CO882-(6-8) — Page 540

16-1

his award in the alternative giving compensation for loss of interest and cost of reinvestment only to the extent that the Directors elect to take cash and to the extent they elect to take inscribed stock making no such allowance.

9. Having regard to section 22 of the Ordinance, we do not think that the plan suggested is feasible, and we doubt whether it would be desirable for any advances to be made pending the arbitration.

J. H. BALFOUR BROWNE. E. W. HANSELL.

165

It is to be considered whether, if the Company withdraw their suggestion that they should be informed whom the Government proposes to nominate as their Arbitrator before they nominate their Arbitrator, the accompanying letter should be accepted.

Mr. Ommanney will call at three o'clock to-day to obtain your further instructions.

We have, &c.,

SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL.

15990

No. 104.

MR. LYTTELTON to GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON.

(No. 126.) SIR,

Downing Street, May 19, 1905. WITH reference to the Colonial Secretary's letter to the Crown Agents of March 25th last,* I have the honour to forward to you a copy of a lettert from Messrs. J. & A. Scrimgeour with regard to quotations for the shares of the Tanjong Pagar Dock Company.

2. The Crown Agents are taking steps to obtain the publications asked for in the first part of the Colonial Secretary's letter, and will forward them to you in due

course.

16658'

No. 105.

I have, &c.,

ALFRED LYTTELTON.

MR. LYTTELTON to GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON.

(Confidential.)

SIR,

Downing Street, May 19, 1905. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I have the honour to transmit to you, for your information, a copy of a letter from Messrs. Sutton, Ommanney and Rendall, enclosing counsel's opinion on certain points in connexion with the Tanjong Pagar Arbitration proceedings.

I would call your attention to paragraph 9 of the opinion, which deals with the question raised in your confidential despatch of the 6th April§ and its enclosure.

I have, &c.,

ALFRED LYTTELTON.

DEAR SIRS,

Enclosure in No. 106.

10, Billiter Square, London, E.C., May 23, 1905.

Straits Settlements.-Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.

ADVERTING to our interviews and correspondence you may take it that the Tanjong Pagar Dock Company Limited, agree that the appointed date referred to in Section 3 of the Ordinance ould be the 1st July, and your clients can have all proper facilities for free access to the lands, works, stores, and premises or property of the Company for the purpose of inspecting the same, and also inspecting the books of the Company in London and Singapore.

It is the wish of the Dock Company that the arbitration should be commenced by the middle of October next, and proceed continuously, but we must entirely decline to bind ourselves to any particular date for appointing our Arbitrator or delivering the Company's statement of claim.

We should like to know before we definitely appoint our Arbitrator whom the Government propose to nominate as an Arbitrator, and we cannot deliver our state- ment of claim until we have reports from the Colony, and we must decline to bind ourselves down to any particular days either for the appointment of an Arbitrator or the delivery of the statement of claim, but you may take it from us that it is the wish of the Company to push on the arbitration, and we shall do all we can to facilitate the progress of the Government, but we shall expect also on the part of the Government equal facilities on their side.

Messrs. Sutton, Ommanney and Company.

17493

No. 107.

Yours, &c.,

DRUCES AND ATTLEE.

17530

No. 106.

MESSRS. SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL to COLONIAL OFFICE.

SIR,

(Received May 23, 1905.) [Answered by No. 110.]

3 and 4, Great Winchester Street, London, E.C., May 23, 1905. Straits Settlements.—Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.

We send you copy letter which we have just received from Messrs. Druces and Attlee, the solicitors for the Company, which you will observe does not contain any assurance either that the Company's Arbitrator will be appointed by any given date, or that their statement of claim will be delivered by some fixed date. Whilst we are of opinion that the Company are not entitled to make it a condition that they should know whom the Government proposes to name as Arbitrator before they appoint their Arbitrator, we think the Company may reasonably decline to fix a date by which they will undertake to deliver their statement of claim.

•

GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON to MR. LYTTELTON.

(Paraphrase.)

(Received 7.55 a.m., May 23, 1905.)

TELEGRAM.

[Answered by No. 109.]

Referring to your telegram of the 16th of May.* When may I expect to receive information as to the date to taking over the Tanjong Pagar Dock Company's undertaking?

17680

No. 108.

MESSRS. SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL to COLONIAL OFFICE. (Received May 24, 1905.)

SIB.

• Enclosure 1 in No. 98.

† Enclosure 2 in No. 98.

‡ No. 103.

§ No. 83.

20503

[Answered by No. 110.]

3 and 4, Great Winchester Street. London, E.C., May 24, 1905. Straits Settlements.-Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited. WITH reference to our letter to you of yesterday's date,† and our subsequent

• No. 102.

† No. 106.

Y 2

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

། ། ། ། ། ་

Reference :-

C.O. 882

8

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TOPage 541

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

「 ཟ། ། ་། །།

חוןז

C.O. 882

8 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

166

interview, we have now to inform you that Mr. Ommanney has to-day seen Mr. Attlee, who, on being pressed to suggest some date by which the Company would appoint their Arbitrator, "declines in any way to alter or add to his firm's letter of yesterday's date, stating that we are at liberty to take that letter as evidencing an arrangement on the Company's behalf to give every facility for the arbitration being commenced by the middle of October next, that if the Colonial Government were not disposed to accept the letter in question in that spirit he should decline further negotiations, and that it was immaterial to the Company whether the 1st June or the 1st July was fixed as the appointed date.

It is apparent from this interview that the Company will be advised not to appoint their Arbitrator until the Government inform them whether an engineer, a barrister, an accountant, or other Arbitrator will be appointed by them, and as the Company have already approached Sir Edward Boyle, K.C., as their Arbitrator, we gather that an immediate appointment of an Arbitrator by the Company is not probable if the Government select an engineer as their Arbitrator.

Mr. Attlee complains of what his clients consider the arbitrary manner in which the Government have acted throughout in connection with the passing of the Ordinance, and more particularly of the fact that the Government have induced the Company's auditor to resign his post and enter the Government's service.

Having regard to all the circumstances, we think the Government are more likely to effect the object they have in view if they accept the Company's solicitors' letter of the 23rd instant, evidencing an arrangement on the Company's behalf to give every facility for the arbitration being commenced by the middle of October next, it being evident to us that if that letter is not accepted, neither the Company nor the solicitors will consider themselves bound in any way by the recent negotiations.

17680

We have, &c.,

SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL.

No. 109.

MR. LYTTELTON to GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON.

(Paraphrase.)

(Sent 5.23 p.m., May 24, 1905.)

TELEGRAM.

Referring to your telegram of yesterday.* Have received from Company's solicitors' assurances, which, though not so definite as could be desired, may be regarded as an honourable understanding that they will do all in their power to ensure that arbitration shall take place in the middle of October. You should therefore fix July 1st as the appointed date for taking over the undertaking.

Very careful consideration has been given to this question, and legal advice has been taken. I am satisfied that the course which I have indicated is best in the interests of the Colony.

Arrangements for sending out the accountants, without delay, will now be

completed.

17680

No. 110.

COLONIAL OFFICE to MESSRS. SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL. [Answered by No. 112.]

Downing Street, May 24, 1905.

GENTLEMEN,

In reply to your letter of to-day's date,† respecting the Tanjong Pagar Arbitration, I am directed by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton to state that he concurs in the view expressed in the last paragraph of that letter, and to request that you will communicate accordingly with the Company's solicitors.

• No. 107.

↑ No. 108.

167

2. I am also to ask that you will complete arrangements with Messrs. Deloitte, Dever, Griffiths, and Company for sending out their clerks to the Colony without further delay.

17906

SIR,

No. 111.

I am, &c.,

FRED. GRAHAM.

ALFRED HOLT AND CO. to COLONIAL OFFICE. (Received May 26, 1905.)

[Copy to Governor, May 31, 1905. No. 143. L.F.]

[Answered by No. 114.]

India Buildings, Water Street, Liverpool, May 25, 1905. We have learnt from Singapore that the Government of the Straits Settle- ments have announced their intention to take over, at an early date, the property of the Tanjong Pagar Do Company, Limited, an undertaking which is doubtless the most important business concern in the Colony, and the management of which is of vital consequence to those who, like ourselves, are largely interested in the shipping trade of the port.

We trust that we are not going outside our province in pointing out that the expropriation of the Company is taking place at a very critical point in its history. The trade with which it has had to deal has been rapidly growing, and in order to provide facilities to meet this expansion large schemes of extension and of renovation have been under consideration.

Our purpose in writing is to express an earnest hope that the change in the ownership of the property may not be allowed to delay the inception of the work of improvement. Probably the Government, in taking over the property, are actuated by political considerations, and these may involve difficulties of which we are not cognisant. From a purely business point of view, however, we would say, with some confidence, as probably among the oldest and largest customers of the Company, that very early action on a large scale is urgently necessary, and we may add that the schemes (involving the construction of a new wet dock and the re- building of the present wharf), which had, we believe, been practically decided upon by the Directors of the Company, appear to us well calculated to meet the require- ments of the port. The time estimated as necessary for their completion might, moreover, we believe, be materially reduced if they were taken in hand in a prompt and energetic manner, and such reduction is very greatly to be desired. We are, &c., ALFRED HOLT AND COMPANY.

17989

No. 112.

MESSRS. SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL to COLONIAL OFFICE.

(Received May 27, 1905.) [Answered by No. 117.]

SIR,

3 and 4, Great Winchester Street, London, E.C., May 26, 1905. Straits Settlements.-Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.

that

In reference to your letter of the 24th instant, we have to inform you we have communicated with the Company's solicitors in accordance with your instructions, and have instructed Messrs. Deloitte, Dever, Griffiths and Co. to com- mence, on Monday next, their inspection of the Company's books in this country, and have arranged with that firm to send two representatives to the Colony on the 9th proximo, unless it is found from the inspection of the Company's books here that it is desirable that their departure should be deferred to some later date.

• No. 110.