PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
CO-885
17 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
It does not seem to me necessary to enter at length into the causes which have led to the non-fulfilment of the only expectation which has not been realized, it is more important to discover the means by which the grounds for disappointment on the part of any of the State partners can most speedily be removed.
have within the past few days received from the Pacific Cable Board a state- ment* of international traffic between Australasia and the United Kingdom, carried by the Eastern and Pacific Cable routes for the calendar year 1904. From this state- ment I take the following:-Canada being introduced in the table as one of the partners, but no figures are given as all Canadian traffic goes direct by the Pacific
route.
2. Victoria and United Kingdom
Words transmitted in 1904.
Origin and Destination of Traffic.
By Eastern Route.
By Pacific Route.
By Both Routes.
1. New South Wales and United Kingdom
385,857
118,084
467,493
86,468
3. Queensland and United Kingdom
17,111
81,464
4. New Zealand and United Kingdom
79,213
285,744
503,941
553,961
98,575
364,957
None.
1,608,400
All.
602,899
5. Canada and Australasia
6. The United Kingdom and Australasia
2,211,299
It will aid in a proper understanding of the subject if we place opposite the annual contributions of each Government partner the percentage of traffic directed to the Pacific Cable by each State.
Partner States.
New South Wales
Victoria
Queensland
New Zealand
Canada
United Kingdom
Share of Deficit.
Traffic of each respective State directed over Pacific Cable in Calendar Year 1904.
£ 8,428
23-4 per cent. of totul.
8,428
15.6 per cent.
8,428
83.2 per cent.
"
8,428
78.3 per cent.
21,070
100 per cent.
21,070
27-3 per cent.
The sums given in the table are from the last returnst furnished (1904-5) by the Pacific Cable Board (in even pounds) indicating contributions required to make up deficits.
On the execution of the Pacific Cable State partnership agreement, as in all partnerships, each partner was understood to assume certain duties and responsi bilities.
I have shown that those Governments at the sources of traffic have had it in their power to direct traffic over the State undertaking almost as they might desire. It seems to me that under the partnership agreement each partner was and is bound, within reason, to make every effort to fulfil the obligation. If there has been no failure in this respect there can be no fault found. If, however, there has been default in any case, when made known in an amicable spirit there should not be much difficulty in having it set right.
An examination of the table unmistakeably shows that there are three partners who are not in default, viz., Queensland, New Zealand and Canada. Each of these
Appendix No. 4.
† Appendix No. 5.
three have done and are doing more than their full share. The same cannot be said of the other three partners, New South Wales, Victoria and the United Kingdom. Had all been actuated by the same spirit as New Zealand and Queensland and adopted the same policy there would have been no cause for disappointment. But the circumstances were different in each case and it is now the object of this Con- ference to find a way of adjustment.
All being willing to do what is just and fair, it seems to me that there are two possible solutions:-
(1) That the three partners in default take means hereafter to direct a larger flow of traffic by the Pacific Cable, so that the percentages in the table be increased in each case approximately as follows:- New South Wales from 234 to at least 50 per cent.
Victoria from 15 to at least 50 per cent.
The United Kingdom from 27 to at least 50 per cent.
(2) The alternative is for these three partners to consent to pay a larger proportion of any annual deficit so long as they remain in a position of delinquency. The exact amount payable by each such partner to be determined by accountants duly chosen.
The EARL OF JERSEY: My position is rather more difficult than that of any other member of the Conferenee. My powers are very much restricted. Undoubtedly some facts have occurred which have not met with universal approval, but I may just enter a gentle protest against two Colonies of Australia being called delinquent partners as stated by my friend on my left. Personally, I share the views expressed by you Mr. Chairman, and Sir William Mulock, as to the desirability, and even the necessity of our arriving at an agreed conclusion, and, personally, I shall do every- thing in my power to arrive at a solution or compromise or a settlement which will be satisfactory to all parties.
The CHAIRMAN: I do not know whether this has been brought to your notice, the report of the Pacific Cable Committee of 1899-1900, page 5, in which the anticipa- tion is not of half the traffic to the Pacific Cable, but out of a traffic of 2,300,000 words, of 925,000 only.
Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: Which Committee?
Mr. MERCER: Sir Francis Mowatt's Committee; the second Committee. Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: I am afraid I have not seen that report.
Mr. MERCER: No, it has never been published; it was private and confidential. Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: I refer to the other Committee in the things I have cited. The CHAIRMAN: I think myself that it would be desirable, if the members of the Conference agree, that we should hear the Pacific Cable Board view upon this; it can only be done with your assent.
Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Yes.
Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: I did not come prepared: I did not know I was expected to take any part in the Conference; therefore, the delegates will excuse me if I do not state things as clearly as I should have done. In the first place I should like very much to emphasise what has already fallen from you, Sir, as to the estimates of the latest authority on the Pacific Cable, the Committee of 1900. I asked Sir Francis Mowatt yesterday whether I might quote the figures; if it were necessary that the figures might be quoted; and he saw no objection to it. That is my justification for referring to a private report.
Mr. MERCER: This report was communicated to all the Governments concerned, but in a confidential despatch; and the gist of it I understand got out into the Austra- lian papers.
Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: I wished to emphasise what you have said, Sir, that that Committee, upon which I may say in parenthesis Lord Strathcona and Mr. Reeves both served, went into a very careful estimate of the traffic between all the Colonies and this country, and they assumed, as you have said, Sir, that out of a total traffic
21872
B