CO885-(13-15) — Page 414

15746/98.

5

MY LORD,

No. 86 (2).

(NIGER.)

LAW OFFICERS TO FOREIGN OFFICE.

Royal Courts of Justice, June 12, 1895.

We were honoured with your Lordship's commands signified in Sir H. Percy Anderson's letter of the 4th instant, requesting our opinion as to the entrance into the Forcados branch of the river Niger of a steam-launch named the "Fuji."

We have taken the papers into our consideration, and, in obedience to your Lordship's commands, have the honour to

Report-

1. That in our opinion the officer in charge of the "Faji" was not justified in disregarding the regulations for the navigation of the river which have been issued by the Royal Niger Company.

The "Faji" was not entitled to any privileges beyond those common to trading vessels of all nations, and as such was bound to clear at Gana Gana and to produce invoices. The fact that she was carrying stores to the "Ardent" did not enlarge her rights, for the Ardent" was not entitled to enter the Niger without permission, and, even if such permission had been granted to the Ardent," it would not have of itself conferred upon vessels chartered to supply her any exemption from compliance with the river regulations. Compliance with these regulations was necessary to enable the Niger Company's officers to ascertain her destination and character.

2. That we cannot perceive in those regulations anything inconsistent with the engagements entered into by this country at the Berlin Conference, either as regards vessels entering the river in transit, or as regards those not in transit.

that no vessel entering

We understand by the provision relating to "relâche forcée

the Niger from stress of weather, or other necessity, simll pay any duty or import for thus seeking refuge. This provision corresponds in substance and is closely similar in expression to Article CXIV. of the Vienna Act, and Article XIV, of the Berlin Act relating to the Congo.

We do not know why there is any difference in the wording, but the sense appears

the same.

3. That the action of the Commander of the "Ardent" in releasing the "Faji" by force was unjustifiable. Even supposing that he might urge the plea of a necessity to obtain supplies (a necessity which could not have arisen but for his own illegal act in entering the river), there was no unconditional refusal by Mr. McTaggart to allow the Faji" to proceed, but merely a demand for compliance with lawful regulations, and it was the duty of the Commander of the " Ardent instead of defying them. His action was wholly indefensible.

to procure obedience to those regulations

4. In the papers sent to us upon this occasion, it appears that vessels can navigate the Niger, or its affluents, to points beyond the British Protectorate. inference of fact, which we drew from the materials submitted to us when considering If that be so, the the case of the "Ardent," viz., that rapids would prevent her from ascending beyond the British Protectorate, may be an erroneous inference.

2379-2-199 131 23147 PAS

5

We have, &c..

R. T. REID. FRANK LOCKWOOD.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

C.O. 885

Reference :-

14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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