it weens olear from the history of the case, ne described
in your letter sad in tue memoranda willon accompanied it, that the present so-called "monopoly" is a menopoly in naze oily, no in
- stuch praction otuer Companies uave been allowed in several casen (indeed in all cases where tim Company concerned was received caff- iciently strong, support from its Government) to lay cables and to establism wireless statious for communicatiou between China and
262
other countries.
The Postmaster General observes from tue telegram of the 23rd ovember last, a copy of watch was molosed with the foreign úf- fice letter of the 6th December, that Sir John Jenison Pender mae mungested that, if tuere is great objection to the mug,“ sted extension of the exclusive colo4ssions, his Company might be ready to accept a soueme “for pooling among the Consortium Powera." it is not clear whether the mug<ested "pooling" applies only to the loan (the exclusive concessions not being extended at all), or whether it is contemplated that tue exclusive concessions would be extended but would not appl, as against one nationals of the -onsortium Powers (which are understood to include the united tutes). The Postmaster General is of opinion that some such Juification as that suggested by Már Jɔm Pender would, if fex- sible, probably be the best solution.
لاقى
The present exclusibe concessions operate not only against -reign Telegraph Companies but also against other British Com- ies, including «ireless Companies. The cul, real risk of serious competition with tae present Cable service between China Kurope seeze to lie in the direction of wireless toiography; phut it is very doubtful whether it is in socordance with British interests that wireless communication with urope should be ex- cluded, ¿rom this point of view, therefore, the exèkusive right■, in wly form in which the British Goverment could agree to them, Bould probably menu little to the hastern Company. As regards ole communistion the Company may well stand on their merita.
Ha
TAQ....