§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLESasked, in view of the intention of His Majesty's Government not to submit the Declaration of London, 1909, to Parliament before ratifying it, was it the intention of His Majesty's Government to ratify it by a pure act of prerogative without the assent of Parliament; and, if so, was he aware that in the case of Baird and Walker the 958 Judicial Committee of the Privy Council decided in 1892 that the fact of the Crown having made a treaty by prerogative alone, without any Act of Parliament to carry it into effect, gave the Crown no right to coerce the subject into obedience to the conditions of such a treaty; and, inasmuch as the Declaration in question abandoned maritime rights hitherto held essential to the defence of the country, did His Majesty's Government propose to advise the Crown to exercise the prerogative by ordering naval officers to abstain from the exercise of those rights, without having received any authority from Parliament to order such abstention?
§ Sir E. GREYI stated during the last Parliament that an opportunity would be afforded for this House to discuss the Declaration of London before it is ratified. The question whether any steps are required to render the Declaration binding on British prize courts is still under the consideration of His Majesty's Government, and I am not in a position to make any statement on the subject at present.
§ Mr. GIBSON BOWLESMay I take it that the Government do not propose to give the advice in the circumstances to which the question refers in the last four lines?
§ Sir E. GREYWe could not give that advice before the Declaration is ratified, and I have already promised that before it is ratified the House will have an opportunity of discussing it.