t
1
1
Y
2
This argument is not intended to prove that the colonists should pay nothing, but to show that a reasonable division would still leave the larger share on Imperial funds. If we had a system under which these places would have a voice in peace or war, and in other matters common to the Empire, the calculations of relative military charges might have some weight.
Those countries, the taxation of which the Chancellor of the Exchequer compares with that of Hong Kong, are sovereign states, whose defences are maintained solely for the protection of those interests which they themselves ad- minister
The principle sought to be laid down by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the Imperial Government has "a right
to fix, in
C
"the last instance, the amount of the con- tribution," is in fact a claim to enforce taxation without any form of representation; a principle which, after long experience, has been abandoned by this country.
Even in the case of a Crown Colony, it is not now possible to act in the high-banded manner which was practicable a quarter of a century ago, when the Duke of Newcastle was Secretary of State.
To force a measure on an unwilling Council in the teeth of the non-official members-putting aside, for the moment, the Government Officers, who would naturally hold views of their own on such a subject-would place a heavy strain upon our Crown Colony system.
What is now being done is practically a redis. tribution, to a partial extent, of the Forces of the Empire in conformity with the military require- ments of the present day. In certain casea, this policy has involved the removal altogether of an Imperial garrison, ag., from Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. In other cases it has involved an increase but this arises from strategical necessity, not from increased local need. Again, is the total strength of the British Army to be raised? If so, is this to be done for the special defence of Colonial property or for purely Imperial considerations?
If the strength is not being raised the increased cost to the British taxpayer is merely the increased cost of maintenance between one station and another.
Assume for example that the additional battalion wanted for Hong Kong could be taken from Gibraltar for which a smaller garrison will in the future suffice. Then the British taxpayer will only have to bear the additional cost of maintenance at the more distant station of Hong Kong. This would seem no justification for the further demand of the Chancellor of the Exchequer over and above the substantial increase agreed to by a Committee on which the Treasury was represented.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer's Memo- randum excludes English local municipal revenue, which is included in the Hong Kong State
CONFIDENTIAL.
[A 150]
73
(6)
This PAPER is transmitted for the personal information
4 Lord Knutsford & emb
of
де
by direction of the Secretary of State for War,
and is to be considered strictly Confidential.
MILITARY CONTRIBUTIONS. HONG KONG.
The principle that Colonies should contri- bute to their defence to the utmost extent that their means will permit is fully concurred in.
This principle was recognized by the Select Committee of 1834 on "Military Establishments and Expenditure in the Colonies." It recom- mended "that the strictest economy should be observed in every branch of the military expen- diture of the Colonies, and that any surplus revenue that may remain after defraying their civil expenses should, in accordance with the regulations which have been adopted by the Ordnance and Colonial Departments, be applied to the payment of their military charges."
The Select Committee on Colonial Military Expenditure of 1861 took the same view, but gave it more definite expression. It divided
the Colonies into two classes :--
1. Those, the main cost of whose defence should fall on Imperial revenues.
2. Those, the main cost of whose defence
should devolve upon themselves.
The second recommendation was qualified
by the statement that "the practical application
of such recommendations, both as to time and place, must necessarily be left to the discretion of Her Majesty's Government, having regard to the local resources of each dependency, to its dangers from external attack, and to the general exigencies of the Empire."
The Committee included Hong Kong in the first category and Mauritius in the second.
Immediately after the report of the Com- mittee of 1861, the contributions to be made by three dependencies came under the con- sideration of Her Majesty's Government—vis., Singapore, Mauritius, Hong Kong. In the case of Singapore, the Government insisted on its paying the full cost of the garrison necessary
(699)-732wo)
PUBLIC RECORD.OFFICE
Reference :-
EPERLIC.O.537
31 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO