|| 2 | 3 |
سلسلسا
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 882
8
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
43177
28
No. 51.
FOREIGN OFFICE to COLONIAL OFFICE.
(Received December 23, 1904.)
SIR,
Foreign Office, December 22, 1904. I AM directed by the Marquess of Lansdowne to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 16th instant* respecting the refusal of the crew of the S.S." Bawtry to proceed from Hong Kong to Vladivostock.
With regard to paragraph 6 of the Governor of Hong Kong's despatch inclosed therein, in which he suggests that the opinion of the Law Officers should be communi- cated to him, I am to point out that, in a footnote to the same despatch, Sir M. Nathan acknowledges the receipt of the telegram sent him by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton, in which it is distinctly stated that the Law Officers have not been consulted in the matter.
It appears to Lord Lansdowne that the better course would be for the Magistrate to decide such cases on his own responsibility, and subject to an appeal in the ordinary
way.
It is open, moreover, to Sir M. Nathan to consult the Attorney-General of Hong Kong on any points presenting special difficulty should such arise.
I am, &c.,
12854
No. 52.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
F. A. CAMPBELL.
April 19, 1905.
Mr. ROBSON asked the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether he was aware that 36 seamen of the crews of the British steamships "St. Helena " and " Battersea Bridge" had been sentenced to three weeks' imprisonment at Hong Kong for refusing to proceed to Japan with contraband of war; and whether, having regard to the terms of His Majesty's proclamation of neutrality, he would take steps to procure the inmediate release of these men.
Mr. LYTTELTON, in reply, said :-" In answer to the question addressed to the Secretary to the Board of Trade, His Majesty's Government have no knowledge of the matter, but will telegraph to the Governor of Hong Kong for particulars."
12854
[See No. 55.]
No. 53.
MR. LYTTELTON to GOVERNOR SIR M. NATHAN.
(Sent 5.56 p.m., April 19, 1905.)
TELEGRAM.
[Answered by No. 54.]
Question asked in Parliament as to alleged imprisonment crew "St. Helena," and "Battersea Bridge" for refusing to proceed to Japan with contraband of war.
Report fully by telegraph.
29
In the absence of decision on appeal in England in previous cases having been com- municated to me, Magistrate acted [upon] at his discretion, as directed in your telegram of 4th November* on subject of "Bawtry." Where they consider that there was no reasonable probability of capture or exceptional personal danger they have held that men were obliged to proceed to plates within terms of agreements entered into with the knowledge [of] state of war existed and nature of cargo. have accepted this principle. In case of Saint Helena " Battersea Bridge" carrying coal Japan, Magistrate 15th April decided that no such special risk existed. On account of proximity of belligerent ships, I am doubtful of correctness this view of facts, and as 18th April Magistrate in case of " Lincolnshire" carrying rice Japan decided that special risk not shown to be covered by agreements did exist, and acquitted crews refusing duty, I have directed release of those sentenced 15th April.
13272
SIR,
No. 55.
"
COLONIAL OFFICE to MR. W. S. ROBSON, K.C., M.P.
[Copy to Governor, April 28, 1905. No. 83. L.F.]
Downing Street, April 27, 1905. WITH reference to the question which you asked in the House of Commons on the 19th of April. I am directed by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton to inform you that he has now received the report of the Governor of Hong Kong on the circum- stances of the imprisonment of the crews of the steamships "St. Helena" and "Battersea Bridge."
2. Sir M. Nathan states that in the absence of a decision by Court of Appeal in England on the cases which have lately arisen upon the question of the right of a crew to refuse to proceed in a vessel carrying contraband of war, the Magistrates at Hong Kong have used their discretion as to the manner in which such cases should be treated.
3. Where they have considered that there was no reasonable probability of capture and no exceptional personal danger involved, they have held that the crew were obliged to proceed to places within the terms of their agreements, if they entered into those agreements with the knowledge of the existence of a state of war and of the nature of the cargo.
In the case of the "St. Helena" and the "Battersea Bridge" the Magistrate decided (April 15th) that no special risk existed. Sir M. Nathan states, however, that he himself doubts the correctness of this view, on account of the proximity of belligerent ships, and as, on the 18th of April, the crew of the steamship "Lincoln- were acquitted on the charge of refusing to carry rice to Japan, on the ground that a special risk, not shown to be covered by their agreements, did exist, he has directed the release of the men who were sentenced on the 15th of this month.
shire
17371
No. 56.
I am, &c.,
H. BERTRAM COX.
13272
No. 54.
GOVERNOR SIR M. NATHAN to MR. LYTTELTON.
(Received 6 p.m., April 20, 1905.)
TELEGRAM.
[Answered by L.F. transmitting copy of No. 55.]
Referring to your telegram of 19th April† on the subject of imprisoned crews.
L.F. on No. 49.
† No. 53.
SIR,
GOVERNOR SIR M. NATHAN to MR. LYTTELTON. (Received May 22, 1905.)
[Acknowledged June 3, 1905. Confidential: 17871: not printed.] (Confidential.)
Government House, Hong Kong, April 21, 1905.
I HAVE the honour to enclose copies and en clair versions of your telegram
of the 19th instant and of my reply of the 20th, on the subject of the refusal of the crews of the steamships "St. Helena" and "Battersea Bridge" to proceed to Japan on those vessels which were carrying cargoes of coal.
• No. 43.
↑ No. 52.
Nos. 53 and 54.