§ MR. MACIVERasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Her Majesty's Government has already taken or intends to take such steps as will insure to our Maltese fellow subjects resident in Tunis a continuance of those commercial advantages which, under Turkish Suzerainty, they have hitherto enjoyed; or if, under French Protectorate, their trade, which to some exent is in British manufactures, will be subjected to disadvantages similar to those under which our trade with the French Republic is already subjected by our system of one-sided Free Trade, and which conditions do not seem likely to be much ameliorated so long as we continue to receive Foreign manufactures free of taxation, while demanding no similar privileges from foreigners in return?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that he should answer the Question in general terms in reply to the Question of the hon. Member for Portsmouth.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFasked, Whether any steps have been taken to secure for British subjects in Tunis all the rights, liberties, exemptions, and privileges obtained for them by the Conventions between the Governments of Great Britain and Tunis, concluded on 10th of October 1863 and the 19th of 951 July 1875; whether any communication has been received from the French Government as to the validity of the capitulations in Tunis; and, what would be the position of British subjects in Tunis as to the administration of civil and criminal justice; and, whether Her Majesty's Government have recognised or acquiesced in the state of things established at Tunis by the recent action of the French Government; and, whether they will defer any decision on their policy in this respect until Parliament has been enabled to consider the Papers about to be laid upon the Table on the subject?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEI propose to give in a few words what information I can with regard to the commercial side of these Questions. If entered on the political topics to which these Questions refer, I should have to read out the whole of our despatches from Tunis, Nos. 2, 3, and 4. I may state that all existing Conventions are to be maintained and respected; commercial and other rights and privileges will remain undisturbed in so far as they are guaranteed by Treaties, unless new Conventions freely entered into should be substituted for the existing arrangements. The General Convention between the Governments of Great Britain and Tunis stilt remains in force; it secures to British subjects, vessels, and commerce the treatment of the most favoured nation, and we, of course, continue entitled to the privileges of the later Treaties.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFI see by the new French Treaty with Tunis, that while the Treaties are to be maintained the French Government are practically to carry on the foreign affairs of Tunis. The Convention of 1875 is limited to a term of seven years; and I wish to know whether the French Government would, on its expiration in 1882, be competent to give notice for its termination in 1882? I have to ask this particularly, because by the Treaty of 1875 an ad valorem duty of 8 per cent was placed on British imports; and in view of the unsatisfactory nature of the present negotiations for a new Commercial Treaty with France, I wish to know whether the French Government would have the power to refuse to renew the Convention of 1875, and to impose on British goods a higher daty?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that he should like to have Notice before answering the Question.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFsaid, he had already given Notice.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that no Notice had been given of the Question then asked. The Convention of 1875 was undoubtedly in force and remained in force; but the question he was asked to deal with was in respect of a renewal of the Treaty.
§ SIR. CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that the Question on the Paper did not specifically raised the question just asked, which was a question dealing with the future.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFgave Notice that he would call attention to this subject on Monday next, and ask what the Government intended to do with regard to the Financial Commission at present in existence, and which consisted of English, French, and Italian Commissioners.
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, that the financial side of the question had not escaped the attention of the Government. The Government had heard nothing from the French Government, except that they had been desirous of maintaining all the existing Treaties. If any desire should be expressed to change the constitution of the Financial Commission, the Government would take the opportunity of expressing their views.
MR. MAC IVERsaid, that he felt obliged to say something on the subject of Malta and Tunis, and that to keep himself in Order he would conclude with a Motion. The relations between Malta and Tunis were of great importance, and Tunis had been a great resort of the surplus population of our fellow subjects in Malta. He contended that the Maltese had not received fair treatment at our hands. They had petitioned Parliament to redress their grievances; but their Petitions had been disregarded. One of their chief wrongs was that we sent our troops and our war vessels to Malta, and that the troops and Navy were relieved from the food taxation which the people of the Island had to bear. Another grievance suffered by the Maltose was that they were compelled to defray the whole expense of 953 the salary of the Governor of the Island, and that the Imperial Government contributed nothing whatever in respect of his military services as Commander of the Garrison. We should be doing the Maltese another wrong by continuing to conduct commercial negotiations in the childish spirit which distinguished the transactions of our present Foreign Office. He had no wish to say anything ungenerous about our French neighbours; but it was a duty from which he could not shrink to urge upon the Government that the trade facilities hitherto enjoyed by the Maltese in their relations with Tunis should be continued in the future. In conclusion, he begged to move the adjournment of the House.
§ MR. FINIGANseconded the Motion, his reasons for doing so being the same as those which had influenced the hon. Member who had just sat down. Touching the question of Free Trade, he observed that he had received information from an eminent statistician which showed that while £280,000,000 worth of foreign manufactured goods had in 10 years been introduced into this country, the nations who sent those goods had drawn an immense revenue from the articles exported to their respective countries in return. The charges imposed upon goods by America amounted to between 25 and 60 per cent. He was of opinion that the industry of this country would soon have to be conducted on sounder economical principles than at present.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Mr. Mac Iver.)
§ MR. ANDERSONsaid, he was as anxious as anyone could be to have the affairs of Malta discussed in that House, because he believed that Malta was not being properly attended to by our Colonial Government at present; but he deprecated entirely its being brought up in this irregular fashion. It was not doing justice to Malta, any more than it was doing justice to the House, and it was because he wished to see some justice done to the subject that he deprecated it. He therefore declined to go into the subject at present, but would be ready to discuss it if brought forward in a regular manner. He wished, however, to appeal to the Government, after the experience they had had to-night, to 954 deal with this question of those untimely Motions for adjournment. He had given Notice of his intention to move a Resolution limiting, without abrogating, the power of Members to move the adjournment of the House at Question time. He therefore appealed to the Government to take this matter in hand.
MR. MAC IVERasked leave to withdraw his Motion, adding that the hon. Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson) was one of the Members who had done their best to effect a "count" on the occasions when he had tried in a regular manner to bring forward the subjects to which he had drawn attention that evening.
§ MR. SPEAKERIs it the pleasure of the House that this Motion shall be withdrawn? ["No!"]
§ Question put, and negatived.