SAN FRANCISCO SERVICE-TELEGRAPH CABLE CHARGES. (CONFERENCE BY TELEGRAPH.)

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1876 Session I, F-03a

F.—3 a.

1876. NEW ZEALAND.

SAN FRANCISCO SERVICE-TELEGEAPH CABLE CHARGES. (CONFERENCE BY TELEGRAPH.)

Presented to both Houses of the General Assembly by Command of His Excellency.

Conference conducted by Telegraph, on Saturday, the 29th January, 1876, between the Hon. Sir J. Vogel, K.C.M.G., at Melbourne, and the Hon. John Robertson, Colonial Secretary, and the Hon. J. R Burns, PostmasterGeneral of New South Wales, at Sydney. On January 28th, Sir Julius Vogel telegraphed from Melbourne to Hon. J. Robertson, stating that he was precluded by ill health from carrying out his intention of visiting Sydney, and suggesting that, under the circumstances, their contemplated Conference might take place by telegram. Mr. Robertson concurred in Sir Julius's suggestion, and named noon on Saturday, the 29th January, 1876, as the time that would suit him for conferring ; and he requested Sir Julius to make the necessary arrangements with the Victorian Government for the uninterrupted use of the telegraph wires of that colony. Sir Julius Vogel concurred; aDd the Hon. Mr. Burns arranged for the free and exclusive use of the New South Wales telegraph. The following subjects (amongst others) were dealt with:— Sir Julius Vooel's List. Outstanding accounts between the two Colonies. Modifications of San Francisco Service. Charge to Fiji for use of Service. New Cable charges. Me. Robertson's List. Overlapping of temporary and permanent Services. Charter of " City of Melbourne." , Case of " Vasco da Gama." Do. " Colima." Delay in transit of mails across the American Continent. Our claim under the Russell-Samuel Agreement. [SIR JULIUS VO GEL'S LIST.] OUTSTANDING ACCOUNTS BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND AND NEW SOUTH WALES. Sir Julius Vogel to the Hon. John Robertson and the Hon. J. F. Bubns. We claim half of three thousand four hundred and fifty-seven pounds ten shillings—namely, seventeen hundred and twenty-eight pounds fifteen shillings. Tour claim is for half fourteen

3?—3a.

2

thousand six hundred and ninety-eight pounds two shillings and tenpence—namely, seven thousand three hundred and forty-nine pounds one shilling and fivepence. The difference is five thousand six-hundred and twenty pounds six shillings and fivepence. I propose to forward you this from Wellington; but ask you to allow me to reserve the right to move you to reconsider your account against us, should Mr. Eussell think any of the items are outside the intention of the agreement. In such case, we would argue out the matter. Answer. We have not all particulars of your claim ; believe ours to be correct. What we have is an account up to the 29th May, amounting to one thousand nine hundred and seven pounds ten shillings, less one-half. We wrote your Government respecting this 2nd July, taking exception to some of the items, and have not heard from your Government on this subject since then. Tour account includes charges for services on the West Coast as well as on the E*ast. Tour right under clause 6of agreement only extended to branch service between Port Chalmers and Auckland. Tour Government claim services from Manukau to Port Chalmers, and from Nelson to Hokitika. Content to leave this matter until you return to Wellington. From Sir Julius Vogel. We abandon the charge of which you complain. The account I have referred to excludes them; I will send it on. MODIFICATION OF SEEVICE. From Sir Julius Vogel. Otje Parliament wishes service modified, if acceptable to you. I do not see how it is to be done with the views I believe you hold. In my own opinion, the calling at Fiji is dangerous, unnecessary, and likely to break the service down. I would negotiate on the basis of the changes being made at the Bay of Islands or Auckland. There is another plan which possibly might prove acceptable to us, but I could not do more than discuss it. I allude to a plan by which we would have a branch boat, say two thousand tons, to and from Fiji and Port Chalmers. Tou would have main boats both ways, and should pay from five thousand to ten thousand pounds more than at present. We should have merely a mail service, and should not pay more than fifteen thousand pounds. The Contractors should reduce the cost to about sixty-five thousand pounds. This plan is, I think, like one proposed by Parkes. Tou would receive contributions from other colonies, we of course having our postages both ways. I only suggest this :I do not know if it would be acceptable to my Governmont. Of course, if change bo not made with joint consent, we support and adhere to contract as it stands. Answer. We are content with the contract as it is, if properly carried out. If you desire any change, it might be better to leave the matter until you can write from New Zealand. From Sir Julius Vogel. So let it be. If you are content with it as it is, Ido not see that we can propose anything that would suit you. After time, you may see how objectionable the Fiji route is. I have only to add, that I hope you will compel Contractors to adhere to letter of contract where our interests are concerned as well as yours. Answer. We will insist contract being carried out as you wish. Eely upon it, your interests will be regarded as rigidly as, if not more so than, our own. > CHAEGE TO FIJI AND NEW CALEDONIA FOE USE OF SEEVICE. From Sir Julius Vogel. Fiji Service. I should be glad to have your views. I think the Colony of Fiji and Home Government should pay a net amount of about five thousand pounds to us, and Fiji keep the postage. Answer. We think with you that Fiji should contribute, and will communicate with Secretary of State for the Colonies. From the Hon. John Eobertson and the Hon. J. F. Burns. We have despatch from Governor of Fiji, and other correspondence on subject of Fiji postages. Propose that Fiji pay same rate as other colonies for use of service, so long as no subsidy is paid by her. Do you dissent, or shall we insist on the five thousand pounds ? Answer. I think Fiji is different from other colonies, as boats call there, and should prefer stipulating for fixed sum. As a matter of fact, the cost of calling at Fiji is about fifteen thousand pounds a year, so that five thousand is very little, and should be increased as the colony progresses. New Caledonia might give five thousand, and send mails across to Fiji. This would materially reduce our cost.

E.—3A;

3

Prom the Hon. John Robertson and the Hon. J. F. Burns. We will endeavour to carry out your wishes in both regards, and decline the postage. We assume that we are to negotiate on behalf of New Zealand as well as our own Government ? Answers Yes, that is what I propose. * NEW CABLE CHARGES. Prom Sir Julius Vogel. Wiiat do you propose about charges for telegrams at Sydney ? Cooper agreed to make a charge of sixpence a telegram for delivery, the Contractors to deliver them to your messengers at Sydney. You have, I understand, objected to the Contractors going to Sydney. What do you propose about charge for telegrams to Sydney ? Answer. Telegraph Act would not permit line Botany to Sydney in hands of a company. We are constructing a line, and propose to charge sixpence each way for messages ten words, which will barely cover expenses. This will include delivery charges. Do you approve ? Prom Sir Julius Vogel. Hah I known at the time I was negotiating with Cooper, that there was an impediment to going to Sydney with line, I would have agreed to place Sydney on same footing as elsewhere. I think the compromise you now propose very reasonable, but would suggest half-penny a word, for reasons which apply to all telegrams, and which I am prepared to bring before you, as follow: — The cable charges between New South Wales and New Zealand will include address and signature, whilst ordinary charges do not. Would it not be better, therefore, to make the land charge for these messages one penny a word, getting the other colonies to do the same ? Of course, when messages go past Sydney, I understand the penny rate only is to be charged, and not the additional half-penny, and the rate for English messages is to be the same as that charged from Melbourne to Adelaide. Answer. As the cable rate is a ten-word tariff, it would cause confusion in accounts to charge a word rale on land and ten-word rate for the cable. Would prefer the sixpenny rate unless Company will consent to word-by-word tariff, when will be prepared to adopt your suggestion. Hope you will agree to this. The Company could not bring the cable into Sydney, and it would not be safe to lay a subterranean line. The through rate to other colonies, including Darwin, will not be altered. From Sir Julius Vogel. I do not think you see the point of their ten words including address and signature, whilst colonial rates do not. However, we can always communicate when line is laid. Meanwhile, you might telegraph to Company suggesting word-rate of ninepence. In any case, I,will agree to your proposal, sixpence ten words Sydney, and I presume half-penny a word additional. Say if this is so, and also that you do not propose to charge the Sydney rate on messages going past Sydney. That would be contrary to agreement in every way. Answer. Quite understood point. Ten words, including address, sixpence, and half-penny for additional word, satisfactory. This does not apply to messages going past Sydney. * The following telegram, and extract from a letter, are reprinted from F. —3 (Papers relating to the San Francisco Service), which see, for further relating to the matter : — The Hon. the Colohial Secretary, New South Wales, to the lion. Sir J. VoaEL. Sydney, 27th February. Burns and I overlooked, in our telegraphic conversation with you on 29th January last, that our predecessors in office somewhat committed this colony to carry Fiji mails for postage ouly. Copy of the correspondence per next mail. Hon. Sir J. Vogel, Wellington. Colonial Seceetary. Extract from Letter dated February 28th, from the Hon. Sir J. Vogei to the Hon. the Postmaster-General, New South Wales. " Since the above was written, I have received a telegram from the Hon. Mr. Eobertson, copy of which I enclose. I understand from this, that your Government consider the conditions with Fiji are somewhat affected by the action of the preceding Government; but Ido not understand Mr. Robertson to consider the question so settled as to preclude your negotiating as agreed upon at the recent conference by telegraph. Possibly, Fiji might prefer paying a stated sum ; and any understanding with the late Government could scarcely have been so definite as to preclude consideration of this fact, ■which arose after that Government's retirement, that the Contractors are willing to take £15,000 less if the calling at Fiji is abandoned. The eowespondenee which was sent to us from your colony on the subject, together with that in our own offices, does not lend to the conclusion that the consideration of the subject is closed. Writing of that arrangement on the 26th January, 1875, Mr. Tilley, the Secretary to the London Post Office, spoke of it as a temporary measure. Mr. Samuel, in his memorandum of the 31st July, 1874, which was forwarded to us by the Hon. Mr. Parkes, stated that it would 'bo necessary to obtain, before any decision can be arrived at/ the consent of New Zealand to his proposal. To this wo replied, ' We concur in the recommendation made by the Hon. Mr. Samuel in regard to the carriage of Fiji mails as a temporary arrangement ; but suggest that, if after a year or so Kandavau should continue to be a port of call for the Pacific mail steamers, the Fiji Government should be required to pay a subsidy for the advantage conferred upon those islands.' Since .then Fiji has become a British colony, and the extra coat of calling there is £15,000. Surely the time has arrived when the temporary arrangement should be superseded. Eecent letters from the Colonial Office treat the question as open, and there was also an invitation to postpone dealing with it till after Sir A. Gordon's arrival. lam under the impression yonr predecessors retired before the Governor of Fiji took office, so that in all ways it seems to me you are free to act; and this colony decidedly desires a fixed contribution from Fiji."

F.—3a

4

RECAPITULATION TELEGRAM. From Sir Julius Vogel. Following I understand to be decisions. Am I right ? 1. I am to send on account to Sydney. 2. You are not prepared to agree to modifications of service, but if we think fit we can further communicate with you on subject. I may say, however, that if you obtain what we have agreed to from Fiji and New Caledonia, our Parliament will be satisfied. 3. You are to negotiate to obtain five thousand pounds from Fiji and five thousand pounds from New Caledonia. 4. You agree to sixpenny rate between Sydney and landing-place, but rate from landingplace to other parts to be ordinary rate. 5. You are to suggest to Company ninepenny word rate. Answeh. Youb, recapitulation of what we have agreed to is correct. [THE HON. JOHN ROBERTSON'S LIST.] OVERLAPPING- OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SERVICES. From the Hon. John Robertson and the Hon. J. F. Burns. All that we have to say in reference to overlapping is to explain the state of matters, which is as follows: — On 22nd May, 1875, the then existing contract with the A.S.N. Company having nearly terminated [the last steamer being appointed to leave Sydney 3rd July], the Government telegraphed to Sir D. Cooper to ask Mr. Russell whether if willing, in view of delay in taking permanent contract, to renew temporary contract; if so, for how long. On 26th May, reply received that Russell willing to extend temporary contract, but wishes to delay fixing exact time until tenders opened in London, Ist June. On 17th June, A.S.N. Company pressing for decision as to whether we intended renewing contract, the Government, in the same telegram which authorized the acceptance of Company's tender, informed Sir D. Cooper that we intended to-morrow renewing temporary contract until November. Not uutil the 24th was the Government advised that the Pacific Company's tender was accepted, and on the 26th we were told that Contractors would commence service in November. Owing to a legal difficulty, the contract had to be re-executed, and this was not done until 19th July, The telegram from this Government approving of the new arrangement [Pacific Company as Contractors, Elder and Macgregor sureties], stated that permanent service must not clash with temporary. Owing to some at present unexplained circumstance, the commencement of the permanent contract was so arranged in England as to clash with the extended temporary service as regards the departure from San Francisco, the time appointed for the sailing of the two last steamers from that port being Bth November and Gth December, the time for the first two leaving under the permanent contract being 10th November and Bth December. The agreement, moreover, only provides for the contract commencing 15th November, and yet, under arrangement above described, it was made to commence on Bth November. This clashing will involve a loss to the two Governments of £6,119 4s. Sd., that is, if the subsidy of the " Colima," the first overlapping boat of the Pacific Company, is paid. This matter having been settled satisfactorily by New Zealand paying its share of the overlapping trips of the A.S.N. Company, we think it desirable to inform you of the facts. Answee. I think we need not revive the subject of the overlapping. It arose through the great difficulty that was inseparable from a distant negotiation. The Contractors' representative in England was very reasonable. He offered to do service for nothing till proper boats ready. Breakdown of cable delayed this, and when Watt wrote you about it he offered to charter you " Cyphrenes." This was not intended. lam sure the Contractors would have paid everything until they were ready with proper arrangements. Under the proposal to which I refer, subsidy to " Colima" should not be paid, and you should telegraph to that effect to Mackrell. Suggest also that contract commence with outgoing boat. Mackrell would communicate with both Cooper and Russell. From the Hon. John Robertson and the Hon. J. F. Bubns. Content to let overlapping matter rest, and can appreciate the difficulties to which you allude; but the only gratuitous offer we had was to convey the October mails from Frisco by the " Vasco da Gama." We shall telegraph to Mackrell, as you suggest, that contract should commence with outgoing mail. Answee. I HEFEit to Watt's letter to Postmaster-General, Sydney, 10th November, the Company's representative's offer to convey the mails as best he could, free of cost, until they could carry out arrangements properly, which he expected to be able to do this month. CHARTER, OF THE "CITY OF MELBOURNE." From the Hon. John Robertson rind the Hon. J. F. Bubns. In reference to the " City of Melbourne," we are advised of her safe arrival at Frisco. Anticipate she will bring mails from thence, 2nd February. We telegraphed Forster and Cooper, London, advising

5

E.—3a

she was chartered owing to Contractors' default, " Colima " having broken down, and that she would be available for return mails, 2nd February, but have received no reply. Forster and Cooper requested to inform Contractors. "We informed Contractors' agent here in similar terms, but he declined to waive Contractors' right to bring return mails unless we indemnified Contractors against consequences arising from failure to supply vessel on that date. Can you give any information in relation to this matter ? Answeb. I know nothing of this matter. CASES OF THE "VASCO DA GAMA," "COLIMA," AND " CITY OF SAN FEANCISCO." From the Hon. John Eobeetson and the Hon. ,T. F. Buens. Case of "Vasco da Gama."—This vessel, which only arrived on the 13th November, after negotiations had been commenced to procure another vessel in her stead, was announced to go via Auckland; permission to go that route having been first applied for by Mr. Hall, and refused, and permission to employ the " Cyphrenes " for that trip in lieu of the " Vasco da Gama " having also been applied for and refused. This Government had determined not to recognize the " Vasco da Gama " as a mail ship, so long as she was announced to go by an unauthorized route, and accordingly did not issue the usual mail notice; and although communications passed between the Post Office and Mr. Hall, the vessel continued to be advertised via Auckland. Hall wrote a letter on the 18th November (copy of which, and of all correspondence relating to the performance of services, have been sent to New Zealand), stating that he was prepared to despatch the vessel at the appointed time with mails to Fiji and San Francisco ; and the usual notice was thereupon issued. The vessel, however, did go via Auckland, from thence to Fiji, and on to San Francisco ; and the question to be determined is, whether the subsidy, less fines for the delay caused to the Sydney mails by the divergence to Auckland, is to be paid or not. The question of payment of the " Colima " subsidy remains to be decided. She occupied fortyfive days in the passage (having broken down), and incurred penalties on account of the New South Wales Government, amounting to J6I,4SS, or within £41 of the subsidy, besides having come by the unauthorized route of Auckland. The enforcement of penalties rests with the Postmaster-General of the colony affected by the irregularities; but in this and other cases where unapproved vessels have been used, or unauthorized route followed, it would seem desirable that the two colonies should act in unison. What is your opinion ? Case of the " City of San Francisco."—This vessel (the second overlapping boat) arrived here on the 7th January ; but although she, like the " Colima," came via Auckland, the voyage was performed within contract time, twenty-seven days. She did not bring the mails, they having been forwarded by the " Mikado." It may be pointed out, that the irregularities on the part of Contractors hare been more serious as regards New Zealand than even as regards this colony, inasmuch as, with one single exception, the service between Auckland and Port Chalmers has never been attempted. The exception was in the case of the " Cyphrenes," an unapproved vessel, which broke down soon after leaving there. The Postmaster-General of New Zealand, it may be added, has written expressing his concurrence in the action taken here in reference to the before-mentioned matters. Will you say what your views are as to the payment of the subsidy in this case ? You will, of course, bear in mind that each Government has already paid the " Mikado " subsidy for conveying the mails from Frisco. Answee. I agbee that when both colonies affected by any palpable irregularity, they should try to act together about penalties. Understood in England, that we were not to pay for li Colima" to the colonies, and am of opinion we should not pay for her trip to the colonies. I have the papers re " Cyphrenes " and " Vasco," and I consider we should adhere to our decision not to regard the service as a contract one. The down service of the " City of San Francisco " we might pay half for. She brought no mails. I thank you for referring to our coastal service. We must have this properly performed, and will not recognize Hall's patched-up services. We put the mails on board the " Cjphrenes " with distinct intimation to that effect. DELAY IN TEANSIT OF MAILS ACEOSS THE AMEEICAN CONTINENT. From the Hon. John Eobeetson and the Hon. J. F. Buens. There is no doubt that unnecessary delay takes place in the transmission of the mails across tho Continent by train, and this Government have it in contemplation to send an officer through with the mails between San Francisco and the place of shipment for England. This course was suggested by the New Zealand Post Office, in May, 1874; but Mr. Samuel thought the officers would not be recognized by the American officials, the mails being conveyed under convention with England, and thought that agents at San Francisco and New York would meet the case. Delays up to five days have taken place in the transmission of the mails. Do you concur with us ? Answer. Me Mail Officer. • I do not think English Government would move American Government to recognize officer, but I am favourable to appointment, if officer properly recognized. The Mail Agent by steamer should be the one to go on with the mails. I think the delay occurs in this 2—F. 3a.

F.—3a

6

way : —Our mails are very bulky, and, if carriage goes wrong, detached and left behind. I believe, if we put letters in bags distinctly marked from those of newspapers, we could get them placed in carriage with United States mails, and then no irregularity would occur or officer be wanted. It would not matter if newspapers were delayed. From the Hon. John Robeetson and the Hon. J. F. Buens. We agree, and assume we can negotiate on behalf of both Governments. OUR CLAIM UNDER RUSSELL-SAMUEL AGREEMENT. From the Hon. John Robertson and the Hon. J. F. Btjens. CiiAiM under Russell-Samuel Agreement may be considered to have been dealt with. By Authority : Geobgb Didsbuby, Government Printer, Wellington.—lB76. Price 6d.] \