§ 2. Mr. HEWINSasked the Secretary for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that the Colombian amendment to the Hague 619 Mines Convention, which amendment forbade the employment of submarine mines except for the protection of a belligerent coast, was in the Third Commission, which settled the Convention, supported by sixteen votes against fifteen negative votes; can he explain why it was that this amendment was nevertheless rejected; why the British delegate subsequently voted for the Convention, which he described as imposing no restriction whatever on a belligerent as to placing anchored mines wherever he pleases; and whether His Majesty's Government were aware of this amendment when they advised His Majesty the King to ratify it?
§ Sir E. GREYThe Colombian amendment was supported by the British delegate. The Austro-Hungarian and German delegates objected on the ground of the difficulty of distinguishing between attack and defence, and on a division sixteen States voted for and fifteen against the amendment, six abstained, and seven were absent. As the majority was not absolute, the amendment failed. The attitude of the British delegates will be found described in the declaration made by Sir Ernest Satow at the 8th Plenary Meeting of the Conference, for which I would refer the hon. Member to Parliamentary Paper, Miscellaneous No. 4, 1908 (Cd. 4081), pages 54 and 55. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.