CO885-(16-18) — Page 810

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

ˇ | | | | | | | | | | | | ' |||||

Te

Tz Ti

Reference :-

C.O.885

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

18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

Fifteenth Day. 14 May 1907.

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY.

(Mr. Buxton.)

*

192

The Conference finally decided they would follow the Postal Union rather than the Telegraph Convention, on the ground that that enables the Conference to allot votes to the Colonies according to their importance, and does not enable a country to claim any number of votes for, perhaps, minute Colonies of no importance, simply because they happen to have a separate telegraph administration. The article passed by the Conference the other day fixes for any country and its Colonies a maximum of six votes. No country need have six votes, but that is the maximum. That is the principle of the Postal Union which has been in existence for many years, and has worked very satisfactorily. Under it, I may say, at the present moment India, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and South Africa each have a vote.

Mr. DEAKIN It might be presumed, then, at the next Conference that each of the six, if adhering, would be entitled to a vote.

Mr. BUXTON : Not "entitled"; that is to say, there is no obligation on the Conference to allot votes, or to allot any particular number of votes. It is a question of discussion as between the different countries, those interested in Colonies and having Colonies. I do not think there is any question about it that the precedent of the Postal Union will be taken, and these five votes in addition to one for Great Britain will unquestionably be given.

Sir JOSEPH WARD: Who would settle that?

Mr. BUXTON: It will be settled by the next Conference. Meanwhile, before the next Conference, which is five years hence, the country proposing to suggest Colonial votes for its Colonies makes the suggestion to the various countries concerned. Any other country may then make suggestions, and what we have had in mind in reference to the matter is that sometime before the next Conference takes place, we should communicate in a friendly way with, at all events, the important countries concerned to discuss what number of votes should he allotted and how allotted. I should like to add that, on the motion of the British delegates, it was decided by the Conference that that should be the first business of the next Conference, and that, therefore, any votes allotted will come into force at the beginning of the Conference, so they will have the full power of voting from the beginning of the new Conference.

Mr. DEAKIN: The new Conference may, if it likes, say yes, we agree, Canada may have a vote; and then go on to consider a tiny colony of some other power, giving it a vote and placing it on an equality with Canada. I am taking a most exaggerated contrast. Is that possible?

Mr. BUXTON: Certainly.

Mr. DEAKIN: That is to say, there is no standard fixed below which there shall be no vote.

Mr. BUXTON: Except that under the Postal Union, the theory and practice has been that votes are all allotted to important Colonies.

193

Mr. BABINGTON SMITH: It is a matter for the Conference to decide. As a matter of fact, under the Postal Union some of the other countries which have colonies have a certain number of votes for them. France, for instance, which has colonial possessions of considerable importance, has, I think, three colonial votes. Germany has two; Portugal, has two; Holland has two; and the other countries which have small colonies have most of them one vote.

Mr. DEAKIN: Then there is no real proportion.

Mr. BABINGTON SMITII: There is no precise proportion as to the importance of the Colony; but, as a matter of fact, I think Sir Joseph Ward will agree that the system has not worked unsatisfactorily for us.

Sir JOSEPH WARD: That is so.

Mr. BABINGTON SMITH: With the additional vote obtained for New Zealand at the last Conference, I think the allotment of votes is satisfactory from the point of view of the British Empire.

There

Sir JOSEPH WARD; I think it is satisfactory for this reason. is no getting over the general position in the world at large, which forms the Postal Union, that the great majority of the representatives are outside the British Dominions. At the Postal Conference we had quite a fight to get one extra vote for a British Colony--that is, New Zealand—and at the same time On the matter to get South Africa put in the position of having a direct vote. of voting I do not think we can improve upon that of the Postal Conference, which has worked satisfactorily. The great majority of the contributors to the Postal Union are Continental people and they outnumber us, and until we get into the position of having other great Colonies in addition to those we have already, which have grown to manhood, the odds are 50 to 1 that we will not As long as we have the get an increase in the representation we have now. assurance from Mr. Buxton that every effort to get the maximum of votes to be used in the interest of Great Britain and her Colonies at the next wireless telegraphy conference I think we have nothing to complain of. Although I know you cannot control it, it comes back to the Conference to say whether or not those votes are to be exercised.

Mr. BUXTON: I meant, we have the precedent of the Postal Union in which we have these votes, and I have little doubt from the knowledge which one has acquired with reference to the working of these international conventions and conferences, that they would see the reasonableness of our proposal to put wireless telegraphy on the same basis as the Postal Union, and we should obtain those votes. I cannot guarantee it. Though we may only have five votes, the representatives of any other colony can be present and take part in the discussion at the Conference as a British delegate. But I would like to put this as strongly as I can that the actual voting is really not very material. The material thing is the influence and power of those representing Great Britain and its colonies, and also the ability of the delegates. At this wireless telegraphy conference last time we only had one vote. We had on the whole a hostile majority against us, but in consequence of the attitude we took up and the very admirable handling of the matter by the British delegates, we really turned that convention topsy-turvy. We obtained every single point we wanted, and

1 49270.

3 C

Fifteenth 14th May

Day.

1907.

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY.

Page 810Page 811

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

I། ། ། ། ། །

Reference :-

C.O.885

18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

Fifteenth Dav.

194

made the convention as we now believe a convention very satisfactory from the 14 May 1907. national point of view and the Admiralty point of view; whereas, as it stood

WIRELESS TELEGRAPHY.

(Mr. Buxton.)

it was very unsatisfactory and we should not have agreed to it. We only had one vote at that time and all the other Powers one vote; so we were in an absolute minority, and it was really more moral strength than voting strength.

Mr. DEAKIN: But was not that due to the circumstances that so marked, the situation of British predominance in wireless telegraphy the Empire is so special, and the opportunities it affords for wireless telegraphy so much greater, that you only had to step out of the Conference and it would have practically fallen to pieces?

Mr. BUXTON: No, it would have gone through anyhow,

Mr. DEAKIN: Besides that, is not there a great difference between the Postal Union, with its exchange of services, and its absolute necessity for joint action throughout the world, and the present condition of wireless telegraphy which has taken great developments only in this Empire, where it plays an important part with the navy? The system is. being extended to some of What gain corresponding its dominions, and will be extended to others. to those, which are obvious in the case of the Postal Union, is there in establishing a union for wireless telegraphy while one member is so far What are we to gain? Are we not immensely superior to the others? accepting a limitation of a power we at present enjoy without an equivalent advantage?

Mr. BUXTON: That raises the whole question of the merits of the Convention, which is now before the Select Committee of the House of Commons, and opens out a very big question. I hold strongly the view that while it is perfectly true that we are in a dominant position in regard to wireless telegraphy at the present time, it is to our advantage to have inter- communication between the various systems, and it is to our disadvantage to have a particular system in this country, the predominating system, which refuses to inter-communicate. I am speaking specially from the naval point of view as well as the commercial point of view. The best method in which wireless telegraphy can be developed (and it is to our advantage to have it developed) is by means of an International Convention which will introduce free inter-communication, though subject to exemption of any stations which we think are better exempted. International regulation will tend to prevent confusion and interference which is really the evil of wireless telegraphy. Unless you have very carefully drawn regulations and power to enforce them, the difficulty is to prevent confusion and interference and to make the best use of the invention. The advantage to us in having an International Convention is that you bring all these different systems and different countries under an obligation not only to inter-com- municate, which is to our commercial advantage, but also to carry out these very carefully drawn regulations under which we believe interference and confusion will be reduced to a minimum. I am only treating it very broa:lly.

Mr. DEAKIN: If there were reciprocal preferences in this matter, it might be very advantageous; but when the Empire has at present all to give and very little to gain, are not we anticipating a state of things which has not yet arisen?

195

محمد

Mr. BUXTON: May I ask what we are giving?

Mr. DEAKIN: We give a power of communicating with the whole

of the stations which we have and all our ships.

Mr. BUXTON: Except so far as we like to exempt them.

Mr. DEAKIN: That exemption could only be used in very special circumstances.

Mr. BUXTON: It could be used so far as the Government is concerned at every one of their stations.

Mr. DEAKIN: You mean you could adhere to the Convention and at the same time exempt the whole of your territory from it?

Mr. BUXTON: No, you must have a certain number of stations for carrying out the international work, but all the existing stations, and any others you like to name, from an Admiralty or any other point of view, can be exempted; that is one of the conditions on which we agreed to the Convention.

Mr. DEAKIN: What does that mean? Those stations will be sending out their wireless messages. In what way are they prevented from being picked up because the station is exempted?

Mr. BUXTON: Exempted stations come under the Convention in every other respect; that is to say, they are as much protected from confusion and interference as are the other stations.

Mr. DEAKIN: That is to say, they can receive but are exempt from exchanging and communicating?

Mr. BUXTON: Yes. They are protected from wilful interference or even accidental, by the various regulations laid down for the management of coast stations and ship stations.

Mr. DEAKIN: We in Australia have before us at present at least two ystems of wireless telegraphy. One has established stations.

Mr. BUXTON: One is the Marconi, and what is the other?

Mr. DEAKIN: The De Forrest, and we have proposals from a third. It means considerable expense on a very long coast line if any one of those systems is to be adopted. If stations were established simply for defence purposes, should we be under any obligation to allow their use in time of peace? When this Convention was concluded, we were in the midst of local negotiations, and a good deal of apprehension was created lest, if we went to this expense, one of the effects of the Convention might be to require us to place those stations at the disposal of Powers inimical to us.

Mr. BUXTON: Do you mean in time of peace or war?

Mr. DEAKIN : In time of peace.

Fifteenth Day.

14 May 1907.

WIRELESS

TELEGRAPHY.