PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 882
6
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
| PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
12
24 June 199
MAURITIUS ROYAL COMMISSION, 1900 -
Sir CAVENDISH BOYLE, KC. M.O
Department swept away lily I am only repeating now what I recommended —an all the various depart- ments male responsible for their stores and a proper ore department set up in the railways. I think it would be a very good thing
1396 Can you e-li us. if you think you are able to speak on the question, whether it would be of real ilvantage to the Colony, without regard to any individuals, to have any large central sugar factory etal·lished in the plan? -I think the ventralisation which has been going on for some time, which is stili going on, can be continued with advantage
1397 Automatically? Yes, automatically, but as to the wisdom of enforcing or expediting that process any measure on the part of the Government I am ry doubtful for this reason, that the distances are lerable, ani, further than that. I think that is R *-.rk which shoull be left to persons who are interested and who are engaged in the industry, and I think it will follow in the natural course
1398 That is an opinion which 1 thunk compares Without artly with what we have been already told
aking of the past at all, speaking simply of the future, and without regard to the necessity or otherwise of raising any money by lonn for Government purposes. do you think that there is any feed for the Government lend money to planters, is there any desire for a ban I doubt whether they would ask for it or even accept it at the present moment.
1399. You see no necessity for raising any lan to assist planters-1 am entirely basing my answer on your previous words, without any reference to the past
100 Quite so-For the future I do not think it would be accepted, I do not think it would be asked
for
1401 You do not think it is required? That is another question. If the plauters engaged in the industry could get cheap money to enable them to increase their output by setting up mille and improved machinery. I think that would be of benefit to all Concerned, but I do not think they would ask for it. I have no doubt that it would be good--cheap money- I do not say Government money.
1402. But my question was rather as to whether you thought the Government should raise money in order to len 1 it to planters for that purpose?—I do not think at the present moment, from what I can gather, and as far as I am advised and enlightened at the present, that any of them would ask for it.
1403. A witness yesterday, referring to that question expressed the opinion that it was not advisable to encourage planters to improve their machinery on their various estates because he said that he thought it was better that indifferent machinery should go altogether in order that this procons of automatic centralisation should go on, and that if you encourage each separate estate to improve its own machinery you are thereby defeating that object ?—That you are perpetuating the unnecessary number of grinding or manufacturing Patates? I have no doubt that has been falt.
1404. Do you share that view -I do not know that I share that view, because I do not think that the planter with the obsolete machinery, having discovered that it would be better for him to send his produce to a neighbouring mill, would go to the expense of setting up new machinery, even if he could borrow the money at a cheap rat»
1405. It is simply a question of transport, how far away he is; he would do what would pay him best P Quite no. Ho is far too sensible for that, unless he had some personal reasons for wishing not to employ his neighbour's factory. That aspect of it gave cause for iny answer that I do not think at the present moment I do not think that any man they would apply for it. with an absolate mill would want to borrow cheap money from the Government in order to perpetunte that. I think the elimination of the inadequate estate mill is a matter of process and will go on in due course. 1400. I should like to ask you some questions that You give here would be of a confidential character.
■ large contribution to ecclesiastical institutions Rs. 159,000, I think, in the figure.
Continued
1407 Will you tell us what you think about that? - do not think that the men who receive those sunis ar altogether useless menabra of society, I think they are very fair custodians of the morals of the people in I think, in a place of this description it is their way. a good thing to have men of that description, and, as regards the larger Church of the two, the good that these people do is very great unleed. Whether it should
paid by the State or not, I do not know; that we should pay 19,000l. a year seems a large amount out of our limited revenue, bait at the same time I do not say that they do not retider sufficient service for that. I think they do. He is a distributor of charity, and he 18 a ponermaker. I do not think he is a proselytiser to any appreciable extent
meul
18. Do you find him of any use to the Govern- For instance, this is an Island which is often alictes when a large priesthood might be of consi- Have they ever been erale use to the Goverment. asked to help, and do they give their assistance readily? The charitable institutions of --They do su, I think the Roman Catholic Church do an infinite amount of good.
1409 Do they do any elucution work which the Government does not pay for?-Yos
1410 Do they do any Church work which the Government does not pay for ?-Yes. And they give us a great deal of nssistance in the leper management.
1411 Would there be a very strong feeling in the Island if that vote were reduced - Yes, I think so.
1
de not say so much about the Anglican Church, but I should think there would be a strong outcry with This is a change regard to the Church of Rome
which I would advocate. I would no longer make them pensionable tiovernment servants as they are now.
1412 What do you mean - The priests and minis ters of the Churches.
1413. Are they pensionable ?—They are pensionable Government servants; they are Government priests There are many who and Government clergymen. come here for a short time and take their pensions with a considerable amount for climatic allowance.
1414. Do you mean the Roman Catholics P-Yes. and others
1415. But is the Roman Catholic Church in Mauri- tins regarded as the State Church-They are both State Churches. There are three State Churches; the Church of Scotland as well.
1416. The priests and ministers of those Churches are all pensionable, are they ?-1 think almost all of the ministers of the Churches are.
1417. You would suggest that in future that should be put an end to?- I think so, most certainly. I think by far the beat arrangement would be to let each denomination have a fixed allowance from Government and let them munage their own affairs with that.
1418. You would simply give them a lump sum regardless of how many priests they had got P—Yes.
1419. You would not say for so much money you must have so many priests or churches or schools?- on their own account No. Their schools. are run
entirely.
1420. You would not say that in return for this subvention you must have so many priests or churches or schools?-I do not think so. Of course I will qualify that answer by saying that the Government would have to see that it got adequate value for its money, but I mean I would not go to the extent of Buying, so many priests or so many churches, and
so on.
1421. (Mr. Woodcock.) You would not make the allowance depend on the number of persons employed by the Church, within a limit, for example?-I think one might do that. Yet I should think, as it is at present constituted, the Church could always be en- trusted pretty well to do that. It would have to render its accounts, which would be subject to audit,
of course.
1422. Under those circumstances, do you think that they would be likely to get more from the general public by way of voluntary contribution -My pro- posal was with that end in view.
24 June 1909.]
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.
Sir CAVENDISH BOYLE, K.C.M G.
1423. (Chairman.) I see by the return it says here that the members of the Church of Rome number 113,000; the Church of England, Protestants, practi ally 5,000; the Mahommedana, 41,000, and the Hindoos, 206.000-Those are about the figures.
1424. Which makes 370,000. I do not give you the Buddhists, because they are a small number? That may be quite right.
1425. The Church of England, Protestants and Presbyterians, come to 6,000?-On that basis the payment to the Church of England is altogether out of proportion to its numbers.
1426. The Christians other than the Church of Rome are only 6,000 or 6,500. We put these ques- tions with regard to the ecclesiastical contribution of the Colony, which is so large compared with other Colonies similarly situated, to a witness yesterday, and we asked him if the whole of the community, including these 200,000 Hindoos, did not contribute to the Revenue which paid for these ecclesiastical subsidies and he said, Yes, and we asked him if he did not think that they ought to be subsidised also for religious purposes, and he said, Yes, if they ask for it, but that they had never asked for it. I think he saw the diffi. cult position he was in if he said, No. At any rate you do not think, having regard to everything, it would be
Adjourned for
1432. (Chairman.) You say you think the military contribution should be abolished and, if not, that it should be suspended for a period ?—Yes.
1433. Will you tell us first, why you think that it should be abolished P-I think that in the present condition of the Colony's finances it is a very heavy I do not think burden to be placed on ite shoulders.
that the military are kept here for the benefit of the Colony. This is an outpost of the Empire, and the military are kept here entirely for military purposes, and for that reason I do not see why a very poor Colony should be called upon to contribute the very large sums, which it is called upon to contribute, for the Imperial defence. If I thought that it was for the benefit of the inhabitants of the Colony themselves that the military should be kept here, or if they were able as they have been in times past to contribute to this expenditure, by all means let them do so; but, in present circumstances, I think it is a legitimate request to make to the Government that they should he relieved from it.
1434. I think you raised the whole point in saying that the military establishment is kept here purely for the benefit of military purposes. Would you be satisfierl if the whole garrison was removed to-morrow?-As regards internal economy or as regards Imperial defence?
1495. Anything to do with the Imperial defence entirely as far as the position of this Island goes ?— Absolutely I do.
1436. Is it required for any internal protection ?— Certainly not. Whether they contribute to any material extent to the revenue or not; I am not prepared to say, that would have to be looked into.
1437. Since you have been the Governor of the Colony, have the military ever been called upon - Never.
1498. As regards contributing to the prosperity of the Colony, I imagine there can be no question of that kind. because the large sum of money which is paid to them in the course of a year and spent in the place must contribute considerably to the prosperity of the Island, but that, of course, is a different question to the question of whether they are required here for colonial purposse P-You must remember that in addition to the military contribution proper, there is an allowance to the officers of the garrison, though not a very
material sum.
1439. There is a colonial allawanoe P-Yes, it is in the shape of a drawback, and I think it amounts to some Rs. 35,000 or Rs. 40,000 per annum.
1440. What is it for P-It is a drawback on Customa duties, or rather, it in in lieu of a drawback on Customs duties.
[Continued.
13
advisable, even though the Colony is in dire straits an regards its finances, to cut down that expenditure. except in the way that you suggest ?—I think at the present moment it is not an economy which I should advocate.
1427. I suppose all the people that are at present engaged you would have to keep faith with and pension them; it would only be from the moment you began to pay a lump sum that you undertook no new reapon. sibilities? That is a blank wall which stands staring one in the face in all cases of reductions.
1428. May I ask you with reference to the military contribution, what is your view with regard to that P
I naked the Secretary of State to allow me to suspend it last year for three years. I think that if it could be suspended it would be a solution of all our difficulties. certainly for the immediate present, and perhaps for the continuing future. I am most strongly in favour of ite being suspended.
You
1429. We are only talking about the future. are in favour of suspending the military contribution if it cannot be abolished -- Yes.
1430. Are you in favour of abolishing it ?—I am. 1431. You think that the military contribution should be absolutely abolished ?-Absolutely. a short time.
1441. (Mr. Woodcock.) Then there are some small advantages with regard to the use of the railway. system ?—Yes.
1442. Are they allowed to travel free!-Not free. but at reduced rates.
1443. They do travel at reduced rates in England. do they not P-I think so. If I may add to my answer, the reduction of the expenditure by that amount I think would afford us sufficient means for all of our requirementa
1444. (Chairman.) It is about Rs. 440,000 P-Yes. 1445. It is almost flogging a dead horse to draw any comparison between the amount of the military contribution of this Colony as compared with the other three eastern Colonies P--If this Colony were in s position to pay, I would advocate that they should pay a good deal more, because I think it is the bounden duty of every portion of the Empire to contribute to the Imperial defence. It it not an unreasonable request to ask them to contribute to the military defence, if they can do so.
1446. But I thought you said it should not be levied at all P-Only in our present position; I think if we were in a position to pay for it, we ought to do so.
1447. I misunderstand you, I thought that you meant it should be abolished'?-No, I wish to see it abolished, of course, because I wish to gain as much as I can for Were the finances the future prosperity of the Island.
of the Island to improve to an extent which is not anticipated now, I should be the first to advocate ita resumption.
1448. I understand you now to say that you think it ought to pay a military contribution, and it is only because its finances are in their present condition that it should not—I do say that every Colony should pay. but if it cannot do so, if it is in such a position as we are here, it is almost the first thing we should turn to for relief for the reasons which I haye given; in other words. I think that such a contribution should be voluntarily given and should not be demanded as a right.
1449. You recognise that 5 per cent. in very small ! -In comparison P
1450. Tea F-Yes.
1451. Now supposing the Imperial Government were willing to reduce or, say, to suspend the payment, for how many years would yon suggest that it should be suspended? In how many years do you think that you could, in other words, recover your equilibrium it this contribution were suspended, making, of course, all the economies that we have been speaking of -- That must depend upon the arrangements made for If it any capital expenditure which may be necessary.