CO885-(15-16) — Page 124

24554

No. 92.

(British Guiana.)

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

C.O. 885

Reference :-

15 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

SIR,

LAW OFFICERS to COLONIAL OFFICE.

Royal Courts of Justice, July 16, 1901.

We were honoured with your commands signified to us in Mr. Lucas's letter of the 15th May last stating that he was directed by you to transmit, for our consideration, the accompanying papers, and to request that we would favour you with our opinion in the following circumstances:-

That the British Guiana Government had, for several years prior to 1890, been the owner of a telegraph and telephone system in and about the City of Georgetown.

That in 1890 an Ordinance was passed by the Colonial Legislature (No. 29) entitled "An Ordinance to facilitate and regulate the supply of electricity for lighting and other purposes"; and that by Ordinance 16 of 1891 a Provisional Order was confirmed giving the British Guiana Electric Lighting and Power Company, Limited, the right to supply electric light and energy under the Ordinance of 1890; and that under that Ordinance that Company continued to supply electric light, and perhaps also energy, down to the year 1899.

That in the last named year an Ordinance was passed (13 of 1899) entitled an Ordi- nance to incorporate a company to be called "The Demerara Electric Company, Limited," which gave power to the Company to acquire, construct and maintain electric light and power systems, and electric tramways in Georgetown.

That immediately afterwards Ordinance 18 of 1899, "An Ordinance to amend the Electric Lighting Ordinance 1890," and No. 19 of 1899, "An Ordinance to facilitate the construction and regulate the working of tramways," were passed with a view to con- trolling the Company's operations; and that on the 19th January, 1900, a License under the Tramways Ordinance, and an Order under the Electric Lighting Ordinances, were issued to the Company.

That the Company proceeded to acquire the electric lighting system from the old Company and to operate it, and also to construct the tramway system, which was opened for traffic early in 1901.

That before the tramway system was opened the Colonial Government was advised that its operation would involve danger to life and property unless the telephone system were equipped with fuses. That that was accordingly done at the expense of the Govern- ment, which, however, expressly reserved its right to claim repayment of the amount expendel from the Company.

That it was soon found that, though that precautión obviated actual danger from the operations of the Company to telephone users and the public, the combined effect of the electric lighting and tramway systems was to materially impair the utility of the tele- phones; and that in the correspondence enclosed it was sought to fix upon the Company the duty of repaying the cost of installing the fuses, and also of restoring the impaired utility of the telephones caused by induced currents to the satisfaction of the Government, probably by paying the cost of placing the telephones on a metallic circuit.

That those obligations the Company repudiated in whole, and in part; and that Mr. Lucas was

to request that we would take the matter into our consideration and advise :-

I. Whether the Company was liable under Clause 34 of the Tramway License, or otherwise, to repay to the Government the cost of equipping the telephones with fuses?

2. Whether, under Clause 68 of the Electricity Order of 1899, the Company were liable for injurious affection of the telephones arising from the lines and works already existing at the date of that Order, or only to such injurious affection arising from lines or works subsequently constructed, or their user?

3. Whether, supposing Clause 68 to apply to all the lines and works of the Company, the Postmaster General must exhaust his remedies under the Electric Lighting Ordinance of 1890 before having recourse to those conferred on him by Clause 68, and

Generally.

We have taken the papers into our consideration, and, in obedience to your com- mands, have the honour to

9871-25-7/1901 Wt 952

D&S

2

Report-

1. That this depends upon a question of fact. If it can be shown that the construc- tion of the tramway system injuriously affected the telegraphic lines, and that it was by reason of such injury that the fuses became necessary, we are of opinion that the Company is liable under Clause 34.

2. We think, under Clause 68 of the Order of 1899, the Company are liable for injurious affection resulting from the user of any of their lines and works.

3. No.

Generally. Any difficulties which this case presents appear to us to be on questions rather of fact than of law. It is, for instance, apparently suggested by the Company that the injury has been caused by the improper action of the Government Officials as to the position of the lines.

The Right Honourable J. Chamberlain, M.P.,

&c.

&c.,

&c.,

We have, &c.,

R. B. FINLAY. EDWARD CARSON.