HC Deb 06 April 1852 vol 120 cc778-80
MR. MONCKTON MILNES

said, he wished to ask his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer a question with respect to what he (Mr. M. Milnes) believed to have been an illegal seizure of the property of a British subject by the Belgian police. It appeared that about 100l. worth of books, the property of a gentleman of the name of Jeff, had been seized, while on board of a British steamer, by the police in Belgium, under the false pretence that the package had contained papers of a seditious character against the French Government. The package did, he believed, contain some pamphlets which the Belgian Government declared to be illegal; but a prosecution subsequently instituted against the author and publisher of those works had resulted in an acquittal. Under these circumstances, he wished to ask his right hon. Friend whether any correspondence had taken place between Her Majesty's Government and the Belgian Government upon that subject; and whether Her Majesty's Government were willing to press for the restitution of that property which had been illegally detained, and for some compensation to Mr. Jeff for the injury he had sustained by that detention?

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

Sir, Her Majesty's Government has been informed of the circumstances to which the hon. Gentleman refers; but I think he has scarcely in the remarks he has made, accurately conveyed the facts. It is true there was a seizure by the Belgian authorities of a case of books belonging to Mr. Jeff, an English subject, I believe, in consequence of a communication between the Belgian police and the commander of the Soho steam packet, in which the case was; but it is not correct to say that the seizure took place on board a British ship, though, had it been so, the ship being in the Belgian waters it would not have affected the case. But it appears the case of books was landed after the communication had taken place between the police and the commander of the Soho, and, on being opened by the authorities, was found to contain a large number of copies of political works—I believe there were 500 copies of a pamphlet which was known to be contraband—a pamphlet entitled, I think, La Vérité des Evenemens du mois de Decembre, 500 of the Moniteur Français, 500 of the Bulletin Français, and several copies of a work complained of as being edited and directed against the French Government, under the false title of Le Belgie Commercial. These were all seized under an old Belgian law of the time of King William, and in the exercise of the powers possessed by the Belgian Government under that law. Since the seizure took place, the Bulletin Français has, it appears, been prosecuted before the Belgian tribunals, and the editor has been acquitted. In consequence of that acquittal, the question naturally arises whether the Belgian Government were entitled, under the law I have referred to, to seize the copies of that newspaper. That question is one of law between Mr. Jeff and the Belgian tribunals; and if he finds he cannot have that relief which is open to any Belgian subject under similar circumstances at the hands of those tribunals, it will then become the duty of the British Government to see that justice is done to a British subject. But now, as far as we know, there is legal relief open to him, and until he has attempted to obtain redress by that means, it is not open to us to make any application to the Belgian Government. The question of compensation must, of course, entirely depend on the previous circumstances.