Coll 34/7 'Slavery: Slave Traffic and Gun-running: Right of search by H. M. ships in the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf' [‎201r] (401/576)

[A 6362/6361/60]
43
No. 27.
Foreign Office to Admiralty.
Foreign Office, November 6, 1923.
WITH reference to your letter of the 21st September last, I am directed b> the
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to transmit to you herewith, for the information
of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, a memorandum regarding the right of
search in the Red Sea and adjacent waters {a) for arms and (b) for sla\es.
I am, &c
G. R. WARNER.
Enclosure in No. 27.
Memorandum on the Fight of Search (I) for Arms, (II) for Slaves.
i
\
I. —Arms.
THE position with regard to the right of search for arms in the Red Sea and adjacent
waters is as follows
2. The Arms Traffic Convention of the 10th September, 1919, was not ratified by
the principal signatories mainly because the United States Congress refused to pass the
necessary legislation to give it effect. Accordingly, in July 1920, the British, Belgian,
French, Italian and Japanese Governments arrived at an informal agreement that the
protocol (which provides that pending ratification the signatories shall not act in a
manner contrary to the provisions of the convention) should be regarded as applying
only to the provisions of the convention relating to the “ prohibited zone (see
article 6, &c ). Thus the cruisers of the above-mentioned Government have the right of
searching for arms on native vessels flying the British. French, Belgian, Italian and
Japanese flags within the prohibited zone under the conditions specified. By custom,
native vessels met within the zone may be searched for arms whatever flag they may be
flying. Prior to the signature of the Convention of 1919 the importation of arms
into Abyssinia was regulated by the Arms Agreement of 1906 between the United
Kingdom, France and Italy. This agreement provides for the search for arms of dhows
trading with the ports of the signatories. His Majesty’s Government regard the Agree
ment of 1906 as superseded by the Convention of 1919.
3. The following States have acceded to the Arms Traffic Convention and Protocol :
Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Finland, Guatemala, Hayti, Muscat, Persia, Peru and Venezuela,
and they may perhaps be regarded in strictness as bound by the protocol until they raise
any objection thereto.
II. — Slaves.
4. There is no longer any general convention in force according the right of search
for slaves. The Convention of the 10th September, 1919, revising the Berlin and
Brussels Acts, does not reproduce the clauses of the latter regarding the maritime
supervision of the slave trade. It merely states in article 11 that the signatories
“ will en ieavour to secure the complete suppression of slavery in all its forms and of the
“ slave trade by land and sea.” The right of reciprocal search granted to the
signatories by the Brussels Act is therefore abrogated by the revising convention.
Treaties are, however, still in force between His Majesty’s Government and the following
States by which the cruisers of the former are allowed to search the vessels of the latter
for slaves, viz. : Borneo, Egypt (vessels under 500 tons), Italy, Liberia, Muscat, Persia,
Spain (vessels under 500 tons), Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. chiefs (Bahrein, Aboothabie, Shargah,
Ras-el-Khymah, Ajman, Amulgavine and Debaye).
5. In practice His Majesty’s ships search native vessels for slaves, whatever flag
they may be flying, within the zone specified in the Brussels Act.
Foreign Office, November 6, 1923.
G 2
[11338]