§ 10. Mr. Shinwellasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can now state the approximate number of Germans and Italians serving with the forces of General Franco in Spain?
§ Mr. EdenI would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my Noble 1401 Friend on l0th February to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for South Paddington (Vice-Admiral Taylor).
§ Mr. ShinwellAre we to understand that there is no fresh information since l0th February? Cannot the right hon. Gentleman bring us up to date in this matter?
§ Mr. EdenMy Noble Friend very wisely declined to give any estimate for the accuracy of which he could not vouch.
§ Mr. ShinwellIs it not possible for the right hon. Gentleman to give an approximate figure? Is there no information in the possession of the Foreign Office?
§ Mr. EdenThis matter has been fully dealt with, and my Noble Friend explained that he could not give figures which he could not vouch as being accurate. That seems to me very wise.
§ 12. Mr. Sandysasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the fact that His Majesty's Government have protested against the laying of mines off the coast of Spain outside the three-mile limit and have not protested against similar action within that limit indicates any modification of the principle that minelaying, except by recognised belligerents, is a breach of international law, irrespective of whether the mines are laid inside or outside territorial waters?
§ Mr. EdenMy hon. Friend will appreciate that there is a distinction between minelaying on the high seas and minelaying in Spanish territorial waters, which come within the territorial jurisdiction of Spain.
§ Mr. SandysIs it not a fact that mine-laying in time of peace is not permissible even by a recognised authority?
§ Mr. EdenMy hon. Friend will observe that I refrained from necessarily accepting the assumption in the last part of his question.
§ 13. Mr. Sandysasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the extension of the Spanish civil war to the high seas, His Majesty's Government agree upon the advisability, in accordance with established precedent of recognising a state of war and of granting belligerent rights to the combatants; 1402 and, if so, in view of the advantage of simultaneous recognition by the principal European Powers, whether His Majesty's Government have represented to other Governments the desirability of adopting this course?
§ Mr. EdenThe policy of His Majesty's Government in this matter was clearly laid down in the reply which I gave on 19th April to a question put by my hon. Friend the Member for South Kensington (Sir W. Davison) and to supplementary questions put on the same occasion, to which I have nothing to add.
§ Mr. SandysIn view of the readiness which my right hon. Friend has always shown to take the House into his confidence, will he not consider the possibility of taking an early opportunity of stating the reasons which have decided His Majesty's Government, contrary to almost all precedents, not to grant belligerent rights?
§ Mr. EdenI think my hon. Friend will appreciate that the granting of belligerent rights would not affect, perhaps, as much as he thinks the reference which occurs in the question. It would solve one set of problems, but I am afraid it would create another.
§ Mr. SandysMay we expect an early statement?
§ 14. Mr. Thurtleasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is in a position to make a statement regarding the negotiations with Germany and Italy on the subject of a resumption by these countries of their co-operation in the carrying out of the non-intervention scheme in connection with the civil war in Spain?
§ Mr. EdenNegotiations between the Powers to whom was entrusted the duty of exercising naval patrol under the international scheme of observation are being pursued. I hope to be able to make a further statement on this subject in the course of the next few days.
§ Mr. ThurtleAre these negotiations making satisfactory progress?
§ 34. Mr. A. Hendersonasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is now in a position to make a statement with regard to the recent explosion on His Majesty's ship "Hunter"?
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty (Mr. Shakespeare)Yes, Sir. The report of the court of inquiry has now been received and considered in the Admiralty. This report confirms the statement previously made by the Noble Lord, my predecessor, to the effect that the damage was caused by a mine. Having regard to the nature of the damage and other circumstances there is a high degree of probability that the mine was moored. In the light of this information a suitable protest is being made to the Spanish insurgent authorities.
§ Mr. ShakespeareI understand about 100 fathoms.
§ Mr. A. HendersonWill the hon. Gentleman acquaint the House with the terms of the protest?
§ Mr. ShakespeareI think, perhaps, I shall satisfy the hon. Gentleman if I state that the protest places on record the view of His Majesty's Government that mine-laying on the high seas cannot be recognised as legitimate in the circumstances of the present conflict in Spain.
§ Mr. BellengerWill any attempt be made to obtain some compensation for the damage caused by this wanton act?
§ Mr. ShakespeareThat question does not arise at this stage.
§ Mr. ShinwellIf it is illegitimate to indulge in this kind of proceeding, why do not the Government demand compensation?
§ Mr. ShakespeareThat is another question.
§ 35. Mr. Noel-Bakerasked the First Lord of the Admiralty on how many occasions British and French warships have entered ports under the control of the Spanish Government since the entry into force of the system of control?
§ Mr. ShakespeareBetween the entry into force of the system of control and 3rd June, British ships have entered ports under the control of the Spanish Government on 33 occasions. According to the information in my possession, the corresponding figure for the French Navy is 21.