PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O.885
18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
Fourteenth Day.
9 May 1907.
BRITISH
INTERESTS IN THE PACIFIC. (Mr. Deakin.)
122
5+
since it springs out of the correspondence about land titles, these being in a very unsatisfactory position at that time. The French Commissaire Général had been requested to furnish his observations on the proposals made by the British Government with regard to the land claims in the New Hebrides, that is on page 1. The suggestion was that a local mixed commission would be necessary to deal with those land titles, but the French, Government thought there would be objections to investing such a commission with full powers, and thought it would be advisable at least to specify the nature of the evidence which could be put in on one side or the other. What was therefore suggested by them was not a commission to settle land titles, but only a chat between two officials to settle the terms on which evidence regarding these titles could be put in. The French Government suggested nothing more than verbal negotiations of a purely semi-official character between a French expert and a British official. That was the proposal. The translation given certainly does full justice to the French request, which will be found in the enclosure. Then comes the arrival of my August letter to which I have already referred. The French Government on October 5th agreed that the examination of title deeds should be trusted to a local mixed commission and suggested for the purpose of settling the powers to be entrusted to the commission, that the nature of the evidence which might be put in should be discussed in verbal nego- tiations of a purely semi-official character. That seems to me to be a little larger than the first proposal, "settling the powers to be entrusted seems an addition, but it is immaterial. Needless to say, of all this corre- spondence we heard nothing and knew nothing. So far as we were concerned it did not exist. On November the 4th, the Colonial Office tele- graphed to New Zealand to ascertain whether they were favourable to a joint Anglo-French protectorate. They received an answer given on page 5 to 'If no better arrangement could be made. They would prefer annexation, but failing that the island should be divided." Next, on page 4, we find that the "functionary named by the French is M. Saint-Germain, a senator of France, occupying a very considerable public position of influence in that country, and scarcely I should say, the kind of functionary contemplated in the earlier correspondence. In addition he is to be supported by two officials, one attached to the Cabinet of the Colonial Office of France, and the other attached to the Cabinet of Monsieur Clémenceau. We are thus prepared for the letter of December 6th, which shows that the next suggestion is that the scope of the commission should be enlarged to discuss the best means of terminating the difficulties which have arisen owing to the absence of jurisdiction over the natives of the islands. The French enclosure is given below. Then we find the Colonial Office informing the Foreign Office that three representatives of the French Government are expected in connection with establishing a land claim tribunal in the New Hebrides. Mr. Lyttelton, the Colonial Secretary, then submits, for the first time, that the opportunity should be taken to discuss verbally with them, if they were willing, the question of a joint protectorate. Of this, too, we knew nothing.
say:
11
We pass on now to a further communication of January 9th 1900, from the Foreign Office, enclosing a copy of a communication from the French Embassy. The chat between two officials about evidence has become a Commission-“au sujet de la Commission des Nouvelles Hebrides is the phrase used in No. 13. In addition to M. Saint-Germain, who has the title of Commissaire," there comes Monsieur Picanon, a very capable and high official, who had just been Governor of New Caledonia,” and Monsieur Weber, who is joint chief of the office of the Colonial Minister. In addition there is a Monsieur Gournay, who is to be secretary and interpreter.
14
123
9 May 1907.
BRITISH INTERESTS IN
THE PACIFIC. (Mr. Deakin.)
The single" functionary" has been transformed into a Senator, an ex-Governor Fourteenth Day. of New Caledonia, a joint secretary of the Ministry of the Colonies, and another gentleman from the same office. It is pointed out in the last paragraph that this is not an official Conference, but for the purpose of a simple exchange of views. It must be understood that we remained unaware of any of these proceedings. The distinguished gentlemen came to London, and the Convention sat in February 1906. Except for the information conveyed to us by ordinary newspaper cables, we were still unaware of its existence and of its character. "We had not the faintest conception of its scope. We saw the notices in the papers, and were somewhat surprised that the appointment of the French official and the British official who were to settle the manner in which the evidence on titles should be put in had not been communicated to us, but regarding the meeting in that light and remembering that it was to be unofficial and that everything was to be subject to after consideration, we supposed it was by a mere official oversight that we were being ignored upon a matter of small importance. It was not, in fact, until expressions of astonishment began to appear in the Australian papers after I had been questioned about the meeting, that the correspondents of English papers in Australia cabled to London some expression of surprise. It was then that we received the first reply by telegraph, which will be found on page 10, March 5th, 1906, referring to our unanswered despatch of August 29th and informing us that the "Joint Anglo-French Commission has signed Convention for submission to British and French Governments for settle- ment of questions in New Hebrides. Convention will not be confirmed until "His Majesty's Government has had opportunity of considering views of your "Ministers. Copy will be sent by next mail." This was signed by Lord Elgin. That was the first intimation we had that there was a Commission, that a convention had been drawn up and signed, and that it was to settle questions in the New Hebrides other than those affecting land titles.
C
There I can stop my recital of events. But it is at least a matter of interest and of some curiosity to know that though the Convention did not sit until February 1906, previously, in December 1905, there appeared in a French paper a forecast of the findings to be expected from this Commission which was posted to me by a very experienced and able member of the House of Commons. So that I was not altogether unprepared for the Convention when it arrived, seeing that it followed, according to the member who posted it to me, and according to my own recollection, the very lines on which the actual Convention was drawn up. That means nothing more than this, that the French Commission went into this meeting knowing exactly what they wanted, thoroughly well equipped with information, with the personal experience of M. Picanon in New Caledonia where he had been Governor for some time, and with the general knowledge of M. Saint-Germain. They knew what they wanted and what they intended to get. There need be no surprise if they got it-nor any suggestion of anything more than their address-knowing their own minds they were successful. Then comes a despatch to us dated March 9th, 1906, which I do not propose to refer to except to quote a line from page 14 the last paragraph, by which we were inforined that the draft Convention must be confirmed or rejected practically as it stands. Except the telegram, this was the first reply we had ever had to our suggestions of August 1905, which, as I have shown, were made in a purely tentative way and subject to consideration, and made only in default of other possibilities. The first information we got was a Convention which we had to confirm or reject practically as it stood. That intimation, it must be remembered, was not made to us by the British Colonial Office for its own purpose, but was an intimation to us that, having debated this matter with the French Commission its oflicers felt sure no better terms could