•
191
1
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
1, 2
Reference :-
TLC.O. 885
6
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
20
rigorously enforced, not alone for the protection of the Victoria revenue, but also of those traders who conform to the existing law, whether such law is burdensome or not, in the transaction of their business.
It has been from time to time alleged that certain financial institutions in Victoria attempt to evade the law by this particular process, but no evidence of such attempts has as yet been laid before the Crown Law Department to prove in any way those allegations. cannot therefore hold out to the Committee any hope of an amendment of this clause, unless the whole subject of remodelling the Stamps Acts comes before Parliament.
(Signed) BRYAN O'LOGHLEN,
Attorney General.
8984.
No. 23.
COLONIAL OFFICE to the ACTING AGENT-GENERAL FOR SOUTH AUSTRALIA.
Downing Street, June 1, 1894. SIR,
your I AM directed by the Marquess of Ripon to acknowledge the receipt of letter of the 24th ultimo,* stating that you have been appointed to represent the South Australian Government at the Ottawa Conference, and to inform you that a set of Admiralty charts (Pacific, No. 844) have been published, showing the soundings which have been taken by H.M.S. "Egeria," in connexion with the proposed cable. These charts can be procured from the agent for the sale of Admiralty Charts, Mr. J. D. Potter, 31, Poultry, and 11, King Street, Tower Hill.
I am, &c.
9660.
(Signed)
No. 24.
EDWARD WINGFIELD.
THE EASTERN EXTENSION TELEGRAPH COMPANY to COLONIAL OFFICE. (Received June 4, 1894.)
MY LORD MARQUESS,
[Answered by No. 36.]
The Eastern Extension Australasia and China
Telegraph Company, Limited, Winchester House,
50, Old Broad Street, London, E.C.,
June 2, 1894. STATEMENTS having been publicly made by Sir Charles Tupper questioning the accuracy of certain figures advanced by the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company in connexion with the Pacific cable question, I have thought it only right to reply to them, and enclosed I beg to transmit for your Lordship's information, a copy of the correspon- dence that has passed between Sir Charles Tupper and myself on the subject.
As your Lordship is aware, the great international cable system, which now permeates the whole civilised world, and without which, it would be practically impossible for commerce to be conducted, has been built up and developed to its present high state of efficiency mainly by private enterprise and British capital, and as the cable companies, whose interests might be seriously affected by the establishment of a Pacific cable, will not be represented at the forthcoming Ottawa Conference, and therefore will be unable to ventilate their views, I venture to hope that your Lordship will see your way to instruct the British delegate, that the existing cable system to Australia is, in the
• No. 14.
21
opinion of Her Majesty's Government, entitled to a large share of consideration at the hands of the Conference.
DEAR SIR CHARLES TUPPER,
I have, &c. (Signed)
JOHN PENDER,
Chairman.
Enclosure 1 in No. 24.
London, May 15, 1894.
I HAVE Carefully looked through the paper which you read last week at the meeting of the Royal Colonial Institute, and had I been well enough to attend the meeting, I should have made an effort to be present.
46
64
I cannot, however, allow your statement to pass unchallenged, that the protest against the proposed cable is largely based upon fallacies," feeling convinced that if you would carefully study our figures and arguments, which are based on actual facts and practical experience of cable working, and compare them with those furnished by Mr. Sandford Fleming, you would come to the conclusion that the fallacies are not on our side, but on your own.
For instance, to take the first point in your paper relating to amortisation, you are entirely mistaken in stating that "some 5,350 miles (or about 30 per cent.) of the "18,000 miles of cable now forming the system of the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company is more than 20 years old, and is still in working condition, the balance of "about 12,650 miles being duplications and extensions laid since 1874." As a matter of fact, nearly the whole of the cables originally laid by the Eastern Extension Company has been renewed, some entirely, and in a considerably shorter period than 20 years.
Then as to your estimate of traffic for a Pacific cable, you have quite ignored the fact that at the Wellington Conference it was decided that the ordinary tariff should be 38. per word instead of 3s. 3d. as proposed by Mr. Sandford Fleming; consequently, after the necessary out-payments are deducted, which would probably amount to 1s. 6d. (1s. for the Atlantic cables and 6d. for the Canadian and Australian landlines) there would be only 1s. 6d. left for the Pacific cable instead of the 2s. relied upon by Mr. Sandford Fleming, and this discrepancy materially affects your figures.
Moreover, any calculations based upon such an unknown quantity as the "normal increase of traffic" cannot be at all reliable, as the circumstances are constantly changing. For example, the growth of traffic with Australasia during the year ending 30th April 1892 was only 8.34 per cent. over that of the previous year, and in the following year ending April 1893 it was less than 6 per cent. as compared with 1892, showing that Mr. Sandford Fleming's estimate of a minimum 123 per cent. is quite misleading.
It is equally unsafe to rely too closely on calculations of increase resulting from re- ductions of tariff, experience having unfortunately shown that on more than one occasion a falling off of traffic has actually taken place after a substantial lowering of rates, instead of a considerable increase, such as your paper indicates would result if the Australian tariff were reduced from 4s. 9d. to 3s. 3d. per word.
Then, again, your description of the existing system as a "monopoly" cannot be justified, seeing that it has never received any exclusive landing rights from the Australian Governments, but has had to rely upon the business-like and economical principles upon which it has been established and worked for its freedom from competi- tion. In fact, the field has always been open to all comers to compete with us, and upon equal terms I should have nothing to say against it, but supported by Government aid it would be quite another matter, and if a Pacific cable were established on this basis, and the pioneer company, which has done so much for the Australasian Colonies in pro- viding them with perhaps the best submarine service in the world were ignored, it would certainly be disastrous to private enterprise, and the Governments interested could not in common fairness adopt such a course without granting similar pecuniary assistance to the existing system.
No doubt a single cable could be constructed and laid for 1,800,000%, and it would undoubtedly materially benefit the cable manufacturers, but no company who knew any- thing about the business and would be held responsible for carrying it through could undertake the work with any prospect of making it pay on the terms of the Wellington Conference Resolution.
At the present moment, however, the proposed cable is not really needed for com- mercial purposes, and therefore the expenditure of nearly two millions sterling when
C 3