HC Deb 14 June 1906 vol 158 cc1132-4
SIR J. JARDINE

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies why the assent of the Legislative Council of Ceylon was required to the twenty years lease of the Government pearl fisheries at an annual rent of £20,660; whether he is aware that the Legislative Council was not allowed to discuss the terms of the lease at their session of February 14th, 1906; whether he is aware that the Ceylon Government share of the fishery of the year 1905 was £150,000 net; and will he say what was the net value of the fishery of the year 1906; and whether that value goes to the company.

THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (Mr. CHURCHILL, Manchester, N.W.)

As regards the first two Questions, I would refer my hon. friend to Mr. Lyttelton's despatch of December 1st, 1905, and the Secretary of State's despatch of the 9th ultimo (Nos. 24 and 30 in Cd. 2906) and also to my reply to a Question put by him in the House on April 2nd last. † The answer to the third Question is in the affirmative. The net value of this year's fishery, after allowing for the expenses of management, is approximately Rs.1,125,000 (£75,000), and of this, as far as can be calculated at present, the company will receive, after deduction of the various payments specified in the lease, about Rs.484,000 (£32.207).

SIR J. JARDINE

asked why the Legislative Council was asked to pass a law approving of the lease, and then refused permission to discuss any single detail thereof.

MR. CHURCHILL

The reasons why the Government adopted the procedure they did are fully set out in the Blue-book which has lately been presented to Parliament, and if my hon. friend will consult that I think he will find it was held by Mr. Lyttelton that it would be difficult for the Council to go into every detail in the lease, and that it would be better either to accept or reject it as a whole. † See (4) Debates, clv., 165,166. Whether that was a desirable thing or not I do not desire to express a decided opinion.

SIR J. JARDINE

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether in the negotiations with Mr. Lyttelton, between December, 1904, and January, 1906, about the lease of the Ceylon pearl fisheries, Sir J. W. Ridge-way acted at any time on behalf of the Government of Ceylon or the people of Ceylon, or solely on behalf of the Gulf Syndicate and the Ceylon Company of Pearl Fishers; whether he is aware that the capital of the syndicate was nominally £10,000, of which £1,687 10s. was called up, and that the Gulf Syndicate sold the concession, after expending £200 as cost of obtaining the concession, £106 as cost of registration, and £110 as preliminary expenses, to the Ceylon Company of Pearl Fishers for £11,000; and whether, before the twenty years lease was conceded, any intimation had been given by the authorities to the commercial centres of Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dundee, Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, Rangoon, and Singapore, of the intention to lease the Ceylon Government pearl fisheries.

MR. CHURCHILL

Sir J. W. Ridge-way did not act at any time on behalf of the Government or people of Ceylon. There appears to be no information available in the Colonial Office concerning the financial transactions mentioned by my hon. friend, and as regards his last Question, I would refer him to the Answer which I gave him on April 9th†.

*MR. SMEATON (Stirlingshire)

Arising out of that Answer, may I ask why the Government did not cause information as to the expiration of the old lease, and the proposal to grant a new twenty years lease, to be given and tenders to be asked for from the Scotch firms, which have had such a large share in the development of the resources of India and Ceylon.

MR. CHURCHILL

I believe there is some possibility—I do not know whether it amounts to a probability—of Mr. Lyttelton again becoming a Member of this House. He is much more capable of giving the hon. Gentleman the explana- † Sec (4) Debates, clv., 986, 987. tion he desires than I am. I confess I have formed views somewhat different from those which appear to have actuated Mr. Lyttelton throughout the arrangements connected with the lease—views which have become more adverse the more I have had to deal with the matter.

MR. COWAN

May I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that Sir J. W. Ridgeway is Chairman of the Ceylon Company of Pearl Fishers, and that he holds 1,000 ordinary and 1,600 deferred shares in that company, and that the deferred shares, which are of the nominal value of Is., are selling at from 10s. to 12s. each.

*MR SPEAKER

The hon. Member must give notice of that Question.

SIR J. JARDINE

May I ask why the information was given to Sir W. J. Ridgeway and the capitalists, and not to the Scotch or Indian firms?

MR. CHURCHILL

I think there are grave objections to the procedure which was followed, and that the result has not been at all satisfactory.