PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
PEPE C.O.
+885
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
17 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
36
engagement, a particular one, and I think Sir Sandford has, for Monday forenoon, that would take up till, let us say, half-past two.
Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: It would be three before we could get here.
The EARL OF JERSEY: We only require to receive the answer.
The CHAIRMAN: That is all. If the answer of New Zealand is favourable Lord Jersey might be empowered accordingly to cable to Australia. I think we could do that without a meeting at all. If there is not a favourable reply, which I do not anticipate, then we can call the Conference again.
Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: In view of that would you give us a copy of the telegram proposed to be sent.
The CHAIRMAN: Certainly, is that agreed?
Agreed.
Adjourned.
THE PACIFIC CABLE CONFERENCE.
THIRD DAY.
Wednesday, July 12th, 1905, at 11.30 a.m.
THE RIGHT HONOURABLE ALFRED LYTTELTON, K.C., M.P., The Secretary of State for the Colonies, in the Chair.
PRESENT:
THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD JERSEY, G.C.B., G.C.M.G.
THE HONOURABLE SIR WILLIAM MULOCK, K.C.M.G.. M.A., K.C.
SIR SANDFORD FLEMING, K.C.M.G.
Mr. GEORGE W. JOHNSON, C.M.G., Secretary.
Sir SPENCER WALPOLE, K.C.B.
ALSO PRESENT:
The Right Honourable LORD STRATHCONA AND MOUNT ROYAL, G.C.M.G. The Honourable W. PEMBER REEVES.
Mr. J. W. CAWSTON.
Mr. W. H. MERCER, C.M.G.
The CHAIRMAN: Well, Gentlemen, the telegram that has been sent to New Zealand was answered on the 5th July, and the answer was to this effect:-
K
New Zealand Government, in order to enable the Conference to pursue their further deliberations, invites the Commonwealth Government to under- take to amend the Commonwealth Agreement by inserting an express provision, excluding the revival of the New South Wales Agreement on the termination of the Commonwealth.Agreement and (2) by sub- stituting in Clause 25, after 1913, the words, and no longer, for all words at present following that date. Sir Sandford Fleming is autho- rized to support this resolution."
Lord Jersey sent on the 6th July the following telegram to the Prime Minister of the Federal Government:-
Cable Conference. Am requested to transmit following message:-Begins: Conference advised by legal adviser of Colonial Office that New South Wales Agreement with Eastern Extension Telegraph Company is in- terminable except with consent of parties to, and that proposed Commonwealth Agreement unsatisfactory in that it does not expressly
37
rescind New South Wales Agreement not itself terminate uncon- ditionally at a fixed time. Conference, therefore, in order to enable them to pursue their further deliberations invite Commonwealth Govern- ment to undertake to amend Commonwealth Agreement: (1) by inserting express provision excluding revival of New South Wales Agreement on termination of Commonwealth Agreement; and (2) by substituting in Clause 25, after '1913,' the words and no longer' for Ends. Early reply all the words at present following that date. greatly desired. Conference strongly in favour of proposed amendment. May I venture to urge importance.-JERSEY." Then this telegram from Mr. Deakin to Lord Jersey, dated the 10th July, 1905, has been received:
"Your telegram of 6th July not understood. Two separate objections appear to be raised. Commonwealth Agreement expressly stated to be in substitution for New South Wales and other Agreements and am advised that construction that its termination will revive New South Wales Agreement untenable; but if Conference desires, we have no objection to endeavour to secure Company's assent to express rescission. Why is unconditional termination asked? DEAKIN."
-
It does not seem to be necessary to discuss the first part of that telegram, which shows a conflict between the legal advisers of the two bodies, because Mr. Deakin expresses his intention, if the Conference desires, to endeavour to secure the Com- pany's assent to the express rescission of the New South Wales Agreement, so we may take that as granted; but the question, why is unconditional termination asked, is for the Conference to decide. The reason why unconditional termination is asked is for us now to give. Well, Sir William, as you were, I think, the author of the resolution for unconditional termination, do you wish to express any views as to how this telegram should be answered?
Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: I will try and draft an answer.
The CHAIRMAN: Yes, perhaps I might remind you of what Sir Edmund Barton wrote upon the 1st June, 1903, to Mr. Seddon.* He said :-
"The Pacific Cable is not for a day; but it is to be hoped for all time, and it is surely the province of those responsible for the administration of
a country not to limit their views to momentary advantages, but rather
to look ahead and proceed in such manner that their actions will be of permanent benefit to the people whose servants they are.
There
can be no doubt that in reducing the term of the Agreement to a reasonable period, the Commonwealth has obtained for the Pacific Cable, a very great advantage, which cannot fail to be of immense and increasing value."
This seems rather to imply that Sir Edmund Barton, at any rate, held that this Agreement should not be of more than reasonable duration.
Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Perhaps the other members would try their hand at drafting an answer, and we could all then compare notes.
The CHAIRMAN: Yes.
(After a pause),
"
The CHAIRMAN: I will read out the result of several drafts that have been sub- mitted, for the purpose of discussion: Unconditional termination of Agreement at a fixed date asked in order that, after that date ruinous expense of competition between Board and Company may be saved, and in order to place the systems of both the Company and the Board on a footing of absolute equality; partners may then determine their policy in concert unhampered by any Agreements independently arrived at." This
with Sir Edmund Barton's letter. "It is not suggested that portions of the Agreement might not be usefully continued if the partners agree to their continuance.”
agrees
• Printed in Commonwealth Parliamentary Paper, No. 17 of 1903.