*
21.
It is pointed out by auterpacht and by iludson
(uppenheim's international Law, 6th su.Vol.Il, p.55,
juson, Ferzanent ourt, p.465) that the reservation as to
reprocity is really superfluous because paragraph
2 of rticle 56 of the Statute states expressly
that the declaration accepting compulsory
jurisaiction is made "in relation to any other
ber or tate accepting the same obligation." This
means, according to liudson, that the Court's
jurisdiction applies only to the common round
covered by the applicants' and respondents'
declarations.
Jonsequently, an applicant can only
rely upon a declaration made by the other side within
the limitation set by the applicants' own declaration.
Hudson cites obiter dicta from two decisions of
the Per anent Court of Internationa. Justice to thia
effect. It seems, therefore, that the result is
that China, for example, could invoke our
reservations against uR.
The Law officers will
however recall that in the case of :ritish Honduras,
precisely because H. \.C's general acceptance of
the optional clause excluded situations and facts
rior to 1930, H.M.G. deposited a further special
ao epta ce of the optional clause covering all
questions relating to the boundaries of that
territory. If it were deeled expedient, H..G.
could presumably deposit another special acceptance
of the optional clause covering all questions
relating to the interpretation of the Treaty of 1898.
23.
A Semorandum has been prepaɛed by the Foreign
office hes arch
Department regarding the terus of all
the le-ses umde by China in 1898 and 1899 to foreign
Fovers (lapur F). it will be seen that there were
five such Leases in ali, two to Crest Britain and
one to erwany, qu sia and er nce respectively.
it
is submitted, however, that there exists a true paraliei
/in.......