CO882-(8-9) — Page 504

CRONESIAE CLAUSUPHRANOU bid Farby dad shippiMESMÍ AL

of 1897 (Mihtary Contribution),' 5th instant, No 31011'05

64

which was forwarded with your letter of the

The arrangement which this amending Ordinance emladies was intended to have effect from the 1st January, 1904 (ride War Office letter, dated 21st April, 1904.† and the enclosures therewith)

The Army Council desire, therefore, to suggest, for the consideration of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, that this date should appear, in the Ordinance it-elt

With this exception they see no obiection to the Ordinance being allowed to

remain in operation

65

4. I do not think that the Colony can now claim exemption from the military contribution in respect of this revenue altogether, but, inasmuch as it is a new source of revenue which the Colony has gained since the arrangement as to the military contribution was made. I think that it will be only fair that the calculation should be made on the net revenue derived from the Island.

37662

No. 85.

I have, &c..

JOHN ANDERSON.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

CO. 882

9

33639

SIR.

(No 175)

No 3 MAURITIUS

I have, &c.

RH BRADE

THE SECRETARY OF STATE to THE GOVERNOR [Answered by No 92.]

Downing Street, 26 September, 1905

I HAVE the honon to inform you that His Majesty will not be advised to exercise his powers of disallowance with respect to the Ordinance No. 15 of 1905, of the Legislature of Mauritius, entitled "An Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 33 of 1897 (Military Contribution)," a transcript of which accompanied your despatch. No 219, of the 20th of July-‡

2 I have however, to point out that the arrangement made with the War Office and the Treasury wa- that the deduction now allowed was to be made from the 1st of January. 1904 The Ordinance as passed makes no provision for such a retrospective arrangement, and it accordingly only applies to the period subsequent the 6th of July, 1905, the date on which you assented to it. For the sake of uniformity, it is desirable that an amending Ordinance should be passed providing that the new arrangement shall date from 1 January. 1904.

3

The copy of the similar Ceylon Ordinances herein enclosed may be of use to your legal advisers

I have, &c.,

ALFRED LYTTELTON

SIR.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.

COLONIAL OFFICE to WAR OFFICE AND TREASURY.

[Answered by Nos. 86 and 90.]

Downing Street, 27 October, 1905. WITH reference to your letter of the [8th of January, 1901,*] [27th of Decem- ber, 1900,†] I am directed by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton to forward to you, to be laid before [the Army Council] [the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury], a copy of a despatch from the Governor of the Straits Settlements with regard to the inclusion of revenue derived from Christmas Island in the general revenue of the Colony for the purpose of assessing the military contribution.

2. Mr. Lyttelton considers that the Governor's proposal that the calculation should only take into account the net revenue from the Island is reasonable, and he accordingly invites [the Army Council] [their Lordships] to accept the suggested arrangement.

3. A similar letter has been addressed to the [Treasury] [War Office].

39185

I am, &c.,

H. BERTRAM COX.

A H

H

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

37662

SIR.

(No. 419}

No 84

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

(Received 23 October, 1905.) Answered by No 91.]

Government House. Singapore, 28 September, 1905. I HAVE the honour to invite your attention to paragraph 3 of Mr. Chamber ain's despatch, No. 19, of the 17th January, 1901,|| in which it was stated that the War Office accepted the proposal then put forward on behalf of this Colony and agreed to by the Treasury that the revenue derived from Christmas Island should not be included in the general revenue of the Colony for the purpose of calculating the military contribution.

2. The period of five years which this arrangement was to last will expire in January next, and I presume that the matter will now be reconsidered.

3. The revenue derived from Christmas Island during the year 1904 amounted to $40,774.15, and the expenditure was $16,989.71, so that a considerable profit is made from the Island.

SIR,

No. 86.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.

TREASURY to COLONIAL OFFICE.

(Received November 4, 1905.)

[Answered by No. 87:]

[Copy to War Office, 2 January, 1906. L.F. See No. 90.]

Treasury Chambers, 3rd November, 1905. In reply to Mr. Cox's letter of the 27th ultimo (37882/1905), § the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury direct me to request you to inform Mr. Secretary Lyttelton that they concur in the proposal that only the net revenue derived from Christmas Island should be included in the general revenue of the Straits Settlements for the purpose of assessing the military contribution.

I am, however, to point out that, should it be found expedient in the future to maintain a garrison on the Island, this arrangement would fall to be reconsidered.

I am, &c.,

39185

SIR,

G. H. MURRAY.

No. 87.

STRAITS SETTLEMENTS. COLONIAL OFFICE to TREASURY.

Downing Street, 9 November, 1905.

I AM directed by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton to acknowledge with thanks the receipt of your letter of the 3rd instant, conveying the concurrence of the Lords

| No. 86.

No. 25.

↑ No. 84.

§ No. 85.

• 1...

† No. 38.

+ No. 75.

Ordinance No. 19 of 1904 (Enclosure in No. 53). 143 not printed.

• No. 26.

24658

66