XLIV. ZANZIBAR.

§ 895.

"The existing treaty being the one signed with Muscat in 1833, to which the then Sultan (father of the present Sultan of Zanzibar) was a party, has, since the separation of Zanzibar from Muscat, been accepted, confirmed and announced by the Sultan of Zanzibar as effective and to be observed by him." Should a new treaty be concluded, the opportunity might be taken to secure for the consular officers of the United States in Zanzibar the rights, immunities. privileges and jurisdiction of the consuls of the most favored nation,” although it was not doubted that the Sultan, in consideration of the. friendship that had existed between the United States and Zanzibar, would voluntarily accord any and all such rights and privileges to American consular officers.

Mr. Bayard. Sec. of State, to Mr. Cheney, consul at Zanzibar, No. 43,
May 6, 1886, 117 MS. Desp. to Consuls, 515.

See, as to the relations of the United States to Zanzibar, Mr. Bayard.
Sec. of State, to Mr. von Alvensleben, German min., May 6, 1886, MS.
Notes to Germany, X. 435.

July 3, 1886, a treaty was concluded with the Sultan of Zanzibar in conformity with the foregoing instructions. It was approved by the Senate with two amendments. By the first there was stricken out, in the first line, Article II., after the word" consuls," the words" and consular agents." The effect of this was to limit the stipulated privileges to fully commissioned " consuls," by which term, however, was understood to be included a vice-consul, when acting as consul in the absence or incapacity of the consul. By the second amendment there were added, in line 4, Article II., after the word "shall," the words "in addition to the rights, powers, and immunities secured by said article," the purpose of the amendment being to make it clear that the American consuls in Zanzibar possessed specific as well as mostfavored-nation rights, powers, and immunities.

Mr. Rives, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Govea, No. 22, April 24, 1888, 125
MS. Inst. Consuls, 103.

"While Zanzibar was a part of the kingdom of Muscat, the probate and
other judicial powers of our consul at the city of Zanzibar were deter-
mined by the treaty of 1833 between the United States and Muscat.
But on the separation of Zanzibar from Muscat this treaty ceased to
have any force in the seceded territory, and our relations with Zanzi-
bar as an independent sovereignty have rested upon mutual good will
and the general principles of international law and usage. The
Sultan of Zanzibar has on several occasions expressed his willingness
to adopt and abide by the Muscat treaty, but the Department has
uniformly avoided acquiescence in that proposition, and has not been
disposed to recognize the Muscat treaty as controlling our relations
with Zanzibar, except as amended by the treaty signed July 3, 1886,

which was sent to you on the 24th ultimo for exchange of ratification. If this latter treaty shall be accepted by the Sultan, then by virtue of its express terms the Muscat treaty will be recognized as having been in force and as having controlled the relations of the two countries, from the beginning of the national existence of Zanzibar; but if the Sultan shall reject this treaty, the only recognition of the Muscat treaty which the United States has made will have become null and void and the relations of the two countries will be the same as they were before the negotiation of the pending treaty was begun.

"If, therefore, the new treaty goes into effect, the probate and consular
court jurisdiction of our consul at Zanzibar will be determined by
the Muscat treaty and the favored-nation clause. If the new treaty
fails of adoption, the judicial powers of the said consul will be
determinable only by international law and usage." (Mr. Rives,
Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Govea, No. 23, May 2, 1888, 125 MS. Inst.
Consuls, 186.)

The ratifications of the treaty of July 3, 1886, were exchanged June 29,
1888. (Treaty Volume, 1776–1887, p. 1209.)
The most-favored-nation clause in the treaty of July 3, 1886, refers to
the extent of jurisdiction, and does not make the laws of other gov-
ernments rules of decision for our consular courts.” (Mr. Wharton,
Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Moffat, Aug. 4, 1891, 182 MS. Dom. Let. 663.)

The United States acquiesced in the provisions of a draft ordinance 'framed by the British and German governments for restricting the importation of alcoholic liquors for the use of the native population of Zanzibar.

Mr. Sherman, Sec. of State, to Sir J. Pauncefote, British ambass., April 9, 1897, For. Rel. 1897, 257.

The United States is unable to make any change in the rates of duty and other charges prescribed in the treaty of September 21, 1833, except by a formal supplementary convention.

Mr. Sherman, Sec. of State. confid. promemoria, Nov. 8, 1897, MS. Notes to Br. Leg. XXIV. 58; Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Sir J. Pauncefote, No. 1338, Feb. 6, 1899, id. 437.

By a treaty between the United States and Great Britain, concluded May 31, 1902, an arrangement was made in regard to the establishment of import duties in that part of Zanzibar which is under British protection.

By a convention with Great Britain of February 25, 1905, the United States agrees to renounce" in the British protectorate of Zanzibar, and in that part of the mainland dominions of His Highness the Sultan of Zanzibar which lies within the protectorate of British East Africa," the extraterritorial rights secured to the United States by the treaty of September 21, 1833, between the United States and the Sultan of Muscat, and the treaty of July 3, 1886, between the United States and Zanzibar, it being agreed that British courts are to exercise jurisdiction. See supra, §§ 267, 786, 864.

XLV. MULTIPARTITE TREATIES.

$896.

"The provisions of the concluding paragraphs of the 11th article of the Universal Postal Convention of Paris reserve to the government of each country of the postal union the right to refuse to carry over its territory, or to deliver articles in regard to which the laws, ordinances, or decrees, which regulate the conditions of their publication or of their circulation in that country have not been complied with." Hence a law of the British government, excluding certain classes of publications from Great Britain, is not inconsistent with that convention.

Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, citing Mr. James, Postmaster-General, to Mr.
Ford, June 18, 1881, 138 MS. Dom. Let. 63.

A new Universal Postal Union Convention was signed at Washington June 15, 1897.

See Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Storer, No. 225, Feb. 2, 1899, MS. Inst.
Belgium, III. 465; Mr. Hay to Postmaster-General, May 19, 1900,
245 MS. Dom. Let. 177; Mr. Adee, Second Assist. Sec. of State, to
Postmaster-General, Oct. 28, 1897, 222 id. 68; same to same, Nov. 24,
1897, id. 643; Mr. Adee, Act. Sec. of State, to Postmaster-General,
Sept. 28, 1898, 231 id. 512; Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Assis
Brasil, Dec. 30, 1898, No. 5, MS. Notes to Brazilian Leg. VII. 182.
As to the ratifications of the various powers, see For. Rel. 1898, 1177–1181.
The British ratification included all the British colonies belonging to the
union, except India, Canada, Cape Colony, Natal, and Australia.
(For. Rel. 1898, 385.)

As to conventions for the protection of industrial property, see supra,
§ 181; Mr. Quincy, Act. Sec. of State, to Sec. of Interior, June 29,
1893, 192 MS. Dom. Let. 486; Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Sec. of
Treasury, Feb. 2, 1901, 250 MS. Dom. Let. 519.
That the United States did not become a party to the International
Sanitary Convention, concluded at Venice, March 19, 1897, which the
United States delegate did not sign, see Mr. Day, Assist. Sec. of State,
to Sec. of Treasury, Oct. 19, 1897, 221 MS. Dom. Let. 553; Mr. Moore,
Assist. Sec. of State, to Sec. of Treasury, May 18, 1898, 228 id. 582.
As to the ratification of the convention for the publication of customs
tariffs, see Mr. Wharton, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Terrell, No. 82,
Aug. 19, 1890, MS. Inst. Belgium, III. 10.

O