HC Deb 11 January 1894 vol 20 cc1325-7
ADMIRAL FIELD (Sussex, Eastbourne)

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will inform the House of the date of the last grant of subsidy of 80,000 rupees to the "Messageries Maritimes Company" by the Colonial Authorities at Mauritius, and the duration of such subsidy; whether lie is aware that the vessels in question are armed cruisers in disguise, with their guns on board in the hold, ready for mounting in case of war; that they are commanded and officered by naval officers and properly manned for service; whether Her Majesty's Government will take steps to prevent the granting of such subsidies in future to Foreign Shipping Companies, unless English firms decline to undertake the required service; and whether he can give an instance of an English Shipping Company receiving a subsidy from a Foreign Government under similar circumstances?

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. S. BUXTON,) Tower Hamlets, Poplar

As regards the first question, the subsidy is voted annually, and the agreement between the Colonial Government and the Company is terminable by six months' notice being given on either side. The grant for 1893 was Rs.60,000, instead of Rs.80,000. The grant for 1894 was, no doubt, voted in December last, but the Estimates for 1894 have not yet reached the Secretary of State. As regards the second question, I have already stated that Her Majesty's Government can hardly compel the Legislature of Mauritius, in which the non-official members are under the present Constitution in a majority, to subsidise any particular line. The, subsidy in question has been in existence for close on 30 years, and to veto it now would be seriously to diminish and to disorganise the communications of the Colony with Europe. As regards the third question, I am informed by the Post Office that the London, Chatham, and Dover Company is subsidised by the French Government for a daily packet service between England and France. The Peninsular and Oriental Company formerly received a subsidy from the Italian Government for a service between Italy and Egypt; and several British Steamship Companies have from time to time made, and still maintain, arrangements with Foreign Governments, whereby for services rendered they obtain monetary advantage if not an actual subsidy.

SIR J. GORST (Cambridge University)

Has the Under Secretary any objection to saying whether the official members of the Legislature of Mauritius have been instructed to vote against the subsidy; and, if not, whether they will be instructed to vote against it, and to use their influence with the unofficial members to induce them to do the same?

MR. HANBURY (Preston)

May I ask whether the ships are officered in the manner described in the hon. and gallant Member's question; and whether they are not practically cruisers in disguise?

MR. S. BUXTON

I am afraid I cannot answer the last question. As regards the question of the right hon. Gentleman, so far as I am aware, the official members of the Legislature were not instructed on the last occasion to vote against the proposed subsidy. I have already pointed out that this subsidy has been in existence for many years, and that to suddenly end it would disorganise the mail service.

ADMIRAL FIELD

Is the hon. Member aware that it is to the interest of the Company to call at Mauritius, whether they have a subsidy or not? The subsidy is entirely unnecessary, and I protest against it.

MR. S. BUXTON

I will inquire into the matter.

ADMIRAL FIELD

I beg to give notice that I will call attention to the subject on the next Colonial Vote, when I will give the hon. Member a warm half-hour.