CO882-(8-9) — Page 379

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O. 882

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

9PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

17 August 2009

enth

MAURITIUS ROYAL COMMISSION, 1909

His Excellency Sir C. BOYLE, K.C.M.G

have to decrease the value, or you would take a very large number off the electorate.

17754 132 Woodcock). I am reading now what are qualifications The franchise qualification appears to be the ownership of immovables worth Rs. 300, or movables worth Rs 3,000, or payment of rent of licence duty of R2 monthly payment of R. 200 annually or reeipt of a salary of Rs. 50 monthly? That has always seemed to me to be a very liberal franchise

H

17.755 (Chairman) I should have thought the most liberal of all those qualifications is the imunovables worth Rs 300, which is 201. ?—Yes.

17.756 (M Woodcock That seems a very low valuation, and the other one which struck me us s extraordinarily low is the licence duty-u Rs. 200 heance duty - Yes

salary of

17,757 And the personal receipt of Rs 50 a month -407 a year? Yes, it is all very remarkable, of course

are one

17,758. Of course, the positions are totally different -one cannot argue from one to the other-but in England, of course. those sort of franchises are unknown, except the land and household franchise. The whole of the franching is based on that. There or two curious anomalies that one need not trouble about, because they are exceptional. With regard to the penal system here, it has been suggested to us that the Reformatory might be handed over, either us to all its occupants, or as to what one might call the non-criminal part of its occupants, the vagrant boys and that sort of thing, to the religious A scheme of that sort has authorities to look after.

ben brought up and acted upon in Ceylon, which we have had before us. Have you considered that at all?

Yes, repeatedly.

How do you 17.759. What is your view about it? think it would operate here -The difficulty in the way 14, if it is a boy who is placed in a reformatory against his will---

17.780. Who is forced into the reformatory against his will That is no; he is a Mahommeilan, a Buddhist, or a Hindoo Are you to hand him over, I ask myself. to the control of the religious institution, such as the Roman Catholic Church or the Anglican Church P

17,761 Of course, you would not be bound to hand You would exercise a discretion ?— any of them over. Then you would have to keep your reformatory going

toms.

17,762. You would have to keep some sort of reform- atory I only wanted to know whether you think it is possible ?—I think the non-criminal part of the reform. story is very well managed and very well controlled.

17.763. And answers well -Yes, but the criminal part is very much the reverse, for it means that boys are constantly kept alongside worse criminals than themselves, and they learn all sorts of crimes.

17,704. Would you be in favour of handing over these boys if there was a religious community willing to take them over? Yes, but for the objection, as to proselytising. Subject to that, I think it might work well That is the great difficulty.

17.765. Are these reformatory boys permitted to work out in the public road and streets?—No, but I think close round their own place, where there is a garden and work grounds, and there is a gang coming here to work in these gardens.

17,786. Are you in favour of that?-I am much against it.

17.787. It seems very wrong, does it not, with young boys, it should tend to make them hardened to it - I do not think that it would do them so very much harm in that way here, because they are kept very much apart, but even qu, I am very much against it.

17,768. But even so, coming out in prison clothes would tend to harden them against it?-With regard to their health, it is a good thing, but I do not think it in good in other respects.

17,769. I do not know whether you were asked on the Tast occasion as to the unofficial members of the Execu- tive. What is your view as to thone ? Are you in favour of extending them I will tell you shortly what my view is, but I have answered that question. But for the

¿Continuest

position in the Couril of Government, I should welcome their not being on the Executive Council, and the only reason for their being retained on the Executive Council lately has been that it is necessary that the Government administration should command, as far as posssible.

majority in the Council of Government, and be able to carry its measures in that way, and by having two members of that body in the Executive Council it has been easier to carry measures than it would have been otherwise.

17.77 If that be the ground, of course it would be better to have nominated members of the Executive Council, who are also nominated members of the Council of Government, rather than nominated memis of the Executive Council who are elected members of the Council of Government?--I cannot agree. The elected members of the Council of Government an much more active in the work that they do in the Council of Government than the nominated members. and they have more control over the unofficial body than the nominated members; therefore it has been the practice to choose two elective members for the Executive Council.

F

17,771. Having regard to the way in which the intereats of the elected member and the nominated You member may clash, are you in favour of that?

duty to your Reе, a man in that position owes Government and he owes a duty to his electors, and those duties may clash. Having regard to that con- tingency, do you think it is well? To have elected members on the Executive Council ?

17,772. Yes?--I am opposed to having elected members on the Executive Council altogether, but I think that it eases the difficulty of administration more by having elected members on the Executive Council the Executive than having nominated members on

Of course, if you Council under present circumstances. alter the constitution it would be quite different.

17,773. Of course your position in the Council of Government would be very much strengthened by having more nominated official members ?-Certainly

17,774. Do you think it would be a good thing to increase the number on the elected Council of nominated official members at the expense of the nominated unofficial element ?-That, as you know, we have power to do under the Letters Patent, but I do not think that that would be enough. I think that should only be done under great stress of circumstances when it was necessary to pass some very important measure.

17,775. Of course the Government puts itself in rather an invidious position if it does it ad hoc in that way-Yes. I do not think, as I ventured to tell Sir Edward O'Malley, that the majority would be sufficient for general purposes, there would more often be trouble.

17,776, (Chairman.) At the time that there was great difficulty here about money, you had a good deal to do with the representatives of the Commercial Bank. I should like to nak you whether it is in your knowledge or not, do political or personal questions enter into the bank's transactions To the first part of the question I should say, no; to the second I should say, yes. Political or personal, I should say personal, certainly.

17,777. Now in what way ? You any that political considerations are of no account ?—No, I do not think they are very great.

17,778. The personal questions are -I should think so.

In

17,779. Now in what way do you mean P-I think they have their friends and their enemies, and I think they would make it caaler for a borrowing friend: whereas they would make it difficult for a borrowing enemy, and during that time when they were difficulties there is no doubt about it, that their enemica showed themselves and their friends showed themselves. Subsequently to that I think they were less ready to meet the wishes of a certain number of clients who hnd rather shown themselves in opposition to them when times were bad,

17,780. How do you mean, they showed themselves as friends or enemies? Might not that even be political P-Nothing of that sort came before me. The political agitation which has been going on recently

17 August 1999.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

His Excellency Sir C BOYLE, KCM.O

had not begun. It began a little after that time. One heard, of course, constant complaints.

17.781. Do you mean that if the directors of the nk were all in favour of the Government adopting a particular policy, either with reference to finance or Sonething else which affected their bank. if individuale opposed the directors' wish and then those individuals went to the bank for a loan, you think they would be treated differently to people who had been in favour of advancing their wishes -Judging from my experience of Mauritius, I should think that was highly probable. I cannot say that I have any knowledge of any specific instance, but I should think it is more than likely.

17.782. Have you ever heard that the business of the bank was carried on in anything but a perfectly straightforward way as we understand that banking Iusiness ought to be done?—I heard many innuendoes and many hints that the business was not conducted in msinesslike way that there was favouritism and that there was a considerable amount of risk taken, not business point of view, but from a personal from a point of view. That I have heard, but whether it was proved or not, I cannot say.

17.783. Have you ever heard that any of the people who borrowed money from the bank had to pay more that appeared in the accounts of the bank?--No, I have not heard that, but what I have heard is this, that members of the board of the bank-the directors- invet as a board and receive applications for assistance. especially during the entrecoupe for the faisance valoir, and an applicant would be refused, but before that individual had left the precincts of the bank he would be button-holed"; he would be talked to by a member of the board, who would say. "The bank will not give it to you, but I will." and in fact I have heard it hinted that the bank's funda were used for that purpose. Whether it suited the bank to do that, unless they got the further security of this individual, or not, I do not know. That was, however, often stated.

17,784. And what was the consideration for which that particular individual offered to give the assistance? -- In all probability he would take his commission. In all probability, if he borrowed it from the bank himself. he would charge more than he paid the bank.

17.785. What I mean is, would there be anything except commission P-It is possible that if the bank bal entertained the application, he would have had to pay 10 per cent., and, the bank having refused to do so, the money might have been lent by the individual at 12 per cent. or more. That is more than possible. I should think it is probable.

17.786. When you say 12 per cent, it would not make any difference whether he took it in the form of 12 per cent, or whether he took it as a sum of money down --No, but I wish to specifically say this, that whether the bank was profiting by that transaction or not. I do not know. In all probability the bank was only too glad to get the further security of the individual director.

17.787. But do you mean that if you went to the bank and asked the bank for a loan and the bank said, "No, we are not prepared to give you a loan,” and then one of the directors said, "If you make it worth my while, I can get the loan for you, and it "will cost you so much to make it worth my while " do you mean that would happen ?-I do not think he said that. I think he said, "The bank will not lend it to you, but I will. I have got the money." In all probability he had not the money. In all probability his was the security which the bank would take, whilst it would not take you as an applicant. That is the way it was worked, I suppose.

103

[Continued

17.788. The bank, I imagine, is a society. I do not know whether they have shares or not? Yes, it is a registered company

17.789 If the director of a bank were to do that, would not be, in a sense, be defrauding the share- holders? If he were to utilise the money of the bank and make a special personal profit on that use for himself, would not he be defrauding the bank P-Not if the bank had refused it through its directorate.

17,790. (Mr. Woodcock.) I do not think he would be, particularly if he was giving his own added security to the bank -No, I should take it that that happens

elsewhere besides Mauritius.

17,791. (Chairman.) Supposing there is no security. supposing he does not give his name at all, but he gives his influence? Then, of course, the bank must be parties to the transaction P-That I do not know.

17,792. You have not heard that ?-No, I did hear that what I have described was frequently done, but whether the bank were parties to it I did not hear. They did not go as far as that.

17.793. (Mr. Woodcock.) You said a meeting of the board. Do you, if you are applying for a loan, bring your application before a hoard P-I fancy each applica- tion is brought before the board.

17,794. It may go before the board, but is not the form that you personally interview three directors separately and get so many directors to support your application P-That I did not know.

-And

17,795. I am asking you for information. then, if you can get a certain number of directors to support your application, the thing probably goes through as a matter of course.-That may be so, but I do not know that it is.

17,796. You did not know that that was the course? -No, but what I believe they claim is that every transaction of moment is discussed at the board meetings.

17.797. Yes, of course the application would have to go before the board. I only wanted to know whether, in your knowledge, the practice was to go round to the different directors and to get them to support your application P-To go round and any - Mr. So-and-so, you are a director; will you support my application? There is no doubt that that may happen.

17,798. If it has happened, it might be abused Have any cases come to your knowledge where it has been abused by a director lending his name, taking any kind of benefit for himself? No, no cases have come before me. The transactions which I alluded to were in the inverse way, that is to say, you have gone to the bank and been refused-I will not Bay whether by collusion or not-but been refused and then an individual director comes out and says: "Well, I will get your money for you.”

ever

17,799. (Chairman.) Tou see what I am suggesting.

I am suggesting that the bank, as a bank, either dose not directly assent or refuse, and then one of the members of the board says, "I think you can get the money, and this is the way to get it "-"Pay me so much and I will get it for you"?

17,800. He does not actually say, "Pay me"; he says, "Give me some advantage," and then if each member of the board does that with the people he knows best, amongst the many directors they will have gathered together a considerable sum, and if afterwards they were to divide that mum, it might be much more profitable to them as directors, but much less profitable to the shareholders of the bank P-Yes, but of courme you must premise that position by there being collurion between the directors.

17,801. Naturally?—I was never told that that was so. 17,809. You have never heard it P-That was never stated to më,

The witness withdrew, Adjourned till to-morrow at 9 o'clock.

G 1