CO882-(6-8) — Page 537

T ༄། །།

اسلنا

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O. 882

8

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

15754

158

No. 93.

GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON to MR. LYTTELTON.

(Paraphrase.)

(Received 1.50 p.m., May 10, 1905.)

TELEGRAM.

[Answered by No. 102.]

In reply to your yesterday's telegram,* I have received from various sources reports that the Company are starving repairs and stores. The Managing Director denies this, but he has admitted living from hand to mouth, and that all capital expenditure has been stopped. I have informed him privately that I shall have a searching investigation, and that if, on taking over, we find business hampered by neglect or by breach of Section 5 of the Ordinance, we shall bring the matter before the arbitrators.

I told him that I proposed to take over on the 1st of June. He pressed for the 1st of July for convenience of accounts. He and all the Company's staff are now working on the case, and I believe that they asked for delay to enable them to complete case before we take over.

The Company have nothing to gain by delaying preliminaries, and I deprecate delay beyond ist of June in interests of future.

If the accountant does not arrive before the end of June, I do not see how it will be possible to have the arbitration in October. The material ought to be in the hands of counsel before he leaves London, and on receiving accountant's report I hoped to make a further effort to settle the matter by negotiation.

15152

No. 94.

MR. G. V. FIDDES to MR. C. H. OMMANNEY.

[Answered by No. 95.]

DEAR Mr. OMMANNEY,

Downing Street, May 11, 1905. I HAVE laid before the Secretary of State your three letters to nie of the 4th, 9th, and 10th instant, as to getting an accountant for the Tanjong Pagar Arbi- tration.

Mr. Lyttelton approves of your retaining the services of Messrs. Deloitte, Dever, Griffiths, and Company on the understanding that they will send competent clerks in advance to the Colony, and that Mr. Maltby will follow in sufficient time to make himself familiar with the result of their investigations, inspect the property, and quality himself to give evidence. The financial terms would be those mentioned in your letter to me of the 4th May.

You do not say how many clerks should be sent, and this is a matter which can be settled by you in consultation with the firm. It seems to us that, a thorough exami- nation of the books being important, it would be wise to be on the safe side in that respect.

Would it not be well that the firm should instruct the clerks that, pending the arrival of Mr. Maltby, they are to obey the general directions of the Governor and those to whom he has entrusted the local preparation of the case?

As regards Mr. Maltby, we think that it should be a condition of the contract with the firm that he should undertake to arrive in the Colony at least a month before the approximate date of the arbitration.

We shall write officially in this sense to the Crown Agents, but, of course, you will not wait for their instructions before retaining the firm.

There seems to be no necessity for our having a personal interview with Mr. Plender at this stage, but if you have a general conference before Mr. Maltby's departure it might be of advantage if a Colonial Office representative were present.

I take this opportunity of sending you, for the confidential use of Counsel and the accountants, three printed copies of a despatch, dated 29th March,t from the Governor enclosing statements as to the business of the Company. I also enclose

‡ No. 79.

• No. 91.

† Nos. 86, 90 and 92,

159

three copies of another despatch, dated 6th April,* with its enclosures. We should be glad to have counsel's opinion on the points raised by Mr. Tomlinson, and on the Governor's suggestion to make immediate advances on shares deposited pending the award:

Attached to 15132

No. 95.

Yours, &c.,

G. V. FIDDES.

MR. C. H. QMMANNEY to MR. G. V. FIDDES.

DEAR MR. FIDDES,

3 and 4, Great Winchester Street, London, E.C., May 12, 1905.

Straits Settlements.

Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.

I AM in receipt this morning of your further letter † (which for purposes of future reference I have taken theberty of dating yesterday) instructing me to retain the services of Messrs. Deloitte, Der, Griffiths and Company upon the terms stated in your letter. The question how many clerks are to be sent in the first instance to the Colony is a matter which I agree is to be settled in conference with that firm after they are informed the exact nature of the work which will be required of them. It is certainly important, indeed necessary, that a thorough investigation of the books should be made.

I am making it one of the conditions of Messrs. Deloitte, Dever and Company's employment, that pending the arrival of Mr. Maltby in the Colony, the clerks are to obey the general directions of the Governor, and those to whom he has entrusted the local preparation of the case. The enclosures to your letter are being submitted to Counsel, and their opinion on the points referred to in your letter shall be communi- cated to you as soon as possible.

G. V. Fiddes, Esq., C.B.

15754

No. 96.

Yours, &c.,

C. H. OMMANNEY.

MR. G. V. FIDDES to MR. W. G. GULLAND. [Answered by No. 97.]

DEAR MR. GULLAND,

Downing Street, May 12, 1905. I HAVE put before the Secretary of State the views you expressed to me yester- day as to the Tanjong Pagar Arbitration. Mr. Lyttelton has no desire to press upon you the name of any one person as sole arbitrator, nor indeed to press for an agree- ment as to appointing a sole arbitrator, if that course is in any way distasteful to the London Committee, though he would naturally prefer it on the ground of expense.

As, therefore, you are prepared to give an undertaking that the Company will do everything necessary to ensure that the hearing shall take place early in October, on consideration of our deferring the date of taking over until the 1st July, I am to ask that you will at once instruct your solicitors to confer with ours (Messrs. Sutton, Ommanney & Rendall) for the purpose of drawing up the undertaking on those terms, on the supposition that the Court will consist of two arbitrators with an umpire.

This will not prejudice our considering at leisure whether we can agree on a sole arbitrator. If we do, so much the better, and the agreement can afterwards be supplemented; if we don't, the agreement as made would stand.

Kindly ask your solicitors to give the matter their immediate attention, as, of course, we must reach a decision in time for the Governor to take over

on the

• No. 83.

† No. 94.

!