CO882-(8-9) — Page 587

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

།། ། ། ། །

Reference :-

C.O. 882

9 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

16

pressed the Treasury to come to a decision as to Ceylon at sanice, leaving the Mauritius, Hong Kong, and Straits Settlements questions to be discussed by the proposed committer in the autumn-

sure i

p

131.

The Treasury, in a reply of great bugth dealing chiefly with the question of how contributions should be paid, (N6, 75 agree to the Colonial Office proposals. The letter is Eulo- important since in one passage the Treasury laid down what they considered to be the logical order in which the several elements of the question of contributions should be considereil:

· That order seems to be, to my Lords, as follows :—

1. The force to be maintained in the Colony

() for internal and external defence of the

Colony ;

(f) for purely Imperial purposes.

2. The cost of that force divided as above in the

Colony and at home.

3. The amount of contribution that ought to be demander of the Colony, having regard to its resources, and to its obligations towards itself and towards the Empire; whether the amount should be the same in peace and war; for what period it should be fixed, &c., &c.

4. The mode of payinent."

This indicates (4) the recognition of the fact, which is of considerable importance, that a garrison has an Imperial as well as a Colonial function, and (b) that the Treasury were inclined to think that the cost of the garrison was not the only factor in settling the contribution. At the end of their letter the Treasury said that this division between Imperial and Colonial purposes afforded a guide to what ought to be the minimum contribution.

"It does not

follow that a colony ought to pay nothing towards Imperial purposes; on the contrary, my Lords hold it to "be the duty of every portion of the Empire to make some "contribution towards those expenses according to its

46

means.

P. 133.

(No. 77).

In September, 1884, the War Office put forward their Ibid., definite proposals for five years from 1st January, 1885. p. 134 They suggested that the garrison should remain at 1,200 (No. 76) of all runks, but that only 400 should be regarded as kept for purely colonial purposes; and that the Colony should pay Rs. 600,000 for the whole cost of the 400 men, the cost of barracks and store buildings being transferred

These proposals were based on a report. Ibid to Army votes. of a War Office Committee.

(No. 78 The Colony was rather discontented at this, and the Ibid., p.144

Enelo- Secretary of State pressed the Treasury to agree to a

sure). contribution of Rs. 5Ì6,000, which represented the cost of the 400 men earmarked for colonial purposes; and in a subsequent letter he observed that the claim for a reduction to Rs. 516,000 was based on the score of justice and not of Ibid., p. 146 poverty:-

:--" The question of requiring a general contribu- (No. 81.

1). tion to Imperial expenditure from colonies over and above Enclosure "the full cost of any troops actually employed in their "defence is of course a fair one for discussion, but it should "be treated separately and not applied for the first time "in the case of a colony struggling under considerable "difficulties which for many years has paid a military "contribution more than double the cost of the troops it "actually required."

The Treasury replied that they were unable to adopt the Ibid., view that the actual cost of the purely colonial part of the P. 148.

Thid.,

P. 149.

Ibid..

P. 150.

Hid..

P. 151.

Ibid,

p. 132.

Ibid..

p. 153.

closure 1, para. 4.

17

garrison was all that a colony could equitably be asked to pay, so long as no contribution was demanded on account of the Navy; but they were prepared to agree to Rs. 516,000 a year for five years if the Secretary of State would concur in demanding from the colony a reasonable contribution towards the cost of Her Majesty's ships on the East Indian station, as soon as Ceylon's finances recovered. They fixed the amount at a sum not exceeding Rs. 360,000 per annum, in addition to the charges of a new loan for tortifications.

*

The Secretary of State replied that he did not understand the last clause since "it is not proposed at present to erect any fortifications in Ceylon, except at the purely Imperial "station at Trincomalee," and he left it to the Treasury to decide whether to charge the full Rs. 600,000 for the five years or Rs. 516,000 as proposed. The Treasury replied by saying that they would agree to Rs. 516,000, but reiterated their demand for a naval contribution.

The Secretary of State then referred the whole corres- pondence to the Governor, asking him to consider the two alternatives of paying Rs. 600,000 for five years without any ulterior arrangement during that period, or of paying Rs. 516,000 with the possible prospect of further payments on account of naval contributions.

The Treasury, on being so informed, said that if anything were paid beyond Rs. 516,000 it would be regarded as in recognition of the claim to naval contribution and trans- ferred as such to the Admiralty.

The Colony decided in 1885 to pay Rs. 600,000 without any pledge or condition as to other contributions rather than involve themselves in indefinite, and perhaps very onerous, obligations for the sake of a small immediate advantage. In informing the Treasury the Secretary of State said that that Department could place any con. No. 83, En- struction it pleased on the payment of Rs. 600,000, but that the Secretary of State and the Colonial Government did not hold themselves bound by what the Treasury had said, and that at the end of the five years the Colonial view of the question would be entirely unprejudiced.

At this point the controversy slumbered. In 1889 it became necessary to consider what payment should be made in 1890, the five years expiring on the 31st of December, 1889. It was proposed that pending the report of the Inter-Departmental Committee which was appointed in 1888, and was now considering Ceylon matters, payment at the existing rate (viz., Rs. 600,000) should be made and regarded as a payment on account: Ibid., p. 167 but Sir A. Gordon reported that though the Council (No. 91

would probably pass a vote for that amount for the whole Enclo-

year, there would be the strongest opposition to any sure).

suggestion that more than Rs. 600,000 would be required.

A 191.

Report.

Report,

(b).

pars. 231

Ibid. (c).

(2) 1890-1895.

The Inter-Departmental Committee reported in July, 1890; the report was not agreed to by the Colonial Office representative. The majority recommended

✔ 23993

(a) a contribution of £50,000 for 1890, being the sterling amount that Rs. 600,000 was estimated to produce when that sum was fixed in 1884.

(6) for the next four years, 1891-1894, the contri- bution should be £70,000, £90,000, £110,000, and £130,000.