CO885-(16-18) — Page 248

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

गय

Reference :-

C.O.

•885

17 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

38

Is there any element left out there which anybody wishes to emphasise?

Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: There is one point at the end of the cablegram which has been received from the Premier of the Commonwealth in which he volunteers to endeavour to secure the Company's assent to its express rescission of the New South Wales Agreement. It seems to me in some way that should be noticed.

The CHAIRMAN: Yes. Well, the telegram might begin as follows:-" As con- flict of legal opinion exists, Conference desires that you should endeavour to secure Company's assent to express rescission." Would that do?

Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: Yes, using his own words, of course.

The CHAIRMAN: Yes, those are his own words, "to secure Company's assent to express rescission."

Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: May I suggest to you that if you secure the express rescission of the New South Wales Agreement, and do not procure the alteration or the termination of the Commonwealth Agreement, the position of the Pacific Cable will be worse than ever; because then you will have an Agreement which will confirm the Eastern Telegraph Company's monopoly in New South Wales, in Victoria and in Queensland.

The CHAIRMAN: I only intend this as part of the whole bargain; we will make the words clear that it shows that it is only a portion of the bargain."

Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: I only wish to draw your attention to the fact that it would be a very serious thing.

Sir SANDFORD FLEMING: Would not the Commonwealth Agreement go to the wall if the New South Wales Agreement was taken out of it?

Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: No, it would not; it would be confirmed; you would make

it much more difficult to get the Company to agree to terminate it.

Mr. PEMBER REEVES: What we are doing is practically not only to continue the arrangements and concessions in New South Wales, but to confirm and really legalise the concessions which have been, as I consider, illegally granted and made in Victoria. We are proposing to do that.

The CHAIRMAN: No, no.

Mr. PEMBER REEVES: Yes Sir.

The CHAIRMAN: To terminate the New South Wales Agreement.

Mr. PEMBER REEVES: No, no; our telegram of last week, or the week before last, proposed to do that, and the only return we get for that, I understood, is the absolute termination of all these concessions and privileges in the year 1913, and that is what I have tried to express.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: How would this do?" With a view to removal of all grounds of difference growing out of South Wales Agreement, Conference considers it most important the proposed Agreement leave no uncertainty as to date of its termination."

The CHAIRMAN: There is not much reason given in that. May I read my draft again?

"Unconditional termination of the Agreement at a fixed date is asked, in order that after that date ruinous expense of competition may be saved, and in order to place both the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company and the Board systems on absolute equality."

We want the termination in order that there may be a perfectly clean slate, and both 'Partners may then" (that is, at may operate against each other if that is necessary. the fixed date) "determine their policy in concert, unhampered by any Agreement independently arrived at." Then quote Sir Edmund Barton's letter, which shows has been suggested to me that that that was in his mind on 1st June, 1903. Then, there may be portions of this Agreement which all the partners may desire to continue, but the great point is that no portion of that Agreement should be continued without

39

the assent of all the partners, and I therefore put in at the end, "It is not suggested that portions of the Agreement might not be usefully continued if the partners agree to their continuance."

19

Sir SPENCER WALPOLE: May I suggest to you there that the word "partners may possibly have a double meaning. Partners in your sense mean the gentlemen sitting round this table or the Governments they represent, but it might read the partners to the Agreement, which are the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company and the Commonwealth of Australia. Perhaps “partner Governments" would do?

The CHAIRMAN: Yes, partner Governments.

Mr. PEMBER REEVES: I hope I may just express an opinion. The CHAIRMAN: Surely.

Mr. PEMBER REEVES: I do trust that the saving clause suggesting that portions Our Government of the Agreement might possibly be found useful will not be put in.

If the

is certainly utterly opposed to this Agreement; it only withdraws its opposition in the hope of having a complete and unconditional termination of it in 1913. partners at that date think that any portion of the arrangements made under that Agreement may be usefully continued, they will be able to suggest it at that time, without our now mentioning such a possibility. I think it weakens our case against this Agreement now to suggest that any of it is useful or good. Personally I do not think that any of it is good; I think it is all thoroughly bad and inimical to the Pacific cable.

LORD STRATHCONA: You desire that the Agreement should terminate absolutely? Mr. PEMBER REEVES: Absolutely; that we should stand by that and say no more. LORD STRATHCONA: It appears that we would be in a better position afterwards, and as Mr. Pember Reeves says, any arrangement might be made by the partners at that time with regard to an Agreement.

The CHAIRMAN: That is quite true. What you say surprises me a little as to there being no portions of that Agreement which you desire continued. Of course, if you object to every portion of it, it would be very undesirable to suggest that any portion should be continued in your name.

Mr. PEMBER REEVES: We do object absolutely.

The CHAIRMAN: If you do think that, I do not think it is really of the essence

of the telegram; against your objection I would not press that being inserted.

Mr. P'EMBER REEVES: The previous paragraph which you read out, I think with regard to the partners being able to confer together and determine their future policy unhampered, I think highly desirable.

The CHAIRMAN: Yes.

LORD STRATHCONA: Is not that your view, too, Sir William, that the Agreement should terminate?

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: Oh yes.

LORD STRATHCONA: Not to retain or to suggest that any portion of it might be renewed.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: There are some things in the Commonwealth Agreement that, if I remember rightly, have no bearing upon our deliberations, and therefore it might hurt no one to have those provisions retained, but I think any request of that kind should come from the Australian Government. If there is anything in that Agreement that they would like preserved, and that the Conference thinks may properly be preserved without prejudice to the cable interests, we can then discuss those points.

LORD STRATHCONA: Yes, it rests with them to suggest.

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK: The ground that I take in connection with the matter is this. There was a certain state of affairs when the partnership was formed between

40