Humanities desk
< December 24	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 26 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 25

Abrogation of Jarnac Convention and Treaty of New Hebrides

I am trying to create an article on the annexation of the Leeward Islands (Society Islands) in 1888 by the French and the abrogation of the Jarnac Convention and a treaty about the New Hebrides. These are the sources I am trying to make sense of:

"In the event the provisional arrangement continued until 1887, when the matter was provided for in the Anglo - French Convention. The abrogation of the Declaration was finally signed in May 1888, leaving France free to extend her sovereignty over the whole group."[1]
"On receiving news of the Declaration of Paris in March 1888, which removed the last diplomatic obstacles, Governor Lacascade annexed each of the three islands." [2]
"In November 1887, France and Great Britain signed an agreement that declared the 1847 convention to be abrogated, after France had made concessions to Britain in other parts of the Pacific. Following that "greenlight" given from London, French governor Theodore Lacascade went to the Leeward Islands in March 1888, and unilaterally declared all three kingdoms to be annexed, without any documents of cession."...Note: "Convention relative aux Nouvelles Hebrides at aux lies Sous Le Vent de Tahiti, signe Ie 16 Novembre 1887 entre la France et la Grande Bretagne r'Convention relating to the New Hebrides and the Leeward islands ofTahiti, signed on 16 November 1887 between France and Great Britain"]. Reprinted in Lechat 1990: 208-210; Declaration signed by France and Great Britain, 30 May 1888. Reprinted in Lecl1at 1990: 217-18"[3]

The questions are: Why are there so many date discrepancies? How could the treaty be signed in November 1887 and also May 1888? Governor Lacascade seem to have responded to the November 1887 signing and annexed the Leewards in March 1888. Also what did the French concede in the New Hebrides because the Anglo-French Joint Naval Commission was established in October 1887 (seemily before the treaty). KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:03, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The convention was signed in Paris 16 November 1887 and contained Article 3: Une déclaration à cet effet sera signée par les deux Gouvernments. That declaration was signed in Paris 26 January 1888. Jacomb, Edward (1914). France and England in the New Hebrides; the Ango-French condominium. pp. 207–9. Haven't found a source for that May 1888 signing.

For Lacascade the government in France issued it's orders after the convention was signed but a week before the declaration was signed: Agissant en vertu des instructions du Gouvernement français, transmises par un télégramme du Ministre de la marine en date du 19 janvier 1888... "PROCLAMATION plaçant les îles Rainlea-Tahaa, Huahine, Bora bora et dépendances sous la souveraineté pleine et entière de la France". Annuaire des Êtablissements français de l'Oceanie: 106–8. 1892. Don't know how a 19 January, 1888 telegraph message would have reached Tahiti, by ship from New Guinea, Australia or New Zealand. New Caledonia didn't have a link until 1891. A couple months for orders to reach Papeete and for Lacascade to make preparations to take formal possession. He issued the proclamation March 16th, landed on Huahine and Raiatea the same day, and Bora Bora the 17th. That doesn't seem like an unreasonable timeline.—eric 07:00, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't trust that date in Anglo-French Joint Naval Commission and Jacomb has something to say in his first chapter on motivations behind the convention but it does not look very trustworthy. Try:

The French settlers in Noumea looked on the archipelago as an extension of the colony in New Caledonia, and hence liable for eventual annexation. But French government interest in this idea waxed and waned. Meanwhile Britain stood in the way. London saw its claims to the archipelago as a useful bargaining chip, which now and again it considered exchanging with the French for a concession elsewhere. But the overseas British—the settlers in the Australian and New Zealand colonies—stiffened the resolve of the mother country. They insisted that French ambitions be challenged.

Henningham, Stephen (1991). France and the South Pacific. pp. 11–12.—eric 07:59, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

KAVEBEAR i haven't been able to find anything that really puts all this into context besides just finding dates in documents. My guess is that some sources are mixing the abrogation of the 1847 agreement which seems to have been negotiated and a done deal by January, and the novel establishment of the commission and later condominium which required a number of years and separate agreements.—eric 18:47, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The footnote for "signed in May 1888, leaving France free to extend her sovereignty over the whole group." points to 1885 Commons debates and L'expansion coloniale de la France, I can't find anything there about May of 1888 but you might have better luck searching the French.—eric 19:07, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just ran across a little bit more from CHRONIQUE DE LA GUERRE DE RAIATEA-TAHAA, the agreement was that French troops had to leave the New Hebrides, which they did March 15th.—eric 23:12, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]