CO882-(8-9) — Page 479

1.

should be paid only on the net revenue after deducting actual outgoings on account of the telephones

I have, &c.,

C. B. H. MITCHELL

PS-I should be glad of a reply by telegraph.

CBHM

Enclosure in No 5

ESTIMATE by the Colonial Engineer for establishing 50 telephone lines in Penang and for the revenue to be expected therefrom.

13670

17

No. 7

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE

(No 166.)

SIR,

(Received May 29, 1899.)

Answered by No. 11.]

Government House, Singapore, 3 May, 1899. WITH reference to my despatch, No. 102 of the 16th March, and your telegram of the 24th April,* I have the honour to inform you that the Ordinance entitled An Ordinance to repeal and re-enact with amendments The Defence Contribu- tion Ordinances, 1896 and 1898,'" was read a third time at a meeting of the Legisla tive Council held on the 25th ultimo.

2. I enclose a protest by the Unofficial Members of Council against the Bill in its present form.

3.

The Attorney-General's report and copies of the Ordinance will be for- warded later

To maintenance of 50 telephone lines, instruments, &c., as per estimate

2,924

By subscriptions for 50 tele- phones at $7 per mensem per instrument

4,200

To depreciation on materials, 5 per cent per annum on $12.991 To interest at 4 per cent per annum on capital ($15.057) Balance to revenue account

By Call Office fees (say)

200

649

602

225

$4,400

$4,400

NOTE In the above approximate revenue account for a 50-line exchange, the same rates of depreciation and interest are provided for as in the revenue account for a 100-line exchange, but as the maintenance cost per telephone fixed is greater in the smaller scheme I have thought it necessary to place the subscription at $7 per mensem per instrument instead of $5.

A MURRAY, C.E.,

Colonial Engineer and Surveyor-General,

Straits Settlements.

I have &c.,

J. A. SWETTENHAM,

For Sir Charles Mitchell

Enclosure in No. 7.

PROTEST BY THE UNOFFICIAL MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AGAINST THE DEFENCE CONTRIBUTION BILL.

WE PROTEST against this Bill being passed without a clear definition therein that the payment of 20 per cent, of the Colony's revenue is to be for such defences as are from time to time necessary for the purposes of the Colony only; and not for such as are necessitated by the Imperial Government having created or hereafter creating or using Singapore as an Imperial Coaling Station or an Imperial Navy docking or repairing Station or a base of operations of the Imperial Navy.

JOHN BURKINSHAW,

LIM BOON KENG, G. S. MURRAY,

J. M. ALLINSON.

23 March, 1899.

12882

No. 6.

Legislative Council,

Singapore 25th April, 1899.

12882

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TLC.O. 882

SIR,

(No. 154.)

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

(Received 22 May, 1899.)

[Auswered by No. 8.]

Government House, Singapore, 26th April, 1899. REFERRING to your despatch, No. 323 of the 23rd December last,* in which it is ruled that the payments made for defence by the Colony from 1st January, 1895, in excess of 20 per cent. of the net revenue after deducting land sales and premia should be refunded by the War Office in three annual instalments, I have the honour to observe that these three annual instalments will form no part of the revenue of the Colony upon which any percentage for defence is due, and I propose, therefore, subject to your approval, to exclude any receipts from these instalments from the revenue of the Colony on which 20 per cent. is to be computed for defence purposes.

I have, &c.,

C. B. H. MITCHELL.

(No. 162.) SIR,

No. 8.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE to THE GOVERNOR.

Downing Street, 31 May, 1899.

I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch, No. 154 of the 26th ultimo,† and to approve of your proposal to exclude from the revenue of the Colony upon which any percentage for defence purposes is due the amounts to be refunded by the War Department. for the payments in excess of 20 per cent. of the net revenue, which the Colonial Government have made for defence purposes since the 1st January, 1895.

2. I would add that, if you prefer, the amount of these refunds need not appear at all on the revenue side of the Estimates or of the Accounts, provided that the net amount of the Military Contribution after making the deductions is entered on the expenditure side.

I have, &o.,

J. CHAMBERLAIN.

27895 not printed.

No. 2; and 8813: not printed,

24658

↑ No. 6.

6

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ES