§ LORD ROBERT MONTAGUasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether blockade is not an act of a belligerent directed against neutrals (namely, to prevent neutrals trading with the other belligerent); whether it is not the right of one belligerent against the other belligerent, to seize his ships on the sea; and, whether the Despatch of May 16 does not merely assert that, as concerns the Suez Canal, England will not permit the exercise of those belligerent rights against neutrals, but says nothing of the acts of one belligerent against the other (excepting in the Canal itself)?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERWith reference to the first part of the Question of the noble Lord, I would observe that of course blockade is an act intended to prevent neutrals trading with the other belligerent; but whether it can be said that it is exclusively directed against neutrals is another question, because, of course, if you prevent trading between a neutral and the other belligerent, you are directing your action against both parties—the neutral and the other belligerent also. With regard to the second part of the Question, it is undoubtedly the right of one belligerent, as against the other belligerent, to seize his ships on the sea. With regard to the third part of the Question, I would ask my noble Friend to excuse me giving any more categorical answer to it than I gave yesterday. I think it is, as my noble Friend will see, inexpedient to be putting isolated questions and receiving isolated answers; and I would make the same observation, if he will allow me, to the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Whalley), who has upon the Paper a Question addressed to the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs upon a cognate subject. I think it would be undesirable that we should have these Questions put at the present moment, and I hope that the House will excuse us for declining to answer them.
§ MR. WHALLEY, whose Notice was as follows:—
To ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, with reference to the claim asserted to a right of way through Turkish Territory, Whether they will enter into negotiations 1489 on the proposals of the late Emperor of Russia in 1853 that (inter alia) 'England should take possession of Egypt and Candia as important for communication with India,'said:—I most readily concur with the suggestion of the right hon. Gentleman, but perhaps he will allow me to offer a short explanation. If a passage which I inserted in the Question before it was placed upon the Paper had been printed, perhaps it would have altered the view of the right hon. Gentleman. It will not take one moment to read. It is this — "That a proposal"—["Order, order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERsaid, the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer having stated that he would not answer Questions of this sort, it would be useless for the hon. Gentleman to enter into an explanation of it.