CO885-(18-19) — Page 162

40

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 12, 1907.

DESCRIPTION OF ENCLOSURE.

Name and Date,

Subject.

Paraphrase of Telegram, No. 18, Commercial, from Sugar Convention.

Sir F. Bertie (Paris), July 12.

(Copy also sent to India Office, Board of Trade, and Treasury.)

41

had declined to do for our own Colonies, and the fact that we had declined it for our own Colonies was the clearest possible evidence that there was nothing political in our action.

M. Cambon fully admitted the force of this and the difficulty of our meeting the French view about the Convention, but was not the less apprehensive as to the consequences.

I urged that time should be gained, and that if Germany and Austria pressed for a negative reply to our proposals the French Government might say that the decision might be postponed at any rate for a few months, that no change would take place in practice before September, 1908, and that our denunciation in September, 1907, if no adverse decision had been arrived at by then, would be put in such a form as to make it clear that we should not leave the Convention in September, 1908, if arrangements were made in the interval to free us from the Penal Clause.

23807

I am, &c.,

E. GREY.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O.885

18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO

Enclosure in No. 60.

PARAPHRASE of TELEGRAM from Sir F. BERTIE.

12th July, 1907. Commercial, No. 18. I am informed by the French Minister for Foreign Affairs that reliable information has reached him that the German Government is being pressed by the sugar industry in that country to make con- cessions, and thus to endeavour to prevent the denunciation of the Brussels Con- vention by Great Britain.

Attached to 25558

SIR,

No. 61.

SIR EDWARD GREY to SIR F. BERTIE (PARIS). (No. 120. Commercial.)

Foreign Office, July 12, 1907. M. CAMBON came to see me to-day on his return from Paris. He told me that he had had conversations with M. Clemenceau and M. Pichon about the Sugar Convention. Germany was putting Austria forward with the object of rejecting our proposal that we should be freed from the Penal Clause. We should then have to renounce the Convention, which would disappear. The French Government could not possibly resist the demand for their sugar interests to be protected. They would be obliged to enter into a combination with Germany and Austria to protect themselves against the competition of bounty-fed sugar imported into England, and the sugar producing countries, including perhaps Russia, would, in order to protect themselves without raising the price of sugar in their own countries, concert measures to raise the price of sugar in England. Things could not now return to the position they were in before the Convention.

The French Government were most reluctant to enter into any such combination and regarded with apprehension what the consequences of it would be.

I told M. Cambon that I thought that it would be very difficult for any com- bination to constitute such a monopoly as to raise the price of sugar in this country. The attempt to make a corner in articles of world-wide production and use had always failed.

We recognised that if we left the Convention other Powers must be free to, take what economic measures they pleased and their doing so would not have political consequences in England. We were a Free Trade country. We recognised that other countries were Protectionist, but we kept economie theory and political feeling entirely apart.

Our Colonies had asked us quite recently to alter our fiscal arrangements to please them. We were on exceedingly good terms with our Colonies but we had declined to make such an alteration. We could not run counter to the strong feeling in this country about the proper fiscal policy with regard to sugar and alter our fiscal principles to please France. In other words, we could not do for France what we

SIR,

No. 62.

NATAL.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE to THE ACTING GOVERNOR. (No. 64.)

Downing Street, July 12, 1907.

I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch, No. 89, of the 10th of June,* forwarding a copy of a Resolution passed by the Inanada Agri- cultural Association on the subject of the Brussels Sugar Convention, which Resolu- tion you state had received the support of the Committee of the Durban Chamber of

Commerce.

I had already received a copy of this Resolution from the Agent-General for Natal, through whom it was duly acknowledged.

25106

SIR,

No. 63.

NEW SOUTH WALES.

I have, &c.,

ELGIN.

NEWCASTLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE to COLONIAL OFFICE. (Received July 15, 1907.)

[Acknowledged through Governor, Miscellaneous, July 17, 1907.]

Newcastle, New South Wales, June 10, 1907. I HAVE the honour on behalf of this Chamber to respectfully urge that His Majesty's Government will take such steps as may be necessary to continue the Brussels Sugar Bounty Convention of 1903, which will, unless renewed, expire in September of next year.

We venture the opinion that the Convention has proved of great benefit to the sugar industry of the West Indies in protecting it from unfair and ruinous competi- tion from the sugar producers and manufacturers of other countries receiving assist- ance from high protective tariffs, bounties, &c., and as it would appear that the operation of the Convention has not raised the price of the commodity to any appreciable extent, if at all, to the British consumer, it is hoped that the Government will give the most favourable consideration to this suggestion.

I have, &c.,

• No. 48.

28570

J. W. HYDE,

President.

F