HC Deb 10 August 1916 vol 85 cc1200-1
2. Sir J. D. REES

asked, in view of the facts that the Declaration of Paris, 1856, was signed by Lords Clarendon and Cowley without authority from Her late Majesty Queen Victoria, that in has never been ratified, that by the two conditions attached to its first four Articles the signatories undertook not to enter thenceforth into any arrangement not resting at the same time on all those four Articles and that the Declaration should not be obligatory except between Powers which have acceded to it, that the United States have not acceded to it and that it is therefore not binding either between the United States and Great Britain or between the United States and any one of the present belligerent Powers, and that Articles III. and IV. of the Order in Council of 11th March, 1915, are contrary to Article III. of the Declaration, have the Law Officers of the Crown been consulted on the question whether the Declaration is now of any effect or binding force; and, if not, will the Law Officers be consulted on that point.

Lord R. CECIL

His Majesty's Government cannot admit that the terms of the Order in Council referred to are inconsistent with the obligations assumed under the Declaration of Paris. There is, accordingly, no occasion to consult the Law Officers, as suggested. The hon. Member is mistaken in supposing that Her late Majesty Queen Victoria did not give her approval to the participation of this country in the Declaration of Paris. As regards his further point, namely, that the Declaration has not been ratified, I would beg leave to point out that the instrument contains no provision for ratification, and that ratification is not always an essential formality in order to give effect to an international arrangement.

Sir J. D. REES

May I ask whether it is not the case that this Declaration was never before, her late Majesty Queen Victoria in its completed form, and also whether it is not the case that the Prize Courts have frequently condemned goods on the sole ground that they are enemy property?

Lord R. CECIL

As to the latter question, I think my hon. Friend is in error, but as to the first my recollection of the document is that her late Majesty gave a distinct authority to the representatives of this country to conclude the arrangement that was afterwards embodied in the Declaration.