CO885-(18-19) — Page 105

25629

6

No. 8.

FOREIGN OFFICE, to COLONIAL OFFICE.

(Received July 16, 1906.)

The Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs presents his compliments to the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, and, by direction of the Secretary of State, transmits herewith copy of the under-mentioned paper.

Foreign Office,

July 14, 1906.

DESCRIPTION OF ENCLOSURE.

Name and Date,

Subject.

India Office, July 4

Sugar Convention.

Sent also to Board of Trade and Treasury,

7

would, however, be unfair to omit certain indirect results of the action taken, which may be set down to the other side of the account. The Director of Agriculture in the United Provinces is of opinion that that action was value in allaying panic and creating confidence among the local manufacturers of real and giving them time to readjust their methods. Of more permanent importance is

the fact which seems beyond reasonable doubt, that the Indian legislation of 1899, and the knowledge that we were about to proceed to the further measures adopted in May, 1902, had an appreciable effect in bringing to a successful conclusion the Brussels Conference of 1901-1902, and that, but for this, the latter might have had no more result than its various predecessors. Mr. Martineau, a well-known authority, has expressed the opinion that the eventual result of the Convention will not be to make sugar dearer, and that "free competition will allow sugar to be pro- duced in larger quantities elsewhere and probably in some new countries, so that eventually the beet-root crop, though still remaining an important factor, will cease to be so absolutely the governing factor in the price of sugar." If this anticipation is correct, the Convention should undoubtedly make for the benefit of the Indian sugar-producer, and no one is likely to advocate endangering its permanent main- tenance by the repeal of the formal enactment which still remains on the Indian Statute Book.

38947

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

س

Reference :-

C.O.8

885

18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

Enclosure in No. 8.

(R. and S. 1491. Confidential.)

SIR,

India Office, Whitehall, London, S.W., July 4, 1906.

I AM directed by the Secretary of State for India in Council to acknowledge the receipt of your confidential letter, No. 19063, dated 12th June, 1906, forwarding for consideration a copy of Sir Henry Bergne's letter* of the 16th May to Sir Edward Grey relative to the future policy of His Majesty's Government with regard to the Brussels Convention.

In reply I am to say that, viewing the question from the standpoint of the interests of India, and from that of the Indian inhabitants of Mauritius, Mr. Secre- tary Morley would be glad to see some such general understanding arrived at by the Governments parties to the present Convention as would effectively prevent a return to the old régime of bounties. He agrees in the opinion expressed in the Foreign Office letter, No. 6664, dated 24th February, 1906, to the Treasury as to the line of action which might properly be taken by His Majesty's Government with the object of promoting an arrangement of this nature to take the place of the present Convention when the five years' period expires.

I am to request that you will bring to the notice of Sir Edward Grey the remarks on the subject of the Brussels Convention contained in paragraph 89, page 24, of the Indian Financial Statement for 1906-1907 (copy appended), as they serve to indicate that the Government of India attach importance to the main- tenance of the principles of that undertaking, and to securing thereby free competi- tion in the production of sugar throughout the world.

The Under-Secretary of State for

Foreign Affairs.

I have, &c.,

A. GODLEY.

89. So far, therefore, as any direct effect on Indian cultivation, imports, or prices is concerned, it must be confessed that the measures of 1899 and 1902 have been without material result. They yielded a certain revenue, some 944 lakhs in the six years, which the Government of India did not particularly require, and which would certainly not have been imposed on fiscal grounds. On the other hand, the legislation itself, the imposition of duties thereunder, and the variation of these from time to time, occasioned no little dislocation of the import trade, which gave rise to vigorous and far from unreasonable complaints by the commercial public. It

* See No. 5.

(No. 431.) MY LORD,

No. 9.

JAMAICA.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

(Received October 22, 1906.) [Answered by No. 11.]

Bellevue, Jamaica, October 5, 1906. As the time is approaching when His Majesty's Government will decide whether to renew the Brussels Sugar Convention or to allow it to lapse, I have the honour to submit to your better judgment the following observations on the subject. 2. Under that Convention confidence had in a great measure been restored in the cane sugar industry in these seas; and a large capital outlay had been incurred in the faith and expectation that the Convention would be renewed by His Majesty's Government.

3. I write "had been" in the past tense, because there seems a widespread impression, which has been increased by the absence of any assurance tending to allay anxiety, that His Majesty's present Ministers may not be inclined to renew the Convention. I understand that a resolution of the Westmoreland Sugar Planters Association of this island was transmitted to your Lordship by the West India Com- mittee on the 7th June last,* in the hope--as yet unfulfilled-of eliciting some declaration of the policy of the Government on the subject. The present anxiety as to the future of the industry is very unfavourable to its development, and I know of at least one recent case in Jamaica where it has induced the owner to order the abandonment by degrees of a very fine sugar plantation.

4. The considerations in favour of renewing the Convention (with or without modification) seem to be:-

(a) That it is usually good policy to preserve continuity of administrative principle.

It has been conceded that the Continental system, successfully suspended by the Convention, was quite contrary to Mr. Cobden's Free Trade principles (see letters to the "Times" from the Secretary, Cobden Club, January 25, and February 11, 1902, and M. Yves Guyot's reply, 6th February, 1902), and that the Convention has been successful in checking bounties.

(6) The ultimate danger to the English consumer which the Convention has temporarily averted, viz., that of becoming, by the extinction of cheap cane sugar grown in the British Empire, entirely dependent on foreign sugar, the price of

• No. 4.