14.5
357
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference—
C.O. 885
9
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
30 November 1896.]
Mr. LAMB.
Chairman Thank you: then we will go on to the expenditure.
Mr. Gillies.
2308. Before leaving the receipts, you have taken first into consideration that we will only receive one third, not a half as some people have estimated ?-Yes.
2309. And one of the reasons for that was that
the cable sometimes will not be able to work,
that there will be a break sometimes? Yes.
2310. And that that will take some time to mend ?--Yes.
2311. Should there be any break you see it has to be maintained for three years, the cable is to be maintained for the first three years by the contractor?—Yes.
we
2312. That would be some consideration, an element of course, and it is not estimated that the breaks-I believe the general evidence have had here is that the breaks will not be serious, and will not be many, so if there were no breaks it would change the situation altogether? -Yes: but may I point out that guarantee on the part of the contractor does not secure you against breaks.
2313. No? It only secures that if a break takes place he will repair it.
a mere
Therefore it leaves
you still with this risk, even in the first three years, of an interruption of your communication and the loss of your business. There are two or three other considerations, if I might mention them.
Chairman,
2314. In this connection ?-Yes: the messages to and from Australasia are to a less degree expressed in code than they are to and from other distant countries, and the explanation I suppose is that the business to and from Australasiais, as a whole, less of an old established character than it is to,say, India. There can be no doubt that the tendency will be to use code words. more and more as the business becomes older, and as the business expressions and phrases come to be better known and more uniform. This tendency to compression has been shown in a marked degree in the Anglo-Indian traffic. I am told that in that traffic, owing to roth-
pression from the use of cole, the words have not increased since 1886. In 1886 the number of words in messages to and from India was 2,174,000 and in 1894 (which are the last figures I was able to obtain before I came the number was 2,165,000 words, that is, less than it was in 1886, and I am told that the volume of actual commercial business has, at the same time, considerably increasel, and that really people have telegraphed more, but they have put their telegrams into fewer words owing
to code.
2315. The number of messages would show that, would it not? Can you give the number of messages in the two years? --No, I cannot give that; but even that would not show it, because a man combines a good deal of his business. That is to say, if he is going to tele- graph he can, I am told, put as many as 20 words, and some people say even 25, into one word, and that he is doing to India, where the
Chairman--continued.
[Continued.
business has become settled and steady. That i- another thing that I have taken into consideration in considering this question of 7 per cent, i as the business gets steadier and older and the phrases that are used in commerce come to be stereotyped and become e qpable of expression in endle words, the tendenes must be to slow off the increase in the number of words, even although the commercial business may be in-
Preasing.
2316. [+ there any other point on that question of business and extension of business that you wish to say before we go to the question of expenditure?—No; I think I have nothing more to say on that.
2317. Can you give us an estimate of what the annual expenses would be of such a cable? I estimate doen as follows: the capital esal 2,000,000/= interest on this at 3 per cent. 60,0007 ; maintenance and working 40,00"}, and sinking fund calculated at 3 per cent, for 25 years 51,8607, or a total of 154,860L
per
2318. You estimate the interest at 3 cent. ?—Yes.
2319. And the sinking find at the same
Yes.
atmount ?
2320, That I presume is for the purpose of re- placing the cable as much as anything else. You may call that an amortisation, I suppose, or sink- ing fund, whichever you like ? Iink the main- tenance, acl workin, and the sinking fund are things which overlap, and if you have a moderate figure for maintenance and working, you must have a sinking fund, and I consider that I have got an extremely moderate amount for mainte- nanee and working
2321. But does 40,0007, include maintenance. and repairs, and working expenses? It is a very low estimate of current repairs and current
expenses.
2322 Can you separate that into maintenance and repairs of the cable, and working expenses of the cable ~ — Well I can roughly separate it into 10,000 for working and 30,000, for mainte- nance, but I feel that is n low estimate.
2323. Making a total of?- £154,860, 2324. So that on the first year's working you estimate a deficit, speaking roughly of 108,00077
Yes. A to the moderation of that estimate, you have only to consider that ordinary current maintenance on some of the existing systems Ins been ascertained to be 41. 5. a knot, which would work out on the actual distance of the Pacific Cable, with 17 per cent. for slack, at 35,71807, a year.
Well, I have gone below that.
Then you inust add working expenses, and then I think you might ask yourselves why the guarantee suggested by the India Rubber Gutta Percha and Telegraph Works Company was 226,000 for whereas my total estimate only works years; out at 154,5007. That leaves a very large margin indeed.
25
2325. The 60,0007, of course, would be re- duced if the money was raised at 23 per cent.?
-Yes.
2326. It would also be reduced if the cable did not cost 2,000,0007, ?—Yes, that is so.
2327. And you are aware that upon that
30 November 1896.]
Mr. LAMB.
Chairman-continued. subject there is some difference of opinion? Yes. There again you will perhaps allow me to say that I am not giving my estimates as an engineer; I am giving them as an administrator, and where in one case I appear to be unfavour- able to the scheme, in others I might be shown to be too favourable.
You will find, perhaps,
if you ask six administrators to arrive at an estimate, that they will all arrive by different ways, but they will arrive at about the same result in the long run, and therefore, although I do not know that I ain prepared to defend every separate item of my estimate, 1 think that, on the whole, the general result would give you what I say.
one.
or
2328. It is quite in that spirit that I am going The 30,000/. for maintenance would through it. include one two telegraph ships? --Only
2329. The 10,0001, for working expenses, you are aware, is considerably below the figure that Sir John Pender named in his letter on the subject some years ago? - Yes.
2330. I think he put the working expenses at 30,0007. ?—I do not remember.
CAT
2331. The 54,000, to be set aside every year at 3 per cent. would be in the nature of an in- surance fund, that is, either to replace the existing cable if it should require replacing. to duplicate the cable, as the case might be? Not to duplicate the cable; certainly not. certainly do not estimate any money for dupli-
cation.
1
2332, Do I understand that the 54,000, only gives you money for repairs? Yes, and renewal.
-
2333. At the end of 25 years the whole of that money would have been used or would have to be used to make good that one calde ?-That is part of my estimate,
2334. You are aware that some people think that, given adequate ammal repairs, a modern cable as a very much longer term of life than 25 years? Yes, I am aware of that; but in that sense I think that the annual repairs that are in the minds of those people would absorb your 54,860/
2335. Do you think, in fact, that you would require on the average to put 54,8601. worth of new cable into the cable every year?--On the average, if you only estimate such a low sum as 40,000 for the other figure.
2336. That leaves you 40,0007, simply for the telegraph ship?—And working.
2337. £30,000 for the telegraph ship?—Yes.
Mr. Murray.
2338. On the assumption that the cable is to be as good at the end of the 25 years as it was at the beginning ?—Yes. I could give you a history of one or two of our cables. They are not exactly the same thing, but what they show more than anything else is that you cannot tell beforehand what is going to happen to your cable. Of course, a cable laid in the waters around Great Britain is in quite a different position from a cable in the
[Continued.
Mr. Murray-continued. Pacific, but at least the history will show you how uncertain the life of a cable is.
Chairman.
2339. Thank you; I think we had better have it. If
your Lordship were to look at the international list of cables published in Berne you would find that one of the cables between England and France was laid in 1851 and was still working, but I will now give you the history of that cable. It was originally laid in 1851, it had been almost entirely renewed before 1875 by means of insertions of new cable at various dates, the only sections of the original cable which then remained being about 40 yards on the beach on the French side and about half a knot in the centre.
Mr. Jones.
2340. That is after being laid 24 years ?— That is after 24 years. It had been entirely renewed excepting for half a knot and 40 yards. Between 1875 and 1889, 19 separate sections had heen inserted at various dates, making total of 214 knots. The whole length of the cable is 213 knots, so that again the cable had been practically renewed, that is between 1875 and 1889 In that case it is only 14 years.
ก
2341. What is the depth of water that it is laid in?—I do not know whether in any case it exceeds 30 or 40 fathoms. I doubt whether it does.
2342. There is, I think, more movement of the cable; it is more exposed ?—Yes, that is so. The present cable is thus, in a sense, the third cable, although it is described here as a cable laid in 1851. Then another case is that of the Anglo-Dutch cable of 111 knots, which was laid in 1858. Of this cable only 36 knots remain. Renewals on a large scale took place in 1868 and 1885, and the cable is now composed as follows:
36
knots original, 27 put in in 1868; 34 knots in 1885; and 14 knots between 1889 and 1896. I ought to explain that in many of these cases there were intermediate repairs, but that is simply its present position.
2343. That cable has been down 38 years?— That cable has been down 38 years.
That is
a case-a very favourable case that is a case of a cable with a good life; but now I come to another Anglo-Dutch cable, of 108 knots, which was laid in 1862; that is, four years later than the other. That cable, after being frequently It was entirely repaired, only lasted 22 years. replaced in 1884.
2344. Was the depth of water there about the same?—It is laid you may say, practically, very nearly over the same ground as the other Dutch cable. The landing points are a little apart. In England the landing point of one is Lowestoft→ that is the cable with the long life--and the cable with the shorter life is landed at Benacre.
Chairman.
2345. Can you give us similar information about a rather more recent cable ?—I could get
Τ