SUEZ CANAL CHARGES

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2091, 28 May 1907, Page 1

SUEZ CANAL CHARGES

HUGE DIVIDENDS.

ATTITUDE OF THE BRITISH GOV ERNMENT.

Apropos of Sir Joseph Ward’s advocacy of reduced charges at the Sugb Canal, the following, which appeared in the. Sydney Morning Herald of 2nd May, is of interest: — “According to advices to hand from London by yesterday’s mail, some interesting official letters between the Governor-General of Australia and the Colonial Secretary in connection with the Suez Canal, together with some letters to and from other departments, have been published in a Parliamentary paper. The Australian complaint was that the Canal dues were so high as to curtail the progress of inter-Empire trade, and it was suggested that the Government should use its influence to securo a reduction in the charges imposed by the Canal authorities. The GovernorGeneral wrote to the Colonial Secretary under date ,of loth May last : ‘Seeing that the Canal dues onablp shareholders to receive a. dividend of 28 per cent., my' Ministers are of opinion that the time has arrived for the reconsideration of tho existing rates, and possibly for a substantial reduction therein, and they suggest that, on behalf of Australia, as well as of all other British possessions lying to the. east of Egypt, the influence of the British Government might bo employed in procuring concessions which would have an early and material effect on inter-Empire trade, as well as upon the volume of traffic whcili will pass through the Canal.’

“In a letter from the three British Suez Canal directors to Sir Edward Grey, touching on the representations made by the Governor-General, and replying generally to other points involved In tho discussion, it was.stated that ‘while the present, dividend of

28 per cent, on the 500 f. shares *s an undoubted sign of tlio groat prosperity of tho enterprise, wo cannot regard it as a proof that its profits are exorbitant. The arrangement which admits of this result was agreed to between tlie shipowners and M. Ferdinand dc Losseps, in 1882, neither party at tho time anticipating its realisation.’ The so-ealled ‘arrangements,’ usually known as the ‘agreement,’ it is pointed out by a London shipping exchange, did not contemplate a 28 per cent, dividend; it provided that when the dividend reached 25 per cent, the surplus profits should lie idlooated to tho reduction of dues until they were brought down to five francs per ton. 11l his final reply to the Governor-General the Colonial Secretary wrbte:—‘l am informed that the Lords'Commissioners of, tho Treasury and the Board of Trado concur in tho views expressed by the directors, and that although they are in full sympathy with the object of your Ministers, they do not think that anything would bo gained by an attempt to pursue that object without due regard to the interests of thoso who have a purely financial concern in the affairs of the Suez Canal.’ ”