§ SIR C. W. DILKE (Gloucester, Forest of Dean)I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies why so much delay occurred in presenting the Further Correspondence respecting the Newfoundland Fisheries, repeatedly asked for in both Houses of Parliament, seeing that the last Despatch, and that a short one, contained in the volume is dated 23rd May last; whether he is rightly reported in The Times and other papers as having said, in reply to a question put to him on Friday last, that the action taken by the Commander of H.M.S. Pelican in preventing the inhabitants of St. George's Bay selling herrings except to the French, and in fixing the price of 1344 herrings, was "under a discretion conferred by Treaty"; if so, whether the Treaty of Utrecht was intended, and, in that case, which of its words; and how a Treaty could confer any such powers on any person in a self-governing Colony possessing representative and responsible institutions?
§ THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. S. BUXTON, Tower Hamlets, Poplar)In reply to the first part of the question, the presentation of the Papers appears to have been promised by Lord Ripon on June 29. They were taken in hand at once, and went to the printer on July 14. A month later—August 17—they were on the Table of this House. The right hon. Gentleman is, doubtless, aware that the Papers would receive careful examination by the Foreign Office as well as the Colonial Office, and that communication with the French Government would be necessary, so that there has been no exceptional delay. In regard to the second part of the question, I must have been misreported, for I did not refer to the Treaty, but stated that the Commander in question was acting in his discretion in issuing the order in question, and, as he believed, and as it proved, in the interests of the inhabitants of the district.
§ SIR C. W. DILKEIn regard to the first paragraph, may I ask my hon. Friend if he is aware that before the promise of the Papers in the House of Lords he stated that they could not be presented in this House with due attention to the demands of the Public Service? That is the point on which I wish to press him.
§ MR. S. BUXTONIn reply to a question put by my right hon. Friend, I did state it was premature to present the Papers because they were not complete. They were promised on the 29th June in the House of Lords. As much expedition as possible has been observed. The last Paper was dated the 23rd May, and we were not at all sure, and rather expected, indeed, a reply to it.
§ MR. A. C. MORTONWhat does the hon. Gentleman mean by the "discretion" of this officer in fixing the price of herrings?
§ MR. S. BUXTONThe position is this. Under the Treaty, or rather under the Declaration which accompanied the 1345 Versailles Treaty, the French were allowed an unrestricted right of catching their own bait. The Commander in this particular case came to an arrangement with the French that instead of exercising this undoubted right the inhabitants themselves should catch the bait and sell it to them. He believed that to be in the interests of the inhabitants, and as far as the Government knew it had given satisfaction.
§ SIR C. W. DILKEBut was not the right a concurrent right?
§ MR. A. C. MORTONWhat discretion had the Commander to fix the price of herrings?
§ MR. S. BUXTONAs I understand it he was acting—or believed he was acting—in conformity with the discretion conferred upon him by the English Government and by the Admiralty in regard to this matter, and in order to avoid all difficulty between the French and the Newfoundland fishermen?
§ MR. A. C. MORTONWill the hon. Gentleman be good enough to give orders to this officer not to take upon himself any such discretion as to fixing the price of articles of food?
§ MR. S. BUXTONThe Commander is not under the control of the Colonial Office.
§ MR. WOLFF (Belfast, E.)Could the officer prevent the Newfoundlanders from catching herrings if he wished?
§ MR. S. BUXTONOnly so far as to prevent them interfering with the right of the French. He believed he was acting in the interests of the inhabitants themselves, and that it would be more to their advantage to catch the bait and sell it to the French than for the French to catch it.
§ MR. WOLFFThe officer may have believed it was in the interests of the inhabitants, but did the latter think it was in their interest?
§ MR. S. BUXTONAs far as I can learn, the action of this Commander has given great satisfaction to the inhabitants of the district. We have had no complaints whatever, and we think it was of great advantage. At all events, it avoided all dispute between the inhabitants and the French.