PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
TLC.O.885
13 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
2
That in a note signed at the same time as the Agreement, your Lordship stated that "Her Britannic Majesty's Government reserves expressly the approval of the British
Parliament before the above-mentioned Agreement is put into execution." That that approval had been given by both Houses of Parliament, and that your Lordship had given the French Government full assurances and explanations on that point in your note to M. Waddington of the 1st instant; but that France, having received those assurances,
had no right, as appeared to your Lordship, to investigate the municipal arrangements by which Great Britain proposed to secure the performance of her inter- national duty, nor to dictate to Great Britain the particular modus operandi which she must select for the carrying out of her engagements.
That the Arbitration Agreement contained no stipulation whatever with regard to methods or processes to be employed by either Government to ensure the execution of its provisions, and that the inference from that fact, as from the general principles of inter- national law, would equally seem to be that each party was to be left entirely unfettered to choose such means as, in its judgment, were most suitable and effective for the pur- pose, while the other party retained the right of remonstrance or resistance if those means should, in practice, be found to be inefficacious or illusory.
That Sir Thomas Sanderson was to add that, so far as the Foreign Office was aware, Her Majesty's Government had made no admission either in various Treaties and Agree- ments entered into with respect to Newfoundland prior to the Agreement under considera- tion, and still binding as between Great Britain and France, or in the diplomatic corre- spondence which had passed between the two Powers, which could be appealed to as modifying in this particular case those general considerations of international law which governed, as between nations, the discharge of their respective Treaty obligations.
That in case, however, of our wishing to consult the principal documents from which the obligations of Great Britain in the matter under consideration were derived, Sir Thomas Sanderson was more particularly to refer us to the following:
Article XIII. of the Treaty of Utrecht, 1713; Article V. of the Treaty of Paris, 1763;
*--
Articles IV. and V. of the Treaty of Versailles, 1783, together with the Decla- rations attached thereto (see Hertslet's "Commercial Treaties," vol. i., p. 237-245); and to-
Article XIII of the Treaty of Paris, 1814 (see Hertslet's “Treaties," vol. i.,
p. 253).
That Sir Thomas Sanderson was to request that we would take the papers transmitted with his letter into our consideration, and that we would favour your Lordship with our opinion as to whether the views indicated above as those which your Lordship was dis- posed to take upon the French contention were sound in international law, as applied to the particular circumstances of the case; or whether we considered that they might advantageously be modified or developed. That in the latter event your Lordship would be obliged for any suggestions or additions, either in the form of a Memorandum or otherwise, as was most convenient to ourselves, with which we might be good enough to favour you.
I
We have taken the matter into our consideration, and, in obedience to your Lordship's commands, have the honour to
Report-
That, in our opinion, the views expressed by your Lordship, as stated in Sir Thomas Sanderson's letter to us of the 13th June, and in your Lordship's letter to M. Wadding- ton of the 1st June, and that to Lord Lytton of the 10th June, are entirely sound in international law as applied to the case before us; and we do not feel it necessary to make any suggestion thereon or addition thereto.
We have, &c. (Signed) RICHARD f. WebstER.
EDWARD CLARKE.
B
List of Papers.
1. Agreement between Great Britain and France
2. M. Waddington
3. To ditto -
4. To the Earl of Lytton
5. M. Waddington
6. To ditto -
7. Colonial Office
8. The Earl of Lytton
9. M. Waddington
10. To the Earl of Lytton 11. Ditto
-
March 11, 1891.
**
-
March 11,
33
-
March 11,
"
(No. 160) May 27,
39
-
May 28,
"
June
-
June
2.
"
·
(No. 192) June
4,
June
7, 35
(No. 180) June 10, (No. 181) June 10,
17
#5
MEMORANDUM by the LORD CHANCELLOR.
per-
I HAVE read and entirely agree with the Report of the Law Officers herein. The matter is of the greatest importance as a precedent. It would introduce topics of petual disagreement among Powers, the internal constitutions of which varied, and unless the broad proposition is adhered to, that one Power has simply the right to call other Power to fulfil its Treaty engagements, I do not know where the assumed right of upon the dictation or even remonstrance would end.
House of Lords, June 19, 1891
• See No. 145 in North American No. 146.
† See No. 443 in
↑ See No. 445′′ in
ditto.
ditto.
(Signed)
HALSBURY,
§ See No. 456 in North American No. 146.
See No. 169 in See No. 502 in
Į
ditto. ditto.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference. :-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
IRE
REPRODICED BUNTOCRANUS
RECORD
1! z| 4[4 PUBLIC
OFFICE
Reference :--
5 KH
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.