Coll 29/86 'Diplomatic and consular expenditure: incidence; revision; general' [‎256v] (512/561)

financial questions involved in the establishment of new
Consulates in Western China and Siamo
6th May
25th June
No «47(Political)
of 1896.
2nd February
1897.
Paragraph 72
Treasury to
Foreign Office
No .15748 dated
20th November,
1895.
23rd February
1897.
”lt may* of course^ be objected to such an answer that
it will ccmniit 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. to contribute towards these
charges, but in the judgment of the Department it will be a
reasonable demand to address to India, as India is immed
iately interested in the development of trade with these
countries”•
79. A compromise was eventually adopted, however, and
the Foreign Office were informed that although the Government
of India were not of the opinion that Indian revenues should
be burdened with a share of the cost either of Mr. Black*s
tour or of the establishment of periodical consular courts in
Siam, the Secretary of State was willing "as a special case,
not to be treated as a precedent”^ to make a contribution of
£100 from Indian revenues towards the cost of Mr« Black*s
tour, "in view of the circumstances and of the fact that the
interests of a large number of British Indian subjects were
affected by it". The Foreign Office*, in accepting the
Secretary of State's offer, acknowledged that by this con
tribution he had met in an equitable manner the claim made on
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. for half the cost cf the expenditure incurred
on account of Mr© Black*s journey, but expressed Lord
Salisbury*s regret at the refusal of the Government of India
to bear any share of the cost of the establishment of con
sular courts in Siamo The Government of India had been
informed of the Secretary of State’s action in a despatch
dated 7th May©
80« Meanwhile, the arrangement made in 1891, under
which India contributed a fixed sum of Rs.15,020 towards the
expenses of the Chiengmai Vice-Consulate, had expired on the
1st April 1896 and the Foreign Office, therefore, approached
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. with regard to the renewal of the arrange
ment for a further period© It will be recalled that in
their letter of 8th April, 1890, the Government of India had
asked that India’s fixed contribution in respect of Chiengmai
should not be made subject to revision, on the ground that
the Government of India would have no voice in sanctioning
future expenditure on the Vioe-Consulate, and that it was not
right that they should be called upon to agree thereafter to
a contribution which fluctuated in proportion to expenditure
over which they were to have no control* The Government of
India's anxieties on this score proved to have been well
justified for the Foreign Office now suggested that India's
contribution should be increased to Rs.18,830. It appears
that, although the Government of India had refused in 1894
to agree to contribute towards an increase of £150 in the
salary of the Vice-Consul at Chiengmai during the currency of
the existing arrangement, the Treasury had in fact sanctioned
an increase of £200 which had taken effect from the 1st
April, 1896© The Foreign Office now proposed, therefore,
that the whole of this increase-, together with a due pro
portion of the Non-Effective Chargesshould be charged to
Indian revenues and continued till 31st March 1901, and that
the Government of India’s contribution under various other
heads should also be increased in accordance with the average
actual expenditure of the previous five years © It is not
surprising that these proposals should have given rise to the
usual unseemly wrangling© The Foreign Office were informed
that as the additional expenditure in respect of the Vice-
Consul’s salary had been provided for in the English and not