CLASS V.—FOREIGN AND COLONIAL SERVICES. (Hansard, 17 August 1883)

§ SIR HENRY HOLLAND
said, he saw no Estimate for the High Commissioner of the Western Pacific, Sir Arthur Gordon. This was a very important post, and he wished to know who was performing the duties?

§ MR. EVELYN ASHLEY
replied, that the Governor of Fiji was at present performing the duties; but the whole matter was under consideration.

§ MR. ARTHUR ARNOLD
said, when he last addressed the Committee on this subject, the Prime Minister said the time had not then come when they could appreciate the real value of Cyprus with regard to Egypt. The time had now come, for the crisis in Egypt was over, and it had shown that with reference to 1082 Egypt Cyprus was of no value whatever. It was of no value to the Empire in any respect. The fact that we had now practically a Naval command in Egyptian waters rendered Cyprus utterly useless. Whatever might be the policy of the Government with regard to the withdrawal of our Army, he apprehended that the time was far distant, and could not be foreseen, when the Naval power of this country would cease to be used for the protection of the Egyptian shores. The present Minister for War, when addressing his constituents in Lancashire last year, spoke of Cyprus as a useless Island. If, in the opinion of the Secretary of State for War, this Island, which was to be a "place of arms," was useless, he need not make any long appeal to the Committee in asking them to join with him in rejecting this Vote. Since he last addressed the Committee on this subject there had been another change in the Colonial Office; and he would offer his respectful congratulations to Lord Derby on the reduction he had effected in Cyprus. He had the utmost confidence in Lord Derby, and if he could believe that Lord Derby would remain at the Colonial Office for a great number of years he should feel quite sure that at no distant time the resources of that Island would be equal to its requirements, and that Lord Derby would not engage in any useless and experimental expenditure, which would only lead to unsatisfactory results. Lord Derby had, to the great service of the country, put forward a statement of what had been the real cost of Cyprus to this country during the five years of our occupation. He showed that Parliament had voted altogether £550,000 for Cyprus, or £110,000 a-year. Lord Derby also stated that he had before him Estimates for the so-called development of the Island, amounting to more than £1,000,000. Railways and harbours were recommended to Lord Derby as means of improving the Island, and what was his comment upon the proposal? He said, as so sensible a Minister would be expected to say, that it should be announced once for all that there was no thought and no prospect of Cyprus being developed by the bounty of Parliament; and he (Mr. Arthur Arnold) was perfectly convinced that so long as Lord Derby was at the Colonial Office there would be no thought of such 1083 a scheme. But Lord Derby would not always be at the Colonial Office. Some day or other there might be a change in the Government; and he should look with dismay on the future of Cyprus when it was committed to the hands of a Conservative Administration. He was fearful that if this country retained its present possession of Cyprus many years would not pass before proposals would be made for the expenditure, perhaps, of £1,000,000 in the Island; and, therefore, it was advisable on all grounds not only that the valuable economy which Lord Derby had practised should be continued, but that a policy should be adopted which would ultimately relieve us from this charge. It was highly dangerous, in face of these schemes for improving Cyprus, to keep the Island. Certainly, while it remained in our hands the Colonial Office might take means to so reduce the expenditure that it might cease to come to that House for grants. He believed such means would be taken; and he hoped the Committee would, by supporting him to-night, stimulate Lord Derby to take further steps in that direction. In order to strengthen the hands of the Colonial Office in that good work, he should oppose the Vote.

§ SIR CHAELES W. DILKE
said, the hon. Member had, at the conclusion of his speech, not informed the Committee of the policy which he wished Parliament to follow with regard to Cyprus.

§ MR. ARTHUR ARNOLD
said, he had done so last year and the year before.

§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE
said, he thought it was quite impossible to propose to hand over the population of Cyprus to Turkish rule. On the other hand, the hon. Member spoke of compounding with the Turkish Government for the surplus revenue; but if that were done it would amount to a proposal for the expenditure of a very large sum of money, and he doubted whether Parliament would be prepared to pay that large sum to the Turkish Government. Therefore, they seemed to be no more forward this year in regard to Cyprus than they were in previous years. The proposal that this money should be raised at once and paid to Turkey, even if the Turkish Government were prepared to assent to the proposition, was not one which Parliament could entertain; and, therefore, they were face to face with 1084 the question whether it was necessary to go on paying these charges for Cyprus. The Government were expecting from that Island a considerable sum of money with which to pay the working expenses; and the real question to consider was, whether the sum now asked for was excessive, and whether it was possible to carry on the government of the Island without asking Parliament for a grant? He believed that Lord Derby had made every reduction that was possible.

§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL
said, he heartily agreed in the view that Cyprus was useless, and worse than useless; but he also agreed with the right hon. Gentleman that we could not get rid of it at once. The Island was now as self-supporting as we could expect it to be. They were asked to vote £45,000, and there was also a charge of £51,000 for troops—together £96,000, which we had to pay as tribute to Turkey. Therefore, the Island was practically self-supporting. The utmost economy, under these circumstances, had been practised; and as we could not get rid of this White Elephant, he hoped the hon. Member would not press his opposition to the Vote.

§ MR. EVELYN ASHLEY
said, he wished the hon. Member would take the trouble to read the Papers before he discussed these affairs, as he would then see that the Vote asked for was £30,000, and that, as a fact, the Island was a great deal more than self-supporting. He would take care that the complimentary observations of the hon. Member should be conveyed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies; but, at the same time, he thought it was due to those who worked under the Secretary of State that he should mention the name of Mr. Fairfield, to whom they were much indebted. He had gone to Cyprus, and had taken a great deal of trouble in this matter. He had shown great ability, and by his exertions the expenditure had been largely reduced.

§ MR. ARTHUR ARNOLD
said, the previous Divisions had been so beneficial to the finances of the Island that he felt bound to repeat the process.

§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL
said, this Vote involved most serious and difficult questions, and he did not think it ought to be taken at that hour. It would be much better to defer it, and he should move that Progress be reported.

§ MR. COURTNEY
said, he hoped the hon. Member would not persist in this Motion.

§ SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS
said, he hoped the Committee would go on.

§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL
said, this Vote involved a most serious principle. Newfoundland was enjoying responsible Government. It had complete Homo Rule, except that it was linked to this country by allegiance to a common Crown. Newfoundland and the United States had a difference about the fisheries, and the Crown was called upon to go into the question. The question was gone into, and it was settled that £15,000 was to be paid. The result was that the British taxpayers, who had nothing to do with the quarrel, would have to provide by far the greater part of the sum. That was a monstrous proposition. What was to be our relation to this Colony? We were called upon to pay £11,000, and the principle would be established that the unfortunate taxpayers of this country had to pay for quarrels with which they had nothing to do. As the people of Newfoundland had a Parliament of their own, and were really the aggressors in this case, but would not pay the money, it was not right that this country should have to pay it.

§ MR. EVELYN ASHLEY
said, he regretted that the Papers with reference to this matter had not been distributed; but they would be in a day or two. No 1086 doubt, there were large principles involved in all these cases; but it was not the fact that £15,000 had to be paid. That was one of the strong grounds of the refusal to pay by Newfoundland. They said that, whether rightly or wrongly, they would have liked to have the matter settled by arbitration; but the British Government had, for reasons of their own, negotiated directly with the United States. They considered the sum awarded too much, and they fortified their view by opinions given in great detail by Judge Barry, a man of great experience and skill, who was consulted by the Colonial authorities as to what should be paid. He said the sum should be about £3,000; but, after consultation between the Colonial Office and Newfoundland, the Colonial Office undertook to pay part of the amount awarded; and he thought, on the whole, they were wise in doing so.

§ SIR HENRY HOLLAND
asked whether the points of law had been settled between Newfoundland and the United States with respect to the infringement of the local laws by the fishermen of the latter country?

§ MR. EVELYN ASHLEY
No.

§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL
said, it was most unfortunate that the Committee should have to pass this Vote without having seen the papers. It was all very well to say that the cost had been divided; the Colonies only paid a small part at their own good pleasure. But, whatever the state of the case was, what had the taxpayers of this country done that they should have to pay this money? They were simply asked to pay because other people who were concerned in the matter would not pay.