296.
paid the expenses of and incidental to the arbitration. It is within our knowledge that the sum paid the Company in Singapore has been disbursed by them in payment of various sums which the Company allege they are entitled to
pay as "liabilities" under Section 7 of the Ordinance, but as, in our opinion, some of the payments thus made may hereafter be held to be payments outside the provisions of that section objection has already been taken by us thereto.
As regards the present application for a further advance of £10,000, Messrs. Druces and Attlee admit that one-half of Sir Edward Boyle's fee is not payable till after the award has been made, and it may reasonably be presumed that the whole of the sums of £5,000 and £1,000 mentioned are not presently payable.
In all the circumstances we recommend a further payment of £5,000 being made generally on account of the expenses of the arbitration.
The question of what payment the Government can be properly called upon to make pursuant to Section 7 of the Ordinance will be dealt with either upon the final adjustment of accounts between the parties or upon taxation of the costs.
We are not aware of the circumstances under which the sums of $2,000, $2,000, and $50,000 were paid to the Company in Singapore, or of the form of receipt given for such payments, and we should be obliged if you would in due course furnish us with information in this respect.
We have, &c.,
SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL.
297
tration as to his claim, been paid his usual salary at the rate of £600 per annum by the Company as Secretary to the London Consulting Committee.
.
Messrs. Druces and Attlee state that it has been the custom of the Company in former years in similar cases to make some provision for the widow and children of servants who have died whilst in their service, and having regard to the fact that Mr. Fraser has been in their service since the year 1886, the Company consider that his wife and children are deserving of some pecuniary assistance at their hands.
Before, however, devoting any sum to this purpose they have requested us to inform them whether the Government would be prepared to make any allowance to Mrs. Fraser and, if so, to what extent.
In the circumstances we are of opinion that the question as to what allowance, if any, should be made to Mrs. Fraser should be left to the decision of the Court of Arbitration, and that, in the meantime, Messrs. Druces and Attlee should be in- formed that you are prepared to make Mrs. Fraser a payment on account of what- ever sum the Court may decide she may be entitled to, to meet her pressing require- ments and to concur in the question being referred to the Court for decision at as early a date as possible.
In considering what course you will adopt it seems to us desirable that you should have regard to the assurance given by the Governor and the Attorney-General set forth on page 586 of the notes of the arbitration proceedings.
We have, &c.,
SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL,
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :--
TTIC.O. 882
8 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
10633
No. 326.
MESSES. SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL to COLONIAL OFFICE.
Enclosure in No. 324.
SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS.
11195
Mr. T. Mathew
Sir Edward Boyle, K.C., M.P.
Lord Robert Cecil, K.C., M.P.
P. W. Meik
£6,824
5,500
1,260
3,676
W. E. Moulsdale
2,410
Messrs. Price, Waterhouse and Co.
3,019
Incidental expenses, passages, printers, sundry counsel's
fees and other expenses, clerical and other disburse-
ments in London
1,500
Ourselves
5,000
Funds for dividend arbitration
1,000
£30,189
SIR,
No. 325.
MESSRS. SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL to COLONIAL OFFICE.
SIR,
(Received March 27, 1906.)
[Answered by No. 336.]
3 and 4, Great Winchester Street, London, E.C., March 26, 1906.
Straits Settlements.
Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.
Wrru reference to your letter of the 11th August, 1905, to our letter to you of the 13th September, 1905, and to page 574 of the shorthand notes of the pro- ceedings in connection with Mr. Fraser's claim for compensation, Messrs. Druces and Attlee to-day inform us that Mr. Fraser has recently died, leaving a widow and a family, consisting of a son, aged 19 years, and a younger daughter, who are unprovided for in any way beyond a small salary earned by the son as a clerk. Up to the date of his death Mr. Fraser has, pending the decision of the Court of Arbi-
• Nos. 227 and 263.
(Received March 31, 1906.)
[Copy to Governor, April 6, 1906. Confidential. L.F.]
3 and 4, Great Winchester Street, London, E.C., March 30, 1906.
Straits Settlements.
Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.
IN further reference to our letter of the 21st December last,* and to pages 511, 526 and 827 of the transcript of the shorthand writers' notes of the proceedings in the Arbitration, we have to call your attention to the fact that during the Arbitration proceedings in Singapore, the Government were unable to accept the contention of the Company as regards certain of the lands of the Company which they claimed they were in a position to sell as not being essential to their under- taking as a Dock Company, or to agree to the Company's valuation of those lands in the event of their contention being upheld.
The Court of Arbitration on the third day of the proceedings accordingly required the surveyors on each side to meet and endeavour to agree and draw up, for the information of the Court, a joint report showing the valuations, where agreed, and in case of difference the valuation made on behalf of either party, and directed them to submit such report to the Court in England in order that the same might hereafter be dealt with without calling evidence in England.
Mr. Tomlinson, on behalf of the Government, and Mr. Maclaren, on behalf of the Company, accordingly met, and, after considerable negotiations, signed a joint report, of which a copy is forwarded herewith, showing the valuations of each portion of the estate which the Company claimed to sell. Copies of this report were delivered to the Company's representative, and also to our junior partner on behalf of the Government, before he left Singapore in November last.
On the last day of the proceedings in Singapore it was agreed that a plan then in evidence should be amended by the Company so as to agree with admissions made by their Counsel during the proceedings as to the Company's rights, the
↑ Not reprinted.
• No. 800.
1.
298