CO885-(18-19) — Page 723

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

SEPERTI

Reference :-

C.O.885

19 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

68

2 July 1908.1

CROWN AGENTS' ENQUIRY COMMITTEE:

Major M. A. CAMERON, C.M.G.

The main features of the design we should never touck because we assume that the Colony knows best what it wants to have.

1461. Even although it might be faulty-If it were faulty in construction so that it would fall down, it would have to be altered, but if a Colony sends you a three-roomed house arranged in a particular way, it would be a strong measure to suggest to them that they ought to have it differently arranged, and wo should not do that.

1462. Take a marine villa, would you vary that if you thought it was of faulty construction ?-It is all a We con- matter of judgment in the individual case.

nder, and it is an understanding of the Colonial Uffice, that we ought to point out serious defects. If we think the Colony is going to spend its money on a thing which will be unsuitable when it gets it. we are bound to point it out to them before we go on.

1463. You would hold yourselves responsible for pointing out any faulty requisition you receive ?-We do.

1361. With a view to amending it either with the sanction of the Secretary of State, or by reference to the Colony? Yes. If it is a minor instance, which often happens, we do not do that; we send the Colony what it has asked for, assuming that there is nothing absolutely wrong about it, but write out at the same time saying that we think they might have done better, so that they may know another time. That is in small cases where, it is not sufficiently im- portant, and you do not want the delay of referring

ont.

1165. But generally you accept that responsibility of seeing that plans, or whatever they are, are sent?- Seeing that they will work.

1466. Having got the plans and specification com- plete, how der you put the thing out to tender? To whom do you send --It depends entirely on what it is. We have a list which Mr. Harding has there of firms for every class of material we deal with.

1967. You send to the people on your list 7-Yes, but there are exceptions,

1404, Is it usual to have the material inspected? That varies very much. It is not necessary to inspect everything. Of course, anything like a bungalow it is very necessary to inspect, but that is not necessary with a great deal of material.

1469. Take the material which it is necessary to in- sport: what is the method of inspection -When we give the order we send all the particulars of it in the inspector, whoever he is, and he approves all the details as the thing goes along, aud inspects to what- ever extent he thinks necessary. He sees it erected in skeleton, or part of it if it is large, and examines the material itself, takes the tests he requires of the material, and ses it right through.

1470. And you accept entire responsibility for his inspection and passing of the goods or otherwise?- What do you mean by accepting responsibility?

1471. Supposing he passed goods as sound and according to specification as shipps, and at the other end they are found not to be sound and according to specification ?--We do not accept that liability in the case of what we call the outside inspectors. Formerly we used to do our work entirely through outside in- spectors, that is to say, engineers who are in general practice as inspecting or consulting engineers, and who took our work only as part of their general prac ties. They occupy the same position towards us as Consulting engineers, that is to say, we select them to the best of our ability, and keep the closest possible watch upon them, but we do not take responsibility for what they do. We have no control over them, in fact, and we can only place the work in their hands as thoroughly competent people; but in the case of the inspection which is done by our own staff we are quile prepared to take the full responsibility of that.

1472. (Chairman.) Has the Colony any say which method of inspection shall be adopted, because it makes a difference to them, does it not -No; it has ned; it is impossible to give the Colony a say in that. but we are in fact gradually absorbing very nearly the whole of the inspection. Is your point, that natur- ally they would wish us to do the inspection because

as to

we would have to take the responsibility, but if the Colony claimed that we should do a branch of inspec tion for which we have not got proper men, and for which we are not qualified, we could not do it. We do all we can du.

1473. Is it not rather hard on the Colony-perhajās it does not happen, but would it not be rather hard if the case suggested by Sir Ralph took place, of goods orderal turning out not to be according to specification or sample, and when they applied to you expecting that you would hold yourselves responsible, you said, "Oh, no, because our own inspectors were busy, we gave it to somebody else to inspect whom we are not responsible for "They are in exactly the same position in which they always were until a short time ago, and in which a principal who employs an agent Always js.

1474. The other plan is better?. Much better, and it is a great advantage to them in that and many other

WILys.

1475. You say you hope to so extend your staff of inspectors as to do it all?—I think there will be cer tain branches we shall never do. Electricity, I doubt if we shall ever do, because that moves so fast and is so special that our work would not be enough to keep a good electrical inspector in modern practice. There may be other branches we can never take on, but we are now doing something like 80 per cent. of all the work that is inspected, and no doubt that will in- crease. We also have to some extent to regard the position of one or two of our former inspectors. There is one man in particular who took on his office and started to some extent-he was a former resident engineer on one of the Colonial railways on our promises, and we are to some extent bound to keep him in a certain amount of work. That, of course, will go, and we shall gradually absorb nearly all.

1476. (Sir Ralph Moor.) Then the position practi- cally is that formerly you employed principally out side inspectors, and that you did not accept responsi hility Entirely.

1477. But you have found it advisable of late years to adjust that and organise a staff of your own inspec tors, and to accept responsibility for their work ?— -Yox,

1178. In a case where your own inspectors inspect the material, and it is found to be faulty on delivery, who pays? We should, undoubtedly; Ť am glad to say that a direct case of the kind has not arisen, but we take all responsibility provided it is satisfactorily established that the fault is with the inspection.

1479. In the case of an outside inspector, who pays then--The Colony.

25

the

1480, (Mr. Gibson.) Qua the Colony, surely that is very unsatisfactory. You say these outside people are your agents, but qua the Colony you are their agents; and it is immaterial to the Colony whether you employ a permanent or outside establishment 7-You have to look at the position supposing there were nu joint institution such

Crown Agents. Supposing the Colony had to make its own arrange- ments for the purchase of stores, what would it do? It woubl employ some man who would not as agent, for a salary, no doubt, who would do the best he could, but he would not undertake financial responsi- bility, having taken every precaution to select a com- petent engineer, for the acts of that engineer.

1481. I do not think the analogy is quite sound there. You are the appointed agents accepted by the Colony and by the Secretary of State, and your offic has to do certain work of inspection. Is it not the case that you appoint a permanent staff of your own for which you accept responsibility ?—Yes.

1182. You draw a distinction between the outside in- spectors, who are appointed for the job, and your own, but personally I do not think the distinction qua the Colonies can be maintained, and I think you are equally responsible for the acts and omissions of your temporary staff who are selected by you.

1183 (Chairman.) The reason the Committee are so interested in this is that they have heard the same view expressed by Sir Ernest Blake, and no doubt it has occurred to every member of the Committe that

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

Major M. A. Cameron, C.M.G.

from the point of view of the Colony it is so odd that if they order from you one day such things as your inspectors can inspect, you say that you will send them, and if they are not what they want you will be responsible," while, if the same Colony another day sends you an order for, say, electrical goods, you - to them, "Yes, we will send them to you, but if they are tot what you want you must put up with it." Why? We know you take so much interest in your work that you do not mind us putting these dilemmas in you see the difficulty; it is a difficulty which has arisen out of our taking on a responsibility which we did not bear before; but to extend that and say, -Because you have once begun to make yourself re- sponsible for certain things, therefore you must sud- denly become responsible for all the others," seems to ma stretching of the advantages which already giving to the Colonies by the establishment of our inspection branch.

We are

1181. It seems bard to them that for wooden houses they should get what they want, while for electrical machinery they should have to take what they can get? You put it in that way, but in fact these posi- tions very rarely arise, and 1 do not think the logicality is apparent to the Colonies because they have so little opportunity of putting the two things sle by side; it is not a practical difficulty.

1485, (Mr. Leather.) 1 think you are paid by per- vntages on the purchase of stores?—The office is.

14M, Is the percentage the same in the three cases, urst, if the goods are inspected by the Crown Agents own agents; secondly, if they are inspected by outside inspectors; and, again, if they are not inspected at all?--The inspection is separately paid for, it is not covered by the purchasing commission.

1487. You get the commission equally whether you have inspected the goods through your own inspectors or through outside inspectors It makes no difference. 1488. (Mr. Bailey.) It costs the Colony more, do I understand, if you employ outside inspectors?—No, the

scales are all the same,

1489. Whether you take those fees yourself directly or whether you hand on those fees, or part of them, to the outside inspectors?—Yes, it is in the memoran- dum I sent in; there is a scale laid down by the Secretary of State which we are authorised to charge, and that was exactly the scale which we were pre- viously paying to the outside inspectors. We took it un at the same rates.

1-400. What I want to make quite sure of is this- that the Colony does not pay any more for you to employ on their behalf an outside inspector?-No, it makes no difference, and if we do not inspect there is no payment by the Colony for inspection. They only pay if the goods are inspected.

1491. (fr. Gibson.) With regard to the division of work amongst the Crown Agents under which Sir Ernest Blake practically manages the African and Chinese railways, is that to be a permanent arrange- mont? Is it an advantageous arrangement that some radways should be controlled directly by one Crown Agent and the bulk of them by another-No arrange. nont of that kind is permanent; they have to be nonsidered from time to time. It is partly a matter of equally dividing the amount of work, and has grown up gradually. Sir Montagu Ommanney used l the West African Railways, and when he left the office Sir Ernest Blake took it on.

1492. You think on the whole it would be an advan- tage if all the work in connection with railways were done under one head?—No, I am not prepared to say that necessarily.

1493. (Mr. Leathes.) If that were so, what would happen if the railway man were away-everything would have to stop --The head of the engineering partment, Major Carmichael has the whole of the strings in his hands

1494. (Chairman.) Of all the railways?—Yes, so that he has got it quits in his mind to secure continu

14805, (Mr. Gibson.) There was one point with regard to the firms. One witness said that he considered your lists wen too limited-take the case of locomotives- but I gather from what you say to-day that any com.

69

12 July 1908.

petent firm can get on your list on application ?—Any firm that can show it is competent comes on the list.

1400. You have 110 restriction practically 1-No restriction whatever as to numbers. I may say that what we do when a firm applies is that we make them give us references; we then find out all we can about them from the references and then we send one of our inspectors to go over their works and see for him- self what they are good for.

1497. It is practically the procedure in force at the War Office, Admiralty and India Office?—Yes, I believe so.

149. With regard to the technical staff of your office, in the Works Department and the Engineering Department they are all appointed. I take it. by the Crown Agents ?—Yes.

1499. Specially selected men ?-All the technical men are selected.

1500. And the salaries of the special technical staff, like the rest of the staff of the Crown Agents, are subject to the control of the Crown Agents ?—Yes.

1501. (Chairman.) I have been requested to ask you whether you deal considerably, or at all, with the larger financial aspects of the "office. say with the loans-Not personally.

1502. We gathered not, but we just wanted to be sure you have more the expert and technical side? Yes. Of course we discuss the financial matters to- gether, but I do not directly deal with them.

1503. That is not your particular Department which you are most interested in?—No.

1501. We have heard a good deal of that from Sir Ernest Blake and we shall hear more. We have asked all these questions which you have answered most fully --and we are extremely obliged to you as you have been a great help to us this morning--with a view to ascertaining what judgment we. as a Committee, should form as to how far it is advisable to bring the Crown Agents' Office more on to the permanent "Civil Service side or lines, and whether the staff should be brought more into harmony with the Civil Service con- ditions. I should like to ask you these two questions: firstly, with regard to the larger aspects of the work to be done, whether you think it would give greater or less satisfaction if the Crown Agents were a Depart ment of State, and secondly, with regard to the staff, whether you think you could recruit a more efficient staff, and that they would be more contented, if they were brought more into line with the Civil Service. Will you please answer number one first, as to giving satisfaction to the Colonies and to the business cont- munity-I think that, to make the Crown Agents a Department of State, would not be popular with the Cufonies. The tendency of the Colonies, and that was expressed by Sir Frank Swettenham particularly in hus reply to Mr. Chamberlain's circular of inquiry. and it has been expressed to me by a good many men Besides, is to complain sometimes that the Crown Agents are too much identified with the Colonial Office as it is. They complain that the Crown Agents have the ear of the Colonial Office, so to speak; 11 is not the case we know, but that is the idea, and that they are not in the position of agents; they say that **Our agents should be our servants to carry out our instructions.**

1505. More like the Agent General of a self-govern- ing colony-Yes; to do what we tell them." "There fore, to identify them with the Colonial Office still more, or to make them a Department of the Imperial Government, would, I think, intensify that feeling very much. We shall in fact cease to be their vants. My own view is that the more we are the servants of the Colonies, and the more we act in that capacity. the less friction there is likely to be with them, and that is what we endeavour to do, Wo try to settle all our points directly with them as much as possible. We do not appeal to the Secre Tary of State if we can possibly help it, nor do they. in fact the cases where reference is necessary are now very few. To identify us with the Imperial Government would. I am afraid, make the position very unsatisfactory to the Colonies from that point of view.

a