§ Mr. BUTCHERasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, before finally determining that the Declaration of 2029W London does not require the authority of Parliament for its ratification, and that the decisions of our prize courts, founded on the law as laid down in the Declaration, could be enforced without the authority of Parliament against British subjects within British jurisdiction, he will refer to the decision of the Privy Council in 1892 in the case of Walker v. Baird, and will consult the Law Officers of the Crown and inform the House accordingly?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI am advised that the case of Walkerv. Baird has no bearing on the question raised by the hon. and learned Member. That case dealt with the question whether the terms of a treaty afforded a good defence to an action for trespass in the municipal courts. I see no need to refer the matter to the Law Officers of the Crown.
§ Mr. BUTCHERasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any Power, except Russia, has within the last thirty years treated or attempted to treat cotton as contraband, and, if so, under what circumstances and with what result?
Mr. McKINNON WOODThe answer is in the negative. So far as I am aware, except in the war between Russia and Japan, there has not been, in the last thirty years, a war in which the question of cotton has been considered important.