Lords Sitting of 13 May 1902

Preamble
Handley Carr Glyn, Lord Bishop of Durham, was (in the usual manner) introduced.
The Viscount Melville took the Oath.

PRIVATE BILL BUSINESS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificates from the Examiners that the further Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with :—
Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway (Steam Vessels).
Hull, Barnsley, and West Riding Junction Railway and Dock (South Yorkshire Extension Lines).
Preston Corporation.
And also the Certificates that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with :
Education Board Provisional Orders Confirmation (Barnes, &c.) [H.L.]
Education Board Provisional Order Confirmation (Swansea United District) (No. 2) [H.L.]
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

STANDING ORDERS COMMITTEE.
Report from, That the Standing Orders not complied with in respect of the petition for a Bill by the Barrow Hæmatite Steel Company, Limited, ought to be dispensed with, and leave given to introduce the Bill.
That the further Standing Orders not complied with in respect of the Nottingham and Retford Railway Bill ought to be dispensed with and the Bill allowed to proceed, subject to the consent of the Duke of Newcastle being proved before the Committee on the Bill.
Read, and agreed to.

HASTINGS HARBOUR DISTRICT RAILWAY (EXTENSION OF TIME) BILL [H.L.]
Reported, with an Amendment.
FAREHAM GAS BILL,
  MANCHESTER AND LIVERPOOL ELECTRIC EXPRESS RAILWAY BILL.
  The King's consent signified; and Bills reported, without Amendment.
  OMAGH URBAN DISTRICT GAS BILL, LIVERPOOL CATHEDRAL BILL [H.L.], IMPERIAL INSTITUTE BILL [H.L.]
  Reported, with Amendments.
  SOUTHPORT AND LYTHAM TRAM-ROAD BILL, BIRKENHEAD CORPORATION BILL, BRYNMAWR AND WESTERN VALLEYS RAILWAY (VESTING) BILL, CALEDONIAN RAILWAY BILL, CAVEHILL AND WHITEWELL TRAMWAYS BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed; the Committees to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
  DARTFORD IMPROVEMENT BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed.
  NORTH BRITISH RAILWAY (GENERAL POWERS) BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed; the Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
  NORTH BRITISH RAILWAY (STEAM VESSELS) BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed.
  SALFORD CORPORATION BILL.
  Read 2a and committed; the Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
  GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY BILL.
  Read 3a, and passed.
  GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY BILL.
    SOUTH-EASTERN AND LONDON, CHATHAM, AND DOVER RAILWAYS BILL. [H.L.]
    Read 3a and passed, and sent to the Commons.
    ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
    Brought from the Commons.
    DUBLIN PORTS AND DOCKS BOARD BILL, DUBLIN, WICKLOW, AND WEXFORD RAILAVAY BILL, GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY (No. 1) BILL, MIDLAND RAILWAY (STEAM VESSELS) BILL, WEST GLOUCESTERSHIRE WATER BILL, WHITECHAPEL AND BOW RAILWAY BILL.
    Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
    NORTH WARWICKSHIRE WATER BILL.
    Returned from the Commons with the Amendments agreed to.
    WREXHAM DISTRICT TRAMWAYS BILL [H.L.]
    Reported from the Select Committee, with Amendments.
  CHARING CROSS, HAMMERSMITH, AND DISTRICT ELECTRIC RAILWAY (No. 1) BILL [H.L.],
    CHARING CROSS, HAMMERSMITH, AND DISTRICT ELECTRIC RAILWAY (No. 2) BILL [H.L.]
    Report from the Select Committee, That it is not expedient to proceed further with the Bills; read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
    DOVER HARBOUR BILL [H.L.],
    Report from the Select Committee, That the Committee had not proceeded with the consideration of the Bill, the opposition thereto having been withdrawn; read, and ordered to He on the Table. The orders made on the 13th of February and 25th of April last discharged, and Bill committed.
    LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1) BILL.
    House in Committee (according to order. Bill reported without Amendment. Standing Committee negatived; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday next.
    ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 4) BILL.
    Read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners. (No. 73.)
  RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
    LAND REGISTRY (LAND TRANSFER ACTS, 1875–1897).
    Report of the Registrar of the Land Registry on the first three years (1899, 1900, 1901) of the work of constructing a general register of title for the County of London.
    ARMY (MEDICAL DEPARTMENT).
    Report for the year 1900.
    FACTORY AND WORKSHOP.
    Annual Report of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops, for the year 1901; Part I. Reports.
    Annual Statement of Navigation and Shipping of the United Kingdom, for the year 1901.

    EXPLOSIVES (ACCIDENT AT THE BLENHEIM ENGINEERING COMPANY'S FACTORY, GREENWICH MARSHES).
    Report to the right hon. the Secretary of State for the Home Department by Captain J. H. Thomson, His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Explosives, on the circumstances attending an accident which occurred in the drying house for coloured stars at the factory of the Blenheim Engineering Company, Limited, at Tunnel Lane, Greenwich Marshes, on the 25th March, 1902.
    Presented [by command]; and ordered to lie on the Table.

    COUNTY COURTS (IRELAND) BILL H.L.],
    Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

    CHARGES AGAINST THE POLICE.
    EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, I rise to call attention to a charge of disorderly conduct against Arthur Smith, heard at Bow-street on 11th April; and to ask His Majesty's Government what steps have been taken to deal with the serious charge made against Police Constable Timms, 316 D, during the hearing of that case. It appears, from the report of the case in the St. Pancras Chronicle of April 19th, that the man Smith was charged with disorderly conduct by
    6
    Police Constable Timms, who alleged that I he pushed ladies and gentlemen about at Gower-street station, and generally acted the part of a Hooligan. In the course of the defence the tables were turned by the evidence, and it appeared that Smith was the aggrieved and assaulted party. Smith himself went into the witness box, and the evidence he gave was to the effect that he was about to enter a public convenience in Gower Place, when he saw the policeman inside it drinking beer from a glass. He thereupon laughed, and drew a friend's attention to the constable, who then dropped the glass and came out and knocked him about, making the remark that he would teach him to spy upon the force. He was then taken to the station. At the station he told the inspector the facts, but the inspector refused to listen to them. A young man named Smythe was called and gave evidence, according to the report, with manifest reluctance. He said he would not have given evidence if the solicitor for the defence had not served him with a subpoena. This witness admitted that he had taken the beer to the constable in the convenience at the time mentioned on the night in question. In answer to the magistrate, he said that he and other costermongers were compelled to treat the police, or otherwise it was a case of "Move on" with them, and they would make things nasty. Mr. Timewell, of Gower Street, deposed that on hearing repeated police whistles and seeing people running in the direction of Gower Place, he went out to ascertain what was the matter. He found the defendant held by a policeman against the wall, bleeding from the nose and mouth, saying "he never intended to give the policeman away." Mr. Fenwick, the magistrate, was not satisfied with the evidence, and expressed a wish to see the barman who supplied the beer to Smythe. The barman was called. He admitted that he supplied Smythe with beer in a glass on the night in question, but did not know what became of the glass, which was similar to the broken one produced. The magistrate dismissed the summons, the evidence against the prisoner being most unsatisfactory. The charges were

    7
    not in any sense proved, but they were made on oath during the hearing of the case, and they amount to an accusation that the constable, having first broken the regulations by drinking beer while on duty, then attempted to cover this breach by knocking about and ultimately taking into custody a member of the public who had detected and might have reported him. The case rests merely on statements made by the witnesses, but they had the effect of satisfying the magistrate that the charge made by the constable could not be substantiated. The statement was also made that costermongers were obliged to treat the police in this way. I am informed that when the witness who saw the occurrence offered to give evidence in favour of the prisoner, he was told by the inspector that if he did not go out of the station he (the inspector) would "hit him in the mouth." This discloses a very serious and regrettable state of things, and I wish to ask the Government whether any investigation is being made into the matter. I am informed that the man Smythe, who gave evidence that he had taken the beer to the constable, has disappeared from the place and cannot be found. The suggestion is that there is a conspiracy on the part of the police to hush this matter up. I have to ask that we may have some assurance that these serious charges will be fully and impartially investigated.
    LORD BELPER: My Lords, in answer to the Question which the noble Earl has put on the Paper, I have to say that the Home Secretary has made full inquiry, and has received a report from the magistrate who heard the case. I think the House will agree that it would not be desirable that I should follow the noble Lord into the details of the evidence, for it is obvious that this House is not the proper place in which to revise decisions of police magistrates, especially when there is not the slightest suggestion that there has not been a fair hearing. The Home Secretary has received a report from the magistrate who heard the case, and also the notes of the evidence, which he has fully considered. It appears that the magistrate gave a very long and careful hearing to the different witnesses who were called, and that, after
    8
    hearing everything that could be said on both sides, he came to the conclusion that the testimony was of such a conflicting character, and many of the facts were in such doubt, that he was not justified in binding over the defendant to be of good behaviour. He consequently discharged him. When the defendant was discharged, his counsel immediately applied for a summons against the constable for assault; but the magistrate, for the same reasons as those which led to his previous decision, held that it would not be fair to allow proceedings against the constable. It was then intimated that an endeavour would be made to produce additional evidence, and the magistrate expressed himself perfectly ready to hear any further evidence that might be forthcoming, and carefully consider it. Those are the circumstances of this case, and, without entering at all into the details, I may say that the Home Secretary entirely supports the decision of the Commissioner of Police to follow the same course as the magistrate, and to take no further action unless additional evidence is produced. Of course, if further evidence is produced, then he will have to reconsider the whole case. I do not think I need say anything further except to strongly repudiate the suggestion made by the noble Earl that the police have taken some part in an attempt to hush up the case and conceal, evidence.
    EARL RUSSELL: Do I understand that no inquiry will be made by the Commissioner of Police into the general charge of drinking on the part of the police while on duty? I mean a disciplinary inquiry.
    LORD BELPER: I have already stated that the Commissioner of Police, following the same course as the magistrate, does not consider there is sufficient evidence at present to justify the holding of an inquiry.

    CELLULOID.
    LORD SALTOUN: My Lords, I rise to ask His Majesty's Government, in view of the fact that celluloid is a highly inflammable and sometimes explosive substance, manufactured chiefly from gun-cotton, and that it is used freely in

    9
    articles of attire, such as combs and collars, if they will cause such modification to be used in its manufacture, or place such regulations and restrictions upon its sale, as will render impossible the recurrence of the many serious burning accidents which have already resulted from the unrestricted sale of this article. I may mention that a member of my family suffered severely from the ignition of a comb of this material while she was sitting at a distance of about 4ft. from an ordinary drawing-room fire. Her head was enveloped in flames, and she suffered a severe scalp wound and the destruction of a portion of her hair. This, I think, will explain the interest I take in the matter, and the anxiety which I feel that the public should be protected from this danger. I understand that there is a preparation of soda which, when mixed with the solution of gun-cotton, which is the basis of celluloid, renders it incombustible. If all articles of this kind were so treated, there would be no necessity to call attention to this subject, but I believe celluloid is sold under various names, and that many articles are not rendered incombustible. Professor Ogston, of Aberdeen University, who has, I think, been employed in South Africa by His Majesty's Government, and whose name will be familiar to your Lordships, took several portions of the comb which was worn by the member of my family referred to for experiment. He subsequently wrote an article, which appeared in The Lancet on 22nd February, 1902, on the subject of "Burns from Celluloid." In that article the following appears—
    "I may mention another fruitful source of danger—the celluloid collars which many Children wear, and some adults, too. They are fearfully inflammable. The hot ash from a cigarette, cigar, or pipe falling on them sets them in a blaze at once, and as they are tightly fastened round the throat it is almost impossible to remove them before serious injury has been inflicted. A leading medical journal some time ago cited several accidents which had arisen from this cause."
    In his article Professor Ogston quoted the following three references to celluloid burns which have appeared in the leading English medical journals during the past ten years—
    "1. The Lancet, March 26, 1892. Experiments with articles made of celluloid. Portions
    10
    placed 18 inches in front of a fire swelled and gave off dense fumes at 110ºC. (230ºF.). Artificial ivory acted similarly at 145ºC. (261ºF.). The writer suggests that celluloid should be made non-inflammable by the addition of some chemical."
    I believe that suggestion has been tried, but I do not think it has been found to act over the whole of a piece of celluloid.
    "2. The Lancet, May 16, 1897. A boy wearing a collar made of celluloid, tied with a string, having no knife to cut the string, attempted to remove the collar by burning the string. The collar ignited, and lighted drops of the composition fell on his clothing. His throat and face were badly burned."
    "3. The Lancet, May 29, 1897. Fires in Paris due to kinematograph films igniting."
    Having received information, about the same time as his attention was called to the case which occurred in my family, of several similar accidents where women's and children's hair was set on fire by celluloid combs while they were seated, perhaps drying their hair, in front of ordinary fires, Professor Ogston requested the assistance of Professor Japp, Professor of Chemistry in the University of Aberdeen, as to the ignition points of articles sold as celluloid, and generally as to what was known on the subject. After his experiments, Professor Japp stated that he had ascertained, as nearly as it could be done, the ignition temperatures of the two specimens of celluloid—the specimens of the particular comb which caused the accident in my family—but could not detect any difference in their behaviour on heating, but they were both unduly sensitive to heat. Professor Japp continued—
    "On dropping small pieces into a test tube heated to a perfectly constant temperature of 270ºF., they began to swell up and froth, and within one and a half minutes from the beginning of the experiment they suddenly decomposed with a puff of smoke, leaving a charred residue. On one occasion I succeeded, by gradually raising the temperature, in inducing this sudden decomposition as low as 264ºF., but this difference is very slight; moreover, in this way of performing the experiment much depends on the rate at which the temperature is raised."
    Professor Japp gave the following data with regard to the action of heat on celluloid, taken from the "Journal of the Society of Chemical Industry," which show that this substance is expected to exhibit greater stability than the specimens which he had been experimenting upon—
    "At 194º F. it becomes very plastic, further heat softens it, and at a temperature of 285º F.

    11
    it decomposes into pyroxyline and camphor aldehyde. At 383º P. the decomposition in instantaneous, the nitro-cellulose inflames, and the camphor is vaporised."
    Professor Japp pointed out that the specimens which had been submitted to him for examination, therefore, exhibited this sudden decomposition more than 100º lower than properly manufactured celluloid. I would point out to your Lordships that, from an ordinary drawing-room fire, the radiant heat is often as much as 400º F. Professor Japp went on to say—
    "It is a matter of common observation with unstable and explosive substances that they occasionally explode, or ignite, as it were by mere chance, and when they are not wanted to, under conditions that, when one is experimenting with the substances, would appear to insure perfect safety. In the case of sub, stances like celluloid this is readily explicable, as they are mixtures of variable composition, and they give way at the weakest point. A badly manufactured piece communicates its instability to the whole."
    That is the point of my Question. Professor Japp wrote to Professor C. V. Boys on the subject of the ignition of celluloid, and Professor Boys's reply contained the following additional point—
    "The curious thing about the celluloid button smoulder (it is, under the usual circumstances smoulder rather than burn) is, that with all the smoke, and fluster, and stink there is nothing that cannot be put out by blowing sharply upon the place so as to cool it. The instinct, on the other hand, to squelch it by squeezing it all up in the surrounding material, is just the one thing to make it go all the more, as it is then made warmer, and, what is more important, the hot gases have no free egress, so they envelop the button and a kind of unstable state is engendered, which results in a kind of deflagration, or slow explosion, burning, possibly severely, the enveloping hand."
    I venture to think that is an extra danger, because the first thing one would do in the event of finding a person on fire would be to envelop that person in something, and in that way endeavour to extinguish the flames.
    Professor Ogston went on to give the results of experiments he had conducted. He found that a steel pin further increased beat and ignited celluloid. A portion of the same comb, placed against the steel on a hat-pin, the steel likewise touching the thermometer, ignited and left a black ash at the moment the thermometer registered 200º F. The thermometer and a third portion of the comb were then enveloped in a small lock of black
    12
    hair, and the celluloid burnt when the thermometer marked 180º F. But when the thermometer and a fifth portion of the comb were enveloped in a lock of fair hair, the celluloid burnt at 167º F. The variability of the igniting point of celluloid is proved by the fact that when the experiment with the lock of hair was repeated a fourth piece of the same celluloid comb ignited only at 220º F. A control experiment under exactly the same conditions gave 170º F. as the burning point of a sixth fragment of the comb when exposed naked, without being enveloped in the hair. A piece of properly manufactured celluloid, exposed under identical conditions with the latter experiment in order to control it, only became softened at 170º F. Celluloid articles of uncertain composition and dangerously explosive quality are everywhere sold and are in constant use, and I wish to ask His Majesty's Government whether steps cannot be taken to control the sale of all such articles which do not sustain, without ignition, a temperature equal to that sustained by well-manufactured celluloid. At the time of the accident in my family I received a number of letters mentioning similar accidents which had occurred to the writers' friends and relatives. I quite recognise the cheapness and usefulness of celluloid, and I do not wish to restrict its use; but at the same time I do think something ought to be done to protect the public from such accidents as those to which I have referred. In his article, Professor Ogston states that badly-manufactured celluloid ignites at variable temperatures, too low for it to be safely used, and he suggests that it is worthy of consideration whether all celluloid articles of personal wear and such others as might give rise to fires ought not to be compelled to have the word "ignitable" conspicuously imprinted upon them. He concludes :
    "If the suggestion of the writer in the Lancet to render celluloid incombustible by the addition of some chemical should be practicable, it would be the best solution of the difficulty, and such an addition ought to be made compulsory by legislative enactment."
    I have ventured to bring this subject before your Lordships because I regard it as a really serious one. I have not relied on my own evidence, but have waited for some two years until Professor Ogston was able to go thoroughly

    13
    into the subject, make various experiments, and come to a practical conclusion. I beg to ask the Question standing in my name.
    LORD BELPER: My Lords, I feel sure that your Lordships are not surprised that the noble Lord should have brought this matter before the House, seeing that a member of his own family has suffered so severely from the ignition of this substance. I do not know that I shall be able to give the noble Lord all the satisfaction he asks for, but perhaps I can give him such an assurance as will show him that more care than he supposes is taken in the manufacture of celluloid. I am informed that if it is properly manufactured and free from impurities it will not take fire except at a very high temperature indeed—that is to say, it would only smoulder at a temperature of 440ºF., and would not burst into flame until a temperature of 550º F. was reached. I think it is perfectly clear that the accidents to which the noble Lord has referred must have been due to the impurity of the materials used in the manufacture of the celluloid. The substance, as he has stated, is made from low-grade gun-cotton, and this material, if not entirely free from acid, is liable to decompose and explode spontaneously. Factories in which celluloid is manufactured have been brought under the Explosives Act, they are under licence, and their work must be carried on under the authority and inspection of the Home Office. The result is that far greater attention is now paid to the purity of the material used than has bee the case formerly. But it is not possible to extend that supervision to the manufacture of celluloid articles which come from abroad, and it may be that the articles which have caused the accidents to which the noble Lord has referred have been imported. Celluloid is now used in the manufacture of an enormous number of articles of all kinds, and the Home Secretary feels that in the circumstance it would be a matter of great difficulty to interfere with the sale of it. It would take almost an army of inspectors—particularly when the difficulty of seeing whether the articles are made of pure celluloid or not is considered—to regulate its
    14
    sale. Therefore the Secretary of State, having very carefully considered the matter and feeling the greatest possible sympathy with those who have suffered from the accidents in the way described, does not see his way to interfere by legislation with the sale of celluloid.
    LORD SALTOUN: I quite recognise the great value of the substance for many articles, and have no desire that its manufacture should be interfered with; but I would suggest that some restriction might be placed upon the use of celluloid in the manufacture of articles of attire, or that they should have the word "ignitable" conspicuously printed upon them.
    LORD BELPER: I will take care that the suggestion is laid before the Home Secretary.

    FRANCE AND SIAM.
    LORD LAMINGTON: My Lords, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can say when the French are going to comply with their obligations to evacuate Chantaboon, whether their continued occupation is due to the Siamese not having fulfilled their pledges, and whether any representations on the subject have been made to the French Government. This is only part of the much larger question of the future of Indo-China, which depends to a great extent on the evacuation of Chantaboon, for so long as the French occupy that port, so long will there be a grievance on the part of the Siamese Government. The registration of natives by the French, the grievance on the part of the French that Frenchmen are not taken into the Siamese service, the difficulties arising from the frontier on the right or western bank of the Mekong—all these various points are naturally fruitful sources of trouble; but they are aggravated by the continued occupation of Chantaboon by the French. The 25-kilometre zone has played a large part in this question. On August 1st, 1893, the Earl of Rosebery, who was then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, read out part of the terms of the second ultimatum accepted that day, which were these—
    "(1) French to occupy port and river of Chantaboon pending evacuation of left bank

    15
    of Mekong by Siam; (2) no Siamese troops to be allowed within twenty-five kilomètres of Mekong."
    It may, therefore, be taken that when once the Siamese had completely evacuated the twenty-five kilomètre zone the obligation rested on the French to evacuate Chantaboon. That this was so was construed by Sir Edward Grey, who said in the House of Commons that the French Government had stated repeatedly that the occupation of Chantaboon was of a temporary character. He was more precise on another date, when, in reply to Mr. (now Lord) Curzon, he said—
    "Explicit assurances have been received from the French Government that they are most desirous of leaving the place at the earliest opportunity, and that the French forces will not remain a day after the Siamese have fulfilled their obligations under the Treaty."
    Asked whether they might expect that the evacuation would occur as soon as that condition had been carried out, Sir Edward Grey replied—
    "Yes, that is the only possible interpretation which can be placed on the assurances of the French Government."
    Therefore I take it that the Government of that day felt assured that, when the Siamese had complied with their obligations, Chantaboon would be evacuated. The French, however, are still there; and the Siamese naturally regard it as an insult that this important port should be held by foreigners. The port itself is within striking distance of Bangkok, and it has a paralysing effect on the Siamese to know that a great Power which directs envious eyes to the richer portions of their country should be in possession of a port so near to their capital. The obligations have been carried out on the one side, but not on the other. I do not know whether in International Law a prescriptive right is recognised, but certainly the French would seem to be acquiring one when, the conditions of the other party having been fulfilled, they still remain in occupation without excuse. I am sure the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs is fully alive to the gravity of the situation, but, at the same time, those who are commercially interested in Siam and those who study Eastern questions would
    16
    very much like to know whether there is any prospect of this objection on the part of the French being carried out shortly. We have suffered so much in regard to our interests in Indo-China through neglect to embrace opportunities that I feel I am justified in bringing this question before the House today. It is not fifteen years ago that advances were made to our Government on the part of the French to preserve the complete integrity and independence of Siam. But, either through our indifference or lack of appreciation of the situation, we took no action, with the result that four or five years afterwards there was that great act of aggression on the part of the French, when we ourselves were brought nearer into conflict with France than at any other time since the period of the great war at the commencement of the last century. Further, we suffered an enormous blow to our prestige in that part of the world; our commercial enterprise received a check; we had to witness Siam, in whose independence we are vitally interested, despoiled of portions of her territory, and, moreover, so forced into a treaty which so bristled with ragged edges that at any opportune time there were abundant opportunities for further aggression. It is because I wish to guard against future danger that I desire to see a fruitful source of trouble removed at the earliest possible moment by the evacuation of Chantaboon.
    THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (The Marquess of LANSDOWNE): I am afraid I shall not be able to give my noble friend all the enlightenment he desires upon this important subject. He evidently knows that the differences between France and Siam are of very long standing. Their history is intricate, and the present situation is still, I am afraid, somewhat obscure. It is the case that in 1893 the Siamese Government entered into a treaty and convention with the Government of France, under which the Siamese ceded to France a very considerable portion of Siamese territory lying on the eastern bank of the Mekong. The Siamese Government also undertook that they would evacuate a zone, 25 kilomètres in depth, following

    17
    the course of the Mekong, and not maintain any armed force within that region. On the other hand, the French Government, in the convention, announced in the plainest language that it was their intention to remain in the occupation of Chantaboon, which they held at the moment, until such time as the whole of the stipulations of the convention had been complied with by the Siamese. We understand that at the present time it is alleged by the French Government that several of these stipulations have not yet been complied with. They are numerous, and I do not think any useful purpose would be served if I were to particularise them. Two matters in particular are in dispute, first, the question whether or not the 25-kilometre zone has been completely evacuated; and, secondly, the extremely difficult and troublesome question of registration. The point is this. The French claim to retain authority over persons of Annamite and Cambodian descent, residing on the western or Siamese side of the Mekong.
    LORD LAMINGTON: And Chinese, too.
    THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: These matters are in dispute between the French and Siamese Governments; and I do not think it possible for His Majesty's Government, in such circumstances, to undertake to decide between the two parties, or to state on which side the right lies. Nor have we thought that the occasion was one for making any representation to the French Government. Having said that much, I can only add that I share with the noble Lord the interest which he takes in this subject. I realise its great importance to the peace of the regions which are the scene of these events; and I can assure him that none will be better pleased than His Majesty's Government if these differences should be composed, and if it should be found possible for the French Government to restore Chantaboon to its legitimate owners. Nothing that has been said by the French Government, so far as I am aware, has ever pointed to the conclusion that they intended their occupation
    18
    to be permanent; on the contrary, the very language of the Convention suggests a different inference, and upon several occasions it has been stated of persons of high official position in the service of the French Government that it was their intention to restore Chantaboon to the Siamese as soon as the stipulations of the Convention of 1893 had been completely fulfilled.
    House adjourned at twenty-five minutes past Five o'clock, to Thursday next, half-past Ten o'clock.