unfounded.
Since the receipt of your letter a note has been addressed to Lord Clarendon by the French Ambassador, at the same time stating that His Government considered the arrest of "Tigre" to be contrary to the provisions of the Anglo-French Postal Convention of September 24, 1856, under which Steamers employed in conveying correspondence are entitled to the same treatment as vessels of war in the Ports of either State. His Excellency at the same time stated that his Government did not support the claim put forward by their Consul at Hongkong for exclusive jurisdiction over all French Merchant vessels in the Port.
A second reference was thereupon made to the Law Officers who reported that a vessel, in order to be entitled under the Convention of September 1856 to the privileges of a vessel of war, must not only fall within the terms of Article 5 but of Articles 1 and 2, which are strictly confined to the object of conveying correspondence, whereas it appeared that the "Tigre" was not such a vessel but was employed in the carriage of merchandize.