§ 22. Captain Viscount CURZONasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any official representations to the Belgian Government are contemplated by His Majesty's Government relative to the "Australia"-"Nautilus" collision inquiry, in view of the fact that the Court was not constituted in accordance with British practice and experience, nor was the judgment in harmony with similar decisions in this country; and if he will make representations to the Belgian Government with a view to having the decision revised and securing general agreement with regard to the future?
§ Mr. LUNN (Secretary, Department of Overseas Trade)As regards the first part of the question, the Court which dealt with this case, and which, I may say, was presided over by three Judges, was the competent tribunal in Belgium to deal with such matters, and His Majesty's Government are satisfied that there are no grounds for making representations to the Belgian Government regarding the judgment pronounced. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.
§ Viscount CURZONAre we to understand from the hon. Gentleman's answer that His Majesty's Government concur, therefore, in the finding of the Court?
§ Viscount CURZONMay I put the question again? Are we to understand from the hon. Gentleman's answer that His Majesty's Government concur in the finding of this Court?
§ Mr. LUNNI did not say anything regarding whether His Majesty's Government concurred or otherwise. I said His Majesty's Government were not prepared to interfere with the finding which has been pronounced.