CO885-(11-13) — Page 81

9308.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

C.O.

Reference :-

885

11 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

MY LORD,

No. 783.

(Hong KoNG.)

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

We are honoured with your Lordship's commands, signified in Mr. Holland's

Temple, September 16, 1872. letter of the 7th instant stating, he was directed by your Lordship to transmit to us the copy of a letter from the Admiralty of the 2nd August, enclosing a Report of Mr. Rothery upon the subject of the arrest in May last at Hong Kong of the French Messageries Maritimes steamship "Ava" under warrant of the local Vice Admiralty Court.

-

2. That the Report entered so fully into the facts of the case, that it appeared unnecessary to trouble us with copies of the documents transmitted from Hong Kong, and the more so as the principal question upon which your Lordship desired our opinion was one of law, depending upon the construction of the Postal Convention with France, of 24th September 1856, which is to be found in the 10th vol of Hertslet's Treaties, p. 108 (copies annexed).

3. That, as bearing upon that question, he (Mr. Holland) was to state that in 1869 the Queen's Advocate was consulted as to the legality of an arrest at Hong Kong of some sailors on board the Messageries Imperiales steamer "Tigre."

4. That in his first opinion he assumed that the "Tigre" was not engaged in the conveyance of correspondence but in the conveyance of luggage only, and upon that assumption he reported that the "Tigre" was not employed in execution of Articles 1 and 2 of the convention, so as to be within the scope of Article V.

5. That the French Ambassador when informed of that opinion* remonstrated against it, and the further opinion of the Queen's Advocate was conveyed in a letter from Lord Clarendon to the French Minister (copy enclosed).

6. That there could be no doubt, your Lordship believed, that the “Ava" was subsi- dised, as was the "Tigre," by the French Government.

7. That in these circumstances your Lordship requested to be favoured with our opinion upon the following questions:-

1. Whether a French vessel which was engaged in the French Government Postal Service and called in either occasionally or regularly in the course of her voyage at some British port, was exempt under the terms of the Postal Convention from the liability which attached to all other vessels for any damage which she might have done in collision with any other vessel.

2. Whether if such a vessel was not within the terms of the convention, but was chartered or subsidised by a foreign government for the postal service she would be entitled to an exemption from such liability.

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

Report

That in our opinion French vessels which are national or the property of the French Government, and vessels which are chartered or subsidised by the French Government employed for the conveyance of correspondence between French and English ports are within the 5th Article of the Postal Convention, and may not on any account be diverted from their especial duty, or be liable to seizure, detention, embargo, or arret de Prince.

But it does not follow that such vessel is exempt from the liability attaching to other vessels for damage which she may have done in collision; redress in such cases must, however, be sought through and with the consent (where the liablity is disputed and the question of fact is to be tried) of the French Government.

2. Where a vessel is not within the terms of the convention and not national pro- perty, but merely chartered or subsidised by a foreign government for the postal service, we are of opinion that she has no claim to any exemption whatever.

In giving your Lordship our opinion upon the two questions which you have directed to be put to us, we have confined ourselves to the very terms in which those questions and Articles 2 and 5 of the Postal Convention are framed.

D

16978-574.

25.-5/86.

• See No. 562a.

2