156
Before any agreement is come to with the Company as to the appointment of a single arbitrator or before any arbitrator is, if necessary, appointed on behalf of the Colonial Government, it would be desirable, in our opinion, to ascertain Counsel's views as to the single arbitrator to be appointed if this can be arranged, or, failing that. as to the arbitrator to be appointed by the Government and the umpire to be appointed by the two arbitrators pursuant to Section 11 (c) of the Ordinance.
We, have, &c.,
SUTTON, OMMANNEY AND RENDALL.
157
Neither Mr. Plender nor Mr. Griffiths can see me until late to-day, if at all, but
I will write or see you again as soon as possible.
I take the opportunity of acknowledging the receipt of your letter of to-day's date,, and its enclosures, which is just to hand.
G. V. Fiddes, Esquire, C.B.
15493
No. 91.
Yours, &c.,
C. H. OMMANNEY.
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 882
8
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
15493
No. 88.
GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON to MR. LYTTELTON.
(Paraphrase.)
(Received 9.30 a.m., May 7, 1905.)
TELEGRAM.
[Answered by No. 91.]
I presume that you approve 1st of June as date for taking over Dock Company. All is ready here, and further delay would be very detrimental.
As I am in communication with the proposed members of the new Board, please telegraph reply.
15485
No. 89.
GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON to MR. LYTTELTON.
(Received 8.30 a.m., May 8, 1905.)
TELEGRAM.
[See No. 109.]
My despatch of 13th February, confidential.*
Telegraph any information you have as to appointment of accountant. Matter most urgent.
Attached to 15132
No. 90.
MR. C. H. OMMANNEY to MR. G. V. FIDDES.
[Answered by No. 94.]
DEAR Mr. Fiddes,
May 9, 1905.
3 and 4 Great Winchester Street, London, E.C.,
Straits Settlements.
Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.
In reply to your letter of yesterday's date,† my idea was, presuming that all the books and accounts are in the Colony, that if competent clerks were sent out to the Colony in advance of Maltby's visit, he would not require to be in the Colony for more than, say, a month before the commencement of the arbitration, so as to satisfy himself as to the figures, and prepare his evidence. If Maltby started in August he would arrive in Singapore in September, and assuming the arbitration comes on in October, and he could leave at the end of that month, he would return here by the end of November, having the whole of September to look into the accounts and prepare his evidence. This was my idea, and I cannot speak more definitely until I have seen one of the partners of the firm, so that I may ascertain how far Maltby would be satisfied with the examination of the books by his clerks, this, of course, being the guide as to the length of time which Mr. Maltby himself would have to be in the Colony.
• No. 61.
† Asking for an explanation of No. 86.
MR. LYTTELTON to GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON. (Sent 9.20 p.m., May 9, 1905.)
(Paraphrase.)
TELEGRAM.
[Answered by No. 93.]
Referring to your telegram of May 7th,† the London Committee have expressed a strong desire that date shou be 1st July. If we do not agree to this, I fear that they may so delay the preliminaries that we shall lose Balfour Browne's services. This they can easily do under the provisions of the Ordinance.
I think, therefore, that we had better accept 1st July on condition that they enter into a binding agreement to do everything necessary to enable arbitration to be held in October. I cannot send you an accountant who can be on the spot before the end of June.
Our solicitors advise the course suggested above. Telegraph your views at once as I will defer approaching the London Committee until your reply is received.
Attached to 15132
No. 92.
MR. C. H. OMMANNEY to MR. G. V. FIDDES. [Answered by No. 24.]
DEAR Mr. FIDDES,
3 and 4 Great Winchester Street, London, E.C.,
Straits Settlements.
Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.
May 10, 1905.
IN reference to my letter to you of yesterday's date I have seen Mr. Plender, the senior member of the firm of Deloitte, Dever, Griffiths and Company, and he expresses an opinion that it would be incurring unnecessary expense for Mr. Maltby to go out to the Colony in the first instance, and states that in his opinion it is only necessary that competent clerks should, in the first instance, be sent to the Colony to go through the Company's books and accounts and summarize the result of their inspection in such a manner as they will be instructed to do by the firm prior to their departure.
Mr. Plender suggests that if Mr. Maltby arrives in the Colony in September, and the arbitration is proceeded with in October, he will have ample time prior to the commencement of the arbitration to make himself familiar with the result of the investigation of the Company's books, inspect the Company's property, and qualify himself to give evidence. If you would wish to have a personal interview with Mr. Plender prior to coming to any decision, I would gladly introduce him to you, but I think you will agree with me that it is advisable that I should be put in a position to retain the services of the firm in question without further delay, if it is decided to employ them.
G. V. Fiddes, Esquire, C.B.
Yours, &c.,
C. H. OMMANNEY.
• Not printed.
† No. 88.
No. 90.
X 2
20305
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.