Page 230 - Gulf Precis (V)_Neat

32
British flng. She is, therefore, liablo to ho forfeited to Her Majesty under Srotion 103 of 17
gnd 18 Vio., Cap. 101. Colonel Herbert should, l think, be called upon to roport specifically as
to tho nationality of the vessel ; and if she turns out to ho Persian, Mr. Alisou should bo moved
to remonstrnto and obtain orders forbidding the Governor of Mohamrnh, or the owner, from
flying the British flag. IE she persists in flying it, she should be confiscated.”
Tlio Hon’blo J. P. Stoplion romarked
“ Tho Soclion roferred to is very difficult to construe, inasmuch qb its terms would appear
to authorize tho 6cizuro by au English cruiser of a Fronch ship which hoisted tho English flog.
I do uot think that this can ho tho meauing of the Act. It must, 1 think, be supposed that
the Act was meant to agree with tho rules of international law, and by thoso rules nothing will
justify the roizure of a foreign vessel, except some act (such as running blockade, carrying
contraband of war, or the liko) which is an offence against international law. The mere
assumption by a ship of one nation of the flag or national character of a different nation is not,
so far as I know, an international offence which would by itself warrant ecizuro, and the
municipal law of England would not extend, unless tho very clearest intention to extend it was
apparent from its terms, to foreign ships. Of course Parliament could pass a law that every
French ship which hoisted an English flag should bo seized and forfeited ; but to do so would
be an act of war, and it cannot be supposed that it is the intention of the Merchant Shipping
Act to authorize such an act. I think, therefore, that tho section must bo read thus
“ If any person U6es tho British flag and assumes tho British national chnraofcer on board
any ship tuOjecl to the law of England, owned in whole, or in part, by any persons not entitled
by law to own British ships for the purposo of making such ship appear to be a British ship,
■hall bo forfoilod to Her Majesty.
“The following considerations favor this view :—Section 18 provides that * no ship shall
be deemed a British ship* unless she belongs wholly to natural born British subjects or
denizeni. In a wider sense, a ship owned by persons owing a temporary allegiance to the
Queen as residents in England, either in whole or in part, would be a British ship, and, os such,
would be liable to hostile capture. Thero is, therefore, a class of ships to which the section
would apply, vi*., British ships in tho more general sense of the words, as opposed to British
■hips as defined by Section 18.
“ In Phillimorc’a International Law, Volume IV, page 601, an account is given of
‘those sections of the Merchant Shipping Act which bear in any degroe upon questions of
Maritime International law.’
“Section 103 is not mentioned but Sections 527 and 528, which authorize the arrest
of foreign ship under curtain circumstances, are referred to. Those sections ure in part
as follows * Whenever any injury has, in any part of the world, been caused to uny
properly by any foreign ship, if at any time thereafter such ship is found in. any port
or river of the United Kingdom, or within three miles of the coast thereof, the ship may be
detained. When foreign ships are referred to, care is taken to name them expressly, and to
confine the power of dealing with them to the case of their being within tho Queen's jurisdic­
tion/
“ Again, the section in question (103) exempts the ships referred to from seizure, if
they hoist the British flag ‘ for the purpose of escaping capture by an enemy or by a foreign
■hip of war in the exercise of 6ume belligerent right.'
" A ship would hardly wish to hoist the British flag (except as a stratagem, wbioh I do
not think. i6 the case intended) unless it was in some sense a British ship—a British ship, that
is, as against foreigners, though not within the meaning of the Merchant Shipping Aot.
Finally, Part II of the Act applies, by Section 17, to * the whole of Her Majesty's domi­
nions.' Neither Bushirenor the shore of the Persian Gulf, nor the High Seas aro part of Her
Majesty's dominions. I think, therefore, that, even if the Section applied to the Snipe, she
ought not to be seized out of Her Majesty's dominions/'
129. Colonel Herbert ascertained that the Snipe was a registered British
vessel belonging to Messrs. David, Sassoon & Co. of Bombay. That firm, on
being asked for information with regard to tho vessel, replied
“We have to state that tho Snipe was purchased io London by our firm there, on account
of Hajce Zainel Abadeen, a naturalized British subject, in accordance with his instructions. Our
firm registered the steamer in our name, and valued for the cost in bills in our favour, with
instructions, when the bills are paid, to transfer tho Snipe to his name. Hajco Zainol Abadeen
paid us the cost of tho steamer by instalments up to November 1870, and on tho 22nd of the
■■me month we made tlo bill of sale in his name, immediately after which tho Snipe 6aued
from Bombay, and returned only last month. We, therefore, had no opportunity till now to
get the register made out in his name, which, however, has now been done.”
130. The Commander of the vessel deposed
" The steamer is now registered in the name of Ruben David Sassoon, of London; ft
Power of Attorney is held by the firm in Bombay. In October or November last *he was