R
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
C.O.8
Reference :-
-885
16
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO |
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
G
Colonial Office on the 14th July, it appears that the commander of the "Dnieper," in handing over mails (seventy-eight bags and one case of mails) to the Dutch steamer Flores" (which landed them at Singapore, whence they were returned to Hong Kong), stated that they were unaccompanied by any documents (ie., way- bill, &c.), and that seventy-three bags and one case had been examined and resealed. We have now learnt (31st July) from the Colonial Office, whom we asked to make inquiries on the 26th July, that in one of these bags was a registered letter addressed to the Japanese Foreign Office from Hong Kong, which has been abstracted by the commander of the Dnieper," and is presumably now in the possession of the Russian Government.
*
The Ikhona is the property of the British-India Steam Navigation Company, and was bound to Yokohama with rice and mails from Rangoon. She was sunk -while on the voyage by the Russian auxiliary cruiser "Terek" (late the "Columbia," This cruiser is now of the Hamburg-American Line) on the 5th June, 1905. interned at Batavia. The officers and crew of the "Ikhona were landed at Singapore from the Dutch steamer "Perlak," to which they had been transferred.
""
No claim has as yet been received, but the owners have given notice that one will be put forward, and Messrs. Waltons, Johnson, and Co. stated on the 30th June that the Insurance Companies interested in the cargo would also make a claim, and were told on the 5th July that it should be sent to the Foreign Office for examination.
**
On the 16th and 26th June telegraphic instructions were addressed to Sir C. Hardinge respecting the cases of the "St. Kilda" and "Ikhona" respectively. In the first message His Excellency was instructed to point out the irritation which the sinking of the "St. Kilda had produced in this country, and that this act was in direct contravention of the specific assurances given by Count Lamsdorff in August, 1904, that no more neutral vessels would be sunk. His Majesty's Govern- ment expressed the hope that the Russian Government would share their regret at the incident, would disavow the action of the "Dnieper," undertake to provide compensation and to secure British shipping against such treatment in the future, and further asked that the Russian Commander should be instructed, on his arrival at Port Saïd, to hand over the officers of the "St. Kilda," and to tender suitable expressions of regret and an assurance that no further acts of the kind would be committed by his vessel. His Majesty's Government further offered to send cruisers to deliver the message.
"}
In the second message Sir C. Hardinge was instructed to impress upon Count Lamsdorff the urgent necessity of dealing promptly with the case of the "Ikhona on the lines indicated in respect of the "St. Kilda," and to say that, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, the sinking of the "Ikhona" greatly aggravated the serious situation already created.
On the 28th June Sir C. Hardinge reported that he had discussed the whole The latter question of the sinking of these two ships with Count Lamsdorff. pleaded that the whole matter rested with the Ministry of Marine, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs merely acting as a channel of communication. He also informed Sir C. Hardinge that it was evident that Admiral Rojdestvensky had, on his arrival in the Far East, given his cruisers fresh instructions, cancelling those of last year, and promised to make inquiries on this point. These inquiries have, up to the present, led to no result.
Meanwhile, the Russian Government accepted the offer of His Majesty's Govern- 25 1 Kuban," ment to deliver instructions to the "Dnieper," as well as to the "Rion,' and "Terek," to abstain from further hostile acts against British shipping, and promised to themselves send the instructions to these vessels as soon as located. His Majesty's ship " Perseus has duly delivered the instructions to the three first- named ships at Jibuti, while the "Terek" received them through His Majesty's Consul at Batavia on her arrival at that port, where she is now interned.
"
On the 10th July, after reference to you and with your concurrence, a despatch was sent to Sir C. Hardinge setting out very fully the circumstances of the two cases, and intimating that claims would be presented by His Majesty's Government on behalf of the parties interested as soon as formulated, quite irrespective of any decision arrived at by a Prize Court. The words underlined* were embodied in the despatch in consequence of a statement made by Count Lamsdorff in the con- versation above referred to that any undertaking to provide compensation, without
• Printed in italics.
a decision to that effect having been rendered by a Prize Court, would prove the chief stumbling-block to the acceptance of the demands of His Majesty's Govern-
ment.
A copy of these instructions, together with a despatch from Sir C. Hardinge dated the 22nd July, will be found in packet (II).
Lord Lansdowne, speaking in the House of Lords on the 31st July with reference to these two cases, made use of the following words :---
"We have intimated that these claims will be pressed irrespective of the decision of the Russian Prize Court," though His Lordship had on the 13th July, in replying to Lord Muskerry's question as to the position of the shipping claims against the Russian Government, stated that: "It is essential in these cases the claimants should exhaust their legal remedies"; and the possible effect of these speeches is one of the circumstances that must be taken into account in determining how these claims shall be dealt with.
Sir C. Hardinge has, however, urged that in these cases also it would be desir- able that Prize Court proceedings should take place, and states that there is some reason to hope that a satisfactory verdict would be obtained.
1
As reference is made in Sir C. Hardinge's despatch No. 106, and in his private letter, to the case of the "Knight Commander," it may be desirable to state that this vessel was sunk by the Russians about the 24th July, 1904, after she had been seized. Her papers were brought to Vladivostock, and the Prize Court decided that the sinking of the vessel was regular, as the Russian Regulations provide for sinking a prize if there are difficulties in the way of taking the ship to a Prize Court for adjudication.
A strong protest was addressed by His Majesty's Government to the Russian Government; and Count Lamsdorff was informed that full compensation would be claimed by the Secretary of State on behalf of the owners, quite irrespective of any decision that might be given in the Prize Courts.
The owners of the vessel, however, were encouraged privately to appeal against the Prize Court decision at Vladivostock in order that His Majesty's Government might not be exposed to the risk of an answer from the Russian Government that the parties were satisfied with the decision that the sinking of the vessel was justifiable, Knight and had not troubled to appeal. (See pp. 33, 34, 95-99 of the Commander" print, packet (1)).
The decision of the Prize Court at Vladivostock was dated the 8th August, 1904; the appeal from that decision has not yet been decided, but the claim of the owners of the ship and cargo was presented to Count Lamsdorff on the 2nd March, 1905; apparently the Russian Government do not intend to consider it until after the appeal of the parties has been disposed of.
19
It may be mentioned that the claims of the owners of the "Ardova" for the detention of that vessel in the Red Sea in July, 1904, by the Volunteer fleet vessel "Petersburgh was presented to the Russian Government through the diplomatic channel on the 14th January, 1905, as a result of which a Commission was appointed to examine the claim at St. Petersburgh. The Russian Government have made no demand in this case that the matter should be dealt with in a Prize Court, and by a note dated the 25th July, 1905, Count Lamsdorff informed Sir C. Hardinge that the Commission had come to a decision favourable in principle to the owner's claim, but raised certain questions as to the details, which are still under consideration.
It will be seen from the foregoing that His Majesty's Government are con- fronted with problems involving very weighty considerations both of law and policy. It is estimated that the claims against the Russian Government arising out of seizures, detentions, and destructions of British vessels during the war-some of which it is not necessary to include in the present reference-amount in the aggregate to between £300,000 and £400,000,
It is true that as a general principle every legal remedy should be exhausted before official aid can properly be invoked in ordinary cases; but the circumstances of many of the cases referred to above, especially that of the "Hipsang," are not of an ordinary character, and it has been shown how little prospect there is in the cases of the " Allanton" and "Calchas” of a Russian Prize Court of First Instance entertaining claims for compensation when the Supreme Admiralty Council have, on appeal, held that the seizures were justifiable; it is also not improbable that