Coll 29/86 'Diplomatic and consular expenditure: incidence; revision; general' [‎261r] (521/561)

P,2809/10.
P.4843/13.
*
Paragraph 69.
P.869/14
No.35 [Political]
of 1914.
No.94-
[Establishment]
1914.
P.4939/22.
—
35.
India had contributed a moiety (£868) of the cost of acquiring
a site for the Vice-Consulate and erecting a suitable building.
106. In November, 1913, the Foreign Office informed 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. that it was proposed to erect, at a cost of £1,500,
a new Consulate building at Chiengmai in place of what had
formerly been the Vice-Consulate building, which was considered
unsatisfactory. The latter had been built between 1884/88,
entirely at the expense of Indian revenues, and India had also
borne the whole cost of its maintenance till 1891 when the
post had been transferred to the Consular estimates on the
adoption of the principle of a fixed contribution from Indian
revenues. The Foreign Office now suggested that in the cir
cumstances the cost of erecting the new Consulate building should
bo met out of Indian funds. In their reply to the Foreign
Office, dated 16th January, 1914, 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. pointed out,
however, that when the annual contribution from Indian revenues
on account of Chiengmai was fixed at Rs.15,020 (£1,000 approximate)
a sum of Rs.1,004 (£67) had been included as representing
(476 for annual maintenance and 4% for renewal) on the total
original outlay (Rs.12,548 = £836) on erecting and furnishing the
Consular building. "It would thus appear inequitable" they
continued "that the Indian exchequer should bear any proportion
of the cost of renewing the building on its present scale but as
the estimated cost of the new Consulate exceeds by some £664" (i.e.
£1,500 less £836) "that of the original building, the Secretary
of State in Council is prepared, in the special circumstances of
the case, to contribute one half of this excess, namely a sum
of £332, towards the proposed expenditure*"
107. The Foreign Office accepted the contribution offered
by 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. , but in their reply, dated 5th March, they
enquired "whether, in view of the increased value of the
Consulate after rebuilding, tho Marquess of Crewe would be
prepared to increase tho contribution of the Indian Government
in respect of the maintenance and renewal from £67 per annum
(Q% of £836) to £120 per annum (being Q% of £1,500). This
suggestion was referred to the Government of India in the
Secretary of State’s despatch of 3rd April, in which it was
suggested that an alternative arrangement would be for India to
pay half the actual cost of repairs year by year and half the cost
of renewals as they become necessary. It appears to have been
overlooked that the fixed annual contribution of £1,000 still
purported to include the 8% allowance on the cost of the original
building to cover maintenance and renewal and that under the
proposed alternative arrangement, unless the fixed contribution
were reduced by £67 to £933, India would, in effect, be paying
twice over for a certain proportion of the cost of maintaining
the Consulate. The Government of India, however, in their
letter of 30th July, agreed to the adoption of the proposed
arrangement and half the actual cost of ordinary repairs and
half the cost of renewals as they occurred thereby came to be
paid annually by the Government of India, under the head "Addi
tional Expenses at Chiengmai."
108. In a letter to the Foreign Office, dated 11th January
1923, 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. pointed out, with regard to the sum of
£320 claimed annually by the Foreign Office as the Indian contri
bution towards the cost of the Vice-Consulate established at
Chiengmai in 1906, that this post no longer appeared in the
Foreign Office list of salaried consular officers and that the
list for October 1913 was the latest list in which it had appeared
as being filled. It transpired from subsequent correspondence