MR. CURZON (Lancashire, Southport)I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the blockade instituted by the French on the coast of 658 Siam is a pacific blockade, or is it an act of war and carries the consequences of such; whether it applies to the ships of all neutral States, including Great Britain; whether in that case any arrangement can be made for the transport of mails to Bangkok; and whether he is now in a position to make any statement concerning the progress of negotiations at Paris?
§ SIR W. PEARCEIs it not the fact that the phrase "pacific blockade" is a contradiction in terms?
§ * SIR E. GREYI think the hon. Member will find that the phrase is discussed by various writers on International Law, though it is one which requires much consideration. In answer to the question, I have to say that Her Majesty's Government have been informed by the British Ambassador at Paris that no information is as yet available as to the precise date on which the blockade will be enforced, or as to its geographical extension. Assurances have been given by the French Government that sufficient time will, according to custom, be afforded for the departure of such ships as might have loaded their cargoes previous to the date of the enforcement of the blockade, and that the earliest possible information on all these points will be conveyed to Her Majesty's Government. In answering the last paragraph, I have to ask for the indulgence of the House while I make a rather lengthy statement. Her Majesty's Government are not in a position to make a full statement about Siamese affairs to-day. This is not owing to any reluctance to take the House into its confidence, but from the fact that M. Develle has been unable from various causes to see Lord Dufferin since their first interview on Saturday until yesterday, and we await a fuller Report of that interview. It may be well, however, once more to define the attitude of Her Majesty's Government in this question. From the very first if has refused in any way to intervene in the dispute between France and Siam. On the merits of that quarrel Her Majesty's Government do not feel called upon to pronounce an opinion. They have, therefore, limited themselves to providing for the safety of the British lives and interests at Bangkok, and it is to be regretted that some should appear to suspect in that provision—none too large for the security of life and 659 property in an Oriental population of 350,000 souls—an encouragement to the Siamese to persevere in a hopeless resistance. In tins connection it is, I think, unnecessary to state in this House, that from the commencement of this Siamese difficulty we have scrupulously avoided giving any advice to the Siamese Government, beyond, when they have asked for it, urging them to come to terms as quickly as possible with their powerful neighbour. But the events now passing in Siam are by no means indifferent to Her Majesty's Government. We have, in the first place, great commercial interests in that country, and British shipping constitutes 87 per cent, of the whole shipping in Bangkok in point of tonnage, and 93 in point of value. For this reason we regret that a blockade should be deemed to be necessary by the French Authorities, and it might raise some difficult questions of International Law; but it is not yet formally notified, and perhaps it is not too much to hope that the necessity for it may yet be averted. Moreover, the territorial arrangements consequent upon this dispute involves matters of British concern. Her Majesty's Government are glad to believe that the French Government are not less alive than themselves to the value of Siamese independence, and that they regard it as a matter of moment both to France and to ourselves that we should nowhere have conterminous frontiers in the Indo-Chinese Peninsular, for such a frontier would involve both States in great military expenditure and constant liability to panic. Her Majesty's Government can well understand the anxiety of the House for Papers on this subject, and they will take an early opportunity of gratifying that wish, by laying Papers on the Table which will embrace the course of negotiations on this subject for the last three years.
MR. CURZONMay I ask a further question with reference to the question I have put? In reply to the first portion of the question, the Under Secretary told the House that he could give no information, and that the Government had no information as to the time or extent of the blockade. My question, which is a very important one affecting commercial interests, is as to the character of the blockade. I wish to know whether the 660 hon. Baronet understands it to be a fact that, although it is, I believe, a recognised principle of International Law that a pacific blockade does not apply to ships flying the flag of another Power, France is, in spite of that, on the verge of establishing a blockade which would have that effect, and which would not so much injure Siam as British trade and shipping. I have just come from the City, and I find great anxiety exists there in commercial circles about this question. Our commercial interests with Siam are at a standstill.
§ * SIR E. GREYThe information I have given in answer to the question is the latest information received by the Foreign Office by telegraph and in answer to inquiries made of the French Government as to the particular character they intended to attach to the blockade. So far we have received no formal notice of the blockade, and the French Authorities have not defined what the character of that blockade will be.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR (Manchester, E.)We are anxious not to embarrass Her Majesty's Government while dealing with a matter of so much difficulty and delicacy; but I hope the hon. Baronet will take the first opportunity of giving us information on the points raised by my hon. Friend as soon as the Foreign Office is acquainted from Paris with the intentions of the French Government in respect of this blockade, and also of other matters in Siam.
§ * SIR E. GREYThe importance of all this has been brought before the French Government, and Her Majesty's Government have been assured that the French Government will give us the earliest information in their power.
* MR. GIBSON BOWLESAs to the possibility of a pacific blockade, I wish to know whether it is not the fact that, although certain unauthorised persons in an unauthorised conference have suggested its possibility, every one of the text writers on the Law of Nations does not lay it down that a blockade is a procedure which can only be based on and arise from a state of war, and whether it is not so laid down by, among others, Grotius, Vattel, Puffendorff, Chancellor Kent, Wheaton, Story, Ortolan, and even Hautefeuille?
§ "SIR E. GREYI cannot say that my researches in the text-books of Inter- 661 national Law have been so extensive as those of the hon. Member; but, as far as they have gone, I observe that there is some difference in the various text-books on this particular question, and where the International text-books differ I do not feel authorised to pronounce any decision.
MR. GIBSON BOWLESWill the hon. Baronet name one text writer who admits the possibility of a pacific blockade?
§ [No answer was given.]
§ SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT (Sheffield, Ecclesall)I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty what British men-of-war are at present in, or are on their way to, Siamese waters—namely, before Bangkok and the mouth of the Menam?
SIR U. KAY-SHUTTLEWORTHThe Swift and the Linnet are at Bangkok. The Pallas is off the bar of the Menam. The Admiralty have no information of the movements of any other ships in or to Siamese waters.