|
Arakan: - One Who Preserves and Takes Care of Their Own Nationality. |
|
Publication by Arakan Action Association (AAA.) |
|
Arakan Past – Present – Future |
|
BY JOHN OGILVY HAY, J.P. |
|
Arakan Library was founded by a group of Arakan Action Association (AAA) in exile in Thailand from Burma in 2007 doing to voice for the knowledge, the people democratic and human rights.
Copyright © 2007 Arakan Libray All Rights Reserved. Free counter, Since 2005.
Arakan Action Association (AAA) Chotana Road , Chaing Mai ( 50301 ), Thailand. Email : arakanactionassociation@walla.com , +66—089-637-4383, +66—053-409-577 |
|
There is abundance of room for it without interfering with any other line of communication either present or future; besides, in my opinion there would be ample traffic to pay, provided the cost of construction was not prodigiously in excess of that expended on other lines. When you say that under your proposals the line can be carried out without any pecuniary call on Government or any guarantee, it seems to me that half the battle is over, and that the scheme pro tanto must receive attention. Government would, I fancy, sanction the preliminary survey, and pay for it. Of course, there are immense difficulties in the way of starting any large undertaking of the kind, and you are a bold man to take the initiative, and be at the trouble of convincing Government to act in their own interests. I have some of the old papers relating to the project, and will look them up and refresh my memory. I may then perhaps be able to give you more effectual help. As it is, I am writing on the spur of the moment, without having thought much on the subject for some years. I shall be glad to meet you again. Are you coming to the Burmah dinner on the 21st June? I enclose a card. My kind regards to Mrs Hay. – Believe me, &c.
From Same. 31st May 1889. Thanks for a perusal of the two enclosures. I think you have written well to the point, and your arguments are likely to receive attention and consideration. After all, it is the finance portion of the question which constitutes the main crux in all projects of this nature. If your Stock Exchange friends see their way to a solution of this difficulty, I look with complacency on all other obstacles. Of one thing I am convinced and that is, that A RAILWAY ACROSS COUNTRY FROM THE BAY OF BENGAL, LATITUDE AKYAB, TO MANDALAY, WILL BE WORTH MILLIONS TO US STRATEGICALLY, AND IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE SENSE ALSO, by assisting to pacify and people the intervening tracts of valuable territory. A mountain-range would have to be crossed, but the total distance to be traversed is not great and a careful survey would probably reduce it to a little over 200 miles. I return your two letters. – Believe me, &c. E. B. Sladen.
From Same. 29th November 1889. I have gone through the papers you sent me yesterday, an which I returned to you this morning. I think you have treated the question of railway extension in Burmah Chinawards rationally and well. The altered conditions brought about by the recent annexation of Upper Burmah have quite settled the point of procedure so far as it relate to the path or direction which railways in Burmah must take in any attempt to carry them on towards China. A death blow has been dealt to the old Sprye route, so actively take up and made their own by Messrs Colquhoun and Hallet Not that it may not be very necessary and desirable in course of time to connect the lower province of Burmah with an railway system which the Siamese Government, as advised by Sir Andrew Clarke, may project northwards; but as a river route for reaching China from Burmah the old Sprye route has for the time being lost all claim to priority, and hardly deserve further notice or consideration. The object of your paper seems to be to draw public opinion and attention to the pressing importance of the railway question as applied to Burmah, and to invite private enterprise to enter the field and bear a portion of the burden. I heartily hope you may succeed. – Yours sincerely, E. B. Sladen.
Letter from General Alexander Fraser, C.B., R.E. (formerly Chief Engineer and Secretary to the Chief Commissioners of British Burmah in the Public Works Department, also subsequently Secretary to the Government of India in the Public Works Department). 7 Bramham Mansions, 10th January 1890. My Dear, Mr Hay, - I regret the delay in answering yours of 8th, re the matter of your Akyab-Mandalay-China Railway. I look at the matter from a different point of view to that taken by General H., though, of course, his opinion should be treated with respect. I think that we must look at your project from its trade aspect first, in its military aspect afterwards. We cannot force trade into military lines, but we can make military dispositions meet the exigencies of trade. If you have a thoroughly good port, such as Akyab undoubtedly is, and that port is the best for the China trade, dispositions could be made, and which it would be worth while to make, to protect it. Rangoon, the alternative port for any extension from Mandalay of a railway to China, is a more difficult port to make, and a more expensive port when arrived at, and has not the accommodation which Akyab might be made to have for a great trade such as that with China might be expected to become. Then again, Akyab is nearer Mandalay than Rangoon, and though the railway might be costly, that would be met by a corresponding diminution in expense due to the shorter length. Turning to General H.’s arguments again for a moment, they cut both ways. I look upon it that England can only be great so long as she retains the rule of the sea. A great trade with China would certainly more than pay for an increase of her naval strength in the Bay of Bengal, which would add in other respects to the power of the Government of India. Akyab, moreover, would be very easily fortified at the entrance to the port; so that, with Mandalay more easily accessible, with a military line of railway over the shortest route, and the base protected by the navy, there appears to me there would be an accession of general strength by dealing with Akyab as you propose, rather than, as General H. supposes, an accession of weakness by establishing a weak point. Akyab would make a better naval station than any port in the Bay of Bengal, at least such is my idea from recollection, without having the chart before me. I am therefore clearly of opinion – 1) That the trade with China would be immense. 2) That the port of Akyab is the most suitable port to take it to. 3) That the line should be broad gauge. 4) That, assuming that I am right as to the trade, there will be great accession of strength, from a military point of view, to the Government of India by the adoption of the former as the port for the trade of Western China. I fear I have not time to elaborate my views to any greater extent than as above for the present, but shall be glad further advanced your financial arrangements. There appears to me no doubt about the trade, and, in my mind, there is no question but that you have suggested the proper way to get at it. There ought to be no difficulty in finding the money to carry out a work so important to the commercial interests of the country but in this I can’t help you. Yes; it was a matter of extreme regret to me to observe in the papers the death of my ole friend Sladen. It was a great shock to me, as I had imagined him to be one of the most healthy of men. – Yours sincerely, Alexander Fraser.
Reply. India Office, Whitehall, S.W., 21st January 1891. Sir, - I am directed by the Secretary of State for India in Council to acknowledge receipt of your letters of 31st December 1890 and the 2nd instant. With respect to your request contained in the first of these letters, that you may be furnished with a copy of the terms offered by the Secretary of State for the construction of the Assam-Chittagong Railway, I am to inform you that the Secretary of State has for some time been in communication with other parties in connector with the scheme, and that the terms on which it may be carried out are still under discussion. As regards the exploration of the country between Akyab and Upper Burmah proposed in your letter of 2nd instant, I am to state that it must be left to the Government of India to determine what should be done; and that the Secretary of State is not in a position to avail himself of your offer to undertake the exploration in question. – I am, &c., Horace Walpole, J. Qgilvy Hay, Esq. 7th May 1891. No. 16. Referring to my letters, No. 6 of 25th March 1890 and 7th July 1890, as also to the replies thereto, 1st May, and 29th July 1890, I beg to ask if any communication has been received from the Government of India on the subject. As mentioned in my letter of 2nd January 1891, I have been waiting expecting to be favoured by the Right Honourable the Secretary of State with some intimation consequent thereon. In view of the last public declaration of his Excellency the Viceroy as to encouraging the construction of railways in India by private companies, and the concession lately granted to the promoters of the Assam-Chittagong line; moreover; considering that the late sad disaster at Munneepore must stimulate such works, I am desirous of again bringing the question of the Burmah-China line before his lordship the Secretary of State, respectfully asking if the proposals I have already made might not be taken as a starting-point for further discussion as to terms.
Reply. India Office, Whitehall, S.W., 3nd June 1891. Sir, - I am directed to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of 7th May 1891, in which you refer to your letters regarding a proposal Burmah-China railway. In reply I am to inform you that having left the matter in the hands of the Government of India, from whom no further communication has been received, the Secretary of State for India in Council has nothing to add to the letter addressed to you on the 21st January last. – I am, &c., John E. Gorst. J. Ogilvy Hay, Esq. Letter to a Manchester Merchant on the Burmah-China Trade-route. 23rd June 1891. I take leave to acknowledge the courteous and considerate attention I received from you and the other gentlemen with whom I had communication during my late visit to Manchester as to the Burmah-China Railway, the solver of the long-vexed “trade-route question.” It was for long a subject of much controversy, but it has now been settled, as you are aware, by the Government having surveyed the line for a railway through the Northern Shan States, from Mandalay to the Kun-Lon Ferry on the Salween river, within twenty-five miles of the first town in the China province of Yuman, a province which has long been the goal to which the “trade-route” pointed. The details of surveyed route are given in the memorandum I handed to you and others when in Manchester. It now only remains for the construction of this railway to be taken vigorously in hand to have the markets of Western China thrown open to our commerce; and the object of my visit was to enlist the co-operation and support of the mercantile community, as represented by the Chamber of Commerce, to bring pressure to bear on the Government of India, that the execution of this work be not delayed. As I have said, there is now no controversy in the matter – action alone is required. The first gentlement I called on entered into the question with much interest, being desirous of seeing the trade of the rich districts of Western China thrown open to the enterprise of our country. He was not much engaged with trade as at present carried on with Burmah, but saw the importance the opening this line would give to the development of the productions, especially of the rich province of Szcehuen. Another gentleman, well acquainted with Indian matters, having held a leading position in the commerce of our Eastern empire, received my representations warmly, and promised his best support in the furtherance of my views. A third gentleman with whom I had an interview expressed the opinion “that the Government of India seem to be acting at present on a very narrow selfish policy – if indeed they have any fixed policy at all as regards Indian railways. With such an enormous undeveloped country before them, so capable of extending our commerce and manufactures, they do not seem to have grasped the importance of the subject, especially as regards promptness and expedition in constructing, railways; they are doing the work but slowly themselves, and will not give sufficient encouragement to the public so as to enlist their active co-operation.” “As the principal lines of railway promise to give fair returns, they do not seem disposed to let this expected profit go out of their hands, little thinking of the loss of revenue every season’s delay in the prosecution of railway works entails on the empire loss of revenue and growth of trade. But to go on with the construction of railways, as the requirements of the times demand, very large loans must be raised, the finances of the empire being incapable of coping with the necessary outlay. Dribblets such as the revenues of the empire can spare in financing these works, delays their execution and increases the cost.” These remarks apply especially to Burmah, where the budget allotment for railways is at present fixed at ₤500,000 per annum. During the past year this sum has been almost entirely devoted to the Mu Valley Railway, which, though important for local and administrative purpose, cannot be compared with the line through the Shan States for the development of the country and promotion of trade and commeree generally. This latter work has been completely shelved, even the completion of the survey has been delayed, and certainly a year lost in a work of paramount importance. This delay is apparent on all Government work on the allotment system, which cramps and delays execution; while works carried out by the public, with available capital, must always be more expeditions and less expensive. On my suggesting to the gentleman last referred to that it would be very desirable that the Chamber should send in a strong remonstrance at the delay, and a recommendation for the speedy construction of the Burmah-China Railway, he said, “There was this difficulty in the way. Some members considered one railway, some another, as most pressingly required, according as their particular interests suggested. On one hand the Kurrachee Railway had its advocates, on the other the Orissa and East Coast line had most favour – and here I was stating the urgency of the Burmah-China line.” To this I replied that a representation as to the urgency for the speedy construction of of all these lines should be pressed on Government, the necessity for each particular line being brought out to the Government, at the same time – what they seen unwilling to see or admit – the impolicy of delay to the detriment of the country, retarding its development, and hence a loss of revenue certain to accrue from the extension of trade generally. Doubtless Government could do all the work themselves if they went into the market and raised enormous loans – what would be required just for the three lines above named, not to mention many equally important lines also delayed? – an operation which might militate against its credit; but this would necessitate the increase of the already extensive and unwieldy railway department, so as to become almost unworkable, and which, on the completion of the works, it would be difficult to disband. Indeed it is almost coming to a state of “fossilification,” requiring new blood and life infused into it rather than extension. Another matter the Government apparently ignores is the fact that, by giving more liberal terms of concessions, and not haggling over infinitesimal trifles, the country would be more speedily covered with a network of railways, more rapidly developed, trade and commerce of every kind promoted, and, before long, the extra terms they now grudge would be recouped by the earlier receipt of revenue, the result of the works stimulated by more liberal terms. Much to their own injury Government are always jealous and afraid of those they have transactions with, reaping too great advantages. There is no question that the short-sighted policy in this respect is a hindrance to development and progress in every way, and retarding an enormous demand for our manufactures of every description. From Manchester I went to Glasgow, where my representations were received with much interest, and I had satisfactory promises that the subject should be well brought before the Clamber of Commerce of that city. One gentleman, while saying that his business relations, being principally with the Straits and other more easterly ports, would not be much, if at all, affected by the Burmah-China connection, saw its importance, especially as a check to the advances he knew the French were making from Tonquin. This he was to bring as a special argument before a Committee of the Chamber and other members as to the urgency of the work, deprecating present delay, and pressing the necessity of the speedy construction of the railway as proposed by the Government survey. In a general way my views were concurred in, and I trust to hear ere long that the Glasgow Chamber will take some decided action. Some two years ago the Secretary for India, Viscount Cross, in an address delivered at Oldman, expressed very freely his desire to encourage private enterprise in railway works in India. There has not as yet been much outcome of this declared policy. At the time it did not seem to be concurred in by the Executive in India – and this possibly checked it. Some months ago, however, the Viceroy, the Marquis of Lansdowne, when opening the Bengal Nagpore Railway, took occasion to contradict what he understood was a general opinion, that Government desired to keep the construction of railways in their own hands. This was satisfactory so far as it went; but when his speech came to be considered, there seemed to be little promise of great encouragement being given – it appearing that as the Government could raise money for the purpose at 3 per cent or so, the public would be permitted to take the work on somewhat similar terms; but it is not likely the public “will rise to the occasion,” and unless some more encouragement is held out and liberality shown, the construction of railways in India may remain in the hands of Government, to be executed at their leisure as heretofore, and progress and development deferred till the Greek Calends. In conclusion, I would take leave with all deference to say what I think the action of the Chamber should be: To remonstrate strongly with Government on the delay that is taking place in the construction of important lines of railway, retarding the extension of trade and development of new markets, and his primarily owing to their undecided policy, and urging them to more liberal dealings with the public so as to enlist their co-operation – not alone by guaranteeing interest, but by concessions in any other feasible way that can be arranged to draw out the investing public. Asking your attention to these remarks, and that you will be so good as to bring them prominently before the Chamber of Commerce and the commercial and manufacturing community generally, - I am, &c. |