§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether a French Consul or Consul General has been appointed at Tunis in lieu of M. Roustan; and, whether M. Roustan is invested with any diplomatic or consular function, or is merely the Minister of the Bey of Tunis; also, whether French Diplomatic and Consular Agents claim jurisdiction over Tunisian subjects resident in Ottoman territory; and whether the Porte and other Governments having Diplomatic and Consular Agents in Turkey concur in such a claim?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE, in reply, said, that the Government had received no official information as to the appointment of a French Consul at Tunis in lieu of M. Roustan or otherwise. Her Majesty's Government had pointed out to the French Government the inconvenience which was likely to arise from the double functions of M. Roustan; and from the manner in which their representations had been received they had reason to believe that a Consul would be appointed, if he was not now appointed. Her Majesty's Government were not informed as to the change of M. Roustan's functions. He had already substantially answered the latter Question, in reply to an hon. Member a few days ago. Papers had been laid before Parliament—Tripoli, No. 1, 1881—showing that the French Consular authorities in Ottoman territory had issued notices calling upon Tunisians to register themselves at the French Consulate. In a Parliamentary Paper recently issued—Tunis, No. 7, 1881, No. 44—would be 1927 found recorded the view taken by the Porte on this matter and other Papers; and the hon. Member would see what passed on the subject of the protection of Tunisians in Egypt, and at Paris between Lord Lyons and M. St. Hilaire. Her Majesty's Government could not undertake to say what view other Governments took on this matter.