CO885-(13-15) — Page 476

25007.

*

SIB,

No. 121.

(SOUTH AFRICA.)

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference:

C.O.885

14 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Royal Courts of Justice,

December 4th, 1896.

We were honoured with your commands, signified in Mr. Wingfield's letter of the 28th ultimo, stating that, with reference to our report of the 21st October last* on the subject of the Bill recently passed by the Volksraad of the South African Republic relating to the expulsion of aliens, he was directed by you to lay before us the enclosed copy of the Act as passed.

That it would be seen that the wording of the Act differed considerably from that of the Bill, and that Mr. Wingfield was to request that we would inform you whether our report applied to the Act, or whether we would desire to modify it in view of the difference between the Act and the Bill.

That Mr. Wingfield was also to draw our attention to the report of the Law Officers to the Foreign Office of the 1st November 1883 on the case of the expulsion of the Salvationists from certain Cantons of Switzerland, and especially to the passage beginning, "We do not think it would constitute a violation," which might be thought to place a somewhat different construction upon a clause in the Treaty between Great Britain and Switzerland similar in language to Article XIV. of the Convention with the South African Republic from that which we placed upon that Article.

That Mr. Wingfield was also to refer us to Wharton's Digest of International Law of the United States S. 206 (Vol. II., pp. 516 et seq.) as showing the views of the Government of the United States of America upon the effect of Treaty provisions similar in character to Article XIV. of the Convention, and to ask us to consider whether by treating the Act of the Volksraad as an infringement of Article XIV. of the Convention Her Majesty's Government would give a handle to foreign Governments with which Great Britain bad treaties containing similar Articles to object on treaty grounds to such legislation as the Aliens Bill introduced by the Marquess of Salisbury in the House of Lords in 1894.

We have taken the matter into consideration, and, in obedience to your commands have the honour to

Report-

That our report of the 21st of October last does not apply to the Act of the Volksraad as passed.

That Act renders liable to expulsion, or confinement to a particular place of residence, aliens who have been guilty of acts or proceedings imperilling the public peace. Such acts or proceedings are, it must be assumed, in contravention of the law of the Transvaal. We think, as stated in our previous report, that Her Majesty's Government are not entitled to insist that there should have been a conviction in a Court of Law before the Transvaal Executive could take summary proceedings,

The difference between the Bill and the Act seems to us to be vital. The former did, and the latter does not, render liable to expulsion, or restriction, aliens who conform to the law.

In view of the wording of the Act, we do not recommend that Her Majesty's Government should protest against it as in itself an infraction of the 14th Article of the Convention of 1884. At the same time, as it is manifestly capable of being abused so as to infringe that Article, we do not recommend that there should be any admission of its validity. We would suggest that the Transvaal Government should be notified that Her Majesty's Government in view of the 14th Article of the Convention, cannot admit the right of the Transvaal Government to expel or restrain any foreigners who are not shown to have failed to conform to the laws of the Republic, and reserve the right to object to any proceedings under the Act which may amount to an infraction of the Convention.

The passage in the report of the Law Officers of the 1st November 1883, which is referred to in the third paragraph of the Despatch to which we are now replying had not escaped our attention, and was fully considered by us before making our report. We only think it necessary to observe that a consideration

◊ 90536.-33. 25.-19/96.

* No. 118.