"التحكيم في قضية مراكب الداو الشراعية في مسقط. محكمة التحكيم الدائمة في لاهاي. السماح برفع الأعلام الفرنسية على مراكب الداو الشراعية في مسقط. القضية بالنيابة عن الحكومة البريطانية". [ظ‎‎٤‎٢] (٢٠٨/٩٣)

the Orders in Council of 1899 for the islands of Zanzibar and Pemba and the continental portions
of the Sultanate of Zanzibar placed under British protection.
I have pleasure in confirming the Agreement thus come to, the terms of which are correctly
described in your Excellency's note.
His Majesty's Government take note of your statement that it has been decided to close the
French Consular Court at Zanzibar on the 15th September next.
flis Majesty's Government will make such arrangements as are required on their part for the
due execution of those portions of the Agreement which relate to French proteges, and, without
entering into the judicial question of the right of the Zanzibar Government to expel the nationals
or proteges of foreign Powers by administrative process, they are willing to give an assurance
that no such action shall be taken against French citizens or proteges without the concurrence of
the French Consul,
1 take note with satisfaction of your Excellency's statement that it is the intention of the
French Government to take measures without delay for winding up and closing the French post-
office at Zanzibar.
I am, &c.
(Signed) LANSDOWNE.
APPENDIX 5.
Wildenhus Case.
" Homicide was committed in the course of an atfray between two members of the crew of a
Belgian ship lying in the port of Jersey City in the United States. A claim was made by
the Belgian Consul that the offence was justiciable only under Belgian law, because of the
terms of the Convention of the 9th March, 1880, between Belgium and the United States.
The controversy was settled in the Supreme Court of the United States by a decision that
the offence was justiciable in the State of New Jersey." (Wildenhus' Case 1887.,
reported 7 Supreme Court Reporter 385 and 120 U.S. Supreme Court Reports 1.;
Below is an extract from the iudgment of Mr. Waite, then Chief Justice of the United
States:—
" It is part of the law of civilized nations that, when a merchant-vessel of one country enters
the ports of another for the purposes of trade, it subjects itself to the law of the place to which it
goes, unless, by Treaty or otherwise, the two countries have come to some different under
standing or agreement; for, as was said by Chief Justice Marshall in The Exchange 7 Cranch,
144 ; 'It would be obviously inconvenient and dangerous to society, and would subject the laws
to continual infraction and the Government to degradation, if such merchants did not
owe temporary and local allegiance, and were not amenable to the jurisdiction of the country.'
(United States v. Diekelman 92, U.S. 520; 1 Phillim., 'Int. Law' (3rd Ed.) 483, section 351;
Twiss, ' Law Nat.,'229, section 159 ; Creasy, * Int. Law,' 167, section 176; Halleck, 'Int. Law'
(1st Ed.), 171.) And the English Judges have uniformly recognized the rights of the Courts of
the country of which the port is part to punish crimes committed by one foreigner on another
in a foreign merchant-ship. (Reg. v. Cunningham Bell, 'Cr. Cas.,' 72; S.C. 8, Cox, ' Cr. Cas.,'
104; Reg. v. Anderson, 11, Cox, ' Cr. Cas.,' 198, 204; S.C.L.R. 1, 'Cr. Cas.,' 161, 165;
Reg. v, Keyn 13, Cox, 'Cr. Cas.,' 403, 486, 525; S.C. 2, Exch. Div., 63, 161, 213.) As the owner
has voluntarily taken his vessel, for his own private purposes, to a place within the dominion
of a Government other than his own, and from which he seeks protection during his stay, he owes
that Government such allegiance, for the time being, as is due for the protection to which he
becomes entitled.
"From experience, however, it was found long ago that it would be beneficial to commerce
if the local Government would abstain from interfering with the internal discipline of the ship,
and the general regulation of the rights and duties of the officers and crew towards the vessel, or
among themselves. And so by comity it came to be generally understood among civilized
nations that all matters of discipline, and all things done on board, which afiected only the
vessel, or those belonging to her, and did not involve the peace or dignity of the country, or the
tranquillity of the port, should be left by the local Government to be dealt with by the
authorities of the nation to which the vessel belonged as the laws of that nation, or the interests
of its commerce, should require. But if crimes are committed on board of a character to
disturb the peace and tranquillity of the country to which the vessel has been brought, the
offenders have never, by comity or usage, been entitled to any exemption from the operation of
the local laws for their punishment, if the local tribunals see fit to assert their authority. Such
being the general public law on this subject. Treaties and Conventions have been entered into by
nations having commercial intercourse, the purpose of which was to settle and define the rights
and duties of the Contracting Parties with respect to each other in these particulars, and thus
prevent the inconvenience that might arise from attempts to exercise conflicting jurisdictions."