CO882-(8-9) — Page 684

124

4. I am confident that you wish to aid Government in its task of reforming the liquor traffic, and I therefore ask you to communicate to me the evidence on which you made the statements mentioned in paragraph 2 supra. Assuredly you would not have made them on such an occasion except after due investigation and upon adequate proof. In fact, yon state that you have made careful enquiry and have certain information from persons who have had ample opportunity of getting information."

51 accordingly ask you to favour me with the evidence on which you based these statements, so that I may take action suitable to the case as early as possible.

I am, &c..

125

that the condition "that the purchasers shall have no concern or interest direct or indirect in the sale of arrack or in the purchase of any privilege for the sale of arrack" may be interpreted as having no application to the case of a servant of an arrack renter who purchases a toddy tavern.

If that interpretation be correct, it seems to me that the Government did not, at the sales of toddy taverns, take any adequate precaution to prevent them being purchased by the creatures of arrack renters, and that they need not he surprised if a large number of toddy taverns have got into the bands of such men.

James Peiris, Esq.

Columbo.

Mr. Peiris Replies,

B. HORSBURGH,

Excise Commissioner.

B. Horsburgh, Esq.,

Excise Commissioner, Colombo,

I am, &c.,

JAS. PEIRIS.

Rippleworth, Colombo, June 21, 1912. SIR, I have the honour to acknowledge your letter of the 20th June. Before making the statements referred to, I made inost careful enquiries and satisfied myself of their truth.

The persons who gave me information did so on the understanding that I would not disclose their names, or the natues of the persons to whom the information referred.

If the latter had been guilty of any criminal offenco, I would not have accepted the information u such a condition.

In the circumstances I regret very much that I am not in a position to give you the information you ask for.

When I made the statement in question, I expected that the Government would obtain informa- tion regarding the matters referred to through the usual channels.

If the Government make enquiries regarding the antecedenta of the purchasers of toddy taverns, and their relationship to, or business connections with, the arrack reuters of the districts, I am confident that they will be able to obtain enough material to convince them of the connection which in a large number of cases exists between these two classes, although it may not be sufficient to afford legal proof of the breach of the conditions of sale, as the understanding between them must necessarily be a secret one.

I notice that in a communication made to the Times of Ceylon" by the Secretariat, it is stated that, at certain sales of toddy taverns, the Government Agente have expressed doubts whether some of the bidders were not the creatures of the arruck renters,

The Government have, according to the same authority, contented themselves with obtaining from them a public disclaimer, apparently not under oath, of any connection with arrack renters.

If, before the contracts were concluded between the Government and the highest bidders at these sales, inquiries had been made with regard to their connections and dealings with arrack renters, people would have gladly given evidence, but now that the Government have accepted these men as "approved" persons they are naturally reluctant to give information against them.

B. Horsburgh Esqr., C.C.S.

Excise Commissioner.

Mr. Horsburgh's Conclusion.

I am, &c.,

JAB. PEIRIS

Office of the Excise Commission,

Colombo, 22nd June, 1912.

SIR, I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of yesterday and to express my regret that you have not seen fit to assist the Government in this matter by submitting to it the evidence on which you made the statements ascribed to you at the recent public meeting.

2. It appears to me that by making these statements in public you became liable to be called on to produce your evidence, and, if you decline to produce it, to have your statements described as, at least, not proven, and capable of being absolutely disregarded.

James Peiris, Esq..

Colombo.

Mr. Peiris' Reminder.

I am, &c.,

B. HORSBURGH,

Excise Commissioner,

Rippleworth, Colombo, 24th June, 1912.

It

SIR,I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 22nd June. When I made the statements referred to therein I said (I):-" I shall not give the names of the districts because I would then be an informer against the people who have bonght rents in these districts" and (2) ;—" The Government are in a better position to find out these facts than I am. will be surprising if the Government Agents in the different Provinces do not know this."

You will thus observe that I made it clear at the time that I had no intention of producing evidence to enable the Government to take action against the persons concerned.

I cannot therefore see how my refusal to do so now can in any way affect the value of the state- ments I have made.

From what has been subsequently made public it appears that I was correct in my conjecture that the Government Agents would have some information regarding the connection between the arrack renters and the purchasers of toddy shops.

I submit that the Government have not made a proper attempt to follow up that information, and 1 fail to see how I can be blamed for not disclosing the information which was given to me confidentially,

I would also like to point out that the public disclaimer which is said to have been made by the persons regarding whom there were doubts can hardly have any value in law, and that it is possible

28484

SIR,

No. 4.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE. (Received 9 September, 1912.)

(No. 466. Miscellaneous.)

[Answered by No. 6.]

The Queen's House, Colombo, Ceylon, 22nd August, 1912.

1 HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch, No. 326, of the 26th July,* replying to mine, No. 333, of the 13th June, in which I forwarded copies of Ordinance No. 8 of 1912, entitled "An Ordinance to provide for the intro- duction of an Excise System."

2. I note that representations against the system introduced by the new Ordi- nance have been made to you by a number of Temperance Societies; and I have read with interest the report of the speeches made by a deputation from the Native Races and the Liquor Traffic United Committee, which waited upon you on the 22nd July, and your reply thereto.

3.

I also note with great satisfaction that, after very careful consideration, you have come to the conclusion that the general principles of the reforms which it is proposed to introduce are not open to serious objection, and that the new system will effect a very material improvement in the methods of controlling the liquor traffic in Ceylon, and that there is good reason to hope that the result will be an eventual reduction in the consumption of alcohol.

4. I note, moreover, that you have accordingly decided not to advise His Majesty the King to exercise his power of disallowance with respect to this Ordinance. As I have informed you by cable, however, I have not caused the Ordinance to be pro- claimed, as I was anxious that no final action in the matter should be taken until you have had time to receive and consider the memorial addressed to you by a Com- mittee appointed for the purpose by a public meeting held in Colombo on the 15th July, and my covering despatch, No. 414, of the 29th July.§

5. In paragraph 4 of your despatch under reply you write :-

"I am strongly of opinion that the proper course to adopt is to provide by rules framed under the Ordinance for the establishment of Licensing Boards in each Province, or possibly in each district, by whose advice the Government Agent or other licensing officer will be guided in deciding whether or not to issue a licence for any arrack or toddy shop;

and you state the opinion that it is most desirable that the issue of licences should be placed more directly under the control of public opinion than is contemplated by the recommendations of the Select Committee of the Legislative Council in paragraph 31 of their Report.

6. In your speech replying to the Deputation on the 22nd July (page 33 of the enclosure to your despatch under reply) you spoke only of " Advisory Committees and, while expressing the opinion that the suggestion that such Committees should be established was well worthy of consideration, you did not pledge yourself, one way or the other, in the matter.

7. I fully share with you your desire that local opinion and local wishes should be fully consulted in this matter; and I am prepared to welcome the suggestion that

• No. 2.

† No. 1.

26303: not printed.

No. 3.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

1111 C.O. 882

9

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO