PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 882
6
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
51
fil on the loan raised for the harbour improvements would be about $700,000; and that he proposed to Bret these charges by the establishment of a special Harbour and River improvement Fund" into which would be paid the proceeds of a special rate of 1 per cent, on the annual value of all property within 100 yards of the river bank; and the proceeds of increased wine and spirit duties. The proposed increase in the duties repre- sented an increase of 66 per cent. The Governor said that it would be impossible to induce the Council to agree if military contributions were to be paid on this special
taxation.
The War Office and Treasury agreed that the proceeds W.0, of any special taxation imposed to meet the charges for 1284706, interest and sinking fund on the loan should be excluded Treasury. from the revenue of the Colony to the extent to which 6441/06, such proceeds were required for the service of the loan. It may be noted here that the special rate referred to above was never imposed; and that when the clause as to the deduction from assessable revenue of the provveds of the special taxation on spirit revenue was added to the Liquors Ordinance the proportion of revenue which was to be deducted was fixed at three-eighths instead of two-fifths, the actual increase in the duties being not 66 per cent, but 60 per cent.
270306
The garrisons of Mauritius and Coylon were reduced-in W... 1906 on the recommendation of the Colonial Defence 0. Committee.
2710406.
In November the Governor of the Straits Settlements sent home the Estimates for 1907; and after pointing out Gov. that the Liquors Ordinance had fixed three-eighths of the 47150. rent of the liquors farm as the maximum sum payable to the Improvement Fund." he observed that the District hod., Collections" ought not to be liable to assessment for para. 43. contribution. These collections were the proluce of assessments levied on lands outside municipal limits for the upkeep of country roads, conservancy work, and irrigation works; the cost of such works far exceeded, and, in the Governor's view, would always exceed, the amount of the collections, and he argued that they stood on the same level as municipal rates, and consequently should not be liable to contribution. The Treasury, to Treasury, whom the question was referred, argued that the proposal 11783/07. to exempt district collections would be an innovation, and that as the contribution was less than the cost of the Ibid., garrison, they could not agree to the proposal.
Governor was so informed.
The Despatch,
8 April. It was in 1907 that the period of acute friction which led to the appointment of the present Committee began to develop. Commencing with requests for more detailed Gor information as to the way in which the cost of the 1778507. Singapore garrison was arrived at, the Governor claimed that certificates from the Comptroller and Auditor-General Gov...
34606/07. should be furnished, and the War Office, after observing that they were "aware that an active movement is at W.O..
present on foot in the Colony for the purpose of 37272107. agitating for a reduction in the military contribution,"
•
felt unable to meet Sir J. Anderson's wishes. The War
Office followed this up with a letter of the 31st October, W.0., in which the whole question of the Ceylon contribution 38419 07.
was revived. The argument was that the 1895 Committee
had recommended a maximum contribution equal to the cost of the Colombo and Kandy garrisons plus half the
cost of the garrison of Trincomalee; that the maximum
But des patch of
7th No.
vember.
tion.
43644/07.
Clor.. 24013.07.
Gov.. 48644/07. Hid Enclo
sure 1.
Thick.
Gov..
13644/07. para 14.
Ibid.,
para. 15,
35
of three quarters of the cost had been fixed because (a) it avoided the disputel question of who ought to pay for The Trincomalee garrison; and (6) the amount was roughly equivalent to three-quarters of the cost of the whole garrison of the island; and that as Trincomalee had now been abandoned the Colony ought to pay for the whole of the cost of the Colombo and Kandy garrisons, or, in other words, the whole cost of the defence.
The question was, of course, referred to the Governor for his views, the Secretary of State observing that the Army Council's contention appeared to him to be reason- able.
As if to embroil the Home Departments effectually, the Governor of the Straits Settlements took the opportunity, in November, 1907, to write a long despatch, in which he advocated a revision of the existing system of contribu tion. In June, 1907, he had reported that there had been a considerable amount of criticism in the local papers ou the subject of the contribution; and the question had been discussed at great length in the debates on the Supply Bill.
A copy of the debates was enclosed in Sir J. Ander- son's despatch of the 21st of November. Mr. Baker, one of the unofficial members of Council, raised the question
of special services," arguing that, on the principle agreed
16
to by the Treasury and War Office-that the Colony should not be placed at a disadvantage in consequence of having defrayed the cost of constructing railways and telephones out of revenue instead of raising a loan for the purpose- any revenue allocated to capital expenditure on special public works ought not to be subject to the military con- tribution; for otherwise the Colony would be at a distinct disadvantage in paying for productive public works out Another member of revenue instead of loan money. (Mr. Fort) compared the excessive contribution per head of garrison with the amounts charged against other Colonies; while a third took the point that Hong Kong, which was one settlement, paid on its revenue, while the Straits Settlements, though three in number, were only defended at Singapore, and that on the Hong Kong prin- ciple the cost of the Singapore garrison, or rather the con- tribution towards it, should be paid on the revenue of the settlement of Singapore. The tone of some of the remarks was strong, the speakers referring to the contribution as a gross, a monstrous, and an iniquitous injustice.
4
Sir J. Anderson, after reviewing the enormous works being carried out by the Colony to retain its trading posi- tion, said that he thought that the system of contribution was not in the interests either of the Home or of the Colonial Government. He argued that the works were in the nature of capital expenditure from which the Colony would ultimately benefit by the improvement of com- munications and increased efficiency in administration. "But for every $100 spent on these works we have to pay $25 as military contribution, i..., for every $80 we "spend we pay $20 to the War Department. It is true "that under the arrangement made by your predecessor " in 1904, when these works are directly reproductive, we "are allowed to deduct from the net proceeds a sum equal to 4 per cent on the capital expended, but on the other "hand we have already paid 25 per cent. of that capital "in military contribution, and in the case of works which may really be of far greater benefit to the Colony and "ultimately to its revenue, though yielding no direct
[
I
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.