R
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
T ། ། ། ། །
ليائينسلينا
Reference :→→→
C.O.
885
SIR,
Downing Street,
May, 1900. I AM directed by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 9th of April on the subject of a concession from the Chief Lewanika of the Barotse to the British South Africa Company.
Mr. Chamberlain desires me to point out that the document which purports to be a concession, granted in 1898, is not signed by Lewanika, and that its terms are somewhat inappropriate to present circumstances.
It is stated that the agreement shall be considered in the light of a treaty or alliance between the Barotse nation and Her Majesty's Government. Lewanika grants to the British South Africa Company inter alia administrative rights, and the British South Africa Company on their part undertake to protect the Barotse from outside interference or attack, and to appoint a Resident, with suitable suite and escort, to reside permanently with Lewanika.
1
Her Majesty has, however, already extended her protection over the Barotse in pursuance of the repeatedly expressed desire of Lewanika, and the Order in Council of 28th November, 1899 provides for an administration of the country with which several of the privileges granted by Lewanika in the Concession might be held to be inconsistent, especially if the Concession passed out of the hands of the British South Africa Company, or if the British South Africa Company ceased to have any part in the administration. For instance the right to adjudicate upon cases to which white men are parties, to construct and maintain public works of all kinds, the right to deal in, refine, and mint specie, coin, and the precious metals, and the right to manufacture and import arms and ammunition, all of which are granted exclusively to the holders of the Concession, are essentially functions of the administrative authority. In fact for many of the purposes of the Concession, the Queen's authority has already taken the place of that of Lewanika, and the grants to be made by him will be pro-tante-ultra vives only operative so far as they are ratified by Her Majesty, or are not inconsistent with the Order in Council,
The grant of a monopoly of trade is of course inconsistent with the terms of Article 20 of the Company's Charter.
In these circumstances Mr. Chamberlain would have preferred that the Company should obtain from Lewanika a new concession confined to the grant of such industrial rights as are not open to the objections mentioned; but it having been represented to him on behalf of the Company that to require alteration would cause inconvenient delay and might unsettle Lewanika's mind, he is prepared if Lewanika signs the Concession as it stands to give it his approval, subject to the condition that it shall not be deemed to confer any rights inconsistent with the Charter or with the North-Western Rhodesia Barotseland Order in Council, or with any legislation which may be enacted in virtue of the powers conferred on the High Commissioner by that Order in Council, or with the Charter of the Company, and that nothing in the Concession shall be held to curtail the rights and powers of the administration of Barotseland for the time being, and that none of the privileges which the Concession purports to confer shall be alienated by the British South Africa Company without the consent of Her Majesty's Government.
A formal document embodying these conditions must be prepared.
The Secretary
To the British South Africa Company.
Gavernor, No. 119, 7-31900. Mr. Am-
brose,
189 1899. Judgment of Mr. Dliver
14174.
SIR,
No. 36.
(MAURITIUS.)
LAW OFFICERS TO COLONIAL OFFICE.
Royal Courts of Justice,
May 7, 1900. We were honoured with your commands signified in Mr. Bertram Cox's letter of the 30th ultimo, stating that he was directed by you to transmit to us for our consideration the documents noted in the margin relative to an action brought by the Government of Mauritius against the Mauritius Estates and Assets Company, and was to request that we would report—
1. Whether in our opinion there was reasonable ground for assuming that the decision of the Supreme Court of Mauritius in this case would be reversed on appeal.
2. Whether, having regard to all the circumstances of the case, an appeal should be Julgment entered, and
3. Generally.
Smith.
of Mr.
Justice
Didier ile
We have taken the matter into our consideration and, in obedience to your
St. Amand, commands, have the honour to--
Judgment
fr. Mon-
rieff.
Hinute by
Procureur
General,
Brief
Colonial Govern-
Report-
That, in our opinion, no attempt should be made to appeal against this judgment. The amount involved is under that in respect of which an appeal can be brought as a matter of right.
The case is not of such general importance as to justify an application for special bent ". leave to appeal. The decision involved merely the determination of the effect of one Company), particular contract, and any inconvenience which might result in other cases can be
rdinances, inutes of obviated by framing the contract differently. There is nothing to show that any large
number of existing contracts will be governed by this decision.
roceed-
ngs,
overn- bent
azettes
We should add that in our opinion it is doubtful whether the decision of the Court of Mauritius would be overruled. The reduction in the amount of water supplied without any corresponding reduction in the price might be held to be a material variation d Regu in the terms on which the Government were ready to supply water, and we think the circumstances of the present case fall short of showing that there was, according to the law of Mauritius, a ratification or adoption of a new contract binding the Company to guarantee the payment of 100 prises under the new conditions.
For these reasons we do not advise an appeal,
itions.
R. E. W. R. B. F.
5
The Rt. Hon. J. Chamberlain, M.P.,
&c.,
&c.,
&c.
We have, &c.,
RICHARD E, WEBSTER. ROBERT B. FINLAY.
•
5824-25-6/1900 Wt 824 D & S
5
15 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
J
}