§ SIR EDWARD GOURLEY (Sunderland)I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General (1) whether, owing to the transition which has taken place in the motive power of ships of war since the Declaration of Paris from sail to that of coal and liquid fuel, any agreement has been arrived at with the signatories to the Declaration and other Governments owning ships of war regarding the treatment of coal and liquid fuel as contraband of war or otherwise; if contraband, will neutral ships be allowed to supply belligerents at sea; (2) can he further state whether belligerents' ships will be allowed to enter British or other neutral harbours for shelter, repairs, coal, and other stores necessary for navigation and war; and (3) will he inform Parliament the meaning of an effective blockade; does it mean a blockade by ships of war, or, in the absence of these, blockade by submarine mines?
§ THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir R. WEBSTER,) Isle of WightAs far as I know, no agreement has been come to as to whether coal or liquid fuel is contraband of war. If contraband, it would certainly not be lawful for neutral ships to supply belligerents at sea. The rights of belligerent ships to enter British or other neutral harbours will be found stated in the proclamations and notices 809 which will, in accordance with the invariable practice, be issued in terms similar to those which have been published on previous occasions. I regret I am not able to give the hon. Member the information which he asks for in the last paragraph of the Question, as it would involve a dissertation of considerable length, which I should not be justified in inflicting upon the House, beyond stating that to attempt a blockade by submarine mines and without ships would be a completely new departure.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donegal, S.)Is it not the case that Sir A. Cockburn in 1873 declared coal to be contraband of war?
§ [No Reply.]
§ MR. DAVITTI beg to ask Mr. Attorney General (1) whether England expressly refused to allow British coal to be carried to a French fleet lying in the North Sea during the Franco-Prussian War in 1870, as coal is an indispensable part of the fighting equipment of ironclads and other warships; and (2) whether, in the event of Her Majesty's Government not selecting to follow the precedent thus established in respect to fleets near British possessions in the West Indies or Canada, the United States will be justified in intercepting British vessels which may carry coal from British or Colonial ports to Spanish warships?
§ SIR R. WEBSTERThe facts are not exactly as stated in the first paragraph of the hon. Member's Question, On a suggestion being made in 1870 that there was an intention to charter some colliers to serve as storeships to attend the French fleet, instructions were given that inquiries should be made with a view to the detention of any such vessels if an offence against the Foreign Enlistment Act were in contemplation, but no action was found necessary, as there was no evidence that any such intention existed. Her Majesty's Government has no intention of adopting any change of policy in regard to such a matter.
§ MR. PICKERSGILLI beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a reply has been received from the Spanish Government 810 announcing its intention to act upon the principles laid down in the Declaration, of Paris?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.In answer to this Question, and to a similar one of which I have received private notice, I have to say that no statement has yet been received from the Spanish Government with regard to their intention to act upon the principles laid down in the Declaration of Paris.
§ MR. T. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)As the matter is urgent, will the right hon. Gentleman consent to lay on the Table of the House the document containing the adherence of the United States?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYIt is not a document; it is a telegram; and if my hon. Friend will ask me a Question on Monday I shall be prepared, I think, to read it to the House.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREI beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will move the United States and Spain to set forth what articles will be deemed contraband of war by them, irrespective of that laid down by the best writers as inherently contraband in their nature. I may also ask whether there is any existing Treaty between Spain and the United States specifying what articles are contraband of war; and, if so, whether he will lay it on the Table of the House, or otherwise publish it?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYI am not aware of any Treaty such as that to which the hon. Member refers. All the Treaties of which I have any cognisance between Spain and the United States on the subject are, I believe, to be found in the Library. I will consider as to laying them on the Table. The difficulties inherent in any attempt to make a complete enumeration of articles deemed contraband of war, would, I conceive, render any such application to the two Governments absolutely nugatory.
§ LORD C. BERESFORDI wish to ask whether either of those countries, when they have become belligerents, can declare anything they like to be contraband of war?
§ MR. GIBSON BOWLESI wish to know whether the decision as to what is or is not contraband of war rests exclusively with the Prize Courts, and whether their decision is not final?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYI conceive that my hon. Friend has stated the case right. I should be sorry to give offhand a decision on a very difficult and important question of international law, nor do I think it expedient that I should do so.
§ MR. DAVITTI beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been directed, in connection with the impending conflict between Spain and the United States, to a circular issued by Lord Granville in 1870, on the outbreak of the Franco-German war, to the Treasury, Home, Colonial, War, and India Offices, declaring that no ship of war of either belligerent shall be permitted, while in any port, roadstead, or waters subject to the territorial jurisdiction of Her Majesty, to take in any supplies except provisions and such other things as may be requisite for the subsistence of her crew, and except so much coal only as may be sufficient to carry such vessel to the nearest port of her own country, or to some nearer destination; and no coal shall again be supplied to any such ship of war in the same or any other port, roadstead, or waters subject to the territorial jurisdiction of Her Majesty, without special permission, until after the expiration of three months from the time when such coal may have been last supplied to her within British waters as aforesaid; and whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to issue similar directions to the Colonial Office for the guidance of British subjects in ports in the West Indies, Canada, and Nova Scotia?
§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURYFormer precedents will be closely adhered to.