§ Mr. BEAUCHAMP
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Article 35 of the Declaration agreed to at the International Naval Conference implies that additional contraband is liable to capture when found on board a vessel bound for the territory belonging to or occupied by the enemy, although not 1142 shown to be destined for the use of the armed forces or of a government department of the enemy state?
§ Mr. BOWLES
asked whether the Constitutional impossibility alleged by the United States delegates at the London Naval Conference of allowing appeals from decisions of the United States Supreme Court to be taken to an international court exists also in this country in regard to decisions of the Privy Council; and, if not, whether His Majesty's Government propose, without reference to Parliament, to submit the decisions of the supreme judicial authority in this country to review and possible reversal at the hands of a new tribunal unknown to English law?
§ Mr. T. McKINNON WOOD
I have already informed the House that the legislation necessary to give effect to the provisions of the International Prize Court Convention will, in due course, be submitted for the approval of Parliament. If and when such legislation has been passed there will be no Constitutional difficulties in the way of appeals from decisions of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council being taken before the International Court at The Hague. In this respect, His Majesty's Government have been given to understand that the position in the United States is different, since an act of the Legislature giving effect to the International Prize Court Convention might, and, we are informed, would, probably, be declared by the United States Supreme Court to be contrary to the United States Constitution, and therefore invalid.
§ Mr. BOWLES
Do we understand that no steps will be taken to submit the decisions of the supreme authority of this country to an international court without the previous assent of both Houses of Parliament?