CO882-(2-3) — Page 463

14.

26.

IN ARBITRATION

BETWEEN THE

INDIA

OFFICE AND THE COLONIAL OFFICE.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TITLICO. 882

3 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

Supplementary Case of the Colonial Office.

THE Colonial Office, in submitting to the Arbitrator a Supplementary Case in the matter of this arbitration, considers that the most convenient course will be first to discuss the several arguments brought forward in the Case of the India Office, and then to sum up the reasons upon which the Colonial Office relies in support of the claim which it makes on behalf of the Colony of the Straits Settlements.

1. Following this course, the Colonial Office asks the careful attention of the Arbitrator

to the very first sentence of the case of the India Office.

That sentence indicates a wide divergence on the part of the India Office from the views of the Colonial Office, even as to the subject matter of arbitration.

The sentence runs thus :--

"The question to be decided in this case is whether the Secretary of State is entitled to receive payment from the Imperial Government for certain ordnance and military stores which were taken possession of by the Imperial Government in 1868, shortly after the transfer of the Straits Settlements from India to the Colonial Department."

The Colonial Office, on the other hand, has stated the subject matter of arbitration in the following sentence :-

"It is agreed that the arbitration shall be confined to the liability of the Colony of the Straits Settlements for the armaments and stores left by the Government of India at the time of the transfer, exclusive of those which have been taken over and paid for by the War Department on Imperial account."

There are two remarkable differences between these sentences: first, as to the party whose liability is in arbitration; and, secondly, in the description of the property in arbi-

tration.

First. The Colonial Office speaks of "the liability of the Colony of the Straits Settle- ments." The India Office speaks of the " 'title of the Secretary of State for India to receive payment from the Imperial Government."

"

Secondly. The property in arbitration is described by the Colonial Office as armament and stores left by the Government of India at the time of the transfer, exclusive, the &c.," while it is described by the India Office as "certain ordnance and military stores, which were taken possession of by the Imperial Government in 1868, shortly after the transfer, &c." And to show that this description is given designedly by the India Office, India Office Cass, page 8 of the case of the India Office may be referred to, where this sentence occurs, p. 8. criticising the Colonial Office letter of April 22nd, 1871 :—

"The armaments and stores were not" left in the Straits "Settlements by the Government of India," but were taken over by "the Imperial from the Indian Govern- ment.'

These differences compel the Colonial Office to recall the attention of the Arbitrator to the subject-matter of arbitration. It is the first principle of arbitration, and one beyond dispute, that the subject-matter of arbitration must be determined by reference to 'the documents constituting the agreement of submission entered into by the parties, for

[414]

B