120
Letter from E. Mackintosh, Esq., dissenting from the resolution of the Chamber of Commerce.
HONGKONG, 22nd January, 1885.
DEAR SIR,
As the sole dissentient Member of the Committee of the Hongkong Chamber of Commerce from the views expressed by that Committee in their recommenda- tions to His Excellency Sir G. F. BowEN, Governor of this Colony, on the question of the renewal of the postal service between Great Britain and China, the opinions of the Chamber having been courteously solicited by His Excellency, I beg to place on record the reasons for my not agreeing with the conclusions of the Committee.
Though strongly of opinion that the time is not far distant when the need for subsidising Mail steamers will become unnecessary, I am inclined to think that perhaps at present we are not sufficiently advanced for so radical a change. Still I conceive that the very onerous subsidies now paid can be considerably reduced by throwing open to public tender the various sections of the route between this and Europe; instead of, as in the past, making the service en bloc the subject of one contract. By this means greater competition will be induced, and the cost to the public most sensibly curtailed. In urging the system of sectional contracts, I wish it to be understood that I have nothing to say against the whole service being performed as one contract. Tenders could be invited both for the entire service and for sections thereof, the option of selection resting with the Imperial authorities.
A line between an Italian or Austrian Port and Alexandria would at once, by means of the railway from Alexandria, place the mails on board a steamer at Suez bound to Bombay. Between Suez and Bombay there is an enormous traffic carried on by the finest steamers afloat. These vessels would gladly compete for a very moderate subsidy, to carry the mails between Bombay and Suez on fixed dates for departures and arrivals. From Bombay the mail could either be transmitted by rail to Madras, where it would be picked up by the Calcutta steamers trading to China, or it might be sent from Bombay by steamer to Hongkong. The large and growing trade between the two chief Indian Ports and this Colony warrants me in stating that no difficulty would be experienced in obtaining for a moderate payment from those now in the trade, or, if they were unwilling, from others, a guaranteed date for sailings and arrivals coupled with superior speed. Thus it appears to me the whole question of continuing subsidies to the Mail service between Hongkong and Europe, if it must be subsidised, can be most efficiently and economically solved as I now suggest. Aden and Ceylon would be served by the Suez-Bombay steamer touching at the former place, while the latter could be reached either from Madras or Bombay as facilities by coasting vessels offered, or special steamers could be detailed for the service. The constant communication between Hongkong and Shanghai presents the certainty of fixed departures with accelerated speed between those ports being obtained for a very trifling payment.
with
Japan could remain as it now is, unserved by any British subsidised line. The American route, being the more expeditious, to a great extent does away the paramount necessity for the slower journey viâ Suez.