CO885-(16-18) — Page 237

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

་། ༴། ་། ། ། ་།།

Reference :-

محمد

C.O

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

+885

17 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

16

desired to make other regulations for the dealing with that traffic than those pro- vided by the Universal Postal Convention.

Mr. MERCER: Yes; but what kind of regulations, if I may ask, would you suggest, because the present rule and practice is that unrouted messages go by the Pacific Cable. Would you propose a regulation to the effect that in addition to these messages, which are routed by the Eastern Companies, should also be sent by the Pacific Cable.

The CHAIRMAN: There would be no good discussing such a proposal as that; it would be said at once public opinion would not stand that for a moment.

Mr. MERCER: No, it would not stand it.

The CHAIRMAN: It would be an uncommonly strong order to take.

The EARL OF JERSEY: At present all Post Office messages can be sent to Australia by the Pacific Cable, but in many instances that is not done.

Mr. MERCER: Do you not think it is better not to draw attention to the fact that preference is always given to our cable. Why mention the matter if we send all unrouted messages by our cable?

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Are you obliged to ask everybody to route his message;

is there anything in the law?

Mr. MERCER: No.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Why do you do that?

Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: I assure you we do not do it.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: It is at the bottom of the form.

Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: We give an opportunity to do it.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: At the bottom of the form you are requested to fill in a blank; that is what that form says; there is nothing in the law calling upon you to invite them to do so. If you look at the form you will see.

Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: I am not responsible for the Post Office action in London.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Well, I only got one form; I went into one Post Office in Sloane Street and I got one form, and there I see that blank. Then I turned up the Post Office Guide to see how it would help me, and cannot find any satisfactory reference to the Pacific Cable in the Post Office Guide in the United Kingdom.

Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: I am quite willing to go to the Post Office; do not think I am discouraging what you are saying at all; I shall be very glad to go to the Post Office again fortified by any expression of opinion, from this Conference, to see what I could get further in the way of facilities from them beyond what we have already obtained. We have been urging, ever since we have been constituted, great concessions. We have obtained a great many concessions, perhaps not quite so many as we should have liked, and an expression of opinion from this Conference would, no doubt, strengthen my hands very much. But I am sure the Fost Office would resist any attempt to do away with the International Convention to which not only they but the Government of this country attach very great importance.

The CHAIRMAN: Could we get your suggestions a little more specific, Sir William? Take the first: the New South Wales Agreement as it exists; we need not take the other two smaller ones; what do you say as to that; do you wish the status quo to be maintained or do you contemplate it should be maintained?

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Well, have we any power to alter it? That is an agree- ment made by an independent sovereign State at the time it was entered into.

The CHAIRMAN: If you please: we will take that in the first instance; we need not say anything about whether it is relevant or not, we may take that for the moment as a fait accompli.

17

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: If it is a concession in perpetuity I do not know what good would be gained by quarrelling over it, if we cannot disturb it.

The CHAIRMAN: Let us take that as standing for the moment. Now, then, you have got the unratified Agreement with the Commonwealth.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Yes.

The CHAIRMAN: As to that you wish, I gather, that that should not be ratified or if ratified should only be ratified for 10 years or some distinct period.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: I would not have ratified at all.

The CHAIRMAN: If anything has to be done in that line it should, in your view, be for a distinct period.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Well, in deference to the wishes of our friends in Australia I would try and meet them on that basis. If they named a reasonable fixed period of time when that Agreement would run out I would try to meet them in that way.

The CHAIRMAN: Yes.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: But of course I would like to hear the views of the other gentlemen present; I do not know what their views are; it is only an opinion of my own.

The CHAIRMAN: I am taking that first in turn as you started.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: They have to give something in order to get rid of the New South Wales Agreement.

The CHAIRMAN: I still fail to appreciate why the object of the limited Agree- ment should not be attained by making the pooling agreement concurrent with it.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Well, the pooling arrangement is a matter that may come to an end at any moment as in its working out it depends upon the action of two parties.

The CHAIRMAN; Yes.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: The Eastern Extension might, for reasons of its own, make it unsatisfactory notwithstanding the agreement to the contrary, and when the pooling arrangement came to an end the situation then would be that we would practically have created a permanent state of affairs; we would be confronted practi- cally with a permanent condition of affairs prejudicial to the Pacific Cable for all Australia.

The CHAIRMAN: What do you say, Sir Sandford Fleming!

Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: I cannot say much about it without instructions from my Government.

The CHAIRMAN: If we adjourn for a week do you think you could get instruc- tions, Sir Sandford?

Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: I would willingly try.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: I was wondering whether it would be of any service if to we had an informal Committee sitting turning the situation over in different

ways see if we can evolve something; Sir Spencer might join us. There are many views to be taken. There is a speech by Senator Staniforth Smith (I have got it) in which he makes some suggestion. Someone sent to me an interview with him in which he suggests a policy, and probably the Committee would discuss the various views held.

The CHAIRMAN: That is rather what I was suggesting in the first instance, but then Sir Sandford Fleming has an objection to that. My suggestion, in the first instance, was that the representatives of the Colonial Government should meet Sir Spencer and endeavour to thresh out what would be satisfactory to them in the nature of a pooling agreement. But Sir Sandford's instructions do not permit him to enter into that parley. We should have to wait until he was able to be instructed

21872

C