CO882-(6-8) — Page 591

265

PUBLIC RECORD

OFFICE

PEPERE

|| | || | ||

Reference :-

C.O. 882

8 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO |

31985

SIR,

No. 273.

MR. LYTTELTON to GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON.

(Confidential.)

[Answered by No. 287.]

Downing Street, September 26, 1905. WITH reference to my confidential despatches of the 11th and 25th_ultimo,* I have the honour to inform you that the question of naval requirements in connec- tion with the Tanjong Pagar Dock has been discussed between representatives of the Admiralty and of this Department.

2. I understand that explanations were given as to the various points touched upon in the Admiralty letter of the 28th July. It seems that the intention is to negotiate with the Dock Board for the provision, on reasonable terms, of all labour required for berthing and coaling, and that no difficulty is likely to arise on this point or as regards the use of the Victoria Dock. I presume, therefore, that it will be possible to arrange these matters locally without further referece home, except that the Admiralty would require an opportunity of considering the proposed rates for wharfage, storage, labour, &c., for comparison with present charges, before giving their final concurrence.

3. A more important question that of placing the wharfage, in whole or in part, at the disposal of the naval authorities in case of emergency. It was pointed out on behalf of the Admiralty, that Singapore is an important strategic centre, and that in certain circumstances, such as strained relations with a foreign Power or the imminence of hostilities, it might be of vital importance to provide for the speedy coaling of His Majesty's ships. To meet the objection taken in the Colonial Office letter of the 4th of August, it was suggested that the naval authorities, in conjunction with the Governor, should determine when a case of emergency had arisen."

4. The Admiralty also attach importance to their suggestion that a naval repre- sentative should be ex officio a member of the Dock Board, and it was urged that his presence and advice, when matters affecting naval interests were under discussion, would be of benefit to the Board and would conduce to harmonious co-operation between the Board and the naval authorities.

5. Before making any further communication to the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty on the subject, I should be glad if you would give your careful con- sideration to the matter and furnish me with a full expression of your views on the points to which I have alluded.

33423

SIR,

No. 274.

I have, &c.,

ALFRED LYTTELTON.

MR. LYTTELTON to GOVERNOR SIR J. ANDERSON.

[Answered by Nɔ. 292.]

(Confidential.)

Downing Street, September 29, 1905.

I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your confidential despatch of the 23rd of August, and to inform you that I am willing to approve your proposal that the Official Members of the Tanjong Pagar Dock Board should be allowed to draw fees at the same rates as their Unofficial colleagues

2. They should, however, be made clearly to understand that this arrangement is provisional, and for not more than three years, and that they will have no claim whatever to be continued as Directors, or, if continued as Directors, to receive fees, when that term has elapsed.

3. I shall be glad if you will inform me what salary Mr. Nicholson receives as Chairman of the Board.

I have, &c..

ALFRED LYTTELTON.

L.F.F. transmitting copies of Nos. 192, 207, 241 and 251,

† No. 192. ‡ No. 207. § No. 270.

35410

No. 275.

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

SIR,

(Received October 4, 1905.)

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

Straits Settlements.

Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.

QUR partner at Singapore reports to us by telegram and by letter that, owing to the difficulty in obtaining assistance in copying and printing documents, he anticipates that it will not be possible for the proceedings in this arbitration to be commenced before the 30th instant, which fact has been communicated to Mr. Balfour Browne.

36459

We have, &c., SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL.

No. 276.

MESSRS. SUTTON, OMMANNEY, AND RENDALL to COLONIAL OFFICE. (Received October 13, 1905.)

SIR,

[Copy to Governor, October 26, 1905. Confidential. L.F.]

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

Straits Settlements.

Tanjong Pagar Dock Company, Limited.

REFERRING to our letter to you of the 10th May last,* and to our letter to Mr. Balfour Browne, K.C., of the same date, of which we enclose copies for your reference, we have now to inform you that Mr. Balfour Browne has written to us calling attention to the fee, 6,500 guineas, which the Company have agreed to pay to Sir Edward Boyle, K.C., as their Arbitrator, to the fee which the Colonial Govern- ment has agreed to pay to Mr. Inglis, their Arbitrator, namely, 4,000 guineas, to the fact that the Umpire receives a fee of £5,750, and an engineer whom the Company is sending out to give evidence on their behalf 4,000 guineas, and requests us, in pursuance of the understanding come to with him, to reconsider the matter of his fee.

At the time that Mr. Balfour Browne agreed his fee of 4,000 guineas, the fee which would be paid to the Company's counsel not being then fixed, an understanding was arrived at to the effect that Mr. Balfour Browne was not to accept on behalf of the Colonial Government a less fee than was given by the Company to their counsel.

We have endeavoured to obtain from the Company's solicitors precise infor- mation as to the fee they have agreed to pay to their counsel, Lord Robert Cecil, K.C., but the Company's solicitors state their inability to supply this information in the absence of Mr. Druce and his managing clerk in Singapore.

We shall, doubtless, in the course of a few days, be able to obtain information as to the fee which the Company have agreed to pay their counsel, by which alone, strictly speaking, Mr. Balfour Browne's fee is to be reconsidered, but in the mean- time we have thought it advisable to cable to him at Singapore to the effect that the understanding we came to with him as to the amount of his fee will be given effect to.

It should be observed that Mr. Balfour Browne's demand for reconsideration of his fee is based not upon the fee agreed to be paid by the Company to their counsel, but in effect on account of the fee paid by the Company to Sir Edward Boyle as their Arbitrator, and in this respect Mr. Balfour Browne writes us:-

"I cannot, having regard to my position at the English Bar, accept a fee of 4,000 guineas and do all the work of the Arbitration, when one of the

15735: not printed.