Question
asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Anglo - American Commissioners have Instructions to discuss with the American Government the advisability of England and America, as the two great Maritime Powers, co-operating to effect such changes in Maritime International Law as may minimize the risk of collision between neutrals and belligerents?
Sir, if this were a question relating exclusively to the Instructions of the Commissioners, and the subject were one that had never been opened before, I think I should ask my hon. Friend to excuse me from answering him, because I do not think it desirable that the topics of their Instructions should be brought out one by one before the public of this country. Whatever is done in that respect had better be done deliberately and of set purpose, and with the consent of the two countries by an understanding together. But, in truth, this was a subject that was mooted very long before the Commission sat, and that has been discussed between the Representatives of both countries at various periods during the last two years — indeed, during a considerable number of years, and ever since a certain stage of the great Civil War in America. And I may say to my hon. Friend that I shall be very much disappointed, as well as very much surprised, if any settlement that may be come to by the two countries does not include the consideration of those improvements which it may be found practicable to introduce into maritime international law.
Afterwards—
asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If Sir John Rose, who was reported to have been one of Her Majesty's Commissioners appointed to adjust all claims between Great Britain and the United States of America has resigned or been recalled; and, if so, why?
, in reply, said, it was the intention and wish of the Government that Sir John Rose should be one of the Commissioners; but for reasons, he believed, of an entirely private and personal nature, Sir John Rose felt himself unable to accept that position.