§ Mr. BUTCHERasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in how many cases, if any, in the year 1885 France exercised the alleged right of treating rice as absolute contraband of war; in how many cases, if any, in that year ships of war belonging to the Government of France captured and seized neutral vessels carrying rice to Chinese ports north of Canton; and whether any of such cases were adjudicated upon in a prize court, and with what result?
The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. McKinnon Wood)Parliamentary Paper, France No. 1, 1885, C. 4359, includes the correspondence which took place at the time between the British and French Governments respecting the rights of neutrals, and was laid in 1885. At the request of the right hon. Member for East Worcestershire, and for the convenience of Members, I propose to lay a paper containing the correspondence on the special point referred to by the hon. and learned Member. I do not think that any case arose in the French Courts, for during the remainder of the war no seizure appears to have been made. It is stated by Mr. Hall in his book on International Law (6th edition, page 659), that shipments of rice appear to have been entirely stopped by fear of capture. The only case of a British ship reported to the Foreign Office was that of the "Amoy," whose owners appear to have postponed the vessel's departure from Shanghai in order to discharge the 5,000 bags of rice which she had shipped. It seems, therefore, that no seizures were made because the threat stopped shipments.
§ Mr. BUTCHERMay I ask whether there is any case in the last ten years in which a neutral ship carrying food has been dealt with in a Prize Court on the ground that the food was absolute contraband of war?
Mr. McKINNON WOODIf the hon. Member will give me notice of the question I shall be glad to give him information.
§ Mr. BUTCHERWhat are the grounds of Mr. Hall's statement to which he has referred?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI cannot tell you what the grounds of his statement are. Mr. Hall is a reputable writer and I suppose he was informed as to the facts.
§ Mr. BUTCHERrose——
§ Mr. SPEAKERA question on international law had better be placed upon the Paper.