373
C. 52056/28 [No. 35].
12
No. 5.
STRAITS SETTLEMENTS.
THE OFFICER ADMINISTERING THE GOVERNMENT
to
THE SECRETARY OF STATE.
(Received 9.2 a.m., 10th November, 1928.)
TELEGRAM.
10th November. No. 782. Your telegram of 7th November*. My telegram of 6th Novembert. Resolutions were:
Begins. (1) That this meeting supports the Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council in their view that under law as it now stands this Colony is liable to contribute to local defence only and that the law has not been observed by the Imperial Government;
(2) that this meeting is of the opinion that the Colony should for a period of five years from the 1st day of January, 1929, contribute annually to Imperial funds the sum of $3,600,000 for cost of garrison stationed in the Colony for its defence; (3) that contribution of the Colony to Imperial funds for the cost of the garrison stationed in the Colony for its defence should be fixed quinquennially after consultation and agreement with representatives of unofficial opinion of the Colony;
(4) that this meeting is also in favour of contributing a further sum towards the cost of Imperial defence to be fixed quinquennially after consultation and agreement with representatives of unofficial opinion of the Colony. Ends. Meeting presided over by R. M. Williams, President of the Straits Settlements and Singapore Association, supported by J. G. Campbell, ex-President of the Straits Settle- ments and Singapore Association who proposed the resolutions, Song ong Siang, who seconded was six years member of the Legislative Council and was awarded C.B.E., see your telegram of 2nd June, 1927. J. Bagnall, Chairman of the Singapore Chamber of Commerce and Elected Member of the Legislative Council also spoke in support. Consider that the meeting was representative of general public opinion. Press account is being sent to you. Similar resolutions were passed at meeting of Indian Merchants' Association. Protest by Unofficial Members of the Legislative Council at meeting on 29th October, 1928, is being forwarded to you under standing rule No. XVII.
13
17 per cent, as a final settlement of this vexed question, then, on the understanding (1) that, with this further safeguard of the Colony's interest, there will be no question as to how far the troops in the Straits Settlements are there for local or for Imperial purposes, or of excluding any part of their cost from calculation of the Colonial military contribution, (2) that you agree that the circumstances are so different in the cases of the Straits and Hong Kong that this concession to the former will offer no ground for a similar concession to the latter, if such should be claimed by Hong Kong, I would accept, subject to the concurrence of the Chancellor of the Excheqer.
I am sending a copy of this correspondence to the Chancellor.
C. 52056/28 [No. 43].
Yours, &c.,
No. 7.
L. WORTHINGTON EVANS.
MR. L. S. AMERY (SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE Colonies)
to
SIR L. WORTHINGTON EVANS (SECRETARY OF STATE FOR War). [Answered by No. 8.]
Downing Street, 12th December, 1928.
MY DEAR WORTHY,
I have your letter of 30th November* about the Straits contribution. I am quite ready to put it to Clifford that the Straits should make the offer of 17 per cent., provided that we can be sure that the offer, if made, would be acceptable to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. As you have sent him the correspondence, perhaps you would be good As regards the two points which you mention, I quite enough to get his concurrence. agree that the concession to the Straits, if made, will afford no ground for a similar concession to Hong Kong. On the other point I agree also, if it is understood that there is no question of withdrawing the exclusion, on which we have agreed, of the capital cost of works for the Base, including a refund of the payments already made.
Yours, &c.,
L. S. AMERY.
C. 52056/28 [No. 42].
No. 6.
SIR L. WORTHINGTON EVANS (SECRETARY OF State for War)
to
MR. L. S. AMERY (SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES). [Answered by No. 7.]
MY DEAR LEO,
War Office, Whitehall, S.W.1, 30th November, 1928.
I have your letter of 26th Novembert, about the proposed reduction from 20 per cent. to 17 per cent. of the revenue-limit on the Straits military contribution. I have tried to look at the matter from the point of view of the Colonial Authorities, and, as I said in my letter of the 21st§, I can quite understand that they may regard such a reduction as not unreasonable in the circumstances, having regard to probable increases in the garrison in connexion with the Naval Base or with the strategic situation generally in the Far East. I cannot make the offer you suggest, indeed I am sure it would not result in a settlement. As you rightly say you want to put yourselves in the position of con- vincing the local people that you have done your best, but you cannot be sure that they will be satisfied if I made the offer.
Is it not much more likely that any offer I may make will be used by them as a jumping-off ground? I see no logical ground for altering the present agreement but if you, with the concurrence of the local people, put forward an offer from them of
* C. 52056/28 [No. 34]: not printed.
C. 52056/28 [No. 401: not printed...
† C. 52056/28 [No. 89]: not printed.
§ C. 52056/28 [No. 39]: not printed.
C. 62093/29 [No. 2].
No. 8.
SIR L. WORTHINGTON EVANS (SECRETARY of State for War)
to
MR. L. S. AMERY (SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES).
MY DEAR LEO,
War Office, Whitehall, S.W.1, 8th March, 1929. You wrote to me on 12th Decembert saying you were ready to put to Clifford the proposal that the Straits Settlements should offer to continue to pay a military contribution under the existing Ordinance, subject only to (1) exclusion from cost of garrison of initial capital expenditure on the new Naval Base, (2) reduction of revenue-limit from 20 to 17 per cent., provided that the offer, if made, would be acceptable to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I have now heard from the Chancellor that he will be prepared to accept á settlement on these lines, and shall be glad if you will now approach Clifford. It would, of course, be understood, as I said in my letter to you of 21st November‡ that this would clear the ground entirely of any controversy as to how far the troops in the Straits Settle- ments were there for Colonial or Imperial purposes.
Yours, &c.,
L. WORTHINGTON EVANS.
* No. 6.
t
↑ No. 7.
C. 52056/28 [No. 39]: not printed.
I
F
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference →→
TREENIC.O. 882/11
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDONİ
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.