§ 1. THE Company to construct a second Canal, as far as possible parallel to the present Canal, of width and depth sufficient to meet the re- 1090 quirements of maritime construction, settled in agreement with the English Directors.
§ 2. The second Canal to be completed, if possible, by the end of 1888.
§ The next paragraph relates to the rates and dues and the dividends of the Company; and in explanation I may say that the dividend for last year was above 16 per cent. and that for this year is expected to approach 19 per cent. The present tonnage rate is 10 francs 50 cents, falling to 10 francs next year. The pilotage rate averages about 75 cents per ton, and the tonnage rate on ships in ballast is 10 francs.
§
3. The Company to reduce the dues and tolls as follows:—
From the 1st January 1884, ships in ballast to pay 2½ francs per ton less than ships with cargoes.
After the profits (interest and dividend) have been distributed, at the rate of 21 per cent., half the pilotage dues to be remitted from the following 1st January.
After the profits, as above, are 23 per cent., the rest of the pilotage dues to be similarly remitted.
After the profits, as above, are 25 per cent., the transit dues of 10 francs per ton to be reduced by 50 centimes, to 9 francs 50 centimes.
After the profits, as above, are 27½ per cent., a further 50 centimes to be taken off.
After the profits, as above, are 30 per cent., a further 50 centimes to be taken off.
For every additional 3 per cent. of distributed profits, 50 centimes to be taken off, to a minimum of five francs per ton.
§ 4. No two reductions of pilotage or transit dues to take place in the same year.
§ 5. If the distributed profits should fall off, an increase of transit dues to take place according to the some scale, but no two increases to take place in one year.
§ I now come to the arrangements for increasing the English share in the management of the Canal.
§ 6. On the first occasion of a vacancy one of the English Directors to be nominated by the President for election as Vice-President, and thereafter one of the English Directors to be always a Vice-President.
§ 7. The English Director now acting as Honorary Member of the Comité de Direction, to become a regular Member when vacancies permit, and thereafter one of the English Directors to be always a Member of the Comité.
§ 8. Two of the English Directors to be always Members of the Finance Commission.
§ 9. An English Officer, selected by Her Majesty's Government, to be appointed by the Board "Inspecteur de la Navigation." His functions to be determined in agreement with the English Directors.
1091§ 10. The Company to engage, in future, a fair proportion of English Pilots.
§ I now come to the advantages to be secured by the English Government for the Company.
§ 11. Her Majesty's Government to use their good offices to obtain the necessary concession—
- (a.) For the land required for the new Canal and its approaches.
- (b.) For the Sweet Water Canal between Ismailia and Port Said, on the basis already accepted by Her Majesty's Government.
- (c.) For the extension of the term of the original concession for so many years as will make a new term of 99 years from the date of the completion of the Second Canal. In consideration of such extension the Company to pay annually from the commencement of the now term of 99 years, to the Egyptian Treasury, 1 per cent. of the total net profits, after the statutory reserve.
§ 12. Her Majesty's Government to lend to the Company, by instalments, as required for the construction of the works, including the Sweet Water Canal, not more than 8,000,000 l. at 3¼ per cent. interest, with a sinking fund, calculated to repay the capital in 50 years, such sinking fund not to commence until after the completion of the works.
§ 13. These Heads of Agreement to be at once communicated to the House of Commons. They will be developed in full detail in a resolution of the Council of Administration of the Company, the terms of which will have been settled in accord with Her Majesty's Government. That resolution will be communicated to Her Majesty's Government for formal acceptance. The agreement, however, and the acceptance of the Resolution, will have no effect until the necessary authority has been obtained from Parliament.
| (Signed) | Pour le President, |
| C. RIVERS WILSON. | CH. A. DE LESSEPS. |
| J. STOKES. | |
| London, 10 July 1883. |
§ I shall lay this Paper on the Table to-day, and in a few days my noble Friend the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs will lay on the Table a Report by the English Directors of the Suez Canal, explanatory of the Agreement.
§ MR. BOURKEOf course, Sir, it would be impossible for me to enter upon any discussion with respect to the very interesting and important statement which has just been made by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Perhaps the House will allow me to make one remark, and it is this. I am quite sure that any proposition which comes from Her Majesty's Government which is calculated to de- 1092 velop the policy of Lord Beaconsfield with regard to the Suez Canal will be received with satisfaction by this side of the House. [Cries of "Order!"]
§ MR. SPEAKERI wish to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that there is at present no Question before the House. If the right hon. Gentleman desires to ask any Question he can do so.
§ MR. BOURKEYes, Sir; that is the only remark I wish to make. I think I shall be perfectly in Order in asking a few Questions of the Government which it is impossible to consider they are not at the present moment quite in a position to answer. The right hon. Gentleman has said that the English Government is to use its influence to obtain a concession. I should like to know with whom the British Government is going to use its influence? I found this Question chiefly on the despatch of Lord Granville written some nine years ago, which contains this paragraph—
The Company is, as Her Majesty's Government consider, an Egyptian Company, and the rights over it of the Porte are undoubted.Therefore, I wish to know whether the negotiations which Her Majesty's Government are going to enter upon for a new concession are to be negotiations between the Porte and Her Majesty's Government? That is the first Question. The second Question I wish to ask is, what security has been taken against any Foreign Power or Powers stopping our communications with India, China, and the East viâ the Suez Canal? The third Question is, will it be within our rights of peace to take military measures for the protection of the Canal? I wish also to know whether the new Canal is to be the property of the old Company, and if the seat of the Company is still to be in Paris; whether the French and Egyptian Courts are to have jurisdiction over the Canal, which is about to be constructed substantially with British capital? Then, are both Canals to revert to the Egyptian Government at the end of the concession which was alluded to by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the original concession being for 89 years? Will the arrangements that have been entered into between Her Majesty's Government and M. de Lesseps preclude any other Company of English capitalists or others from obtaining, or 1093 endeavouring to obtain, a concession of another Canal? Lastly, after all the sacrifices made by England, are we to understand that the relations of the Canal Company to Great Britain will remain substantially the same as those which have hitherto governed it, and that British capital is to be raised for making a new Canal on foreign soil without the security of Sovereign rights for the protection of the Canal?
MR. GLADSTONEI think, Sir, the right hon. Gentleman can hardly suppose that these Questions, relating to matters of the gravest importance, and announced viva voce across the Table, can be answered specifically at the present moment. As far as I could gather the purport of them, three of them related to matters that are germane to the Agreement which has been provisionally formed, and three of them relate to questions of high policy connected with the general position of the Canal. As regards these questions of high policy, it is quite obvious, I think, that we should have communication with my noble Friend the Foreign Secretary of State before attempting to answer them. As far as regards the questions relating to the position of the Canal, I believe I may say this, that the reversion of the Canal to the Egyptian Government will remain unchanged, as under the present Agreement, and that the domicile of the Canal Company will continue to be in Paris, as it is at the present time, although with enlarged arrangements with regard to the introduction of the British element into the management of the Canal. With regard to the question whether another Canal could be formed, that, of course, is a question of high policy; but there is nothing in the arrangement with M. de Lesseps which in any manner bears upon that subject. I speak now, of course, of another Canal under separate management, and representing separate interests of a totally distinct character—because it is well understood that the construction, at the earliest possible moment, of a second Canal for the purpose of forwarding the traffic is, in truth, the basis and foundation of the arrangement now made. Perhaps, with regard to these Questions, this answer may be sufficient; but, if not, I should ask the right hon. Gentleman to be good enough to give Notice.
§ MR. BOURKEI will put the Questions on the Paper, and I will consult the convenience of the Government as to when they would like to answer them.
§ SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEWhen do the Government propose to submit these arrangements for the ratification of the House?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)I shall lay this Paper on the Table to-day, as I said before; and I shall lay on the Table a more extensive Report by the British Directors in a day or two. The form in which the House will be asked to express its approval will be on the appropriation of a sum not exceeding £8,000,000, and then the whole question can be raised.
§ SIR STAEFORD NORTHCOTEIs it to be a Vote of Parliament for the £8,000,000?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)Yes, certainly; the sum must be voted by Parliament.
§ MR. NORWOODI wish to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether I am correct in understanding that the Agreement does not provide for any increase of the English Directors upon the Directorate of the Suez Canal? I understood that the Vice President of the Directorate would be an Englishman; but I did not understand that the number of our Directors, which is only three in a body of 24, was to be increased.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFI wish to ask whether it is not intended to increase the voting power of the English Directors of the Canal; and whether you are actually restricting the number of English Directors of the Canal to the number fixed by Lord Beaconsfield's Government—namely, three? I also wish to ask as to the manner in which this money is to be raised—whether it is to be added to the National Debt of this country by a loan, and then to be lent to the Suez Canal Company, or whether you have any other means of obtaining the money without adding to the National Debt; also, whether there is anything in the shape of a guarantee to be given; whether, if you do not lend the money actually, you are supposed to guarantee the loan? If you guarantee the loan, if not raised in this country, you can do that without applying to Parliament. And that, I think, would be 1095 most objectionable. The English Government guaranteed the loan raised by the Danubian Commission for works on the Danube without coming before Parliament. The sum was certainly small; but the principle was established that the Government could guarantee a loan without coming to Parliament.
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)On the financial question, I may say that the money will be obtained very similarly to the way in which it was obtained for the purchase of the Suez Canal Shares. There will be no addition to taxation; but a loan will be raised as on the former occasion. With respect to the suggestion of the hon. Member for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drumrnond Wolff), that we could avoid coming to Parliament by guaranteeing a loan—in the first place, I doubt the fact; and, in the second place, I greatly doubt the policy, because we certainly could not obtain the money at anything like so good a percentage of interest if we guaranteed it, instead of raising it. As to the Question of the hon. Gentleman behind me (Mr. Norwood), we carefully considered the point about adding to the number of Directors, and it was, in our opinion, of no material advantage to this country to add to the number of our Directors unless we had insisted, which would not have been reasonable, on obtaining an absolute majority of the whole Directors. We thought that the present arrangement, under which we have a limited number of Directors, with the enlarged function proposed to be given to them, was very much better for this country than a large body of English Directors. Of course, when we come to the full enjoyment of our Shares in the year 1894, the whole question of representation of this country will be different; but I adhere to the opinion which I have already expressed, that it would be impolitic to insist on any large number of Directors.
MR. CHARLES PALMEEIs it intended to administer all the affairs of this Company in Paris, or will there be a Board of Directors appointed to sit in London, so that any grievances of English shipowners may be laid before them in this country, instead of in France?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)No; we have 1096 no intention of proposing any alteration of the domicile of the Directorate. In our opinion, it would be extremely inconvenient, and not of the least advantage.
§ MR. ARTHUR ARNOLDDid I understand the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say that the new Canal would be the same depth as the existing Canal?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)No, Sir; my words were—
Of width and depth sufficient to meet the requirements of maritime construction, settled in agreement with the English Directors.
SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFEWith respect to the voting power, we own, I think, one-half of the Shares of the Canal, and have only 10 votes at a general meeting. I wish to ask whether, considering that we have half of the Canal Shares, and are to advance the whole capital for the new Canal, the Government do not think that we are entitled to a larger voting power?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)That will not be possible, because our Shares do not bear coupons. We do not propose to change the terms of the present concession; but, of course, in 1894 we shall enter upon the full rejouissance of our Shares.
§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFsaid, no Shareholder, whatever the number of Shares he held, could have more than 10 votes, and asked whether the Government were not to have more than 10 votes—a larger voting power at general meetings?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)I said at the outset I would not introduce any matter of argument, and I think the Question of the hon. Member is an arguable one. When the proper time comes all these questions can be fully discussed. Meanwhile, I merely state that we do not propose to alter the present arrangements in this respect.
§ MR. MONKI wish to ask whether, as a matter of fact, the present Directors have no voting power whatever in respect to one-half of the capital which has no coupons, but that a certain number of Shares had to be purchased before the Directors exercised the right of voting?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)Speaking from memory, I think that is so.
§ MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTHow many Members will be upon the Finance Committee?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)Two English Members will be upon the Finance Committee; but the total number I cannot at this moment distinctly state.
§ MR. MAGNIACWill the British Government have power to interfere with respect to the construction of the Canal—to see, in the interests of this country, that the money is properly spent?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)I have stated that the new construction will be settled in agreement with the British Directors. One of these is a very distinguished engineer, and I think that the hon. Member will feel satisfied that he will take all the necessary precautions.
§ MR. LABOUCHEREIs the House to understand that this large sum of money is to be handed over en bloc to the Company, whether it is all required or not for the purposes of constructing the new Canal?
§ THE CHANCELLOR Of THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS)I am afraid that the hon. Member did not follow the words of the Agreement as I read them, which are—
The Government to lend to the Company by instalments, as required, for the construction of the works,a sum not exceeding £8,000,000. Of course, the money will only be advanced from time to time on the report of the responsible authority that it is required for the purpose.