CO882-(6-8) — Page 315

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

LITICO. 882

8

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

242

of the material. It was estimated that there were something like 30,000 tons of canes which would be unable to reach the mills if that railway was not built. I am not saying that that railway ought not to have been built, on the contrary, I entirely support the action of Sir Charles Bruce in building that railway, and I say that it would have been a loss to the whole community as well as to the Government if those 30,000 tons of canes had been left on the ground; we would have lost far more by not building that railway than we could lose if the railway was run at a loss. Well, I do not regard that railway, at all events at present, as a reproductive work. Up to the present it has not paid interest, I am not sure whether it will ever pay interest, or whether it will ever pay interest and sinking fund; I have also to look to the fact that the rails are very light and some of them are bent, but that is unavoidable, we did the best we could with the money available. However, I do not regard that as a reproductive work.

Now we come to the Long Mountain railway. Well, I may say of that railway that it was built of second-hand material and up to the present it has not paid.

Then we come to the Town tramway. When the Town tramway was first pro- posed I considered that it would pay. The promises and the expectations held out by the Arab merchants led me to believe that the tramway would pay. Those expecta- tions have been disappointed, the best I can look to at present is that the Town tramway should pay its working expenses. But is that a reason why it should not be built I am not in any way attacking the policy of these tramways. I say that to-morrow we may have an outbreak of surra in town which may make it impossible to convey rice to the estates or to carry goods from the docks, this out- break will paralyse the whole industry of the Colony. The Town tramway is a safeguard and an insurance against that. Even if it never paid a cent, still that tramway justifies its existence in that respect. But I do not regard the Town tram- way as likely to produce its interest and sinking fund.

Then we come to the dredger and to the harbour works. Well, I do not think that the dredger or harbour works are likely to produce either interest or sinking fund. I do not say that they ought not to have been undertaken. It is very neces- sary for the trade of this port that we should be in a position to admit large ships, because ships are growing in size, in berths which are close to the shore, which permit of transport from the shore to the ship to be carried out cheaply and quickly and under good conditions. I think that the trade of the Colony, the Colony as a whole, will benefit by the improved harbour. But I do not expect any return to the Government; I do not expect that the Government finances will show any return from the harbour works or from the dredger.

Therefore I am driven to this. The works included in the honourable member's motion are not reproductive in the sense that they will provide interest and sinking fund. They may, I do not say they will not, pay indirectly a return, that is to say, they will benefit the community as a whole, they will avert disaster, they will pre- vent calamity which would otherwise injure the Government finances; but in the sense of direct profit I do not think that anything serious can be expected.

Then we come to the rolling-stock of the railways. I myself urged the neces- sity of that rolling-stock. The question has already been submitted to the Secretary of State. I may say that the figures are far below our requirements. If we were to do justice to the railways, if we were to provide all that is required, we would want a very much larger expenditure on rolling-stock than appears in the present estimates. We have provided just enough to keep us going and to keep pace with our contracts, because we have got contracts.

Now I come to another point; that is, whether it is or is not wise to apply to the Secretary of State for permission to square our deficit by a loan. I will begin with the harbour. A Committee was appointed in 1900 to deal with the harbour question, and it reported as follows:-

"Your Committee do not see the necessity for undertaking exten- sive harbour improvements in the immediate future. The trade of the Colony is not likely to expand much beyond its wants which are limited by its production. They are therefore of opinion that the requirements of trade will be met by the gradual dredging of the harbour. They accordingly re- commend that a dredger of a size to be determined hereafter, and capable of dredging down to 36 feet below flotation line, be purchased and set to work as soon as convenient, and that berths for six ships

248

of deep draught be created and that the necessary number of intproved moorings be also provided for such berths. As this work will be spread for over several years, special provision for the cost thereof might be made yearly in the estimates."

When we

Well, that report, which was signed by Mr. Leclézio, as Chairman, was approved by the Secretary of State. Here I must say a word to my honourable friend, the niember for Moka. In quoting his name I am not in any way charging him with inconsistency, I do not think that there is vice in inconsistency.

On the contrary, there are some cases in which inconsistency becomes a virtue, in such matters as medicine and politics. For example, I do not think we could justify any medical practitioner who said that he could not change the treatment of his patients. I do not believe in people who would kill their patients to retain their consistency, and, therefore, as politicians are more or less doctors of the people I do not seek for consistency in a politician; I do not ask any politician to imitate the consistency of Gil Blas's master Dr. Sangrado. I hope that when new discoveries are made politicians will change their opinions, and, therefore, I make no charge whatever of inconsistency; on the contrary, I say that when symptoms or circumstances change inconsistency is a virtue. But there are certain points on which it is very necessary to retain consistency and that is when the question relates to finances. undertake to discharge a debt, to pay for a thing in a certain way, it is undesirable that we should, when the time comes for payment, say we did not mean it, we meant something else. If, for instance, we undertake to a bank manager, or to any person. to discharge an obligation in such a way and on such or such a day. it is not very desirable to come forward and say to that bank manager, it is true we said so, but we did not mean it, circumstances are changed, we are not in the same position. That form of inconsistency should be avoided, and it seems to me that it should be avoided more than ever at the present time. We have recently given to the Secretary of State one example on the same point. We have asked that the instal- ment due on the Planters Loan should be deferred. Well, having made that request; having had it granted, the mere request, and the nature of it, ex hypothesi, must tend to destroy our credit, then the duty of everyone connected with Mauritius is to bring up that credit again and to see that we do not further impair it. The honourable member for Moka has made an excellent statement of our financial posi- tion, I do not quarrel with it in the least, but I may say that every time we come with these requests to the Colonial Office we impair what is just as important to

us as our financial position, and that is our financial credit.

Mr. L. E. ANTELME: You mean to say each time we ask for a loan.

THE OFFICER Administering the GovernmenT: I do not say if you ask for a loan, because the loan may be reproductive, but each time we ask for the post- ponement of an obligation or a promise into which we have entered. Perhaps I may take a very homely illustration and say that if the Colony has given a bon for so much, when the time comes for the échéance of the bon it is best to pay and not to ask for time, that such an act tends to lower your credit. That is one of the points which strikes me very strongly, and I am confirmed in that by perusing the correspondence which took place in the early part of this year with regard to the railways on the northern side of the island. This is what the Secretary of State stated in reply to a request made, and, I may say, strongly urged by myself, in favour of spending money on railway extension, that is to say, on works analogous to those which are mentioned in the honourable member's motion. Those works I may say were, in my opinion, likely to be more profitable than those dealt with by the honourable member for Moka. So far as I can ascertain the facts, there seems to be some promise of a return. They were more promising than those with which we are now dealing. What was the Secretary of State's reply ?——

19234

"In addition to the above considerations, the amount of the loans already raised or sanctioned is so large that the Government should not have recourse to further borrowing unless it is absolutely unavoidable, especially in the very unfavourable state of the money market now prevailing. The financial position as described in your confidential despatch of the 23rd December is not favourable, and though your telegram states that the prospects have improved further loan expen- diture will not be justified without more definite assurances that can be afforded by the experience of less than a month.”

2 H 9