 Nov. 1888, F.O. 99/270.
134 Green, no. 129, 6 Nov. 1888, F.O. 99/260.
135 Feraud, tel. no. 43, 4 Nov. 1888 (Maroc, vol. 57); similarly Cambon, no. 63, 8 Nov. 1888 (Espagne, vol. 914).
136 Patenotre (Tangier), no. II Conf., 15 Jan. 1889 (Maroc, vol. 58); Ribot to Patenotre, no. 33, 21 June 1890 (Maroc, vol. 60); Cambon, no. 30, 18 June 1891 (Espagne, vol. 917), etc.
137 Moret, priv. to Ford, 31 May and 1 June, copies in Stumm, no. 129, 2 June 1888, vol. v; Ford, no. 74 Conf., 4 June and Green, no. 85 Conf., 30 June 1888, F.O. 99/260; Herbette (Berlin), no. 1, 2 Jan. 1889, printed in D.D.F. VII, no. 293.
138 Cambon, no. 1 Protectorats Conf., 9 June 1890 (Espagne, vol. 916); Feraud, no. 70 23 June 1888 (Maroc, vol. 56).
139 Féraud, no. XVI Conf., 25 Nov. 1887 (Maroc, vol. 54); also no. 72, 2 July 1888 (Maroc, vol. 56), on England, Germany and Italy in ‘accord complet…un groupe parfaitement uni’.
140 Green, priv. to Pauncefote, 31 Oct. 1887, F.O. 99/241.
141 Sumner, B. H., Russia and the Balkans (1937), 438Google Scholar.
142 Ford, no. 172 Conf., 11 Dec. 1887, F.O. 99/258; Lascelles (Berlin), in , Gooch and , Temperley, British Documents, III, 81Google Scholar, similarly , Nicolson, in , Gooch and Temperley, op. cit. III, 97Google Scholar.
143 Grenville, J. A. S., Lord Salisbury and Foreign Policy (1964), p. 41Google Scholar.
144 Rouvier to Bihard (Berlin), 11 June 1905, in Affaires du Maroc, 1901-05 (1905), no. 270Google Scholar.
145 , Gooch and , Temperley, op. cit. IX, 11, 117: ‘if a settlement is easy, it can be arranged; if it is difficult, a Conference might make it worse’Google Scholar.
146 Eubank, K., Paul Cambon Master Diplomat (Norman, Oklahoma, 1960), p. 127Google Scholar. , Grenville, op. cit. p. 227Google Scholar, illustrates a British fear that France would attempt to put the Nile question before a conference in 1898.
147 Minute on Ford, no. 84 Conf., 18 June 1888 and comment thereon by Hervey (Western Department), F.O. 99/260.