Coll 29/86 'Diplomatic and consular expenditure: incidence; revision; general' [‎250v] (500/561)

■FT 1 ’’™’''
14.
exercise his functions "under the exclusive charge and control
of Her Majesty’s Agent and Consul-General at Bangkok". The
24th August India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. informed the Foreign Office in reply that they
had no objection to such an arrangement "provided it is not
intended that all correspondence between the Vice-Consul and
the local authority in the adjacent districts of British Burma
is to be carried on through the circuitous and • • • sometimes
wholly inaccessible channel of Bangkok*
39* "The questions which arise at Chiengmai almost
exclusively affect natives of British Burma or merchants
resident in that province^ and, while the communication with
Paphoon, the headquarters of the British Deputy Commissioner,
is short and easy, with Bangkok it is long and difficult*
40. "Unless, therefore, the Vice-Consul at Chiengmai
is to be in full and free correspondence with British Burma,
though of course subordinate to Her Majesty's Representative
at Bangkok and taking instructions from him in all questions
of a diplomatic nature and involving reference to the Siamese
Government, Lord Hartington can anticipate from the appoint
ment no advantage proportionate to the expense which it will
entail upon Indian revenues."
11th October 41* In reply to an enquiry as to whether the total
expenses of the Vice-Consulate at Chiengmai would be accepted
24th November as a charge on Indian revenues, the Foreign Office were informed
that "the expense of the establishment and office contingencies
which, in the opinion of the Government of India, may be
necessary, as well as the Vice-Consul's salary, will be met
from Indian revenues"® It was added, however, that it was
extremely doubtful "whether the Government of India would be
prepared to agree to include amongst the expenses of the
Consulate properly chargeable to the Indian Treasury, any pay
ment on account of outfit to the Vice-Consul according to
Consular Regulations"* It was further added that "it will, of
course, be understood that previous to the deputation of any
gentleman from the Consulate at Bangkok to Chiengmai, the name
of the officer selected will be submitted by Her Majesty's
Agent and Consul-General for the approval of the Governor-
General of India in Council, as arranged in the correspondence
which passed in 1877". The letter concluded as follows: "It
will also be understood that, as the arrangement is made for
the purposes of the Government of India, who defray the whole
expenses, it will be open to them to terminate it at any time
if they find it necessary to do so**’
42. It is interesting to find that Sir Louis Mallet,
then Under Secretary of State at the India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. , noted on
this correspondence as follows: "I do not like this arrange
ment. It is irregular and inconvenient that our Government
should take upon itself the whole charge for an officer (and
establishment) appointed by another Government and directed and
controlled by that Government© The officer may be incompetent
or insubordinate and the Government of India will be able to
do nothing but remonstrate through the Foreign Office who will
probably support their agent® Only one thing is certain -
that India will have to pay an indefinite sum which the Foreign
Office will have no interest in controlling. I think it
should be a • • • condition of such an arrangement that the
officer paid by India should be an officer of the Government
of India."
43. A copy of the correspondence with the Foreign
Offic 0 was forwarded to the Government of India under cover of
No.76 of
1880
No. 101 of
1880
No. 35 of
1881
No.110 of
1881