CO885(3-4) — Page 371

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

རྦ། །

Reference :-

mmmmmm... 885

4 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

24

and the East? Have we not seen lately the disadvantage of a break or stoppage in the telegraph between England and Constantinople?

It is alleged by Sir James Anderson that a cable laid in the South Atlantic can easily be destroyed; but surely this would be a more difficult task for an enemy's cruiser, just because it is in "a deep ocean," than a similar operation in the Red Sea.

Sir James Anderson objects to my suggestion on another ground, namely, that the cables would "be costly to the taxpayers of this country," and yet he urges that one advantage of the Red Sea route consists in the possibility of establishing another line Quite so; there, "not likely to be interrupted, if this country will spend the money.' but why should public funds be claimed for an additional Red Sea line, while the cast of laying a western cable is deprecated as a burden on the British taxpayer?

ני

Again, Sir James Anderson says that, "as the whole strength of this nation must be "exerted to keep the highways of commerce protected, the telegraph lines are more likely "to be secure along this (the Red Sea) route than any other." But, Egypt is under Turkey; Turkey has not the control of her own future; complications may arise calculated to hinder our free use of either the railway, the telegraph, or the canal in Egyptian territory; and the breaking out of war might at any moment stop our ships, as well as our telegraph lines communicating with the East. It certainly is our duty to keep the highways of commerce protected, but how are our ships to protect the land lines through foreign territory, or would it be easy for our men-of-war in the Red Sea to There is assuredly intrepidity protect the cable there from being lifted or "destroyed "? enough in the navy or army of Russia to succeed in such an attempt, if, unhappily, we had war with that Power; even an Arab dhow might do the mischief. In common with Sir James, I am not afraid of our being able to protect our cables in the Mediter ranean, but I think that the admitted necessity of providing for their protection proves that it is desirable the Government should provide an alternative route. Anderson argues my case when he uses these words, "The only possible method by "which neutrality to cables in time of war can be established, is by creating so many "alternative routes that nations at war will not care to destroy them, because there "will still exist others which cannot be interrupted."

Sir James

I cannot conclude better than by quoting the following extract from Sir Garnet Wolseley's speech as chairman of the meeting at the Royal United Service Institution, when I read a paper on this subject in March last, Sir Garnet said :—-

"As a nation, it would be perfectly ridiculous for us to depend upon the Suez Canal If we cannot as a line of communication with our Eastern possessions in time of war. depend upon communicating by means of ships, and if the Canal can be easily destroyed, how much more easy would it be to destroy a line of telegraph. Although the line of telegraph via the Red Sea is very useful to us in peace, still it would be quite suicidal were we to depend upon it, and it only, in the event of war, I therefore think we must come round to what Mr. Currie has recommended, which is to pay our greatest attention to, and never lose sight of the communication with India and Australia via the West Coast.

"

3 and 4, Fenchurch Street, London, E.C., 6th March 1878.

Mr. ROUND'S MINUTE on Mr. DONALD CURRIE's letter, dated

March 6, 1878.

D. C.

MR. CURRIE reverts to bis own project, but he does not give us the least idea what subsidy a company would require for a western line such as he suggests.

I do not think he establishes anything new in favour of a western as against an eastern route. Nobody denies that an entire alternative route to India via the Cape would be an excellent thing, but to accomplish this the Cape must be connected both westwards with St. Vincent and eastwards either with Aden or Ceylon. So that the line Mr. Pender, Sir J. Anderson, &c. advocate is just as much a link in this route as that advo- cated by Mr. Currie. But the immediate question is to connect South Africa with either one or the other, and for this purpose Government must consider—

(1.) The relative outlay necessary for either undertaking.

(2.) The amount of trade accommodated by either, and consequent probable receipts

of the line.

(3.) The security for keeping communication open in the time of war.

23

With reference to (1) and (2) the information contained in Sir P. Julyan's Report was I think, conclusive in favour of the eastern route, more especially on the assumption that Mauritius should be included in any scheme and with regard to (3), assuming that England would do its utmost in any case to keep one line of communication open with Aden, the additional labour of securing the line from Aden to the Cape would not be equal to that of securing the line not only from St. Vincent to the Cape but from England via Portugal and Madeira to St. Vincent, which last would for other purposes be comparatively unnecessary for England to undertake.

As to the immediate undertaking of the short line from St. Vincent to the West Coast, this would still leave the home authorities subject to all the inconveniences of being only able to telegraph to the Cape once a week, and having to wait at least 25 days for an answer, so that it would be hardly worth while for Government to assist in this, unless satisfied that the further land lines right down the coast were practicable and likely to be made. I imagine that the maintenance of such lines would be very great, and as to their first cost even Mr. Currie gives no estimate, and Mauritius with its trade of six millions would certainly not contribute a penny to such a line.

8/3/78.

No. 8.

F. R. R.

The RIGHT HONOURABLE SIR M. E. HICKS BEACH, BART., to the OFFICERS ADMINISTERING THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE CAPE,OF GOOD HOPE, NATAL, AND MAURITIUS.

SIR,

Downing Street, March 21, 1878.

AMONG the subjects which have engaged my attention since I assumed the seals of the Colonial Department, is the important one of telegraphic communication between the South African Colonies, Mauritius, and this country.

2. It will probably be convenient for the purpose of reference if I here recapitulate what has already taken place in relation to the matter.

3. The subject was, I understand, first brought before Her Majesty's Government in 1873, when the agents of three different companies visited South Africa and Mauritius, and entered into communications with the local Governments with the view of obtaining a concession, on the strength of which it was proposed to construct and lay a submarine cable from Aden via Mauritius and Natal to the Cape. They all asked considerable financial support, either in the shape of a subsidy or guarantee, and the matter at that time ended in Hooper's Company entering into contracts with the three Governments to undertake the work, in consideration of subsidies, amounting in all to 18,000. a year, for ten years. These terms were much more favourable than had been proposed by other parties, and the cable was to have been open for traffic by 31st December 1875. Early in that year, however, Hooper's Company announced their inability to form a company unless larger subsidies were given by the Cape and Natal, and they subsequently renounced all the contracts.

4. At this time, my predecessor, before whose notice the importance of securing telegraphic communication with the Cape was being constantly brought from various quarters, instructed the Crown Agents for the Colonies to report fully as to the Sir P. Julyan accordingly, possibility and probability of effecting the object required.

in December 1875, prepared a scheme, the main suggestions of which were that a loan of either 1,150,0007. or 1,350,000l. according to the route adopted, should be raised by the three Colonies of the Cape, Natal, and Mauritius, combined; that this loan should be guaranteed by the Imperial Government; that a contract should be made with some cable-constructing company for making and laying a cable; that the four Governments should make themselves liable for certain sums annually, (viz., the Imperial Govern- ment 22,5581. (besides the guarantee); the Cape 25,8431.; Mauritius 14,4737,; Natal 4,3587.) the total of which it was calculated would be sufficient to pay interest on the loan, and to provide a sinking fund of 2 per cent. annually; that the receipts of the line should be employed in paying working expenses and in the maintenance of the cable, and that the balance should be distributed amongst the Governments contributing in proportion to the annual charge allotted to each. Lord Carnarvon recommended this scheme to the Lords of the Treasury, subject to certain modifications as to the distribu- tion of the charges and receipts, and subject to further consideration of the particular route to be adopted. Their Lordships, however, declined to take part in this scheme,

D 3