‘Report for the Army Council on Mesopotamia. By Sir John P Hewett, GCSI, KBE’ [‎34r] (72/119)

For reasons given in paragraphs 73 and 76 respectively the summary does not include any suggestions
for recoveries to be made for steamers and other craft of the Inland Water Transport fleet which may
be purchased by the civil authorities, or for the railway systems in Mesopotamia. I am directed to report
how civil funds can currently or eventually bear such charges. I have been informed by the acting
Civil Commissioner that no budget has yet been prepared of the revenue and expenditure of the occupied
territory for the current year. The net receipts for 1915-16 were £130,000 : for 1916-17 £270,000,
and for 1917-18 £100,000, according to the telegram from the Government of India to the Secretary of
State for India of the 5th February 1918. It is evident from these figures that the civil administration
is not likely, at an early date, to be able to pay the bill set out above. In his letter No. 18791 of the 8th
September last to the Chief of the General Staff at Baghdad, Lieut.-Colonel Wilson wrote, I am assuming
that, in the case of railways, works, power plant and other assets of the kind erected in the country and
required for post-war purposes, they will be assessed and handed over at a valuation to the civil adminis
tration, which will hand over to the Treasury an equivalent of Mesopotamian Bonds in lieu thereof,
the interest and sinking fund on w^hich will be payable annually. An arrangement of this nature seems
to be the only one to meet the case ; details of it will depend on the status which the Peace Conference
may assign to Mesopotamia in the future.”
Financial Control over Agricultural and Irrigation Schemes.
82. I am directed to make recommendations to secure, as far as possible, that adequate local business-
control and supervision are maintained on behalf of the Imperial Government over expenditure on the
schemes for Irrigation and Agriculture.
The Financial Adviser, who had to deal with this expenditure, was an officer of the Military Accounts
Department, and it is not an easy matter for any financial authority, who has not had administrative or
revenue experience among Eastern peoples, to give an opinion on projects for the extension of irrigation
and the encouragement of cultivation such as were embodied in the schemes for 1918 and 1919.
The Agricultural Development Scheme prepared by Mr. Garbett in 1918 was not preceded by any
elaborate financial examination of details. Indeed, since it was only drawn up in July, 1917, and since
sowings for the Spring harvest of 1918 were timed to begin on 15th September, it is patent that if the
results aimed at were to be achieved, no laborious examination of these details could be attempted, the
success of the scheme depending on immediate arrangements being made to procure the necessary seed,
to put in hand the cleaning of the canals to be utilized, and to arrange for advances to cultivators. The
original scheme contemplated an expenditure of £300,000 to be treated as recoverable advances, and
the only out-of-pocket expenses involved in it were such proportions of the advances as might prove
to be irrecoverable, and the salaries of the very small staff specially engaged for the scheme.
As has been stated in paragraphs, the committee which examined the scheme added to the estimated
expenditure the sum of £100,000 for miscellaneous expenses. The figures stated above were then regarded
by the Financial Adviser as a Budget which could not be exceeded without further sanction. No returns
of expenditure seem to have been submitted to the Financial Adviser. The expenditure had been
authorized, and, as the sanctioned estimates were not exceeded, no further financial control was exercised
over the Administrator’s expenditure. The scheme eventuated, as has already been stated, m a loss
of 4:30
It’has been noticed (paragraph 30) that the estimates of 1919 seem to have been m some respects
based on imperfectly ascertained data. The estimates finally sent in on the 22nd April were described
as being rough estimates, subject to further modification as occasion might arise. The figures have
not been modified, and have been regarded by the Financial Adviser as definite figures sanctioned by
the War Office. , , „ • , • i ^ n j •
In order to secure that the accounts of the scheme, should be fully maintained, the Lommander-m-
Ohief in India, in the Quartermaster General’s letter of the 27th May, 1918 [AppendixXIII], insisted that
the Financial Adviser should keep in constant touch with the progress of operations, his primary object
beino' to assist in securing that expenditure should be limited to immediate food development. It was
ordered that a member of the Financial Adviser’s staff should be placed at the disposal of the Board of
Agriculture for the purpose of keeping a financial record. Complete and accurate accounts °f a fi opera--
tions were to be submitted in the first instance by the disbursing and receiving officers to this special;
Accounts Officer. His duty was to compile these accounts in an approved form for the field Controller,
of Military Supply Accounts. The Financial Adviser was himself directed to submit a quarterly review
of expenditure connected with the scheme. For the purpose of this review special forms of accounts
exhibiting under the accepted heads of charge the expenditure of the Directors of Agriculture and
Irrigation were prepared by the Financial Adviser, and approved by the Board of Agriculture and
the Government of India. In the case of the Director of Irrigation a complete schedule of expenditure
on (l) Government canals, (2) Tapu (private) canals, (3) Protective works, (4) Communications, (5) Build
ings, (6) Miscellaneous petty repairs or construction, (7) General, including executive, superintendence-
and direction charges, was prescribed. v . , x
The account required in the case of the Director of Agriculture was limited to the expenditure on
Dairv Farms, Grass and Fodder Farms, Demonstration Farms, Establishment, Directorate, Office
Contingencies’ and Transport, these being the heads of charge under the immediate control of the Director
° f ^fhlTfinancial results in both the Irrigation and Agricultural branches of the scheme for 1919 are
alike in that the present estimate of expenditure falls below the original estimate under almost every
separate head.
(C 1781) F