Skip to main content

Mexico—Diplomatic Relations

Volume 217: debated on Tuesday 5 August 1873

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.


asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether any communication has been received from the Government of Mexico, or through the Representative of any friendly Power accredited to that Government, on the subject of the renewal of Diplomatic communication with this country; and, if not, whether, considering that the Government of Earl Russell refused the offer of the United States of America to settle with the English bondholders, and thereby used the debt for purposes of State, the present Government is prepared to take steps to protect the property of the English creditors in Mexico—that is to say, the Land and Customs Dues, assigned to the English bondholders, but now being used by Mexico for other financial purposes, notwithstanding such assignments?

Sir, no official communication of the nature alluded to in the hon. Member's Question has been received for some time past by the Foreign Office, and in the present state of relations with Mexico Her Majesty's Government are not prepared to take any steps with that country in reference to British claims of any kind.

Patent Rights—International Conference, Vienna—Question

asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he has seen the following statement which appeared in the Continental telegrams to-day:—

"Vienna, Aug. 4.—The first International Patent Congress was opened to-day.….The official representatives of the various Governments present were: —England—Mr. T. . Webster."
Whether it is or is not correct that Mr. Webster represents the Government of this country; and, if not, whether the Under Secretary does not think it expedient to take means to prevent other misapprehensions that must ensue from that learned Gentleman being received, and his part in the proceedings seeming entitled to he recognized as more than the facts of the case warranted?

in reply, said, that he had no reason to believe that Mr. Webster was officially authorized to represent the Patent Law Commission at the International Patent Law Congress at Vienna. He had no doubt that misapprehension on the subject would be avoided by the hon. Member having called attention to the subject.