CO885-(10-11) — Page 39

2

legally and actually in the possession and exercise of the right suggested. The circular does not instruct the Consul to make the claim in question.

I merely suggest these topics in the event of the Governor finding himself, as it were, forced into a correspondence with the Consul. I repeat, however, that he should as far as practicable decline all discussion with the Consul on the matter.

The Right Hon. Lord John Russell,

&c.

&c.

&c.

I am, &c. (Signed) J. D. HARDING.

5744.

No. 20.

(MAURITIUS.)

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

mimim

TILLC.O.

885

10

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

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

MY LORD,

LAW OFFICERS to FOREIGN OFFICE.

-

Doctors' Commons, May 31, 1860. We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Lord Wodehouse's letter of the 5th instant, in which he stated that on the 30th of August last he referred to Her Majesty's Advocate General, by direction of your Lordship, certain papers upon the subject of a question which had arisen at the Mauritius as to the liability of the French Consul in that island to be summoned to appear before the Law Courts, and to produce the archives of his consulate for the purpose of forwarding the ends of justice. Lord Wodehouse was also pleased to say that on the 30th of the same month Her Majesty's Advocate General requested that further information should be obtained upon

the matter from the Mauritius, and that when such information was received the case should be again submitted to us for our opinion.

Lord Wodehouse was also pleased to say that the information required having now arrived he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us the letter from the Colonial Office in which that information was contained, and also some additional cor- respondence on the subject which had passed between the Foreign Office and the French Embassy in London, also between the Foreign Office and the Colonial Office. Lord Wodehouse was also pleased to request that we would take those papers, together with the former papers which were also enclosed, into our consideration and favour your Lordship with our opinion thereupon.

In obedience to your Lordship's commands we have taken the enclosed documents into our consideration, and have the honour to

Report

}

That we concur generally with the view taken of this case by Mr. Dickson, the Advocate General of the Mauritius.

The French Consul has no personal exemption from attendance in a court in obedience to a "subpoena." He should have attended and stated his objection to produce his consular registers; of the validity of which the Court would have judged.

It is impossible for Her Majesty's Government to interfere with its courts of justice or the rules of procedure therein.

There is no rule of international law which entitles consuls to any diplomatic privi. leges, or any legal exemption from ordinary judicial process. They have none such by English law, and Her Majesty's Government has never, as far as we are aware, insisted upon British Consuls being entitled to any such privileges, or exemptions, in France.

It is not practicable to lay down beforehand any positive rules as to the questions which a consul, when examined as a witness, may, or may not, be compelled to answer, or as to the documents which he may or may not be compelled to produce; either he or one of the parties must formally object to such production at the hearing and state the ground of objection; and the Court must decide. Her Majesty's Government has no power whatever to interfere in this matter.

The Lord John Russell.

We have, &c.

(Signed)

J. D. HARDING.

RICHARD BETHELL.

W. WHARTON.

0 16970,-695. 25,-9/86.