§ SIR C. W. DILKEI beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, with reference to statements implying that, by her recognition of a protectorate of France over Madagascar taken in connection with the Brussels Act, Great Britain has lost all power of search of Malagasy or Arab vessels suspected of being engaged in the Slave Trade in the territorial waters of Madagascar and of dealing with such vessels and their crews as though engaged in piratical undertakings, and that the instructions framed by the late Government to naval officers inform them that they have now no power to search vessels in the territorial waters of Madagascar, it is not the case that the instructions of 1892 are those referred to; whether the instructions for the guidance of the Captains and Commanding Officers of Her Majesty's ships of war employed in the suppression of the Slave Trade issued in 1892 state, in regard to the territorial waters of Madagascar, which are included in the Slave-Trade Maritime-Zone defined by the Brussels Act, that the provisions of the Brussels Act and of all pre-existing Treaties and Conventions for the suppression of the Slave Trade remain in force in spite of the Anglo-French agreement about Madagascar; whether this statement by the Admiralty is correct; whether the abstention, in practice, at the direction of the Admiralty, of British officers from acting on the provisions of the Brussels Act and of treaties in the territorial waters of 1367 Madagascar, is a voluntary abstention based on a suggestion by the Foreign Office, rather than a Treaty obligation; and why, under these circumstances, Admiral Kennedy should have been allowed to pay compensation to the owners of dhows seized by Her Majesty's gunboat Redbreast before these instructions were received?
§ SIR E. GREYIf the question refers to an answer given by me last February, it is the case that the instructions mentioned are those of 1892. These instructions refer to the Treaty engagements of Madagascar as still subsisting; but they also direct officers to act in conformity with the Brussels Act, Article XCVI. of which repeals all Treaty stipulations which are inconsistent with it. As regards territorial waters of Protectorates, the Act is the supreme authority in respect of the slave trade. The ground of abstention, therefore, is that, according to the Brussels Act, protecting Powers are instructed with the execution of the Act in the territories under their protection, and, consequently, in territorial waters. Admiral Kennedy, as I have previously stated, paid a small sum out of his own pocket spontaneously to men whose dhows he considered to have been irregularly boarded, and in doing so exercised a discretion with which the Government do not intend to interfere. I may add that the dhows in question were under French colours.
MR. J. A. PEASEMay I ask whether Her Majesty's Navy has a right to search vessels carrying the French flag in case there is a suspicion that the vessel is engaged in the Slave Trade?
§ SIR E. GREYWe have no right to search vessels under the French flag outside territorial waters.