§ MR. W. HOLMSasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it is 441 true that the stipulations entered into between Great Britain and France, by the Commercial Treaty of 23rd July 1873, with regard to the Duty to be levied on British mineral oil have been virtually set aside and rendered inoperative by the French Law of the 29th December of that year; and that, notwithstanding the repeated representations and remonstrances of Her Majesty's Government, extending over a period of five years, no redress has been afforded by the French Government for what has been characterised by Her Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs as "a violation of Treaty engagements;" and, if this be true, and having regard to the fact that Her Majesty's Government have pointed out to the French Government that the question between the two Governments has no connection with the new General Tariff, what course does Her Majesty's Government intend to take in order to insure the fulfilment by France of the stipulations contained in the Treaty of 23rd July 1873?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERI am sorry to say that the fact is as stated by the hon. Member. By the Treaty of July, 1873, it was stipulated that British mineral oils imported into France should pay a duty of 5 per cent ad valorem, and also a compensatory duty equivalent to any Excise tax charged on French mineral oils. The French Government, however, have fixed this compensatory duty much in excess of its correct amount. This has been proved, and it is admitted by the French Government that such is the case. But in fixing the duty, the French Government appear to have had regard to the scale of duties contemplated by the passing of the new General Tariff Bill. Her Majesty's Government have pointed out to them that the two matters have no connection, and have strongly remonstrated with them on the subject. The British Ambassador, on the 18th of February last, presented a Note to M. Waddington, asking that the attention of the new Minister of Commerce might be called to the subject, as one involving a violation of Treaty engagements, and expressing a hope that the French Government would perform the simple act of justice asked for. No answer to that Note seems at present to be given.