MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)To ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs can he explain the inconsistencies in the translation of the Sugar Convention of Brussels, exemplified in the use of one and the same English word as a translation of two different French words (as in Article I.), and of 743 three different English words as a translation (as in Articles VI. and VII.) of one and the same French word; and can he explain what controlling books are; who is responsible for the translation; whether the French or the English is the binding text of the Convention, and particularly which is the binding text of Article X.; whether the French text—viz., "dans le cas ou aucune des Hautes parties contractantes n'aurait notifie," or the English version—viz., "in the case of any of the high contracting parties not having notified"; and whether, in case it is the French text that is binding, the English translation thereof will be reconsidered and amended.
(Answered by Lord Cranborne.) The apparent inconsistencies to which my hon. friend refers do not affect the general accuracy of the translation, and it is this which really signifies. If my hon. friend will explain to me in private his reasons for considering that in Articles I. VI. and VII. the French text (which is binding) has not been adequately reproduced, I shall be glad to consider his criticisms. The translation of the passage referred to in Article X. is, I am sorry to say, incorrect. The whole translation (which was made under great pressure in order that no time might be lost in presenting the Paper) will be carefully revised for reissue in the Treaty Series. The Secretary of State is constitutionally responsible for all papers presented to Parliament on behalf of the Foreign Office. The controlling books are, I understand, records of the operations carried out in bond under Article II. maintained for the purpose of facilitating inspection. The technical term would appear to be "check registers."