§ 9. Mr. HORE-BELISHAasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his Department is negotiating with other Powers with a view to reaching an agreement that the plea of diplomatic immunity be no longer relied on in the case of defendant shipping companies subsidised by their Governments?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERThe negotiations which are at present proceeding on the question of the immunity of shipping from process of law are those connected with the draft International Convention of 1926 for the unification of certain rules relating to the immunity of State-owned vessels. This draft Convention applies to ships owned or operated by States and does not apply to ships which are merely subsidised.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHACan the right hon. Gentleman say whether his attention has been called to the fact that the United States Shipping Line are taking this plea and will he say whether they have any contracts for carrying mails or 1139 any other arrangements with the Government?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERAs to what contracts there are for carrying mails, I should not like to answer that question without notice. I think it should be addressed to the Postmaster-General. Obviously, I cannot comment on a case that is sub judice, but I am not at all sure that the hon. Member is right in saying that the defence of immunity is in fact being taken in this case.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYIs the right hon. Gentleman watching this matter closely from the point of view of British merchants and commercial houses?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERYes, certainly. That is why I was so anxious to get a convention which would abolish immunity of State shipping—a universal convention which would abolish that immunity in all cases where the State is the owner of ships. I think the Convention does not deal with mere questions of subsidy, but it is generally assumed by the International lawyers who are engaged upon it that they would not be covered.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHAWill the right hon. Gentleman call for papers in the case of Russell v. The United States Shipping Line and see what observations the Master made about the propriety?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERThe powers entrusted to me are fairly extensive, but I am not sure that they extend to the right to call for papers in such a case as this.
§ Sir A. SHIRLEY BENNCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the attention of the American Government has been drawn to the position taken up by the United States Shipping Company, because, from what I know of America, it is perfectly certain that the common-sense there would prevent them from taking up so absurd a line as that taken up by the shipping line.
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERI think it would be well to await delivery of the pleadings in this case before we criticise the action of the company.