PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O.885
18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
REVISION OF COMMERCIAL. TREATIES. (Mr. Denkin.)
30 Thirteenth Day. Hebrides. Tho New Hebrides is, in a sense, a no man's land, for at that time it was not even subject to the Convention which now obtains. We received 8 May 1907.
a communication on the 1st October last from the Secretary of State for the Colonies to the effect that we could not grant a preference to these products, because rights to most-favoured nation treatment were possessed by most foreign countries under treaties by which the Commonwealth was bound. We then asked what were the existing treaties and whether the French nationals in the New Hebrides were entitled to have their goods admitted free of duty into France and New Caledonia. We were then told that the countries entitled to the most-favoured nation treatment in Australia were set out in a Parliamentary Paper, Commercial, No. 9, 1807, of 1903. An example was cited, the treaty with Italy of 15th June 1883, to which all the Australian Colonies adhered except South Australia. Again, we were informed by a further telegram that the admission of goods from the New Hebrides free of duty into New Caledonia does not conflict with any After some corre- conumerical treaty between this country and France. spondence I obtained an opinion from our Attorney-General, in which he maintained that the treaties referred to in the parliamentary papers mentioned by the Secretary of State for the Colonies do not, in his opinion, contain any provisions which would be violated by a reduction or remission of duty to the British New Hebrideans. That is the effect of it. Finally we obtained a reply from this Office that, after reconsideration of the matter, His Majesty's Government concurred with the opinion of our Attorney-General that we had power to make the discriminations previously challenged by the Colonial Office. I only cite that as a case presenting some peculiar features of its own, because the period from 1st October 1900 to February 1907 elapsed before we had it settled. There was a difference as to the actual operations of the commercial treaties mentioned in respect of the New Hebrides and British settlers therein. It required four or five I do not say that was too long a months before it was finally decided. time. What this illustration goes to show is the necessity of having our rights and privileges under these treaties decided in advance so that we may not have interposed at any time an objection to a course that we desire to take, on account of some suggested conflict with a treaty which may be proved not to apply in that instance. But the particular illustration we had before our minds related to a Bill which has been mentioned in this Conference on more than one occasion, in which we sought to provide for a special preference for British goods carried in British ships. We received a communication about the same time as the cablegrams to which I have just been alluding, from the Colonial Office, in which the Board of Trade pointed out that while the right of giving preference in respect of British goods is beyond question, preference to such goods by reason of the British nationality of a vessel carrying them would seem to be a violation of a number of treaties binding some or other of the Australian Colonies. It also named one or two countries which were We accepted that finding, entitled to the most-favoured-nation treatment.
but on consideration arrived at the conclusion that a number of the treaties cited did not really operate; and that the rest did not operate effectively against the inclusion of such a provision. Twelve treaties were mentioned On examination, I find that in the first list as impeding our freedom. five of those had never been acceded to by any of the Australian Colonies prior to their union in the Commonwealth. Five others were only acceded to by some of those Colonies, and only two were acceded to by all. Those two treaties were with Honduras and Salvador, two countries whose shipping trade is nil, and whose interest in this question is nil.
We have now had placed in our hands a revised opinion from the Board of Trade, a very valuable document, to which the President of the Board of and 10. I pass by, for Trade has already referred to-day. This is at pages
31
the time being, the question whether an adhesion to any treaty by any Colony before federation is binding after federation, saying a word or so upon it presently. On page 10 the memorandum says: that as regards the inter- Imperial trade of Australia there are binding treaties with Austria-Hungary, Russia, Colombia, and Salvador. The total shipping trade of those particular countries is very small indeed, and the inclusion of any such conditious affords an instance in which a concession appears to have been granted unnecessarily, possibly without consideration. Certainly, that is not the kind of restriction for the grant of which any great public reason can be alleged. l'assing over the countries that have some claim because certain Australian States formerly agreed to a convention of the kind, the treaties which prevent the confirming of the preference to British goods in British ships, are those with Austria-Hungary, Russia, Colombia, Liberia, Morocco, Salvador, and probably Honduras.
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Italy.
As to
Mr. DEAKIN: I am going to deal with that in a moment. Liberia, Morocco, and Salvador, they have no mercantile marine. Colombia is in the same position. Austria-Ilungary and Russia are both small traders. Russia has some, but very little trade with us.
Tho
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: A very considerable trade with us. suggestion is made to me that the Foreign Office are very alarmed at the idea of a discussion about Treaties getting on to the Notes.
Mr. DEAKIN: I have no objection to keeping it out of the Notes. CHAIRMAN: It was not kept off the Notes at the last Conference, but the Notes were treated as confidential.
Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Very well, a note might be taken, but it will he circulated confidentially.
CHAIRMAN: It will be understood to be a confidential document.
Mr. DEAKIN: Yes. I should think there would be next to no difficulty in obtaining the assent at any time of Austria-Hungary and Russia to the removal of those restrictions on the principle that unless you receive some You never know consideration, it is unwise to tie your own hands.
what emergency may arise, or what particular contingency you may be required to meet. In making treaties, especially with minor States, these wholesale sweeping concessions which had no significance probably at the time when made should hereafter be excluded.
CHAIRMAN: Lord Tweedmouth is waiting to deal with Naval Defence, and this present discussion may last some time.
Sir JOSEPH WARD: I think it would be better to postpone this, and hear Lord Tweedmouth now.
Mr. DEAKIN Certainly.
Thistesuth Day.
8 May 1907.
REVISION OF COMMERCIAL
TREATIES.
(Mr. Deakin.)