19
459
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
wwimmimCO.885/25
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
18
It is a truism to observe that both imports and exports depend for their development upon adequate and cheap shipping facilities, and I think that the Council will agree with me that, in this department of commercial energy, a healthy rivalry and competition is as essential as in any other that it promotes efficiency and is in the interest of shippers and of trade. I submit the view that Nigeria should invite the assistance of His Majesty's Government to promote this object. so essential to the development of the natural resources of this country, if neces- sary by the means outlined in the fourth paragraph of the first recommendation under head C, viz., if necessary, by the grant of subsidies and financial assistance. In expressing this view, however, I desire to emphasize the fact that it does not connote any depreciation of the energy and ability shown during the War by the sole existing company, Messrs. Elder Dempster. On the contrary, I would desire to express my own personal view that Nigeria is much indebted to that company for its efforts during this difficult period.
On the first part of the second question have no particular remarks to offer to the Council. As regards the securing of new markets, Nigeria itself is a new market, as yet only partially developed and of enormous potential possibilities.
This Government will require capital after the War to open up this market by railways, roads, and ports, and other works to facilitate trade, but we ought to have no difficulty in raising such loans as we may require. Private enterprise will also require capital, and I welcome the statement made in the public Press that the British firms engaged in the trade of Nigeria, in whose energy and ability we have confidence, have ample capital at their back, and have invested an additional two million in the country since the outbreak of war. It is no reflec- tion on their ability if I add that, in the interests of trade, we should welcome the stimulus of increased competition, including the increasing participation by natives of the country, and all the non-enemy capital which can be attracted to the country.
This leads me to the subject of the fourth question: "How can the sources of supply be prevented from falling under foreign control?" No responsible states- man has, I think, yet been found to maintain that the industrious and intelligent populations of Germany and Austria, numbering some 121,000,000 of people, should or could be excluded after the War from the trade and commerce of the world. Were it possible to do so-which it is not-we should suffer almost as much as they. What we do desire-and are now considering how to effect-is that they shall not, as in the past, exploit our own markets against us, and establish monopolies in essential products and manufactures on which the safety of the Empire depends, and, in the words of this question, that "the sources of supply in the Empire shall not fall under their control.”
It is a large and complex, and, withal, a very delicate question to discuss here. I venture with humility to declare my adherence to the views expressed by Mr. Bonar Law in the recent debate on sales of enemy properties (referring to the basis of Mr. Chamberlain's efforts), that our policy should be to attract and not to repel foreign capital, provided that the strictest precautions are adopted for securing that it is not employed in enemy interests, or to our own disadvantage. I hold that the very foundations of the British Empire rest on its tolerance, and the open door which it has always afforded to all the world. This alone has disarmed the opposition of other nations to the growth of the Empire and secured their good will. To abandon that policy and to close the Empire to all but British subjects would be to return to a policy long abandoned, and would in the years to come inevitably cause the other nations to unite in a common antagonism against us. But this War has taught us that even so vital a principle as this may be applied too carelessly, and that there are undoubtedly directions in which precautions should be taken, so that our liberality shall not be exploited to our own disadvantage in the future, as was done by Germany.
One of these possible precautions is the extent to which foreigners should be allowed to own immovable property in any British country. This is a question which Mr. Bonar Law informed the House is now being considered by a committee, and it is therefore presumably a question upon which he desires the views of the Colonial Governments.
I am inclined to the view that foreigners--other than the present Enemy Powers to which I shall presently refer should only be allowed to acquire real property, whether from Government or from private owners, on leasehold title, and that the conditions of such leases (to be verified by Government if Government is not
the lessor) should include safeguards not only to prevent their transfer to Enemy Powers, or their use on their behalf, for a stipulated period of years, but also to prevent as far as possible a recurrence of such abuse as was effected by Germany before the War.
The safeguards necessary to prevent the use in enemy interests of property held on lease by foreigners would be of the same nature as those imposed upon the purchasers of the German estates recently put to auction, and would include a stipulation that the business shall be conducted in such a manner that it cannot reasonably be shown to be in the enemy interest, and, with this object in view, shall conform to such rules as may be laid down in regard to its directorate and the nationality of its local agents.
C
$1
It may be urged, as it was in the Nigerian sales debate. that no safe- guards can be adequate for this purpose. I think that anyone who has con- sidered the ramifications and interdependence of the world's trade in these days would be disposed to agree that absolutely watertight safeguards are impossible, but in practice I apprehend that they can be made fairly effective. Not only would the risk be great to any one who attempted to evade them, but trade is sensitive, the world competition is keen, and restrictions framed with a definite object in view can easily result in making evasion not worth while.
Secondly, I consider that the continuance of the lease should be dependent on the bona fide use of the land for the purpose for which it was acquired-- whether for trade or missions or other purpose; and in the third place the lease should not be sold nor transferred without the sanction of Government. Other minor restrictions suggest themselves; they are matters which require prolonged consideration, and I do not propose to discuss them here.
As regards Enemy Powers, I submit that no German should for a period of years say twenty be allowed to acquire any lease of real property." At the end of that period the international situation may or may not call for its continuance.
The restrictions on foreigners to which I have referred would, I submit, in no way contravene the great principle of the "open door" in the British Empire. They are, so far as Allies and neutrals are concerned, merely safeguards against a misuse of opportunity which would not be in any way a restraint of trade, nor, I think, are they such as we would resent if imposed on ourselves in foreign territory. In view, however, of the difficulty of controlling certain subjects of neutral States who are of enemy origin. I am inclined to subscribe to the view that, during the period of reconstruction, no neutral should hold real property unless his business is registered in the United Kingdom or a British Dominion or Colony. So far as the Central Powers are concerned the restrictions are a penalty imposed for past misuse. during the period of commercial reconstruc- tion. As regards foreign capital we should, as I have said, welcome it, but with the same precautions-that it is not employed in order to gain control of the sources of supply of any particular raw material or mineral.
To summarize my remarks in reply to questions 3 and 4. I submit that it is to the interest of Nigeria, in common with the rest of the Empire, that the traditional policy of the open door" should not be replaced by one of exclusive privilege as against the foreigner: that Allies and neutrals should be welcomed and the introduction of their capital and competition facilitated, under stringent safeguards, to prevent the recurrence of the abuse of the freedom accorded, and the entry, under any disguise, of enemy interests: that, in particular, foreigners should hold land only under lease with certain conditions, which should not be in restraint of bona fide trade; that neutrals, during the reconstruction period, should only hold real property if their businesses are registered in the Empire; and, finally, that no enemy subject should hold land, or directly or indirectly control any business, in Nigeria for a period of years.
I have but one word left to say in regard to question 3 before I close these manifestly inadequate remarks on the vast subject which you are invited to discuss. To what extent and by what means can the resources of the Empire with particular regard to Nigeria-be developed? I have no doubt that there are many experienced members of this Council who could fill a volume in reply to this question. I will offer but one observation myself on this tempting theme.
It has been one main object of the policy of this Government, since its direc- tion was entrusted to myself, to develop the local use of local resources with the object of saving the enormous cost of importing material manufactured, or partly