PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
19
Reference :-
C.O. 882
8
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
6
ment by the cost incurred, but it is obvious that the only source from which any accurate division of cost can have been obtained is from the Peninsular and Oriental Company itself. As I have already pointed out, the company has professed its in- ability to undertake the-task, and it is obvious that if they cannot do it, no one else can make the attempt.
17. The Colonial Office have suggested taking into consideration the question of speed, but for the same reason that it is not possible for me to ascertain the cost of the whole service, I do not feel able to arrive at the cost of one rate of speed as compared with another, and I think that any one who reads carefully the suggestion of the Colonial Office with the rejoinder of the Post Office on this point will come to the same conclusion which I have done, that it is not possible to make any fair apportionment based on the principle of speed, and I, therefore, reject, as a basis for consideration, the figures in Appendix G. of the case of the Eastern Colonies, but it does not follow, and I do not intend it to be understood as my opinion, that such questions as that of speed, size of boats employed, and other similar considerations, should be left altogether out of sight.
Mr. Johnson urged strongly upon me that the Secretary of State only agreed to the matter being submitted to arbitration on the distinct condition "that the Colonies are not to be prejudiced by the assumption that £85,000 is the proper amount to be assessed to the Australian portion of the contract or that India's share is fairly assessed under Lord Morley's award," and that the Treasury did not demur to this. He there- fore urged that the only fair way to arrive at a settlement of the portion of the sub- sidy to be paid by the three Eastern Colonies is to find some uniform system and to see how it would work out if applied to India and Australia. He represented that if this were done on the basis set forth in Appendix F. of their case, that it should not be taken as judging the cases of India and Australia, or to saying that under existing circumstances Australia is let off too easily. I am not able to concur in this view; I am afraid that the inference would certainly be drawn that, in my opinion, Appendix F. is the true method of calculation. It seems to me impossible to accept any basis of a general nature without the opportunity being given to every interest affected to appear and state its case. But there is enough in the presumption that such a basis of general application as that afforded by Appendix F. to make me hesitate to say that the United Kingdom should bear the whole loss, which it would have to bear if this contention of the Colonial Office were given effect to.
18. The figure suggested for Ceylon by the Post Office is £6,633, as against £2,940, so that in that case the difference is £3,693.
In the case of the Straits Settlements the figure suggested is £7,611, as against £5,550, the difference being £2,061.
In the case of Hong Kong the figure suggested is £13,131, as against £11,010, the titerence being £2,Ĭ21.
19. I am afraid I am not able to suggest any principle which would be thoroughly logical, having regard to all difficulties of the case, and I am, therefore, reduced to suggesting that an arbitrary figure should be taken as a basis for settlement.
20. It will be seen that the difference between the two suggestions is greater In the case of Ceylon than in that of either of the other Colonies: relatively to the respective amounts involved it is very much greater, but there is a special point in connection with Ceylon which is mentioned at the conclusion of the rejoinder of the l'ost Office.
21. The figures which I suggest should be taken :-
That Ceylon should pay an annual sum of £4,700. The Straits Settlements an annual sum of £6,600. Hong Kong an annual -um of £11,500,
in respect of the cost of sections, and that the principles laid down in Lord Morley's award as to sea sorting and incidental expenses should be applied as at present, but under deduction of the respective shares of extra receipts on Foreign Closed Mails and one half excess collected in the United Kingdom.
In order that the precise financial effect of this might be actually shown, and with the object of securing that there shall not be any room for difference of opinion hereafter on minor points, I append a statement showing in figures how effect should be given to my award.
7
This statement has been compiled for me by Mr. Johnson and Mr. King, and it is my intention that it should be taken as my award, and that the detailed figures should be shown to the Colonial Office if they desire.
The only matter not dealt with in this statement is that of the parcels which should be accounted for in detail, and should be dealt with as shown in Appendix D of the Colonial Office case.
22. I think the sum of £10,000, by which the subsidy will be increased on the commencement of the new contract should, after deducting the proportion payable by India, be met by an apportionment on similar principles.
I think it right to say I owe much to the ability and care with which Mr. Johnson and Mr. King have put the cases of their offices before me, and to add that I have greatly appreciated the trouble they have taken to make my duty as little difficult as was possible.
To the Secretary
of the Treasury.
EASTERN MAIL SERVICE.
I am, &c.,
BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH.
Division of Cost in accordance with the principles embodied in the Award of Lord Balfour of Burleigh.
"Cost of Sections settled by paragraph
21 of Award.
Cost of Sea Sorting
***
Incidental Expenses (£3,806) shared rateably on basis of Total Cost of Sections.
Payable by-
Ceylon.
Straits Settlements.
Hong Kong.
Amount.
Percentage of Total Cost.
Amount.
Percentage of Total Cost.
Percentage
Amount.
£
4,700
76
2:00
2
of Total Coet.
•
£
6,600
2:80
£ 11,500
4.88
500
500
106
2.80
186
4.88
Gross Contribution payable
Deduct-Extra Receipts (£12,921) shared
as above.
4,776
7,206
12,186
258
2:00
362
2:80
631 4.88
4,518
320
6,844
98
4,198
6,746
Net Contribution payable
Pooling Account :-Allow one-half of excess collected in the United Kingdom.
Annual Contribution
Add:-For Sea Postage at Postal Union Rates on Colonial Mails charged in the Division of Cost against the United Kingdom-which would be payable in any case, viz. :—
(a.) On mails from Ceylon, &c., to places east and scuth (e.g., Singapore, China, Australia), v. § I of Colonial Office Case. (b.) On mails from Hong Kong Agencies in China (prepaid in Hong Kong postage stamps).
1
11,555
230
11,325
966
183
65
56
61
on
(c) Collected by the Colonies from
Foreign Countries, &c., behalf of the United Kingdom.
600
180
Total Annual Contribution in
respect of P. & O. Service,
5,220
6,990
-
12,170
December 21, 1904
[
↓
I
T
B OF B.
}