2
3. Such British vessels are liable to be stopped and searched by Mexican authorities in Mexican waters. As the left bank of the Rio Hondo belongs to Mexico, the Mexica authorities are entitled to take reasonable measures in Mexican waters to ensure that British vessels proceeding to. the Rio Hondo are bound for the right bank, or are not engaged in any trade on the left bank contrary to Mexican law.
4. Such vessels are bound to comply with any reasonable Mexican regulations on this head.
5. The Mexican authorities are not bound to treat such papers as conclusive, but may reasonably exercise the right of search to satisfy themselves of the facts. This right. however, must not be used vexatiously, and if it be so used, diplomatic remonstrances may be addressed to the Mexican Government.
.
6. It should be distinctly stated that the passage of transports, ships of war, and military stores through British territorial waters can take place only by permission of Her Majesty's Government, and is not a matter of right.
7. Permission for this purpose may be allowed if it be thought desirable.
8. They should in every case be formally called upon to ask permission.
9. Her Majesty's Government may, of course, if they please, impose as a condition of such passage that prisoners should not be carried on board the vessels in question.
We think that the passage of Revenue cutters should be allowed only on the terms of their not carrying on board any British subjects who may have been seized for alleged violations of Mexican Customs law.
We have only to add that we quite agree with the view stated by your Lordship' that while the passage of Revenue cutters should ordinarily be remitted, the Mexican authorities should not be allowed to suppose that this is a matter of right. These vessels are public vessels, and Her Majesty's Government have the same right to exclude them as to exclude men-of-war generally,
In view of the pretensions raised by General Monasterio's letter of the 22nd May, it is important that a clear statement should be made that Mexican public vessels can only be allowed passage by courtesy and not as of right,
The Marquess of Salisbury, K.G..
心い。
&c..
&c.
We have, &c.,
RICHARD E. WEBSTER. ROBERT B. FINLAY.
19711.
SIR,
No. 187.
(JAMAICA.)
LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.
Royal Courts of Justice, August 31, 1898. We were honoured with your commands signified in Mr. Wingfield's letter of the 18th instant, stating that he was directed by you to enclose a Despatch and enclosures from the Governor of Jamaica with respect to a Bill to amend the Marine Board Laws 1896 and 1897 of that Colony and a further Despatch reporting that the Governor had assented to the Bill, and transmitting copies of the Law with the Report of the Attorney-· General of the Colony upon it.
That with reference to the Report of the Solicitor-General of Jamaica, dated the 21st May last, which formed one of the enclosures in the Governor's Despatch, Mr. Wingfield was to request us to take those papers into our consideration, and to favour you with our opinion on the following points :-
(a) Whether, in view of Clause 11 of the Bill which repealed the words, "and may fix the amount of remuneration to be paid to the members of such Board," occurring in section 2 of Law 17 of 1896, it would be lawful for the Governor, with the advice and consent of his Privy Council, to make rules under section 21 (1) of Law 17 of 1897 authorising the payment of fees to members of the Marine Board.
(6) Whether such fees, if authorised by the Governor and Privy Council under section 21 (1) of Law 17 of 1897, could be legally paid out of the General Revenue of the Colony on such authority only, and without a vote of the Legislative Council. (e) Whether, as suggested by the Solicitor-General of Jamaica, the Marine Board could legally make such payments as it thought fit to its members out of the moneys it receives under sections 30 and 36 of Law 17 of 1896.
(d) Whether, if the repeal of the words quoted in Clause 11 of the Bill prohibited the remuneration by fees of members of the Marine Board, such prohibition was applicable to members of the Board appointed prior to the passing of the Bill, the rate of whose remuneration had already been fixed under section 2 of Law 17 of 1896, or only to those subsequently appointed.
(e) And generally.
In obedience to your commands we have taken the papers into our consideration,
and have the honour to
Report-
(a) That there is no authority to pay anything to the members of the Board. Section 21 (1) of Law 17 of 1897 does not, in our opinion, confer any such authority, and no rules can be made under it for the purpose proposed.
(b) No. The effect of the amendment in the Bill of 1898 is that members of the Board are not to be paid.
(c) No. The fees can be applied only in ways authorised expressly or by implication. There is no longer any express authority for payment of members, and it cannot be regarded as necessary.
(d) The present members are in no better position than future members.
(e) The only authority for any payment to members was conferred by the repealed words, and falls to the ground with them.
The Right Hon. J. Chamberlain, M.P..
&c., &c.,
&c.
We have, &c.,
RICHARD E. WEBSTER. ROBERT B. FINLAY.
524-25-9/98 Wt 21618
D&S
5
اب طلبة كل سنة
| | | | | | ||
VITIVE
C.O.
Reference :-
885
14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO |
1