14416
39.
No. 45.
FOREIGN OFFICE to COLONIAL OFFICE.
(Received May 1, 1905.)
43440
No. 42.
COLONIAL OFFICE to SIR H. BERGNE.
SIR,
Downing Street, February 28, 1905. I AM directed by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton to transmit to you the accompanying copy of Ordinance No. 14 of 1904 of the Legislature of Hong Kong, shortly entitled The Sugar Convention Ordinance, 1904," together with a revise of a print of the correspondence on the subject of the Hong Kong Sugar Regulations up to date.
You will observe that the Governor has been instructed to cause the Ordinance, and the Regulations which had been drafted for enactment under Section 3 of the Ordinance, to be amended in certain respects; and I am to suggest that it may be well to defer communicating this Ordinance to the Bureau of the Permanent Sugar Commission pending the receipt of the amending Ordinance and the Regulations as finally issued.
I am, &c.,
C. P. LUCAS.
SIR,
[Answered by No. 47.]
WITH reference to your letter of the 31st ultimo, respecting the duty on raw
Foreign Office, April 29, 1905. sugar in the Philippine Islands, I am directed by the Marquess of Lansdowne to suggest that it appears hardly worth while to make a communication to the United States Government on the subject with a view to securing a reduction of the surtax on Philippine raw sugar only, since (on the view taken by the Commission in the previous case of Denmark) this would probably not be held by them to be sufficient to comply with Article III. of the Convention. The refined sugar consumed in the Philippines is entirely derived from imports, and a reduction of the Philippine duty on refined sugar to the equivalent of six francs per one hundred kilogrammes would involve, on the basis of the amount of refined sugar at present imported into the Islands, a reduction in revenue of about £11,000 per annum. In these circumstances, and since, on the appeal of His Majesty's Government, the Permanent Commission have now suspended the countervailing duties fixed by them for Philippine sugar at the autumn Session of 1904, Lord Lansdowne desires to inquire of the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he considers it still desirable to approach the United States Government on the subject.
9787
No. 43.
I am, &c.,
E. GORST.
SIR,
COLONIAL OFFICE to FOREIGN OFFICE. [Answered by No. 45.]
WITH reference to the letter from the Board of Trade to the Foreign Office
Downing Street, March 31, 1905. of the 14th of February, † a print of which was enclosed in your letter of the 24th of March and to the letter from this Office of the 3rd of February,§ I am directed by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton to enquire whether it would be possible to make a similar suggestion to the United States Government with regard to the duty on raw sugar in the Philippine Islands as that made by the Board of Trade with regard to Cuba.
It might be pointed out that the present surtax on raw sugar above the Conven- tion limit is comparatively small, while the imports of raw sugar must be incon- siderable, so that the loss of revenue would probably be insignificant; and that on the other hand if the Permanent Commission should finally decide that Philippine raw sugar is bounty-fed, Hong Kong would, in the circumstances in which it is placed, be compelled to prohibit the importation of Philippine raw sugar, to the serious detriment of the trade alike of Hong Kong and the Philippine Islands.
I am, &c.,
C. P. LUCAS.
10779
No. 44.
15221
No. 46.
GOVERNOR SIR M. NATHAN to MR. LYTTELTON. (Received May 6, 1905.) [Answered by No. 48.]
4
(No. 98.)
SIR,
Government House, Hong Kong, April 7, 1905. REFERRING to the seventh paragraph of your despatch, No. 28, dated the 10th February, 1905,† which dealt with the question of the penalization of raw sugar produced in the Philippine Islands, I have the honour to transmit a note which, after discussing the matter with General E. S. Bragg, Consul-General for the United States of America, I handed to that gentleman on the 15th ultimo.
2. General Bragg informed me on the 3rd instant that he had communicated on the subject with the authorities at Washington and Manila, and that the Civil Governor of the Philippines, recognising the importance of the Hong Kong market to sugar growers in the Philippine Islands, was bringing the question of reduction of surtax before the Commission there.
3. In view of the meeting of the Permanent Commission at Brussels on the 6th instant, I considered it advisable, after consulting the representatives of the firms of Jardine, Matheson and Company, and Butterfield and Swire, who own the two sugar refineries here which at times obtain large quantities of raw sugar from the Philippines, to send you the telegram of which a copy is enclosed.
I have, &c.,
GOVERNOR SIR M. NATHAN to MR. LYTTELTON.
(Received 4.20 p.m., April 3, 1905.)
TELEGRAM.
[Copy sent privately to Sir H. Bergue, April 4, 1905.]
Referring to seventh paragraph of your despatch, No. 28, of 10th February, United States Consul informs me Government of Philippines considering reduction of surtax. In the meantime as surtax does not result in sugar bounty hope that in the interests of refineries Philippine sugar will not be penalised.
Enclosure in No. 46.
M. NATHAN,
Governor, &c
NOTE handed to the Consul-General for the United States of America. Article III. of the Brussels Sugar Convention of March 5th, 1902, lays down that:-
"The High Contracting Parties undertake to limit the surtax to a maximum of 6 francs per 100 kilogrammes for refined sugar and assimilable sugars, and to
• Eastern No. 87.
↑ No. 41.
+ L.F.
§ No. 38.
| No. 40.
• No. 43.
↑ No. 40.
‡ No. 41.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 882
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO