CO885-(1-2) — Page 254

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TILLC.O. 885

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

48

Treaties.

tional, in cases where the other Power may not choose to fulfil the condition. To make the exact extent of this difficulty visible, it is requi- site to go into some detail with regard to our State of our treaties with the following Powers, Sweden, Spain and Denmark, the South American States, France, Holland, the Hanse Towns, and the large class of countries with which we have treaties containing "favoured nation” clauses.

I. Sweden.

With Sweden we have several treaties of ancient, and one of modern date, which contain stipulations binding either country to treat the other upon the footing of the most favoured nation. It has been held, and I think rightly, that were we to admit the ships of any country into the reserved trades, though upon condition that British ships should be admitted into the corresponding trades of that country, we should be bound to admit Swedish ships into the same trades, without obtaining the fulfilment of a

similar condition; and not only has an opinion

to this effect been given by the law officers of

the Crown, but we have very recently instructed our Minister in Sweden to remonstrate against certain proposed alterations in the Swedish law, on the ground that they would be contrary to the treaties between the two countries; upon which he is officially directed to announce that England puts the construction above adverted to. It is true that Sweden has hitherto treated us with great liberality, and that, unless she alters her law, no diffi- culty would arise out of the stipulations of

the treaty; but, as has just been remarked, she has recently shown a disposition to alter her law, so as to give an advantage to Swedish ships engaged in the long voyages; and though she cannot make the particular alteration she pro- poses, she might make others that would lead to embarrassing results.

The modern treaty with Sweden is now termi- nable, but its termination would not dispose of

the difficulty.

49

11. Spain and Denınark.

We have a great number of treaties of ancient date with these two Powers, which are still in force, and which it is not in our power to termi- nate. They contain several stipulations, couched

in language quite as strong as that of our treaty with Sweden, binding us to treat those nations on the footing of the most favoured nation. Denmark treats foreign ships with great libe- rality, and our engagements to her would there. fore not be likely to lead to much practical difficulty. Spain, on the other hand, imposes very heavy differential duties on foreign ships, and there is no probability of her taking them off. Here then a difficulty would at once arise, for Spain would claim our privileges without fulfilling the conditions.

The only answer we could make to the Spanish claim would be, that the treaties subsisting be- tween us are of very aficient date; that they were framed under a different state of circum- stances; that it is doubtful whether they have not been abandoned; and that after all, we must appeal to practice as affording an interpretation

of them. We have long maintained, and do still maintain, higher duties on Spanish vessels than

on those of some other countries; and we did the same with regard to Danish vessels between the years 1810 and 1824. Yet it was never contended that our doing so was a violation of our treaties with those Powers. This is an argument likely to be used. There is some force in it as affecting the imposition of countervailing duties; but I do not think

it so applicable to questions relating to the prohibition of intercourse. Where the practice has always been at variance with what at first sight appears to be the literal construction of the Treaty, it certainly raises a presumption that the Treaty was understood by the parties in a sense somewhat different from its letter; but such presumptions must not be pushed too far. Granted that the practice proves that discrim- inating duties were not provided against by the general expressions that were used, it does not