CO885-(20-21) — Page 465

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

། ། 3།

Reference :→→

C.O.885

21 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

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

10994/11.

66

We ascertained, however, from Mr. Gibbes that recruiting for Assam is also conducted on the commission principle, and we think that this should be pointed out to the India Office. Commissions for recruiting for Assam seem very much on a par with commissions for recruiting for the Colonies.

We should therefore impress upon the India Office the view of the Indian Government that the system of payment by commission must be adhered to if emigration is to be continued "-a view shared by our recruiting agents in Calcutta, We might say that, as at present advised, the Secretary of State is disposed to share that view though he would be glad if any alternative could be devised which would not endanger recruiting, and he would ask the India Office and the Indian Government to take into consideration the whole question of recruiting, i.e., recruit- ing for Assam and Burmah, which is now, it is understood, paid for by commission, as well as the Colonies and Surinam.

If it is possible to put forward any general scheme for the recruiting of emigrants which will put an end to payment by commission in respect of all emigrants without unduly enhancing the difficulties and cost of recruiting it might well be tried, but it is essential that any such scheme should offer reasonable pros- pects of recruiting for the West Indian Colonies and Fiji, and it would therefore be desirable that the Colonial Emigration Agents at Calcutta should have an oppor- tunity of expressing their views upon any scheme which may be proposed before it is submitted to His Majesty's Government. One thing is very clear, it would be impossible to call on the Colonies concerned to accept the abolition of payment by commission so long as other Agencies which enter into competition with them are allowed to retain the system.

(2.)

The amalgamation of the two Agencies was recommended by the Committee in paragraph 81 of their Report, and the scheme is supported by Mr. Gibbes on the ground that competition between the two Agencies tends to raise the commission which is paid to recruiters, and also to lower the dignity of the Immigration Agents and of recruiting generally.

It should be explained that what is proposed is only to amalgamate the staff of the Agencies. The two depôts will and must be retained, for it would be impos- sible, in view of the divergencies of the terms offered in the various Colonies, to keep coolies who have been recruited for different Colonies in one and the same depôt at the same time.

Both the Indian Government and the India Office are in favour of the amalga- mation, and so are we The proposal is not a new one (see paragraph 81 of the Report), and has been before the various Colonies on more than one occasion. In forwarding the Report of the Committee to the Colonies a year ago, we again asked their views and endeavoured to obtain general concurrence in amalgamation. Jamaica and Fiji have agreed, but Trinidad, a former dissentient, still holds out and has now been joined by British Guiana, where, in 1906, the Planters' Associa- tion supported the proposed amalgamation, the Immigration Agent-General opposed it, and the Governor thought it would be of very doubtful advantage. present occasion the Executive Council advised against amalgamation and the On the Governor concurred. I don't think we need anticipate trouble with British Guiana, but the opposition of Trinidad is a more serious matter.

The Confidential despatch on 12518/10* shows that the renewed proposal for amalgamation has already been urged upon Trinidad with strength not unmixed with courtesy, and it will be seen from the Governor's replyt that the Immigration Com- mittee have refused to give way and have again served up the somewhat offensive resolutions which they passed on the subject in 1907.

The reason for their obstinacy is, I understand, jealousy and the fear that the interests of Trinidad should be deferred to those of other Colonies; but whatever the grounds for these objections, the situation is difficult and delicate. It is the sort of question (see 17204/07)‡ over which the nominated members might resign in a body, and it is unfortunate that we should have to give them an extra snub just at present, as they have recently received the despatch containing Mr. Harcourt's decision with regard to the incidence of the cost of immigration, a despatch which (as Mr. Grindle points out to me) they are sure to find very unpalatable.

No. 7.

+ No. 22.

‡ Not printed.

67

The line to take with Trinidad, and, in a lesser degree, with British Guiana, is that the Indian Government and India Office both desire that amalgamation should be effected, not for any financial reasons, but with a view to modifying the objections to the present system of recruiting, which are urged both by the Indian Government and the India Office; it is obvious that " individual Colonies cannot claim that their views should prevail over those of the Government of India," and unless the Govern- ments of the Colonies concerned are prepared to co-operate with the Government of India in such matters it is doubtful whether further emigration to the Colonies will be allowed. As a matter of fact the proposed amalgamation commends itself to the Emigration Agents at Calcutta, to the Colonies of Jamaica and Fiji, and to the Secretary of State, who does not see that the wishes of the Indian authorities can in any case be resisted, nor does he see any adequate grounds for resisting them, as he is satisfied that competition in recruiting is undesirable and tends to increase expense and also to lower the dignity and status of the Immigration Agents and to cast discredit upon the whole system. The amalgamation should lead to saving in both in the staff in India and in the cost of transport to British Guiana and Trinidad, expense to which Colonies it will be possible to send joint shiploads of immigrants.

The proposed appointment of a responsible Agent in the United Provinces is a corollary of the amalgamation. The Indian Government suggests that he be stationed at Benares, but Mr. Gibbes thinks it would be better to put him at Fyzabad. It is clear that a responsible white Emigration Agent in the centre of the recruiting districts should be able to keep a closer watch over sub-agents and recruiters than is at present possible, and do much to remedy such abuses in the shape of undue inter- ference as may now exist.

The decision as to the station must be left to the local authorities, but we can fairly insist that the views of our Emigration Agents should be considered before a final decision is taken.

(3)

The restriction of the area of recruiting was advocated by the Committee in paragraph 77 of their Report; their reasons are explained in paragraph 76.

Mr. Gibbes does not think there is any objection in principle, and we might answer the India Office to this effect, explaining, however, that Mr. Harcourt would wish the Emigration Agents to be fully consulted before definite restrictions are agreed upon, and if there are any towns or districts outside the limits proposed which the Emigration Agents would wish to be left open for recruiting it should be possible to meet their wishes in the matter.

II.

MINOR QUESTIOns affecting aLL THE COLONIES ARE—

(1) Proposed periodical ( quinquennial) visits of inspection by Indian

officials to the Colonies employing emigrants.

It will be seen (paragraph 11 of the despatch) that the Indian Government demur, and don't think there is a case for sending inspecting officers at the expense of the Indian taxpayer except when special circumstances arise.

The India Office, however, favour systematic visits in the interests of the emigrants, and think such a scheme may help to forestall criticism. My only anxiety is lest such a charge on the Indian taxpayer may enhance "the rising opposition to Indian emigration "; but I think we must risk that, and readily fall in with quin- quennial visits or any other arrangement that the India Office may decide on.

(2) Paragraph 9 of the despatch from India. Those of us in this Office who are responsible for supervising indentured Indian emigration will, no doubt, continue to examine the annual reports, watch changes in the emigration laws, and consider whether they should be generally adopted, but we should certainly agree to the additional safeguard of an interchange of all reports and legislation affecting indentured labour between the four Colonies concerned. instructed accordingly.

The Governors should be

(3) Uniform immigration reports. As to this see Trinidad 25944/11.*

have asked the various Colonies how the Committee's proposals (para- We graph 439) can best be adopted without undue increase in cost. When

• Not printed.

39391

E 2