PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
CO.
Reference :-
885
12 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
2
Japers in the case, which had already been before us, were there- venience of reference.
ir Lordship's commands, we have the honour to
Report
our former opinion that the High Court had no jurisdiction, and y properly be given to the High Commissioner that he should ttoman Court to deal with.
e further papers, we should observe that assent will not give whether the exception to the jurisdiction was taken before or entence, is immaterial.
We have, &c.,
(Signed)
› Marquis of Salisbury,
&c.
&o.
JOHN HOLKER.
HARDINGE S. GIFFARD. J. PARKER DEANE.
6553.
MY LORD,
No. 219.
(GENERAL.)
LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.
We were honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Sir Julian
Temple, 23rd April 1880. Pauncefote's letter of the 19th instant, stating that he had to transmit to us, by your Lordship's desire, the correspondence and documents noted in the margin with reference to the difficulty which was apprehended in consequence of the recent Judgment of the High Court of Admiralty in the case of the "Parlement Belge," in carrying into effect in Her Majesty's dominions of Article V. of the Postal Convention with France, and Article VI. of the Postal Convention with Belgium, in cases where the foreign mail packets were not the property of the State by which they were employed, but private vessels chartered or subsidized for their mail service.
That Sir Julian Pauncefote was to refer us to the letter from the Foreign Office to the Treasury of the 19th March last for a statement of the grounds on which it had been suggested that the Law Officers of the Crown should be consulted as to the expediency of introducing a Bill in Parliament to meet the difficulty which was appro- hended; and Sir Julian Pauncefote was to request that we would favour your Lordship with our opinion as to whether such legislation was necessary, and, if so, that we would be good enough to state generally the nature or frame of the provision which we might consider best calculated to carry out the object in view.
That Sir Julian Pauncefote was also to draw our attention to the recent case of the French mail packet letter of the 10th March last, and to previous cases which had occurred in that Colony, Anadyr," at Hong Kong, reported in the Colonial Office of which an account was given at pp. 13-18 of Sir E. Hertslet's printed memorandum on mail packets.
44
That if we should be of opinion that legislation was necessary in the case of the steamers of the Messageries Maritimes, as held by the Supreme Court of Hong Kong on the authority of the Judgment of the High Court of Admiralty in the case of the Parlement Belge," your Lordship would be glad to be informed whether in view of the great traffic carried on by those steamers in Hong Kong, and of the frequent discussions arising there as to their privileges and immunities, we considered that there would be any objection to the immediate passing of a short local Ordinance to secure to them, while within the waters of the Colony, all the privileges and immunities which the Vth article of the Postal Convention with France purports to confer on them.
In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have the honour to
Report
That in our opinion it may be expedient to introduce a Bill in Parliament to meet the difficulty which it is apprehended may be the result of that part of the Judgment of the Admiralty Court in the "Parlement Belge" which was not reversed, and upon which it was not necessary to raise any question in the Court of Appeal.
A short Act giving the power by Order in Council to grant the privileges and immunities of national ships, the property of the Government, to vessels chartered or subsidized by that Government for the conveyance of mails under any postage con- vention with such Government, will probably be the most convenient way of attaining the object in view.
But, and especially with reference to the vessels belonging to the Messageries Maritimes, whose business is not so much the carrying of mails as that of general merchant ships, we desire to call your Lordship's attention to a great practical difficulty.
Treasury, March 11; Foreign Office to Treasury, March 19; Treasury, March 31; Colonial Office, March 10; to Colonial Office, March 19, 1880; Memorandum by Sir E. Hertslet; Postal Covention with France, 1856; Postal Convention with Belgium, February 17, 1876.
▲ 13916.800. 25.-19/84.
Page 480Page 481
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
C.O.
Reference :-
• 885
12 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED - PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
2
namely, the easy and cheap means of obtaining the advantage of the Postages Conven. tion and Orders in Council for merchant ships by a slight and nominal payment as a subsidy.
Some arrangement should therefore be made, if possible, to secure that a real and substantial charter or subsidy be entered into or paid by the foreign Government.
rance
We see no objection to the passing of a local Ordinance at Hong Kong, giving the privileges and immunities of the Vth Article of the Postal Convention with to the vessels of the "Messageries Maritimes;" but we think that local Ordinanco should at first be only temporary, and that the attention of the French Government should be called to the difficulty in which Her Majesty's Government is placed by the decision in the "Parlement Belge," and which difficulty Her Majesty's Government will endeavour to remove by legislation at the earliest moment.
We have, &c., (Signed)
JOHN HOLKER. HARDINGE S. GIFFARD. J. PARKER DEANE.-
MY LORD,
No. 219a.
(CYPRUS.)
LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.
We were honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Sir Julian
Temple, April 27, 1880. Pauncefote's letter of the 11th March last, stating that by the direction of your Lordship he transmitted to us a copy of the Ordinance of the Legislature of Cyprus establishing Her Majesty's High Court of Justice in that Island, and to request that we would be good enough to favour your Lordship with our views on the following points :-
*
That a recent trial for murder before the High Court of Justice had directed the attention of your Lordship to the provisions of the Ordinance which regulated the procedure in capital cases.
That we would observe such cases were tried by a single judge sitting with not less than two assessors (§ 16). That those assessors had no voice in the decision and sentence of the Court, though they might record their objections thereto (§ 7).
That your Lordship had reason to believe that the power thus vested in a single judge to decide a capital case was viewed with apprehension by the foreign residents in Cyprus, and your Lordship was disposed to think that the Ordinance should be amended in that respect.
That though trial by jury could not, at all events for the present, be conveniently introduced in Cyprus, provision might be made for the attendance in capital cases of a larger number of assessors, who should decide questions of fact by majority, a casting vote being reserved to the judge in case the votes should be equally divided; or pro- vision might be made for increasing the judicial staff, and for the trial of capital cases before not less than three professional judges. That your Lordship would be glad to be favoured with our views as to the best mode of dealing with the question.
That the other point to which Sir Julian Pauncefote was to invite our consideration was the following
*
That, owing to the peculiar circumstances of the Island and to the variety of nationalities of which the community was composed, perplexing questions not un- frequently arose as to the competency, of the various Courts to try cases brought before them. That it had been suggested that it might facilitate the administration of justice if the High Court were to possess the power to exercise a concurrent jurisdiction with all the other Courts in Cyprus (other than the religious tribunal mentioned in the first article of the annex to the Convention of June 4th 1878, copy of which was annexed), and whenever it should think fit, to hear and determine any case, civil or criminal, arising in the Island, whether the same be within the jurisdiction conferred by
of the Ordinance or not, subject to such rules as to the particular law to be administered, and as to the adjunction of Ottoman judges in particular cases, as might seem expedient.
That it was conceived that such a facultative provision would not only be found convenient in solving disputed questions of jurisdiction, but would pave the way to the fusion of all existing jurisdictions in one Supreme Court of Judicature.
That Sir Julian Pauncefote was to request that we would also favour your Lordship with our opinion as to the expediency of increasing the jurisdiction and power of the High Court of Justice to that extent.
In obedience to your Lordship's commands, we have the honour to
Report
That, in our opinion, the appointment of a number of assessors to decide questions of fact, and of whom a majority, from inexperience or worse reasons, might decide against the opinion of the presiding judge, is objectionable, and we doubt whether it would be desirable to leave the presiding judge with merely a casting vote in the event of the votes of the assessors being equally divided. The appointment of three pro- fessional judges for the trial of capital cases would, in our opinion, be a very satin- factory measure. These judges uld, we presume, not be, for the present at least,
A 20491-25. 25.-6/86.