670099-1885-Legislative-Council-8th-April-1885- — Page 3

THE HONGKONG GOVERNMENT GAZETTE, 18TH APRIL, 1885.

313

GOVERNMENT HOUSE, HONGKONG, 7th March, 1885.

"MY LORD, I have the honour to report that I yesterday telegraphed to your Lordship in the following terms :-

The French Consul informs me that a blockade will be established from March the 7th on Pakhoi and the neighbouring coast of China, from the frontier of Tonquin to the 107th meridian of longitude.'

2. This blockade was announced to the French Consul at Hongkong by a telegram from Captain DE BEAUMONT, commanding the French Naval Forces in Tonquin, dated at Haiphong on the 5th instant. It was added that no notice of the blockade could be given to the Foreign Consuls at Pakhoi, as no communications were possible between the French Naval Forces and that port. Consequently, I telegraphed to the above effect to the British Consul at Pakhoi (Mr. ALLEN).

3. It appears that the longitude referred to is reckoned by the French from Paris; and therefore, the blockade would seem to extend from the Frontier of Tonquin to a short dis- tance to the East of the Treaty Port of Pakhoi; which contains about 25,000 inhabitants and is the outlet of a large district.-Public Notice (By Proclamation in the Hongkong Government Gazette of March 7th 1885) of the blockade has been given at Hongkong, which carries on a considerable trade with Pakhoi; and Admiral Sir W. DOWELL has despatched thither the British Gun-boat Espoir.

4. It will be understood that the French are now blockading parts of the coast of China both to the North and to the South of Hongkong."

As is mentioned in this despatch, I lost no time in causing public notice of the blockade to be given in the Hongkong Government Gazette of March 7th, and there was a further notice in the Gazette of March 28th, when the British Consul at Pakhoi had sent me, under flying seal, a letter addressed to Her Majesty's Minister at Peking, to the effect that the blockade was then in active operation, being carried on by two French Men-of-war. This is all that I know concerning the blockade of Pakhoi.

The Council is, of course, aware (as the Honourable Gentlemen stated,) that all questions of the nature of that now under consideration should properly be addressed to the British Minister at Peking, who is ex-Officio Superintendent of Trade in China, and not to the Governor of Hongkong, whose jurisdiction is limited by law to the waters of this Colony. And it will be recollected that the Chamber of Commerce has hitherto acted on this prin- ciple, and has addressed its correspondence on matters affecting the trade of this community direct to the Minister, without even transmitting the letters through the Governor. The Honourable Member has, I think, given reasons which will be deemed sufficient by the British Legation in China, for treating the present case as an exception to the general rule of the Chamber. Moreover, I have always considered myself justified in addressing both Her Majesty's Governinent and my late lamented friend, Sir HARRY PARKES, on all matters affecting the commercial and general interests of this Colony. Thus I have reported, both by telegraph and by despatch, all the French blockades and other proceedings which can affect, directly or indirectly, the trade of this community; such as the stopping and search of the Glenroy, and of other British Merchant vessels, and of one of the P. & O. steamers; and the declaration of the French that they will treat rice as contraband of war. My instructions from the Imperial Authorities on this subject are to the effect that they recognise the exercise by the French of the customary rights of Belligerent nations, and that the legality any seizure of a British ship by French cruizers "must depend, in the first instance, on the decision of the Prize Court, subject to ulterior diplomatic action."

of

These instructions confirm in principle the opinion given two months ago by my responsible Legal Adviser (the Attorney General), when one of the leading Mercantile Firms here asked a question of the Government as to whether coal would be regarded by the French as contraband of war; and suggested that the Home Government should be consulted on this point. I was then advised that "Neither the Imperial Government, nor the Colonial Government can give an authoritative opinion on questions of this nature, nor should any such application as that suggested be made to the Home Government.

Whatever cargo private firms carry in their ships on the China Seas under present circumstances, they carry entirely at their own risk.”

I was further advised in connexion with this question that "it is of the utmost import- ance that the Colonial Government should not give any legal opinion upon matters of this kind; for otherwise it may find itself involved in dangerous responsibilities,

(1.) To the Belligerents; for acts which, though harmless from an international point of view so long as they are distinctly the acts of private persons only, and done without the sanction or connivance of the Government, might, if they were done under the positive sanction or advice of the Government, form a proper subject of complaint by the Belligerents.