TREATY WITH FRANCE.—QUESTION. (Hansard, 12 March 1860)

§ THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH
wished to direct the attention of Her Majesty's Government to the third Article of the Treaty, respecting which he wished for some explanation. That Article was as follows:— It is understood that the rates of duty mentioned in the preceding Articles are independent of the rates the differential duties in favour of 336 French shipping, with which duties they shall not interfere. Now, literally translated, the French Article would run thus:— It is agreed that the duties fixed by the preceding articles are independent of the differential duties established in favour of French shipping. The differences were that in the English translation the word "understood" was used instead of "agreed," the word "mentioned" instead of "fixed," the word "established" was altogether omitted, and the words at the end, "with which duties they shall not interfere," were added. He could not discover any clear meaning in either the French or English version, and he wished the Government to explain what the meaning of the Article really was. It was important that an Act of Parliament should be most precise in its language, and it was equally important that a Treaty should be expressed in precise terms. Their Lordships had twice had occasion lately with respect to treaties with the United States of America to lament the obscurity of the language used, and he was most anxious that the same thing should not occur with regard to this Treaty. After reading this Article both in French and English he could not understand whether, under the words as they stood in either Article, France retained the power of raising the differential duties, or whether they remained fixed as at present, and liable to be diminished if the Emperor should think fit. If the French Government had the power of raising these differential duties they had the power of making it impossible to export from this country in British bottoms any portion of the various articles which it was the object of the Treaty to enable us to export. If this were an Act of Parliament the words would be very different. Care would have been taken before the word "established" to use the word "now" established, and there would have been a proviso guarding against the possibility of these differential duties being increased. If, on the other hand, it were intended that the French were to have the power of raising these differential duties the words used would have been "which now are or may hereafter be established," so as to give the power of raising the duties. He wished to ask whether the French Government had or had not under this Article the power of raising these differential duties.

§ THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE
said, he agreed that the language used in the 337 French and English versions respectively was not very clear. Not being content with his own interpretation of the Article, he had consulted the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to ascertain whether his opinion coincided with his own, and he thought he was now in a position to state the views of the Government as to the interpretation of the 3rd Article. At the same time, he would admit that neither in the English nor French version were the words very clear and distinct, but of the two he thought the French the more clear, in the sense in which the Government understood this Article. The understanding of Her Majesty's Government was that the French Government would not retain any power of raising these differential duties as against Great Britain. He would not enter into any further discussion, as, no doubt, these and other points would be raised more fully on Thursday, when they would be more conveniently discussed.

§ THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH
considered this matter as of too much importance to be left to the opinion and understanding of Her Majesty's Government, and he earnestly hoped that before their Lordships took this Treaty into consideration on Thursday the Government would communicate with that of France, and then they would be able to lay upon the table, he would not say an additional Article explanatory of the Treaty, but a written declaration on the part of the French Government that under that Article they did not consider themselves to possess the power of raising the differential duties now existing.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL
doubted whether the noble Earl had not misapprehended the facts. There were no differential duties against British shipping engaged in the direct trade between France and England; but there were differential duties on the shipping of other countries, and Dutch or Swedish ships carrying English goods to France were subject to differential duties. This clause was, so far as it went, protective of the interests of British shipping.

§ THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH
desired also to ask the Government whether it was their intention to lay upon the table of their Lordships' House, before Thursday next, a copy of the French tariff at present in force; because it was desirable to know what was the French point of departure as well as our own.

§ THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLE
said, he 338 had made application to the Board of Trade, and was informed that they possessed a copy of the French tariff as it stood on the 1st of January, 1859. The French tariff, as the noble Earl was aware, was one of the longest, most cumbersome, and most intricate of all the Continental tariffs. There was not the smallest objection to lay the document upon the table, but it would be impossible to have it printed so as to be ready for their Lordships by Thursday, or, indeed, for some days later; but he held in his hand an abstract of the French tariff, which had been published, which included all the most essential points of the document, which he would place in the hands of the noble Earl.

§ THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH
said, he was quite satisfied with the statement of the noble Duke.

§ EARL STANHOPE
confirmed, from his own experience, the statement of the noble Duke as to the unwieldy nature of the document comprising the French tariff, and thought his noble Friend would get all the information he desired from the abstract.