PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
TILLI C.O. 885
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
·ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
Enclosure K.
90
There were six-indents, all received on 23rd November, 1899, and several ship- ments were made, thus,
Due.
Ordered.
Instruments
1 December
18 January
Stimulants...
&
12 December...
"
Instruments
1
10 January
19
Battery jars
12
19 December ...
29
་
Shipped.
31 January.
19 December.
...
14 February,
16 January.
(Involving reference to Consulting Engineers.)
1
The latest delivery (shipped 14th February) was, we may mention, made by a firm to whom we were directed to give the order by the Colonial Government. The actual times, therefore, instead of 70 and 97 days, were 26, 54, 69, 83 days.
73. Another case is where correspondence was necessary before we could go on. Thus 53 days are stated to have been taken to execute an order for target frames. The estimated cost was £52, but the maker (named by the Colonial Government) required £110; we had, therefore, to telegraph to the Colony, which took 20 days to reply. Our order was given the following day, and the goods were shipped 18 days after.
In such cases we submit that the time should be reckoned from the
date of the receipt of instructions enabling us to place the order.
74. The circumstance that it was impossible to proceed with the order at once does not prevent the Colonial Government from reckoning the whole time against us. Thus there is on the face of it a striking case attributing to us 215 days to forward certain books. The explanation is that the books in question (law treatises) were out of print. and, of course, could not be forwarded till republished. This was fully explained to the Colonial Government.
75. To further test the question whether the cases given in table" C." disclose unsatisfactory procedure on our part, or state the facts as to time correctly, we have taken all the cases where it is stated that the goods are not yet received," and we annex a memorandum giving the circumstances.
76. In most of these cases the goods must have been received some considerable time before the despatch was written.
77. We do not perceive that any of them show any shortcomings on our part, and we can hardly think that the circumstances have been examined.
78. It is, of course, impossible for us, in the absence of all information about the orders sent to New York, except the brief data 'given in table "D." to attempt any xamination of the list. It may be remarked generally that the average time shown against us is greatly swollen by the long time taken in supplying the heavy indents for clothing and uniforms which notoriously take a long time to make, and in the period under review have, on account of the war, been greatly delayed. No orders of this kind seem to have been sent to New York. It is quite evident that in a very large, proportion of the cases in which we have had articles specially made, the New York agents have sent articles from stock. This brings us back to a point we have referred to before, and we may repeat that to comply with the indents received we have had to order articles to be made. We should be interested to know whether in any cases the orders sent to New York have left the agents there a freer hand than is given to us in similar matters. In a correspondence on record in this office the Superinten- dent of the Government Printing Office, in a letter to the Colonial Secretary of the 19th of October, 1892, reports about an order for paper sent to the United States; it is there stated that the merchant was ordered to buy and ship “the nearest article to the sample sent to him": that the paper was bought from a “jobber" and not from a maker; that the jobber's profit had to be added, and that five per cent. commission was paid to the merchants.
79. We further gather from paragraph 5 of the Governor's despatch that the orders gent to us are heavier than those sent to New York, and His Excellency states that very probably this is sufficient to account for a normal excess of time and that he does not suggest for a moment that the difference between the two averages would be a fair measure of real difference in efficiency. We would go further and say that
91
any comparison such as that suggested is worthless unless in each case full details of the transactions are given and, all the circumstances taken into account. He further states (paragraph 7) that as regards the execution of orders requiring to be manufac tured he believes it to be the case that we are to a great extent helpless. We infer that the imputation of unbusinesslike methods on our part rests entirely on the complaint that we have not executed orders from stock.
80. We have only to add that we do not recall that we have described American and German goods as “cheap and worthless," and we should be glad if the Governor would be so good as to refer us to the occasions he is speaking of. In our letter to you of the 1st of March, 1901, we argued against the purchase from local merchants of articles which have to be imported, and we observed that such a system lent itself to the purchase of " inferior goods,” “probably mainly of American or German origin.” This, we submit, is a different thing from asserting that American and German goods necessarily cheap and worthless," and in this instance again, if this is the passage referred to, we think that words which purport to be a quotation should be those actually used.
are
81. The last table enclosed by Sir A. Hemming compares the prices previously paid by the railway with those now proenred by us. We find it difficult to comment on this table, as prices depend on quality, and we have no means of testing them in these cases. Fifteen cases are given; in eight of them our prices are the lower; these were cases of paints and oils which, Sir A. Hemming observes, were obtained from the Crown Agents "from makers who may or may not be inferior to Hubbock and Sons. They were obtained from Messrs. Craig and Rose, a firm of the highest standing, and wire, we are advised, are "well above" Hubbock and Sons. Of the other items mentioned it is evident that such articles as masts, cutlasses, buckets, brushes, &c., are of very varying quality, and can be bought at either low or high prices.
52
2. We are, however, able to supply a case where the agents mentioned by Sir A. Hemming dealt with the same firm (Messrs. Waterlow and Sons) that we do, and Enclosure we annex a list which we have obtained from that firm of the prices of the same Lj articles as charged to us and to Messrs. Mildred Goyeneche and Co. It will be scen that our prices were substantially lower. This list may be communicated to the Colonial Government in confidence, so that they can check the figures, but should, for obvious reasons, not be given to Messrs. Mildred Goyeneche and Co.
3. In paragraph 14 of his despatch Sir A. Hemming states that the firm of agents in the Colony charged one and a-half per cent, commission on all supplies and gave the railway the benefit of discount received. We need hardly say that we also give the Colony all the discounts received. The commission which we pay to Messrs. Blakemore is paid to them not as ordinary agents but as skilled experts in the hardware trade, who can buy to better advantage than persons who do not devote themselves to this business. It has been repeatedly proved to our satisfaction that the commission paid to Messrs. Blakemore is more than covered by the saving which they effect in prices, and in addition it practically means inspection by experts in a great variety of manufactured goods. It also covers the collection of such goods from many quarters, and frequently the storage of the goods in their own warehouse till ready for being packed and shipped. The proper mode is to regard the commission as part of the price paid for the article, and from investigations which we have made from time to time of individual cases we feel certain that the prices so arrived at could not be reduced by obtaining articles of the same quality from any other source. The only alternative to this system would be the purchase of such goods from wholesale houses, which would involve an additional charge. We, however, quite recognize that on the face of it the payment of a commission of this kind, in addition to our own one per cent., invites question, and we have accordingly arranged that Messrs. Blakemore shall in future give us an inclusive price for each article they supply, taking the responsibility for the quality and guaranteeing that the price is as low as possible. The firm should therefore be regarded as the actual suppliers, and Colonial Governments need only have regard to their prices and qualities." If in any case it is shown that the price is unreasonable or the quality unsatisfactory compensation will be recovered from the firm. We have no doubt, however, that orders executed in this way will be more advantageously done than if executed through local agents or other merchants.
84. As regards the payments made to our shipping agents, we would observe that they are not made by way of commission, but represent charges on specific
9932