HC Deb 31 July 1883 vol 282 cc1145-7
SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he can explain why a Vote for £11,246, out of the sum of £15,000 paid by Her Majesty's Government to the United States in June 1881, as compensation for acts of violence committed by Newfoundland fishermen in Fortune Bay and other places, has been included in the Supplementary Estimates; whether the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies did not inform the House in October last that the Government of Newfoundland had agreed to propose a Vote to the Colonial Legislature for the amount so paid; and, on what ground it is proposed to impose on the taxpayers of the United Kingdom the payment of compensation for acts of this nature committed by the inhabitants of a self - governing Colony?

MR. COURTNEY

Sir, the right hon. Gentleman asks for explanation of a Vote about to be submitted in Committee of Supply. That is somewhat inconvenient, if not unprecedented, as the answer necessarily involves statements of facts and arguments, most of which are subjects of controversy. The state of the case, shortly, is this—The sum of £15,000 was settled in diplomatic communications between Her Majesty's Government and that of the United States. Of this amount, £150 was apportioned to Canada, and has been repaid, and the remainder was claimed from Newfoundland. The Governor, in compliance with the promise of my hon. Friend (Mr. Evelyn Ashley), duly brought the question of repayment before his Ministers on the meeting of the new Legislature this spring, but was advised by them that there was no hope of obtaining a Vote for the full amount, the inhabitants of Newfoundland having throughout strongly protested that they were not justly liable for any payment, and that the utmost he could hope to obtain was the sum of $17,300, being the value put by a local Judge upon the damages actually inflicted by the Newfoundlanders. Upon full consideration, Her Majesty's Government decided to accept that sum in discharge of their claim, and it has already been received here. As I have intimated, the people of Newfoundland have always disputed their liability, and it must be remembered that the amount paid was settled without consultation with their Government; and in reference to the last Question of the right hon. Baronet, I must remind him that we have practically no means of compelling payment by a self-governing Colony.

SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH

gave Notice that he should oppose the Vote when it was proposed in Committee of Supply.

SIR HENRY HOLLAND

asked whether Papers would be laid on the Table, containing the Correspondence, before the Vote came on?

MR. COURTNEY,

in rely, said, if the hon. Member moved for them, he had no doubt they would be presented.